Written Answers Nos. 333-349
334. Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the legislation which underpins the regulation and governance of housing estate management companies; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48357/13]
View answerThe position is that the primary purpose of the Multi-Unit Developments Act 2011 is to reform the law relating to the ownership and management of common areas of multi-unit developments and to facilitate the fair, efficient and effective management of owners' management companies (OMCs). These are companies registered under the Companies Act, the members of which are the owners of residential units within the development, which are established for the management of such areas.
Section 2(2) provides that provisions set out in Schedule 2 of the Act will apply to multi-unit developments consisting of houses, whether detached, semi-detached or terraced, but which have an OMC structure. The relevant sections of the Act which apply to such developments are:
Section 4 — Transfer of common areas in cases where section 3 does not apply.
Section 5 — Obligation of developer to transfer ownership of common areas of completed developments to owners’ management company.
Section 6 — Owners’ management company to join in transfer to purchasers.
Section 7 — Obligations to complete development to remain with developer.
Section 8 — Automatic transfer of membership of owners’ management company on sale of unit.
Section 9 — Consequences of transfer of common areas.
Section 11 — Determination of certain beneficial interests on completion of development.
Section 12 — Determination of certain beneficial interests in common areas in certain cases.
Section 17 — Annual meetings and reports of owners’ management companies) — other than —
(a) section 17(2)(c) (unless a sinking fund exists in respect of the development),
(b) section 17(2)(g) (to the extent that provision related to the relevant part of the development), and
(c) section 17(2)(h) .
Section 18 — Annual service charges.
Section 20 — Application of section 19 to certain developments.
Section 21 — Owners’ management company annual charges.
Section 22 — (Recovery of charges and contributions).
Section 24 — Dispute resolution and rehabilitation of multi-unit developments (other than subsections (5)(b)and (5)(h) of that section).
Section 25 — Persons who may apply under section 24.
Section 26 — Jurisdiction and venue of Circuit Court.
Section 27 — Mediation conferences.
Section 28 — Report of chairperson of mediation conference.
Section 29 — Saver for existing jurisdictions.
Section 30 — Restoration of certain companies to register.
Section 31 — Transfer of benefit of guarantees and warranties.
Section 32 — Restriction on entering into certain contracts.
Section 33 — Exercise of power to make regulations.
Schedule 3 — Documentation to be handed over pursuant to section 31(2)
Section 2(2) of the Act was put in place in order to accommodate developments consisting of houses which have an OMC structure in accordance with the planning conditions. I understand that the practice of requiring an OMC structure has, under instructions from the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, ceased. I should add that the taking-in-charge of such housing developments is a matter for the relevant local authority and I am aware that the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government has issued a guidance document to the local authorities on this matter.
335. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Justice and Equality the number of life-sentence prisoners on release who were recalled to prison during the period 2011 to 2012 owing to breach of conditions; the total number for each condition where a breach resulted in the revocation of temporary release in a table (details supplied); and where a revocation of temporary release is as a result of being charged with an additional offence, the type of offence which was alleged to have been committed. [48377/13]
View answerTable as follows:
|
Year |
Number |
Reasons(s) |
|
2011 |
1 |
Failed to comply with Temporary Release conditions - did not return to prison on date specified on Temporary Release form and was subsequently unlawfully at large. Refused a further period of Reviewable Temporary Release because of the risk of not complying with temporary release conditions. |
|
2012 |
1 |
Refused a further period of Reviewable Temporary Release because of the risk of not complying with temporary release conditions. |
During the 2011 to 2012 period, two life sentenced prisoners were recalled to prison from temporary release.
In 2011, a life sentenced prisoner failed to report to the prison on the date which was specified as part of the conditions of this person's temporary release. The prisoner returned voluntarily to the prison at a later date and was not granted a further period of temporary release, i.e. they were taken back into custody.
In 2012, a life sentenced prisoner was not granted a further period of temporary release when he reported to the prison primarily because of his non cooperation with Probation Service supervision and due to the fact that he was not of good behaviour when he was convicted of a minor offence . The legality of his detention was later challenged in an Article 40 Habeus Corpus case in the High court. He was subsequently granted a short period of temporary release with specific conditions which he failed to comply with and was taken back into custody.
I can advise the Deputy that life sentenced prisoners who are released into the community continue to serve their sentences, subject to a number of stringent conditions. While in the community, a life sentenced prisoner will be on Reviewable Temporary Release under the supervision of the Probation Service. Reviewable Temporary Release is where a prisoner is granted a specific period of temporary release from prison. This can be at varying intervals, for example, weekly, monthly or annually. The period of release is reviewed when the prisoner returns to prison and a decision is made whether to refuse or grant a further period of Reviewable Temporary Release.
The Probation Service provide Progress Reports to the Irish Prison Service outlining resettlement and reintegration progress and will report on any risk management concerns a Life Sentenced prisoner may present. Where it is reported to the Irish Prison Service that the prisoner in the community is failing to abide by the conditions of their release, that person may be refused a further period of temporary release and be taken back into custody.
An Garda Síochána may return a prisoner to prison where they are of the view that the prisoner is in breach of their temporary release conditions. When this happens, the Governor will conduct an oral hearing into the allegation. If the Governor is satisfied, taking into account evidence presented and comments made, that a breach of temporary release conditions has occurred the prisoner should be notified accordingly. The Reviewable Temporary Release is then revoked and the prisoner is taken back into custody.
336. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Justice and Equality if his attention has been drawn to the challenges being faced by community and voluntary organisations in securing Garda clearance of persons to be recruited to youth worker roles; and the additional costs and delays experienced on foot of same. [48382/13]
View answerI am informed by the Garda authorities that the current average processing time for applications is now approximately 7-9 weeks from date of receipt. However, seasonal fluctuations and the necessity to seek additional information on particular applications can result in this processing time being exceeded on occasion. Nonetheless, this is a significant improvement on the processing time of 14 weeks which existed in July this year. This improvement reflects the fact that I have given this matter particular priority as it is essential that the GCVU has the resources required to perform this most critical of roles effectively and efficiently.
In that context, I have been actively engaged on this issue with my colleague the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform. As a result of that engagement, I am pleased to say that the Garda Commissioner has confirmed to me that there are now 136 whole time equivalent staff assigned to the GCVU, some 41 of whom have been redeployed from elsewhere in the public service since the end of March 2013. Some of these redeployed staff have only recently completed their training in the vetting process, and the full impact of their work will be seen in the coming weeks. Furthermore, I have also recently received sanction for the redeployment of 40 additional staff to the GCVU. This brings the total number of staff in that service to over 170, more than double that of the average allocation of 78 staff at the Unit over the past two and a half years.
The Deputy may also wish to note that the development of an e-Vetting solution is also underway. This will facilitate the processing of all applications in an e-format, thus removing the time-consuming current process of manually managing all applications received . The initial phase of testing this e-vetting system will take place during late 2013. When this is achieved, this system will streamline the overall vetting process in this jurisdiction, and further contribute to reductions in processing times for all vetting applications.
337. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Defence the reason that current net voted expenditure in his Department was €32 million behind profile at the end of October 2013; if he expects this underspend to continue to the end of 2013; if any unspent allocation will be available for any other programmes in 2013; if he anticipates that any underspend in 2013 will be greater than the level of cuts his Department made in 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47908/13]
View answerCurrent expenditure on the Defence Vote is lower than profiled at the end of October 2013. However, there are significant spending commitments for the remainder of the year. In addition, the Army Pensions Vote will require a supplementary estimate of some €10m. It is expected that this will be offset by savings on the Defence Vote.
Overall, it is not expected that, when taken together, there will be any significant underspend on the Defence and Army Pensions Votes by year-end.
338. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Defence the reason that capital net voted expenditure in his Department was €2 million behind profile at the end of October 2013; if he expects this underspend to continue to the end of 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47909/13]
View answerThe variance between profiled and actual capital expenditure within the Defence Vote at the end of October 2013 is largely due to some of the more significant works projects not progressing as originally scheduled. The factors which led to the initial delays have been addressed and the projects are now underway. Progress on capital projects is reviewed on an ongoing basis and, where unforeseen delays arise on particular projects, other minor capital works projects are brought forward, insofar as is possible. In addition, my Department has applied for a deferred surrender of capital funds to 2014 to meet commitments which will not mature before year-end, due to the delays referred to above. At this point, it is expected that the remaining funding for 2013 will be substantially spent by year end.
339. Deputy Seán Kenny asked the Minister for Defence the number of the 20 additional aircraft mechanic apprentice posts that have been filled to date; the number of the 15 additional engine room artificer posts to the Naval Service that have been filled to date; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47964/13]
View answerCurrently both competitions are ongoing and are now at the interview stage of the selection process which should be completed by the end of November. The successful candidates will be inducted once medical and security clearance procedures have been completed for them. No date has been set for their induction but I expect the whole process to have been completed in respect of both groups early in 2014.
340. Deputy Dominic Hannigan asked the Minister for Defence the position regarding a barracks (details supplied) in County Meath; his plans to transfer the ownership of the barracks to the council for community groups to use; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48311/13]
View answerThe former Reserve Defence Force post in question was vacated in March of this year and is now surplus to military requirements. In accordance with normal procedure for the disposal of State property my Department invited Government Departments and other Public Bodies to identify any interest in acquiring this property. No interest was expressed by any of those bodies. Meath County Council confirmed in writing to my Department in May last that it is not in a position to purchase the property. In the circumstances the property is being put up for sale by public auction on 5th December.
341. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Defence if a cost-benefit analysis has been undertaken by his Department on the impact of Ireland signing the Antarctic treaty; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48317/13]
View answerIreland is not currently a party to the Antarctic Treaty. Consideration of any such treaty is a matter in the first instance for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and as such any questions in relation to this matter should be addressed to my colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and I understand that the deputy has addressed a similar question to him.
342. Deputy Tony McLoughlin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine his plans to redeploy civil servants from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine based at the district veterinary office, Drumshanbo, County Leitrim, to alternative duties working for other Departments based in the same building; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47723/13]
View answerFollowing the successful restructuring of my Department’s local office network, which reduced the number of local offices from 58 to 16, my Department decided that significant further savings could be achieved by centralising the administrative support to its local offices in one or two ‘back office’ locations.
The decision to centralise the administrative support is based on a review by my Department of the business processes and procedures and, in particular, the administrative support requirements, in its 16 Local Offices. This review concluded that, arising from the substantial reduction in disease levels and the changes introduced earlier this year in relation to the implementation of controls in the context of the TB eradication programme, the number of administrative staff required in the local offices would be significantly reduced and that further significant efficiencies in terms of the number of administrative staff required would accrue from the centralisation of administrative support in one or more centralised office(s). I have accepted this recommendation and I have decided that the centralised offices will be based in Cavan and Portlaoise.
The position in relation to Drumshanbo is that some administrative staff are currently engaged in work for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade while the remainder continue to provide the administrative function from that office for my Department. Should the opportunity arise to redeploy administrative staff from the Drumshanbo office then this will be considered. As with other local offices where redeployment has taken place, a full frontline service will be maintained and the service provided to farmers will not diminish in any way.
343. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the amount of money spent in 2011 and 2012 by local authorities throughout the country on the disposal of abandoned horses and horse welfare, broken down by local authority area; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47725/13]
View answerMy Department provides funding to Local Authorities under the Control of Horses Act, 1996, to enable these bodies implement their powers relating to the control and welfare of stray or abandoned horses. Details of amounts paid to Local Authorities in 2011 and 2012 are set out in the table.
Accounts paid to Local Authorities in 2011 and 2012
|
City/County Co's |
2011 |
2012 |
|
€ |
€ |
|
|
Carlow Co. Council |
12,445.90 |
4,922.40 |
|
Cavan Co. Council |
||
|
Clare Co. Council |
70,637.36 |
110,056.30 |
|
Cork Co. Council |
108,389.58 |
149,952.30 |
|
Cork City Council |
144,427.22 |
88,207.04 |
|
Donegal Co. Council |
||
|
Dublin City Council |
391,616.39 |
237,663.45 |
|
Sth Dublin Co. Council |
187,872.00 |
|
|
Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown Co Council |
61,856.88 |
25,052.22 |
|
Fingal Co. Council |
187,902.70 |
110,648.79 |
|
Galway City Council |
||
|
Galway Co. Council |
26,479.06 |
11,503.25 |
|
Kerry Co. Council |
99,771.07 |
88,968.22 |
|
Kildare Co. Council |
63,160.95 |
91,100.92 |
|
Kilkenny Co. Council |
92,790.93 |
79,014.17 |
|
Laois Co. Council |
96,582.67 |
132,446.36 |
|
Leitrim Co. Council |
14,706.07 |
20,014.06 |
|
Limerick Co. Council |
152,294.85 |
171,593.85 |
|
Limerick City Council |
361,802.48 |
307,979.69 |
|
Longford Co. Council |
624.25 |
250.00 |
|
Louth Co. Council |
27,876.85 |
18,656.22 |
|
Mayo Co. Council |
79,932.08 |
157,617.37 |
|
Meath Co. Council |
35,703.65 |
51,519.61 |
|
Monaghan Co. Council |
109.31 |
369.88 |
|
Offaly Co. Council |
48,067.55 |
|
|
Roscommon Co. Council |
6,022.94 |
8,442.80 |
|
Sligo Co. Council |
44,879.96 |
30,574.61 |
|
Tipperary (North Riding) Co. Council |
65,123.86 |
68,707.83 |
|
Tipperary (South Riding) Co. Council |
78,675.41 |
67,209.48 |
|
Waterford Co. Council |
37,790.11 |
16,152.34 |
|
Waterford City Council |
||
|
Westmeath Co. Council |
53,129.00 |
76,689.85 |
|
Wexford Co. Council |
38,136.00 |
37,287.50 |
|
Wicklow Co. Council |
115,823.80 |
36,518.11 |
|
Totals |
2,704,630.88 |
2,199,118.62 |
344. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when single farm payment will issue in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47647/13]
View answerThe person named submitted a Single Farm Payment/Disadvantaged Areas’ Scheme application on 26th April 2013. EU Regulations governing the administration of these schemes require that full and comprehensive administrative checks, including in some cases, land eligibility inspections, be completed before any payments issue.
In order to meet the EU requirements, the application concerned was one of a number which was selected for inspection. The application was initially examined via remote sensing (Satellite Inspection). As over claims were determined on some parcels, these were sent for ground inspection.
The ground inspection has now been carried out and the results are being finalised with the intention of issuing any payment due as soon as possible. In the event that any queries arise officials in my Department will shortly be in contact with the person named.
345. Deputy Patrick O'Donovan asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when single farm payment will issue in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Limerick; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47658/13]
View answerProcessing of the application of the person named under the 2013 Single Payment Scheme/ Disadvantaged Area Scheme revealed an over-claim in respect of four of the land parcels declared by the person named. The person named was recently notified of this error by letter and of the fact that the over declaration has resulted in a nil payment for 2013. Maps of the relevant land parcels and information on how the person named could seek a review of this decision were included with the letter. To date, no response has been received.
346. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when a 2013 disadvantaged area scheme payment will issue in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Kerry; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47738/13]
View answerThe person named submitted a Single Farm Payment/Disadvantaged Areas’ Scheme application on 9 May 2013. EU Regulations governing the administration of the schemes require that full and comprehensive administrative checks, including in some cases on farm inspections, be completed before any payments issue.
The application of the person named was selected for a ground eligibility/cross compliance inspection.
The ground eligibility inspection identified discrepancies between the area declared and the area found, resulting in an over-declaration in area of less than 2 hectares. Based on the Terms and Conditions of the schemes, this results in the 2013 payments being based on the found area.
The person named was notified of this decision on 4 November 2013. The person named was also informed of their right to seek a review of this decision. In the event that the person named in dissatisfied with the outcome of the review, the decision can be appealed to the Independent Agriculture Appeals Office, within 3 months.
Payments due under the 2013 Single Payment Scheme and Disadvantaged Areas’ Scheme issued based on the reduced area found to the nominated bank account of person named on 1 November 2013 and 6 November 2013, respectively.
347. Deputy Michelle Mulherin asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the reason for the delay in the issuing of payments to a person (details supplied) in County Mayo under the disadvantaged areas payment scheme 2013 and the single farm payment scheme 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47742/13]
View answerThe person named submitted a Single Farm Payment/Disadvantaged Areas Scheme application on 6 May 2013. EU Regulations governing the administration of these schemes require that full and comprehensive administrative checks, including in some cases on-farm inspections, be completed before any payments issue.
The application of the person named was selected for a ground eligibility/cross compliance inspection. This inspection has been completed and the results are now being finalised with the intention of issuing any payment due as soon as possible. In the event that any queries arise officials in my Department will shortly be in contact with the person named.
348. Deputy Jim Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the position regarding single farm payment and disadvantaged areas payment in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47771/13]
View answerThe person named submitted an application under the 2013 Single Payment and Disadvantaged Area Schemes on 10 May 2013.
The processing of the application was recently finalised and full advance payment has issued under the Single Payment Scheme to the nominated bank account of the person named. Payment will issue shortly under the Disadvantaged Areas Scheme.
349. Deputy Jim Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the position regarding single farm payment and disadvantaged areas payment in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47772/13]
View answerThe person named submitted an application under the 2013 Single Payment and Disadvantaged Area Schemes on 10th May 2013.
Processing of the application of the person named under the 2013 Single Payment /Disadvantaged Areas Scheme revealed an over-claim in respect of two of the land parcels declared by the person named. The person named was recently notified of this error by letter. Maps of the relevant land parcel and information on how the person named could seek a review of this decision were included with the letter.
In the meantime, payments in respect of the Single Payment and Disadvantaged Areas schemes have recently issued to the nominated bank account of the person named on the revised eligible area. Should the person named appeal the decision regarding the over-claim and in the event that the appeal is successful, then supplementary payments will, of course, be made.
