Written Answers Nos. 160-179
160. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Education and Skills the extent to which extra teachers have been recruited to meet the emerging needs at primary and second level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18539/16]
View answerThe criteria used for the allocation of teachers to primary schools is published annually on the website of the Department of Education and Skills. The key factor for determining the level of staffing resources provided at individual school level is the staffing schedule for the relevant school year and pupil enrolments on the previous 30 September.
The Deputy will be aware that Budget 2016 made provision for some 2,260 additional teaching posts for our primary and post primary schools next year. These posts will provide for an improvement in the staffing schedules at primary and post primary levels, enhance the leadership and management roles of deputy principals at post-primary level by reducing their teaching time, an improvement to the scheme of release time for principal teachers at primary level and additional resource posts to meet special education needs.
At primary level there will be a one point improvement to the primary staffing schedule to be implemented for the 2016/17 school year. This will see the primary staffing schedule operate on the basis of a general average of 1 classroom teacher for every 27 pupils. Lower thresholds apply for DEIS Band 1 schools.
At post-primary level the schedule will improve by .3 points, from 19:1 to 18.7:1 for the 2016/17 school year. The position of post-primary DEIS schools will be further enhanced for the 2016/17 school year by a change to an allocation on the basis of 17.95:1 down from 18.25:1.
163. Deputy Carol Nolan asked the Minister for Education and Skills his plans to promote apprenticeships. [18561/16]
View answerA campaign to promote apprenticeship is currently being developed by SOLAS in consultation with key partners including the Apprenticeship Council. The campaign will raise awareness and promote the value of apprenticeship for individual apprentices and for employers and it will cover both existing apprenticeships and the new apprenticeships now coming on stream.
This Government has committed to doubling the number of apprenticeship places. In addition to rising numbers entering apprenticeships in the existing trades, the Apprenticeship Council is overseeing the expansion of the apprenticeship system into a range of new areas, following a call for proposals from employers and education and training providers. 25 proposals have been prioritised by the Council for development, with employers on a number of these new apprenticeships planning to recruit in 2016. The Council is working with partners to ensure that information on these new opportunities across a range of sectors and at a range of levels of the National Framework of Qualifications is made available as widely as possible.
164. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the status of wind energy development guidelines (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17925/16]
View answerIn December 2013, my Department published proposed “draft” revisions to the noise, setback distance and shadow flicker aspects of the 2006 Wind Energy Development Guidelines.
These draft revisions proposed:
- the setting of a more stringent day- and night-time noise limit of 40 decibels for future wind energy developments;
- a mandatory minimum setback distance of 500 metres between a wind turbine and the nearest dwelling for amenity considerations; and
- the complete elimination of shadow flicker between wind turbines and neighbouring dwellings.
A public consultation process was also initiated on these proposed draft revisions to the Guidelines, which ran until 21 February 2014. My Department received submissions from 7,500 organisations and members of the public during this public consultation process.
As outlined in the Programme for a Partnership Government published last month, the Government is committed to finalising the revisions to the 2006 Wind Energy Development Guidelines within 3 to 6 months. The revisions to the Guidelines will be informed by the public consultation process and best international practice. My Department will continue to advance work on the Guidelines, in conjunction with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.
The revisions to the Wind Energy Development Guidelines 2006, when finalised, will be issued under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended. Planning authorities, and, where applicable, An Bord Pleanála are required to have regard to such guidelines issued under Section 28 in the performance of their functions under the Planning Acts.
165. Deputy Denise Mitchell asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to compensate for the cessation of the Ballymun social regeneration fund in 2017. [18352/16]
View answerWhile investment in the physical regeneration of Ballymun is largely complete, my Department has been continuing to support certain social and economic interventions in Ballymun with funding allocated on the basis of agreed annual work programmes. An allocation of €1.7million is available for these social regeneration initiatives in the Ballymun area for 2016. My Department will be continuing to engage with Dublin City Council regarding the position of such initiatives from 2017 onwards.
Other funding for the Ballymun area from my Department comes via the Social Inclusion and Community Activation Programme (SICAP), where the allocation to the Ballymun, Whitehall and Tolka area this year is €1.5 million. SICAP is an important community-focussed programme with the aims of reducing poverty and of promoting social inclusion and equality through local, regional and national engagement and collaboration. It is a key priority of Government and its vision is to improve the life chances and opportunities of those who are marginalised in society, living in poverty or in unemployment through community development approaches, targeted supports and interagency collaboration, where the values of equality and inclusion are promoted and human rights are respected.
166. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the recent changes in van tax which appear to have made it more expensive for van users, particularly those who are not self-employed. [18412/16]
View answerThere have been no changes to motor tax rates for commercial vehicles since the reductions announced in Budget 2016 and given legislative effect in the Motor Vehicle (Duties and Licences) Act 2015. The reductions applied to all vehicles with an unladen weight in excess of 4,000kgs, with no change to rates for smaller commercial vehicles.
To be taxed as a commercial vehicle, a vehicle must be constructed as a goods vehicle and must be used solely in the course of trade or business. Under section 2 of the Finance (Excise Duties) (Vehicles) Act 1952, if a vehicle is being used in a manner that would attract a higher rate of tax, the tax becomes payable at that rate. In other words, if a vehicle is also being used in a private capacity and the relevant private rate applying to the vehicle is higher than the goods rate, then the vehicle must be taxed at the private rate.
Licensing authorities have an obligation under Article 3 of the Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) (Amendment) Regulations 1992 to be satisfied that a vehicle is correctly taxed and it is thus open to a motor tax office to seek additional documentation supporting a claim for the commercial rate of motor tax. Such documentation may include a certificate of commercial insurance, evidence of registration for VAT or, at the discretion of the licensing authority concerned, any other appropriate documentation that would indicate that the applicant is in trade or business (including confirmation from an employer that a vehicle is being used by an employee solely in the course of trade or business). It is up to the individual concerned to provide whatever evidence is required by the local authority in order for it to be satisfied that the applicant is entitled to claim what is in effect a concessionary rate of tax.
167. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to ensure that Show Racism the Red Card receives funding under the support scheme for national organisations (details supplied). [18586/16]
View answer225. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government why an organisation did not receive funding for a project in the latest round of funding despite having been recommended for funding and having received funding for the previous five years under the scheme to support national organisations. [18515/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 167 and 225 together.
The organisation in question submitted an application to Pobal under the Scheme to Support National Organisations in the Community and Voluntary Sector. In total 148 applications were received and assessed by Pobal on behalf of my Department with 70 organisations to receive funding.
The quality of applications was very high, leading to a highly competitive assessment process. I approved 70 organisations for funding, at a total of €16.4million, well in excess of the indicated amount initially advertised, in an effort to fund as many organisations as possible.
There was an extremely high demand for funding under the scheme, and it was clearly indicated that reaching a minimum threshold score of 65% was no guarantee of funding. Having regard to the funding available, 70 organisations were allocated funding, and the minimum score to be awarded funding was 76%. With the substantially increased allocation to the Scheme, there is no scope to award further funding to other organisations.
Pobal is available to engage with the organisation concerned if it requires further information on its application.
168. Deputy Brendan Griffin asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to introduce mandatary inspections of private rented accommodation; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17929/16]
View answerMinimum standards for rental accommodation are prescribed in the Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) Regulations 2008, as amended by the Housing (Standards for Rented Houses) (Amendment) Regulations 2009, made under section 18 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1992.
The Regulations specify requirements in relation to a range of matters, such as structural repair, sanitary facilities, heating, ventilation, natural light and safety of gas and electrical supply. With very limited exemptions, these regulations apply to local authority and voluntary housing units as well as private rented residential accommodation.
All landlords have a legal obligation to ensure that their rented properties comply with these regulations and responsibility for the enforcement of the regulations rests with the relevant local authority supported by a dedicated stream of funding provided from part of the proceeds of tenancy registration fees collected by the Residential Tenancies Board (RTB).
Since the establishment of the RTB, over €30 million has been paid to local authorities to assist them in the performance of their functions under the Housing Acts, including the inspection of rented accommodation. Over 167,000 inspections have been carried out in this period. Following the enactment of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009, local authorities have a strengthened legislative framework available to them which provides for the issuing of Improvement Notices and Prohibition Notices where landlords are in breach of their obligations. Fines for non-compliance with the regulations were also increased; the maximum fine increased from €3,000 to €5,000 and the fine for each day of a continuing offence increased from €250 to €400.
In the short term it is my intention to promote best practice in implementing the regulations across the local authorities. The possibility of shared services across local authority areas is also to be explored.
169. Deputy Eoin Ó Broin asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government where the functions relating to waste management, regulation of waste collection companies and regulation of recycling facilities will be located after the division of the existing Department of Environment, Community and Local Government into two new Departments. [18001/16]
View answerResponsibility for environmental functions in relation to waste and resource efficiency, including waste management, regulation of waste collection companies and regulation of recycling facilities, will transfer to the Department of Communications, Energy & Natural Resources. That Department will be renamed as the Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment following completion of all relevant transfer of functions processes. The statutory process to give effect to these changes in respect of the environment portfolio is underway and will be completed as soon as possible.
170. Deputy Jack Chambers asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to immediately suspend the planned charge system for waste collection until there is clarity on the outcome of the changes for families and households; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18012/16]
View answer171. Deputy Jack Chambers asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his plans to prevent an increase in the cost of domestic waste collection; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18013/16]
View answer172. Deputy Jack Chambers asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to order waste collectors to outline the justification behind increases in charges and to outline where customers' money is going; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18014/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 170 to 172, inclusive, together.
In an open market, it is a matter for a waste collector to set charges at the level they consider to be competitive, in compliance with the requirements of environmental and other applicable legislation. However, since the waste industry began releasing its planned pricing plans in relation to the nationwide roll-out of pay-by-weight charging at the start of June, I raised some concerns with the industry regarding the reported increase of waste charges for some customers from July, particularly in relation to some proposed increases in service charges.
In this regard, I engaged actively and intensively with representatives of the waste industry and have agreed a clear way forward that results in customers paying no more than their current rate for presenting the same amount of waste over the next 12 months - by means of a price freeze to end-June 2017.
From 1 January 2017, customers will be able to see through a dual billing process, details in their bills about the amount of waste they are disposing of, their costs under the continuation of their current price plan and details of the comparative pay-by-weight charge. During the transition period, to end June 2017, the Government, in partnership with the waste industry, will drive an intensive public awareness, information and promotion campaign to support customers in understanding the new system, how they can change their waste management behaviour and manage better their waste costs under a pay-by-weight system.
The above approach provides increased transparency around what charges households would incur under pay-by-weight and also provides householders with information on the operation and benefits of pay by weight along with the option to switch to pay by weight charging from 1 January, 2017.
After the transitional 12-month period, the operation of pay-by-weight and of the wider waste market will be reviewed to inform decisions in relation to arrangements beyond 1 July 2017.
173. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the legislation relating to the maintenance of privately owned trees when they endanger the private property of another person; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18057/16]
View answerPlanning legislation places no specific restrictions on the height of trees, nor does it make any particular provision for remedy from any other nuisance which may be caused by trees in an urban residential area. However, there is currently a civil remedy available concerning branches or roots of neighbouring trees encroaching on a person’s property.
The previous Minister of State for Housing and Planning wrote to the Minister for Justice in June 2012 to explore the possibility of providing a broader civil law remedy for parties affected by high trees and hedges on adjoining properties. In this regard, advice was sought on the possibility of legislative provision being made whereby a person substantially deprived of the enjoyment of their property, such as the deprivation of light caused by high trees on a neighbouring property, could apply to the Courts for an order, and that the Courts could make an order as they see fit, e.g. to cut the trees back to an appropriate height. Safety considerations relating to overhanging trees could also potentially be addressed in any such provisions.
The Minister for Justice responded in July 2012, suggesting that disputes of this nature between neighbours could perhaps be more appropriately dealt with through mediation - which is being increasingly used internationally as a tool for the resolution of civil disputes - rather than through the Courts. In this regard, I understand that the Department of Justice is currently progressing the drafting of a Mediation Bill, aimed at assisting in speeding up the resolution of civil disputes of this nature, thereby reducing legal costs associated with, and ameliorating the stress of, involvement in such contested court proceedings.
174. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if his Department or a body under its aegis has monitored if waste collectors have weighed waste since July 2015 and provided this information to their customers; and if he will provide this data. [18060/16]
View answer179. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the percentage of households he estimates do not avail of an authorised waste collection service; if he ensures that local authorities investigate whether these households manage their waste in an environmentally acceptable manner in accordance with legislation and waste management plans; and if he can provide statistics on the level of monitoring by local authorities of these households' waste disposal practices. [18105/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 174 and 179 together.
Waste Enforcement Regional Lead Authorities (WERLAs) have been established in each of the three existing waste regions, with responsibility for coordinating waste enforcement actions and ensuring consistent enforcement of waste legislation while still leaving local authority personnel as first responders on the ground to specific breaches of waste legislation. This will facilitate a transformation from process-driven enforcement, structured around separate implementation of individual regulations, to one that focuses greatest effort on the waste problems and issues that matter most and to take swift, proportionate and effective action.
A working group on the introduction of Pay-By-Weight charging, consisting of members from my Department, the WERLA’s and the National Waste Collection Permit Office (NWCPO), has to date devised and completed a programme of data collection and inspections to help ensure that household waste collectors are, inter alia, weighing waste and making those weights available to customers. The first phase began in March 2015 with an information & awareness visits, followed by vehicle inspections (June 2015), customer account inspections (February 2016) and back office Inspections (April 2016). There are currently further inspections on-going in coordination with the NWCPO review of waste collection permits. The work of the WERLAs is being supported by continued funding provided by my Department for the local authority waste enforcement network. Some €8.2 million is being provided in 2016 for the retention by local authorities of 155 specialised waste enforcement officers, critical to tackling issues such as illegal dumping in local communities and in providing an enhanced response on the ground to infractions of the waste code.
The Environmental Protection Agency National Waste Report from 2012 estimates that approximately 72% of households availed of a kerbside household waste collection service, with other households managing their waste through bring banks, civic amenity sites and waste brought directly to landfill. However, this estimate contains a number of caveats as set out in the Report.
In terms of investigating whether households manage their waste in an environmentally acceptable manner, the Regional Waste Management Plans published in 2015 set out policy actions to:
- identify areas of low collection coverage and survey householders who are currently not availing of a household waste collection service to determine the cause (end 2016);
- design and implement a programme to regulate, enforce and communicate in areas with low collection coverage (ongoing); and
- engage with authorised waste collectors to design solutions to serve communities or areas of low collection coverage and implement the solutions (end 2017).
In addition, certain local authorities have introduced bye-laws which require householders to sign up to a household waste collection service.
175. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to provide statistics and evidence to back the claim made on page three in the Minister's briefing on the introduction of pay-by-weight for household waste that in areas where pay-by-weight is already operating, householders have become more efficient in preventing and segregating their waste, leading to a reduction in the amount of waste collected and a reduction in costs. [18064/16]
View answer177. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to provide a list of references and studies to corroborate the claim in the briefing on introduction of pay-by-weight for household waste that pay-by-weight drives higher household recycling levels of between 27% and 32% and higher diversion rates from landfill of between 28% and 35%, including the margin of error on these estimates. [18094/16]
View answer178. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government the number of households that have regular waste collection services operating on a pay-by-weight, a flat rate, a pay per lift, or a tag basis, or on a combination of two or more of these, by local authority area, in tabular form. [18095/16]
View answer183. Deputy Barry Cowen asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government if his Department still stands over the credibility and reliability of its claim that 87% of households would receive a reduction in household waste bills under the proposed pay-by-weight system or whether it now questions this claim; how this figure was estimated; and if he believes this claim should have been put into the public domain. [18109/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 175, 177, 178 and 183 together.
A Study of Pay-by-use Systems for Maximising Waste Reduction Behaviour in Ireland, published in 2011, estimated that:
- 46% of households used differential bin-based charges (a flat fee),
- 34% used tag-based charges (either pay-by-lift or tags), and
- 20% used weight-based charges .
While the Study does not break down the number of households by local authority area, it does conclude that weight-based charges are the single most effective pay-by-use (PBU) system in terms of waste prevention, waste recycling and diversion of waste from landfill. These charges prompted the highest per household recycling levels (between 27% and 32%), highest diversion rates from landfill (between 28% and 35%) and the lowest total kerbside waste figures (between 800kg and 947kg per annum). The study projected that, if the estimated 80% of those households across Ireland currently on pay per lift/tags and differential bin systems switched to ‘per kg’ based PBU systems, it could lead to an annual diversion from landfill of approximately 446,000 tonnes of domestic waste per annum.
The Study examined three separate forms of Pay-by-Weight system:
- A charge per kg of waste presented, in addition to an annual flat service charge;
- A “banded” weight-based system, using several weight ranges within which the annual weight of waste presented will fall within, with a different price applicable to each weight band;
and
An “average” weight-based system with 800 kg per annum being an average weight - if less than 800 kg is presented during the year, a credit is given for the following year’s bill; if more than 800 kg is presented during the year, the customer is billed for the additional weight.
The data from the Study clearly indicates that a ‘pay per weight (per kg)’ form of weight based-charging is the most effective pricing system in terms of influencing household behaviour under all indicators, as illustrated in Table 4.1.4 of the study, reproduced below.
|
System |
Percentage residual waste |
Percentage recycling |
Total waste per household (kg) |
|
Per kilogramme weight based charge |
65 |
32 |
800 |
|
All weight based charges taken together (combination of 22 different types of weight based charges) |
72 |
27 |
947 |
|
Tag based (i.e. Tag or per Lift) |
79 |
20 |
928 |
|
Differential (i.e. bin size) |
79 |
21 |
1,294 |
The Study highlights the desirability of “providing a continuous pricing signal to householders” through the charging system. For example, when using a smaller bin (even at a lesser charge), the householder will not reduce waste costs if they do not fill their bin and thus have no on-going incentive to change their waste management behaviour to divert waste from landfill any further than is necessary to avoid exceeding the capacity of the smaller bin size.
The practice of charging a simple flat rate fee (annual or otherwise periodic) for waste collection services does not appear from the Study to incentivise the management of waste in line with the national waste policy, the waste hierarchy, the polluter pays principle and incentivising waste reduction and segregation by householders. The argument which has been made is that, by offering the choice of a large and a small residual bin and applying a smaller annual charge for smaller sized bin, due regard is being had for waste prevention. However, the Study identified that the practice of waste compaction undermined the rationale for the use of the smaller size bin. Indeed, the EPA Study’s overall finding on Differential Bin-sized Pay-by-use Charges was that “this PBU system was found to be the least effective system in terms of impact upon the environment, resulting in a high waste to landfill rate (79%) and highest total waste of the three PBU systems (i.e. Pay-by-weight, Tag-a-bag and Differential-Bin-Sizes) studied (1,294kg per household per annum).”
The pay-per-lift approach results imply that it is more effective than a flat fee charging system in terms of encouraging waste reduction and recycling. However, in the case of organic bins, the pay per lift approach encourages consumers to wait until their bin is full and the waste within it is well compacted before having the material removed, which can mean that unnecessary odour nuisance has been created and much of the resource value of the material has diminished by the time it is collected. Applying a per kilogramme pay-by-weight charging system for organic bins encourages a more frequent collection of such material and thus ensures a reduction in potential odour nuisance and a better quality product to the end processor.
Pay-by-weight per kilogramme is not a new charge, but a new way of charging to incentivise waste prevention and segregation. However, it appears that some companies may have taken the opportunity to increase charges to customers under the guise of the introduction of pay-by-weight, especially to recover costs in instances where the service was being provided below cost.
The 87% figure of people doing better under pay-by-weight was based on a study of a pay-by-weight model which was in actual operation in the South West of the country, when compared to other pricing structures in that particular area. The figures were collated in response to a request to get an indication of how pay-by-weight compared in terms of price. The area chosen had a mix of urban and rural customers and pay-by-weight was long established, so that the customers in that particular area had had the time and opportunity to adapt their behaviour to preventing and segregating waste. The figures showed that households of 4 people or less in that area were better off under pay by weight and those figures were extrapolated, using CSO data on household size, to give an indication of the savings which were achievable.
176. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government his views on the advice provided to tenants by Threshold (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [18079/16]
View answerThe Residential Tenancies Act 2004 regulates the landlord-tenant relationship in the private rented residential sector and sets out the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants. The Residential Tenancies Board (RTB) was established as an independent statutory body under the Act to operate a national tenancy registration system and to resolve disputes between landlords and tenants.
Security of tenure under the 2004 Act is based on rolling four-year tenancy cycles. Where a tenant has been in occupation of a dwelling for a continuous period of 6 months and no notice of termination has been served in respect of that tenancy before the expiry of the period of 6 months, the tenancy is established for the remainder of the four year period. This is referred to in the Act as a ‘Part 4’ tenancy.
A landlord may not terminate a Part 4 tenancy except in very clearly defined circumstances such as a failure by the tenant to comply with his or her obligations in relation to the tenancy. Where there is a dispute regarding the validity of a notice of termination, or where the tenant does not comply with the notice of termination, the dispute may be referred to the RTB for resolution.
Section 87 of the Residential Tenancies Act 2004 states that, if a dispute referred to the RTB relates to the termination of a tenancy for failure by the landlord or tenant to fulfil his or her obligations relating to the tenancy, any remedial action taken by the other party subsequent to the receipt of the notice of termination shall not be taken into consideration by the Board, a mediator, an adjudicator or the Tribunal in dealing with the dispute.
The national housing charity, Threshold, is an independent body which provides advice and advocacy services to those experiencing difficulties within a tenancy. I have no function in the operational matters of this body.
Questions Nos. 177 and 178 answered with Question No. 175.
