Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 6 Jul 2011

Vol. 209 No. 4

Adjournment Matters

Planning Issues

Senator Colm Burke

I am aware the Minister of State has just come from a meeting where this issue was being discussed. I apologise, but I understood the Adjournment would be a little later.

This issue concerns property that was built with planning permission under the planning Acts which must comply with Part V. In order to comply with Part V, the agreement is that the developer must provide a separate piece of land to the local authority. The problem that has arisen is that a property that is developed and fully finished is mortgaged with a bank which is not part of NAMA and the land that was offered to the local authorities is mortgaged with a different bank. The problem now is that the bank that has the separate piece of land is not prepared to surrender it to the local authority. Therefore, the receiver cannot comply with Part V and the local authority refuses to yield on it. As a result, approximately 160 units are left sitting and cannot be sold because an engineer's certificate of compliance with planning cannot be furnished.

Will the Government take a look into this issue? I am sure this is not the only example of what is happening, but it is the particular case of which I am aware. The requirement to comply with Part V is an important part of the planning process and I am not looking for it to be changed. However, we now have a situation where developments do not comply with the planning Acts because of the changes which have occurred in the building industry over the past three to four years and there is a need to get NAMA, the relevant Departments and the local authorities to work together to move this matter forward so that we do not have properties lying idle because of not being able to comply with planning regulations.

In this particular case, nine months after the issue was raised with the local authority, it has still not resolved the problem. It is for that reason I raise the matter. It is an issue that must be resolved, particularly at a time when we are trying to resolve financial difficulties and to prevent the problem of property lying vacant and idle. I urge that the matter be dealt with in a co-ordinated fashion so that we can resolve all such problems as early as possible.

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Brian Hayes)

I thank the Senator for raising this issue. I am not aware of the particular case referred to by him, but it is clear from his remarks that the issue may have a wide implication across many parts of the country where there are unfinished estates and housing units, apartments and the like which must be finished. There are implications with regard to what happens where a development has, effectively, been put into NAMA, particularly in terms of Part V. He has made a very valid point in that regard. For clarity, I will read the note I have on this matter and we can then take the matter further through correspondence or discussion with me or the Minister for Finance.

Among other things, Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000 requires that up to 20% of land zoned for residential developments or for a mix of residential and other uses is to be reserved to meet social and affordable housing needs and to be made available to the local authority at the existing use value rather than development value. In addition to the options of providing land, units or sites within the proposed development, agreements with developers may include the transfer of other land within its functional area; the provision of new units on other lands within the functional area; the transfer of fully or partially serviced sites to the local authority or to an approved housing association; the payment of money in lieu; or any combination of these. This encapsulates the Part V provisions that were part of the original Planning and Development Act.

The fact that NAMA acquires a debitor's loans does not alter the debitor's statutory obligations with regard to Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000. There are cases where a developer has not completed a development and where the 20% Part V component has not yet been fulfilled. This might cause difficulty in regard to the sale of the completed housing units in other parts of the development because the terms of the original planning permission are not yet met and the local authority is not in a position to issue a certificate of compliance. Given the prevalence of unfinished estates, this is likely to be a widespread phenomenon. However, NAMA debtors will be involved in only a minority of cases.

The same issue arises, on a larger scale, in the case of developers who borrowed from non-NAMA banks, to whom the Senator referred. NAMA is not in a position to provide funding to enable unfinished developments to be fully completed unless it can be shown they are commercially viable. In the case of most unfinished developments, however, they are unfinished precisely because they are no longer commercially viable. Nevertheless, each estate will be examined on a case-by-case basis by NAMA as part of its commitment to the Minister of State with responsibility for housing to examine options arising out of the report of the advisory group on unfinished housing developments.

Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, has played a considerable role in the delivery of social and affordable housing since its introduction in 2002. However, Part V was designed for a radically different housing market to that which exists in 2011. In recognising that, we must consider how planning gain can continue to be captured while taking account of prevailing market conditions. A full review of Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, was announced in a new housing policy statement launched on 16 June. Also announced in the policy statement was the standing down of all affordable housing schemes, including shared ownership, in the context of this review.

NAMA is aware that the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government is reviewing Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, and the agency will dovetail its approach with the outcome of that review. In the interim, outstanding issues in regard to the fulfilment of existing Part V agreements may best be resolved on a case-by-case basis, with developers and local authorities coming to agreement on revised Part V arrangements. In some cases, local authorities, as well as developers, will be unable to fulfil their side of Part V agreements, often for budgetary reasons. NAMA engages with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government regularly on planning matters and the engagement to date has been constructive and productive.

In general terms, and without wishing in any way to pre-empt the review, it is likely that a revised Part V will place a greater focus on the delivery of social housing supports, particularly where there is no demand for affordable housing. I thank Senator Colm Burke for raising this important matter. I will report to the Minister for Finance and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the substance of his remarks. However, as I outlined in my reply, these issues are being worked through by NAMA on a case-by-case basis. That process may not be as conclusive as Members would like, but the commitment has come from NAMA that this will be done in order that we ultimately attain some agreement from the process. The Senator's points are well made and I thank him for raising them.

Senator Colm Burke

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. However, in the case to which I referred, a lack of demand for housing is not the issue and the development is located within a mile of a large urban centre. It is not desirable to have such a development sitting idle, as is the case in other locations throughout the State. I take on board what the Minister of State said, but my concern is that a timeframe be put in place to deal with these issues, rather than merely saying they will be dealt with. I ask the Minister of State to seek to resolve this at an early date.

Deputy Brian Hayes

I fully agree there is a necessity to complete unfinished estates where there is demand in an area, particularly built-up areas in which there are still employment opportunities. Under the NAMA Act, the agency has power to borrow up to €5 billion in working capital for the purpose of advancing new money to complete developments or projects where it is commercially advantageous to do so. All approvals of working and development capital are subject to a credit decision-making process approved by the board of NAMA. To the end of April 2011, the agency has approved more than €800 million in new money advances. For example, it advanced in the region of €100 million to Google for the completion and sale of high-profile buildings. NAMA has this capacity to provide working capital as a means of completing a development, but that can only be done on a case-by-case basis.

In the case to which the Senator referred, there is a role for the local authority in pushing the issue with NAMA so that the agency is fully apprised of the circumstances. Where it is commercially viable for these matters to come to a conclusion, my understanding is that they can and do come to a conclusion. In the case the Senator highlighted, it is certainly a matter worth pursuing with the local authority and NAMA.

Harbours and Piers

Senator David Cullinane

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Deputy Shane McEntee, and thank him for taking this Adjournment matter. There is an urgent need for funding to repair the pier at Helvick in County Waterford. It was brought to my attention at a recent meeting between Oireachtas Members and the executive of Waterford County Council that an application for funding of €1.2 million was made by the council to the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food in 2009. There are two aspects to the proposed redevelopment: first, the extension of a slipway at the pier to accommodate the Royal National Lifeboat Institution, RNLI, lifeboat; and, second, the necessity to repair the substantial damage to the pier.

The main pier has become honeycombed at foundation level and the sea is passing under it. A former engineer with the county council remarked to me that it is amazing the pier is still standing. Weight restrictions are in place but there is an urgent need to address this problem. I asked my party colleague, Deputy Michael Colreavy, to table a parliamentary question on this issue recently, which he did. The issue goes back to 2003 and many Deputies and Senators have raised it in the past. I received the same standard response which began: "The responsibility for the maintenance and upkeep of the pier lies with the local authority." That may be correct but, in this instance, we are talking about substantial damage, substantial remedial work and substantial costs. Waterford County Council simply does not have the means to repair the damage. All local authorities are strapped for cash and do not have the ability to borrow. As such, the council requires support from the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. It is unreasonable to expect the local authority to shoulder the cost of the necessary works alone.

The director of services with responsibility for this area indicated to me that if the repair works are not carried out, the potential future cost of rebuilding a collapsed pier would be a multiple of what it would cost to carry out the remedial work now. It makes economic sense for the Department to initiate a joined-up plan with the local authority to provide the necessary funding. It does not matter to the remaining fishermen in Helvick whether the funding comes from the county council or the Department; they simply want to ensure the pier is safe and will not collapse.

As I said, there are two separate aspects to the work that is required and there seems to be some confusion in the response of the Minister to the parliamentary question. He talks about a funding application which was sent to Waterford County Council in respect of the slipway repair. The rib of the slipway had to be expanded in order to allow the lifeboat to launch in a straight line. Essentially, that was the issue involved. Waterford County Council carried out the work and paid for it with its own funds and those it procured from the CLÁR programme and Údarás na Gaeltachta.

The work has been done but the real issue at hand is the substantial damage to the pier. I must stress that there must be proper co-ordination between the Department and Waterford County Council in respect of putting a plan in place to ensure that the necessary funding will be made available. There will be no point returning to this matter in a number of years when more damage has been done and, as stated earlier, when we will be obliged to spend much more money to repair the pier. That would not make financial or economic sense. In addition, it would not make sense to the members of the local community who would suffer if the pier were to collapse. I ask the Minister of State to address that issue and to contact the county council in the interests of ensuring that there will be some form of joined-up plan for the future between it and the Department.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (Deputy Shane McEntee)

I thank the Senator for raising this issue. If he does not receive the answers he is seeking, I hope he will not leave the House frustrated as I did on many occasions when I was in opposition in the Lower House. I will pursue further any issue about which the Senator is concerned but which is not addressed in my reply. I read the reply before entering the House and it seems that someone missed the boat in recent years.

I welcome the opportunity to deal with the issues raised by Senator Cullinane in respect of the pier at Helvick, County Waterford. I wish to clarify the position with regard to the responsibilities of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food regarding the development of fishery harbours. My Department is responsible for the day-to-day running, maintenance and development of the six fishery harbour centres. These are located at Killybegs, Ros an Mhíl, Dingle, Castletownbere, Dunmore East and Howth.

There are, however, numerous other fishery harbours throughout the country which are not in the ownership of my Department. In the main, these harbours are in the ownership of the various local authorities and my Department is committed to assisting, where possible, their development and upgrade. Funding for such developments has traditionally been provided under my Department's fishery harbours and coastal infrastructure development programme, subject, of course, to the availability of Exchequer funding. Helvick pier in County Waterford falls into this category and is in the ownership of Waterford County Council which is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the harbour, as well as its maintenance and development.

Waterford County Council has made a number of applications for funding under the fishery harbours and coastal infrastructure development programme in recent years. In 2007, the then Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources approved funding for underpinning works on the pier which were to cost €690,000, 75% of which was to be funded by the Department. Unfortunately, due to delays on the part of Waterford County Council in the appointment of a consultant and the tender process, it was unable to appoint a contractor and complete the approved works and draw down the approved grant.

Waterford County Council again applied for funding in 2008 under the Department's fishery harbours and coastal infrastructure development programme. This application, in conjunction with all others received, was given full consideration and assessed with reference to available Exchequer funding and overall national priorities. The funding application for Helvick was, however, unsuccessful on that occasion. In 2009, my Department received a further application from Waterford County Council for funding under the fishery harbours and coastal infrastructure development programme for improvements at the pier, including the extension and realignment of the existing slipway. The cost of this project was stated as €300,000. Regrettably, however, given the limited Exchequer funding available at that time it was not possible to fund any local authority-managed projects in 2009 and, therefore, the request for funding in respect of the pier at Helvick was not successful.

In September 2010, my Department was in a position, with limited resources, to invite local authorities, including Waterford County Council, to submit applications for funding for projects costing a maximum of €150,000. No application was received from Waterford County Council at that time. This year my Department invited local authorities to submit applications in respect of priority harbour development projects for inclusion in the 2011 fishery harbours and coastal infrastructure development programme in early May. In light of the limited resources available and with the aim of maximising the number of individual projects that could be progressed, the maximum cost of each project was limited to €150,000. Waterford County Council submitted an initial application to my Department which identified the extension and repair of the RNLI slipway at Helvick pier to allow the launch of the rescue vessel at low tide as its top priority. The cost of the project was stated as €96,400.

Following a short-listing of initial applications, my Department circulated detailed application forms to the various local authorities seeking additional information in respect of projects in order to assist in the further evaluation of the preliminary applications. A detailed application form was issued to Waterford County Council in respect of Helvick pier and other projects. The deadline for the return of these application forms was 10 June last. No reply was received from Waterford County Council and, therefore, my Department's evaluation committee was unable to consider any Waterford County Council project for inclusion in the programme. The local authority element of the 2011 fishery harbours and coastal infrastructure development programme has now been finalised and it is not possible at this stage to approve any funding for works at Helvick pier.

I do not know if I have provided the information the Senator is seeking. As stated earlier, however, it appears that someone missed the boat.

Senator David Cullinane

The Minister of State referred to the ownership of the pier resting with Waterford County Council and indicated that the latter has responsibility for maintenance, which is fine. However, this does not prevent the Department from providing grant aid. The position is similar to that which applies in respect of the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. That Department provides grant aid to local authorities to carry out remediation works to housing stock which they own. It is not the case that the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food cannot provide the funding. However, it may be that it is not in a position to allocate funding at present. The latter is a separate issue.

There appears to be some confusion regarding the various applications made by Waterford County Council, particularly in the context of what it was seeking. The Minister of State indicated that the 2007 application listed the total cost of repairs at €690,000 and that the 2009 application listed it as €300,000. I am not sure, therefore, if we are referring to the same funding application. There appears to be confusion regarding the repair works relating to the slipway and the substantial works required in respect of the pier. Perhaps some works were carried out by the county council in the period between 2007 and 2009. I understand from discussions I had with the director of services at Waterford County Council that the new sum required in respect of the remediation works to be carried out on the pier is €1.2 million. That is a significant amount of money. We must consider, however, what would be the cost if the pier was to collapse completely.

I accept the Minister of State's reply and I understand that he is required to return to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to discuss the matter further. There is a need for a joined-up plan involving the Department and the county council because otherwise there is potential for an extremely difficult situation to arise in respect of the pier at Helvick. It would not be good if the State were obliged to spend huge amounts of money to build a new pier. We should invest the necessary funds now in order to repair the existing pier.

Deputy Shane McEntee

As the Senator stated, there appears to be some confusion regarding the cost involved, which was initially estimated at €690,000. It appears that when the money was available, someone slipped up. I ask that the Senator return to the county council and clarify all of these matters. He can then approach me personally and I will meet him in the Department. I am aware that money is scarce but if we can get to the bottom of this matter and avoid any mix-up, then perhaps we can start afresh. I accept the Senator's point that if the pier collapses it will cost between €2 million and €3 million to rebuild.

National Car Test Centres

Senator Kathryn Reilly

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport. I am seeking to obtain an update on the investigation into fraud at national car test, NCT, centres and to discover what the Department has done to ensure that no car passes the NCT fraudulently. In recent days I was approached by a concerned individual who bought a car only last week which had passed its NCT one or two weeks prior to that. When he brought the car home, he took it to his local mechanic who telephoned him a couple of days later and stated that there was no way it could have passed the NCT because several major parts needed to be replaced. How could a car pass the NCT when that is the case?

It is obvious that an endemic problem remains in respect of car testing. The individuals at NCT centres who are culpable in the context of passing cars which should not be passed are causing real danger by allowing potentially defective vehicles back onto our roads. People are driving their families on roads on which they may encounter unsafe cars. We see road safety advertisements every day about dangerous driving and showing us the human tragedies of car accidents. What about dangerous cars? This is an important issue. Why must we wait for a "Prime Time Investigates" special? What happens when the sensationalism and the spotlight die down after the "Prime Time Investigates" programme? It seems that the heat dies down but the fraud goes on. What is happening to ensure our national car testing service is being properly delivered? What monitoring takes place to ensure our cars are being properly tested so that people are not hoodwinked? What happens to cars that have been passed fraudulently? Two months since the "Prime Time Investigates" programme was broadcast, this fraud is still going on. I know this from the concerned person who came to me. On the "Prime Time Investigates" programme, the person interviewed highlighted the point that fraud was going on not just in the centres identified in the programme but nationwide.

Are Applus+ Car Testing Service Limited, the company that runs the national car testing service, and the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport reliant on programmes like "Prime Time Investigates" and people coming forward or are they trying to get to the core of these issues? Is it an active or passive investigation? I do not want to be dependent on waiting for someone to come forward. A person may be fearful for his or her job and the ramifications of coming forward. At the time of the programme, Applus+ Car Testing Service Limited said it would vigorously investigate the allegations of fraud at its centres and that it had reported the matter to the Garda Síochána. Applus+ Car Testing Service Limited asked the State broadcaster to provide details of the allegations. In a statement released at the time, Applus+ Car Testing Service Limited said the NCT is operated to the highest international standards and takes the issue of vehicle safety and fraud very seriously. The company is supposed to be reviewing the tests to determine whether unroadworthy cars were passed. If cars were passing this test up to two weeks ago when they should not have been, what is going wrong?

There are wide-ranging and detailed concerns about the national car test and anecdotal evidence about the lack of consistency across the NCT centres. This leads to people questioning the validity of NCT centres. It will not help us to promote road safety. We need the public to believe in the quality of the work done by the NCT. Until this issue is resolved, that cannot happen. I ask the Minister of State to address these concerns.

Deputy Shane McEntee

I will take this debate on behalf of my colleague the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Varadkar. I know where Senator Reilly is coming from as I was involved in road safety for five years in the Dáil. Everyone worked hard to get us from having the worst record in Europe to being at the top. The quality of our cars was a major issue. Setting up the NCT caused us much pain but when one had the NCT test, one felt one had a roadworthy car. Everyone was shocked at the "Prime Time Investigates" programme but this is under the eye of the Road Safety Authority, headed by Noel Brett. Gay Byrne has done a fantastic job in getting us to where we are. The Senator may be happy with the progress outlined in the reply. I propose the Senator keeps on the pressure because that is what politics is about. He or she who shouts loudest gets results. That is how it works.

I thank Senator Reilly for raising this issue and for giving me the opportunity to update this House on recent developments on the NCT. The NCT is an important preventative road safety measure and ensures that cars, particularly older cars, are in a roadworthy condition. It is important to remember that, under road traffic legislation, it is the responsibility of vehicle owners to ensure that their vehicles are in compliance with the law and are roadworthy at all times. Under the Road Safety Authority Act 2006, the Road Safety Authority has responsibility for the delivery of the NCT. Since the start of 2010, operation of the day-to-day testing function rests with a company called Applus+, with which the RSA signed a contract following a detailed procurement process. This contract requires the contractor to meet a number of specific performance standards in a wide range of operational areas including customer waiting times, customer satisfaction and test integrity. It also sets out the penalties that can be imposed in the event that the contractor fails to meet the performance requirements set down.

On a recent RTE 1 "Prime Time Investigates" television programme, allegations of fraud and corruption were made regarding the NCT and specifically the roadworthiness testing of vehicles being used as taxis. In a follow-up programme, further allegations were made in regard to shortened test times and faulty equipment. The RSA participated in both programmes and in all subsequent media interviews and broadcasts on these matters. The Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport and his departmental officials have discussed the issues raised by the programmes with the RSA, which takes very seriously the allegations of misconduct relating to any aspect of the NCT service. It is engaging with Applus+ on an ongoing basis on the investigation of the allegations made and the enhancement of systems and procedures for fraud prevention and detection. The RSA is also in discussions with PricewaterhouseCoopers and AA Ireland, which audit and supervise the NCT service on its behalf. Following the "Prime Time Investigates" programmes, the NCT contractor Applus+ undertook an internal investigation and the outcome was that seven vehicle inspectors identified as a result of the programme were suspended. Three have since been dismissed.

In parallel with the action taken by Applus+, a Garda investigation is currently under way and Applus+ is providing all the information and assistance required during this investigative process. In addition to these actions, Applus+ is also implementing a number of measures to address the issues raised by the "Prime Time Investigates" programme. While details of many of these measures must necessarily remain confidential, they include preventative measures and fraud detection measures based on following up on specific risk areas identified. Some of the more public measures that have already been put in place include a confidential hotline and e-mail address, a signed declaration for all vehicles booked at test centres, including trade and taxis, identifying the presenter of the vehicle and recording the driver number and the garage represented, if applicable, posters in centres advising all customers that no valuables should be left in the car and measures to increase awareness that the presenter must produce a driving licence.

Under its contract with the RSA, Applus+ was already engaged in the process of fitting cameras on every test lane and these are expected to be in place by the end of this month. The second "Prime Time Investigates" programme alleged that test times had reduced dramatically due to the introduction of the productivity incentive scheme for NCT vehicle inspectors and that faulty equipment was being used to test emissions. These issues were fully investigated at that time and were found to have had no foundation. Results for 2010 and 2009 show little difference in pass rates. In 2009 the pass rate for full tests was 51.5% and for 2010 was 51.8%. The average test time has changed from 20 minutes in 2009 to approximately 19 minutes in 2010 as the productivity changes have taken place. The proportion of tests conducted in 15 minutes or less remains unchanged since 2009. Shorter test times are typically for younger, cleaner vehicles and in centres that have clerical or administrative support staff. Abnormally short test times are monitored continually by the RSA and the supervision services contractor.

Regarding allegations of faulty equipment, Applus+, as part of a comprehensive re-equipment programme planned under its contract with the RSA, proposed to deploy new gas analysers. Following in-depth testing by the company the equipment proved unreliable in Irish conditions and the company decided to use an updated version of the analyser provided by the previous supplier, which is currently being deployed without a problem. While responsibility for the deployment of equipment rests with Applus+ throughout the testing and deployment period, the RSA was kept informed of progress in this matter. The RSA has informed the Minister that it is confident that the appropriate steps were taken by the company in testing the equipment and deciding not to put it into production so that the quality of emission testing was not compromised. The RSA has also assured the Minister that it monitors the performance of the contract continuously and has frequent meetings with the contractor to discuss performance and any issue arising.

In view of the seriousness of the allegations made by the "Prime Time Investigates" programme, the Minister is glad to say that the RSA has acted swiftly and proactively and will leave no stone unturned in rooting out fraud. Deliberate fraud by professionals is notoriously difficult to detect as has been demonstrated in other areas. Notwithstanding this, the RSA has assured the Minister that it will continue to take every possible action to tackle these issues head on. I thank the Senator for raising this issue and I hope I have addressed her concerns.

An Leas-Chathaoirleach

Has Senator Reilly a supplementary question?

Senator Kathryn Reilly

I have two brief comments. First, in regard to the RSA and the discussions with PricewaterhouseCoopers and the AA which audit and supervise the NCT service, I would be interested to find out further information on how they perform that audit and how they look for fraud. I read that they use the same car, bringing it to all the centres to ensure the service is uniform. My fear is that if officials who engage in fraudulent behaviour twig that this is the car in question they can advise another person in another centre to watch out for it and to be careful.

As to the confidential hotline and e-mail address, last week there was a Private Members' debate in the Seanad on whistleblower legislation. I would be very conscious that the trade of mechanic is a very hard one at present because of the recession. People are very afraid for their jobs and the accompanying ramifications. Nobody wants to be the person who comes forward. Are people covered if they do so? I realise the process is confidential and may be anonymous but none the less if a person in a test centre makes allegations against his or her colleagues it might be easy to identify him or her as having ratted on them. I hate that term but that is what will be said to the person. Is the protection in place?

Deputy Shane McEntee

The NCT was set up to progress road safety. There is no question about that purpose because of the number of faulty cars. I can only put my hand on my heart and state that the Road Safety Authority under Mr. Noel Brett will do nothing wrong. I have not spoken to him since the programme which was a major shock to everybody. We know that 99.9% of our mechanics are the best one could get but, as in any game, there will always be one person who takes a short cut. Anybody who knows anything should come straight out with it and not be afraid, as should the Senator if any matter is brought to her attention. No mechanic in his right mind would allow a faulty car to go out, risking not only the life of its driver but that of any other person.

If the Senator has information, I ask her to supply it to me and I will make sure that my Department returns to her on any question arising.

The Seanad adjourned at 7 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 7 July 2011.