Leaders' Questions.

Mr. Kenny

I remind the Taoiseach that public order on our streets is one of the critical issues on people's minds. The Government reneged on a solemn commitment and promise made to the people that 2,000 extra gardaí would be recruited. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform recently stated on a television programme that his Department had no moneys to deal with this promise. Public order offences have tripled to 117 per day during the Government's term in office. We have also learned that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will spend €15 million on refurbishing his offices and those of the Department at a time when school buildings are falling in on children's heads and when many other priorities should be dealt with around the country. The latest work of fiction, the progress report on the implementation of the programme for Government, states that the 2,000 extra gardaí will only come on stream as economic circumstances permit.

Will the Taoiseach explain why the Government gives greater priority to refurbishing the offices of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform than to the reallocation of €15 million, which would pay the salaries of 725 new gardaí? How in conscience, when 117 public order offences are being committed daily on the streets of our country, can the Taoiseach and the Government decide to give greater priority to the refurbishment of ministerial offices than to the recruitment of much needed gardaí to protect our citizens and to maintain law and order on our streets?

The Taoiseach

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has outlined to the House a number of times recently what his plans are on recruitment of gardaí. He wants to try to increase the number of gardaí by 2,000 during the lifetime of the Government and, in the meantime, to maximise the resources in Templemore to ensure he maintains Garda strength at 12,200. He is committed to doing so and he has money in the Estimates to do so. That figure was agreed with him in the Book of Estimates for this year.

Deputy Kenny will be well aware of the actions of the Minister in relation to violent crime. There has been public order legislation and tough measures have been implemented to deal with public order issues. The Intoxicating Liquor Bill 2003 is being rushed through the House to deal with a number of important issues that have arisen through the analysis of public order issues.

Gangland killing is also a serious issue and there were two more killings over the weekend. While these are operational matters for the Garda, the Minister has divided the force into specialised groups to try to deal with these issues. Far from ignoring crime, the Minister of justice, given the substantial resources, staff and increased commitments he has, is endeavouring to deal with it. It is entirely disingenuous of Deputy Kenny to say this issue is in any way being ignored given the legislative base the Minister has, the improvements in and strengthening of the law, the number of gardaí available to him and the fact that Templemore is operating at its maximum.

Mr. Kenny

The Taoiseach's answer is quite confusing. He speaks about the Minister maximising resources, although the Minister recently said publicly on television that he had no more money to recruit gardaí. The Taoiseach referred to him as the Minister of justice; I thought he was supposed to be the Minister for justice.

The Taoiseach

He is.

Mr. Kenny

This money comes from the public purse and priority has been given through the Department of Finance, which has responsibility for the Office of Public Works, to allocate €15 million for refurbishment of ministerial offices over and above the priority accorded to the recruitment of gardaí to keep law and order on our streets, given the legal base the Minister has. If Templemore is not capable of producing more recruits, surely other facilities can be used for temporary training of new gardaí. The Taoiseach has a moral responsibility to see to it that the priorities of the taxpayer, who funds the public purse, are addressed.

In his time, serious crime has increased by 22% and assaults have increased by 50%. There were 1,886 more assaults in 2002 than in 2001, with 16 assaults and nine sexual assaults every day. The detection rate has fallen from 41% to 38%. I ask the Taoiseach to maximise resources and give the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the necessary priority to keep law and order on the streets. Will he and the Government decide to reallocate the €15 million and, instead of refurbishing ministerial offices, use it for the recruitment and training of gardaí?

The Taoiseach

I was not one bit confusing in what I said. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is working off a figure of 12,200. That is the current authorised strength of the Garda. He is resourced for that and the priority is to bridge the gap and make maximum use this year of the existing capacity of the Garda training college and to bring the strength of the force to its highest ever level. That is what is happening. As I understand it, Templemore cannot take more students for training. We are committed to increasing the number as resources permit.

With regard to crime figures, the last quarterly figures showed that there was a drop of 10% but that is neither here nor there. As long as there is crime, we should try to deal with the issue.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

We are heading for zero crime.

The Taoiseach

The Garda budget has increased dramatically over the past few years. There has been an unprecedented amount of reforming legislation in the area of criminal law. The Minister has had more legislative measures before the House than any other Minister.

Mr. Allen

All without enforcement.

The Taoiseach

They are being enforced. An additional €38 million in funding has been provided for the prisons budget to ensure there is enforcement. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is delivering on the Government's commitments in this area in terms of extra resources. Hopefully, as resources increase in the years to come, we will be able to increase Garda strength. However, it is currently at an all-time high.

Mr. J. O'Keeffe

Priority is being given to Taj Micheál.

Mr. Rabbitte

I want to bring the Taoiseach back to the deal that he caused to be done on the day before the Government came into office, when he asked his friend and now backbencher, Deputy Woods, to do a deal with the religious congregations about their contribution to compensation for victims of abuse in residential institutions. The Taoiseach will recall that was done on 5 June 2002 and he will recall, for ease of reference, that the arrangement provided for unlimited exposure of the taxpayer and the Exchequer and a ring-fenced contribution from the religious institutions. It was roughly on the basis of one third cash, one third properties already transferred and one third properties to be identified for transfer. Under the deed of indemnity the properties were to be identified within nine months and accepted by the State. Now that the nine months have passed, have those properties been bestowed on the State? Is the Taoiseach satisfied, bad deal as it was, that at least that contribution has been made by the religious congregations?

The Taoiseach

Subject to getting the precise details, as I understand it, the lands and properties have been identified. I do not think they have been passed to the State but there is a number of these in the education area. Some time ago the Minister for Education and Science informed me of some of the properties the Department hoped to get and others that were still under negotiation. I can provide a list of the updated position. Deputy Rabbitte does not share my view. Perhaps the negotiations finished last June but they had gone on for a considerable time and they were properly conducted. Since we last spoke about the issue, the data were put in the public domain. I still believe it was a fair and responsible deal, which went through all the Cabinet procedures. With regard to the sites, I have every confidence the religious authorities will honour the commitments they gave. The Minister for Education and Science was anxious to get particular sites and lands that were more important to him than others. There might still be some level of discussion taking place on that issue but there is a commitment that they will be handed over to the State.

Mr. Rabbitte

By way of reply to a parliamentary question on 10 June, the Minister for Education and Science made it plain that not one single property has been transferred in the nine months.

The Taoiseach

I said they had been identified, and the agreement was that they would be identified. I said they were not transferred.

Mr. Rabbitte

We are agreed on that. On the identity question, the Minister stated: "However, a number of other properties were rejected on the basis that no benefit to the State could be identified by acquiring a title."

It would appear that the majority of the properties identified to be transferred have been rejected as being of no benefit to the State. In respect of the €40 million to accrue from the properties already transferred, according to the Minister's reply: "To date none of the properties on the list has been accepted." Regarding the €40 million that was to accrue from the properties already transferred, none of the properties is deemed suitable by the redress unit in the Department of Education and Science. Not only did the Taoiseach get a bad deal initially but it seems the deal, such as it is, has not been enforced and that taxpayers have good reason to feel acutely aggrieved at him and the former Minister, Deputy Woods. A person who would do a deal like that could not be sent to the well for water.

The Taoiseach

The church authorities will have to deliver on the deal. The amount of money involved was stipulated and the Minister for Education and Science has indicated the lands he requires. The fact that he has not agreed to accept those offered to date is an indication that there are others which he prioritises and wants to get. He has a register, if not a complete one, of church lands in which he is interested. I understand he has identified sites which he and his Department want. The State's position is that these sites must be delivered.

Mr. Rabbitte

The deal states the religious institutions, not the Minister, will identify the sites.

An Ceann Comhairle

There is provision for only one supplementary question. The Deputy should allow the Taoiseach to continue.

The Taoiseach

From the earliest stage the religious authorities made suggestions as to which sites they would like to give over but the Minister is anxious to indicate where he wants the sites. Obviously, there are cases where he might otherwise have to purchase sites for school programmes. Hundreds of schools require land for extensions and most of the land, particularly in primary education, is in the hands of religious bodies. The Minister has many sites. I saw a list of key sites identified by the Minister. They have not been transferred.

Mr. Rabbitte

They are not identified.

The Taoiseach

I believe they are identified. I accept that they are not transferred but they have been identified by the Department as those which it wants.

Mr. Rabbitte

One would have thought the Minister would have said that in the answer to the parliamentary question.

The Taoiseach

That may be so, but he indicated to me the sites he and the Department wanted, so that they would not have to be bought in the future.

Mr. Quinn

The answer is wrong then.

Mr. Sargent

I understand the Taoiseach may be heading off to Thessalonika this week to deal with the new EU constitution. I am interested in the Government's position regarding the EURATOM Treaty. Is the Taoiseach aware that a large number of MEPs and parliamentarians have come together in a united call that the EURATOM Treaty should not be a part of the new constitution, even as an annexe? Given the interest shown by the Government in the Sellafield case, it is surprising that it has not signed up to this common approach. Is the Government considering signing up or is it pursuing another agenda?

Is the Taoiseach aware that Article 1 of the EURATOM Treaty calls for "the speedy establishment and growth of nuclear industries"? This is not what we expect from the Government, given its opposition to Sellafield. Is the Taoiseach conscious of the fact that most of the EU member states have no nuclear power or are phasing it out and that since the Chernobyl and Three Mile Island accidents there has been a radical change in the attitude to EURATOM and nuclear power in the EU? I ask the Taoiseach to provide leadership in supporting the call by the Governments of Austria and Luxembourg, among others, to include a sunset clause that would see the EURATOM Treaty phased out after 2007.

Will the Taoiseach support the integration of nuclear safety, which we all support, in the environmental and health aspects of the new EU constitution? That will be the place to deal with the clean-up operations following this sorry episode of EU history, when nuclear power has dominated research funding to the exclusion of other energy forms such as renewable energy.

The Taoiseach

I commend the work which was completed on Friday in the convention. It certainly provides the basis for a successful summit in Thessalonika and for the commencement of the Intergovernmental Conference in mid-October. I acknowledge the work everyone has put into this.

The EURATOM Treaty was discussed last February. At that stage, Deputy John Bruton put forward a paper from the praesidium to which the Irish Government responded. Within the group of countries – the friends of the communitaire group – we have supported initiatives of Germany and other countries and the winding down and closure of nuclear stations has been agreed.

It has not yet been decided how the EURATOM Treaty is to be finalised. I spoke to the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, just after Question Time today. Precisely how it is to be dealt with, whether it is to be an annexe to the treaty or take up a separate section, has not yet been resolved. When we put forward a position paper last February, agreement had not been achieved. Deputy Bruton endeavoured to get agreement at the praesidium as to how it would be dealt with but that was not finalised.

If the group that we have been supporting on all the other issues – and our Austrian friends who have been taking a lead are in that – we will certainly be supportive of it.

Mr. Sargent

I am sure we could have a long discussion about the EU constitution in general. However, I have a specific question for the Taoiseach. Why did the Government not sign the agreed call from MEPs and parliamentarians, and the Governments of Austria and Luxembourg, to bring an end to the EURATOM Treaty and to insert a sunset clause which would come into effect after 2007? I understand that Deputy Carey signed it but that the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, did not. Can we have a clear response as to where the Government stands on this issue?

Giscard d'Estaing can be forgiven for supporting the EURATOM Treaty, given the French association with nuclear power and that country's disproportionate spending of €3 billion on nuclear power. Where is the Irish interest? Is this about not upsetting the British over Sellafield or nuclear power in general? Will the Government give clear support for the ending of the EURATOM Treaty? It is a dinosaur among EU institutions and has outlived its usefulness and relevance. I ask the Taoiseach to be proactive in this regard.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Sargent is well aware of what happened a few months ago. At the meeting of environment Ministers in Luxembourg last week on environmental liabilities, we supported the principle of the directive and voted against the nuclear section included therein. We have taken that view throughout the convention on any areas where there was reference to the involvement of the nuclear industry. This is consistent with what we are doing in OSPAR, UNCLOS and in the case in The Hague. The issue which arose in February, and which was not resolved, is how we can deal with this issue in the finalisation treaty.

Deputy Sargent can take it that I continue to support Wolfgang Schuessel. I spoke to him about this issue and I continue to support the Austrians on it.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 17 Jun 2003