Adjournment Matters

Sentencing Policy

Senator Averil Power

Defendants in a number of serious sexual assault and domestic violence cases for several years have had some or all of their prison sentences written off in return for payment of financial compensation, much to the disgust of their victims. Most rape and domestic violence cases are not even reported to the Garda, let alone prosecuted in court. It is disgraceful that women who are brave enough to report their attackers and endure the ordeal of facing them in a courtroom would then have to watch them buy their way out of jail. I will not mention specific cases because I do not want to prejudice ongoing or future legal actions but the overall message is that if one has enough money one can escape justice. If one has sufficient financial resources, one can rape and beat women with impunity.

It is a damning indictment of the justice system that people are regularly sent to jail for non-payment of fines or for petty theft but not for vicious attacks on women. As Colette Browne points out in today's Irish Independent, more than 8,300 people were jailed last year for non-payment of court imposed fines, including 242 who were jailed for failing to pay fines for not having a television licence. Clearly, justice in this country is only for the poor. Financial compensation is entirely appropriate for financial or non-violent crimes but it is outrageous to put a value on the damage that rape or assault does to a person. I ask the Government to change the law in order that defendants can no longer pay financial compensation in lieu of jail time. This issue has arisen in several cases. It is not an isolated incident and it is time the Government put a real value on victims' lives by ensuring this will never happen again.

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

I thank the Senator for raising this matter on the Adjournment. I am speaking on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality who regrets that he is unable to be present due to other business.

As the Senator will appreciate, the courts are independent in the matter of sentencing, as in other matters concerning the exercise of their judicial functions, subject only to the Constitution and the law. In accordance with this principle, the role of the Oireachtas has been to specify in law a maximum penalty for an offence. Having considered all of the circumstances of a case, a court may impose an appropriate penalty up to that maximum. It is the responsibility of the court to determine the sentence to be imposed in a particular case, having heard all the evidence presented and taking case law into account. The court is required to impose a sentence which is proportionate not only to the crime but also to the individual offender, in that process identifying where in the sentencing range the particular case should lie and then applying any mitigating factor which may be present. From time to time, issues arise with consistency in sentencing and the sentences imposed in high profile or particularly sensitive cases.

The Senator will appreciate that it would be inappropriate for a member of the Executive to make any comment on individual cases. However, I draw attention to an important safeguard, the power of the Director of Public Prosecutions to apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal to review a sentence imposed by the Circuit Court, the Central Criminal or the Special Criminal Court that she regards as unduly lenient.

Section 6 of the Criminal Justice Act 1993 provides for the making of a compensation order, on application or otherwise, against a convicted person by the court instead of or in addition to dealing with the person in any other way, unless it sees reason to the contrary. The Minister intends to seek Government approval very soon for the general scheme of a Bill to replace the Probation of Offenders Act 1907 with modern provisions dealing with community sanctions and the role of the Probation Service in the criminal justice system. In the context of that legislation, consideration will be given to the question of whether the Criminal Justice Act 1993 should be amended to ensure there is to be no link between the payment of compensation by an offender and the sentencing of the offender. The replacement of the court poor box with a transparent statutory reparation fund, which has been recommended by the Law Reform Commission, will also be considered in the new legislation. The details of the proposed Bill will be announced in due course following Government approval.

In September 2012 the Minister for Justice and Equality announced a strategic review of penal policy. A working group is carrying out this review which is examining all aspects of penal policy, including sentencing. The group is expected to report in the coming months. In its deliberations, the group will take account of the recommendations of the Law Reform Commission's recent report on mandatory sentencing and both reports will be considered by the Minister in due course. The issue of domestic and sexual violence is one the Government takes very seriously. Cosc, the National Office for the Prevention of Domestic, Sexual and Gender-based Violence, is continuing to co-ordinate the implementation of the National Strategy on Domestic, Sexual and Gender-based Violence 2010-14.

Since coming into office, the Minister has brought forward important amendments to the Domestic Violence Acts 1996 and 2002 through the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2011. The net effect of these changes has been to extend the protections of this legislation to a wider number of people and circumstances. It is the Minister's intention to bring forward a package of workable and effective proposals for the consolidation and reform of domestic violence legislation as soon as possible, having regard to other legislative priorities. To advance this work, officials in Cosc, the National Office for the Prevention of Domestic, Sexual and Gender-based Violence, have met representatives of a number of groups to discuss their proposals for legislative change. Careful consideration will also be given to the recommendations from the examination of domestic and sexual violence by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality when the report is available.

Senator Averil Power

I accept that the Minister of State is responding on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter. It is welcome that change in the 1993 Act on financial compensation will be considered. As far as I am concerned, it must be changed. I do not see a case for leaving it as it is. It is never appropriate to give financial compensation in an assault case, be it sexual assault or other form of assault such as domestic violence. At the least, it should not be possible to do so without the consent of the victim. If a victim speaks about her ordeal, be it rape or sexual violence, in court and says she objects to financial compensation it should not be possible for the attacker to get off with the payment of a fine or compensation instead. It makes a complete mockery of the seriousness of the crime.

It is welcome that such a change is being considered and I hope the legislation will be changed as soon as possible. The reply states it is up to the courts to decide on sentencing. Of course, that is true, but we set out penalties in this House and it is up to the Legislature to decide on appropriate penalties and what the spectrum of penalties should be for given offences. It is our job and responsibility to decide on the issue and it is beyond time that we stood up and said that financial compensation is not appropriate in such cases and that we would change the legislation as soon as possible.

Deputy Dinny McGinley

I again thank the Senator for raising the matter. An Garda Síochána takes appropriate action to respond to assaults, domestic violence incidents and sexual offences that are reported to it. Senators will be aware that An Garda Síochána is available at all times of the day and night, every day and every night, to intervene where there is a danger to life or the safety of any citizens of the State. That includes, in particular, victims of domestic violence. An Garda Síochána has comprehensive policies in place on domestic violence, sexual violence and dangers to children.

The courts need to have available to them various methods of disposal to ensure they can respond appropriately to the wide range of criminal offences that come before them and the circumstances of each individual case. It is fundamental to our system of justice, as Senators will appreciate, that the courts are independent of the Executive in regard to any particular case before them. While specific difficulties arise in regard to particular aspects of criminal justice legislation, the Minister for Justice and Equality will of course bring forward such amending legislation as may be necessary. As I stated, specific consideration is being given to amendment of the compensation order provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 1993 and reform of the court poor box in the context of forthcoming legislation on community sanctions. The Minister intends that this consolidation and reform of domestic violence legislation will be progressed as soon as possible, having regard to the need for consultations, other legislative priorities and any recommendations of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality arising from its examination of domestic and sexual violence.

Farm Safety

Senator Michael D'Arcy

Many of the slurry facilities that were built the best part of 30 years ago are beginning to get old and the number of incidents that occur each year with slatted tanks is greater than we would like. A total of 16 farming deaths took place in 2013. They did not all involve slatted tanks and, thankfully, the number was lower than the previous two years, 21 and 22, respectively. There is insufficient knowledge and information as to what should happen if stock or even worse, a person, ends up in a slurry storage tank. It is a pretty horrific experience of which I have personal knowledge in that 13 animals went into tanks and I did not know what to do. I do not consider myself to have more or less knowledge than the average person in such circumstances, but the reality is that such a situation is dangerous and there is no protocol. I would like to hear the Minister of State's view on same.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Tom Hayes)

I thank the Senator for giving me the opportunity to outline the position. The Health and Safety Authority, HSA, within the remit of my colleague, the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Richard Bruton, has primary responsibility for health and safety in the workplace. The HSA is also the enforcement agency for workplace safety. It carries out in the region of 3,000 inspections annually and plans to continue with a high level of engagement during 2014. These visits are aimed at advising and educating farmers of the dangers that are ever present in the farm environment.

It is a fact that farming is the most dangerous occupation in the country, with more people killed on farms than all other workplaces combined. To a large degree, the nature of a farm is at the core of the problem. A farm is, to a great extent, seen first and foremost as a family home. This means it is seen as a place of security and welcome for family, friends, neighbours and visitors. However, a farmyard is a very dangerous place of work with large modern machinery and other dangers such as animals and extensive slurry storage areas.

The difficulty is to marry the family home part of the farm with the farmyard and other dangerous areas of the extended farm.

Last year there were 16 fatal accidents reported on farms, down from 21 in the previous year. Unfortunately, there has already been one fatality this year.

The Department is represented on the farm safety partnership advisory committee which is a sub-committee of the Health and Safety Authority. The committee advises the board on the direction the authority should take in farm safety. The farm safety action plan 2013-15 follows on from the previous farm safety action plan 2009-12 and has been developed in conjunction with the farm safety partnership advisory committee. Slatted slurry storage units are safe as long as they are designed, constructed, operated and maintained in accordance with best practice. The most dangerous time in the use of a slatted slurry storage tank is during the agitation of slurry. All animals must be removed from the building during agitation; all vents must be opened to the maximum, including sliding doors, and agitation must take place on a breezy day. Most importantly, it is critical that no person enters the building during the agitation process.

The other danger is the risk of slat failure. With slatted units it is important to ensure slats are inspected on a regular basis. They are not lifetime items and need to be replaced before they fail. Slat failure can be an expensive way to discover replacement is required. Failure can and has resulted in the loss of highly valuable livestock. To avoid broken legs or, worse still, animals or people in the slurry tanks, all slats should be carefully inspected for cracks and sagging and replaced, as necessary. Attempting to rescue animals from slurry tanks is extremely dangerous and has resulted in the loss of multiple human lives.

In November 2012 my Department, in conjunction with Teagasc, published a two page article in the Irish Farmers Journal on how to inspect cattle slats on top of a slurry tank in a safe manner. The article highlighted the importance of regular monitoring of the condition of cattle slats and the safe procedures for entering a slurry tank to undertake such an inspection. The Department has detailed specifications for the design and construction of all slatted units. These specifications detail the required safety procedures and construction standards for these units. The first section in all of the specifications documents concerns safety. All of the specifications are freely available on my Department's website to anyone who is undertaking work on the construction of a slurry store. The specifications are kept under continual review and any development in safety or construction techniques is incorporated into them.

In March 2013 the Department included a farm safety message with the single payment application packs sent to over 130,000 farmers. The leaflet focused, in particular, on the dangers of slurry gases and the safe procedures for handling slurry. This was a joint initiative between the Department, the Health and Safety Authority and the farm safety partnership advisory committee and its aim was to draw attention to the risks associated specifically with slurry gases. It is just one example of co-operation between various agencies to remind farmers of the importance of following safe farming practices and the potentially fatal consequences for them, their families and other farm visitors of lowering their guard.

There is no single solution to the problem. All relevant agencies should and, I am confident, will work with the HSA and the farming representative organisations to continue to tackle this issue. This is a good time to be a farmer. We want to do everything we can to get individual farmers to take care of their safety and that of their family and all others who visit their farms. The information is available, but we must keep working to get individual farmers to take notice and put into practice good safety procedures and routines at all times.

Senator Michael D'Arcy

One thing that amazed me following the incident on my farm was the number of people who had said to me they had had a similar incident. To put the matter in context, on every occasion somebody enters such a tank, he or she is likely to die. That is how dangerous it is; one lungful of the poisonous gas will kill. The point I wish to make is that there is nothing in the safety guidelines regarding the use of a small breathing apparatus which is available for purchase and should be available at every tank, in the same way that fire extinguishers are available on farms and in worksheds, etc. The breathing apparatus should only be used in cases of extreme emergency and the fire brigade should be called to come with the correct breathing equipment to enter tanks in emergencies. It should be called for emergency rescues in order to ensure people will be safe. We saw what happened, unfortunately, to the Spence family in Northern Ireland. The necessary discussion on this issue has not been held. People might or might not call the fire brigade because of the call-out fee. For a very small increase in one's insurance premium, call-out fees are covered in the case of fire. They should also be covered in emergencies such as incidents involving slurry tanks. People do not have enough information on the protocol to be followed in cases where someone must enter a slurry tank. If someone's son or daughter or a member of his or her family is in danger, he or she will try to rescue him or her.

Deputy Tom Hayes

I take the Senator's point on the need for information. Efforts are ongoing in considering how to make farms safer. There is no doubt that with modern techniques and the changeover to bigger slurry tanks which create more gas, farms have become very dangerous places. However, there are strict and clear guidelines for the spreading of slurry and agitating tanks, of which people should be aware. As in the case of sending guidelines with the single farm payment, every opportunity should be taken to provide the relevant guidelines and information.

On the new rural development programme, I have advocated for a long time that farm safety measures be included in it. We will discuss the programme in the next number of months, which will provide an ideal opportunity to ensure this happens. Too many people are losing their lives and too many injuries are taking place. If one visits any hospital in a farming area, one is almost guaranteed to meet someone in the accident and emergency unit who has been injured on a farm. This is a real problem and no stone should be left unturned in dealing with it if the Department and I are to have any input in saving lives. The new rural development programme should be seen as a vehicle that could be used to help us to make farms safer.

Public Transport Provision

Senator David Cullinane

I welcome the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Leo Varadkar. I am extremely worried by the proposal, as I see it, to privatise the entire bus service in Waterford city. All five city bus routes and the service to Tramore are to be awarded to private operators from 2016, as well as the Bus Éireann routes serving Kildare, Tullamore, Newbridge, Portlaoise and Athy. This is part of a larger plan by the National Transport Authority to allow private bus operators to tender for services currently operated by Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus.

I must express my complete opposition to the privatisation of public transport which I believe is not in the public interest. I am absolutely opposed to this nonsensical plan to privatise 100% of the public service in Waterford city and I ask the Minister to explain why that is the case. The NTA's proposals would hand over a significant percentage of the public bus service to private operators. This has been criticised by the Competition Authority. The privatisation of either part or all of the State's public transport network is not in the interests of the public, the staff of Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus or the State.

We have heard criticism at Oireachtas committee hearings and in public by SIPTU and the NBRU, which spoke about the lack of public debate on the issue, problems with a very narrow consultation process and the impact that the Minister's proposals would have on jobs. As we know, the NBRU represents 2,500 employees and is on the record as saying this is the folly of an "ideologically-based agenda", and it is hard to disagree with that. I must ask the Minister why Waterford is being singled out for what I would see as an experiment. Is Waterford to be a guinea pig, with all the bus routes in the city being handed over to private operators, compared to only 10% of bus routes in the State as a whole? Why is that the case? It is going to cause concern for those who use the bus services in Waterford and for the employees of Bus Éireann.

We are in danger here of confusing value for money with cheapness. All international research and evidence on the privatisation of public transport companies shows that even when they are privatised they still have to be subsidised by the State. We saw this with London Bus. A report on public transport in the State was published in 2009 which found that the level of Government subsidy to CIE and Bus Éireann was relatively low by European standards. It found that subventions to both companies had continued to fall on an annual basis.

I am taking the opportunity to ask the Minister to rethink this foolish and ill-thought-out plan for privatisation. I also urge him to recognise that, unfortunately, there is a price to be paid and that it costs money to provide a vital public service. Private operators exist to provide a service and to make money, which is fine. However, sometimes bus services are required to meet a social need. We must provide a service to people and there may not be profit in that. While those services must be as efficient as we can possibly make them, it does not always work out that they will be profitable. I hope the Minister is not going down the road of privatising bus routes, with profit becoming the sole motivating factor and services coming a poor second. That is not what we need. It would be a retrograde step for public service provision in the State.

My main question for the Minister is why contracts are to be awarded for 100% of bus services in Waterford city when the figure is only 10% across the State. Is it the case, as some fear, that Waterford city is being used as a guinea pig in the Minister's ideological experiment?

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport (Deputy Leo Varadkar)

First, it is important to say Bus Éireann is not being privatised. It will remain a State-owned company. The Senator, due to his interest in, if not obsession with, ideology, has not actually looked at this from a commonsense perspective. What is happening is that routes are being tendered out to contract. Different operators can tender for these routes. It is not something that is particularly unusual. It is already the case that the operation of the Luas, for example, is tendered out. It was tendered out very successfully and the Luas service is a very good one, with over 30 million journeys taken last year. It is already the case that a lot of bus services are provided by private operators and are very popular with the public. I ask the Senator to take that into account, to see beyond his own ideology and look at what is happening in the real world and at what real people are doing.

When it comes to the contract that is being tendered out for services for Waterford city and Tramore, it is open to Bus Éireann to tender for it. It can tender for the contract on its own or as part of a joint venture with another company if it so wishes. I totally agree with the Senator on one point: this is not about savings. This policy is not about savings or reducing subventions. I totally acknowledge that public bus services require a subvention. This is about getting a better service for the Senator's constituents, for the people who live in Waterford.

The NTA will draw up a set of services that it wants provided, it will say there is X amount of money available and will ask the various bus companies what kind of service they will provide for that amount of money. I expect that whichever company wins the contract will be able to provide a better service for the same amount of money or, at the very least, the same service for an equal amount of money. I would expect in particular that the contract winner in Waterford would provide a weekend service, which is not provided by Bus Éireann currently. That is what this is about. It is about getting better services for the people who live in Waterford with the same amount of taxpayer subvention. If Bus Éireann can provide a better service than it currently does, for the same subvention, then it may be the company that wins the contract.

I understand politicians come under pressure and heat from those who already have what they want, the existing interests, the "haves" who include the workers, the unions, the company itself and its management. However, I ask the Senator to have regard for his own constituents. How could anyone in Waterford be against having a better bus service at no additional cost to the taxpayer? If, for the same amount of subvention, we can provide a better bus service, how could anyone be against that? I just do not understand it, unless it is some sort of strange ideology that the Senator has which does not take into account that the most important people here are the passengers and the taxpayers. Maybe the Senator thinks somebody else is more important.

I can read the prepared response if the Cathaoirleach wishes but the bottom line is that the decision about Waterford was made not by me but by the NTA. If it was up to me, I would have tendered out a lot more than the 10% that is being tendered out. The NTA made that decision. It did not want to take too much off Bus Éireann because the transition needs to be managed. In Cork, the city is just too big and it could have damaged the future financial viability of Bus Éireann if Cork was taken. Waterford has a particularly bad bus service and a particularly low usage of that service. This is something that public representatives from the region should be welcoming rather than opposing.

Senator David Cullinane

In response to the Minister, I do live in the real world. In the world in which I live the Minister's plan is to put out to tender a number of bus routes in Waterford. He has not answered the fundamental question I asked, which is why 100% of bus routes in Waterford city are to go to tender, when the national average is only 10%. Why is Waterford being singled out? The reality is that once those routes are put out to tender they can be transferred from Bus Éireann to private bus operators that operate to make money, not to provide a public service. There is a concern and a fear among people who depend on public bus services. Those services meet a social as well as an economic need. Once we go down the slippery road of transferring the provision of services from the State to private operators, in time we could see fewer services. We will see the colour of the Minister's money on the question of whether we actually get improved services. I attended a launch a number of years ago of transport plans by one of the Minister's predecessors in the role, who lived in Waterford. We were promised super buses and all sorts of service improvements, which never came, a little like the hypothetical bus.

Acting Chairman (Senator Paschal Mooney)

The Senator is supposed to be asking a supplementary question, not giving a Second Stage speech.

Senator David Cullinane

We will have to wait and see in that regard. Leaving aside the merits or otherwise of the Minister's overall plan to transfer services from Bus Éireann and Dublin Bus to private operators, I ask him to explain why Waterford has been chosen to have all five of its bus routes put out to tender, which is 100%, as compared to 10% across the State. Why is that the case?

Deputy Leo Varadkar

I agree that we will have to wait and see and what I hope we will see in 2016 or 2017 is other people around the country, in other cities, looking at how much better the bus service in Waterford has become. I hope to hear those working in policy areas describing how the number of people using the bus in Waterford has increased and asking why it cannot be done in Limerick or Galway, too. That is what I want to see in a few years' time, but we will have to wait to see whether it works.

As I mentioned, the decision on services in Waterford was made not by me but by the NTA.

It would not make sense to tender out every tenth route because routes go into depots. One cannot tender out one tenth of a depot. A group of routes needs to be taken together.

With regard to the Waterford services, the NTA noted the simplicity of tendering a comprehensive city operation and that the size of the tender package would make it attractive to the market. It would also offer the future opportunity to the NTA to benchmark a regional city bus operation.

Tendering of Galway and Limerick services was also considered as they are sufficiently large to attract interest from potential market entrants. However, they are also sufficiently small that bus and depot transfer from Bus Éireann may not be essential to secure an economically advantageous tender price. Waterford is the smallest city operation and can be grouped with services in other cities, thereby creating a geographical spread of tendering opportunities.

Tendering Cork city services was also considered an option but these services comprise almost 20% of the Bus Éireann PSO, public service obligation, operations. The consequential management of a 20% downsizing in terms of staffing and overheads would be very challenging to achieve without triggering a need for an additional PSO subsidy. Consequently, tendering the entire Cork network is not recommended, although individual corridors were considered.

Schools Building Projects Status

Senator Lorraine Higgins

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Ciarán Cannon. I know he is quite familiar with Loughrea, County Galway and how it has experienced a significant increase in its population. This has led to an increased demand on public services in the town and surrounding areas. This is particularly evident at Scoil Naomh Éanna national school, Bullaun, Loughrea, County Galway.

The school is a standard three-classroom built in 1959 with an increase in its enrolment from 39 pupils in 2000 to 187 pupils in 2013. Scoil Naomh Éanna urgently requires the construction of a new school building to help meet the demands of its increased enrolment. To help cope with the increase in pupils, the school's board of management purchased four prefabs, costing the school €100,000 a year in rent. Pupils are also being taught out of the school grounds in the local Bullaun hall. Parents of children at the school have raised concerns with me and other Oireachtas Members about the safety of their children going to school in Bullaun hall, as they have to cross and walk along a busy main road. To compound matters, the owner of the land on which the school was initially given consent to locate prefabs is now using legal action to seek the removal of the prefabs.

Further to this, the school's septic tank is now absorbing water from the water table. In the past year, it has been emptied and desludged several times. A recent health and safety audit condemned the system. The school principal has warned this is a crisis. The board of management has already applied for emergency works to be carried out on its percolation system. While funding has been sanctioned by the Department, the school has been unable to proceed with the project because of space restrictions and difficulties with planning permission. The school literally does not have the space to install a new system.

The board of management has had several contacts with the Department of Education and Skills for the past seven years emphasising this significant enrolment increase was unfolding and that a new school building was urgently required. In December 2006, an application was lodged with the Department of Education and Skills for funding major capital works at Scoil Naomh Éanna. The whole-school evaluation in 2007 resulted in a recommendation by an inspector that this funding be made available as a matter of urgency. In 2014, funding is still not forthcoming for a school building. Despite spiralling enrolment during the past seven years, the school has been banded 2.2 on the waiting list for funding from the Department. Given these circumstances, the school’s community is rightly concerned as to why it has not been given immediate priority for funding to build a much needed new school.

The patron of the school, Bishop John Kirby, has agreed to make a site available for the construction of a new school. A fund-raising drive by the school and parents in 2006 raised €35,000 towards what was then seen as a project which was highly likely to materialise. This is still in a deposit account gaining interest.

It is clear that Scoil Naomh Éanna does not have adequate conditions. Will the Minister of State outline proposals for dealing with this matter? I hope this project will be expedited and that the Minister of State will use his influence in the Department in order that the people of Bullaun, Loughrea, County Galway, can look forward to a new school building sooner rather than later.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Ciarán Cannon)

I congratulate the Acting Chairman for his correct pronunciation of Bullaun. It is often mispronounced.

Acting Chairman (Senator Paschal Mooney)

I am a man of the west.

Deputy Ciarán Cannon

I thank Senator Lorraine Higgins for raising the matter as it provides me with the opportunity to clarify the position on the proposed building project at Scoil Naomh Éanna, Bullaun, Loughrea, County Galway.

The Senator will be aware of the significant demographic challenge facing the education system in the coming years and the need to ensure there is sufficient school accommodation to cope with these pupil enrolments. The delivery of new schools, together with extension projects to meet future pupil enrolment demand, will be the main focus for capital investment in schools in the coming years. While Bullaun has not been identified as an area of significant demographic growth, the Department, however, also recognises that schools not included in the five-year construction programme may require additional accommodation where an immediate enrolment need in an area is arising. In the past five years, enrolment at Scoil Naomh Éanna has risen from 140 pupils to 187, a 30% increase which is significant.

In the case of Scoil Naomh Éanna, the Department has recognised the need for additional school accommodation to address its immediate needs. In April 2012 the school was approved funding for the purchase of an additional temporary mainstream classroom. In December 2012, the Department approved further funding for an extension of the existing staff room and resource teaching room. These projects have been completed and all moneys have been paid to the school. However, Scoil Naomh Éanna has experienced issues with wastewater treatment on its existing school site. In that regard, the school was authorised to engage a suitably qualified consultant engineer to address the problem, if possible, by installing an appropriate sequencing batch reactor. In December last I facilitated and attended an on-site meeting between the Department, the school and its consultant on the matter. At that meeting, it became apparent that the existing site is too restricted to provide an appropriate wastewater treatment system and the additional permanent accommodation also under consideration. In that regard, it was also accepted that the option of extending the school site was not available.

To address the site limitations, the school advised in the course of the December 2013 meeting that its patron is willing to offer a greenfield site for a new school development. The Department acknowledged this offer and requested that appropriate details such as site maps be supplied. The principal has told me this information has been supplied. In addition, the Department sought that formal confirmation be supplied by the patron that the site concerned would be offered for development. On the basis of the information received by the Department on 16 January, the Department intends to have the site concerned technically evaluated shortly to determine its suitability for school development. In the event that no issues arise from this assessment, the new school building project can then be progressed into the architectural planning process. I do not expect any issues to arise as the proposed site is suitable, right in the heart of the village and adjacent to a newly developed car park.

I thank the Senator for allowing me the opportunity to outline the position on Scoil Naomh Éanna.

Senator Lorraine Higgins

I thank the Minister for his response. Contrary to what he said, there is significant demographic growth in this area with an increase in the school’s enrolment from 39 pupils in 2000 to 187 pupils in 2013. I am critical of the Department's five-year construction programme and that there should be some degree of discretion to add schools to the list, especially in the light of the position in which Scoil Naomh Éanna finds itself. It is critical the school's problems are addressed sooner rather than later. We cannot sit on our hands any longer. In 2007 the school’s situation was deemed to be a matter of urgency and should be addressed with funding put in place for a school building to be developed.

Unfortunately this has not happened and seven years later matters are not improving but getting worse. This relates to the constituency of the Minister of State and he knows the area. We cannot allow bureaucracy to get in the way or slow down what is happening. We need to cut through the red tape and deliver a school for the people of Bullaun because it is the least they deserve.

The Seanad adjourned at 6.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 30 January 2014.

Seanad Éireann debate - Wednesday, 29 Jan 2014