Written Answers Nos. 313-332
313. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the cost of a new public sector pay deal, subject to the outcome of current public sector pay talks, will be funded through the €400 million of the €2.7 billion budget package to be allocated in 2022; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39459/22]
View answer314. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if payment of the Christmas bonus is factored into the 2022 expenditure ceiling as set out in the Summer Economic Statement; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39460/22]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 313 and 314 together.
The Summer Economic Statement (SES), published on 4th July 2022, sets out the key parameters for Budget 2023. This included a total expenditure budget package of €5.7 billion over 2022 and 2023, €0.4 billion of which is phased into 2022. This is an increase of €1.7 billion relative to what was originally provided for and will ensure that support is provided to households to help with the higher cost of living.
This will result in an increase to the 2022 and 2023 core expenditure growth rates to 6 per cent and 6½ per cent respectively. €80.5 billion in core expenditure will now be available for 2022 with €85.8 billion in 2023. These significant annual increases in expenditure balance the need to protect core public services and help to support citizens through mitigating the cost of living pressures while also ensuring that budgetary policy does not become part of the inflation problem.
Provision of the €0.4 billion under 2022 funding will allow for the early implementation of new core current expenditure measures. Decisions regarding the allocation of this funding will be made as part of the estimates process.
315. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the expenditure allocated to demographics under the Summer Economic Statement, disaggregated by Department. [39462/22]
View answerUnder the approach set out in last year’s Summer Economic Statement, 3% of the core current expenditure base is being set aside each year to meet Existing Levels of Service or ELS costs. These include costs arising from demographic pressures in areas such as Social Protection, Health and Education as well as the carryover costs from measures already introduced in prior year Budgets and public service pay commitments under existing pay deals.
The updated budgetary strategy for the period to 2025 was set out in the 2022 Summer Economic Statement, published earlier this month. Provision for meeting these ELS costs has been included under the amount shown as ‘budgetary decisions’ in Table 1 of the document. This amount also includes increased core capital spending as set out under the National Development Plan.
The division of the available resources under this 3% provision between the areas covered by ELS, including demographics, will be examined and allocated at Department level as part of the Estimates process and published in the Expenditure Report.
316. Deputy Jennifer Whitmore asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the amount of carbon tax ring-fenced on an annual basis since its introduction for environmental measures; and if he will make a statement on the matter [39522/22]
View answerI am advised by Revenue that the total annual amounts collected through the Carbon Tax, since its introduction in 2010 and up to 2020, are published on the Revenue website at the following link:
www.revenue.ie/en/corporate/information-about-revenue/statistics/excise/receipts-volume-and-price/excise-receipts-commodity.aspx
I am further advised that the amounts raised through the Carbon Tax in 2021 and provisionally to the end of June 2022 are €652 million and €409 million respectively.
317. Deputy Robert Troy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if an appointment will be expedited with community alcohol and drugs services in CHO8 for a person (details supplied). [38800/22]
View answerThis is a matter in the first instance for the Minister for Health. The Department of Health will reply separately to provide clarification on this issue.
318. Deputy Alan Dillon asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will provide an update on engagement with Roscommon County Council to mitigate the effects of an issue (details supplied);; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38874/22]
View answerRoscommon County Council is leading the works to manage the flood risk at Lough Funshinagh. In April this year I met with Mr. Eugene Cummins, Chief Executive Officer, Roscommon County Council and locally elected representatives to discuss the outcome from the recent judicial review to the works by Roscommon County Council to protect properties at risk from flooding at Lough Funshinagh.
In May, Mr. Joe Murphy, Cathaoirleach, Roscommon County Council and Mr. Eugene Cummins, CEO, Roscommon County Council wrote to me highlighting the policy and legislative issues that Roscommon County Council believes needs to be addressed to allow the Council pursue works at Lough Funshinagh.
As many of these issues fall within the remit of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, I have referred these matters to Minister Darragh O’Brien T.D. for his early consideration and highlighted that OPW officials are available to discuss these matters with his Department and with other key stakeholders, as may be appropriate. I have recently met and discussed these issues with Mr. Peter Burke TD Minister of State Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage with responsibility for Local Government and Planning and his officials.
Senior officials from the Office of Public Works met with officials from Roscommon County Council on 20th June. The meeting focused on identifying possible approaches to a viable solution to manage the flood risk at Lough Funshinagh. Further meetings between officials are to be arranged.
I have assured the Council of the OPW’s continued support for the Council, to find a viable solution to manage the flood risk at Lough Funshinagh.
319. Deputy Pearse Doherty asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the level of funding remaining and unallocated in the Covid-19 contingency reserve for 2022; the amount that has been allocated by policy measure and Department; the amount that has been allocated for the expenditure relating to Ukrainian refugees; and a monthly profile of that expenditure relating to Ukrainian refugees. [38929/22]
View answerBudget 2022 made provision for up to €7.5 billion in funding to continue our response to the Covid-19 pandemic and for the Brexit Adjustment Reserve. Following the Revised Estimates in December 2021, €3.9 billion of this funding remained unallocated. This contingency is held in reserve centrally to allow Government flexibility to respond to emerging needs during the year.
In February 2022, the Government announced a suite of measures to assist with costs of living pressures. This included the Electricity Credit to domestic account holders, which had an estimated cost of €400 million. This required a Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Environment, Climate and Communications, given the scale of this amount in relation to the original Estimate for Vote 29. This Supplementary Estimate was brought before the Dáil in March to provide an additional allocation of €271 million with the remaining cost funded through reallocation of existing Vote 29 resources. Following this development, the remaining contingency balance stood at just under €3.7 billion.
While this is the only draw down from the contingency funding allocated in Departmental Estimates in the first six months of 2022, there are significant pressures and commitments on the remaining funding including:
1. Further Covid support measures, including the response to the Omicron wave will require additional funding over that foreseen at the time of Budget 2022. This includes income and employment support schemes in the Department of Social Protection, Department of Health Covid-19 response, the targeted Commercial Rates Waiver for Q1 2022 and Department of Education Covid response measures. These Covid-19 expenditure pressures are evident in the end June expenditure reported in the Fiscal Monitor with gross current expenditure in the Department of Social Protection €292 million ahead of profile and €284 million ahead of profile in the Department of Health.
2. Additional allocations may be required to fund the other cost of living measures announced in throughout the first six months of 2022.
3. Costs related to the humanitarian response to the war in Ukraine will also need to be provided. Ultimate costs will depend on the numbers of refugees arriving, the length of stay, labour market participation over time and the accommodation solutions provided. There is considerable uncertainty in relation to these elements and it is too early to say how much will be required from the contingency at this point. To date approximately €186 million has been spent across a number of Departments.
4. An additional Supplementary Estimate of €110 million was presented to the Dáil at the beginning of July for the Department of Environment, Climate and Communications to make funds available to address security of energy supply for winter 2023/24 as set out in the EirGrid, Electricity and Turf (Amendment) Bill 2022
Further allocations from the contingency will be considered later in the year taking account of any offsetting underspends.
No allocations have been made in respect of Ukraine-related expenditure in the first six months of the year with pressures being managed within Departments expenditure ceilings. Allocations will be made at a later point in the year when there is greater visibility on costs and possible savings across Departments' allocations. Costs to date by month and Department are included below. It is likely that costs will arise in other Departments including Health and DFHERIS throughout the year.
|
Cumulative Spend at end Month |
March Issues/ Returns |
April Issues/ Returns |
May Issues/ Returns |
June Issues |
|
€m |
€m |
€m |
€m |
|
|
AGRICULTURE, FOOD AND THE MARINE |
0.1 |
|||
|
CHILDREN, EQUALITY… |
0.5 |
16 |
49.6 |
105.0 |
|
DEFENCE |
0.2 |
0.3 |
0.3 |
|
|
EDUCATION** |
0.1 |
0.4 |
||
|
FOREIGN AFFAIRS |
11.0 |
18.1 |
20.5 |
20.6 |
|
JUSTICE |
0.7 |
1.0 |
1.4 |
|
|
PUBLIC EXPENDITURE AND REFORM |
||||
|
of which OPW |
0.01 |
0.22 |
||
|
SOCIAL PROTECTION* |
3.2 |
27.0 |
49.4 |
58.9 |
|
TRANSPORT |
0.6 |
|||
|
HEALTH |
0.2 |
0.2 |
||
|
DFHERIS |
0.0 |
|||
|
Total |
15.4 |
62.3 |
121.8 |
186.1 |
320. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of staff who are abated under his Department in accordance with the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012, in tabular form. [38957/22]
View answerThis Department would not have the information readily to hand about the number of staff to whom abatement has been applied. We can follow up with the deputy’s office to confirm the information required and revert directly to the Deputy.
321. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of exemptions from pension abatement applied for and issued across all Departments under the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012; the number of appeals to decisions made regarding pension abatement per Department and their outcome; and the annual full year revenue collected under the pension abatement arrangements. [38962/22]
View answerThe Deputy has asked about the number of exemptions from pension abatement applied for and issued across all Departments under the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012 (“the 2012 Act”). This Department can provide information about the waivers sought and granted by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (DPER) in accordance with the 2012 Act. DPER has received a total of 27 applications in respect of individuals over the period, May 2016 to date (date at which collection of aggregate information commenced). In this regard, a total of 10 individual waivers of abatement have been granted.
During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, temporary waivers were granted to front-line health sector staff to meet the specific demands arising from COVID-19. The Department of Health would have statistics in relation to any waivers granted in respect of COVID-19. Separately the Department of Education has operated temporary waivers under sanction from DPER. The Department of Education would have statistics in relation to any individual waivers granted.
To date, this Department has not received any appeals in respect of a determination issued by DPER not to grant a waiver. Information in relation to the annual full year revenue collected under the pension abatement arrangements is not available, individual Pension Paying Authorities would have records of the amount of money saved through the application of abatement.
322. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the number of legal challenges to date per Department to pension abatement under the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012, in tabular form. [38963/22]
View answerThere have been no legal challenges to date in respect of the application of Section 52 of the Public Service Pensions (Single Scheme and Other Provisions) Act 2012 in which the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform has been a respondent.
323. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if his attention has been drawn to the sale of lands in proximity to Castletown house in Celbridge (details supplied); if the OPW intends to inspect the lands with a view to expanding on and protecting its own holdings in the area; and if he will provide a schedule of planned upgrades and additions to the existing Castletown house and lands. [38978/22]
View answerStrengthening the integrity of the Castletown Demesne is an ongoing objective of the Office of Public Works and as such this matter is kept under constant review as part of the ongoing management and development of the Castletown House Estate. The OPW is fully familiar with the lands to which the Deputy refers. As this is a matter of ongoing consideration, it would not be appropriate to provide any further comment at this time.
Regarding the schedule of planned upgrades and additions to the existing house and lands, the restoration of the Tom Connolly Room is now completed with conservation works planned for the Pastel Room. The historic windows of the great house are currently being conserved and restored. Works are ongoing on the consolidation and repair of the estate wall at the Batty Langley Gate.
The OPW is also in the process of conserving the farmyard complex at Castletown to provide new visitor facilities with exhibition and event spaces. It is anticipated that works will commence here in 2023. Preparations are also underway to provide improved parking facilities for visitors.
324. Deputy Dara Calleary asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will provide an update on the consultation process for the Crossmolina flood relief scheme; the number of submissions received by 30 June 2022; if he will identify the applicants; and if he will outline a timetable for the next steps. [38979/22]
View answerIn October 2020, the Office of Public Works (OPW) submitted the Confirmation documentation for this scheme to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform (DPER) for review. As part of this process, there are a number of statutory steps including public consultation and a request for further information, if needed. Supplementary Information was subsequently sought by the Department and this was provided by OPW in July 2021.
In order to limit the risk of Judicial Review, DPER advised that a further Public Consultation, that included the supplementary information, would be appropriate. This Public Consultation process commenced on 6 May 2022 and ran until 1 July 2022.
The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform will now consider the submissions made during this consultation and a decision, in respect of the scheme, will be made in due course. The Minister can decide to either: confirm the scheme, refuse to confirm the scheme or refer the scheme back to OPW for revision in specified aspects.
The OPW remain committed to this scheme and have allocated funding and a works crew to progress the scheme subject to approval from DPER and the absence of any Judicial Reviews.
325. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the reason that he has inserted an amendment to a piece of legislation (details supplied). [38980/22]
View answer326. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if his attention has been drawn to the contributions that this Deputy has made in Dáil Éireann with respect to the case of a person (details supplied) among others; and if the very late insertion of an amendment to the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Bill 2022 at s2B of the Principal Act was not a targeted measure to seek to deprive whistle-blowers, specifically including the person, of the protections which the proper transposition of the protections of European Union Directive (2019/1937) would otherwise provide in Irish law. [38983/22]
View answer327. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will address matters in relation to legislation (details supplied). [38984/22]
View answer328. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way that the constitutional provisions he has referred to in his representations to Seanad Éireann, Article 15.1.1 have the effect of depriving whistle-blowers whose cases are already before the Courts of the protections with respect to the extension of the presumption of causation specifically envisaged by European Union Directive (2019/1937); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38985/22]
View answer329. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will address a matter related to legislation (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38987/22]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 325 to 329, inclusive, together.
I am not in a position to comment on individual cases before the courts.
The Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Bill 2022 provides for a significant overhaul of the framework of legal protections for whistleblowers provided by the Protected Disclosures Act 2014. It also provides for the transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law. The Bill provides for enhanced protections, notably:
- the extension of the existing protections of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 to a wider cohort including volunteers, shareholders, persons belonging to the administrative, management or supervisory body of an undertaking, and persons going through a recruitment process or in pre-contractual negotiations,
- reversal of the burden of proof during proceedings at the Workplace Relations Commission and the courts,
- access to interim relief at the Circuit Court against penalisation, and
- providing for criminal penalties for penalisation.
Following a recommendation in the pre-legislative scrutiny report and at Second Stage in the Dáil in February of this year, I signalled my intent to consider how to make provision for retrospective protection where possible. At each stage when this Bill has been considered, I have updated members of the House on progress in this regard, and my commitment to go as far as possible to provide retrospective protection, where possible, to persons who have reported relevant wrongdoing within the meaning of the Act prior to the Bill's forthcoming enactment. In light of my instruction to provide retrospective protection as broadly as possible, the amendments required careful consideration by my officials in conjunction with the Office of the Attorney General. The amendments introduced at Committee Stage in the Seanad fulfil the commitment I gave to the Houses on this matter.
The amendments I have introduced provide that a worker who reports a relevant wrongdoing before the Bill is enacted but suffers penalisation after the Bill is enacted is entitled to the enhanced protections of the amended legislation, including the reversal of burden of proof in civil proceedings at the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) and the courts.
The amendments further provide that a worker (as defined in the 2014 Act) who reports a relevant wrongdoing and suffers penalisation before the Bill is enacted but has not initiated proceedings at the WRC or the courts will be entitled to the reversal of the burden of proof in such proceedings. I am satisfied in light of my Department’s engagement with the Office of the Attorney General that it is not possible to apply those changes to existing proceedings, since that would involve interfering with already existing litigation. To seek to apply new rules to cases where proceedings have already issued would be unfair and give rise to legal issues. This is especially so where there is already a Court decision in place.
Section 13 of the Protected Disclosures Act provides that, "If a person causes detriment to another person because the other person or a third person made a protected disclosure, the person to whom the detriment is caused has a right of action in tort against the person by whom the detriment is caused".
Section 22 of the Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Bill provides for the insertion of a new subsection - (2B) - into section 13 of the 2014 Act, which provides that, "In any proceedings under this section in respect of alleged detriment caused to a person, the detriment so caused shall be deemed, for the purposes of this section, to have been caused as a result of the person or another person having made a protected disclosure, unless the person whom it is alleged caused the detriment proves that the act or omission concerned was based on duly justified grounds."
The effect of subsection (2B) is to reverse the burden of proof in any tort proceedings taken under section 13, so that the court must assume that the alleged detriment occurred because of a protected disclosure, unless the defendant can prove otherwise. This is to give effect to Article 21.5 of the Directive.
Paragraphs 3 and 5 of Schedule 7 of the Bill provide for the retrospective application of this provision to persons who have reported before the enactment of the Bill but suffer retaliation after enactment. Paragraph 7 of Schedule 7 provides for the retrospective application of this provision to persons who have reported and suffered penalisation before enactment but have not initiated proceedings in the Workplace Relations Commission or the courts. Without these provisions in Schedule 7, Section 13(2B) will not have any retrospective application, i.e. it will only apply to protected disclosures made after the enactment of the Bill.
330. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the Minister of State at his Department or the Office of Public Works have yet convened a meeting with the Department of Transport and Mayo County Council in relation to funding the South Mayo flood relief scheme that is urgently needed; if not, when this meeting will be convened; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39040/22]
View answerLocal flooding and coastal erosion issues are a matter, in the first instance, for each Local Authority to investigate and address. Where necessary, Local Authorities may put forward proposals to relevant central Government Departments, including the Office of Public Works, for funding of appropriate measures depending on the infrastructure or assets under threat.
Under the OPW Minor Flood Mitigation Works and Coastal Protection Scheme, applications are considered for projects that are estimated to cost not more than €750,000 in each instance. Funding of up to 90% of the cost is available for approved projects. Applications are assessed by the OPW having regard to the specific economic, social and environmental criteria of the scheme, including a cost benefit ratio and having regard to the availability of funding for flood risk management. Full details of this scheme are available on www.opw.ie.
Mayo County Council carried out a Feasibility Report (funded by the Office of Public Works) in September of last year. This report estimated the cost of addressing the issues here at €6.4m with the majority of the benefits coming from the protection of road infrastructure, thus identifying a potential role for the Department of Transport. The capital cost is now well in excess of the €750,000 ceiling for Minor Flood Mitigation Works.
As the report indicated that the majority of the benefits from the proposed scheme would be to roads and access, Mayo County Council were advised in February this year to develop a joint proposal for the scheme with the Department of Transport and to subsequently meet with OPW to review the joint proposal.
On the 9th June 2022, the Minister met with a delegation of local stakeholders and representatives of Mayo County Council to discuss the flooding issues relating to the Neale. It was agreed that Mayo County Council will finalise the feasibility review report, include options assessment and forward to the OPW. The OPW will review this feasibility report. Following that review, the OPW will convene a meeting with Mayo Co. Co, Dept of Transport and the OPW to discuss possible funding options for a scheme for this area, given the majority of benefits are to roads and road access. The Minister indicated that the outcome of that meeting will inform what scheme can be progressed. This will be convened by the Office of Public Works once the review of the feasibility report is complete.
331. Deputy Catherine Murphy asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the OPW plans to refurbish the backyard area of a garda station (details supplied). [39273/22]
View answerThe Office of Public Works (OPW) can confirm that works to repair the render of Store St Garda Station are due to commence shortly, followed by painting of the rear façade of the building under our planned maintenance programme .
OPW have not received any request from Garda Estate Management in relation to the refurbishment the of the backyard area of Store St Garda Station, and currently have no plans for any works there.
332. Deputy Rose Conway-Walsh asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the budgetary implications of drawing down funding from the National Training Fund reserve; the impact on Departmental and overall Government spend; the way that this would be categorised; the impact on the national debt given that the Fund reserve is currently invested in 0% National Treasury Management Agency Exchequer notes; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39360/22]
View answerDepartmental expenditure management is predominantly undertaken through the cash-based Exchequer system and comprises of Voted Exchequer expenditure and spend from key funds: the Social Insurance Fund and the National Training Fund. This expenditure is defined as the Government Expenditure Ceiling in the Minister’s and Secretaries (Amendment) Act 2012 as the sum of expenditure which is met out of:
- money supplied out of supply grants and appropriations-in-aid in respect of supply services,
- money paid out of the Social Insurance Fund, and
- money paid out of the National Training Fund.
The Government Expenditure Ceiling aggregates individual Ministerial Expenditure ceilings, i.e. the National Training Fund spend must be included within a Ministerial ceiling. Therefore an increase in expenditure from the NTF, all other things being equal, would require an increase in the relevant Ministerial and overall Government expenditure ceilings. While spending from the surplus of the NTF has no impact on the Exchequer Balance, it would be included in general government expenditure and consequently worsen the General Government deficit. For that reason the legislation provides that both the expenditure of the SIF and NTF form part of the expenditure ceiling.
I am informed by the Department of Finance that if the National Training Fund was to reduce its investments in Exchequer Notes, there would be a corresponding reduction in the National Debt, all other things being equal. However, there would not be any reduction in General Government Debt as the National Training Fund is within General Government so any lending/borrowing is consolidated.
