Written Answers Nos. 508-523
508. Deputy Fiona O'Loughlin asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform for a list of Office of Public Works buildings in Dublin that are not currently in use; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22141/16]
View answerThe Commissioners of Public Works own the following three properties in County Dublin that are currently not in use.
1. 91a Lower Georges St, Dun Laoghaire
The property is retained for strategic purposes.
2. 10/11 Castle St, Dublin 2 .
The property is adjacent to Dublin Castle and retained for strategic purposes.
3. 390-396 Clonard Road, Crumlin
This property was recently vacated by the Probation Service.
509. Deputy Niall Collins asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the Ministers in Cabinet and Ministers of State in the Thirty-second Dáil who are eligible for annual funding under the leader's allowance scheme; the maximum amount that can be paid to each in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22186/16]
View answerI refer the Deputy to my reply to question 165 on 26th May 2016 (ref. 12264/16).
510. Deputy Jan O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will introduce measures to include social value issues in public procurement; if, in advance of such a measure, he will delay the tender for public libraries that is due to be conducted by the education procurement service to incorporate such a provision; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22278/16]
View answerThe State spends approximately €12 billion per annum on goods, services and works. This level of expenditure affords significant business opportunities for firms. The procurement reform is being carried out in a manner that recognises the clear importance of small and medium-sized enterprises to the country's economic recovery. European and National rules ensure that procurement processes must be transparent and equitable in the treatment of all suppliers. The Office of Government Procurement (OGP) has estimated that approximately 93% of this annual procurement spend goes to Irish suppliers which illustrates that public procurement activity is a significant enabler of employment and economic activity within the State.
The recently transposed EU rules on Public Procurement are designed to facilitate SMEs to tender for public sector procurement contracts. Measures specifically designed to improve access for SMEs and start-ups include:
- financial capacity criterion is less onerous; it is generally limited to twice contract value;
- use of a self-declaration (European Single Procurement Document) of compliance with selection and exclusion criteria by suppliers should reduce the cost of participation;
- the discretion to divide public contracts into lots, with the proviso that opting not to divide a contract into lots must be explained;
- provision for "consortia bidding" to encourage SME involvement.
A number of these measures were included in Circular 10/14 issued by the OGP in advance of transposition; a measure broadly welcomed by SME representative bodies at the time.
The reform of public procurement across the public service is on-going and will continue to provide opportunities to the SME sector to win business. The OGP will continue to work with industry and state agencies to ensure that winning government business is done in a fair, transparent and accessible way and to ensure that government procurement policies are business friendly.
In relation to the tender for public libraries, this is a matter for my colleague the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government.
511. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of times the flood management policy interdepartmental co-ordination group met in each of the years 2010 to 2016 to date; the reports it has made to him; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22303/16]
View answerThe Inter-Departmental Flood Policy Co-ordination Group did not meet between 2010 and 2014.
In July 2015 the Group was reconvened as the National CFRAM Programme approached the stage of preparation of Flood Risk Management Plans, which would in turn require the consideration of whole-of-Government responses to flood risk.
The Group met on 3 occasions in 2015 and presented an interim report to Government in January of this year. The Group held 2 further meetings in 2016 to date and is currently working on the preparation of a final report with recommendations which I expect to receive shortly. I will bring this report to Government for its consideration as soon as possible.
512. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of times the national catchment flood risk assessment and management programme steering group has met in the years since it was created to date, broken down by year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22304/16]
View answerThe National CFRAM Steering Group was set up to co-ordinate the implementation of the National CFRAM Programme, and for the relevant Departments and other key stakeholders to provide input to, and be informed of, the progress and direction of the Programme. The Group was established in May 2009 and met on six occasions up to November 2010, three times in 2009, and then three times in 2010.
During this period, the Group provided input into:
- The Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA)
- The preparation of the CFRAM Brief
- The preparation of the Statutory Instrument to transpose the EU 'Floods' Directive
By the end of 2010:
- The PFRA was largely complete
- The Generic CFRAM Brief had issued for tender, and the first of the Contract Specific Briefs had been prepared and issued for tender
- The SI was finalised and the EU 'Floods' Directive had been transposed into Irish Law
In this regard, the core elements of the National CFRAM Programme had been set by the end of 2010, and so the Group had largely met its initial objectives in terms of setting the direction of the National CFRAM Programme.
The ongoing implementation of the CFRAM Programme after appointment of the consultants involved significant survey work and technical analysis, such as hydrological analysis and hydraulic modelling. This work was being co-ordinated and overseen by the Steering (Advisory) and Progress Groups at the Project level.
No. of Project-Level Steering and Progress Group Meetings Held
(From Project Initiation to the Date of Publication of the C&AG Report - April 2016)
|
PROJECT/GROUP |
No. of Steering/Advisory Group Meetings Held |
No. of Progress Group Meetings Held |
|
Shannon |
10 |
44 |
|
Eastern |
5 |
31 |
|
South-Eastern |
5 |
31 |
|
South-Western |
7 |
30 |
|
Western |
8 |
22 |
|
NW-NB |
2 a |
31 |
|
TOTAL |
37 |
189 |
Note a: The NW-NB Steering Group decided to merge with the Progress Group due to the degree of overlap in membership.
The National CFRAM Steering Group was reconvened in November 2014 when the draft maps were being prepared for public consultation. A further meeting took place in 2016 prior to the consultation on the Flood Risk Management Plans.
It might also be noted that numerous bi- or trilateral meetings have been held throughout the period of the National CFRAM Programme to ensure co-ordination on specific issues. Such meetings would have been held with DECLG, the EPA, ESB and Waterways Ireland. Meetings have also been held regularly with the Rivers Agency of Northern Ireland to ensure co-ordination in cross-border catchments.
It is acknowledged that it should have been formally recorded that the Group was to go into recess after 2010. However, it is considered by the OPW that:
- The Group did largely perform the function and meet the objectives defined in the Outline Implementation Plan in relation to setting the direction of the National CFRAM Programme
- There was effective coordination and over-sight of the implementation of the National CFRAM Programme through the Project-level Steering and Stakeholder Group meetings, and through bi- and trilateral meetings on specific aspects of the Programme.
513. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of pilot projects identified since 2005 to date to prepare flood maps and flood risk management plans for a river basin projects; the delivery date of each project; the estimated cost at inception; the estimated cost if delivered; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22305/16]
View answerA review of national flood policy was undertaken in 2003-2004. The review was undertaken by an Inter-Departmental Review Group, led by the Minister of State at the Department of Finance with special responsibility for the Office of Public Works (OPW). The Review Group prepared a report that was put to Government, and subsequently approved and published in September 2004.
The scope of the review included a review of the roles and responsibilities of the different bodies with responsibilities for managing flood risk, and to set a new policy for flood risk management in Ireland into the future.
Three specific recommendations of the Report, led to the development and implementation of the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Programme. These were:
- Focus on managing flood risk, rather than relying only on flood protection measures aimed at reducing flooding.
- Taking a catchment-based approach to assess and manage risks within the whole-catchment context.
- Being proactive in assessing and managing flood risks, including the preparation of flood maps and flood risk management plans.
In 2005, a Plan for the implementation of the new policy was developed by the OPW, and this included the proposed approach for developing and implementing what became the National CFRAM Programme. This Programme would be a major undertaking that is new within Ireland, and so it was hence decided that pilot projects should be undertaken to develop and test the process before rolling the Programme out at a larger scale. It was intended that pilot testing might be undertaken over a range of catchments to develop an understanding of the different issues that might arise in catchments of different characters (as influenced by factors such as size, degree of urbanisation and availability of data). The selection of pilot catchments was however primarily governed by data availability, the pro-activeness of Local Authorities and prioritisation based on the existing degree of potential risk and the pressure for future development
The Implementation Plan identified nine candidate communities or catchments as possible pilot CFRAM projects. Four pilots were eventually progressed, which were:
- The Lee CFRAM Pilot Project, which included large urban areas of high risk (i.e., Cork City), as well as a number of smaller towns and villages potentially ay risk, with flooding occurring from both the rivers and the sea. This catchment hence included priority areas of assessment (i.e., Cork City) as well as a diverse range of factors that would enable robust testing of the CFRAM process.
- The Dodder CFRAM Pilot Project, which included significant urban areas within Dublin that had previously experienced severe flooding, and hence was a priority area of assessment.
- The Fingal - East Meath Pilot CFRAM Project where there was significant pressure for development leading to the relevant councils proactively seeking flood risk assessments to inform sustainable development.
- The Suir CFRAM Project, where previous work had been done, and which was deemed suitable to be undertaken in-house to build the technical expertise to enable OPW staff to critically assess and work with the CFRAM outputs, noting the OPW’s responsibility to maintain and review the Plans.
Of the remaining candidates projects, it might be noted that:
- two candidate rivers/catchments were integrated to form part of the scope of the Fingal - East Meath Pilot CFRAM Programme,
- flood risk assessments and/or the development of flood risk management measures were taken forward for two candidate communities through other projects, and,
- major schemes were progressing to address the principal areas of risk in two other candidate catchments.
The first of the Pilot CFRAM Studies (the Lee Pilot CFRAM Study) commenced mid-2006, and the Dodder Pilot CFRAM Study and then Suir Projects then commenced shortly thereafter. The Fingal-East Meath Pilot CFRAM (the FEM-FRAM) Study began in 2008 following a request from Fingal County Council. The projects have been delayed by a number of factors, including aerial survey delays.
The draft Flood Risk Management Plans, which represents substantial completion of the work, were published as follows:
- Lee Catchment: February 2010
- Fingal - East Meath Area: November 2011
- Dodder Catchment: March 2012
The completion of the Suir CFRAM Project is now aligned and co-ordinated with the South Eastern CFRAM Project, given the overlap of membership between the Steering Groups for both projects.
The contracted and out-turn costs for the pilot CFRAM Studies is as set out as follows:
|
- |
Contract |
Out-Turn |
|
Lee Pilot CFRAM Project: |
€1.8m |
€3.0m |
|
Fingal - East Meath Pilot CFRAM Project: |
€1.5m |
€2.3m |
|
Dodder Catchment Pilot CFRAM Project: |
€1.1m |
€1.3m |
|
Suir CFRAM Project: |
€2.4m |
€2.7m1 |
1: Projected cost to end 2016
Costs have increased above those contracted by €2.4m. Of this increase, €1.1m is for additional work agreed in advance, including the development of new methods and approaches for testing in the Pilot Studies, and subsequent application in the National CFRAM Programme, and the work required to re-calibrate and validate the Lower Lee model after the flood of November 2009. Payments of €1.2m have also been made as compensation to the consultants for disruption and additional work related primarily to the delays in the delivery of the survey data.
514. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of flood risk and flood hazard maps which have been submitted to the OPW; the number which met the due date deadline in 2014; the number which are outstanding; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22306/16]
View answerIn March 2014, the OPW reported the required flood maps for 50 of the 300 Areas for Further Assessment (AFAs). This included the reporting of the maps for the Lee, Dodder and FEM-FRAM Pilot CFRAM Projects.
The OPW has engaged with the European Commission on an ongoing basis since 2013 in relation to the progress in Ireland with regard to producing and submitting its map requirements in line with the EU timeframe.
The OPW had signalled to the EU Commission that it could report its national predictive flood maps to meet its compliance with the EU Floods Directive but that, given the approach of the work being undertaken by the OPW, it did not consider doing so to be of benefit purely for the sake of reporting compliance.
All of the flood maps were published in November 2015 for public consultation under SIs 122 and 495 of 2010 and 2015 respectively. Since closure of the public consultation on 23 December 2015, the OPW has been updating and finalising the maps on the basis of the observations and objections submitted.
All of the flood risk and hazard maps were reported to the EU Commission in February 2016. Note that the delay from the intended December 2015 date quoted was due to the winter flooding of 2015/16 and the associated demands this placed on OPW resources.
It should be noted that the flood mapping being developed under the CFRAM Programme significantly exceeds the requirements of the EU 'Floods' Directive, as it is deemed that additional maps are required to optimise the benefits of the maps and ensure the robust development of flood risk management measures. The production of these additional maps has placed increased resource demands on the consultants undertaking the CFRAM Projects.
Examples of additional mapping includes:
- Preparation of flood maps for two potential future scenarios reflecting the potential impacts of climate change - This will permit the consideration of potential future adaptation requirements into the flood risk management planning process, and can also inform spatial planning and development management decision-making.
- Preparation of flood maps for eight flood event magnitudes/probabilities, where the Directive requires only two - This provides a significantly better understanding of flood risk, and can inform emergency response given the detailed understanding as to how a flood can develop and evolve.
- Flood Zone maps, which are not a requirement of the Directive - These maps correspond to the Flood Zones defined in the Guidelines on the Planning System and Flood Risk Management (DECLG/OPW, 2009), hence directly supporting sustainable planning and development, and the avoidance of building in floodplains.
In total, the OPW is producing approximately 40,000 flood maps through the National CFRAM Programme, of which only approximately 13,000 are required under the EU 'Floods' Directive.
515. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the amount which has been spent on flood relief schemes here from 2004 to date, broken down by county and by year; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22307/16]
View answerExpenditure by the Office of Public Works in the period 2004 to the end of June 2016 on flood relief activities and measures amounts to approximately €402 million, of which €292 million relates to expenditure on major flood relief schemes. A breakdown of this expenditure on major schemes is shown by county in the table below. The remaining €110 million is made up of €58 million on Strategic Studies including the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Programme, the Flood Studies Update and Coastal & Hydrology studies and research, €30 million on the OPW's Minor Flood Mitigation Works & Coastal Protection Scheme and €22m on the funding provided to Local Authorities for storm damage repair which arose following the severe storms which affected the western seaboard in December 2013 and January 2014.
Breakdown by County of expenditure on Major Flood Relief Schemes over the period 2004 to end June 2016
|
- |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 (End June) |
TOTALS |
|
- |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
|
Carlow |
||||||||||||||
|
99 |
38 |
12 |
2,144 |
9 |
57 |
0 |
1,088 |
2,732 |
716 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
6,895 |
|
|
Cavan |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Clare |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
337 |
320 |
255 |
2,873 |
4,793 |
1,995 |
2,390 |
287 |
9,668 |
4,196 |
1,410 |
54 |
28,578 |
|
|
Cork |
||||||||||||||
|
1,555 |
1,975 |
825 |
730 |
5,097 |
9,618 |
6,162 |
6,235 |
9,395 |
12,167 |
6,581 |
4,135 |
7,100 |
71,575 |
|
|
Donegal |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
13 |
34 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
36 |
64 |
0 |
25 |
172 |
|
|
Dublin |
||||||||||||||
|
1,748 |
2,514 |
4,910 |
6,996 |
3,117 |
3,678 |
3,162 |
805 |
4,046 |
2,710 |
6,315 |
4,524 |
1,497 |
46,022 |
|
|
Galway |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
25 |
285 |
1,518 |
795 |
234 |
190 |
201 |
130 |
3,378 |
|||||
|
Kerry |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Kildare |
||||||||||||||
|
8 |
3 |
0 |
644 |
2,019 |
835 |
814 |
1,470 |
715 |
130 |
89 |
149 |
16 |
6,892 |
|
|
Kilkenny |
||||||||||||||
|
9,711 |
5,127 |
517 |
616 |
787 |
1,180 |
62 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
18,004 |
|
|
Laois |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
121 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
121 |
|
|
Leitrim |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Limerick |
||||||||||||||
|
37 |
470 |
0 |
30 |
40 |
422 |
72 |
0 |
60 |
0 |
691 |
69 |
0 |
1,891 |
|
|
Longford |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
164 |
116 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
280 |
|
|
Louth |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Mayo |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
12 |
11 |
78 |
24 |
40 |
165 |
|
|
Meath |
||||||||||||||
|
1,018 |
1,755 |
2,607 |
599 |
391 |
874 |
1,669 |
1,130 |
479 |
58 |
36 |
66 |
22 |
10,704 |
|
|
Monaghan |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Offaly |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
177 |
0 |
0 |
22 |
0 |
13 |
799 |
997 |
53 |
6 |
2 |
2,069 |
|
|
Roscommon |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Sligo |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Tipperary |
||||||||||||||
|
494 |
719 |
1,811 |
1,820 |
5,743 |
7,584 |
5,495 |
11,280 |
4,170 |
786 |
1,323 |
897 |
244 |
42,366 |
|
|
Waterford |
||||||||||||||
|
51 |
1 |
57 |
5,000 |
30 |
500 |
2,700 |
600 |
3,315 |
3,996 |
4,240 |
2,542 |
0 |
23,032 |
|
|
Westmeath |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
130 |
233 |
58 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
421 |
|
|
Wexford |
||||||||||||||
|
5 |
25 |
414 |
0 |
93 |
231 |
124 |
0 |
51 |
88 |
0 |
317 |
4 |
1,352 |
|
|
Wicklow |
||||||||||||||
|
0 |
150 |
0 |
59 |
313 |
299 |
1,738 |
0 |
7,117 |
997 |
4,875 |
12,444 |
19 |
28,011 |
|
|
TOTALS |
14,726 |
13,139 |
11,650 |
18,893 |
20,940 |
30,476 |
24,336 |
26,533 |
33,973 |
32,594 |
28,731 |
26,784 |
9,153 |
291,928 |
516. Deputy David Cullinane asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his views on the outworking of the memorandum of understanding between the Office of Public Works and the representative body of the insurance industry; the level of exchange of flood defence data; if changes have led to a new commitment to provide insurance cover to those unable to obtain insurance; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22308/16]
View answerThe Office of Public Works (OPW) has no role or function in relation to the oversight or regulation of insurance matters. The provision of insurance cover and the price at which it is offered is a commercial matter for insurance companies and is based on an assessment of the risks they are willing to accept and adequate provisioning to meet those risks.
In March 2014, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Insurance Ireland (II), the representative body for the insurance industry in Ireland, and the Office of Public Works (OPW). This Memorandum sets out principles of how the two organisations will work together to ensure that appropriate and relevant information on completed OPW flood defence schemes is provided to insurers to facilitate, to the greatest extent possible, the availability to the public of insurance against the risk of flooding. II members have committed to take into account all information provided by OPW when assessing exposure to flood risk within these areas.
The Memorandum came into effect on 1 June, 2014 with an initial tranche of data provided by the OPW to II in respect of 12 completed flood defence schemes and showing the design, extent and nature of the protection offered by these works. The schemes concerned are:
- Clonmel (River Suir)
- Dublin (River Dodder Tidal)
- Dublin (River Tolka)
- Dublin Fingal (River Tolka)
- Duleek (River Nanny)
- Dunmanway (River Bandon)
- Ennis (River Fergus Upper)
- Fermoy (River Blackwater)
- Kilkenny City (River Nore)
- Meath (River Tolka)
- Mornington (River Mornington)
- Tullamore (River Tullamore).
A further tranche of data was provided to II in January 2015 covering a further 4 completed flood defence schemes. These schemes are:
- Munster Blackwater, Mallow South and West, Co. Cork
- Hazelhatch, Celbridge, Co. Kildare
- Derrymullen, Ballinasloe, Co. Galway
- Carlow.
OPW will continue to provide data to II as flood defence schemes are completed.
Insurance Ireland estimates that flood cover is included as standard in 98% of household insurance policies throughout the country. II has carried out a number of surveys among its members to ascertain the extent to which flood insurance cover is available in the areas for which OPW has provided data on completed flood defence schemes. The results of these surveys are summarised in the following table:
Percentage of Property Insurance Policies which include flood cover
|
- |
13 January 2015* |
17 November 2015 |
22 January 2016 |
|
Areas Protected by Permanent Flood Defences |
91 |
86 |
89 |
|
Areas where Protection includes Demountable Defences |
66 |
67 |
78 |
|
All Protected Areas |
77 |
75 |
83 |
* 13 January 2015 data are information from the first 12 schemes on which the OPW provided data to Insurance Ireland.
II has pointed out that the effective operation of demountable flood defences requires accurate forecasting systems and methods, flood alert systems and monitoring, efficient mobilisation of equipment, manpower and materials and the timely and correct operation of the demountable defences. It has identified a number of specific risks associated with the operation of demountable defences and has stated that, should a failure occur in the deployment of demountable flood defences, the financial impact for insurers would most likely be very significant. Because of this potential exposure, insurers have limited risk appetite for providing flood insurance in areas protected by demountable defences.
I met recently with Insurance Ireland to stress the need for flood victims to have the best possible chances to be able to obtain insurance cover at reasonable cost. I highlighted that OPW schemes using demountable defences are built to the required standard and to provide robust levels of flood protection to properties. I welcome a commitment given to me by II to assess the risk from the deployment protocols, warning systems and emergency response systems in place. II and OPW will begin work to share information on the performance and deployment procedures of these defences.
The subject of insurance against the risk of flooding is one of the matters which will be addressed in the forthcoming report to Government from the Inter-Departmental Flood Policy Co-Ordination Group. The Group is due to report to me with its recommendations shortly. I will then bring the Group’s report to Government for its consideration as soon as possible.
517. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his progress in ensuring flood insurance cover is available to households in areas where remedial works have been carried out by the Office of Public Works; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22559/16]
View answer519. Deputy Michael McGrath asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the status of the transfer of information between the insurance industry and the CFRAM programme; the timeframe on the future implementation of information exchanges; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22561/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 517 and 519 together.
The Office of Public Works (OPW) has no role or function in relation to the oversight or regulation of insurance matters. The provision of insurance cover and the price at which it is offered is a commercial matter for insurance companies and is based on an assessment of the risks they are willing to accept and adequate provisioning to meet those risks.
In March 2014, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Insurance Ireland (II), the representative body for the insurance industry in Ireland, and the Office of Public Works (OPW). This Memorandum sets out principles of how the two organisations will work together to ensure that appropriate and relevant information on completed OPW flood defence schemes is provided to insurers to facilitate, to the greatest extent possible, the availability to the public of insurance against the risk of flooding. II members have committed to take into account all information provided by OPW when assessing exposure to flood risk within these areas.
The Memorandum came into effect on 1 June, 2014 with an initial tranche of data provided by the OPW to II in respect of 12 completed flood defence schemes and showing the design, extent and nature of the protection offered by these works. A further tranche of data was provided to II in January 2015 covering a further 4 completed flood defence schemes. OPW will continue to provide data to II as flood defence schemes are completed.
There are no plans for transfer of information from the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) programme to the insurance industry. Under this Programme which is being undertaken by engineering consultants on behalf of the Office of Public Works (OPW) working in partnership with the local authorities, detailed draft flood maps have been produced for 300 communities at potentially significant risk from flooding. The insurance sector was informed that the draft flood maps cannot be relied upon to inform insurance premiums, policies or excesses. The maps are now being finalised following completion of a statutory public consultation, and finalised maps are being published together with draft Flood Risk Management Plans. Access to the finalised maps is subject to acknowledgement and acceptance that the maps may not be used for any commercial, business, professional or other income generating activity.
Insurance Ireland estimates that flood cover is included as standard in 98% of household insurance policies throughout the country. II has carried out a number of surveys among its members to ascertain the extent to which flood insurance cover is available in the areas for which OPW has provided data on completed flood defence schemes. The results of the most recent survey were provided in January of this year; they indicate that 83% of property insurance policies in these areas include cover against flood risk. Where the defences are permanent in nature the percentage is 89%; where demountable defences are used the percentage is 78%.
II has pointed out that the effective operation of demountable flood defences requires accurate forecasting systems and methods, flood alert systems and monitoring, efficient mobilisation of equipment, manpower and materials and the timely and correct operation of the demountable defences. It has identified a number of specific risks associated with the operation of demountable defences and has stated that, should a failure occur in the deployment of demountable flood defences, the financial impact for insurers would most likely be very significant. Because of this potential exposure, insurers have limited risk appetite for providing flood insurance in areas protected by demountable defences.
I met recently with Insurance Ireland to stress the need for flood victims to have the best possible chances to be able to obtain insurance cover at reasonable cost. I highlighted that OPW schemes using demountable defences are built to the required standard and to provide robust levels of flood protection to properties. I welcome a commitment given to me by II to assess the risk from the deployment protocols, warning systems and emergency response systems in place. II and OPW will begin work to share information on the performance and deployment procedures of these defences.
The subject of insurance against the risk of flooding is one of the matters which will be addressed in the forthcoming report to Government from the Inter-Departmental Flood Policy Co-Ordination Group. The Group is due to report to me with its recommendations shortly. I will then bring the Group’s report to Government for its consideration as soon as possible.
518. Deputy Eugene Murphy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform to provide an update on the development of the CFRAM flood risk management plans; the timeframe for their completion; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22560/16]
View answerGood progress is being made on the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Programme, which is being undertaken by engineering consultants on behalf of the Office of Public Works (OPW) working in partnership with the local authorities. The Programme involves the production of predictive flood mapping for 300 locations nationwide (Areas for Further Assessment or AFAs), the development of preliminary flood risk management options and the production of flood risk management plans. The CFRAM flood risk and hazard mapping is being finalised following the conclusion of the national statutory public consultation process on 23rd December, 2015.
Following the finalisation of the flood mapping and the preliminary flood risk management options, the final output from this important project will be integrated Flood Risk Management Plans containing specific measures to address in a comprehensive and sustainable way the significant flood risks identified.
The draft Plans are being made available for public consultation on a rolling basis from Friday 15th July, 2016. The draft Plans for the Shannon and South Western River Basin Districts will be available first, from two of the six CFRAM study areas. This public consultation will run for ten weeks until Friday 23rd September 2016. Further details are available on the dedicated consultation website www.opw.ie/FloodPlans. Copies of the draft Plans, related Environmental Assessments and an information leaflet are also available at the principal offices of each local authority. Observations or comments must be made directly in writing to the Office of Public Works (OPW) or via the email address draftplans@opw.ie .
Following the public consultation process, the draft Plans will be finalised taking on board the comments received. The finalised Plans will include a prioritised list of measures, both structural and non-structural, to address flood risk in an environmentally sustainable and cost effective manner. The Plans, scheduled to be completed by the end of 2016, will then be sent to the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform who may approve the Plans, refuse to approve them, or refer the Plans back to the Commissioners for revision. If approved by the Minister, they will be sent to the local authorities who will have three months to consider and examine them. The councils may decide to adopt them or otherwise.
The Government recently announced increased levels of investment in the area of flood relief as part of the overall Capital Investment Plan 2016-2021 and this investment programme will allow for consideration of measures arising from the Flood Risk Management Plans.
520. Deputy Eugene Murphy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of meetings held by the interdepartmental flood policy co-ordination group per annum from 2011 to date in 2016; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22562/16]
View answerThe Inter-Departmental Flood Policy Co-ordination Group did not meet between 2011 and 2014.
In July 2015 the Group was reconvened as the National CFRAM Programme approached the stage of preparation of Flood Risk Management Plans, which would in turn require the consideration of whole-of-Government responses to flood risk.
The Group met on 3 occasions in 2015 and presented an interim report to Government in January of this year. The Group held 2 further meetings in 2016 to date and is currently working on the preparation of a final report with recommendations which I expect to receive shortly. I will bring this report to Government for its consideration as soon as possible.
521. Deputy Eugene Murphy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the breakdown of flood relief capital allocation from 2011 to 2016 to date; the total drawdown per annum from 2011 to 2016 to date for each local authority, in tabular form; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22564/16]
View answerExpenditure by the Office of Public Works (OPW) in the period 2011 to the end of June 2016 on capital flood relief measures and activities amounts to approximately €234 million, of which €197.4 million relates to major flood relief schemes, OPW's Minor Flood Mitigation & Coastal Protection Scheme and on the funding provided to Local Authorities for storm damage repair which arose following the severe storms which affected the western seaboard in December 2013 and January 2014. A breakdown of the €197.4 million figure is shown by county on the table below. The remaining €36.6 million is made up of expenditure on strategic studies primarily the Catchment Flood Risk Assessment and Management (CFRAM) Programme, the Flood Studies Update (FSU), and Coastal & Hydrology studies and research. This expenditure is not disbursed on a county basis.
|
County |
- |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
TOTALS |
Sub-total by County |
|
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
(End June) |
€,000 |
€,000 |
||
|
Carlow Co Co. |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
2,732 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2,732 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
1,088 |
0 |
716 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,804 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
611 |
439 |
114 |
0 |
0 |
66 |
1,230 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5,766 |
|
|
Cavan Co. Co. |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
0 |
110 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
110 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
110 |
|
|
Clare Co. Co. |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
2,390 |
100 |
9,668 |
4,196 |
559 |
54 |
16,967 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
187 |
0 |
0 |
851 |
0 |
1,038 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
617 |
426 |
271 |
205 |
0 |
0 |
1,519 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,182 |
8,530 |
0 |
9,712 |
29,236 |
|
|
Cork Co Co. |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
5,978 |
9,199 |
11,343 |
5,867 |
2,513 |
6,890 |
41,790 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
257 |
169 |
824 |
614 |
1,622 |
210 |
3,696 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
394 |
282 |
222 |
59 |
81 |
0 |
1,038 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
626 |
644 |
0 |
1,270 |
47,794 |
|
|
Donegal |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
36 |
64 |
0 |
25 |
125 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
32 |
79 |
76 |
0 |
158 |
0 |
345 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
562 |
239 |
0 |
801 |
1,271 |
|
|
Dublin |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
539 |
1,539 |
2,085 |
4,834 |
3,396 |
1,502 |
13,895 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
236 |
2,507 |
625 |
1,481 |
1,128 |
5 |
5,982 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
320 |
873 |
307 |
446 |
122 |
0 |
2,068 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
67 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
67 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
159 |
41 |
0 |
200 |
22,212 |
|
|
Galway |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
1,445 |
795 |
121 |
98 |
70 |
130 |
2,659 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
73 |
0 |
113 |
92 |
131 |
0 |
409 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
1,357 |
702 |
192 |
36 |
875 |
0 |
3,162 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
132 |
63 |
281 |
107 |
31 |
14 |
628 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,012 |
735 |
0 |
1,747 |
8,605 |
|
|
Kerry |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
44 |
190 |
35 |
0 |
139 |
37 |
445 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,206 |
37 |
0 |
1,243 |
1,688 |
|
|
Kildare |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
1,473 |
715 |
130 |
32 |
25 |
16 |
2,391 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
57 |
125 |
0 |
182 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
0 |
306 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
306 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
326 |
46 |
57 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
438 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
3,317 |
|
|
Kilkenny |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
8 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
538 |
58 |
108 |
27 |
0 |
0 |
731 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
739 |
|
|
Laois |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
14 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
14 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
14 |
|
|
Leitrim |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
125 |
101 |
117 |
0 |
166 |
0 |
509 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
509 |
|
|
Limerick |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
60 |
0 |
691 |
69 |
0 |
820 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
268 |
92 |
142 |
291 |
43 |
0 |
836 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,656 |
Table ctg
|
County |
- |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
TOTALS |
Sub-total by County |
|
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
€,000 |
(End June) |
€,000 |
€,000 |
||
|
Longford |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
261 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
271 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
271 |
|
|
Louth |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
67 |
0 |
72 |
49 |
22 |
11 |
221 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
142 |
49 |
0 |
191 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
412 |
|
|
Mayo |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
12 |
11 |
78 |
24 |
40 |
165 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
31 |
76 |
0 |
41 |
0 |
0 |
148 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2,076 |
2,135 |
0 |
4,211 |
4,528 |
|
|
Meath |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
1,130 |
479 |
58 |
36 |
66 |
21 |
1,790 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
39 |
0 |
163 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
202 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
6 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
6 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
127 |
0 |
127 |
2,125 |
|
|
Monaghan |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
32 |
227 |
28 |
463 |
309 |
0 |
1,059 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,059 |
|
|
Offaly |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
13 |
799 |
997 |
43 |
6 |
2 |
1,860 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1,860 |
|
|
Roscommon |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
0 |
105 |
87 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
192 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
192 |
|
|
Sligo |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
0 |
59 |
290 |
0 |
46 |
0 |
395 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
292 |
0 |
292 |
687 |
|
|
Tipperary |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
11,156 |
3,709 |
670 |
1,156 |
773 |
238 |
17,702 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
125 |
461 |
116 |
167 |
124 |
6 |
999 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
327 |
133 |
0 |
5 |
81 |
0 |
546 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
19,247 |
|
|
Waterford |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
600 |
3,315 |
3,996 |
4,240 |
2,542 |
75 |
14,768 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
0 |
14 |
15 |
12 |
0 |
0 |
41 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
354 |
896 |
0 |
1,250 |
16,059 |
|
|
Westmeath |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
83 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
83 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
83 |
|
|
Wexford |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
51 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
51 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
0 |
88 |
8 |
317 |
4 |
417 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
0 |
90 |
38 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
128 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
356 |
921 |
0 |
1,277 |
1,873 |
|
|
Wicklow |
OPW direct spend on Major Schemes |
0 |
43 |
6 |
0 |
0 |
18 |
67 |
|
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Major Schemes |
0 |
7,074 |
991 |
4,875 |
12,444 |
0 |
25,384 |
||
|
Funding to Local Authorities for Minor Works |
70 |
389 |
8 |
0 |
37 |
9 |
513 |
||
|
OPW direct spend on Minor Works |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
||
|
Funding to local Authorities for Storm damage |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
103 |
0 |
103 |
26,067 |
|
|
TOTALS |
32,201 |
38,810 |
35,284 |
38,049 |
43,651 |
9,385 |
197,380 |
197380 |
522. Deputy Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform when he expects to receive the report of the interdepartmental working group on fuller working lives, examining the issues of retirement and pension ages; and if he will publish the report. [22605/16]
View answerI have recently received the Report of the Interdepartmental Group on Fuller Working Lives.
As I have stated previously, I intend to publish the Report on my Department's website following its consideration and approval by Government.
523. Deputy Sean Sherlock asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of politically appointed staff working in his Department including the names, roles and salaries of each staff member; in the case of special advisers, their qualifications and experience relevant to their roles; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22737/16]
View answerIn response to the Deputy's question the tables below outline the number of politically appointed staff working in my Department including details for the Minister for State Eoghan Murphy.
Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform
|
No. |
Name |
Role |
Salary Scale |
Qualification/Relevant Experience |
|
1 |
Deborah Sweeney |
Special Adviser |
€79,401-€91,624 |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
|
2 |
Stephen Lynam |
Special Adviser |
€79,401-€91,624 |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
|
3 |
Ray McAdam |
Parliamentary Assistant |
€41,091.75 - €52,199.83 |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
|
4 |
Dimitri Caffola |
Civilian Driver |
€34,700pa |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
|
5 |
Anne Desmond |
Secretarial Assistant |
€23,181.49 - €44,726.61 |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
Minister for State
|
No. |
Name |
Role |
Salary Scale |
Qualification/Relevant Experience |
|
1 |
Carmel Daly |
Secretarial Assistant |
€23,181.49 - €44,726.61 |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
|
2 |
Luach Hardiman |
Parliamentary Assistant |
€41,091.75 - €52,199.83 |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
|
3 |
James O'Connor |
Civilian Driver |
€34,700pa |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
|
4 |
Vincent Cahill |
Civilian Driver |
€34,700pa |
Suitably qualified and experienced |
