There is a commitment in the programme for Government to increase civilianisation in An Garda Síochána so that more gardaí can be freed up for front-line policing services. This is to include delegated court attendances and release from desk work. The aim was to free up 1,500 gardaí from desk and other duties by 2021, but we learned from the Policing Authority report that only 14 have been successfully transferred. That is not exactly good progress. The report suggests that it will be 2031 or 2041 before the target will actually be achieved. The chairperson, Ms Josephine Fehily, has been very disappointed with the lack of progress on this specific issue. What does the Government intend to do to implement its commitment in the programme for Government on civilianisation within the force?
Questions on Promised Legislation
I thought I misheard the Deputy for a moment and that he was suggesting that we need to increase civilisation in An Garda Síochána.
The Taoiseach heard correctly.
That is definitely true.
I understand that he means civilianisation, and it is absolutely the Government's commitment to increase Garda personnel to 21,000 by 2021, which will comprise 15,000 gardaí, 2,000 Garda Reserve members and 4,000 civilians. In budget 2018, we have allocated-----
I did not ask about that. I asked about the specific commitment on civilianisation of the Garda. There were supposed to be 1,500 gardaí transferred from desk jobs but only 14 have been successfully transferred.
Civilianisation is done by hiring civilians and by transferring existing gardaí-----
No. Forget about it.
-----to different roles. To answer the Deputy's question, we have money in the budget to hire 500 additional civilians this year, and obviously we would expect the Garda authorities to make more progress in transferring uniformed gardaí out of clerical roles and back to front-line roles.
The programme for Government commits to a schools capital investment programme to improve facilities. Some of these are funded by public private partnerships, PPPs. The collapse of the British construction company, Carillion, has impacted the completion of six school buildings in this State. Some schools have been waiting for years and operating in very poor conditions, and they need assurances that they can still relocate to their new buildings, as was promised. Carillion is now a textbook example of the failures of outsourcing and privatisation. We need to move beyond this failing model. Shareholders and profit margins should not matter more than schools and students. Will the Taoiseach provide assurances that school buildings and relocations will be completed within the given timeframes, and that further disruption will not be caused to the schedules? Can he guarantee that any other capital projects involving Carillion will proceed within the established timeframes?
The Taoiseach dealt with the question very well earlier. There are a couple of points worth making. If this were a traditional build the State would have spent its money and we would not have the same level of hold. The position with the PPP contract, as Deputy Howlin pointed out, is that until the companies get a licence agreement they do not get any money back for the substantial investment - at 90% complete - that they have made. That puts us in a strong position, and a stronger position than if it were a traditional build by a company which then went into liquidation. It is important to make that point.
On the wider issue of the capital programme, we have huge pressures. We are seeing growing pupil numbers at both primary and secondary level, and that means that we are running hard to keep pace. My Department is completing 20,000 places per year and keeping up with the demand. We will continue to work hard to realise those targets.
My question relates to the Children and Family Relationships Act 2015, which is important legislation that was passed before the marriage equality referendum. It was the view of the previous Government that it needed to be passed before that referendum was put to the country. It amends the law to extend parental rights and responsibilities to non-traditional families and it was long overdue. It takes into account the views of the Commission on Assisted Human Reproduction and of the Law Reform Commission report of 2010.
The Bill was signed into law in May 2015 but the Government has yet to sign the statutory instrument to commence the sections of the Act that deal with donor assisted reproduction. To some extent, the old Act is still fit for purpose in terms of traditional families and opposite-sex couples. However, same-sex couples are excluded under the old Act. When will the Government finally commence all sections of the Children and Family Relationships Act so that both spouses can exercise normal parental rights regarding their children?
I am afraid I do not know but I will check with the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs and revert to the Deputy. It is possible that it is linked to the assisted human reproduction legislation, which has yet to be published but which is being worked on by the Department of Health. I may be wrong about that. I will check for certain and revert to the Deputy.
The collapse of Carillion calls into question not just the wisdom of public private partnerships, PPPs, in terms of the five schools affected and the Carlow Institute of Further Education. It also gives rise to questions regarding a range of commitments in the area of school-building, house-building, social housing in particular and capital infrastructure projects as to whether the PPP model is an accident waiting to happen rather than an efficient way to deliver these vital projects. I endorse the call by Fianna Fáil and others for a vote on this, although it is worth noting that as recently as last May, Fianna Fáil was saying that the Government was not being ambitious enough in taking up PPPs. The Labour Party also supported this in terms of the school programme-----
We put a 10% cap on it.
That is right. The Labour Party, when in government, signed off on the contracts for these schools.
Absolutely.
We need a serious debate about the wisdom of using PPPs to deliver housing, schools and vital infrastructure-----
The Deputy's time is up.
-----because, as we have seen with McNamara Construction and with the schools in question, PPPs are an accident waiting to happen.
The timing of a debate is a matter for the Business Committee. To reply to the Deputy's substantive point, however, the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton, answered that very well. If these schools and the college of further education had been procured by traditional means, namely, a simple contract with a private construction firm, it is equally possible that said firm could have gone bust.
Who is going to manage the schools? This is not just about construction.
Management companies will do so to an extent.
Companies of all types can go bust and as the Minister for Education and Skills pointed out, we are in a more favourable position because we have not paid over the money yet, and we have ownership of the schools. I am often a sceptic when it comes to PPPs. There is a role for PPPs to provide infrastructure in different ways. We built almost all our intercity motorways by means of PPPs. Had we done that by traditional methods, it would have taken very much longer. The party opposite made the right decision in doing that-----
I thank the Taoiseach. His time is up.
-----but PPPs are certainly not a panacea to everything. They involve risks and we need to be wise in respect of them.
The Taoiseach referred to a report he was reading last night in anticipation of his trip to Davos. I see this morning that the most recent ESRI report is concerned about Dublin-centric economic activity. I have been raising that issue and I tabled a question to the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe, on it yesterday. Is it okay to continue, a Cheann Comhairle? Does Deputy Dooley find everything around here funny, including dipping his hand into that box not once but twice?
No, please.
Now that I find funny.
The Deputy did it.
No. I was referring to Deputy Dooley, who interrupted me. He finds everything funny.
This is the latest report expressing concern, at a European level, about all the economic activity taking place in Dublin to the disadvantage of the rest of the country. Such activity is not viable. Sixty per cent of the people live in rural Ireland. I note what the report says. When will the Taoiseach start listening? In his reply to my parliamentary question, the Minister for Finance said he did not agree with me. However, the ESRI's report echoes what I said. We can all see it when we are trying to get in and out of the city. We see the cranes on the skyline. We do not begrudge anything happening in Dublin, but we want some balance in terms of investment in rural Ireland. The report refers to every place outside Dublin. The Taoiseach might have a look at it before he goes off to Davos.
I will have a look at it. The ESRI is not a European body. It is a Government agency that has compiled this report on our behalf. The report is very good. It is also very realistic-----
I cannot hear the Taoiseach.
-----because it says that if we do nothing, the vast majority of population and economic growth will happen in Leinster, in the greater Dublin area. It does not say that we should cap or stop growth in Dublin and Leinster. That is not practical. We all know that in a free country and in the real world we cannot tell people where to live, open their businesses or shop but the report states that if we do nothing, more than half of population and economic growth will happen in Leinster so we need to take action to rebalance that in some way.
I cannot hear the Taoiseach with all the noise.
In particular, the report recommends that we should focus on the other big cities - Cork, Waterford, Limerick and Galway - and that will be very much at the centre of the national planning framework when it is published. That will not be at the exclusion of growth in rural Ireland and other places but the ESRI report is clear and stark in that regard. If we do nothing, too much of the population growth will happen in Dublin and Leinster. If we do something and if we put together a realistic plan, half the growth will still happen in Dublin and Leinster, but we might be able to get half of it in the rest of the country as well. That is what we want.
It is about balance.
Tá cur síos iontach ar thábhacht na Gaeilge ar leathanach 146 de chlár oibre an Rialtais. Tá sé ráite sa cháipéis sin go bhfuil an Rialtas 100% taobh thiar de chur chun cinn na Gaeilge ar chuile leibhéal. An bhfuil an tAire Stáit ar an eolas faoin gcinneadh atá déanta ag RTÉ Nuacht RTÉ a bhogadh ó cheannáras TG4 i mBaile na hAbhann ar ais go Domhnach Broc? Tháinig an cinneadh seo aniar aduaidh orm. Iarraim ar an Aire Stáit labhairt faoi na himpleachtaí a bhaineann leis an gcinneadh sin go háirithe ó thaobh costais de, ach freisin agus níos tabhachtaí ó thaobh an íosghrádú atá i gceist ó thaobh na Gaeilge de.
Tá tiomantas i gceist maidir le ceist ollmhór na Gaeilge. Beidh na dréachtóirí ag obair go dian ar Bille na dteangacha oifigiúla. Níl na sonraí agam chun freagra a thabhairt ar an gceist a chur an Teachta maidir leis an gcinneadh atá déanta ag RTÉ Nuacht RTÉ a bhogadh. Beidh mé sásta na sonraí sin a fháil ó mo chuid oifigeach agus teacht ar ais go dtí an Teachta ina dtaobh.
Tá na sonraí ar tuairisc.ie inniu.
Tá tuairiscí sna meáin, ach níl na sonraí agam. Beidh mé sásta iad a fháil amach anseo agus dul i dteagmháil leis an Teachta ina dhiaidh sin.
Sin deireadh le ceisteanna ó na ceannairí. Rachfaimid ar aghaidh go dtí na Teachtaí eile.
On page 86 of the programme for Government, there is a commitment to investment in education as a prime way to grow our society and economy in tandem. In recent years, PPPs have been used to build schools, including, by way of example, the new Loreto school in Wexford town. The latter was built by Carillion, which is now in liquidation. Loreto was to move into this brand new, state-of-the-art school this week but, distressingly for everybody involved, it cannot now be occupied, indefinitely, despite the Minister's assurances to the contrary last week. It is clear there is a lack of confidence as to what will happen. Will the Taoiseach now agree that the use, efficiency and value for money of PPP agreements for investment in education buildings must be urgently reviewed? What assurances can he give to the parents, children and staff regarding this issue?
I call Deputies Thomas Byrne and John Brady on the same matter.
I raise the apparent nonchalance of the Government regarding this matter. The Taoiseach appeared to answer Deputy Howlin's question by reading from Emma O'Kelly's good reporting on RTÉ.ie. In view of the fact that the Taoiseach had to read a statement given to the media in respect of this issue, what communications did the Government have with Dutch Infrastructure Fund? This is a matter of major concern. The reality is that last week the Minister gave assurances and told all of us that everything was fine. We held back and we accepted those assurances in good faith, and they have not turned out that way. As far as Eureka in Kells is concerned, it is going to plan. It has not been told differently but I can tell the Taoiseach that the subcontractors in Kells feel terrible. They have been shafted in some cases and not just in the past week or so. In the past year, people have come to me regarding payment on that site. There are other people in the chain and it is of major concern to them now, and the Minister has not given any assurances in that regard.
I asked the Minister about this issue last week when news first broke that Carillion had gone into voluntary liquidation. He gave assurances in the House that there would be no delays whatsoever, other than a day or two. Something has changed substantially in the interim. I have been speaking to the National Development Finance Agency, NDFA, and it said everything has been checked out legally and it could foresee no delays whatsoever. Construction workers are walking off building sites in Bray in my constituency. I refer to two schools, Coláiste Ráithín and St. Philomena's. Coláiste Ráithín is finished. It was ready to be opened on 22 January. Additional teachers have been employed.
First year is being doubled in size and is now at 100% capacity. It is bursting at the seams. It is completely unacceptable for the Taoiseach to say they have their old schools to go back to when those old schools are not fit for purpose. They do not have the facilities.
Thank you, Deputy.
We need the Minister to be more than a passive observer here.
The Deputy has made his point. Can we hear the Minister now, please?
We need answers and the schools need answers. We need assurances.
Deputy.
We have written to the Ceann Comhairle seeking a full Dáil debate on this. I ask that provision be made for a full Dáil debate on the issue.
It is a maiden speech.
I will not be calling the Deputy again if he keeps going.
Under the PPP contract, there are clear obligations on the parties in the event of a liquidation, as has occurred here. The NDFA is the Government's agent dealing with the contracting parties, in this instance the DIF. Both the NDFA and the DIF have indicated that they are fully committed to working out the issues involved here. As the Taoiseach and others have pointed out, we have not made payments in respect of these schools and the only way investors can retrieve their money is by entering a licence agreement with the State on the handing over of those schools. As such, we are in a much stronger position in respect of these contracts than had they proceeded under a traditional build. That is in answer to Deputy James Browne's question. As the Taoiseach said, that is not to say that PPPs should be chosen in every case. In this situation, however, the NDFA, which is handling this, is in a very strong position because payment has not been made. Of course, we have to work through these remaining issues and the contract commitments in the PPP agreement have to be fulfilled.
The Government is leaving that to third parties.
It has been indicated that it will take some time to work through that. Both the DIF, representing the contractor, and the NDFA have indicated that they are fully committed to working through this as quickly as possible.
At page 46 of the programme for Government, the Government which was then forming stated that it had expected to have a contract signed by June last year to roll out high-speed broadband to the 540,000 homeowners and premises across the State which do not have access through the commercial market. I notice the Taoiseach is looking around. If the Minister, Deputy Naughten, was there, he would probably enlighten us about the number of places connected on a daily basis through the good work of commercial contractors. What I want is some indication as to when the Government expects to sign a contract with a company to roll out that high-speed broadband over the next couple of years to those 540,000 homes and premises.
I call Deputy Michael Healy-Rae and Deputy Michael Moynihan on the same matter.
When will the Minister, Deputy Naughten, appoint the contractor for the national broadband plan? The procurement process is in its final stages but when will the contractor be appointed? This is a matter of huge importance for businesses and homes. Having proper broadband in places of work and houses is as important as having electricity, water or sewerage connections. The Taoiseach knows that himself.
It is crucial. In 2014, which is four years ago, the then Minister, former Deputy Pat Rabbitte, gave a commitment that a State aid exemption was being applied for and that a contract would be put in place. It is crucial for people. Other Members have raised this morning the issue of balanced redevelopment. Every single person living in areas which do not have proper broadband services is entitled to access. Given our way of life now, it is as important as any other infrastructural project yet I see no urgency from the Government. I appeal to the Taoiseach to tackle this matter head on because it is crucial as we go forward.
I accept that this is taking far too long and that it is enormously frustrating for everyone waiting for broadband connections in their homes. We anticipate that the contract will be signed this year and probably in the middle of the year. However, it is a very complex and complicated contract, much more so than people might have anticipated. Certainly, the best thing to do now is stick with it and get it signed this year rather than to go back to square one.
Does the Taoiseach accept that this is a significant delay which has not been announced and, as such, that this is new information he is giving the House?
It is a significant delay but the contract will be signed this year. We anticipate that it will be signed by the Minister this year.
Is that January?
How many more years?
Please, Deputies, for the Taoiseach.
There is a process to be followed and it is a complicated contract which must be tendered. Notwithstanding that, when the Government of Fine Gael and Independents came to office, approximately 52% of premises in Ireland had access to high-speed broadband, which figure is up to approximately 66% now. It will be 75% by the end of the year.
The Government wants to keep the recovery going, does it not?
Notwithstanding the fact that we are struggling to get this contract sorted for those really important 500,000 premises, we are making progress.
The spring-summer legislative programme indicates that work on the health (transport support) Bill is still under way. The purpose of the Bill is to restore the mobility allowance which was withdrawn six years ago on foot of an ombudsman's recommendation. It was closed to new applicants. There are thousands of disabled people who have become entitled on medical grounds to some assistance with their transport costs. Does the Taoiseach agree that the delay has been unconscionable? I have raised this question several times over the last six years and on each occasion I have been told that work is under way. When can we see the legislation and when will the anomaly be resolved?
The purpose of the Bill is not to restore the mobility allowance, it is to create a new form of transport support allowance which complies with all of the different stipulations. Work is under way involving the Department of Health and the Department of Public Expenditure. I have asked specifically that the legislation be done this year so that we can factor it into the Estimates for next year.
The programme for Government refers to the protection of inshore fishermen's incomes. Following a question I raised with the Taoiseach a couple of months ago, fishermen experienced huge losses of equipment, including shrimp and lobster pots, during Storm Ophelia, which have cost them tens of thousands of euro. This has caused huge financial hardship to fishermen and their families. Will the Government introduce an aid package immediately to support these fishermen after the severe and horrific storm?
I am not aware of any specific proposals in that regard and will ask the Minister, Deputy Creed, to correspond with the Deputy.
First, I declare that I have an interest in a family plant hire firm. The programme for Government states that, as far as possible, we are to create and protect jobs. However, principal contractors are going bust and leaving many subcontractors without payments which were due. That means they go out of business in turn. It seems continuously to happen that after a few months the principal contractor is back in business again while the small fellow is buried forever. This Government and its predecessor promised they would do something about that and introduce regulations to ensure that fair play was meted out to subcontractors. It is not happening, however, and principal contractors are continuing to abuse the system. What is the Government going to do about it?
It is a huge problem. I have come across many cases in the course of my constituency work where subcontractors have been left unpaid. It is always a problem if a bill goes unpaid for any reason. That has an impact on the person or business whose bill is unpaid. The norm is for people to seek recompense through the courts, but that cannot be achieved if the company no longer exists or the person who owes the debt cannot pay it or has left the country. We are open to any suggestions from Deputies as to what we could do to change that, but it is a very difficult matter for a Government to resolve. If a company does not pay its debts and closes down or if an individual does not pay his or her debts, it is difficult to know what the Government could do to resolve it other than to give people what they already have, which is the right to seek recompense and recourse through the courts. We cannot, certainly, have a situation in which Government steps in and pays such debts. That would not be fair to the taxpayer.
The Garda Síochána (compensation) Bill is promised legislation. Given that approximately 5,000 gardaí have suffered serious injury in the course of their duties over the past number of years, when will that important Bill come before the House?
I thank Deputy Durkan. We have been missing him over the past couple of days.
I know, I was counting myself actually.
It is important legislation. Heads have been approved by Government already but we do not expect publication this session, unfortunately.
Previously, the Minister for Finance stated in the Dáil that his intention is to bring certainty to the structure of the insurance compensation framework, particularly in the event of the liquidation of an insurer that is providing motor insurance in the State. Under current legislation, payments can only be made out of the insurance compensation fund. With the approval of the High Court, it can make payments up to 65% or €825,000, whichever is the lesser. Draft legislation has been prepared by the Government, which moves to a 100% cover regime in cases where an insurer, like Setanta, has gone into liquidation. Constituents of mine in Dublin North West, who are affected by such matters, have raised concerns that some payments will not be retrospective under the proposed legislation. Will the Taoiseach outline when this legislation will be brought to the House? Will it address the concerns of my constituents?
We expect the publication of the insurance Bill in the first three months of this year but, as is almost always the case, legislation cannot be retrospective.
On New Year's Day, it was reported that the Taoiseach told the media the Government is set to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It was said it would be done with votes in the Oireachtas in February. The reality is that ratification is very much necessary but we still have serious outstanding gaps in legislation in order to meet the standards of the convention in any meaningful way. This includes the commencement in full of the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Act, the passage of the Disability (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill and an overhaul of the Mental Health Act to implement the recommendations of the expert group review, which will be three years old in March. Can the Taoiseach provide a timeline for these necessary reforms and others and will he commit to prioritising these as to ratify the convention in their absence, while welcome, would be more of a gesture than a real step towards rights for people with disabilities?
Pretty much every country in the Western world has already ratified the convention and the Government is very committed to ratifying it, ideally next month. The majority of countries that have ratified it, just like us, have certain aspects of detailed legislation they have not finalised so we will not be out of line in any way in ratifying it with a few reservations and some legislation that needs to be sorted out. They are already priority legislation but they are particularly complicated particularly with regard to the deprivation of liberty.
In December 2016, the then Government - the Taoiseach's Government - indicated it would bring in legislation to deal with the very difficult phenomenon of revenge porn. This is very badly needed because revenge porn causes huge psychological damage to its many victims. I asked the Taoiseach about it in October 2017 and he said he was not sure but that his office would come back to me on it. I have not heard anything since. Ireland is completely behind the curve in dealing with this as we have no legislation in place to deal with revenge porn and help protect the victims of it. The current legislation, which was enacted in 1997, is completely out of date because it does not deal with smart phones or the advent of social media. There are many loopholes that can be exploited at this point in time. We absolutely have to deal with this and we have to act to protect the many victims who remain unprotected. What are the Taoiseach's plans in this area? I accept the Labour Party introduced a Bill last May that will help but it is urgent.
We are taking it this week and I hope we will have all-party support for it.
I will have to double check but I think Senator Bacik has legislation.
No, I introduced legislation here and we are taking it next week in Private Members' time.
Next week so.
The Taoiseach will be aware that the Citizens Information Board is in the process of restructuring the Money Advice and Budgeting Service, MABS, and Citizens Information service, CIS companies. A recent letter from the CIB to MABS makes the point that CIB is aware that MABS national management forum receives contributions from individual MABS companies. It said that CIB will be contacting all MABS companies to instruct them not to provide such funding. This includes additional funding for legal advice on the restructuring. In a recent reply to a parliamentary question, the Minister informed me that the restructuring process would take up to two years. I view this move by CIB to remove that funding as nothing more than bullying. I am concerned it is going to intimidate individual companies, whether CIS or MABS companies, which feel their funding will be withdrawn if they do not co-operate and comply within a very short timeframe. I am asking the Taoiseach to have a look at this and that the funding for the national management forum of MABS not be withdrawn during the restructuring process.
It is a matter for the Citizens Information Board. I will ask the Minister, Deputy Doherty, to reply to the Deputy in more detail.
That concludes our consideration of items of promised legislation.