I welcome the new Minister of State, Deputy Paudie Coffey.
Adjournment Matters
Voluntary Sector Funding
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stait. Comhghairdeas. I wish him the best of luck in his new responsibilities.
I raise the issue of the defunding of the Neurological Alliance of Ireland which was founded in 1998 by concerned activists and specialists, principally Professor Orla Hardiman. An umbrella group was founded to provide for competency in advocacy in dealing with a group of very uncommon diseases. Some are so uncommon that there might have been one, two or three sufferers from the disease in Ireland. People with these diseases have great difficulty in seeking an advocacy position. They did have a commonality of interest in terms of physical impairment, cognitive impairment and emotional impairment that could occur and in terms of the supports needed. During the late 1990s and the early years of this century the group was extremely active and had a number of practical inputs and outputs. It managed to formulate new standards of care for patients with disabilities to varying degrees and also laid out a road map which was subsequently used by Comhairle na nOspidéal. From then on it found that its inputs were being taken on board by the HSE in terms of the clinical leads programme. It also runs an annual brain awareness project.
It has recently been announced that the group has lost its entire funding. It has received annual funding of €60,000 from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government through the scheme to support national organisations. The application for funding in 2015 has been turned down. This is the only funding the organisation receives. As a result, the alliance will be forced to cease operations in December. It asked for €80,000, an increase of €20,000 owing to increased demands on the organisation being the only umbrella group. Let me reiterate that the group has no other source of funding; it is totally reliant on the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government's scheme for its core funding.
This is a very lean organisation. There are many charities that need to look at their inner workings in terms of being large, bloated, inefficient and top heavy, with big public relations and other departments. This is a very small organisation. It has one development manager who works part time, a four fifths basis, and an administrator who works part time, on a two fifths basis. The entire board give of their time and services for free. The money is spent on core running costs - the primary members of staff, rent and so on.
It will be the experience of those familiar with the great work done by the group that it has played a critical role in raising awareness of brain and other neurological diseases, facilitating fund-raising and increasing the focus on research in these activities and also in making sure decisions made by the Department, the HSE and other support agencies are well informed. The small amount of money allocated has been extremely well spent. I do not like to get up on my own hobbyhorse, but the amount of money spent on the Neurological Alliance of Ireland is spent many times over in health and social services and, I suspect, the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government on public relations. The money would be repaid to the State amply in terms of improved outcomes for patients who suffer from these conditions, many of which, as I said, are so rare that those who have them really believe they are on their own. The alliance has given them cohesion and critical mass. I, therefore, urge that the matter be looked at again.
I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House so soon after his appointment. This is appreciated.
I thank the Senator. This is the first visit of the Minister of State, Deputy Paudie Coffey, to the Chamber to deal with matters on the Adjournment. I wish him well in his new role.
I thank the Acting Chairman. I also thank Senator John Crown for placing this important matter on the agenda. I have a detailed response which will help to clarify how the schemes are funded and assessed. I can respond again should the Senator wish to raise further issues.
On behalf of the Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly, I am pleased to have an opportunity to address the Seanad on the funding scheme to support national organisations in the community and voluntary sector. The funding scheme to support national organisations in the community and voluntary sector aims to provide multi-annual funding for national organisations towards core costs associated with the provision of services. A new scheme commenced from 1 July. The overall budget for 2014, including the previous scheme and the new one, is some €3.1 million.
During 2013 the Department carried out a review of the scheme which found that it had fulfilled its main objective of providing multi-annual funding for national organisations towards core costs associated with the provision of services. The review recommended that organisations be required to demonstrate clearly the added value of the work proposed. The effective use of core funding in recipient organisations also requires that robust governance and cost control procedures be in place within these organisations.
The new scheme was advertised for applications earlier this year. Pobal was asked to undertake an assessment of the applications received, given the organisation's significant experience and expertise in terms of the design of assessment criteria and completion of assessment functions.
Two well-attended information sessions were hosted by the Department and Pobal during the application process to outline the requirements of the new scheme. Application guidelines were also issued that outlined the scoring process, including capacity of the organisation, strategic fit, demonstration of need, achievability of the proposal and value for money. Organisations were provided with support in the application process, including a dedicated e-mail address as a preferred contact method to deal promptly with queries. Inquiries were also dealt with by telephone.
Some 157 applications were received by Pobal. Of these, three did not meet the basic eligibility criteria. The remaining 154 applications were appraised by Pobal against the criteria as outlined in the application guidance. In order to make funding available to as many organisations as possible within the prevailing resource constraints and taking into consideration the results of the appraisal process, 55 applications were approved for funding for the two-year period from 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2016.
Pobal has put in place a dedicated team to deal with inquiries from applicants and to provide detailed feedback. There is also an appeals process and Pobal has provided applicants with detailed information on it. As the appeals process is now live, it would not be appropriate for me to make any further comment on the funding process or the application of any particular organisation.
I thank the Minister of State, whom I am conscious is brand new and has been thrust into the firing line on this issue. I will try to be informative, instructive and collegial in my points.
I have the score card that the Neurological Alliance of Ireland received as part of the process. In university scoring system terms, the alliance got honours in capacity, need and achievability and a high pass in value for money. The only aspect it failed was strategic fit. For someone who is as sceptical about bureaucracy-waffle as I am, this seems insubstantial ground for taking a small grant away from an organisation that deals with many patients with different diseases.
Of the 25 groups under the alliance's umbrella, 11 applied for funding from the Scheme to Support National Organisations, SSNO, individually. None, zero, aucun, rien, nada was accepted. There has been a great deal of focus in the House and elsewhere on Huntington's disease, a cruel, devastating, incurable and inevitably destructive disease for which our society has made little provision in terms of, for example, qualifying for a medical card. The Huntington's Disease Association of Ireland has received €22,500 per annum since January 2008, but it had its funding decreased in 2009 and has now been defunded completely.
I have been asked to bring a matter to the Minister of State's attention. Perhaps he might discuss it with his Government colleagues who have more direct responsibility for health. Neurological services in Ireland fall dramatically short of what is available in other developed countries. We are not doing well. These groups have asked me to make the case as strongly as possible for a sustainable funding stream, one that is peer reviewed and publicly accountable, to be put in place for these modest but important core activities. I hope that our interaction tonight will provide the Minister of State with the opportunity and inspiration to raise this matter with others involved in the decision making process, particularly as it relates to the score card, which looks extremely odd.
I appreciate the Senator's genuine concerns in this matter and take on board the good case he has made. I discussed the issue with the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Kelly, this evening after I saw that this Adjournment motion had been tabled. We are prepared to reconsider applicants with disability or health-related functions to determine whether anything can be done in the short term. However, there must be co-operation with possible amalgamations - we do not know whether that will happen yet - of some of the groups that have similar interests so as to avoid duplication. The Senator should be satisfied that the Minister and I have agreed to re-examine the matter.
I would like the Minister of State to convey my gratitude to the Minister, Deputy Kelly.
Pyrite Remediation Programme Implementation
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit go dtí an Seanad agus comhghairdeas freisin. I wish him all the best in his new role. I am delighted for him and am certain he will acquit himself well. I thank him for attending, as my Adjournment motion relates to the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, in which he has responsibility for housing, planning and co-ordination. Although he must still read himself into his brief, I urge him to pay specific attention to the pyrite issue.
As many of my colleagues know, the first legislation on pyrite was produced by me in the Seanad. It is a major issue. I broadly welcomed the establishment of the Pyrite Resolution Board, but it and the Minister need to report on the progress of the remediation scheme. Some home owners have applied for remediation but have not had their applications approved yet. In many instances, this seems to be the case because the builders who built their homes are still trading and-or the builder or home owner is involved in litigation. Unfortunately, a number of people from the Lusk village action group and the Lusk pyrite action group could not be present for this debate because the scheduling of additional business left us unsure, but they are watching online. They have done a ferocious amount of work and have been involved since the start. The north Dublin area has been particularly hit by the scourge of pyrite.
Will the Minister of State look into the concern that I am about to raise? In respect of the home owners in question in Lusk village and an estate in Donabate in north County Dublin, the resolution board is taking a long time - "stalling" would be the wrong word - to confirm whether their houses will be remediated because the builders are trading or may be taking legal action against quarries or other parties.
I debated the board's establishment with the former Minister, Deputy Hogan, and met the board during its briefings in the Custom House. Colleagues such as Deputy Clare Daly and I were assured that the State reserved the right to pursue builders or those it felt were at fault for some or all of the costs. I agree with that approach, but it does not have to be done before the applications are approved.
In the case of Lusk village, the board is considering compliance with eligibility requirements, including the availability of other practicable options. I have no issue with that, but I do not want hundreds of home owners whose houses comply with the requirements - those requirements are not perfect, but they are a start - left to the end because we are waiting for the result of legal cases. When I put these points to the then Minister, I was assured that it would not be the case. I fully support the State's right to pursue those who were negligent or at fault to recoup those funds. I do not want home owners in Lusk village to be left dealing with the estate's builder, whom they claim has not been co-operative with the process in any way, shape or form.
One of the reasons we are in this situation is because HomeBond refused to pay to remediate these homes, yet we learned recently that the pyrite board had entered into a partnership and concluded a contract with HomeBond for project management services to remediate affected homes. This is difficult for us and the home owners to take.
Will the Department seek confirmation from the Pyrite Resolution Board that, where the State is recouping costs, home owners' in-fill will be removed and their houses remediated regardless of whether the relevant builders are still trading or legal actions are pending?
I thank the Senator for his kind comments. I spent over four years in the Seanad with many colleagues. They were very good years.
I thank the Senator for raising this matter which I am taking on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly, and providing me with an opportunity to report on the progress made to date by the Pyrite Resolution Board in addressing this very difficult problem. The board, with the support of the Housing Agency, is tasked with implementing the pyrite remediation scheme in accordance with the provisions of the Pyrite Resolution Act 2013. The scheme was published in February this year and the board commenced accepting applications from affected homeowners on 26 February. The scheme is reflective of the conclusions and recommendations made in the report of the independent pyrite panel and a scheme of last resort. It applies only to dwellings affected by significant damage attributable to pyritic heave and where the applicant has no practicable option other than to secure, under the scheme, the remediation of the dwelling. To date, the board has received approximately 520 completed applications which include multiple applications from 26 developments and 47 single site applications in respect of one-off builds and single applications from larger developments.
The process of approval involves a number of stages, including validation by the board of applications against the relevant eligibility criteria and an assessment, verification and recommendation process undertaken by the Housing Agency. Approximately 206 applications have been validated by the board and forwarded to the Housing Agency for the assessment, verification and recommendation process and, of these, 52 have been approved for inclusion in the scheme and the applicants notified accordingly. The assessment and verification process involves confirmation that the damage recorded in the building condition assessment in respect of a dwelling is attributable to pyritic heave. This stage may involve testing of the hard core material. While no contracts have been awarded as yet, I understand the Housing Agency is close to awarding the first remediation works contract and it is intended that this phase of the process - the awarding of contracts and the commencement of remediation works - will gather momentum in the coming months.
In line with the provisions of the Pyrite Resolution Act, the board must satisfy itself that applicants under the scheme have taken all reasonable and appropriate steps to seek to have those parties who have a responsibility to remediate their dwellings to pay the cost of remediation. In this context, the board is in discussions with a number of builders or their representatives with a view to securing funds from these sources for remediation works. However, it is not the board's policy to exclude applicants from the scheme solely because the builder is still trading or to unduly delay the remediation works in such cases. Each application will be considered by the board on its own merits and having regard to the eligibility criteria of the scheme. I am satisfied that the board will adopt a balanced approach in dealing with applicants in these circumstances, but it must also be recognised that it is incumbent on it to explore all possible avenues to ensure any funding that can be acquired for remediation purposes is secured for this purpose.
I fully support the approach being pursued by the board and look forward to continuing progress in providing solutions for affected homeowners.
I thank the Minister of State for the response. I am due to meet representatives of the Pyrite Remediation Board tomorrow in Leinster House with residents from Lusk village and my colleague, Deputy Clare Daly. The response is very similar to the one we are getting from the board. Following the meeting tomorrow, in the coming months or September when the Dáil and the Seanad are back in session, it would be useful if the Minister of State and the Minister committed to meeting affected residents to hear their stories. This is a new process and I always knew there would be bumps on the road. However, it is our job to iron them out. Perhaps after the meeting with representatives of the Pyrite Remediation Board tomorrow, the Minister of State might commit to meeting me and my colleagues in the next six to eight weeks. Everyone wants to have the problem solved. It is the right thing to do. I am happy that the Minister of State has said it is not the board's policy to exclude applicants because the builder is still trading. While I understand this, it is not what we are hearing. We need to have the matter clarified.
I understand these are very genuine concerns and they affect many public representatives of all political persuasions and none. The Senator, rightly, raises them on the floor of the Seanad. I wish him well in his meeting tomorrow with representatives of the Pyrite Remediation Board. I certainly would have no problem in meeting a delegation at some time if progress was not being made. A meeting can be arranged and I am certainly open to meeting a delegation.
Motor Tax Collection
I welcome the Minister of State and congratulate him on his appointment. We look forward to working with him in the coming years.
The matter of a tax credit for road hauliers has been brought to my attention by hauliers and others. Those with heavy trucks and other vehicles have to pay a substantial road tax. Last year a law was introduced stipulating that any vehicle off the road must be declared as such, with the declaration to be accompanied by a garda's signature, and that when it was back on the road a garda signed declaration also had to be submitted. This has implications for those who have a truck or other heavy vehicle taxed. I spoke to an individual who had paid €1,800 to have a truck taxed. Unfortunately, he lost the contract on which he was working and the truck was taken off the road, with the effect that his €1,800 was more or less down the drain. Perhaps we might consider a scheme whereby the €1,800 could be held in credit until the truck was put back on the road or the driver received another contract. That would carry the driver forward for another three or four months.
What I propose does not apply so much to smaller vehicles, tractors and other vehicles on which the tax paid is small. However, in the case of a large truck, the tax on which is €1,800 for three months, a lot of money is tied up. Is it possible to receive a tax credit if one’s truck is taken off the road temporarily?
I thank the Senator for his kind comments. I look forward to working with him and many colleagues in the House.
I thank the Senator for raising this matter which I am taking on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly. I acknowledge the importance of a healthy and competitive haulage industry to our general economic welfare and employment across all areas of the country.
Changes to the procedures for declaring vehicles off the road came into effect on 1 July 2013. The Non-Use of Motor Vehicles Act 2013 replaced the system whereby a vehicle was declared to be off the road retrospectively, which was unverifiable, and put in place new arrangements to allow motorists to make provision for genuine periods of non-use of a vehicle. For commercial vehicle owners, this could be for anticipated downtime or due to cyclical business demand.
The arrangements for off-road declarations only allow for a future declaration. It must be made in advance of the vehicle being taken off the road, in the month before tax falls due or when a previously made declaration of non-use expires. The declaration of non-use can be made at any time during that month, for free, online or at a motor tax office. An owner can return the vehicle to the road early if circumstances such as an increase in trade require it simply by taxing the vehicle, effective from the first day of the month in which it is taxed. As the taxation period which can be three, six or 12 months is due to expire, the owner can make a fresh off-road declaration, if he or she wishes.
An estimated €55 million was being lost annually through motor tax evasion linked with retrospective declarations. Motor tax receipts for the half-year to the end of June 2014 are €47 million ahead of those in the same period in 2013, despite the fact that there has been no increase in motor tax in the intervening period. While not all of the increase in motor tax income can be attributed to the change in the rules for off-road declarations, it is clear that the measure is having an impact. The new arrangements strike a balance between the need to tackle tax evasion which hurts compliant motor taxpayers and a degree of flexibility to allow vehicle and fleet owners to arrange their affairs only to pay motor tax for periods their vehicle is in use on the road.
Given the extent of tax evasion which was for many years facilitated by retrospective off-road declarations, it is not intended to reintroduce retrospective declarations, accompanied by tax credits, as to do so would risk reopening the evasion loophole via motor tax credits.
The introduction of such a scheme for hauliers would inevitably lead to calls for similar treatment from other categories of road users, risking ultimately completely negating the improvements in the fairness of the motor tax regime introduced last year.
I accept the rules introduced made a big difference to the Exchequer - with €55 million to accrue to it. However, as I outlined, I feel it would be good for businesses and people involved in road haulage if a tax credit was introduced. I do not believe it would open up a loophole that would help them evade tax. The money would have been paid and there would be no question of it being refunded, but it would be held in credit and when the truck was put back on the road, the credit would kick in. I think fleet owners in the United Kingdom have a facility such as this, where tax credits are available. I suggest the Minister should take another look at that at some stage.
I do not have the answer the Senator requires. The figures I have outlined clearly state that by the end of June 2014, the motor tax receipts are €47 million greater than for the same period in 2013. It seems clear therefore that the measures implemented are having the effect of ensuring people who might in the past have tried to evade paying motor tax are compliant. The Department does not intend to review the scheme at this stage.
Seirbhísí Eitilte
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Joe McHugh, to the House and congratulate him on his recent appointment and wish him well over the next year and a half.
Cuirim céad fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit agus déanaim comhghairdeas leis as ucht a cheapacháin - tá a fhios agam go bhfuil sé ag tarraingt neart cainte. Bíodh sin mar atá, tá an tAire Stáit sa ról anois agus tá súil agam go n-éireoidh go maith leis ann. Táim cinnte go mbeidh muid i gcomhrá go minic sa Seanad ar an Athló.
Baineann an cheist atá á hardú agam anocht leis na haerstráicí ar an gCloigeann agus Inis Bó Finne i gContae na Gaillimhe. Mar atá a fhios againn, tá seirbhís aeir go dtí na hOileáin Árainn le blianta fada anuas. Éiríonn go maith le sin agus tá sé riachtanach go mbeadh a leithéid de sheirbhís ann. Tá an Roinn a bhfuil an tAire Stáit freagrach as tar éis tacaíochta a thabhairt dó sin agus tar éis geallúint go dtabharfaidh sé tacaíocht dó ar feadh bliana eile. Ach tá ceist agam maidir leis na haerstráicí ar an gCloigeann agus in Inis Bó Finne.
Bhí plean ann go mbeadh seirbhís, cosúil leis an seirbhís go hOileáin Árainn, ag imeacht ón gCloigeann go hInis Bó Finne, ach, faraor, níl sé sin chun tarlú faoi láthair. Bheadh duine ag rá, b'fhéidir, gur airgead amú mar sin a bhí sna haerstráicí. Ach is léir go gceapann daoine eile nach bhfuil an t-airgead imithe amú agus go bhfuil úsáid gur féidir a bhaint astu, go háirithe an ceann ar an gCloigeann. Tuigtear dom go raibh Garda Cósta na hÉireann ag féachaint ar an suíomh sin. Tá an ceantar sin iargúlta, ach tá riachtanais go leor ann ó thaobh an Aerchóir agus ó thaobh cúrsaí sláinte agus mar sin de. Dá mbeadh aon duine tinn, d'fhéadfaidís túirlingt in áit cosúil leis an gCloigeann. Tá a fhios agam freisin go bhfuil daoine príobháideacha chomh maith ag léiriú suime san aerstráice agus sna foirgnimh atá ann.
Tuigtear dom gur leis an Roinn iad na haerstráicí seo. Cén plean atá ag an Roinn maidir leis na haerstráicí sin. An bhfuil sé chun iad a dhíol, cé leis an bhfuil sé ag caint agus an féidir tuairimí an phobail a thógáil san áireamh maidir leis na pleananna atá i gceist? Má tá úsáid phobail, ar nós úsáid do Gharda Cósta na hÉireann, gur féidir a bhaint astu, ba cheart go dtógfaí sin san áireamh
Ar maidin, bhí strus agus brú orm, ach anois um thráthnóna tá mé réidh.
Tá áthas orm an deis seo a fháil an t-ábhar tábhachtach seo a phlé anseo sa Seanad inniu. Ba dheas liom i dtús báire cúlra an scéil a mhíniú don Seanad. In 2001, rinneadh Ollscoil Cranfield staidéar neamhspleách ar na seirbhísí aeir chuig na hoileáin thar ceann na Roinne. Rinneadh moladh sa tuarascáil sin do sheirbhís aeir idir Inis Bó Finne agus an Clochán i gContae na Gaillimhe. Mar thoradh ar sin, tógadh cinneadh rúidbhealaí a thógáil chun go bhféadfaí seirbhís aeir a sholáthar. Ar ndóigh, ní miste a nótáil go bhfuil seirbhís farantóireachta do phaisinéirí agus seirbhís lastais chuig Inis Bó Finne á maoiniú ag an Roinn i rith an ama.
Mar chúlra ar an scéal, bhí réamhobair ar siúl d'fhorbairt na n-aeradróm chomh fada siar leis na nóchaidí. Ag amanna éagsula, bhí plé ag Údarás na Gaeltachta agus ag Comhairle Contae na Gaillimhe leis na forbairtí sin. I ndiaidh cur agus cúiteamh, socraíodh go nglacfadh an Roinn seilbh ar na haeradróim agus ceannaíodh na suíomhanna dá réir. I gcás an aeradróim ar an gClochán, tá an suíomh i seilbh na Roinne. I gcás an aeradróim ar Inis Bó Finne, ceannaíodh an talamh seo trí ordú ceannaigh éigeantaigh le comhoibriú ó Chomhairle Contae na Gaillimhe. Níl an talamh seo aistrithe go hoifigiúil chuig an Roinn on gcomhairle go fóill agus tá an Roinn ag obair leis an gcomhairle chun é seo a dhéanamh. Tuigtear dom go bhfuil €8.6 milliún caite ar na rúidbhealaí go dáta, idir ceannach na talún agus forbairt an bhonneagair ar na suíomhanna ag Inis Bó Finne agus ar an gClochán. Ta céim a haon den phróiseas chun ceadúnas a fháil do na haeradróim curtha i gcrích ag an bpointe seo agus tá cead pleanála faighte do chríochfoirt ar an da shuíomh.
Mar gheall ar an gcúlú eacnamaíoch agus i bhfianaise an bhrú atá ar sholáthar na Roinne, tógadh cinneadh i mí lúil anuraidh gan dul ar aghaidh leis na forbairtí ar an dá shuíomh agus go ndéanfaí socruithe chun na suíomhanna a chur de láimh. Níl cinneadh criochnúil déanta ag an Roinn go fóill faoin mbealach is fearr chun é seo a dhéanamh. Go bunúsach, feictear dom go bhfuil dhá rogha anseo, is iad sin na haerstráicí a chur ar léas fadtearmach nó iad a dhíol. Tá an dá rogha á meas ag an Roinn i láthair na huaire. Ní miste a rá go bhfuil roinnt teagmhála neamhfhoirmiúil déanta ag páirtithe éagsúla leis an Roinn mar gheall ar na haerstráicí. Cé nach bhfuil cinneadh tógtha go fóill, is féidir leis an Teach seo a bheith cinnte go dtabharfar faoi na haerstráicí seo a chur de láimh trí phroiseas oscailte soláthar poiblí.
Táim an-bhuíoch as an bhfreagra sin. Is scéal maith é go bhfuil an obair fós ar siúl agus nach bhfuil an cinneadh glactha go hiomlán. An mbeadh an tAire sásta bualadh leis na páirtithe éagsúla a bhfuil suim acu sa scéal seo, go háirithe Garda Cósta na hÉireann? Measann daoine sa cheantar go mbeadh sé an-tábhachtach go mbeadh seirbhís dá mhacasamhail ann. B'fhéidir go bhfuil féidireacht ann an t-aerstráice a bheith oscailte, ó thaobh turasóireachta de. Tuigtear dom go bhfuil grúpaí éagsúla ag rá go bhféadfadh siad an t-aerstráice a rith mar aerfort tráchtála, i gcomhar le Garda Cósta na hÉireann agus go bhféadfadh na rudaí éagsúla tarlú ag an am céanna. Bheadh sin iontach úsáideach. Dá mbeadh an tAire Stáit sásta bualadh leis na daoine seo ag am feiliúnach chun na ceisteann seo a phlé, bheadh sin an-chuiditheach.
Go raibh maith agat.
If there are options it would be important to feed them through. It is important to ensure that the two options available at the moment are up for discussion, namely, the possible lease or the possible sale. No decision has been made. Some €8.6 million has been invested in two airstrips. Beidh mo dhoras oscailte le haghaidh aon phlean. The constraints on my Department are economic and financial. We have €5.6 million to spend on all ferry, cargo and air services. There are constraints but I would be interested in the Senator forwarding suggestions or working with the group. If there are plans for the coast guard I will examine them.
The Seanad adjourned at 9.15 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 17 July 2014.