Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 22 Mar 2023

Vol. 292 No. 11

Nithe i dtosach suíonna - Commencement Matters

Planning Issues

Senator Emer Currie

Since January 2020 there have been 23 section 254 licence applications for telecommunications masts in Dublin 15. These are not phone masts or telecommunication masts the size of lamp-posts; they are 15 m to 18 m or potentially up to 60 m in village and residential locations. I am not mad about The Spire, although I know other people are, but I certainly would not be okay with it turning up outside my kitchen window or towering over my local green. Community groups and Tidy Towns groups are doing a huge amount of work in the public realm with clean-ups. Are we really supposed to be okay with 18 m eyesores popping up without any public consultation whatsoever, and that they are treated as the equivalent of street furniture and vending machines? Something is wrong in our local planning process.

This is my recap of the legislation as I see it. I know I will probably get an answer based on it. Class 31 of Part 1 of Schedule 2 under the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 allows for specified telecommunications infrastructure without having to go through the planning process, but not if a telecoms mast is greater than 12 m. Then full planning permission is needed, section 34 applies and a five-week public consultation period. However, the process can be bypassed if an application is made under section 254 to put a mast on public land. The planning authority must be provided with details such as the position, the design and the capacity of the infrastructure, and it must abide by proper planning and sustainable development of the area and take account of the county development plan but even when it is refused by the planning authority it can be overturned by An Bord Pleanála on the basis that "some masts will remain quite noticeable despite best precautions." They can even go up to 60 m, but most are between 20 m and 40 m. One of the masts in Castleknock is only 15 m and that is supposed to be the reason it is acceptable.

I totally understand that we need broadband coverage and mobile phone coverage. It fits in with all our ambitions in terms of where the country is going but that does not mean public land should be the Wild West for telecommunications masts. This must be managed properly. The community must have a say. For example, there are 23 applications in the Dublin 15 area. In the same period, there were 52 applications in Fingal. How is that supposed to be resourced in an already overstretched planning department? How do the planners go out and make sure that every single application is appropriate? The applicant only has to pay €125 to go through this process, which does not wash its face.

The other side of the matter is how the planners check the validity of the coverage maps. It is all based on coverage maps they receive from Eir, Vodafone and Three. Potentially, there is also a mast for each operator, so we are potentially talking about three masts for three areas. The Aarhus Convention is supposed to give people a say in public planning and their environment. Is this good enough for local planning?

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill)

I thank Senator Currie for raising this important issue on the process under section 254 of the Planning and Development Act for telecommunications infrastructure. Senator Currie was a leading proponent of remote working and the need for broadband in that regard.

Long before the onset of Covid and long before the Senator was elected to this House, she led the charge for remote working and highlighted the benefits that could be brought to society at large by introducing remote working in a broad way. Of course Covid expedited that and we now have a very different cultural situation. I am aware that Senator Currie, the other Senators here today and I, as a constituency Deputy, have been inundated with requests for better broadband at particular pinch points. There is simply no question but that the delivery of broadband coverage is a strategic imperative for communities and the State.

That said, the Senator is right that we need an appropriate planning process where broadband is concerned. I have some of these masts and some broadband challenges in my own constituency so I understand the issue very well. On behalf of the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage I want to say that the use of the section 254 licensing process is restricted solely to public roads. As I think the Senator is aware, section 254 of the Act provides for a licensing system for appliances and structures placed on, above, under or along a public road, including footpaths. The Act provides that a "public road" has the same meaning as the Roads Act 1993, as amended, which defines it as "a road over which a public right of way exists and the responsibility for the maintenance of which lies on a road authority", which is a local authority.

A person applying for a licence, under section 254, must provide the planning authority with such plans and other information concerning the position, design and capacity of the appliance, apparatus or structure as the authority may require. The Senator is quite right to highlight the relative resourcing of local authorities. I believe that the provision of broadband is an absolute priority from the State's perspective and these things must be attended to as quickly as possible.

A licence may be granted by the planning authority for such a period and upon such conditions, including conditions in relation to location, design, space taken up and the need to protect protected structures. Again, I also have had situations where somebody looks out their kitchen window and sees a large mast, much to their surprise. A mast can be erected very quickly so consultation is the least that communities might expect.

I recognise that there are difficult competing challenges, which are: to deliver broadband quickly; to deliver the masts quickly; to engage in public consultation; and to have a planning process that enables the quick delivery of this strategic imperative. It is very difficult to manage all of those things both from the perspectives of local authorities and of local representatives.

Section 254(5A) of the Act outlines the licensing process in respect of an application for a licence to erect, construct or place the electronic communication infrastructure and any associated physical infrastructure. If a planning authority fails to make a decision within a period of four months commencing on the date of receipt of an application, a decision of the authority is deemed to have been made on the day following the expiration of that period of four months, which as the Senator said speaks even more to the need to engage in this and engage in it quickly in order that local authorities have the best information, and decision-making, available to them.

Where a planning authority requests additional information from the applicant and has not made a decision within a period of four months of receiving the applicant's response to the request, a deemed decision to grant a licence shall be deemed to have been made. So the Senator can see from what I have said that the impetus is in favour of the granting of a licence. However, because of the need for broadband consultation, it is very difficult to argue that that should be slower, given the imperatives that we have. I think it is also possible to judicially review such things, although I am well aware that this is not an easy thing to do.

Where an appeal has been lodged with An Bord Pleanála to judicially review same, the reality is that the communities want to be consulted on changes to their streetscape. It is also a reality that communities want broadband. On a different day the Senator might come in here looking for an increased roll-out of broadband and these are the competing challenges of running or managing a State.

Senator Emer Currie

As usual, the Minister of State has gone right to the nub of the issue, which is striking the right balance and making sure that people have access to modern digital services in order that they can lead modern lives. For me, the issue is how this is managed. It does seem like the Wild West as telecommunication masts have been erected on public roads, footpaths and greens. It costs €125 to purchase a licence fee and I wonder if the process can be verified by an overstretched planning department that we want to see busy tackling other issues like housing. Does every operator need one? Can this issue be managed? Can people be made part of this process like we do with all other planning applications in local areas? I ask that because people feel disempowered and that is never a good position to be in. If coverage is needed, and it can be proved that it is needed and is in the best area, then people will accept it but at the moment they have no voice.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I totally understand that, Senator. We must strike a balance between providing consultation but ensure there is no capacity to block or delay it because these things do need to be delivered.

On the questions about whether they are all needed and juxtaposed on the same street or whether they need to be spread out, and what coverage is being provided and by what provider, those are normal transparent pieces of information that people should be able to expect.

I agree with what the Senator said about the fee. It seems unduly low from a commercial perspective, given the benefits that will accrue to a commercial provider. I would always look at fees in the context, particularly on the commercial space and there are such long-standing benefits from the erection of telecommunication infrastructure. More broadly, the roll-out of the broadband plan would benefit from greater consultation between the different providers regarding putting down fresh ducts every time something is opened but I appreciate that I am out of time.

Planning Issues

Senator Victor Boyhan

I welcome the Minister of State and my Commencement matter relates to the issue of new rural housing guidelines. As she will be aware, the Government has promised these guidelines for a number of years.

I have a letter dated 9 May 2017 in front of me from the then Minister who promised that there would be rural guidelines. I am sure the Minister of State will also be aware of the Flemish decree and the conflict in terms of European law regarding the suggestion about rural housing and regulation within the European Union around that and the ongoing legal challenges.

As I am a member of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine and the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage, I straddle those two areas. Clearly, I am in very close contact with rural communities and urban areas within rural communities regarding the demands for housing. Yesterday afternoon, I spent time in Longford and Roscommon, last night I was in Carrick-on-Shannon, County Leitrim, and a few days ago I was in the Acting Chair's constituency of Kildare and west Wicklow. In all those places, I talked to members of those communities about rural housing and the challenges they face when it comes to rural housing. As a result, I am aware that many farm families feel that the Government is inactive when it comes to rural housing policy and has forced many of them off the land of their forebears due to unreasonable policy decisions, restrictions in terms of the granting of planning permission for rural lands, and preventing the sons and daughters of farmers from living on the land and in communities in which they were born and reared. The Government is midway through its term in office yet it still has not published the new rural housing guidelines. The Minister's long-promised new rural housing guidelines need to be published so a degree of certainty, clarity and understanding about the possibilities of young families and young couples exploring the options of either restoring old farm homesteads or looking at new housing options in their rural communities. In particular, I am thinking of the younger people who wish to stay in their communities. I am sure that the Minister of State will understand the benefits of young people either staying in or returning to their rural communities to support and build up communities, which is so vital for the many parts of Ireland that are dying on their feet. These places need new people or young people to return to their roots. The advantages when family members return to their communities are immeasurable. We cannot overestimate the importance and significance of people being allowed to live in their own communities.

I fully recognise the importance of having a clear policy and objectives to protect the rural landscape because that is important. We must ensure that environmental matters are important in the context of housing options in the countryside. I am sure that the Minister of State will know that a sustainable rural housing policy is important. I call for a policy to be published in terms of sustainable rural housing guidelines for sustainable rural communities. Again, the Government must work on policy that constructively supports rural communities and secure affordable housing through community trusts. I mentioned the latter because there are community trusts in Scotland that buy land in rural communities and then build co-operatives to build houses. We need to consider community trusts as a first option in Ireland. We must also consider imaginative partnerships with local government, landlords and housing associations to deliver affordable housing options. Can we have a degree of certainty about the rural housing guidelines that the Government might bring in?

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I thank Senator Boyhan for raising the matter. I could not agree more that it is time to publish the guidelines. The last set was published in 2005 and it is now 2023, 18 years later. Following the passage through these Houses of the national planning framework and the legislation that went with it in 2018, it is crucial that the guidelines be published, and published shortly. They were due to be published at the end of last year but it was necessary to conduct an additional environmental assessment. They are to be published in quarter 1, I believe, or immediately thereafter.

The Senator is quite right that the updated guidelines will expand on the high-level spatial planning policy of the national planning framework, in particular on national policy objective 19, NPO 19, which relates to rural housing. This objective makes a clear policy distinction between rural areas under urban influence, that is, areas within the commuter catchment of cities, towns and centres of employment, and rural areas where population levels may be low or declining. NPO 19 is also aligned with the established approach whereby considerations of social or economic need are to be applied by planning authorities in rural areas under urban influence.

The proposed draft rural housing guidelines will set out relevant planning criteria to be applied in local authority development plans for rural housing, based on the high-level policy framework set by the national planning framework. The guidelines will continue to allow county development plans to provide for housing in the countryside based on the considerations detailed in NPO 19 of the national planning framework, and will also highlight the need to manage development in certain areas, such as the areas around cities and larger towns and environmentally sensitive areas.

Since the publication in 2005 of the current guidelines, which continue to have effect, there have been important changes to our planning system. Most notably, our obligations under European directives and international agreements relating to the management and protection of the environment and our climate have become more central to the operation of the planning system. The draft guidelines need to address all these complex environmental issues while also providing a framework for the sustainable management of housing in rural areas.

The last set of guidelines was published in 2005. It is now 2023, 18 years later. If we were to fast-forward 18 years, to 2041, we would expect to see a very different landscape again. I hope this has been considered in the preparation of the guidelines, along with the time at which they might next be reviewed. I certainly hope that in 2041 we will be looking at floating wind farms along the west coast, for example. There is a need to consider the planning implications of this and the additional housing that will be needed for the technicians with the 12-month-per-year jobs needed to support sustainable energy and floating terminals off the west coast. I hope the guidelines will consider this sort of vision or planning because I hope they relate to the future we all look forward to and agree we need. There will be very many benefits right along the west coast from the type of development envisaged.

I am told by the Department that the guidelines are at an advanced stage of drafting and that the strategic environmental assessment and appropriate assessment relating to the impact of the proposed guidelines on the environment, as required by EU legislation, are nearing finalisation.

It is intended to have the draft guidelines published for public consultation as soon as may be. The guidelines will subsequently be finalised, taking into account the inputs in the consultation process. I hope they will support more consistent and updated policies on rural housing within county development plans and across local authority areas, in line with the objectives of the national planning framework. I hope they are future-looking.

Senator Victor Boyhan

I thank the Minister of State. I agree with her. I did not believe I would have here today a Minister of State who lives in the same constituency as me. Let me quote the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown development plan, on which we are ad idem. It states it should be the policy of the planning authority to consider new proposals for one-off housing in areas outside the boundaries of established settlements, in accordance with the rural housing objectives and subject to compliance with normal planning and environmental criteria, and to encourage the renovation and reuse of existing traditional farmhouses, buildings such as traditional stone buildings and other buildings of local heritage merit for residential use or indeed tourism-related accommodation, subject to compliance with requirements on protecting the local character and the visual amenities. The plan also states rural housing should be sensibly sited, designed and landscaped in keeping with the character of rural areas. I am really referring to the mountains within our own county. The development plan of the local authority in question, of which the Minister of State and I were members, is progressive. That is the sort of relevant and future-proofed policy we should be embedding in our rural housing policy. Again, I thank the Minister of State.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I thank the Senator. I am not sure I can add much more to what he said. I completely agree. Balancing the need for additional housing where required and the need for development to be in keeping with the environment is our shared objective.

Housing Schemes

Senator John Cummins

The topic of rental tenancies has never been more in focus, and that is why I have submitted this Commencement matter. I seek to activate derelict and vacant properties for use for housing and to deliver a volume of cost rental tenancies for those above the threshold for social housing and who either cannot or do not wish to own a property.

Let me start with the first suggestion, which is to expand what I believe is a very popular scheme, namely, the vacant property refurbishment grant scheme. When it was launched in July 2022 it inexplicably excluded one-off rural houses and those in cities. However, following lobbying, which I was very happy to lead, the scheme was expanded in quarter 4 of last year to include these. This has resulted in a huge uptake in queries to local authorities right across the country.

The grants, of €30,000 and €50,000, respectively, are currently open only to owner-occupiers where there is a commitment made to reside in the property for a period of ten years and the clawback is in place. However, given the context of the reduced number of rental properties on the market and the ongoing challenges experienced owing to the availability of rental properties in both urban and rural settings, I believe now is the time to extend the scheme to those who wish to refurbish a vacant or derelict property and rent it out on the private market. I suggest that the ten-year clawback remain in place to ensure the property remains in the private rental market for a period of ten years. That would undoubtedly open up the scheme to many more individuals and families with a vacant or derelict property who do not have the firepower to renovate it or do not want to live in it because they already have their own property, but who, for historical reasons, want it to remain in the family. The latter motivation is probably more common than one might think.

It is my considered opinion that the properties in question are really the only ones that do not have a bespoke scheme. The repair and lease scheme, on which I will touch in the second part of my contribution, is in place, but there is now an opportunity to extend the scheme in question to allow us to provide much-needed rental homes to individuals and families.

Let me turn to the second aspect, the expansion of the repair and lease scheme. It has been very successful in my county, Waterford, but unfortunately not in others. There are many reasons for that. I have asked for targets to be set for local authorities. That has not happened to date but it is finally in train according to correspondence received by the joint committee yesterday. The scheme, which has worked very well, is geared only towards putting social leases in place for the council. I am seeking the expansion of the scheme to enable councils and approved housing bodies to provide cost-rental tenancies on the same basis. The scheme operates by providing up to €60,000 of the up-front cost of renovating a vacant or derelict unit. There is a discount of 15% to 20% on market rent factored in. The full cost of the €60,000 is recouped over the course of the period of the lease, but the arrangement could also be applied to cost-rental tenancies and would essentially operate on a revenue-neutral basis because, unlike the social tenancy, which is based on paying a differential rent, the cost-rental tenancy would be based on the market rent or the market rent minus the discount.

I put my proposal to officials well over 12 months ago. It has not been taken up to date. There is now an opportunity to do so given that we are going to be putting the cost-rental backstop in place for cost-rental tenancies. I ask that it be expedited. There is no better location than Waterford in which to pilot the scheme, if it needs to be piloted at all. Waterford City and County Council is willing to do this. I ask that the proposal be implemented without delay.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I thank the Senator. It is always very satisfying to talk to him about any housing matter.

The Senator's suggestions have been taken on in many cases. I hope his suggestions in the latter part of his contribution will be taken on in this instance. I am not often in a position to deliver good news, but it is intended that the refurbishment scheme the Senator described will be extended to include properties, which will be made available for rent from 1 May, as well as reviewing the grant rates applicable. That was on foot of the Senator's work and his suggestion at earlier stages.

Pathway 4 of Housing for All sets out a blueprint to address vacancy and make efficient use of our existing housing stock. None of us want vacant properties, and those brought back into use could add real vibrancy and provide additional accommodation. It really should be done. One of the actions taken by the Government has been the introduction of the vacant property refurbishment grant. A grant of up to a maximum of €30,000 is available for the refurbishment of vacant properties for occupation as a principal private residence, including the conversion of a property not previously used as residential. Where the refurbishment costs are expected to exceed the standard grant of up to €30,000, a maximum top-up grant amount of up to €20,000 is available where the property is confirmed to be derelict, bringing the total grant available for a derelict property up to a maximum of €50,000. I am well aware the Senator is already aware of that, but I will put it on the record again.

Feedback on the grant has been very positive, with almost 1,400 applications reported to date. The Government is building on the initial success of the grant and it is planned that the eligibility date for properties, which is currently properties built before 1993, will be changed to include properties built prior to 2007, by 1 May. It is also planned that the refurbishment scheme will be extended to include properties which will be made available for rent from 1 May, as well as reviewing the grant rates applicable.

The repair and leasing scheme, RLS, provides an upfront loan, to a maximum of €60,000, including VAT, to owners of vacant properties that require work to bring the units up to the required standard for rental properties. It is a social housing delivery mechanism at present. Given the current demand for social housing across all local authorities, the principal aim of the scheme remains the provision of social housing. I am told by the Department that the Senator's scheme will be considered, but the Senator says he has raised it. I understand that Waterford City and County Council has raised a cost-rental RLS with the Department. Given the success of Waterford council in its RLS delivery targets to date, it should be heard clearly.

It is quite extraordinary to see the scale of the council's success, relative to every other county council. The total dwellings delivered by Waterford council to the end of quarter 3 in 2022 was 164. It has a target for 2023 of 80 dwellings. There is no other council that comes remotely close. The other councils are: Wexford at 28 dwellings; Mayo at 19; Limerick at 30; Fingal at 28; and Clare at ten. I recall a similar situation with regard to compulsory purchase where Louth County Council was a standout council. It shows how the dedication of a particular person or group of persons within a council really focused on a particular project can be so effective and successful. Having had this very strong success which delivers for the people of Waterford - I know the Senator has been very strongly involved in that - it seems Waterford council's suggestions on the expansion of such a scheme would be very welcome.

The particular pressure point at present is not just social housing, but the people who would be eligible for cost rental. I know the intention is to do more and extend the eligibility further. It seems a completely sensible approach to be able to look at something such as that. I wish to set out the success of Waterford in the scheme so far. It seems obvious the council should be heard fully on its proposal.

Senator John Cummins

I thank the Minister of State for what is an exceptionally comprehensive reply. It is obviously fantastic news that the vacant property refurbishment grant will be extended, not only to owner occupiers, but those who wish to do up a property and lease it to the private rental market. It will have a tangible impact in providing additional rental properties within the market. I ask that the ten-year clause is kept in there, to ensure the property remains in the private rental market for at least that period. I welcome the Minister of State's response in that regard.

The proposal to have a cost-rental version of the RLS makes complete sense. Waterford has seen considerable success and, in fact, all agencies and the council would attribute the fact that no bed and breakfasts or hotels have been used for homeless accommodation in the past three years in Waterford, to the success of providing those much-needed one- and two-bedroom properties in predominantly urban areas throughout Waterford. I know from her response that the Minister of State is committed to taking it back to the Department, notwithstanding it not being her Department. It makes complete sense to have a cost-rental version of the scheme. It is not just about the squeeze in the social housing sector, as the Minister of State has said, but the people who are above the social housing income limits.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

The Senator is absolutely right to identify that social housing delivery is always needed and continues to be needed. I, like the Senator, have constituents who have received social homes in the past number of weeks and months and are happy about that. There is a positive trend on which we must continue to work. However, the particular point of difficulty at present is the group who are not eligible for social housing. The waiting list has come down by more than one third in the past number of years. We also know there is considerable private rental sector pressure and the demand for cost rental will continue to expand. Cost rental is a new form of social housing delivery that we have prioritised. We have legislation in respect of it. The Land Development Agency has been tasked with developing and rolling it out with all the approved housing bodies. I would have thought that a measure such as this, which complements existing schemes, could be extended to that pressure point. It is very welcome. The total dwellings delivered from the RLS last year, until the end of quarter 3, was 349. Waterford delivered 164 of those. That is the scale of Waterford's success and it is to be commended on such success.

Acting Chairperson (Senator Mark Wall)

Before Senator Dooley starts, I will welcome visitors from St. Joseph's National School from Bekan in County Mayo, who are with Deputy Dillon today. I hope they enjoy their stay.

Nitrates Usage

Senator Timmy Dooley

I welcome the Minister, Deputy McConalogue, to the House. It is an indication of his commitment to this issue, that he has taken time out to be with us.

As the Minister is well aware, there is considerable concern in the dairy farming sector at the looming crisis that will be caused if the nitrates derogation cannot be maintained at its current level. On Monday, I had the opportunity, at the invitation of the Irish Farmers Association to visit Adrian Brooks. He is a young farmer who is known to me for many years and I can see the work that he has done. Mr. Brooks was joined by a number of other dairy farmers, namely, Kieran Woods, Micheál O'Dwyer, Kieran O'Connell, Tommy Lane, Andrew Dundas and Caroline Enright. They all share the same worries and concerns, in that any changes to the derogation will have a significant impact on their livelihoods. The notion that any reduction in the 250 kg of organic nitrates towards 220 kg, or below, would have a detrimental impact on their livelihoods.

Mr. Brooks and his colleagues are typical in that they are young, prosperous, well-intentioned farmers who have built a sustainable livelihood for themselves and their families on the farm. They have invested heavily and made these farms viable. They are not in the super league, or anywhere like it. Average farm sizes in County Clare are significantly smaller than in other parts of the country, but a number of these farms are intensive and every perch of ground is utilised to the benefit and profitability of the enterprise. This intensive approach has made these farms viable, let us be honest about it. The approach has allowed the farmers to have full-time jobs on the farm and create employment for others.

The banding approach, of which the Minister is aware, has already had a serious impact on stocking rates. Thus, any changes to the derogation towards 220 kg or below will undoubtedly require farmers to reduce cow numbers further, with a knock-on effect on viability. Reducing the number in a herd of cows in County Clare from 100 to 90 or 85, throws the farm into being non-viable. If one takes 100 cows out of a 1,000-cow herd, the operation is still viable.

You may have to reduce some activities, but farms taking out nine or ten cows will have a detrimental impact, and it will be the difference between full-time and part-time farming. Having encouraged these young farmers to take over their family farms, to make them more productive than in the past, to invest significant amounts of borrowed money and to develop their enterprise, we cannot have a situation where we now allow the rug to be pulled from under them on the basis that there is not really an alternative. We have to find an alternative. There is a significant knock-on effect on other enterprises, as the Minister knows.

The interim review will be based on comparing water quality between 2021 and 2022. This is flawed, because some of the measures coming into place in 2022 and 2023 will have had no chance to improve water quality. The reduction in the nitrate derogation to 220 will have significant economic impact and could potentially remove between €225 million and €230 million from the rural community. The prospect of reducing the maximum stocking density to 2022 is already having a knock-on effect and consequences on all farming sectors. It is increasing the demand for land and leading to significant increases in land prices. That is having a disproportionate impact, particularly in County Clare, where it is forcing up the price of land and making it less available to other enterprises, whether to sheep, to the suckler herd, which is an important area in County Clare, or to the beef sector. Even though the proposals have not yet been put in place, or have not yet been agreed, they are really destabilising the future of farming in the county I know best, and I am sure in many other counties.

Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Charlie McConalogue)

I thank Senator Dooley for raising this matter. It reflects his commitment to representing the agriculture sector across County Clare. I begin by saying that I fully recognise the importance to the rural economy of maintaining Ireland’s nitrates derogation. I am committed to seeking to maintain it in the longer term. We want the derogation to be maintained and continued. As the Senator pointed out, it helps to support productive family farms and support the rural economy. To do this and maintain it, we must all act together, in particular on the objective of improving our water quality.

As required by the nitrates directive, a nitrates derogation may only be granted if it will not compromise achievement of the directive’s two objectives, namely, to reduce and to prevent water pollution caused by agriculture. It is, therefore, a derogation from some of the requirements of the nitrates directive but not its objectives and is based on specific criteria.

In March 2022, the Government secured a new nitrates derogation for Ireland covering the period 2022 to 2025. We negotiated the extension to the derogation in 2021 and early 2022. In considering the outcome, we must be conscious of the background to those negotiations. The previous extension was negotiated in 2017. Over the four-year period from 2017 to 2021 in Ireland the dairy herd expanded by more than 300,000 head. An average additional 30,000 tonnes of nitrogen were being used nationally per year. Water quality also declined in certain areas, particularly in the south and south east.

Given this background, the European Commission insisted on attaching increased conditionality to Ireland’s nitrates derogation. This included conditionality around water quality trends. The water quality review required by the Commission will take place in the coming months based on Environmental Protection Agency data. Depending on the outcome of that review, it is possible under the derogation we negotiated, and to which we had to agree, that at least some of the country will have to move to the lower maximum stocking limit of 220 kg of organic nitrogen per hectare.

The quality of water in any catchment reflects the cumulative impacts of all pressures on water quality in that catchment. Agriculture’s impact is determined by the cumulative impact of all farmers' actions. As a result, we must all work together across the entire agrifood sector to improve Irish water quality to secure the possibility of retaining our nitrates derogation in the long term.

There are three ways we are working to achieve this. The first way is by regulation through the current nitrates regulations. Under the recent review we have asked farmers to do significantly more, including reducing nitrogen limits by 10% for most farmers, extending the periods when fertiliser and manure cannot be spread, increased use of low emissions slurry spreading technology and requiring better management of nutrients on the farm among other actions.

The second way is by supporting farmers through measures included under the agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES, within the CAP strategic plan. In this regard, I was delighted to accept all 46,000 farmers into ACRES recently. The targeted agricultural modernisation scheme, TAMS, will also support on-farm capital investment in storage and provide accelerated capital allowances for investments in slurry storage facilities to be written off over the coming three years.

Finally, we will achieve this by working in collaboration with industry and initiatives such as the dairy co-ops sustainability schemes. In this regard, I acknowledge the support that the dairy processing industry is providing for the agricultural sustainability support and advisory programme, ASSAP. It is a brilliant and free advisory service to help farmers in selected catchments to improve water quality. From the original base of ten industry-funded advisers at the start of the programme, there are now 23 advisers working on the programme employed by the dairy co-ops, alongside 20 supported by the State.

At the moment only Ireland, Denmark, the Flanders region of Belgium, and the Netherlands have a nitrates derogation. The Netherlands derogation is being phased out. It will not be granted a derogation after 2025. At the end of last year, the derogation for the Flanders region expired. It has not yet sought an extension. Denmark’s current derogation expires in 2024. Based on our unique soils, land use and farming systems within Europe we can, and we will, seek to justify our nitrates derogation. However, we must at the same time deliver on our commitments in terms of water quality improvements. I believe we can achieve this.

I am strongly committed to working with farmers and industry, both in delivery of our water quality objectives and maintaining the derogation in the longer term. I want the derogation to work for farmers and our environment in the short term as well as the long term.

Senator Timmy Dooley

I assure the Minister the farmers I know best want to work with him. They want to work in a sustainable and environmentally-friendly way. They too want to ensure our water courses are protected. It is in their interest. What they do not want to happen is to see themselves penalised for the activity of sectors outside of the agri-sector. We will have to find a better way to manage and monitor what happens on-farm rather than trying to do it on a regional or a national basis. Other industries have a negative impact on water, whether it be the forestry sector or other areas. There is no guarantee that a reduction in the maximum stocking density to 220 will improve water quality. Farmers will continue to adopt measures that protect water quality. However, this must not be based on the blanket regulatory approach but on the right measures in the right place at the right time principle, which has been shown to deliver improvements in water quality. Farmers are up for it. They have shown their commitment in the past. They need the commitment shown today by the Minister to continue, as I know it will, based on my knowledge of how he does business. We need to take that fight to Brussels and bring home the bacon.

Deputy Charlie McConalogue

I thank the Senator for raising this today. I acknowledge the concern among many farmers, particularly those who are more highly stocked. There is a particular concern among medium and small farmers on the impact any change from 250 to 220 would have on them. We had to agree to the mid-term review, and to the fact that 250 could be reduced to 220 in certain catchments if water quality was not improving. I am preparing a case to engage further with the European Commission to see if we can get further flexibility around time to show improvements in water quality. There is no guarantee there will be any change in that. As it stands, the situation is that it could drop to 220 in certain catchments if water trends do not improve.

However, as the Senator said, farmers are taking steps to improve water quality. I am aware of the challenge this could pose to some farmers from the point of view of economic viability. I am engaging with the European Commission to seek further flexibility. There is no doubt of the backdrop here. We have to improve water quality. That is a must. It is also a must, not just from the environmental perspective, but if we are to continue having a nitrates derogation after 2025. I have laid out a situation where by 2025 we may be the only member state that has a derogation. It will become increasingly challenging as a result. It is certainly not something we can by any means take as a given.

It is something we will have to prove the case for and we will have to get the consent of other member states to be able to maintain that derogation after 2025.

School Accommodation

Senator Seán Kyne

I thank the Cathaoirleach’s office for selecting this Commencement matter for debate. Coincidentally I attended an information session on Zoom this morning from St. Joseph's Patrician College, better known as "The Bish", in the heart of Galway city. The school has announced exciting plans for the development of the school. It will move to Dangan and a planning permission application for a 1,000 pupil school design is due to be lodged in April. This is badly needed to provide additional capacity for the growing population of Galway. I wish the school well in its endeavours.

I raised matters pertaining to school accommodation issues in June 2021, especially the need to examine the case for providing a secondary school in the Moycullen area. At that stage, the Minister of State, Deputy Madigan, stated in response:

The Department has identified a significant volume of current or planned unused capacity in schools in Galway city....This capacity across schools in Galway city is expected to be sufficient to address projected emerging requirements in that school planning area as well as to facilitate a continuation of the enrolment patterns from primary schools in the Moycullen area.

The issue of lack of school places from this September is real. Based on information from parents who have contacted me, not only in Moycullen, but also in other areas of Galway city, the schools are full. We have seen a sea-change in the response from the Department in June 2021 and the reality on the ground facing parents and pupils for this coming September. I have been contacted by parents who say they have been told that no place is available. There are waiting lists in city schools and it is unlikely those parents will find a place for their children in the city schools. This is a real problem in the community that needs to be addressed.

This is especially prominent in the western environs of Galway city. Parents of one pupil told me they had applied to five schools for their son, he had not been accepted anywhere and he is placed extremely low on the waiting list for each school. The waiting list figures may have changed but at that stage there were waiting lists of up to 160 in Coláiste Mhuire Mháthair, of 360 in Coláiste Éinde, 148 in Galway Educate Together Secondary School, 91 in Coláiste Iognáid and 99 in The Bish. The parents were told that there was a low chance of getting into those schools. They have contacted the education and welfare services to notify them of the lack of available places. These are real issues.

I understand that responses have to be given to parents, but advising parents in Moycullen or other areas west of Galway city that there is capacity in Athenry, Headford or Loughrea which are across the city and further, is not realistic. It is an insult to parents. There is a real and immediate need for additional capacity in the existing school system in Galway city for the coming September.

I look forward to hearing the Minister of State's response. I hope it will indicate that the Department of Education is taking this issue seriously and recognises this is an issue of importance on the ground for this September. We cannot have a situation when we see deadlines for school bus tickets approaching that parents are unable to apply because they cannot indicate whether there is a school place or what school their child might go to. This is a real issue on the ground that needs to be resolved. I hope the Minister of State will be able to go back to the Minister of State, Deputy Madigan, to the Minister, Deputy Foley, and to the Department looking for a timely update and action to solve this problem.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I thank the Senator for raising this important issue. I cannot imagine how difficult and stressful it is not to have a place in school for a child going into secondary school, especially given the important transition and the important age at which it happens. I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Foley. She would like me to clarify the current position relating to post-primary school provision in Galway city.

She states that for school planning purposes, the Department of Education divides the country into 314 school planning areas and utilises a geographical information system to anticipate school place demand. Information from a range of sources, including child benefit data, school enrolment data and information on residential development activity is used for this purpose. In addition, Project Ireland 2040 population and housing targets inform the Department's projections of school place requirements. Projections of post-primary school place requirements are informed by multiple factors, including primary school enrolments in the area and primary to post-primary transfer patterns, which I imagine are reasonably consistent.

As the Senator is aware, following an assessment of post-primary school place requirements, a new school, Galway Educate Together Secondary School was established in 2019 to serve the Galway city and Oranmore school planning areas. The Department's projections of post-primary school place requirements in Galway city show some continued growth in overall enrolments in the short to medium term. The Department is aware of increasing pressures and demand for additional school places in Galway city. However, it points out it is important to note that where enrolment pressures arise, it may not be as a result of lack of accommodation but may be driven by some of the following factors: duplication of applications where pupils have applied for a place to a number of schools in the area, the Senator stated his constituents had applied to five schools; the school of choice, where pupils cannot get a place in their preferred school where there are places in other schools in the town or area; some towns or areas have single sex schools and while places are available in the school they are not available to all pupils; and external draw, that is pupils coming from outside the local area.

The Department is working to establish the true extent of any capacity issues across school planning areas through ongoing discussions with the relevant school patrons and authorities. It would be appropriate to contact the Senator and other representatives to provide the true picture if it is different to the one the Senator's constituents are experiencing. If additional spaces are available as a consequence of some of the factors I have mentioned, including the duplication of applications or other things, they may not be visible to individual principals or parents, but they should be visible to the Department which is conducting this assessment. I hope that will be provided to the Senator at the earliest possible opportunity to enable him to communicate with his constituents to try to ease their concerns as they approach their September decisions.

The Senator will also be aware that the Department is progressing a number of building projects in Galway city under the national development plan. The most significant project is a 1,000 pupil school building for the recently established Galway Educate Together Secondary School which will also include provision for students with special educational needs. Additional projects have been approved or are under assessment at schools in Galway, including a major project for St. Joseph’s Patrician College to expand the school to 1,000 pupils as well as provision for students with special educational needs. This project is currently at stage 2b. Coláiste Éinde has an additional school accommodation project for specialist accommodation and general purpose classrooms currently at stage 1. In addition, there is a major project for Coláiste Mhuire Mháthair to expand the school to 1,000 pupils as well as increased provision for students with special educational needs. That project is also at stage 1.

Senator Seán Kyne

I thank the Minister of State and the Department for providing the response. There has been engagement between school principals across the region and they do not believe there is duplication of applications. As regards school of choice, I am not being smart but at this stage any school place would be welcome for parents. They are not being picky. All schools are of good quality but it is about getting a school that is realistically proximate to where they live. There are plans in the medium to long term to increase capacity. I mentioned the project in The Bish that will be a number of years away, but we need an immediate fix for the problem parents are facing for the coming September. The Department of Education must intervene to increase capacity in one of the existing schools this September. With the best will in the world, with everyone working, a new school will not be built between now and September. We need intervention to provide additional places in our city schools for the coming September and I ask the Minister of State to go back to the Minister, Deputy Foley, to ask her to take this matter seriously and to engage with all schools about capacity problems.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I thank the Senator. I will certainly do that. I am told the priority for the Department is to ensure there are places available for every student for the next school year and that it will continue to engage with patrons and school authorities in this regard. I completely agree with the Senator. I imagine the principals are working quite closely to ensure they do not have duplication of applications with confusion arising as a consequence.

I do not represent that side of the country but I am aware of the scale of distance involved in being in a different school, parish or community and the disruption that would cause to a child in terms of developing friends in his or her area, in addition to the impact on family life. There are also the climate consequences of having to travel that distance. Therefore, I completely understand what the Senator is saying about the need to have a targeted campaign to establish exactly what provision is required and to meet that provision. As the Department has said, it is its priority to do so in advance of September 2023.

Legislative Process

Senator Paul Gavan

It is always good to see the Minister of State. Having said that I must express my disappointment that nobody from the Department of Health was available today. This is the second time the Minister, Deputy Donnelly, has declined an invitation to the House to talk to me about an important issue. Whether he is dealing with an important matter of the State or whether he is washing his hair, I do hope his afternoon is going well.

I want to talk to the Minister of State about the safe access zones Bill that has been-long promised but which we have yet to see delivered to either House of the Oireachtas. I will provide a little bit of a backdrop. In May 2021, I tabled a Commencement matter on this topic and the then Minister of State, Deputy Feighan, came to the House and said that the view of the Department was that we did not need a safe access zones Bill and that the legislation was bedding down nicely. This was quite a shocking statement to make considering what was happening outside several hospitals, with protesters trying to intimidate women seeking a termination.

Thanks to the Together for Safety group, I was privileged to introduce a safe access zones Bill later in 2021, which the Minister of State will know has passed all Stages in the Seanad. During a debate on that Bill, the Minister, Deputy Donnelly, asked me if I was willing to work with the Government to help pass his Bill and I said "Yes". He assured me, as only he can, that we would have a Bill introduced no later than March 2022. One year later, and almost three years after the pledge in the programme for Government, we are still waiting. I attended a private meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Health in March 2022 and no one from the Department who attended that meeting could tell me anything about when we would see the Bill.

I am glad to say the situation has moved on. We saw the heads of Bill published last autumn. I attended another meeting of the Joint Committee on Health in January, and it was clear the Department has been doing good work in trying to progress the Bill. However, it still could not give an indication as to when the Bill would be ready to be introduced in the Dáil or Seanad. When I asked Department staff what the outstanding issues regarding the Bill that needed to be finalised were, of the issues listed they highlighted Garda warnings and specifically whether there would be a requirement to include temporal and geographical limits on those warnings. There was also the question around the interaction between warnings and criminal law, and I was assured the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel to the Government, OPC, was looking at that. The other issue was the delineation of zones and, again, I was reassured that "good progress" was being made on this. Finally, I was told there were some small outstanding issues about Garda powers.

We were assured the OPC was already working on this issue. Therefore, I hope the Minister of State will give a meaningful update as regards where the last few issues are at, as it is more than two months since that update. We were told at that meeting of the Joint Committee on Health, "We are most of the way there with this". Therefore, I am hopeful that nearly three years into the life of this Government, I will finally be given a date as to when the Bill will be published. I do not need to tell the Minister of State how urgent it is when one considers the fact that only one in ten GPs have signed up to offer abortion services. We know, and the Department has acknowledged, that intimidation from these protests is a major factor in that regard.

I have another brief question on a related matter and I think the Minister of State will appreciate it. She may be aware that the repeal review report, by Marie O'Shea, has been with the Minister for nearly a month and it has not been published. There is a growing concern among many people that the Government is dragging its feet on the publication of this crucial report. Will the Minister of State provide an update on when the Minister will publish the report? There is no reason for him to sit on it. An update on that would also be very welcome.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I hope I will not disappoint the Senator with my answer but I am afraid I cannot add much more information. I would, however, say that I am deeply interested and invested in the passage of this legislation, in addition to the correct receipt, review and consideration of that very important report and what needs to follow from that.

I thank the Senator for the opportunity to be here although I appreciate he would have preferred to have the Minister here on this occasion. I do not know what he is doing. I imagine he is attending to matters in his Department. Of the Minister, the Senator and the Acting Chair - I hope they will forgive me for pointing this out - I am the person who might have difficulty washing my hair rather than any of the three of your good selves.

Senator Paul Gavan

It was mentioned in an ironic way.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I appreciate that. I imagine he is working in the Department, but I do not know. In any event, the Senator will be aware that the Front Bench cover try to do the best they can to get information to Members. I totally agree that nobody should be harassed, insulted or intimidated in any way, frankly, at any healthcare setting but particularly involving a matter of such sensitivity. People should not have their decision to access lawful healthcare services subject to attempted influence in an unsolicited way by strangers or, indeed, persons who are not strangers.

Progressing safe access zones legislation is a priority for the Minister and the Government, and is certainly a priority for me. To this end the general scheme of a Bill was published in August 2022. Work on the finer detail of the legislation is ongoing and the Department continues to engage closely with the Office of the Attorney General and all relevant stakeholders, including An Garda Síochána. Both the Minister and the Department are committed to finalising the Bill as expeditiously as possible.

Cabinet approval was secured in July 2022 to legislate for the designation of safe access zones around healthcare premises to safeguard access to termination of pregnancy services. The general scheme of the health (regulation of termination of pregnancy (safe access zones)) Bill was published in August 2022. A formal Bill is currently being drafted by the Office of the Attorney General, in consultation with the Department. I understand that pre-legislative scrutiny is ongoing, and the last hearing was held with departmental officials on 18 January 2023, six weeks ago. That is the best update I can provide to the Senator at this point.

Senator Paul Gavan

It is not the fault of the Minister of State; I accept that entirely. She has been handed a script, which I think she will acknowledge is entirely inadequate. It tells me nothing that I did not already know having attended the meeting of the Joint Committee on Health on 18 January. It is extremely disappointing because we need to know when this Bill will be introduced.

The Minister is on record as having promised the Bill would have been introduced in either the Dáil or the Seanad over a year ago. It is another broken promise by the Minister, in addition to the fact that he cannot find the time to turn up here. I did ask for the reason he was not available. No reason was provided. That is disrespectful not just to me but to this House. It is not good enough. That is not the Minister of State's fault; I acknowledge that. However, it is hugely frustrating. The statement tells us nothing that we did not already know.

Here is my worry. I represent an awful lot of people, including those in the Together for Safety group, who have campaigned passionately on this matter, as the Minister of State knows. There is a real fear that the Government is foot-dragging on this. I cannot for the life of me understand why the few outstanding issues, which I learned about in January, have not been closed out by now and why someone in the Department could not have given the Minister of State something more to say in terms of when we will see this Bill. Surely to God we will see it by June, but from what has been said here, there is no indication. Will we go into the summer recess with no further information? It is a failure of this Government, a failure that lies fairly and squarely at the feet of the Minister, Deputy Donnelly.

Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill

I understand that I do not have more detailed information for the Senator, but the broader point is how it was a Fine Gael Government that introduced this legislation to put to the people in relation to the referendum. There is certainly no lack of commitment about the provision of appropriate healthcare services for every person in this country, on my part or the part of my party. There is a body of work to be done within the Department of Health. It is not a Department that produces a great deal of legislation. It should be available. If it is going through pre-legislative scrutiny, that is probably a good thing. It also helps the passage of the legislation by going through the Houses in a more efficient way because people have had good sight of and engagement on this prior to the publication of the Bill.

I apologise that I do not have a date for the Senator. It would not be typical that one would have that. I do not believe pre-legislative scrutiny has concluded at this point. It is, therefore, not clear to me what report will be published by the Joint Committee on Health, for example, if that is to follow, as would normally be the case, and what the response of that would be. If that is the case, as I understand it, that pre-legislative scrutiny is continuing, that is an appropriate next step. I believe everybody in the campaign would want to see that process completed in order to have the best and most efficient and constructive passage of legislation through both Houses.

Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 1.40 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 2 p.m.

Sitting suspended at 1.40 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.