Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 1 Dec 2015

Vol. 898 No. 4

Ceisteanna - Questions (Resumed)

Seanad Reform

Lucinda Creighton

Question:

1. Deputy Lucinda Creighton asked the Taoiseach the legislation to reform Seanad Éireann he proposes to introduce during the lifetime of the current Dáil Éireann; the suggestions and proposals he intends to adopt arising from his meeting with Opposition Members earlier in 2015 to discuss reform of Seanad Éireann; the steps he has taken to implement the recommendations of the working group on Seanad Reform, which his Department published on 13 April 2015; to progress the draft Seanad Reform Bill prepared for the working group; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31755/15]

Micheál Martin

Question:

2. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the status of the proposals for reform of Seanad Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33947/15]

Micheál Martin

Question:

3. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the status of the most recent Seanad reform document; the recommendations therein; the actions being taken; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38960/15]

Joe Higgins

Question:

4. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on proposals for the reform of Seanad Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40212/15]

Gerry Adams

Question:

5. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his proposals to reform the Seanad; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42214/15]

Gerry Adams

Question:

6. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his comments in Dáil Éireann that he did not think it would be possible to introduce the planned reform of Seanad Éireann before the next election for Seanad Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [42218/15]

The Taoiseach

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together.

The Deputies may recall that I met the leaders of the different parties and groupings in the Dáil and the Seanad in December 2013 to discuss how best to proceed with reform of the Seanad. Following this, in February 2014 the Government presented a package of proposals on Seanad reform to the Leader of the Seanad for submission to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges of the Seanad.

In addition, in February 2014 the general scheme of the Seanad Electoral (University Members) (Amendment) Bill was published for consultation. The purpose of the Bill is to enable implementation of the 1979 constitutional amendment to extend the Seanad franchise to graduates from institutions of higher education in the State that do not currently form part of the Seanad university constituencies. This Bill is due for publication in 2016. More recently, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government published the Electoral (Amendment) Bill 2015, whose purpose is to amend the Seanad electoral Acts in regard to nominations for panel member elections and candidate election posts for university member elections and to amend the Electoral Act 1992 in regard to the supplement to the register of electors.

In order to further progress the Seanad reform process, I established an independent working group in December 2014 with a focus on possible reforms of the Seanad electoral reform system within existing constitutional parameters as well as on exploring ways of reforming Seanad Éireann generally and the manner in which it carries out its business. The working group published its report on 13 April last and it is available on my Department's website. The associated draft Bill and explanatory memorandum prepared for the group were also published on my Department's website on 14 May.

I issued a statement when the report was published in which I welcomed it and described it as being innovative and radical and as containing some far-reaching recommendations about how Members are elected to the Seanad and on how it should perform its functions. I indicated there needed to be a public and political discussion and consultation on the report. To that end, I requested that the working group make a presentation to the Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht and to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges of the Seanad. On 5 May last and again on 8 July, statements on the report were made in the Seanad with the chairman of the working group and former Senator Joe O'Toole, a member of the group, in attendance.

I also said that I intended to meet Opposition party leaders to discuss the report's contents and this meeting took place in July. Arising from that meeting, I gave a commitment to have a debate in Dáil Éireann on the working group's report and it is my intention that this will take place before the end of this session. The report recommended that the commencement date for the new arrangements, were they to be accepted, should be immediately following the next Seanad general election.

Deputy Micheál Martin

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. It is an extraordinary situation that since the Taoiseach got that wallop two years ago from the electorate, he has been extremely lacking in terms of bringing forward any substantial reform to how Seanad Éireann works, how people are elected to it and the work it does. We met the Taoiseach on this issue last July and while I do not want to upset the Taoiseach, it was one of the most farcical meetings I ever attended in terms of the Taoiseach's lack of any notion of what he wanted to do himself. He had the independent report and put it on the table and asked us for our opinions but had no real opinion himself. It then emerged during the meeting that the Government had no position on the independent report. The Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Alex White, who was representing the Tánaiste, said the Government had not even considered it, yet the Government was asking the Opposition for commitments on specific aspects of it. At the end of the meeting, we asked the Taoiseach whether he would support the elements of the independent report that referred to direct franchise for citizens having a say in electing Senators. He demurred at that and eventually Deputy Ross put it to him that he was up for anything. The Taoiseach used the phrase that he would "consider anything".

The meeting was very incoherent and many of us left it scratching our heads because it was clear to us that neither the Taoiseach nor any member of the Government knew what they were doing with regard to the Seanad or the independent report the Taoiseach had commissioned. The members of the independent group who produced the report were busy lobbying everybody and felt they had got the green light from the Government and were encouraging the Opposition to play ball and agree with the recommendations made, although we would not have been entirely happy with all of the recommendations, particularly some of those to do with the compromise in regard to the direct franchise rather than the better solution that was produced here in legislation, both before and after the last referendum.

I understand from what the Taoiseach has said today that the legislation concerning the university panels will not now be finalised before the next election, although he committed to bringing it forward at that meeting. He has said today that it will be published in 2016. Will he confirm that means it will not be introduced before the general election, but that it will be left to a new government to implement it? Is it clear where the Taoiseach stands on this issue? Will he indicate whether he supports all of the recommendations of the independent working group he established, particularly in regard to the direct franchise and allowing citizens have a say in electing Senators?

This goes to the heart of the democratic revolution we were promised but never got from the Government. The people rejected the Taoiseach's proposition to abolish the Seanad, which he only thought up before the last general election to try to gain some momentum for his party. Most of the Taoiseach's party did not agree with the proposal but he went ahead with it. The public said "No" and the reason for that was that they valued alternative voices in democracy and valued debate.

They value of the idea of politicians having a platform and capacity to articulate ideas about society and about how things should evolve. The Seanad has played that role in spite of all of its challenges and difficulties. It has been a platform for alternative voices down through the years, from party-affiliated Members, as well as Independents. The people did not want to suppress that voice, even though the Taoiseach wanted them to do so.

The Taoiseach's failure on the Seanad is evident, particularly since his commitment to the party leaders following the independent review group. Nothing has happened. We have not been called into any meeting. There are about two weeks to go in this session, yet he throws out in his reply that he intends to have the debate before the end of the session. There are so many things supposed to happen before the end of this session that I am getting dizzy. There are letters coming from Ministers wanting to rush through emergency legislation and so on. There are a load of guillotines lined up for next week. The Chief Whip contacted me this morning to say he wishes to guillotine five or six Bills. That goes to the heart of democratic revolution.

The Taoiseach's reluctance to engage in proper debate on these issues, or to facilitate a genuine parliamentary democracy, is at the heart of it. Since he got the wallop when the people said no to the abolition of the Seanad he has thrown his hat at it and does not seem to want to progress any reforms, despite the fact that every Opposition party told him they would co-operate with the legislation. The Taoiseach was asked a direct question about it at the meeting but he did not answer. We do not know where he stands.

I received an invitation and I am sure the Taoiseach also did, to take part in the general election debate on TV3. I am prepared to do that but he is not. He has laughed. His view is that if he avoids those debates it is better. The public and the younger generation think that politicians should debate issues in the Dáil and Seanad Éireann, and that we should allow alternative voices to have their say. The Taoiseach belongs to a sort of cute hoor form of politics that says the more one ducks and dives, the less----

An Ceann Comhairle

That is not very parliamentary.

Deputy Micheál Martin

It was meant in the most parliamentary way. It is not meant to be----

Deputy Sean Sherlock

The Deputy is displaying a nasty streak today.

Deputy Micheál Martin

No, that is a well known phrase and many works of political science, actually----

An Ceann Comhairle

Would you put your question, please?

Deputy Sean Sherlock

That is a nasty streak coming out. It is unbecoming of the Deputy.

Deputy Micheál Martin

As a person who has studied political science, the Minister of State, Deputy Sean Sherlock, will find that phrase in many recommended documents, articles, books and so on. They use other language as well which one would not ordinarily use.

An Ceann Comhairle

There are many things in books. The rules of the House are different.

Deputy Micheál Martin

My point is that it seems to be the Taoiseach's view that the less space there is for parliamentary debate, the better. The less room for debate between any politicians of any hue, the better. I was in Temple Bar last Saturday week. Deputy Lucinda Creighton and I turned up but the Taoiseach did not. No one from Fine Gael or the other parties attended.

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us get on. I will let the Deputy back in again.

Deputy Micheál Martin

It was the same in UCD. There were six or seven politicians who attended but no leader from Fine Gael or the Labour Party. This is a trend. It is wrong that politicians should avoid debating with one another.

The Taoiseach

I am not sure that rambling contribution deserves any kind of response. Are we to have a sudden revelation here in the Oireachtas that the greatest debater of all time has arrived?

Deputy Micheál Martin

I am sorry-----

The Taoiseach

The Deputy refused to accept any responsibility for the ministries he held. Now suddenly everybody should be cowering away under the benches because they are going to be devoured by this wonderful new political scientist who knows all the answers to all the questions.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Anybody----

The Taoiseach

The Deputy may continue with his arrogance if he wishes. I saw his picture in the local papers in Castlebar in the Sacred Heart home, the new expansion of which his representatives there say will never go ahead. The Deputy was standing there with his people. He is welcome any time.

Deputy Micheál Martin

I thank the Taoiseach. Am I allowed to go to Castlebar?

The Taoiseach

The Deputy will be welcome when the facility is opened.

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us get back to the Seanad.

Deputy Micheál Martin

It took the Taoiseach five years to deliver that.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

It is being delivered.

The Taoiseach

I want to talk about the questions in respect of the Seanad. Deputy Micheál Martin might send me the list of Bills he believes are going to be guillotined. The Chief Whip has set out a very long list of legislation that we need to get through before the end of this session.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Yes, but they will guillotine it all.

The Taoiseach

I hope that far from obstructing Bills like the bankruptcy Bill the Deputy will co-operate and see they are put through in the interests of everybody.

I had a view about the Seanad that I would have liked to have seen it abolished. The people gave me their answer and I accepted it. Following that, I was very grateful to former Senators Manning and O'Toole, Mr. Tom Arnold, Dr. Elaine Byrne and others, who set up the working group and had no vested interests other than to put forward a number of radical and innovative ways of dealing with the matter. They made the central point that were this to be accepted, and I accepted it although it is not accepted by Deputies Micheál Martin or Gerry Adams----

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Taoiseach does not accept it.

The Taoiseach

I do accept it.

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Taoiseach could not tell us at the meeting.

The Taoiseach

They made the point that the time to implement the report would be after the next Seanad general election. Perhaps the Deputy did not read the report. He clearly has a very different viewpoint, as does Deputy Gerry Adams. There is no point in getting into a long, contentious argument, which is what all the other reports about Seanad Éireann have led to over 40 years, about what to do with it.

Deputy Micheál Martin

We all agreed on one thing at that meeting, except the Taoiseach. This is the usual disingenuous presentation of things. There should be direct elections.

The Taoiseach

I accept that we agree the Seanad needs reform in the way it does its business. A number of issues were mentioned in that report by people who have long experience and which are very much worth noting. They did say we should implement it after the next Seanad general election.

I am not going to be as presumptuous as the Deputy. His party, from what I can gather from his spokespeople, looks to have an overall majority as an individual party and is not associating with anybody. It does not want to be in partnership with anybody.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Neither does Fine Gael.

The Taoiseach

That assumes the Deputy intends to lead his party to an overall majority in the election in the spring. Good luck to him. As far as I am concerned, I do not want to be in any way presumptuous but if it happens that the Government I have the honour of leading is returned by the people, which is a matter for them, this is a report which I look forward to implementing.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I want to remind the Taoiseach in case he strays into other territory that I have not been in Castlebar in a few months.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy is welcome any time.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I thank the Taoiseach very much. I have asked him to report on his proposals to reform the Seanad, and to report on his comments that he did not think it would be possible to introduce the planned reform of the Seanad before the next general election. We will not discuss the Taoiseach's cuteness or any other matter except, if possible, these ones. I have never accused the Taoiseach of being cute.

I join the Taoiseach in thanking those who participated in the working group on Seanad reform. He will recall that it was established after the electorate gave him a wallop and defeated the proposal to abolish the Seanad. The working group was given very tight terms of reference and was to consider submissions and previous proposals for reform; look at the role of a reformed Seanad; its powers and functions; the method of election; selection of Members; and any such matters the working group saw as relevant. Despite the limitations imposed on it by the terms of reference, there were some important recommendations. These include recommending that a majority - 30 - of the panel seats be elected by popular vote on the principle of one person, one vote; and that the principle of one person, one vote be extended to include Irish citizens in the North and holders of Irish passports living overseas. The working group argued for a system of online registration of voters and downloading of ballot papers.

Although the recommendations may have fallen short of what Sinn Féin and others believe is needed to make the Seanad a genuinely democratic and representative, accountable elected Chamber, they are nonetheless important. We disagree with the Taoiseach retaining the privilege of appointing 11 nominees, and with the failure to deal with university representation, gender representation and the representation of ethnic groups, particularly the Traveller community. That is a summary of what was reported back.

A promise and proposals were made in this regard as far back as Bertie Ahern that citizens in Northern Ireland should also have Oireachtas representation as of right. I recall the meeting on 8 July to which the Taoiseach invited us. It was a waste of our time. When the Taoiseach asked us what we thought of the report, I asked him what he thought of it. The Taoiseach did not have a view. It became clear in the next few moments that the Government had not even considered the report. The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Alex White, made this clear and said that the Labour Party had not decided what its position was and the Government had yet to apply itself to this. I remember telling the Taoiseach that the Government should sort out its position on this and bring it to the Dáil when we could have a debate on it. I believe my memory of that is correct but this has not happened. The Bill was published on 5 May, which was seven months ago. In response to me at the time, the Taoiseach promised a debate on the issue but there has been no debate. It is now clear that no legislation will be introduced or passed by the Dáil in respect of the Seanad before the next general election. Arguably, we would not even be having this discussion if we had not put down the questions at this time. I see no evidence to suggest the Government and the Taoiseach are serious about Dáil reform.

I also think the John McNulty affair shows how all the old tricks continue to work in the new dispensation because that was an abuse of the Seanad, particularly in respect of those citizens who would serve on the cultural panel. There is still a chance. The Government could still schedule a long overdue debate in both the Dáil and the Seanad on the working group report. I do not have the details but our Whip reported to our last group meeting that there would be a series of guillotines this week on motions and proposals that the Government is bringing forward.

Going back to my original question, will the Taoiseach tell us why it is not possible to introduce the planned reform of Seanad Éireann before the next general election? Will he report on his proposals to reform the Seanad?

The Taoiseach

The working group, which I commended very strongly, recommended that if the report was to be implemented, it should be done after the next general election. Former Senators Manning and O'Toole, and the former Minister, Mary O'Rourke, made very cogent arguments as to why this should be but also as to what it would mean for the electorate and the way it might do its business. Deputy Gerry Adams is quite entitled to have a view that is very different from that report and that is fair. It is not just a case of the Government saying that this is its view because one wants the arguments and discussion for and against, which is natural. I would have thought that the report of people from all the different parties, who gave long years of service, would be one that would be acceptable to the Members in this House and be implemented. That is what they said. They said it should be done after the general election.

I always thought it unfair in respect of the universities panel. A referendum was held in 1979 and the Bill was published. However, as it will not be implemented before Christmas, it will fall to the next Administration to make its decision regarding Seanad reform. The parties can set out all their points. Obviously, we will set out our points. I hope that in the early part of the next Administration, some changes can be made that will make Seanad Éireann, which is here to stay by virtue of the people's vote, more effective and allow it to do its work in a different way in the times ahead.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Fianna Fáil was the only party which supported and campaigned for the retention of Seanad Éireann, although we wanted a reformed Seanad. I think that following the referendum most people were of the view that reform was required and should happen. That was the overwhelming perspective received from the people.

At the meeting in July, to which all the leaders were summoned by the Taoiseach, the only people who did not have a view on the independent report were the Taoiseach and the Government. That was explicitly stated by the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Alex White. He was very clear in making his point - almost to the point that one detected a certain sense of annoyance on his part about how things had unfolded. All those on the Opposition side agreed that they were in favour of the legislative approach, legislating for direct franchise to the Seanad. That point was put to the Taoiseach very clearly. The Opposition agreed it would run with this report's recommendations, particularly on direct franchise to the Seanad. As the Taoiseach did not follow through on that in any shape or form, we need to be very honest and straightforward about that aspect of it. There has been no follow through since that meeting in July. The Taoiseach did not come back to us about any aspect of this in terms of building a consensus because it is also agreed that a consensus is required. The Opposition was willing. The Independent group kept putting pressure on the Opposition because it had a sense it had got a green light from the Government. However, the reality we experienced at the meeting was completely at variance with what it expected would happen. That is my sense of it. I did not get any sense that the Government is seriously considering the independent report at all.

In terms of reform in politics generally and the points about debates, I am not talking about myself. I am talking about any leader here. I will debate with anybody. It should happen, if somebody else comes in. We tell young people to get involved in politics. We go to schools and tell students to get involved and interested in their community and in the world and they expect that from all political representatives. That is what people expect. They expect politicians, regardless of who they are, to debate passionately about whatever they believe in or disagree with. The example they get from Government is an orchestrated and choreographed response that is really designed to avoid any meaningful debate or engagement. That is the point. This speaks against the whole value of parliamentary democracy and democracy in general because it allows others to come to the fore.

The Taoiseach

I thought Deputy Micheál Martin was speaking about himself and had said that he was invited by a television station to debate certain issues with me and that he accepted that. He was talking about himself.

Deputy Micheál Martin

That is fair enough.

The Taoiseach

Fair enough, but he said-----

Deputy Micheál Martin

The general point is beyond that.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy actually said he was not speaking about himself-----

An Ceann Comhairle

Through the Chair, please.

The Taoiseach

I look forward to the opportunity to have debates with you all - everybody.

Deputy Micheál Martin

You all.

The Taoiseach

Yes.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Because-----

The Taoiseach

Is the Deputy the Leader of the Opposition or is it Deputy Gerry Adams?

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Taoiseach does not want to debate one-to-one with anybody. He should debate with Deputy Gerry Adams.

An Ceann Comhairle

We are talking about reform of the Seanad.

The Taoiseach

Is Deputy Micheál Martin the Leader of the Opposition or is it Deputy Gerry Adams?

Deputy Micheál Martin

RTE and the Taoiseach are at one on this. RTE agrees with the Taoiseach. It is probably facilitating him in one way.

The Taoiseach

RTE is entitled to its own opinion.

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us get back to the business at hand.

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Taoiseach has had the back door in there, to be quite blunt about it.

The Taoiseach

As far as I am concerned, I debate political issues every day of the week-----

Deputy Micheál Martin

The same thing happened last year.

The Taoiseach

----- and, in some cases, far more robustly than what the Deputy does in here. Be that as it may, the Deputy has a particular slant he wants to follow at all times. I suppose he is entitled to that. We have a series of really important pieces of legislation to put through between now and the end of this session. I hope co-operation will be forthcoming from the Opposition parties on these matters rather than them waiting to prolong things just for the sake of discussion.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Does the Taoiseach accept that there will be a guillotine on those? Five minutes ago he said there was no guillotine.

An Ceann Comhairle

We are speaking about Seanad reform.

The Taoiseach

I hope we do not have to guillotine-----

Deputy Micheál Martin

The Taoiseach has asked for guillotines. He has tabled motions to the Whips for guillotines.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is a thing called speaking through the Chair.

Deputy Micheál Martin

My apologies.

The Taoiseach

We have the bankruptcy, the climate change and the legal services legislation to finish.

These are important Bills and I hope that the Opposition parties, in the interests of having the legislation put through, will be able to make their valid points and where amendments are made and accepted, fair enough.

Deputy Micheál Martin

Is the Taoiseach now confirming that they will be guillotined?

The Taoiseach

I cannot confirm what will happen in the Dáil, but I hope we will get all those Bills through in the time that is available in this session. I look forward to the Deputy’s help in that regard.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I want to go back to my original question, which is for the Taoiseach to report on his comments that he did not think it would be possible to introduce the planned reform of Seanad Éireann before the next election. That is contrary to what he told me seven months ago when he promised that we would do this.

I was at a meeting last night in Ballymascanlon called by the local county branch of the Irish Farmers Association to deal with rural crime. I will not take us along that road although it is an issue worthy of debate. What struck me was the anger at the politicians who were in attendance. All the main parties were there but we had been instructed not to speak. Towards the end of the meeting that instruction was relaxed. The reason there is so much anger, not just about rural crime but a range of issues, is the high-flown rhetoric the Taoiseach employed when he talked about political reform and spoke of Paddy needs to know, a democratic revolution, never doing things the way they were done in the past, doing them differently and that honesty was going to be the policy.

Then we come to the issue of Seanad reform and, as we were reminded a moment ago, the referendum question put by the Government did not include the ability to vote for reform, which was our preference. The question was either retain it or get rid of it. One would think, given how the electorate responded to that, and given that this working group was set up that the Taoiseach would have responded speedily but he did not. He has had the report - I will not repeat what happened at the meeting that took place - for seven months and he has not brought it forward. That is why so many citizens are cynical about politics and angry about some politicians, on top of all the other policies the Government has employed. It is not enough to say the working group did not see this being brought in until after the next general election. That does not stop us from priming ourselves and getting the best legislation possible. Why did the Taoiseach not bring forward the report? Was that a real promise he made in May when he agreed to do so or was it just off the top of his head? Was he serious? Why do we not have this issue addressed, including the legislation and the debate that is required in order to fulfil the Taoiseach’s commitment to political reform and the democratic revolution?

The Taoiseach

As the Deputy is aware, in a referendum the answer is either "Yes" or "No". It is not "might" or "would" or "maybe". It is not a question of asking people do they want to consider abolition of this entity or not, and by the way they might consider something else while they are at it. It is a straightforward question. I am quite sure that many of the people who were at the meeting in Ballymascanlon last night, a place I know well, voted one way or the other as they were perfectly entitled to do, in response to the question they were asked. They gave their answer and Seanad Éireann is here to stay. In order to reflect on all the different reports from different parties, entities and Senators, that have been there for many years-----

Deputy Gerry Adams

Does the Taoiseach have the report?

The Taoiseach

Yes and it is a very good report. It is a very objective report from experienced people who have served in the Seanad and in this House and understand the mechanics of politics very well and have no vested interest in the Seanad or in being Members of the Seanad.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Why did the Taoiseach not bring it forward?

The Taoiseach

I did not bring it forward because of the view taken by the working group on the question of implementation.

Deputy Micheál Martin

That is not what it said.

The Taoiseach

If that is not what it said the Deputy seems to know, regardless of whether he read it. That is what it said. There is not agreement on this report.

Deputy Gerry Adams

We have not had a chance to debate it.

The Taoiseach

There is no agreement on this report. The Deputy will have his debate before Christmas, but he will not agree with Deputy Micheál Martin or us. There will be different points made and that is fair in political discourse and debate but I do not think the people in Ballymascanlon last night were angry about high-flown rhetoric about Seanad Éireann.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Does the Taoiseach think so? It is about the money the Government gave to the banks.

The Taoiseach

Not at all. The Deputy should not be foolish. There are many challenges and issues to be considered and they can only be dealt with by decisiveness and clarity and not high-flown rhetoric, like putting €2.2 billion on the table for social housing, or whatever. People understand that.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Cutting Garda numbers.

The Taoiseach

Garda numbers yes, and a new unit to deal with cross-Border crime, and a new authority to deal with that and €200 million to provide the Garda with proper information systems so that it can apprehend criminals. We can get everybody involved, north and south of the Border to deal with this.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Welcome to the club.

The Taoiseach

The Deputy’s contacts will I am sure be helpful to the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the Garda in that regard and we look forward to putting those criminals behind bars where they should be.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I work with both of them as the Taoiseach knows.

The Taoiseach

It does not take high-flown rhetoric to do that. We need communications systems, security forces that are well financed and facilitated with resources to do that and protect our citizens. That is why people get angry when they do not see that. I hope they see it now.

Deputy Gerry Adams

A Cheann Comhairle, the Taoiseach still has not answered the question.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is a matter for the Taoiseach, not for me.

Cabinet Committee Meetings

Joe Higgins

Question:

7. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach when the last meeting of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears took place. [31774/15]

Ruth Coppinger

Question:

8. Deputy Ruth Coppinger asked the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears is expected to take place. [31778/15]

Micheál Martin

Question:

9. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the number of times that a Cabinet sub-committee met at which housing was discussed. [35261/15]

Richard Boyd Barrett

Question:

10. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears last met. [40154/15]

Gerry Adams

Question:

11. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when the last meeting of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears took place. [42219/15]

Gerry Adams

Question:

12. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach the number of meetings of the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears that have taken place in 2015 to date. [42220/15]

The Taoiseach

I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 to 12, inclusive, together.

The Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears which was established in 2014 has met eight times to date, of which five meetings took place in 2015. The committee last met on 8 October. The next meeting of the committee has not yet been scheduled. For reasons of Cabinet confidentiality, it is not appropriate to comment on specific issues discussed at particular meetings.

The Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears was established to monitor implementation of the Government’s construction strategy and to oversee effective implementation of the Government’s response to the issue of mortgage arrears on a whole-of-government basis. In addition, matters relating to social housing, homelessness and associated issues are discussed regularly at the Cabinet committee on social policy and public service reform.

Deputy Micheál Martin

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply because he said the Cabinet committee on Construction 2020, housing, planning and mortgage arrears has met eight times. The structure the Taoiseach has in place, and the number of times that committee has met, are inadequate when measured against the degree to which this problem has escalated in the past four years and grown to crisis levels in respect of homelessness and rough sleeping, families with children becoming homeless and the failure to construct an adequate supply of houses. Several Departments are privately admitting they did not see this coming and got it wrong three or four years ago in respect of the crisis we are experiencing. They felt then that there was no need to invest in social housing or to deal with the supply of housing in the private market. Instead, what happened was the decision to reduce the rent supplement and to impose a rent supplement cap, which made the situation more difficult for tenants in certain accommodation. Given that rents have increased by 30%, the Government has created a crisis with many families ending up homeless because they could not afford to pay the rent. We have been pointing this out for the past three years. The Tánaiste and the Taoiseach have been very stubborn about it.

The Taoiseach has consistently been missing the point that those who are renting and perhaps on low incomes or in receipt of welfare payments cannot cope with increasing rents. He pillories me for stating this, but I am not the only one who says so. Those involved in helping homeless families have been stating it consistently since the Government changed strategy on rent allowance. It reduced it, brought forward restrictions and failed to increase it.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is a separate question. I have been giving the Deputy some leeway.

Deputy Micheál Martin

My point is that there is something fundamentally wrong in respect of the meetings, the structure, the number of meetings the Government has been having, the lack of joined-up thinking and the lack of urgency shown on this issue. That is why we are experiencing chaos for many families and crises in dealing with homelessness across the board and in housing supply. The Government's own targets for social housing have not been met and in the past three or four years fewer than 1,000 social housing units have been built in the entire country. The Taoiseach should contrast this with the 14,000 social housing units built between 2007 and 2010 as there is a huge difference between the two figures. It appears as though the structure has not worked and that the Cabinet committee system has not worked because, by any objective yardstick, what was a problem or challenge a number of years ago has evolved into a full-scale crisis, notwithstanding that the committee has met eight times or nothwithstanding the Cabinet sub-committee structure the Government has established. Does the Taoiseach accept the basic point that what the Government put in place was not adequate and that the number of meetings held simply has not been adequate to deal with this growing and escalating crisis for many families nationwide?

The Taoiseach

The question of homelessness and rough sleepers is dealt with under the social policy and by the public service reform committee which also meets. This is not to state the question of housing and construction was not discussed directly by the Cabinet. I refer to the discussions that normally take place on reports from individual Ministers. I was not aware that Departments were admitting privately to the Deputy that they did not see this coming. Obviously, when 90,000 houses were being built per year and when that figure fell to 8,000 or 8,500 per year after the crash, it became perfectly obvious that there would be a supply problem. As I stated previously to the Deputy, rent supplement was an issue that put a lot of pressure on people to move from houses because the opportunity, on foot of lack of supply, means that there is pressure for space. The rent supplement scheme supports 63,000 people at a cost of almost €300 million, a significant amount of money. Properties are secured under the scheme and 17,200 rent supplement tenancies were awarded this year, which is an important consideration for families.

Clearly, a review of rent limits earlier this year found the impact of increasing limits at a time of short supply would increase costs disproportionately for the Exchequer, with no new housing being made available to new recipients. Rather than increasing limits, rent supplement policy, therefore, obviously will continue to allow flexibility where landlords seek rents in excess of the limits both for existing customers and new applicants for rent supplement. As I have pointed out many times, circumstances are considered on a case by case basis and rent supplement amounts are being increased above the prescribed limits as is appropriate. This flexible approach has helped 4,700 households nationwide to retain their rented accommodation. These are some of the people who have approached the offices of Deputies Micheál Martin, Richard Boyd Barrett and Gerry Adams, as well as mine. They are under pressure from their landlords to get out, but because of this flexible rental system, the rent supplement amount can be increased above the limit. This has helped 4,700 families, which is an important consideration. Moreover, the rent limits for the homeless under the housing assistance programme, HAP, pilot scheme were also increased to allow homeless families in Dublin to move out of hotel and emergency accommodation to find homes. For those families in emergency accommodation in Dublin city, HAP payments will be allowed to 50% above rent supplement levels. In addition, they are being increased in Cork, Galway, Kildare and Meath, where flexibility allows.

I do not accept Deputy Micheál Martin's assertion that the structure is a failure. From my perspective, it has allowed Ministers, their Departments, agencies and Ministers of State the opportunity to respond at Cabinet sub-committees on issues of the day or issues that are important. The Deputy may have a different view. The system that used to operate previously was that Cabinet sub-committees met highly irregularly and normally met on a Tuesday or a Wednesday. I found that the agendas were long and that they were unable to make decisions because other issues piled up during the course of a normal busy parliamentary week. From my point of view, I leave available one Monday per month for whatever Cabinet sub-committee meetings are necessary. The next meetings will be held on next Monday which allows for six or eight to be held from 8:30 a.m. onwards. Ministers, Secretaries General and senior civil and public servants attend and personnel from different agencies or organisations, as need be, can also attend, if appropriate. In that sense, it clearly has helped with the Action Plan for Jobs, the regional action plans and the development of and bringing to a conclusion proposals that have been put to the Government to be accepted. The Deputy may have a different view, however, to which he is entitled. I must state that perhaps the responsibilities of the committees might be slightly restructured in a different way. The Government has changed the remit of a number of them because things have changed. While families are still dealing with the issue of mortgage distress and so on, it is no longer of the same scale, as was the case two years ago. Consequently, that matter has been put with housing and construction sector planning. Across the entire range of Cabinet sub-committees I have found it to be a highly effective way to put propositions, set timescales, demand responses and move on to the Cabinet, where necessary, to seek decisions.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

This question relates to the Cabinet sub-committee on the Construction 2020 strategy and housing and mortgage arrears. I put it to the Taoiseach that there probably is no sub-committee of the Cabinet of which he is a member that is guilty of a more spectacular failure and gross incompetence than this one and all those involved in it. The result of its endeavours, or lack thereof, is the worst housing and homelessness crisis in the history of the State. The position has worsened every single year since the Government took office and since the sub-committee has been deliberating on the issue of housing, as well as overseeing and informing the housing policy of the Government. When one considers what is happening, is this not proof of gross incompetence and utter failure? First, the problem concerns the response to the unprecedented crisis we face, with families and kids in record numbers sleeping on the street or in hostels and with housing waiting lists having spiralled out of all control to the point that one is now facing spending 18 to 19 years on a housing list. When the Taoiseach took office, the list in Dún Laoghaire was approximately 12 years long.

It is now 18 years long. That indicates how many people have come on to the list and how little social housing the Government has delivered.

When these points are put to the Taoiseach, he says, "We inherited a crisis. It is not really our fault. We are now trying to deal with it." That is just not an honest response. He is not telling the truth about what the Government did, which I can only assume was based on advice from this committee. When the Government came into office, it made a policy decision in July 2011 to cease construction of social housing. It is in a circular issued by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, which made clear that the intention and belief of the Government was that it would be possible to provide for the social housing needs of the State by leasing from the private sector. It was stated explicitly.

Is it not the truth that policy has led us to the mess we are now in? The belief was that somehow the private sector would deliver the social housing when it self-evidently was never going to do that and has not done this. Based on that misguided belief, the Government stopped building social housing. Even now is the Taoiseach not being dishonest with this House and with the public when he says he switched to a policy of delivering social housing? I keep trying to alert anybody who is interested in this debate to the fact that when we read behind the Housing 2020 strategy and the Government's claim to deliver social housing, the actual figures make it absolutely clear that 80% of the housing the Government hopes to deliver, it hopes will be delivered by the private sector through leasing. That is a fantasy. That cannot happen.

An Ceann Comhairle

We cannot debate the issue. The Deputy asked when the committee last met. I gave him a bit of rope, but there are others to ask a question.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I know there are. I did not interrupt any of the previous speakers.

An Ceann Comhairle

I have tried to give everybody a fair go.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

You did not interrupt Deputy Micheál Martin who spoke for ten minutes.

An Ceann Comhairle

Hold on one second. I have tried to be fair. We have 11 minutes left. Deputy Gerry Adams has a number of questions. The Taoiseach has to respond to the Deputy and I am trying to warn him-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Give me one more minute, a Cheann Comhairle.

An Ceann Comhairle

Okay. The Deputy asked when the committee last met.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

And I am asking-----

An Ceann Comhairle

We cannot debate the housing issue.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Yes. I am asking whether this committee is responsible for the misguided policy of believing that leasing from the private sector in general is capable of dealing with the problem when it self-evidently is not. This is something the Taoiseach repeated this morning and I heard it on Leaders' Questions. How can he possibly state that delivering private housing will provide social housing or deal with the social housing and homeless crisis? I just do not get the mindset.

Is it not obvious that the way to deliver social housing and deal with homelessness is for the State to provide it and provide the resources to deal with homelessness? The Taoiseach continues to make the bizarre assertion that by providing private housing through the State via NAMA is somehow an answer to the social housing crisis and the homelessness crisis. From where is this stuff coming? Is it not time to admit that the ideology informing these policies has been a spectacular failure and must be abandoned?

The Taoiseach

The Deputy is deliberately mixing up the question of social housing and private housing. The Minister for Finance, in consultation with NAMA, has reached agreement that 20,000 private houses would be provided by NAMA between now and 2020 on lands owned by NAMA and with contractors contracted to NAMA. That is private housing.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

From a State body.

The Taoiseach

That is to deal with a serious shortage of private housing in this city and other places. The Government has put €2.5 billion on the table for social housing and has called all the chief executives of the local authorities together and instructed them to get on with their targets and objectives and to start building. That is separate development of infrastructure from the private housing sector.

The Deputy will have seen an announcement by a major firm intending to build significant numbers of houses in his area. They will be private housing, I assume.

The strategy for social housing was published in November of last year. That strategy indicated a target of 110,000 social housing units, as the Deputy is aware, through the delivery of 35,000 social housing units and meeting the needs of 75,000 households through the housing assistance payment and the rental accommodation scheme. Those two together will deal with nearly 90,000 claims for social housing.

I agree with the Deputy that it is not on for anybody going on the housing list today in 2015 not to get a house until 2037. We will deal with that issue. That is why the Government has put up serious amounts of public money to build social housing in order that these things can apply. The Minister has commented on this.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Some 75,000 of those are supposed to come from the private sector.

The Taoiseach

Regarding social housing, budget 2016 will ensure that 17,600 households will have their housing needs addressed next year, in 2016. That is in addition to those who received accommodation and assistance during 2015.

For 2016, the housing allocation has increased by 18%, or €125 million, from €686 million to €811 million. That accounts for more than half of the budget of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. It is a very significant amount of money, translated in reality to houses on the ground for people who need them. An additional €56 million has been allocated for capital programmes and there is also a significant increase in current spending. A further €112 million is coming from local authorities. I hope they get on with this business.

Clearly, the Government's allocation is designed to meet the target of 22,882 social housing units by 2017. The Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly, and his departmental officials have had significant engagement with the local authorities about this. So far in 2015, nearly €500 million in capital funding has been allocated to local authority and approved housing body projects. These projects will contribute to delivery in 2016 and when taken together 17,100 units will be provided next year.

It is not as if Government was sitting back and wondering what should happen here. There has been a raft of measures, including legislation, incentives, changes in the structure of the welfare system and now direct finance to the local authorities from public funding to build public housing for social housing through the registered housing authorities together with NAMA and the private sector in general, to meet the demand.

Deputy Gerry Adams

I am not against the structure in principle. It can be useful to have a core group or a sub-committee dealing with these issues but it is results that count. It is not a question of the structures but the results of their deliberations. Despite the eight meetings and the frequency of Government press releases, we are now in a live crisis. Last December 40 families lost their homes. It is now between 70 and 80 families each month. A year ago more than 300 families, including 726 children, were homeless in Dublin. In May this figure had risen to 900 children and almost 1,500 adults. I do not have a huge amount of time to go through all these statistics.

Two weeks ago, a major European report, the European index of exclusion 2015, found that the State had the second highest rate of rent and mortgage arrears within the European Union. One in five citizens is affected by this. Of the 28 EU member states, this State is the second worst, with almost half of the poorer households paying out more. At the end of June almost 100,000 mortgage accounts were in arrears and just over 70,000 households were in arrears of more than 90 days. All of the bad policies contribute to children being at risk of poverty - 34% compared to the EU average of 28%. Regardless of the structure and the number of meetings, the fact is the Government has favoured the private rental market as opposed to building social and affordable houses in which to house people. The dependency on the private rental market, which is for profit, has driven up rents. Unscrupulous landlords have exploited that and pushed down conditions for those who are renting the accommodation. The committee is not working. The crisis is getting worse day by day and there is no strategy to deal with it. Will the Taoiseach consider standing down the membership of that committee or, as I said to him previously, go to the European Commission to have the housing crisis declared a national emergency? I put that suggestion to the Taoiseach twice today and he has not even had the good manners to answer me. Even if he said to me, "That is nonsense, Gerry, forget about it," but he did not even answer me, he just ignored the suggestion. Would that not be something the Construction 2020, housing planning and mortgage arrears Cabinet sub-committee could consider in the time ahead?

As the Taoiseach and other Members were speaking, up came the magical year of 2016. What would any of the signatories of the Proclamation think of the statistics, which are living people, citizens, and the way they are being treated? They cannot even have a home, a roof over their heads, and they are in danger of poverty on the Taoiseach's watch.

The Taoiseach

They would probably say we were in a better situation than Belfast. I think they would look at the situation-----

Deputy Gerry Adams

Is that what the Minister of State, Deputy Sean Sherlock, said?

The Taoiseach

-----where the Government has reacted to an unprecedented challenge.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Come on Sean - shame on you.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am sorry. Members should speak through the Chair.

Deputy Sean Sherlock

What are you talking about?

The Taoiseach

Far be it from Deputy Gerry Adams to cast aspersions on anybody.

Deputy Gerry Adams

Come on. We are talking about citizens of the State.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy asked his question. Will he, please, listen to the reply? There is only one minute left.

The Taoiseach

A total of 87% of people are up to date with their mortgage payments. Those who are in difficulty have had very little contact with the lender in the first place. That is why the insolvency agency practitioners and MABS are working with each individual case to take them out of the distress and remove the fear which had led to the situation where letters are unopened. I hope that in the time ahead the remaining membership of that group, where there are distressed mortgages, can be dealt with. The signatories of the Proclamation in 1916 will ask whether the Government responded to the housing crisis. Given the scale of the collapse that took place, with the loss of 100,000 jobs, emigration haemorrhaging all over the place, us being blocked out of the markets, the people, in accepting the scale of the challenge, have pulled the country back from that brink to a point where we are in a very different position now. One hundred years on from 1916, they would see the path ahead as being one of careful management, competency-----

Deputy Gerry Adams

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

The Taoiseach

-----in terms of managing the economy for the people to be able to have that engine to drive and invest in services, as the more people that are in work, the less tax they will pay.

As I said, the Government has put €2.5 billion on the table for social housing, in addition to the changes in the legislation and the incentives for contractors, the reduction in rebates, the opportunity for reduced rebates in areas to incentivise developers to get on with it, and the investment by NAMA in more than 20,000 units in the near future. The European Investment Bank has been very open to investment in a number of areas in this country and has been very forthright in its willingness to help. It is helping in a number of infrastructural areas. While we are not at the point where we can say the supply side has been dealt with, a great deal of effort has gone into the matter and progress is being made. Admittedly, we are not at the point where we would like to be yet, but we are getting there.

Written Answers follow Adjournment.