Adjournment Matters

Local Government Reform

Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill

This Adjournment matter relates to the document Putting People First and the proposed legislation on local government reform which I understand will be before this House shortly, after its passage through Dáil Éireann. I refer to the workings of town councils throughout the country. The Government's proposals, covered in the Putting People First policy document, are to abolish all 75 town councils and the five borough councils. From meeting local town councillors and attending public meetings in places such as Letterkenny in County Donegal, I know this to be a retrograde step that would remove the layer of democracy closest to the people.

I offer the example of the cost of running a town council such as that in Letterkenny which has nine elected members and a number of staff. The town council has a budget of between €8 million and €9 million per annum. The cost of running the council is €80,000. If that does not reflect value for money, I am not sure what does. The town has a population of approximately 20,000. The council is deeply engaged with the Tidy Towns committee, is involved with 90 resident associations and is deeply rooted in all the sporting and voluntary organisations within the town council area.

Moreover, it offers money back to the county council from the rates collected within the town.

The argument that these proposals will save substantial moneys does not make any sense whatsoever. As such, I am calling for a period of reflection. I appreciate that the legislation might already have been drafted, but I hope the Minister, Deputy Phil Hogan, will at least prove himself willing to accept amendments whereby some of the town councils in a position to prove their effectiveness and success would be retained. To clarify, I am not arguing that all town councils should be retained. However, having carried out my own survey of the 75 town councils and five borough councils throughout the country, I discovered that only 29 covered a population of 5,000 or fewer. In other words, 51 of these fora are catering for a population of more than 5,000. Why not set a population threshold whereby councils at or above that level and which can show they are economically viable and effective and have benefited the local community would be retained? To use the example of Letterkenny, with a budget approaching €10 million, the net cost to the taxpayer is €80,000 in the form of salaries for council members. The argument that savings will arise from laying off town council staff does not stand up because these staff will be redeployed in the local government sector.

Now is the time for the Government to reflect on its local government reform plan. The people indicated in the referendum last week that they did not favour the abolition of the institutions of our democracy. Town councils are the democratic fora which are closest to the people. Given the outcome of the referendum, the Government should at least consider retaining some, if not all, of the effective, efficient and successful town councils throughout the country. I am not sure whether the Minister of State will be able to give me the response I am looking for. I ask, however, that she and her senior Minister take on board last week's vote and reflect on the points I have raised, with a view to accepting the amendments my party intends to table when the legislation comes before the Oireachtas.

Acting Chairman (Senator Terry Leyden)

I hope the Minister of State finds the Senator as persuasive as I have.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government (Deputy Jan O'Sullivan)

I thank Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill for raising this matter which I am taking on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Phil Hogan. I am glad to have the opportunity to provide some context and detail of the important issues he has raised.

The Government's action programme for effective local government, published in October 2012, sets out proposals for a range of measures to reform and strengthen local government structures, functions, funding, governance and operational arrangements. Chapter 6 of the action programme details the policy decision to replace town councils with a new comprehensive model of municipal governance based on principal towns and designed to strengthen local government within counties and address weaknesses and anomalies in the current system.

I fully acknowledge that many town councils have achieved successes for their communities. I am convinced, however, that the strengths of municipal governance that have been a hallmark of these councils will be brought to bear on a wider basis in each county under the new arrangements which will see towns being united with their natural hinterlands. Instead of talking about abolition, it should be recognised that a new model of municipal governance is being introduced in which municipal districts will cover the entire territory of each county, reflecting European norms, removing outdated boundaries and ending the anomaly of small towns having municipal status and dual representation, while certain larger centres and rural areas lack any sub-county governance. The effect will be to enhance significantly both democratic leadership and accountability, on the one hand, and operational efficiency, on the other, within a far more cohesive and integrated system which reflects the realities of the 21st rather than the 19th century.

As well as creating a more rational and comprehensive structural arrangement, the new system will result in more effective and community focused decision making and implementation. The successes of town councils such as Letterkenny have been achieved, despite limitations of powers and resources. Under the new arrangements, there will be full integration of local authority resources across each county and the elimination of duplication both in administrative and electoral terms.

An important benefit of the new system will be a more appropriate assignment of local authority functions. The performance of different functions by members at county and district levels will result in greater effectiveness than the current parallel town and county system which involves a significant element of duplication of functions. The division of functions between county and district levels will be determined on the basis of what is most relevant to each level. Local matters will be dealt with at municipal district level, while those of wider strategic application will be decided at county level, without duplication between county and district jurisdictions. Elected members will perform a range of important reserved functions at district level on a fully devolved basis, subject to certain requirements relating to consistency with overall local authority policy. By ensuring decisions are taken on a devolved basis and functions are carried out at the appropriate level within the county, the principle of subsidiarity will be strengthened in the local government system and the best features of effective councils such as Letterkenny will be retained and extended across the country.

The new arrangements will also address the extent of disparity in representation levels. The local electoral areas recommended in the boundary committee report, published on 30 May 2013, will form the basis for configuration of the new municipal districts. As is evident from the report, the committee was mindful of the need to integrate towns and boroughs into the new governance structures when determining the local electoral areas. The electoral review also had a specific goal of achieving a better balance and consistency in representational ratios, having regard to the significant population changes that have taken place since the current numbers were decided. The review also took particular account of factors such as the location of towns and local identities in the new municipal governance arrangement.

I am confident the new governance arrangements within counties will enable councillors to represent their constituents more effectively than under the current arrangements. Work on the implementation of the reform agenda is proceeding rapidly and we will be moving shortly to the next phase with the publication of the necessary legislation to provide for the new arrangements, thus paving the way to deliver the benefits outlined in the action programme. These include greater operational efficiency and representational effectiveness, getting more from the local government system, improving the range and quality of local government services for citizens and communities, maximising value for money for taxpayers, and ensuring local government can make a strong contribution to national recovery.

Most agree that radical change in the local government system is long overdue. This is not about change for the sake of it. It is about delivering a restructured and revitalised local government system that is capable of acting as the main vehicle of governance and public service at local level. I am sure there will be room for proposals from Members on Committee Stage.

Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill

I appreciate that the Minister of State is answering on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Phil Hogan. I disagree, however, with the fundamental approach being taken. The Department can dress it up however it likes, but the reality is that we are seeing a stripping of powers from local authority members at both town and county level. This is of particular concern in a context where Irish Water is set to subsume all of the relevant functions for which councillors have formerly been responsible.

Where the town council model has worked well, towns throughout the country will, as a result of these proposals, lose an important local democratic forum. In addition, pressure will come on other areas within the extended rural electoral area because ratepayers and people in these areas will not be able to meet the demand-----

Acting Chairman (Senator Terry Leyden)

The Senator is moving beyond the scope of a supplementary question.

Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill

I am asking the Minister of State to convey my concerns to the Minister and urge him to engage in a period of reflection.

Deputy Jan O'Sullivan

Our intention is not to take away powers but to devolve functions to appropriate levels. If we were to retain town councils, while also putting in place municipal districts, there certainly would be duplication.

Pension Provisions

Senator John Whelan

I welcome the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Pat Rabbitte. I appreciate his taking time from a busy schedule to respond to the issue I am raising. I am taking the opportunity to seek clarification and reassurance on behalf of ESB workers in the context of the recent revelation of a significant shortfall in that company's pension fund.

I have been contacted on a daily basis in the past few weeks by ESB workers throughout Laois, Offaly, Kildare and the midlands. The ESB is a strong, well respected and valued employer. Generations of families have been employed in the ESB throughout the midlands over the years. There is unnerving news that the ESB pension scheme is in deficit to the tune of between €1.6 billion and €1.7 billion. It is difficult to see how it can occur in a highly successful and profitable semi-State company with international status. It pays substantial annual dividends to the State on behalf of the taxpayer.

An area of concern to the workers is that the management has unilaterally changed the status of the pension scheme from a defined benefit scheme to a defined contribution scheme. I fell victim to the same thing when I was employed in the newspaper industry. That also rings alarm bells for workers looking forward to retirement in years ahead and the significant impact it will have on their entitlements. Due to the financial flux in the sector and the industry in the past few years, Waterford Crystal workers were left high and dry. It is not a parallel but it rings alarm bells. In companies in the private sector, pension schemes are seeking a write-down from the Pensions Board in respect of exposure and what is due to workers. I hope the Minister can bring clarity and reassurance to the area, particularly because the ESB pension scheme is the largest funded pension scheme in the country, with liabilities in the region of €5 billion. This is a worrying signal to all workers in the public, private and semi-State sectors if they cannot rely on, and trust, a pension scheme in a gilt-edged company such as the ESB. What hope do workers in other companies have when they do the prudent thing and contribute on a weekly basis to their pension for retirement?

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Pat Rabbitte)

I am here out of respect for the House and my understanding is I will be here again next week to deal with legislation.

Acting Chairman (Senator Terry Leyden)

The Minister is always welcome.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte

I am grateful for that, Sir, but perhaps I can have the temerity to say that, as a Member of the Lower House, I was advised at some stage today that I should be here at 5.55 p.m. It is now 8.20 p.m. and, without intruding into the affairs of a House of which I am not a Member, if it is the wish of the Seanad, as it ought to be, to have Ministers come into the House to deal with issues for which they are responsible, I respectfully suggest Members should be able to organise their business more efficiently than inviting me to be here at 5.55 p.m. I changed two commitments I had this evening in order to be here. In the Lower House if one has to reply to a Topical Issues matter at 5.43 p.m., the Minister is present at 5.43 p.m. I make these remarks with due respect.

Acting Chairman (Senator Terry Leyden)

On behalf of the House, I apologise to the Minister. There was a late change in the Order of Business which resulted in this situation. It is not normal. I was a Minister of State, too, and came to the House many times as Minister of State. In this situation, there was a change and we apologise to the Minister and thank him for coming. It will not happen again.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte

I am grateful to you, Sir.

I understand the issues concerning the ESB pension scheme, which has some 13,700 members, need to be handled sensitively and carefully. I am pleased to provide what information I can, which was provided for my Department by the ESB.

In late 2008 the trustees of the ESB superannuation scheme brought forward the tri-annual valuation of the scheme by one year to assess the financial health of the scheme. The actuarial valuation to 31 December 2008 showed an ongoing valuation deficit of €1.9 billion and a minimum funding standard deficit of €1.8 billion. As required by the scheme rules, the ESB and the ESB group of unions formed a working group to assess how best to address the reported deficit and to protect as far as feasible the interest of the ESB and the current members of the scheme. The ESB reached an agreement with staff in 2010 to resolve the pension deficit. That agreement closed the scheme to new entrants, it broke the link between salaries and future pension increases and introduced a solvency test for future pension increases. The measures adopted under that agreement have, I understand, had a positive effect, resulting in the scheme actuary recently reporting that the scheme is now in balance on an on-going actuarial basis.

Aside from the ongoing actuarial position, the Pensions Board also requires the ESB scheme to assess whether it could meet a certain prescribed standard, known as the minimum funding standard, MFS. This effectively tests whether the scheme could meet all its current obligations if it were wound up immediately, in other words, if everyone retired from the company on Friday. Neither the Government nor the ESB envisages the winding up of the scheme or everyone retiring on Friday, but, regardless, the scheme is still required to meet the requirements of the minimum funding standard.

I understand the scheme actuary reported at the end of 2011 that the ESB scheme, like many others, did not at that time satisfy the MFS requirements. I assume this is the deficit to which Senator John Whelan is referring in his question. I understand the Pensions Board does not require the MFS deficit to be addressed immediately but does require that a plan be developed to address it over a reasonable time. I am informed that the trustees of the ESB scheme, with the agreement of ESB, submitted a funding plan to the Pensions Board, which was approved in October 2012. I am also informed that this plan aims to eliminate the deficit by 2018 and that this plan remains on track.

In common with other companies where the Irish Government is the principal shareholder, the scheme is governed by legislation and supplementary regulations. I understand that, in the event of a deficit arising in the scheme, the regulations require that the relevant parties meet to agree a mechanism to address the deficit. I understand that in August 2013 solicitors on behalf of a small number of members of the ESB scheme served a plenary summons on solicitors for the ESB and, therefore, the issue is subject to judicial proceedings.

With regard to the manner in which the ESB accounts for the scheme in its financial statements, my Department has been assured by the ESB that, having taken expert legal and financial advice, the company is entirely satisfied that the current accounting treatment for the scheme is correct and in accordance with applicable laws and international accounting standards. I trust that this provides some clarity for the Senator.

Senator John Whelan

I am grateful to the Minister for the information. In the matter he raised, I would like to respond by saying it is not on the part of the Senators that the schedule was changed at 2.30 p.m. to reschedule the business of the House. I had anticipated the question would be taken at 6 p.m. With no disrespect, the question was tabled last Wednesday and deferred at the Minister's request to be taken this week at a more suitable time.

I am grateful for the response but for the ESB workers it is a worrying transformation in how the pension scheme is being handled and dealt with in the company. The ESB group of unions is going so far as to describe it as a pensions crisis. From speaking to workers, it is leading to unease and some of them are talking about industrial action and unrest. No more than the workers, the Minister would not relish that outcome if the workers did not find comfort in the reassurances of the ESB. The last thing we need heading into the winter months is industrial unrest from a company of such strategic importance to our economic recovery as the ESB.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte

I agree with the Senator. The last thing the country, the economy and private domestic consumers need is industrial unrest. I genuinely do not believe there is any serious cause for industrial unrest. The ESB pension scheme is absolutely sound. There is no comparison of any kind to be drawn with Waterford Glass and the tragic circumstances that happened there or in any other private failed pension scheme. The ESB pension scheme is one of the most robust in the country. It is not the fault of the ESB unions or ESB management that the pensions board requirement in respect of the application of minimum funding standards has created a situation whereby a scheme that previously was in sync now has a temporary deficit, but the plan entered into between the trustees and the company will bring the fund back in sync by 2018. I am aware, of course, that judicial proceedings are pending and it is not for me to comment on what will happen in the courts. However, I honestly believe the pension scheme is sound. I can understand why it is so important for the workers concerned but in my best judgment there is not any cause for concern or unease on their part. Everybody knows that the ESB is not going to close down on Friday evening, nor will all the employees be going out on pension at the weekend. Therefore, the concerns will not be realised.

Third Level Qualifications Recognition

Senator Colm Burke

I thank the Minister for his attendance at this late sitting. I raise the question of an individual who has a university degree from Cork and proceeded to a master's degree in the University of Ulster. It appears the individual had to apply to the Department for recognition of the qualification from the University of Ulster. I am a little concerned about a letter from the Department of Health which states that non-Irish dietetic qualifications are assessed under Directive 2005/36/EC. I was not aware that a qualification from a university in Northern Ireland was regarded as non-Irish. This person has an offer of a job in Ireland but cannot take up the position because a master's degree awarded in Northern Ireland is not recognised by the Department. The Department wrote to the person on 11 September 2013 and stated it would give its decision on or around 23 December 2013. I find this amazing that someone who has a primary degree from a university in Cork and is awarded a master's degree in Northern Ireland must wait up to six months from the time of application for recognition of this qualification by the Department of Health. I ask why this is taking six months for a person who is from Cork, who went to school in Cork, who has a degree from Cork and who has been offered a job. The reason the person went to Northern Ireland is that it was the only place where further studies in this particular area could be pursued.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte

I thank the Senator for raising what seems to be a reasonable question. I am answering on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, although I do not have any expertise in the matter. However, I will read the Minister's statement for the information of the Senator.

There is no system of statutory registration for dietitians in Ireland. The health and social care professionals' council, CORU, which was established in March 2007, provides for statutory registration of 12 separate health and social care professions, including dietetics. The Dietitians Registration Board has been established and is expected to open its register by the end of the year.

One aspect of statutory registration is the possession of an approved qualification. In the absence of statutory registration, persons are free to work in the private health sector in Ireland without having their qualifications recognised. However, persons wishing to work in the publicly funded health sector in Ireland who have obtained their qualifications outside the Twenty-six Counties must apply to have their professional qualifications recognised under Directive 2005/36/EC. This directive applies to all EEA nationals wishing to practise a regulated profession in an EEA member state other than that in which they obtained their professional qualifications. Its intention is to make it easier for certain professionals, including health professionals, to practise their professions in European countries other than their own, but due safeguards are provided in the assessment of qualifications for public health and safety and consumer protection. The professional qualifications directive applies to a range of professionals, not only health professionals, and the Department of Education and Skills has overall responsibility for qualification recognition policy in Ireland.

Dietetics is a regulated profession for the purposes of the professional qualifications directive. Where statutory registration does not apply for a profession in Ireland, non-Irish qualifications are assessed for their equivalence to the Irish entry-level qualifications required to work in the public health sector. The directive provides for mutual recognition of qualifications for certain professions. In the case of the health and social care professions, including dietetics, the directive does not provide for automatic recognition of professional qualifications obtained in another member state. It provides for an assessment, on a case-by-case basis, of the formal qualifications and professional experience of an applicant against the qualifications required to practise in the host member state - in other words, Ireland. If deficits are identified, an applicant must be offered a compensation measure - that is, the choice of completing an adaptation period or taking an aptitude test. Because of the case-by-case nature of the assessment, the directive provides that applications must be acknowledged within one month and the applicant informed of any missing document. A final decision must be communicated to the applicant within four months of submission of a complete application.

Under SI 139 and 166 of 2008, which transpose the professional qualifications directive into Irish law, the Minister for Health is the competent authority for the assessment of dietetic qualifications. The Department of Health is advised on applications for recognition by the professional body, the Irish Nutrition and Dietetic Institute. There are no applications in hand which exceed the specified timeframe and in general, in the case of dietetics, applications are processed in a much shorter time.

Senator Colm Burke

I thank the Minister for a very comprehensive reply. It is unfortunate that the Department has issued a letter to state a qualification from Northern Ireland is termed as a non-Irish qualification. It is unfair and it is not justified. The clarification that such persons can work in the private sector is not what the individual was advised. It is interesting that this clarification is now given because the individual was advised he could not work at all without recognition by the Department. I thank the Minister for that clarification. The correspondence that my constituent received clearly indicates that a decision is not expected to be made until 23 December 2013.

Acting Chairman (Senator Terry Leyden)

As the Minister is taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of the Department of Health, he is not in a position to give further details.

Senator Colm Burke

I certainly appreciate the comprehensive reply given by the Minister.

Deputy Pat Rabbitte

According to the text I have read, the information on how the private sector operates is distinctly different from what the Senator was advised. I do not know whether that is of any assistance in this case.

I am bound to say I cannot disagree with the Senator. If we are talking about a recognised validated university in Northern Ireland, I am not exactly sure why it ought to be seen as non-Irish in terms of recognition here. I know that dietitians have over very many years fought for recognition within the social care system, but I was unaware that this was the disposition towards universities based in Northern Ireland. I will be happy to take up this matter with the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, as I do not know the background to it.

Data Protection

Senator Deirdre Clune

I wish to ascertain the steps being taken to ensure personal data are afforded a greater level of security on the Internet. This question is exercising many people at this point and the Edward Snowden scandal was a wake-up call with regard to what can happen with the sharing and usage of data for inappropriate purposes. It is again a question of what is inappropriate, which is anybody's guess. I make a distinction between information provided for security reasons and that which relates to personal data. A European Commission survey confirms 72% of Europeans do not feel in control of the data they have disclosed on social network sites and 90% indicate that having their data protection rights respected whenever data is collected or processed is very important. That is clear.

Since the Snowden affair we have heard from Commissioner Reding that she has put strong rules on the table that will ensure companies offering products and services to European customers will have to play by European rules, even if the companies are based in the United States, Asia, India or anywhere else. National data protection authorities will be able to sanction firms that violate the rules. There is a difference between how the United States and the European Union, for example, regulate data privacy, and that has been recognised for a long time. In the United States data can be processed unless the act is specifically prohibited, but in the European Union personal data cannot be processed unless the task is specially authorised. There is a difference, but companies outside the European Union work here under the guise of guidelines and self-regulation; we need to get to a point where companies outside the European Union but operating within it and providing services abide by EU regulations, laws and rules rather than those from the home country.

It is an important issue and Commissioner Reding has indicated strong rules have been put on the table to control the matter. Will the Minister of State detail Ireland's view on this and how we will move forward in the area? We have guidelines and proposals from Commissioner Reding, but we need to act swiftly to give users of the Internet confidence that their personal data are not being used or abused for services they do not want. I accept that information is needed for security reasons in the fight against terrorism - we all need to feel safe and secure on our streets - but private data can be used by companies for reasons other than that for which it was surrendered in the first place. We need to move swiftly, as the media reaction following the Snowden affair has alarmed many people and suggested that private data is not secure.

Minister of State at the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (Deputy Dinny McGinley)

I am standing in for my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Equality, who is unavailable.

I thank the Senator for raising this important subject, which is relevant to all of us who use the Internet, whether for commercial, personal or leisure purposes. By way of introduction, general issues of Internet security are matters for the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources and his Department, whereas data protection policy falls within the area of responsibility of the Minister for Justice and Equality.

Communication networks and information systems have become an essential component of both our economic systems and social life. All of us here today have witnessed an information technology revolution in our lifetimes and the pace of change shows no sign of slackening. Electronic communication systems and networks have become necessary utilities almost the same as electricity or water supplies. The security of those networks and information systems is, therefore, a matter of utmost concern, not only for business but also for individual citizens. Security breaches, whether they arise from accidental loss, mistakes or unauthorised access such as hacking, pose a threat for businesses and for individuals alike. They also put at risk the trust and confidence of users of the Internet services which are essential to the continued development of the digital economy and the economic growth and job creation potential of this dynamic sector.

The threats to Internet security are continuously changing. The European Union has reacted by establishing the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security, ENISA, to raise awareness of network and information security and to develop and promote a culture of network security in society for the benefit of citizens, consumers, businesses and public sector bodies. It also assists member states in enhancing and strengthening their capability to prevent, detect and respond to network and information security breaches. Specific safeguards for the protection of personal data, which also apply in respect of the processing of such data in the Internet context, are also in place at European Union level. I would like, on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality, to take the opportunity to briefly set out the background.

The centrepiece of existing EU legislation on personal data protection is Directive 95/46/EC which seeks to reconcile the protection of personal data with the free flow of such data within the Internal Market and to countries outside the European UJnion. It has been transposed into Irish law in the Data Protection (Amendment) Act 2003 which supplements the Data Protection Act 1988. This legislation requires all those handling personal data to take appropriate security measures against unauthorised access to, or unauthorised alteration or disclosure of, the data, in particular where processing operations involve the transmission of such data over a network. In determining what is appropriate in any particular case, account must be taken of the risk of harm that might result from security breaches and the state of technological development and costs of implementation. These security measures also apply where data are transferred to a destination outside the European Union.

The 1995 data protection directive has been supplemented by other more specific legislative measures such as the e-privacy directive which applies to providers of publicly available electronic communications services, namely, telecom providers and Internet service providers. This directive requires such companies to take appropriate measures to safeguard security of their services and to protect the confidentiality of communications and related traffic data. In January 2012 the European Commission tabled proposals for a reform of the current data protection framework and these proposals are currently being discussed separately in the Council of the European Union and in the European Parliament. These proposals, if implemented in their current form, would provide substantial extra protection for the privacy of citizens across Europe.

It is generally recognised that the 1995 directive's standards need to be updated to take account of more recent developments such as the increased usage of mobile phones, cloud computing, social networking and increasing globalisation of data transfers. Key features of the existing legislation, including the need for appropriate security measures, remain part of the reform agenda. The proposed regulation's enhanced data protection standards will, when agreed, apply directly in all member states without the need for transposing national legislation.

Achieving progress on the reform proposals was a priority of the Irish Presidency and I am pleased that substantial progress was achieved on key aspects of the reform package. The reform proposals remain a priority for the current Lithuanian Presidency. A detailed debate on an important aspect of the reform proposal took place at a meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Council in Luxembourg yesterday, which the Minister attended and participated in. However, it is not possible to predict when agreement between the Council and the European Parliament can be reached.

Senator Deirdre Clune

I am glad that the issue was on the Council's agenda yesterday. I am sure the issue I have raised about companies from outside the European Union that are operating here not being subject to as strict regulation as companies from within the Union will be addressed in the detail of the proposals. We will progress that issue again.

The Seanad adjourned at 8.55 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 9 October 2013.

Seanad Éireann debate - Tuesday, 8 Oct 2013