I welcome the Minister of State to the House.
Nithe i dtosach suíonna - Commencement Matters
Regulatory Bodies
I welcome the Minister of State. As he is aware, we have problems across the country with apartment defects. More than 100,000 apartments are affected by defects and the Government announced a remediation scheme some time ago. While it has been slow in commencing, a portal was opened last December for submissions for interim funding as we await the Bill for the overall remediation scheme. The interim funding piece is for cases such as a block like Park West, which is being represented by Sam and Odette Doran of the Not Our Fault campaign, where they have made sure that all the surveys have been carried out and everything is done. They are engaging with the fire officer and are doing a fantastic job, and hopefully they will be the first to draw down from that scheme. Because they are so far advanced, they provide support services and advice to other owner-management companies and that has thrown up a major problem with the Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011.
It was agreed as a priority that the Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011 needed serious reform. It was very good legislation at the time but the lived experience has rendered outdated an awful lot of its provisions. This interim scheme has shown that you have management agents charging fees for the administration of the remediation scheme and therefore less money is going back to owners who are affected by it. A situation can arise where only some have paid for the survey and only some should be getting back money and the question is how do you administer that. Owner-management companies are in the main run by volunteers. Other issues that arise are owner-management companies or management agents planning to hold on to the moneys from the remediation scheme and perhaps using it to upgrade to today's standards instead of the requirements within the scheme.
Some have paid out money in good faith and are expecting to receive that money back from the Government. If the Government decide to only pay it to the owner-management company, if that owner-management company is dominated by institutional landlords or even approved housing bodies, because they have a vote for every unit rather than just one entity one vote, they can often outvote the owner-occupiers within schemes. The need for a regulator is very clear and that regulator, it is proposed, would need to come in under the multi-unit development reform amendment Bill that is due. Although all of this is all Department of housing discussion, the legislation for it and enforcement of it is within the remit of the Department of Justice. Hence, it has taken me a somewhat circuitous route to find myself in front of the Minister of State here.
What is needed is a regulator that will be a source of information and resources, that will be a point of appeal for owner-managers and can be an arbitrator where there are disputes. They can perhaps be a conduit, along with the Housing Agency who are administering this scheme. Let us say you have 30 owners in a scheme who have paid in, that money could be paid to a solicitor for the owner-management company through this regulator that would then ensure that that solicitor, in the same way as we have with conveyancing, undertakes to distribute those moneys to the owners who have paid in good faith with the residual amount then going to the management company. That can be done through an undertaking from a solicitor.
Look at Park West where they have really led the way. They do not have those problems because they happen to have Sam Doran there who is very experienced. Not every development has that.
I thank the Senator and call Minister of State, Deputy Martin Heydon.
I am going to start by thanking Senator Seery Kearney for raising what is a really important issue. I will respond on behalf of our colleague, Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, who unfortunately cannot be here today. Last December, the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Darragh O'Brien, announced the opening of the interim remediation scheme as the Senator outlined, for fire safety defects in eligible apartments and duplexes. The scheme provides for the funding of emergency fire safety defect works, in order to provide an acceptable level of fire safety in buildings, pending the completion of the full remedial works.
Apartments and duplexes built between 1991 and 2013 with eligible defects qualify for the scheme. The scheme, which has been administered by the housing agency on a nationwide basis, is open to applications via the housing agency's website. Given the current legal obligations and ownership of common areas, owner management companies, OMCs, will receive funding to carry out the necessary remediation works. Only applications from authorised representatives of OMCs will be considered and funding will not be directly allocated to any individual homeowner. Although only applications from authorised representatives of OMCs will be considered, I am advised that the process is designed in a way that OMCs will complete the application through the assistance of competent professionals such as engineers, architects and quantity surveyors, as well as local authority fire service personnel.
As of the end of last month, May 2024, 154 applications have been validated by the housing agency across 27 local authority areas, representing a total of 15,743 residential units. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage has also been advancing the steps to put the remediation scheme on a statutory footing, as a matter of priority. Full remedial works, which will include all necessary fire safety measures as well as those relating to water ingress and structural damage, will be funded under the statutory scheme.
As regards the establishment of an interim non-statutory regulator for OMCs as has been raised here, I am told that it is important to point out that the owner management companies are already subject to company law provisions including their own memorandum of association. They are also subject to oversight by the company registration office and the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement. Furthermore, the Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011, or the MUDs Act as it is known, also acknowledges the risk of disputes arising in the enforcement of rights and the performance of obligations imposed by its provisions on OMCs. Section 24 of the MUDs Act makes provision for the resolution of such disputes. A non-statutory regulator would have no lawful authority over any entity and so establishing such a regulator would be of no practical effect. Given the challenges arising in the context of the interim scheme and the proposed statutory scheme, Deputy McEntee and Deputy O'Brien have agreed to establish an interdepartmental group to consider what further regulatory measures are required for OMCs.
The Minister is just the messenger but that is a wholly inadequate answe that does not reflect the lived experience. These are voluntary people on an OMC, people who live in apartments they have been told have defects and some of them got bills for €64,000. There are owner management companies that are in bed with the suppliers and getting backhanders. All sorts of stuff is going on. They have inflated tendering processes and inadequate procurement processes. They are charging levies to owners and applying interest to those levies and who is benefiting from that? In many cases the original builder, who developed the development with all of these issues in hand, has a controlling interest in the owner management company. The idea that the MUDs Act is deemed to be appropriate is way off the lived experience of people around the country. That is a wholly inadequate answer and I will finish on this: The fact is we are looking for a statutory regulator, not a non-statutory regulator. Everything that has happened was foreseeable and was warned by people like Sam and Odette Doran, so there is no excuse for the delay.
I thank the Senator. The Minister has one minute to respond.
I will bring the very important points the Senator raised back to the Ministers. I do note from the wording of her motion, it was an interim OMC regulator. Maybe that was perceived as non-statutory. I take the very serious points the Senator raised on board. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage has also been advancing the steps to put the remediation scheme on a statutory footing as a matter of priority.
The full remedial works, which will include all necessary fire safety measures, as well as those related to water ingress and structural damage, will be funded under the statutory scheme. Given the complexity of the issues, including the significant amount of Exchequer funding that the Government has committed to assist affected homeowners, sufficient time is required to ensure the scheme is fit for purpose, provides value for taxpayers’ money and contains appropriate oversight and governance measures, which I am sure the Senator will agree are important. However, in respect of refunds for outlay made by homeowners before the interim scheme came into operation, the Government approved the principle of allowing remediation costs incurred or levied to be covered under the forthcoming statutory remediation scheme, once such costs fall within the scope and defined parameters of the scheme.
It is expected the general scheme of the proposed Bill will be submitted to the Government before the summer recess. Subject to the legislative process, the statutory scheme will be in place shortly thereafter. As I noted earlier, it has been agreed to establish an interdepartmental group to consider what further regulatory measures are required for the OMCs. I will bring the specific points raised by the Senator back to both Ministers.
Defence Forces
The next matter, in the name of Senator Clonan, relates to the need for the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence to make a statement on the role of the commissioned officers of the Defence Forces during the trials and sentencing hearings of soldiers accused of criminal offences. I will add a general comment. Decisions or judgments of the court cannot be the subject of review or discussion in this House as the House is not a judicial body. I know the Senator will be fully aware of that.
I thank the Minister of State for coming in. I am not going to comment on the judgment that was delivered in a recent high-profile case. Instead, I will address the question of the role of commissioned officers. Under Defence Forces regulation A7, paragraphs 55 to 58, they are required to attend court in an observer role but they are not required to disclose any information concerning the accused soldier unless required by the court to do so. These are administrative instructions that come from the Defence Acts and the Department of Defence.
I have spoken to some very senior senior counsel about this. Unfortunately, at a sentencing hearing, this regulation leaves it open to a defence team of highly skilled solicitors and barristers to call upon the officer who is attending court to read from a document called Army form 43(a), or AF 43(a). Under paragraph 56 of this Defence Forces regulation, the officer is required to bring this document to court and if requested by the court, he or she must answer questions in cross-examination. What I am told is that a capable and competent defence team, either during a trial or at a sentencing hearing, will call upon the officer knowing that he or she is required to read from this document. That is why we get a performance appraisal containing language like “exemplary”, “above average” and so on.
I want to be clear that this is not a character reference. If you like, this is a legal loophole that allows those who have either pleaded guilty to a serious criminal offence or are accused of a serious criminal offence to exploit this in order to mobilise some sort of defence for themselves. It has brought an officer, a person who is completely blameless in this regard, unnecessarily under the most unprecedented hostile scrutiny over the last number of days to the extent that he was trending on Twitter, with his name included. This is an individual who has a family. It was completely unfair.
I was struck that notwithstanding the Tánaiste's contribution on Friday, there was no clarification from the Department of Defence that was sufficiently clear. The only clarification I got about this was from the Representative Association for Commissioned Officers, RACO, which is to be commended for looking to the interests of its members in that way. It is within the gift of the Minister to reform this regulation. He can do it. It can be done as an administrative exercise. The requirement in paragraph 56 for the Army form 43(a) to be brought to court and for the officer on cross-examination to be questioned should be deleted immediately. There is no need for it. It is completely irrelevant to a person's charge on a criminal offence to have their performance appraisal read out in court. A soldier, a sailor or an aircrew member can answer questions in cross-examination about their own military service if the court deems that to be relevant.
However, this should not be mobilised as a way of mitigating a person’s behaviour, particularly when we are talking about violence against women.
I remind the House of the 1991 trial of soldier in Dublin, Private Sean Courtney, who brutally murdered a young woman, Patricia O’Toole. At that point, soldiers were entitled by regulations to wear uniforms to court. At the stroke of a pen following the case, immediately that practice was ended because it brought everybody into disrepute and was part of a potential miscarriage of justice.
I appeal upon the Minister and civil servants to completely rescind this. I ask the Minister of State to, in his reply, clarify whether soldiers who have been convicted of serious criminal offences, including violence against women, are to be automatically discharged from the Defence Forces.
I thank the Senator for raising this important and topical point, considering recent cases in the media. I am responding on behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence, who unfortunately cannot be present today. I convey his apologies to the House.
First, I unreservedly state my unequivocal condemnation of assaults. I add my voice to those who have commended the courage and dignity of victims who speak out, particularly in relation to recent cases. Such assault and behaviour has no place in modern society or in the Defence Forces, and being in the Defence Forces is no defence for such acts to be carried out. There is no place for domestic, gender or sexual-based violence anywhere in our society.
My colleague, the Minister for Justice, Deputy Helen McEntee, recently published a targeted 2024 implementation plan for further delivery of "zero tolerance" – the third national strategy on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. The zero-tolerance strategy is a whole-of-government response to domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, and the 2024 implementation plan contains actions for a wide range of Departments as well as various State bodies.
Regarding specific points raised by the Senator, the process for a military representative in court cases is captured in defence force regulations, namely, DFR A7 paragraphs 55 to 58, which specify that a military representative is required to be present during the trial in a civil court - criminal court - of an accused member of the Defence Forces. The role of that representative, which is also provided for in the regulation, is to assist the court, if called upon, to do so with any queries the court may have in respect of the service record of the accused member. It should be noted that, under paragraph 57 of the regulation, the officer detailed to attend the trial is not required to disclose any information concerning the accused soldier unless required to do so by the court. If required by the court, and again in line with the regulation, the military liaison officer will furnish any information in his or her possession as to the soldier’s character and service, and full particulars of any previous convictions by a civil court or by a court martial for an offence under the Defence Act. The officer detailed to attend civil trial of a soldier will be furnished by the soldier’s commanding officer with a certified copy of the soldier’s record sheet, which is an A.F. 43(a), copies of any other documents in possession of the unit relevant to the soldier’s previous service or conduct or to previous trials or convictions of the soldier by a civil court.
Immediately after the conclusion of the proceedings, the officer attending the trial will prepare a brief but comprehensive report of the trial and findings. This report, together with documents originally furnished, will be transmitted by such officer to the soldier’s commanding officer directly.
As the Senator may also be aware, subject to the provisions of defence force regulation, DFR A10 paragraph 58(m), a person of the Permanent Defence Force may be discharged as a result of conviction by the civil power. The application for discharge will be accompanied by full details of the case together with the individual’s conduct sheet, A.F. 43, and copies of civil convictions.
If the conviction carries sentence of imprisonment or penal servitude and discharge is directed, it will be effected with all convenient speed, the date of discharge determined by the officer in command. If the conviction carries a suspended sentence, the discharge, if directed by the officer in command, will be carried out as soon as possible after the case has been dealt with by the civil power. Of note also, discharges under this subparagraph will not be carried out until it has been ascertained that no appeal against the conviction is pending or, where an appeal has been made, until the appeal has been heard and determined.
Where a member has been convicted of an offence by a civil court, it is assessed at the time that if such activities pertaining to the charge in question represent a serious element of misconduct and disreputable activity, the commanding officer can recommend discharge as a result of conviction by the civil power. In the case of last week’s court ruling, which we are all familiar with, I am advised that this process commenced on Monday and is in train.
The Tánaiste has already asked the Defence Forces for a full report on the number of current Defence Force members who have had convictions of gender-based violence and other convictions. This report is expected imminently and will be immediately assessed on receipt for further actions. It would be inappropriate for me to comment while the assessment by the military authorities is ongoing. The Tánaiste has also requested a full report on the circumstances where a member of the Naval Service was kept in service following a conviction last November, as highlighted recently in reports. The same defence regulation in relation to this case is now being applied to this member.
I want to be absolutely clear. The Government has zero tolerance of domestic violence and gender-based violence and does not believe that this behaviour should be tolerated in any way by our Defence Forces.
In the context of the commitment to zero tolerance for violence against women, as a matter of priority, the Tánaiste and the Secretary General of the Department of Defence should immediately amend these paragraphs of the Defence Forces Regulation, DFR, A7, in that membership of the Defence Forces, in cases of violence against women, should not be a mitigating factor. It should be an aggravating factor in sentencing and in consideration of offences of that nature.
I again commend Natasha O'Brien on her courage and the manner in which she has spoken out for all women because there is a persistent and profound problem with violence against women in Irish society and throughout our culture. The Defence Forces are in the process of attempting to address that with the statutory inquiry set up last week by the Tánaiste. I ask that there be no delay in this. It also should be noted that the individual concerned bears no responsibility for being instructed or required under military law to carry out his functions. Most of all, justice in regard to that member of the Naval Services and other members of the Defence Forces, as the Minister of State highlighted, under regulation A10, paragraph 59, should be done expeditiously, without any delay.
I feel the gravity of the points raised by Senator Clonan. I read exactly the response I received from the Tánaiste in the first response. In regard to the very specific point the Senator raised about the serving member who, under the regulation, is being asked to go in, and how that could be misconstrued as a character reference, by a skilled legal team, that is a valid point that I will bring back to the Tánaiste. It states here that the current provisions in these regulations are being kept under review. I will highlight the points raised by the Senator. Cases such as those referenced here have to inform where changes to regulations are needed. That is an important matter and I thank the Senator for raising it. We will continue to keep a close eye on it.
I thank the Minister of State and Senator Clonan.
Hospital Services
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Butler.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, to the House. I raise this issue in regard to the provision of respite beds at the Sacred Heart Hospital, Castlebar. As the Minister of State will know, the Sacred Heart Hospital, Castlebar, was renovated in the past ten years. St. Joseph's ward, where the respite beds are, was renovated during the Covid-19 pandemic. There is a respite bed and a rehabilitation bed in St. Joseph's Ward. Prior to Covid-19, there were two respite beds at the Sacred Heart Hospital in St. Joseph's ward.
There is plenty of room in the ward for many extra beds. In our district hospital in Swinford, which is 16 or 17 miles away, there are nine respite beds. We are all aware that Castlebar is one of the largest towns in Connacht, but there is not great public transport between Castlebar and Swinford. One bed is not adequate for the requirements of the large population in the large hinterland around the country town of Castlebar.
I urge the Minister of State to look into this matter very seriously. I hope she will have some good news for me. There is a lot of agitation locally for the provision of an extra bed or an extra two or three beds because the space is there and it can be done quite cheaply.
We all know the work carers do. I have seen it at first hand. My mother lived to a great age; she lived at home until she was in her 96th year. We could not have looked after her had it not been for the carers. There are so many families like that now. They are saving the State so much money by looking after people at home. Some family members who are looking after a loved one will require respite. The biggest problem is the inadequate number of beds. Cancellations also cause hardship.
A pensioner who is acting as a carer only gets a half-rate carer's allowance, which is not very fair. The only thing that changes between being 65 years of age yesterday and 66 years of age today is that a person loses half the carer's allowance. I ask the Minister of State and the Government to look at this. We had an unsuccessful referendum earlier this year. Here, we have a situation in which people who are caring for loved ones in a full-time capacity and who reach pension age only get a half-rate carer's allowance. They paid for their pension. This is most unfair to those people. I hope the Minister of State has some good news for us today and she will bring back to the Government the issue of the half-rate carer's allowance for people who have paid for their pensions and are now in a position to draw down their pensions.
The provision of an extra bed or two at the Sacred Heart Hospital in Castlebar is badly needed to serve the local needs of a big, populated area in the hinterland of Castlebar.
I thank the Senator. He covered more than the Commencement Matter he raised but it was particularly interesting.
It is all related.
I thank Senator Burke for raising this important matter. I acknowledge the vital healthcare role Sacred Heart Hospital plays and the excellent level of care and support it provides to residents and their families in the Castlebar community and surrounding areas.
The Sacred Heart Hospital in Castlebar is registered with HIQA for the provision of 74 long-term beds. The hospital also has 26 rehabilitation beds. These beds offer an extremely important service as we seek to maximise the functional capacity of older people so that they can return home following a stay in an acute hospital. Sacred Heart Hospital also provides a respite bed to allow family carers in the community a welcome break. This bed is currently occupied. This bed offers additional assistance to families and carers in Castlebar to help alleviate the ongoing stress associated with providing care.
The are currently a total of 37 respite beds in HSE Community Healthcare West, of which 14 are available in County Mayo. I advise the Senator that increasing the respite bed numbers in Sacred Heart Hospital would require a reduction in the number of long-stay or rehabilitation beds in the facility. Unfortunately, the HSE has advised that this is not currently an option as the demand for these other beds, that is, the long-stay beds and the rehabilitation beds, is too high. The HSE has assured me that if any emergency respite applications are made in Castlebar, every effort will be made to accommodate the person in either the Sacred Heart Hospital or the closest available bed in the county. The HSE will also review the provision of respite beds in County Mayo with a view to exploring the option of providing an additional respite bed in Westport, which is the closest location to Castlebar.
As for other query the Senator raised, which is a matter for the Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Humphreys, as the Acting Chairperson said, my understanding is that this has come up several times previously. Anyone in receipt of a State payment cannot receive two full State payments.
It is my understanding the people will get half the carer's allowance if they are drawing down the contributory or non-contributory pensions. I compliment the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, on the work she has done recently in relation to carers and making sure they are eligible for their own pensions. I know the Senator welcomes that and it is really important.
Regarding the Sacred Heart Hospital in Castlebar, bed management comes under the remit of the HSE. There are 74 long-term-care beds. These would be for people on the fair deal scheme. The hospital also has 26 rehabilitation beds. These are very important for people who leave an acute hospital setting and who need rehabilitation before they are able to go back to their communities. The hospital also has one carer's bed specifically for carers. I have been told there is not currently an option to reduce the number of long-stay beds to put in a second respite bed. However, I welcome the fact the provision of respite beds is being reviewed in County Mayo at the moment.
I thank the Minister of State for her response but I do not think it will go down that well with the population in Castlebar. It seems the HSE will provide a bed anywhere except in Castlebar, which is the county town and which has a huge hinterland and a big population. All the routes lead in to Castlebar. It is much easier for people to visit a relative or a loved one in Castlebar. To be quite honest, I am very disappointed with the response. I had hoped the Minister of State would have had some good news but there is no good news here. An extra respite bed may be provided in Westport, which is nearly ten miles away and not much further than Swinford. I and the people would not mind other than there is space at the Sacred Heart Hospital in Castlebar. There were two respite beds there before Covid. I cannot see why the HSE would not make a second bed available there. This will be greeted with great disappointment in the locality.
It is important to put it into context. Bed management is extremely important. Even though the Senator said there is room for another bed, to do so, there also needs to be the nursing staff and health and social care workers to provide that support. Currently, there are 74 long-term beds in the hospital, the majority of which I assume are under the fair deal scheme. That is to support older people to be able to age in a community nursing hospital when they can no longer be cared for at home. The Senator is possibly missing the point that the hospital also has 26 rehabilitation beds. He said the hospital had one rehabilitation bed but in fact it has 26. These are really important for people who have had a stay in an acute hospital and now need rehabilitation, perhaps after a stroke or a hip operation, to be well enough then to go back into their communities.
The Sacred Heart Hospital provides a respite bed to give family carers in the community a welcome break. This bed is currently occupied. The bed offers additional assistance to family and carers. The HSE has also said that if any emergency respite care applications are made in Castlebar, every effort is made to accommodate the person, in either the Sacred Heart Hospital or the closest available bed in the county.
I understand what the Senator said about people not wanting to travel, but at the same time, if a choice has to be made between closing a long-stay bed to have a respite bed, I would prefer to keep the long-stay bed. However, I will bring what the Senator has said to the head of older persons' services in the area, Des Mulligan, whom I speak to weekly, to see if anything further can be done.
Departmental Schemes
Go raibh maith agat a Chathaoirligh Gníomhach agus fáiltím roimh an Aire Stáit. I thank him for taking this Commencement matter on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Martin. Since the Government introduced the basic income for artists scheme in 2022, 2,000 artists have been able to avail of the sum of €325 per week. All the reviews, including one the Minister published recently, show that it has allowed those artists to spend more time concentrating on their work and developing it. It has also meant the money has been put into materials, so it supports the artistic community.
I would always make the argument, and I know it is the Government's view, that artists are essential for society culturally but also from a social and economic perspective. Ireland is rightly proud of our commitment to investment in the arts, in particular this programme, which is a direct investment in artists.
I pay enormous tribute to the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin, for championing this issue. A direct support for artists was probably the most innovative measure since a tax exemption was introduced by Charlie Haughey in the 1960s. While there are many other supports for arts organisations and venues, specifically to allow artists to focus on the creation of the work has been critical. As I said, all of the reviews are extremely positive and I am quite certain in her response these will be highlighted by the Minister of State.
The three-year pilot scheme will finish next year. There is a question among those currently among the 2,000 artists who were part of the pilot programme about whether they will be able to continue in the programme or if a new scheme will potentially be opened up to 2,000 artists or more. What evidence will we have from the other group that also took part in the programme? I know the Minister is keen on addressing that. I will not pre-empt my party's manifesto, but in Fianna Fáil there is a commitment to continue the basic income scheme for artists and examine ways in which new artists can participate. I encourage the Minister to raise the issue in Fine Gael.
Given that the end of the three-year pilot will occur next year, we should not wait until the last minute. We need to learn lessons from the scheme, which has been in place since 2022, and consider the necessary improvements we may need to introduce. For the artistic community, which is hugely supportive of this scheme, we should provide them with a bit of certainty around the continuation of the scheme.
I hope that if and when the Government is re-elected, this will form part of the next programme for Government. It will be a critical issue in the general election in terms of support for artists and those in the wider cultural community. I hope that the Minister of State can give us some indication of the views of the Department around where the scheme will develop from 2025.
I thank Senator Byrne for raising this today. I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Catherine Martin, who cannot be with us today.
The basic income for the arts is a once-in-a-generation policy intervention which has the potential to transform the lives of artists. The scheme is part of a suite of measures that the Minister, Deputy Martin, has introduced to support professional arts practice in Ireland. I am particularly proud of the fact that former Taoiseach, Deputy Leo Varadkar, said when he became party leader and Taoiseach that he would set about significantly increasing investment in the arts as a key point. We are seeing that come through now, through the resources the Minister, Deputy Martin, has and continues to have.
The basic income for the arts is accompanied by a three-year research programme which started in October 2022 and will continue until the end of the pilot in 2025. The research programme is a unique opportunity to gather data on the sector that we did not have before. In researching impacts on recipients and the ecology of the arts, this pilot scheme has the potential to change the landscape of the arts in Ireland and how we fund it. It will help us to make further progress towards a more evidence-based approach to funding for the arts and to tell a story about the sector based, to a greater extent, on data.
In May, the Minister hosted a conference to discuss the status of the artist in Ireland. It marked the launch of data from the first full year of the basic income for the arts pilot scheme. It was a timely opportunity to bring artists and the broader arts sector together to discuss the challenges facing Irish artists today. The Minister participated in a panel on artists’ supports, including the basic income for the arts, which was a valuable opportunity for her to discuss the pilot with the sector and hear their voices on what can be done to ensure that the policy context for artists is as supportive as it can be.
The newly-published research shows that the basic income for the arts payment is having a consistent positive impact across almost all indicators; affecting practice development, sectoral retention, well-being and deprivation. It is intended that participants remain the same throughout the three-year pilot research scheme. The scheme is a randomised control trial that consists of two groups of randomly selected people.
One, which is the treatment group, is receiving the basic income payment, while the other, the control group, is not. Analysis of the results involves a comparison of averages between the two groups. As the groups have similar characteristics at baseline, and are large, any difference arising during the trial can be assumed to have been caused by this policy. The data collected as part of the BIA scheme will help us to make further progress towards a more evidence-based approach to funding for the arts. Data published through the reports is of use to the Department, the Arts Council, local authorities and arts organisations. The existing reports are available on gov.ie and more reports will be published in the coming months as we continue to collect and analyse the data. The Minister, Deputy Martin, cannot presuppose the outcome of future budget negotiations or Government decisions in terms of a continuation of the BIA after the pilot is finished. However, the Minister believes the data so far shows that the intervention is having a positive impact on participants, as the Senator has outlined. The reason the Minister put in place a robust research programme was to provide a clear data-driven evidence-base upon which future Government policy decisions on funding the arts can be taken. While the Minister is very supportive of the BIA, it is too early in the research to fully understand the impact of the scheme, and the pilot will need to be completed to assess the effectiveness of the BIA on those in receipt of it. For example, positive impacts seen early in the research may change or reduce over time, so it is too early to make that decision on the next steps right now.
I thank the Minister of State. I was at part of that conference on the status of the artist and the Minister does articulate her views and her commitment to this very well. I totally appreciate and think it is right that our decisions on the extension of the scheme are going to be evidence-based. My worry is that we will move into 2025 pretty quickly. Not all Departments move particularly quickly in renewing and developing schemes and acting on the reports and the evidence. However, it is important to give a clear indication that, acting on the evidence, there will be a continuation of the scheme from 2025 onwards. I totally understand, based on the evidence, that it may need to be tweaked and so on, but for the artistic committee it should show there is a commitment to continuing with it. The fear will be that we complete this scheme in 2025, there will be a hiatus and we will then be waiting to see what will happen. That is not what I would like to see happening.
The Senator raises very valid points which I will bring back to the Minister, Deputy Martin. While the Minister is optimistic that the basic income payment is having a positive impact on those receiving it, she is very cognisant of the data which is emerging about the difficult conditions in which artists find themselves more generally. Therefore, she held the status of the artist conference in May, which the Senator attended, that focused on income and working conditions in the arts in Ireland. A year on, the BIA payment is having a consistently positive impact across almost all indicators, affecting practice development, sectoral retention, well-being and deprivation. Artists in receipt of the support are typically able to devote more time to their art, have a boost to their well-being through greater life satisfaction and reduced anxiety, and are protected from the precariousness of incomes in the sector to a greater degree than those who are not receiving it. That is all really positive. We have to be mindful as well that we cannot make that commitment but all of the key indications are here that it is very positive. Along with the Minister, I thank the Senator and his colleagues in the Seanad for raising this point and discussing it here today. We will keep a very close eye on it.
Sports Funding
The Minister of State is very welcome. I thank him for taking this Commencement matter on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Byrne. The reality is we do not have facilities that are of an equal standard throughout the country and across all sporting activities. Over the last number of years, and particularly since the 2020 campaign from the Federation of Irish Sport, we have seen a massive increase in female participation across the main codes, namely, GAA, rugby and soccer. As I said, the reality is that a significant number of those facilities were built solely with men in mind because of the fact that there were not female teams in that local area or parish. My own local community is a prime example of that. I have been involved in the GAA at a local, provincial and national level for a long time but I am still involved in my own local club. We developed our facilities just over 25 years ago.
However, we did not have a female team in the club at the time and the facilities were built with men in mind, particularly the toilet and showering facilities. We now have an active underage and adult ladies club, and it is time that we brought our facilities up to equal status. We have all heard stories of ladies’ county teams not getting access to county grounds in years gone by. We have come a long way since then and are now at a point I am strongly supportive of, namely, the one club model, with the integration of the LGFA, the Camogie Association and the GAA into one GAA family. We are one GAA family and that is where we need to be. The joint Oireachtas committee on sport recently held discussions on this matter with the former President, Professor Mary McAleese, and the three associations. We aim to achieve integration by 2027, but our facilities are not up to standard. This is not just the case in the GAA, but across boxing, rugby and all other sports. I have been working with Longford Rugby Club on a sports capital grant application to upgrade its showering and toilet facilities to proper levels for the ladies club.
I want a specific fund set up for clubs. We are anxiously awaiting the announcement of the sports capital programme, which I hope will be next September or October. I believe that more than €320 million is being allocated to it this year. We need to introduce a specific programme for upgrading facilities in this way because, although some clubs are upgrading theirs, some are not. We need to make this a priority. We need to have equal facilities in all sports. Having a specific fund would give clubs an incentive to make this a priority over other issues, for example, lighting, stands, etc. This needs to be the number one priority. Our facilities for female participants must be on a par with those for males. There have been recent successes in athletics and boxing. Newstalk ran a programme last week following my press release on this matter and highlighted that some of our well-known international boxers did not have facilities in their clubs.
The fund would not just be for the GAA, but all sports. We are in 2024 and it is time we set a deadline of a number of years, put funding in place and ensure that female and male athletes’ facilities in every sporting organisation are on par.
I thank the Senator for raising this important issue. A fundamental aim of the Government’s national sports policy is to increase the levels of participation in sport and physical activity across the population, with a specific focus on less represented groups, including women and girls. A great deal of good progress is being made, not just in increasing participation by women and girls, but also in the important areas of leadership and management roles in sport.
A number of new policies have been introduced by the Minister, Deputy Martin, and the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, in addition to significant funding provided under our women in sport programme. The Minister and Minister of State have also announced a new similar access requirement, which ensures that public funding will only go towards the development of sports facilities that provide similar access to women and men.
The Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media operates two capital funding programmes for sport, namely, the sports capital and equipment programme, SCEP, and the large-scale sport infrastructure fund, LSSIF. The SCEP is the primary vehicle for Government support for the development of sports and recreational facilities and the purchase of non-personal sports equipment throughout the country. The LSSIF provides support for larger sports facility projects where the Exchequer investment would be greater than the maximum amount available under the SCEP. The LSSIF is currently open for applications, with a deadline of 1 July, which is next week.
Under the latest round of the sports capital and equipment programme, changes were introduced to make clear that applications for local projects that did not provide access to its facilities on similar terms for men and women would not be eligible for funding. Applicants will also be ineligible for funding if they do not confirm in writing that they are in compliance with the provisions of the Equal Status Acts.
On 26 April, the Minister and Minister of State opened a new €120 million round of the large-scale sport infrastructure fund. Applications under this fund remain open. Under the new round, a similar access requirement was introduced. The similar access requirement means that recipients of LSSIF funding must accommodate the needs of women and men on a similar basis with respect to accessing the facilities that have been allocated public funding.
Any organisation in receipt of LSSIF funding must have a similar access policy in place and publish it. The Minister, Deputy Martin and the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne, have also confirmed that a record €250 million is being made available under this round of the sports capital and equipment programme. This figure represents a 50% increase in funding compared with the previous round of the programme in 2020. Applications for capital allocations under this round of the programme are currently being assessed, which includes a review of the applicants' provisions with regard to similar access. It is expected the capital allocations under the programme will be announced by autumn.
Addressing women's participation at all levels of sport is an important element of the national sports policy. Through the work of Sport Ireland, the Department of Tourism, Culture, Arts, Gaeltacht, Sport and Media is committed to increasing women's sustained involvement in sport as coaches, volunteers, club members, athletes, advocates, leaders and participants from grassroots to the podium. The Women in Sport funding programme has been in place since 2005, and since then more than €30 million has been invested through the national governing bodies, NGBs, of sport and the local sports partnerships. This supports the Government's vision for women in sport as one where women have an equal opportunity to achieve their full potential while enjoying a lifelong involvement in sport. In 2023, Government funding of €2.7 million was invested in the Women in Sport programme, and in budget 2024 there was a significant increase in funding, which will see a record €4 million invested in the programme. The increased funding for Women in Sport in 2024 will support sporting organisations to put programmes in place to increase women's participation in their sports and assist in achieving our aim of equal participation by 2027. Sport Ireland's funding guidelines for our Women in Sport programme also continues to encourage organisations to develop programmes and initiatives focused on key areas outlined in Sport Ireland's policy on women in sport, namely, coaching and officiating, active participation, leadership, governance and visibility. Investment in the programme to date has enhanced all aspects of female involvement across these target areas.
While I welcome the significant funding put in place, the large-scale infrastructure fund is for large-scale infrastructure projects. The GAA alone has 2,200 clubs across 32 counties. There are also rugby clubs and soccer clubs. These are the smaller club facilities where young girls start out playing the sport. The reality is that a high percentage of them do not have the facilities. I welcome that €250 million is set aside for the sports capital programme, but what percentage of that is to upgrade facilities for female participation? A significant amount of that would be for stands, drainage on pitches and so on. I ask that a breakdown would be given on what amount is part of that. While improvements have been made, I do not think it is sufficient, and I still believe it is important we put together a specific scheme similar to the sports capital programme on that specific basis. We are taking it seriously and looking to get people involved in leadership. We have been active with regard to the percentage on boards, but not on governing bodies. In 2024, the facilities need to be on a par, but the reality is they are not. If we do not push to put funding in place for that to happen, it will not happen in the short term. That is not acceptable.
I hear the Senator's points and will bring them back to the Minister, Deputy Martin, and the Minister of State, Deputy Byrne. From the response I have from them, their argument would be that every euro going into a sports organisation or club, whether large scale or sports capital, is being done. To avail of any grant, clubs have to confirm they are providing equal access. The approach is, rather than having a scheme to encourage clubs to make available the extra dressing room for female participation, is to make sure that unless they have equal participation, they will not get the funding to do the drainage, build a stand or whatever they are doing. I was the secretary of my GAA club for seven years. I am married to a lady footballer. I know all about the importance of women in sports. I know the barriers they face with access to grounds and different things. I am thankful it is changing, but I will bring back to the Minister and Minister of State the point raised by the Senator about a separate scheme. They would say that, at sports leadership level, they have introduced a new rule to ensure 40% gender representation on boards of governing bodies as well. More female voices at governing body and board level will ensure that prevalence comes through, but I will bring those points back and thank the Senator for raising them today.
I welcome the Minister for agriculture and his guests to the Seanad.
Road Network
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit go dtí an Teach. The N53 road from Castleblayney in County Monaghan to Dundalk in County Louth with a section that runs through Northern Ireland is a road of strategic importance with the importance of Dundalk Institute of Technology likely to increase in the not-too-distant future. The N53 is 23.5 km long, including a section that passes through Northern Ireland. The 6 km section that passes through Northern Ireland passes through Cullaville in County Armagh where it is classified as the A37 and is known locally as the Concession Road. Unfortunately, the N53 has a very poor safety record and is often described as an accident black spot. It is very narrow in places with poor verges and dangerous bends. It is in a poor state of repair in many places.
There have been some piecemeal improvements over the years but it is widely acknowledged that this road needs substantial improvement to bring it up to modern-day standards. Decades ago, families from County Monaghan would have travelled to Dundalk to shop or visit the beach in Blackrock. Now the increased usage on that road is down in no small measure to Dundalk Institute of Technology which is now pushing for status as a technological university. DkIT has over 5,000 students enrolled and provides graduate and postgraduate courses from levels 6 to 10. A range of developments have taken place with a view to obtaining technological university status for the third level education facility. The college has a catchment area which includes Louth, Meath, Cavan, Monaghan and indeed Dublin. DkIT is strategically important in providing the skills needed for local industry in the north east, including County Monaghan. Its links with local industries such as Combilift and with institutes such as the MIFET in Monaghan are of increasing importance to the development of linkages between third level facilities and future industries.
The N53 is something of a forgotten road in comparison with the A5 which has garnered much more attention over the years. However, for many people in Monaghan and Louth as well as County Armagh and the wider region, it is a very important route that could assist considerably with trade, infrastructural and educational links well into the future. I would be grateful if the Minister of State could provide me with an update on the potential funding available from various Departments. I know I will probably get the standard response on that. I would like the Minister of State to focus on the possibility of shared island funding for this road. I feel that is where the future is. It straddles the Border with Northern Ireland going through County Armagh. Strategically from the point of view of an educational facility with Dundalk IT, which should have university status very shortly, and indeed industry in the region it is vital that this road receives funding. I would like the Minister of State to explore the possibility of the shared island unit being an avenue for such funding.
I thank the Senator for his question on the important matter of good transport connectivity in the Border area. I am delivering this response on behalf of the Minister for Transport who unfortunately could not be here today.
The Minister for Transport has responsibility for overall policy and Exchequer funding relating to the national roads programme. Once funding arrangements have been put in place for Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, under the Roads Act 1993 to 2015 and in line with the national development plan, planning, design, improvement and upgrading of individual national roads is a matter for TII in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. TII ultimately delivers the national roads programme in conjunction with project Ireland 2040, the national planning framework and the NDP.
The Government has earmarked €5.1 billion for capital spending on new national roads projects from 2021 to 2030 as part of the NDP. This funding will enable improved regional accessibility across the country as well as compact growth which are key national strategic outcomes. The funding will provide for the development of numerous national roads projects, including the completion of projects which are already at construction stage and those close to it as well as the development of a number of others. As the greater proportion of this funding becomes available in the second half of the decade, this has meant that there is a constraint on the funding available for new projects in 2024.
However, approximately €411 million of Exchequer funding was provided for national roads through TII to local authorities in 2024.
A major priority in the NDP, in line with the Department's investment hierarchy, is to maintain the quality and safety of the existing national road network. The NDP foresees an Exchequer allocation of circa €2.9 billion for the protection and renewal of existing national roads of the ten-year period to 2030, allocated fairly evenly across the decade. This includes funding for minor improvement projects, safety schemes such as junction upgrades and road realignment, and pavement renewal.
The N53 between Monaghan and Louth has been the subject of phased improvements under TII’s minor works programmes over recent years. Two improvement schemes have been completed to date. TIl is currently funding the Hackballscross to Rassan scheme on the N53 between Monaghan and Louth. An allocation has been provided in 2024 of €500,000 to Louth County Council. The project is currently at the enabling and procurement phase and comprises the realignment of approximately 3.4 km of the N53 between Hackballscross and Rassan.
Other projects in the region have been allocated funding in 2024. In County Monaghan, the N2 Clontibret to the Border scheme was allocated funding to progress the project through the design and environmental evaluation phase. This project is also in receipt of funding through the EU Connecting Europe Facility, CEF. In Louth, an allocation was made for the Ardee bypass which, when completed, would remove significant volumes of traffic from the town centre.
Details of the road scheme life cycle phases and decision gates are outlined in TII's major roads and greenways projects active list, which is available on the TII website. I hope this information is of assistance. I understand the Senator was requesting the cross-Border piece and it is not here in it, but I will bring that point back and raise it with the Minister.
Gabhaim buíochas leis an Aire Stáit as ucht an cheist seo a phlé. I acknowledge the script the Minister of State has read to us on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Ryan. I appreciate that funding has been received in Monaghan for the progression of the A5 Clontibret to the Border scheme and additional funding from the EU. Now is the time that this road got similar attention. I acknowledge that the Minister of State said he would bring the matter to the Minister, Deputy Ryan, with a view to exploring the possibility of getting shared island funding to explore this road as well. I thank the Minister of State for his efforts in that regard.
The Minister for Transport has allocated national road funding for 2024 in a manner that seeks to achieve the following key outcomes: protection and renewal of the existing national road network; progressing major projects in or near construction; progressing major projects that are pre-construction but well advanced in the development pipeline; and prioritising any remaining funds for major projects that provide for local bypasses and compact growth in Ireland’s towns and villages.
It is important to note that in 2024, approximately €5.5 million in capital Exchequer funding was allocated for the national road network in Monaghan, with a further amount of approximately €1.9 million being allocated for the road network in Louth. This funds the protection and renewal of the existing road network, which includes upgrades to roads such as the N53. It also includes new national road projects such as the Ardee bypass and the N2 Clontibret to the Border project, as I mentioned. This is in keeping with the programme for Government, which commits to ensuring the existing national road network is maintained to a high standard and to investing in new roads infrastructure to ensure all parts of Ireland are connected to each other.
I thank the Senator and the Minister of State, Deputy Heydon. We really appreciate the Minister of State giving of his time here this afternoon for Commencement matters. It is appreciated by the House.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 2.08 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 2.33 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 2.08 p.m. and resumed at 2.33 p.m.