Vol. 959 No. 3
As there are only a few minutes left I do not think there is much point in starting a debate on Questions Nos. 8 to 10. Some of the Members are not here anyway. I suggest we move on to questions to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I welcome the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, and the Ministers of State to the Chamber.
34. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the status of the mid-term capital review; if it will provide specific estimates of key projects; if it will earmark funding to specific projects; when he expects the review to be published; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40449/17]
The summer economic statement gave a commitment to increase the public capital plan by 17%. The Minister published a glossy document at the beginning of September relating to the review of the current plan. Can he give assurances that this is not more of the Government spin, which has been the hallmark of its first 100 days in office, that there will be substance to this capital plan and that it will make a difference to communities across the country, including those about which we have just spoken? How does he intend to align it with the national planning framework the Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, is preparing?
The Deputy is aware, as acknowledged, I published the review of the capital plan on 14 September and a copy of the report was made available to each Deputy on that day.
The review of the plan draws on an evidence base that included submissions by Departments and offices, an extensive public consultation and an infrastructure capacity and demand analysis completed by the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service, IGEES, in the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.
I also published for the first time a capital tracker, which lists a range of projects and programmes committed to by Departments over the period of the capital plan. Copies of the documentation and the capital tracker can be found on the website of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.
The review of the plan highlights some key themes, which will closely inform and be incorporated into the analysis, which will then lead to the finalisation of the new ten-year national investment plan. These themes include confirmation of the central role of public capital in underpinning the long-term growth of our economy and society; the need to align public capital investment priorities to a changing society and changing demographics; the critical importance of public capital infrastructure to deliver balanced development across our country; the need to respond to Brexit; the central importance of making sure that money is spent well; and that a solid business case is in place for important public spending.
Based on this analysis, the review of the plan has identified a number of sectors such as priorities for investment, including transport, education and housing. The findings of this review will assist Government in selecting priorities for the allocation of €4.1 billion up to the period to 2021. Consequently, between 2014 and 2021, public capital expenditure in Ireland will have more than doubled and as set out by the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, this will see public investment in Ireland moving to among the highest in the EU. The Government will make final decisions on the allocation of this funding in the context of the 2018 Estimates.
When does the Minister expect to publish the plan? How will it align with the work the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, is doing on the national planning framework? The document the Minister published, the review of the capital plan, highlights broadband as an area for prioritisation. He may have heard in the last hour or so that SIRO has pulled out of the national broadband tendering process. Does that suggest to him that a company made up of Vodafone and ESB has no confidence in a process? What action will the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform take to ensure the effectiveness of the national broadband process in light of that? What action will the Minister take to ensure that all the provisions of the capital plan are implemented in a manner that is effective and efficient and without causing capacity issues for the economy?
Regarding the Deputy's first question, the Minister, Deputy Murphy, and I aim to publish the ten-year plan in December. Regarding his second point on broadband, the role of my Department has been purely confined to making sure there is enough of a capital allocation to support the tendering process. Any decisions regarding who is tendering for it and the implementation of that process is for the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Naughten. I will leave it to him to comment on the information the Deputy shared with the House.
In terms of making sure the capital plan will then be implemented, the reason we are now publishing the capital tracker I referred to earlier is to ensure that in regard to specific projects that have been committed to in the public plan, the public and the Oireachtas can see where they stand in terms of implementation. We can see the fruits of that in terms of the last plan that is in its final phase of implementation such as the Gort to Tuam road, Luas cross city, progress on the national children's hospital and, for example, the recent progress that has been made in delivering another 14 primary care centres through use of public private partnerships, PPPs.
First, the Minister's response to my broadband question highlights a problem I have, namely, who is in charge of making sure the plan is delivered? If the Minister leaves it to each line Minister, who is in charge of making sure he or she does his or her job? Is it not the Minister's job to make sure that they spend the money and spend it properly?
Second, the Minister mentioned PPPs. Does he envisage a role for PPPs and will that role perhaps involve an expansion of the money within the capital plan?
Regarding the first question, I am absolutely responsible for the allocation of capital funding and making sure it is spent in the way that is agreed with other Departments. In regard to the policy area for the roll-out of the broadband process, all issues and decisions relating to tendering are a matter for the Minister, Deputy Naughten, although I support and work with him in any way he requires and that I can.
Regarding public private partnerships, the review we have under way of capital expenditure that will culminate in the ten-year capital plan will include an assessment of the use we may make of public private partnerships in the future. All of that must be set against the fact that when we used public private partnerships in the past, we did them at a point at which the country was not able to borrow. Now that we are able to borrow, we have to look at the use of those funding schemes in a new light, which I am currently doing.
35. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will use budget 2018 to address the State’s need for infrastructure investment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40547/17]
This question follows on from the same line of questioning of my colleague, Deputy Calleary. It relates to the capital plan. As opposed to the review in the sectors under most pressure and where capital will be allocated, is the Minister of the view that he will increase the overall envelope in terms of capital more than what has already been outlined in the review using the resources that are available in this year's budget, particularly in view of the fact that capital can be smoothed over a four-year period?
I will not read out to Deputy Doherty the answer I have just shared with Deputy Calleary. I will just answer the specific question the former has put to me. I have already identified that we will seek to make a further €500 million available in 2019, 2020 and 2021 as part of the summer economic statement. This will take the additional amount of new capital we will be allocating across that period to more than €4 billion. The total amount of capital funding that will be available between 2018 and 2021 will be approximately €26.8 billion. At the end of this programme we will be increasing gross voted capital by nearly 85% more than where we stood in 2016. For those reasons I am not currently planning to increase the level of additional public capital expenditure that will go into those figures because I believe a near doubling of the level of public capital expenditure across those years is a very strong increase and because my judgment is that if we were to look to increase it further beyond that pace, we could get into difficulties regarding value for money and making sure we have the right amount of capacity in the economy to translate those levels of expenditure into the schools, roads, bridges and primary care centres we want to make happen. For these reasons, I am not at present planning a further change in that capital expenditure figure beyond that which I decided in the summer economic statement.
I recognise that there is to be an increased level of capital expenditure over the next number of years. This will represent an increase from the lowest level in Europe, which is the baseline from which we are working. When one is at the lowest level in Europe, it is easier to get 60% or 70% increases because one is starting from a very low base. Nonetheless, there is an increase and it will ramp up as we get closer to 2020-21. The problem is that we have at this point in time serious crises, as everyone in this Chamber knows, which require capital investment. For individuals who are either on housing waiting lists or in emergency accommodation, 2020 or 2021 does not mean much to them; they need investment now. I would argue - and I make this point to the Minister in advance of the budget - that smoothing rules are available. For example, for every euro the Government cuts in taxes, it could increase capital investment this year by €4. For every €200 million the Government gives in tax cuts, it could invest €800 million in capital that would be smoothed out over a four-year period in respect of housing. We are in the middle of an almighty crisis. As legislators, we do not have the luxury of saying we will reach the mid-term or the higher end of capital investment in four or five years' time after coming through a decade of drought, of underinvestment in capital that was a result of Government decisions and budgetary decisions. We can argue why those decisions, taken by both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, were taken and for what effect, but they resulted in the crises we now have. We must take decisions now and then, and I acknowledge that we are increasing investment in public housing, but it is not enough. It does not meet the scale of the crisis we have out there.
When I use a word or phrase such as "infrastructure", I always accompany it with an acknowledgement that we are talking about homes, schools and the overhaul of facilities that in many cases do not meet the needs of our citizens. I am crystal clear that behind technical phrases such as "public capital expenditure" and "where we are as a percentage of national income" is the reality that we have families who need homes and investment that needs to be made in many parts of our country. That is the reason we are making the increase in capital expenditure the Deputy has acknowledged. He can make the case that we should increase it more, as indeed he is doing, and it is obviously a legitimate case to make. My view is that we can reach a point at which we can deliver more things more quickly if those parts of the economy upon which we depend to build homes - and we will begin to build even more homes ourselves directly, as the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, has acknowledged - have confidence that the levels of expenditure I am outlining can be consistently held for a number of years. That will give companies, local authorities and banks, as well as other sources of investment, confidence that in the future money will be available for which they can plan. That is what we are looking to do. As for the approaching budget, while I still have a lot of work to do dealing with spending Departments regarding deciding what the budget will look like, I expect that the percentage increase in capital expenditure that will be seen at the end of this budget will be significantly ahead of the increase in current expenditure. The reason for that will be the desire to respond next year to the many difficulties I know people have.
We can talk about where we are, about the fact that we are at the lowest level in Europe and about getting to the midpoint or the higher midpoint, but the Minister must recognise that our capital investment was €10 billion and fell to €4 billion. There was a massive withdrawal of investment here. That is why we have a housing crisis, why our roads are now under pressure, why our rail is under pressure, why we do not have adequate broadband, why our flood defences in our communities are flooding and people are being put out of their houses and so on. Next year the Government intends to spend €70 million on flood defences. By 2021 the figure will be €100 million. It is completely inadequate. I know the Minister must balance all the needs in the budget. He has heard my articulation of the argument. I do not believe there is a need for the type of net tax cuts he proposes but I genuinely believe, as politicians, we have a responsibility - not a responsibility to chase votes but to act in the best interests of our citizens. We know about, we will all talk about and we will all sympathise with the fact that there are 3,000 children going to bed tonight in emergency accommodation. We have within our gift to ramp up delivery of social housing by using the resources this State has made available to us as politicians to decide where they should go. The European Union's rules have allowed that for every tax cut, every euro that is cut in tax, the Government can spend four times that much this year on social housing. I plead to the Minister and beg him to consider, even at this late stage, increasing capital investment out of the fiscal space available in this year.
I am acting in the best interests of citizens. What always motivates me, as I am sure is the case with the Deputy, is what the long-term best thing is for our country. The only reason I put the kind of focus I do on economic indicators such as where we are with bond yields, interest rates and so on is to give our country the chance to try to create the resources to deal with the kind of difficulty I know our citizens face because I represent them, just as does Deputy Doherty. While he is correct to make the point that capital expenditure decreased for many years, I will make two points. First, when €10 billion was being spent in the past, it was buying things of poor value to our country. We should and must move away from asking how we can match a level of expenditure that, even at that time, many in the Oireachtas felt was not delivering good value for the citizen. What we must do is look at how we can get best value for the taxpayer while increasing expenditure.
Regarding housing and all the progress we need to make there - and I know we need to make progress - of course, what the Deputy's point did not acknowledge is that 80 citizens per day are now being given solutions to their housing difficulty, whether that be through use of payments available through our social welfare system or new homes being offered to people. This is happening as a result of decisions that were made in recent years too. While we have much more difficulty we need to deal with, if it were not for the change in our economic circumstances I would not even have the ability to allocate this additional funding.
36. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the contingencies put in place to deal with increased water levels in rivers and waterways; the extra measures that have been established to deal with the upcoming winter months; the amount dedicated towards these contingencies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40551/17]
We have just come out of a very wet summer. Met Éireann figures show it was a wetter than average summer. There were the extraordinary events in Donegal, the debate on which Deputy McConalogue will be leading later, and I know the Acting Chairman, Deputy Eugene Murphy, visited Donegal as well. What plans has the Minister in place to deal with the potential flooding that may arise this winter, particularly given we are going into a winter with river levels much higher than they were this time last year?
Responsibility for the overall management and co-ordination of the front-line response to flooding events rests with the local authorities, which work with other first responders such as the Garda and Civil Defence. I wish to acknowledge the staff of all those organisations who were on the ground dealing with the aftermath of the recent flooding in Donegal. I saw for myself the devastation that the communities experienced and commend them on their resilience and spirit. My sincere sympathy goes out to all those affected by the flooding, many of whom I met personally while in Donegal.
Regarding the wider issue of flood risk management, the Government has approved the interim report of the interdepartmental flood policy co-ordination group, which outlined the range of measures that are addressing Ireland's flood risk for this winter. The Government has invested €285 million in major flood defence schemes since 1995, which is providing protection to approximately 8,000 properties, with an estimated benefit to the country of damage avoided of more than €1 billion.
A further investment of €33 million in minor works since 2009 is protecting 6,000 properties across the country. Since the flooding of 2015, the Government has delivered a number of additional measures that are helping to manage flood risk for this winter. Significant investment in major and minor flood relief works is continuing, with expenditure of €69 million since the beginning of 2016 and with ten major schemes currently under construction and seven more expected to start in the next 12 months. A further 25 major schemes are at design and planning stage.
As the Deputy is aware, the Shannon Flood Risk State Agency Co-ordination Working Group is trialling the lowering of levels in Lough Allen to complement existing water level protocols in place for Lough Ree. The OPW and Mayo County Council are progressing an individual property protection pilot project in Crossmolina. This initiative will provide protection for up to 76 properties and, together with another pilot scheme in Kilkenny, will inform any future assistance by Government to homeowners for individual home flood mitigation.
The OPW’s proactive flood risk planning through the CFRAM programme in recent years is nearing completion. By the end of this year I would hope to publish the final flood risk management plans developed under the CFRAM process and to announce the proposed structural measures contained within those plans that will, over the coming years, be taken to detailed design stage in order to protect at-risk communities and properties.
I thank the Minister of State. However, he could have given me that answer in June or July. I want to know what specific new initiatives he has taken to deal with the rainfall levels this summer and their potential impact on the flooding in those communities later this year. We had the extraordinary event in Donegal but that is now becoming less extraordinary and more the norm. While the response was eventually very comprehensive, it took some time to organise. Will the Minister give a guarantee to communities across the country that, in the event of there being a flooding emergency in their community this winter, the response will be immediate and there will not be delays?
The OPW has spoken of "one in 100-year" flooding events. Given what happened in Donegal and what happened in 2015 and 2016, are there plans to change how the impact of flooding events is measured?
The Minister of State mentioned Crossmolina. The scheme there is very welcome and I commend the OPW on using it. However, we do not want to see it used. Will the Minister of State give me an update on the long-term plan for Crossmolina?
As the Deputy is aware, I have travelled much of the country throughout the summer. I visited Donegal and saw first-hand what those people experienced and had to deal with. However, the question the Deputy asked is whether we are dealing with it, and the answer is that, yes, we are. Since 24 August we did not have one dry day up to the past two fine days. Within the system we have, it is very hard to manage the rainfall but, where we can, we are providing money for flood defences and minor works schemes for those communities. We are working particularly closely with the local authorities. We have not been found wanting. On Saturday last I visited the Deputy's area to attend a funeral and saw first-hand what is happening there. From dealing with the local authorities and talking to the engineers on the ground, I can assure the Deputy that everything that can be done is being done at this time. Yes, I would like to see a ramp-up of flood defences but, given what I have to spend, I want to spend wisely up to 2021. Other measures will come through CFRAM, hopefully by the end of this year, and we will be able to ensure the protection of the homes to which the Deputy referred.
With regard to Crossmolina, a meeting was held in my office last week and I will have a report on that in the not-too-distant future. Hopefully, it will be a positive one from the Deputy's point of view.
I had heard the Minister of State was around the area. It is the end of September and the level of the River Moy is what it should be at the end of November. While I do not need a response on that, it gives an indication of the potential challenges this year. The Minister of State has to ensure that a response is ready to go on the ground in the event of a repeat of what happened in 2015 or in Donegal earlier this year. I hope it does not happen. I hope we do not have to use any of those responses but, if we do, let us not come with the poor mouth or come crying afterwards. We can take action now.
Five or six years ago the flooding in the River Moy, the River Shannon and across the region was winter flooding. In recent times, however, we have seen downpours happening and nobody, not even anybody in government, could plan for what may come. However, what we can do is give assurances. We are working with local authorities and delivering for local communities. Through CFRAM and further measures that will be taken, we will deliver on schemes and protect those people. The local authority delivered a very fast response in Donegal and the criticism of its response was unfair. I met the first responders on the Tuesday and went with them to everywhere that was flooded. I assure the Deputy that everything that can be done is being done with the local authorities.
37. Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on the review into the ongoing attempts to bring the public services card into widespread use; his views on whether the manner in which this has taken place has caused significant public alarm; his plans in relation to the expansion of the card; the legislative steps he plans to introduce to underpin it; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40647/17]
The Department's e-strategy describes the widespread adoption of the public services card as being critical to the success of that strategy. The manner in which the public services card has been rolled out has caused a fair deal of concern and there is significant public apprehension and a lack of trust in regard to the use of the card. I want to know what steps the Minister is taking to address that public concern and whether he intends to introduce further legislation aimed at addressing those concerns and restoring public faith in the public services card.
The public services card and, importantly, its underpinning registration process are about providing people with public services in a safe and efficient manner. The underpinning registration process, which is called SAFE 2, involves a 15-minute visit to an INTREO office and is done just once. This process is used to establish a person's identity to a substantial level of assurance. This identity assurance level is the highest that is available to the public service. After going through SAFE 2 registration, the person gets a card and a MyGovID account. The card can be used for quick and safe access to services in the physical world, whereas MyGovID gives quick and safe access to public services in the online world.
Going through this registration process gives a number of benefits to the individual. It can protect a person from identity theft, reduce the potential for someone else to fraudulently access information, save time and effort in providing documentation that has been already provided to verify identity and allow a person to access more public services online. It also brings us into line with the increasing needs of the digital single market.
On the question of legality, provision for the information collected during SAFE 2 registration, how that information can be used and the production and use of the card is set out in the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, specifically in section 263. The process, the data and the card have been discussed as part of the legislative process in the Oireachtas over multiple Bill amendments. Since the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, successive Governments have discussed and progressed this initiative. The card has been promoted in successive public service reform plans. The matter has been subjected to a Comptroller and Auditor General study, published in the annual report of that body and examined by the PAC. It has gone through an exhaustive process of verification and debate to date, as it should. I have no plans at this stage to bring in further legislation in regard to the card because of the legislative foundation I have described.
I thank the Minister. I think it important to point out that my query is not about the merits of expanding the system. I understand there are very many reasons to introduce a card like the public services card and I readily acknowledge the benefits of wider e-governance. However, these systems require a level of public trust in order for them to function properly. At present I think a growing number of people simply do not believe their data are safe and are not sure how their data are going to be used. That is the issue. I am not questioning the card itself. I am questioning the lack of public confidence and trust in the system to maintain people's data safely and to ensure there are proper penalties in place.
As the Minister said, the public services card was introduced in legislation over a long number of years.
I believe that it can be traced back some 20 years when it was first discussed and early arrangements were made. Its function has steadily expanded since then. As a result of it going on for so long, many people were simply unaware of it until they were told they needed to have one of the cards to apply, for example, for a driver theory test. The vast majority of the public did not realise that was the case and that in the coming months the public service card was to be required in order to renew a passport, where their identity has already been safely established through holding an initial passport.
For the eGovernment strategy to succeed, the public needs to know exactly what their data is being used for, who can access it and what are the penalties for those who abuse that access. That has not been spelled out.
I appreciate the Deputy's acknowledgment of the merits to the public services card and the approach that underpins it. On the specific questions the Deputy has asked around the use of data, any sharing of data between public bodies has to be consistent with the guidance from the Data Protection Commissioner. The commissioner has raised a number of matters on the operation of the card and I believe that the answer back to the matters raised by the commissioner will be published shortly, if they have not already been published. This will be done in public and will deal with any of the matters the commissioner has raised.
With regard to how we can further buttress the sharing of information and how to make sure the sharing of information is done in a way that meets best standards, this is where the data sharing and governance Bill makes a very important contribution. The Bill is currently at pre-legislative scrutiny by the Oireachtas. This legislation looks to make very clear the different kinds of datasets that can be held in organisations and how those datasets can be shared with other organisations in a way that is further supported by law. I hope that the passage of the legislation through the Oireachtas might deal with some of the issues referred to by Deputy Shortall and some of the concerns people have. The public services card is now held by 2.3 million individuals across the State. I believe that many of these people understand that at the very least it will allow citizens to get to a point where they only have to share information once to allow them to access multiple services, which will be a big step forward.
The Minister has made the case for me in respect of the lack of public confidence in the security of these cards. The Data Protection Commissioner has raised serious concerns. The commissioner has been waiting some time for responses to those concerns and she has insisted that those responses would be published. The public has still not seen those responses. If the system is secure and if it is properly based, why is there such a delay in providing those responses?
The Minister also raised the data sharing and governance Bill. The Minister seems to be implying that there was a requirement for the data sharing Bill to be passed and brought into law in order to provide the assurances to people that their data are safe. Is the Government putting the cart before the horse?
Apart from the Minister giving sympathy and assurances to people today, he has not been very specific about what exactly are those safeguards and the penalties in place in the event that officials abuse the rules around access of the data, as we have seen before from some officials in Government Departments.
I do not see how I could be making the case for the Deputy that there is no faith in this project, given that I pointed to the fact that 2.3 million individuals have this card and the roll-out of the card has to be compliant with current law on data protection. I said that very clearly.
The data sharing and governance Bill is legislation that has been before the Oireachtas for some time. It recognises there is potential for greater data sharing in the future and, recognising that potential and European Union law in that area, is looking to address issues regarding potential uses that could happen in the future. This is why the Bill is before the Oireachtas now and I hope the Houses will consider it positively.
With regard to the issues raised by the Data Protection Commissioner that are being considered by the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection and my Department, we will respond and make our response to all the issues raised fully and publicly available.
The Deputy asked about penalties. I do not have available to me what exactly are the penalties. I will write to the Deputy with that information. It would be a gravely serious matter, and has been a serious matter, if any public servant uses the information on a public services card for any purpose other than that for which it is intended. I will make available to the Deputy the information on sanctions but I assure her that they are very serious and proportionate.
That concludes Priority Questions. Before I move on to Other Questions, I remind Members that there is six and a half minutes in total for each question: 30 seconds for the question to be introduced, the Minister has two minutes to reply, and the Deputy then has one minute to respond. The Minister can come back with one minute and the Deputy has one last minute, and then the Minister has the final say. I ask that Members stick to the six and a half minutes because I do not like interrupting people. The reality is that when a Member goes over their time, another Member who is waiting to get their question answered does not get the time. Please bear that in mind.
