Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 30 Jan 2018

Vol. 964 No. 4

Order of Business

Today's business shall be No. 11, motion re amendment to the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer, referral to committee, and No. 32, Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2016 - Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage. Private Members' business shall be No. 171, motion re affordable housing, selected by Sinn Féin.

Wednesday's business shall be No. 32, Planning and Development (Amendment) Bill 2016 - Report Stage (resumed) and Final Stage, and No. 4, Childcare Support Bill 2017 - Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. Private Members' Business shall be No. 49, Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Bill 2017 - Second Stage, selected by the Labour Party.

Thursday's business shall be No. 4, Childcare Support Bill 2017 - Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. Second Stage of No. 50, Island Fisheries (Heritage Licence) Bill 2017, will be taken in the evening slot.

I refer to the report of the Business Committee dated 25 January 2018 on today's business. It is proposed that the motion of referral of the amendment to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer shall be taken without debate. In relation to Wednesday's business, it is proposed that Second Stage of the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Bill 2017 shall be brought to a conclusion, if not previously concluded, after two hours.

There are two proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with today's business agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Wednesday's business agreed to? Agreed.

What I am about to ask again cuts to the heart of honesty in the framing of the health Estimate. I refer to section 39 organisations. What happened was fundamentally dishonest. When the public service pay determination was agreed to and new agreements were made, everybody assumed that those who worked in disability organisations and hospices would have their pay restored in line with that of HSE employees, as had always been the case. It was the case when the financial emergency measures in the public interest, FEMPI, legislation cuts were administered, as a paper trail demonstrated and proved. The Workplace Relations Commission endorsed the link between HSE employees and employees in section 39 organisations. The HSE, the Minister for Health and the Taoiseach tried to bluff in parliamentary replies and said that, as those concerned were not public servants, there could not be pay restoration. That has changed and I welcome it in so far as it is acknowledged that something has to be investigated. For the past two months we have been told that there is an issue with expenditure in the area of health. It is terrible that SIPTU and-----

Excuse me, but the one minute is up.

I will conclude. Others get an opportunity every now and again. Will the Taoiseach, please, make a determination and will the Government, please, do the right thing by the people who work in these services by including them in the pay determination for HSE employees?

The Taoiseach has one minute to give a response.

I will do my best to reply within one minute. To clarify, there are over 2,000 section 39 bodies which range from non-governmental organisations, NGOs, to companies and charities. Their staff are not Government employees or public servants. Therefore, the position has not changed. They are funded by a block grant which part funds their operations and it may range from €10,000 for a small local body to millions of euro for a large hospice.

The Taoiseach is fudging again.

They are the facts and I am sorry if the Deputy has a difficulty with them. We have looked into this matter.

We discussed hospices.

Some section 39 bodies comply with public pay policy and some do not. We have seen how some of them have paid extraordinary salaries to the top brass, bonuses and other things like them-----

We are not talking about that but about nurses, paramedics and therapists.

The Taoiseach's time is up.

Some cut pay during the recession.

What is going on is outrageous.

Some did not cut pay during the recession.

The Taoiseach's time is up.

It is outrageous. The dishonesty-----

Please, Deputy. The time the Deputy takes is not available to the other Deputies who will come after him.

This is an issue I have raised time and again.

I know that it is, but other Deputies are entitled to answers.

We have been very facilitative of other Deputies in the House for a long time.

According to media reports, the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross, brought a memorandum to the Cabinet meeting today proposing primary legislation to replace existing laws on noise restrictions with less restrictive EU regulations dating from 2014. This is a major issue for those who live in the environs of Dublin Airport and are anxious to have noise restrictions retained as per the planning permission granted in 2007. Will the Taoiseach confirm that it is the intention of the Government to disregard these noise restrictions? Will he advise us when we will see the legislation spoken about in the media today?

The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross, will make a more detailed statement on this issue later. It was agreed at the Cabinet meeting today to offer Government support to the Dublin Airport Authority, DAA, to commence construction of a new north runway. It is very important for the economy, tourism and business that we increase capacity at the airport. We want construction to start within the next couple of months and today gave our support. There is a new European noise directive which supersedes previous laws. The Minister will, through primary legislation, turn the new European directive into Irish law. That is what is required. Fingal County Council will be given the role of noise regulator for the airport.

The Minister of State at the Department of Health with special responsibility for disability issues has announced that the Cabinet has decided to ratify the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and he stated that the Government will bring a resolution to this effect before the Dáil. The Disabilities (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2016 passed Second Stage in this House last February and has been on Committee Stage since and we have now been waiting a year for the amendments from the Minister. A road map to drive the ratification process has been in place since October 2015 and the delay seems to have arisen from the fact that the Minister cannot get his act together to bring forward the amendments to enable us to enact the Bill.

It has always been our position that we ratify UN conventions after the legal provisions have been passed. This is a unique situation where the Minister cannot get the law enacted so he is going to ratify it in advance. Can the Taoiseach confirm when we will see the amendments and the enactment of the Bill? When will we have a formal resolution to ratify the convention before the House?

As the Deputy and Members will be aware, it is ten years this year since we signed the UN declaration and it is important that we now proceed to ratify it, with a view to having all matters fully completed by the end of this year. It involves a number of Departments and I assure Deputy Howlin that, following the decision at Cabinet today, there will now be an accelerated process with engagement between the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Health. I expect the resolutions will come before the House for debate within the next few weeks and that the Department of Health will now proceed towards completing the work on the appropriate amendments so that we can proceed step by step in the course of this year to complete the ratification process.

This time last year the Minister for Health, Deputy Simon Harris, commissioned a report, Cannabis for Medicinal Use - A Scientific Review. Not only has nothing happened in that time, the Government has stalled the Bill to legislate for medicinal use because of a money matter. The Taoiseach said yesterday that we exported our problems and imported our solutions but, at this moment, families and individuals are leaving this country for Spain and Holland because they cannot get access to medicinal cannabis. As the leader of this country the Taoiseach has to show leadership to the Minister Deputy Simon Harris, so that he lifts the money matter. There are four people who have licences for medicinal cannabis and they have to pay €11,000 per year for medication but they cannot get it. I ask that we bring in legislation for this immediately.

As the Deputy correctly points out, it is possible to obtain cannabis on a medicinal basis in Ireland by licence, though one needs an appropriately qualified doctor to prescribe it and a licence from the Minister for Health. The Minister has never actually denied a licence and when applications come through, with a consultant or an appropriate specialist to back them up, they are granted.

I will have to check on the progress of the legislation. I have not refused a money message so it has not come to my desk.

The Taoiseach has to show leadership on this.

The programme for Government is strong in its commitment to protect citizens in their homes. Electronic tagging should be a condition of bail for repeat offenders. In 2016, 13% of offenders were repeat offenders who were out on bail, an increase of 2% on the year before. Horrific attacks have been perpetrated on my constituents and in Offaly and all over the country. I am told the legislation is already there so why would we not enact it? Can the Minister for Justice and Equality say why there is a reluctance in An Garda Síochána, for example, to have tagging for repeat offenders? We must protect our citizens and this debate must be about victims rather than criminals who want to continue their thuggish behaviour by terrorising people in their own homes.

As the Deputy is aware, there is provision in law for the type of tagging referred to by the Deputy. I assure the House that this matter is receiving important attention. An expert working group is sitting to consider the various legal aspects and the practice that would be involved to ensure the monitoring is in accordance with best international standards. I expect that working group to report to me this spring whereupon I would be anxious to proceed with the commencement order at the earliest opportunity.

I want to ask the Taoiseach about the Education (Admission to Schools) Bill. It went to committee last June. The Minister for Education and Skills indicated his intention to amend that legislation to abolish the baptism barrier. He promised to do that and have the Bill completed by Christmas but no progress has been made on it since. I think we all think it is important to ensure that we do not have yet another year where young children are discriminated against on the basis of the belief system of their parents so can the Taoiseach give an undertaking that the necessary amendments will be dealt with well in advance of the new school year later on in September?

The Minister is working on those amendments and I know it is priority legislation for him. Those amendments will be completed as soon as possible in order to bring the Bill back to the House.

One of the Minister of Transport, Tourism and Sport's proposals in the Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill is that cars will be taken off unaccompanied drivers with a provisional licence and that those who own the cars will be jailed. It takes 22 weeks for a driver with a provisional licence to get a driving test in Killarney. This period is seriously too long. Why does the Government not do something positive to help young persons who want to get on the road legally and give them a chance because I believe every young person, boy or girl, should get one chance to get on the road in this world? Twenty-two weeks is too long. The Government should give over with regard to the nonsense of jailing people and taking cars off them. They are draconian measures that should never be entertained.

The Bill is on Committee Stage and will be before committee on 9 February.

With regard to the issue of retained firefighters having to retire at 58, there is a wish to extend that age to 60 years. The response of the management at the WRC meetings has not been negative but it has flagged possible difficulties with retrospection and legislation relating to pensions. The Government is in the process of passing legislation that will, hopefully, resolve the pension issue. At what stage is that legislation because we are losing valuable and experienced firefighters every day who should be on for another number of years? It is great to keep experienced people in a job.

The pensions Bill is being drafted currently but with regard to retirement age for firefighters, it is international best practice. A working group looks at this every couple of years. This group came together about six years ago to look at this and compare it to international developments. It was agreed that the timeline should be increased slightly but no more than that so 58 is still the norm to retain firefighters. I am prepared to meet people to discuss this again and we can review it. We do so every couple of years but it is not recommended internationally that we do that just yet. However, I am prepared to meet a group on behalf of the Deputy if he wishes.

Page 121 of the programme for Government relates to trade negotiations. I, along with other rural Deputies, have raised serious concerns about a potential Mercosur trade deal, which could have serious negative effects on the beef producers and public health due to the lack of proper standards and traceability of this beef coming into the EU. Negotiations are ongoing this week regarding this matter. What reassurances has the Government received from the EU Commissioner, Phil Hogan, that Europe will not sell out and allow South American beef into the EU in return for car exports in South America?

As the Deputy will be aware, negotiations are now under way. Having a trade deal between the EU and Mercosur involving those countries in South America would be beneficial to our economy in the round, as it would be for their economies, but we have a particular sensitivity around the beef sector. As I said at the IFA AGM, without its beef sector, Ireland would not be Ireland and we are very keen to protect that sector from unfair competition from South America.

I have met Commissioner Hogan. We meet regularly as the Deputy knows. I also met Commissioner Katainen, who is dealing with this. In Davos I met Commissioner Vestager and President Macri, the President of Argentina. I stated to them in no uncertain terms that we do not agree with any proposal by the European Commission to increase the quota for beef that is being suggested.

The programme for Government makes multiple references to public transport and the need to better serve the greater Dublin area. I represent the commuter belt constituency of Kildare North, which is heavily dependent on rail links into the capital and yet the stations can no longer accommodate the demand. The car parks are creaking at the seams. The Sallins and Naas station in my constituency is now averaging 165% to 175% occupancy and Maynooth would be very similar. That means that an additional two thirds of the number of cars that can safely be accommodated are squeezing into the car park every morning. Somebody arriving from 7.30 a.m. onwards has no chance of a space and must drive on in the car to Dublin.

Irish Rail has advised me that it would gladly extend the car parks and examine all the options if the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport would only open the purse strings. Will the Taoiseach ask the Minister to examine this very serious issue and provide park-and-ride facilities across Kildare North and the wider commuter belt?

I am very familiar with the issue, as the Deputy can imagine, because people may start their train journey in Maynooth and Leixlip, but shortly after that the train arrives full in my constituency in Clonsilla, Coolmine, Castleknock, Navan Road Parkway and Hansfield. Passenger numbers on those train lines have now exceeded where they were before the financial crisis began, which is good on one level because it shows that people are working again, but obviously we are now facing the kinds of traffic problems we saw before the crisis with congestion on our train lines. This matter will be considered as part of the ten-year investment plan which we intend to publish in the next couple of weeks with a view to upgrading those train lines significantly through additional carriages, electrification and car parks. As is the case with all these things, it is not possible to do them quickly. We would have done them four or five years ago had we not been broke, but unfortunately we were.

The programme for Government made a strong commitment to deal with flood relief and flood defences. As the Fianna Fáil spokesperson for matters relating to the Office of Public Works, OPW, including flood relief, I am getting an increased number of calls from around the country from people who are extremely distressed because farms and businesses are being destroyed. People cannot get insurance. Many families have been turned down for the relocation policy. This is a major crisis.

Most disappointing of all, from 2011 to 2017 there has been a €53 million underspend on flood defences. Will the Taoiseach assure me that this issue will get proper focus in the national development plan, because having read it I am not happy with what is in it? Will the Taoiseach assure me that that €53 million will be used as quickly as possible where flood defences are needed? My county, Roscommon, has had no money spent on a major flood defence despite incredible damage caused in 2015 and 2016.

I do not have the details those budgetary allocations in front of me. However, I know that the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, is an extremely active and very effective Minister of State. Almost every Friday he is in some part of the country announcing a new scheme. I imagine if it is possible to spend the money, he will ensure that happens.

I wish to raise an issue that has become of concern to people around the country, mainly British people but also other foreign nationals who have been living in this country for a considerable period of time. When applying for citizenship, the law stipulates that they need at least one year's continuous residence. In the case of a constituent of mine, Stephanie McCorkell from Ashbourne who has lived in Ashbourne for 40 years, it turn outs that a new rule has been brought in which is not in the law or in any statutory instrument that a break of six weeks breaks the link completely.

There are retired people who may go for a camping holiday for six weeks in the summer or go to visit friends or relations in other countries and who are not breaking their continuous residence in the place where they live. My constituent has been denied citizenship because she was absent from the country for a six-week period last year. A straight and plain reading of the law makes it clear that the Department of Justice and Equality is not entitled to deny her and others citizenship on this basis. An article in The Irish Times over the weekend indicates that clearly there are other cases because many immigration solicitors have raised the issue. Some of them have contacted me after I tabled a parliamentary question on this case a number of weeks ago. Has the Minister changed the law without coming through the Oireachtas?

There is no change in the law. The Ceann Comhairle will appreciate that there is a certain reluctance on my part to discuss individual cases on the floor of the House. However, I acknowledge a matter that Deputy Byrne has brought to my attention. I have asked that the matter be reviewed and sought a report on it. I do not have it to hand but I would be happy to engage further with Deputy Byrne on what, on the face of it, appears to be an important issue.

Mar an gcéanna leis an Teachta O'Reilly, tréaslaím leis an Taoiseach as an méid a dúirt sé inné. My question relates to the independent review mechanism set up by Government to look into a number of Garda misconduct cases and other forms of Garda failures. In the cases reviewed, 315 cases were returned stating "no further action required". This was all the information that complainants and families received. Many of these cases were quite sensitive, for example, the tragic death of Shane O'Farrell. Providing full information to the families can offer some closure to those affected, and some additional clarity. Would the Minister and Taoiseach agree that people should receive the rationale and reasons that the independent review mechanism concluded that no further action was required?

I would be keen to ensure that as much information as possible would be given to people who have made complaints or who have grievances. On the specific case referred to by the Deputy, he will be aware the issue is the subject of an investigation by the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC. It would, therefore, be unwise for me to make a comment at this stage but I acknowledge that there are issues and look forward to receiving the GSOC report at the earliest opportunity.

I want to ask the Taoiseach about the family courts Bill. The Department of Justice and Equality states that the purpose of the family courts Bill is to establish a dedicated family court in order to improve levels of judicial expertise and training in family law matters and streamline family law proceedings, thereby making them more user-friendly and less costly. As the Taoiseach knows, family court law operates in every small town and city in Ireland. The courts deal with personal and sensitive matters, including divorces, custodies, children in State care, child maintenance and domestic violence. Proceedings in these courts are very stressful. In a typical family court session, fathers and mothers fight over the possibility of having their children removed from their custody. While it was originally anticipated that a referendum to amend Article 34 of the Constitution would be required to remove any constitutional obstacle to the establishment of a separate family code, recent examination of these issues indicates that it would be possible to proceed with the establishment of a court in a manner which does not require such a referendum by establishing the court as a separate division within the existing court structure. What is keeping the family courts Bill from coming to the House?

The Ceann Comhairle might give consideration to supplanting Taoiseach's questions with questions to the Minister for Justice and Equality. Deputy Fitzpatrick raises an important point. During the course of my tenure as Minister for Justice and Equality, I intend to ensure a separate family law division within our courts system. I refer to the family courts Bill, the heads of which are undergoing preparation. I expect that will be completed in the course of the spring and summer, following which the matter will go to committee for pre-legislative scrutiny. It is important and I look forward to presenting the matter to the House, perhaps later this year.

In the programme for Government, under the heading, Working to Make Our Older Years Better Years, it states: "We will review legislation relating to elder abuse." Has the Government any plans to introduce legislation to tackle the issue of social charges in private nursing homes? In recent months, I have been approached by a number of my constituents who are concerned about the very high costs. In some cases, the individual does not even retain the 20% portion of his or her State pension. Surely something has to be done? Some of these extra charges could be described as financial abuse of our elderly.

There is no specific legislation proposed on that matter but I know the Minister of State, Deputy Jim Daly, is examining it to ensure there is at least proper transparency about charges and that people are not double-charged.

The programme for Government commits to enhancing primary cares services in the community, including access to X-ray and ultrasound services locally. Chiropractors are concerned that impending secondary legislation will interfere with their access to X-ray services. Accurate diagnosis and safe treatment delivery often require access to and the use of imagery such as X-rays. Will chiropractors be facilitated in the secondary legislation in the same way as chiropractors are in parts of the European Union? The secondary legislation is EU regulations on standards of protection against dangers arising from medical exposure to ionising radiation.

I will ask the Minister for Health to provide the Deputy with a detailed note on the matter. On the face of it, we should bear in mind what an X-ray is. It exposes patients and others to radiation, which nobody does without good reason. X-rays should only be ordered by doctors and specialist nurses qualified to do so. Chiropractors are practitioners of a form of alternative medicine and I would have concerns about them being able to prescribe exposure of patients to radiation.

Page 125 of the programme for Government outlines support for an LNG project in Ballylongford, County Kerry. The owner of the land bank, Shannon Properties, sought expressions of interest in April last year and the sale was to have been completed by August. I understand a number of companies have made a bid, but we are approaching the end of January and still have no indication as to whether there has been a successful bid or the timeline for progression of this key infrastructural development for north Kerry-west Limerick and in meeting the energy interests of the State.

I am familiar with the project and have met the promoters, but I do not have any information on the land sale.

Perhaps the Taoiseach might get some.

Who owns the land?

Shannon Properties. It is State land.

The Deputy should telephone or write to it. I can make inquiries for him, but I do not have information on Shannon Properties.

I, too, would like to raise the issue of chiropractors being able to access X-ray services. The statutory instrument concerned which is due to come into force on 6 February will impose restrictions on chiropractors. The Taoiseach stated that his preference would be for X-rays to be ordered by doctors. Chiropractors go through a certification and qualifications process, operate to a high standard and are overseen by a regulatory body. In fairness, they are qualified practitioners providing a service. Chiropractors in England, Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland will continue to be able to provide this service. I am sure the Medical Council in Britain or Northern Ireland did not brush away such concerns. Will the Taoiseach request his colleague, the Minister for Health, Deputy Simon Harris, to correspond directly with me and Deputy Aindrias Moynihan on the matter? As I said, the statutory instrument will come into force on 6 February.

I am not properly informed on the matter. For my own education, I will ask for a note on it from the Minister for Health and ensure it is passed on to the Deputies.

Some individual cases were referred to during the course of Leaders' Questions. The convention is that personal cases are raised through the parliamentary questions system, using the details supplied mechanism. I ask Deputies to adhere to this convention and not to raise individual cases during Leaders' Questions on the floor of the House.

Top
Share