Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 18 Oct 2006

Vol. 625 No. 5

Adjournment Debate.

Pension Provisions.

I thank the Office of the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter and I thank the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Seán Power, for coming in to participate in the debate.

As the Minister of State probably knows, Cobh General Hospital is a voluntary independent hospital that is community-run and not directly funded by the HSE south. It is operated by a board of management and currently has 35 employees, of whom 17 are nurses. The structure consists of a board of governors. The Minister of State is probably aware that the hospital was handed over by Lady Bell, I understand, in the 1920s. It is now run by a board of governors that is very interested in the future of the hospital and up to now it has been doing its best to manage it properly.

One of the main issues with the hospital, and the reason I am here, concerns the introduction of a pension scheme, particularly for the nurses and other staff. The HSE is funding the hospital indirectly in the main. As everyone agrees, the management structure is out of synchronisation with the management structure in other similar hospitals in the area and the State.

I understand the HSE is anxious to take over the hospital and the board of governors is anxious that this come about. The workers in the hospital are looking for it to be taken over also as the pension issue could then be dealt with. An issue appears to be the public service embargo on recruitment. Extra staff coming on board could possibly breach the embargo. This is the reason the Minister should get involved. It is only at this level the matter can be sorted out. Everybody else wants this to happen and it is now on the Minister's desk. It is up to her to make the decision and up to the Government to sanction it.

Once this happens, the hospital will come under the auspices of the HSE. In the long run, that will be better for the well-being of the patients in the hospital. That is the issue which everyone is focusing on, particularly the workers, nurses and the board of governors and management in the hospital. They are all anxious about the future of the patients.

There is a worry about the future recruitment and retention of staff due to the lack of a pension scheme. The Minister of State will understand there is a shortage of nurses in the State anyway. If a pension scheme is not in place, current nurses may leave. In the event of future vacancies, it may not be possible to recruit new staff.

This matter went before the Labour Court, which adjudicated on it on 10 July. It agreed with the issue put before it and noted the management was working towards a solution to the difficulty. It recommended the discussions continue and be concluded as quickly as possible, especially given the fact that some nurses and other staff are due to retire shortly, which should alert the Minister to the urgency of the situation.

The Labour Court was also alarmed to be informed that nurses with more than 20 years service in the health sector have no occupational pension entitlements. I am sure the Minister will also be alarmed by that. The issue must be resolved soon but cannot be because of the public service embargo. I hope the Minister will address this issue in his response tonight or, if not, will investigate the matter, reply accordingly and use his good offices to ensure the difficulty is resolved.

It is not hugely difficult in a global sense. The staff are being paid out of the public purse and the hospital is resourced similarly so the proposed solution should not, in practice, breach a public service embargo. It would also solve the pension scheme problem. By bringing the hospital under the auspices of the HSE other issues such as equipment could be dealt with and standards raised to the benefit of the patient and the town of Cobh.

I look forward with interest to the Minister's reply.

I thank Deputy Stanton for raising this matter on the Adjournment this evening I will attempt to clarify the matters raised by the Deputy.

As he knows these issues are primarily a matter for the Health Service Executive. Cobh General Hospital is a community-run facility with an independent board of management overseeing its administration. It is a legal entity in its own right and plays an important role in delivering services to older people in the Cobh area, through the provision of private and contracted publicly-funded beds. This is not a HSE hospital. It is, however, contracted by the Health Service Executive Southern Area, as one of a number of health care providers, to provide step-down facilities for older people in the region.

It is important to point out that employees of Cobh Hospital are not public sector employees and therefore do not have access to any public sector pension schemes. Eligibility for membership of public health sector pension schemes is based on a number of strict criteria that employees of Cobh General Hospital do not meet. The staff involved are the employees of the board of Cobh Hospital and their contracts of employment are with Cobh Hospital. The Department is advised by HSE southern area that there are no plans to change the employer-employee relationship.

The hospital, as an employer, is legally obliged to provide access to personal retirement savings accounts, PRSAs, for their employees. Employers are not obliged to contribute to a PRSA but must provide access for employees so that the employees can contribute if they wish to do so. The management of the hospital fulfilled its obligation in this regard in 2003. I am informed that there was no uptake by employees. Management at the hospital advised a Labour Court hearing in July of this year that due to a lack of resources, it was unable to introduce a pension scheme.

The Department of Health and Children is advised by HSE Southern Area that, following a recommendation of the Labour Relations Commission hearing in August 2005, there were discussions regarding governance and structural and management change at the hospital. The Labour Court recommended that the ongoing discussion between the HSE and Cobh Hospital continue. I confirm that regular meetings have taken place and will continue in this regard.

Sexual Health.

Sex and sexuality are core dimensions of the human experience and are important contributors to our general well-being. In Ireland sex is a topic much speculated on and eloquently written about by many of our literary giants. We have, however, been remarkably, if not surprisingly, short of evidence about matters sexual on which to design services in education, according to the two authors of the report on the Irish Study of Sexual Health and Relationships who opened an article in yesterday's The Irish Times. The report makes us very much aware that this is the first time such a comprehensive study into attitudes to sexual activity and relationships has been undertaken in Ireland. It certainly deserves a serious response in terms of policy direction from the Government.

Chief among the important findings of the report is the extent to which attitudes to sex generally and sexual relationships in particular have changed in the past 30 years. Irish people's attitudes are now far more in line with those of continental Europe and a more liberal and tolerant attitude to sex and sexuality prevails, which is healthy. Just 6% of the 7,500 people surveyed think that pre-marital sex is wrong. In 1973 that figure was 71%. Equally telling is the fact that 64% of the sample believe that abortion is acceptable in some circumstances and this is something of which we, as public policy makers, need to be cognisant.

Sex education in schools is now far more accepted than ever before and 92% of those surveyed supported sex education for young people on the subjects of sexual intercourse, sexual feelings, contraception, safer sex and homosexuality. The report also dwells on the high level of risky behaviour in which young people engage and to this I will address the rest of my contribution. It is nothing short of a scandal that the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases in Ireland increased by over 240% in the years between 1998 and 2003. This is, by any standard, a major public health problem.

The implications of the spiralling growth in sexually transmitted diseases for the future population are worrying indeed. Untreated, some sexually transmitted diseases can lead to infertility and this is something we need to address. Equally, in the first six months of 2005 over 140 new cases of HIV were recorded and, as far as we know, they might be only the tip of the iceberg. Nowadays young people are very well informed about the dangers of HIV and AIDS and the protections they need to take to avoid contracting such conditions. The report highlighted that the cost and availability of contraceptives was a problem, in particular for young people. Some 15% of the people surveyed indicated that cost was an issue in the use of condoms. I am sure the Minister will agree, and I have spoken with the senior Minister in the Department, that, given the147 new instances of HIV and AIDS, it is something with which we will have to deal in the budget.

As the Minister will know, condoms are VAT-rated at the 21% rate for luxury items. None of us can continue to consider a medical device which offers protection against infection a luxury item. At the very least I call on the Minister for Health and Children and the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children to persuade the Minister for Finance, at a minimum, to reduce the VAT rate on condoms from 21%. It is a joke to consider them luxury items.

I hope public policy will reflect the modern attitudes to sex and sexuality in Ireland.

I thank Deputy Fiona O'Malley for raising this matter on the Adjournment this evening. I welcome this report, the Irish Study of Sexual Health and Relationships, which is the first national study of its kind in Ireland. The study is based on the responses of 7,441 people and provides a wide range of data which will be of benefit to policy-makers and service providers alike.

On foot of a recommendation of the national AIDS strategy committee, my Department and the crisis pregnancy agency commissioned the Irish Study of Sexual Health and Relationships, ISSHR, in 2003. The results of that survey form the basis of this report. The survey was conducted by the Economic and Social Research Institute, ESRI, and the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, RCSI, and is in line with research in other European countries. Its purpose is to provide useful information on attitudes and behaviours and to provide a benchmark for evaluating the impact of our policies and practices regarding HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, STIs, and our overall sexual health.

The main report was launched this week. Three sub-reports focusing on "first sex and sex education", "sexual health challenges and related service provision" and "contemporary sexual knowledge, attitudes and behaviour" will be published in the coming months.

The findings are significant and convincing and send a clear message to policy-makers, parents, teachers, health care providers and society in general. That message is simple — Ireland is changing and so too are sexual attitudes and behaviours. Our sexual health policies and services cannot be allowed to fall behind, but must keep pace with this change. For example, the findings show that since 1973, the proportion of the population who agree that sex before marriage is "always wrong" fell from 71% to 6%. The findings also show that over 50% of the population believe that "homosexual sex" is never wrong. This view is even more prominent among under 25-year-olds.

While the data gathered for this study was examined on the basis of the location of the respondents, there was little or no difference between the attitudes and behaviours of people across the country, regardless of whether they lived in urban or rural communities. The data shows a largely consistent pattern, however, in respect of socio-economic groups: the higher the standard of education of the respondent, the more likely it was that people had better knowledge, safer sex practices and better outcomes from their first and later sexual experiences.

This survey shows that Irish people want to maintain good sexual health and, importantly, they want their children to learn about this early in life. The findings show almost universal support for sex education for young people on sexual intercourse, sexual feelings, contraception, safe sex and homosexuality. There is wide scale support for sex education at home. The report also shows that while increasing numbers of young people are receiving sex education, just over half of respondents find the education received helpful. Poor levels of knowledge among some groups on sexual matters were reported.

On the issue of the age of first vaginal sex, the study shows that most respondents had a first sexual encounter at 17 and older. However, a growing minority are having first sexual intercourse before age 17. Sexual intercourse under the age of 17 is shown to be associated with lower education levels.

On the issue of contraceptives, over 90% of the group aged 18 to 34 report using a contraceptive at their last sexual encounter. Of those in the youngest age group who did not use contraception, the most common reasons include drinking alcohol, taking drugs, cost, no contraception available, unplanned, and not thinking of contraception.

This is a base line study and the findings will inform policy and service development in sexual health related areas into the future, building on current developments. There are several specific HIV and STI education and prevention programmes in place, such as a national public awareness advertising campaign to promote sexual health. The campaign is aimed at men and women in the 18 to 35 age group to increase awareness about safe sex and sexually transmitted infections. The overall goal is to increase safe sex practices, reducing the incidence of STI transmission and unwanted pregnancies among young people in Ireland.

Several areas within the HSE have significantly advanced strategies and programmes in the area of sexual health at regional level, with dedicated human and financial resources allocated. Partnerships between statutory and voluntary providers to improve sexual health and promote safe sexual practices are common at national and local level. Resources are available for population group specific work, for particular high risk groups such as young people, those working in prostitution, gay men, IV drug users and the homeless.

The development and promotion of sexual health and relationships within the framework of personal and social development is a cornerstone of sex education programmes as supported by my Department and the Department of Education and Science in the school and out of school settings. In response to the specific issues regarding unplanned pregnancy, the Crisis Pregnancy Agency, CPA, was established by statutory instrument in 2001, funded in its entirety by the Department of Health and Children. The CPA is a planning and co-ordinating body established to formulate and implement a strategy to address the issue of crisis pregnancy in Ireland.

While the results of the survey strongly indicate that much good work is being done, we must do more. We can empower people of all ages, but especially our young, with relevant, suitable and meaningful sex education. Recognising the importance of sex education in the home, we can assist and provide resources for parents to fulfil their role. We can further reduce risky behaviours by improving access to affordable contraception and protection. We can improve access to STI services and encourage people to use them and improve outcomes from crisis pregnancy.

The report strongly suggests the need for a sexual health strategy to be prepared by my Department and the HSE with the involvement of other key stakeholders. A comprehensive strategy and action plan will be developed swiftly once the three further reports are issued within the next three months.

Air Services.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this important issue, the future of Aer Lingus. I wish to share time with Deputies Broughan and Shortall.

The proposed takeover of Aer Lingus by Ryanair would be a disastrous development for the air travelling public, the strategic interests of our country and the workers in Aer Lingus. It is the type of situation we in the Labour Party warned could arise from the Government's ill-judged and unnecessary decision to privatise the national airline. It gives me no satisfaction, as a Deputy from the Dublin North constituency where thousands of Aer Lingus workers and their families live, to say "we told you so".

Last July, we had a successful and viable State airline in competition with a strong private airline which was to the benefit of the commuter. Now we are faced with the prospect of a privately-owned monopoly, with the bulk of its business located outside the State, controlling most of the air traffic in and out of Ireland. This is not in the strategic interests of this country and must be prevented. The privatisation of Aer Lingus is akin to selling the family jewels.

The Government assertion that the majority sale of Aer Lingus would increase competition, employment and the growth of Aer Lingus has been proved to be a smoke screen. I am not an economist but I share the view of many of my constituents who ask how come Aer Lingus was sold off at such a ridiculously low price, and who were the main beneficiaries because the State certainly was not one.

The revelation that Ryanair has acquired 20% of the shareholding in Aer Lingus and is intent on becoming the majority shareholder shows the immediate need for the Government to protect Aer Lingus from a takeover bid. The workers of Aer Lingus have lost confidence in the ability of the Minister to prevent a takeover. Apart from endeavouring to justify the sale of Aer Lingus, the Government seems to be concentrating on one avenue only, the regulatory appeals system within the European Union. If this fails, the State should seriously consider buying back shares to prevent the takeover of the company. We told the Minister he was going down the wrong road and have been proved correct. It is up to the Minister and everyone in this House to pull back and to prevent the takeover of Aer Lingus.

I thank the Minister for coming to the House for this debate. I have a file of e-mails, and have received many telephone calls, from Aer Lingus workers detailing their real distress and grave anxiety at the prospect of a predatory and hostile takeover by Ryanair. They repeat the unanswerable point about which the Minister was warned a few months ago and failed to take on board.

The takeover by Ryanair will be extremely bad for competition in this country and will deal a devastating blow to competition in aviation. In the early days of Ryanair, the State helped the company to stay afloat and in business to promote competition. Now the Minister has allowed a situation to arise in which there will be no competition.

The workers detail their own fine service and the hard work over the past ten to 20 years, and in one case 28 years, in helping to restructure Aer Lingus and make it competitive again. They look at the vicious track record of Michael O'Leary with the appalling treatment of Ryanair workers and the refusal to allow them professional representation. He has always had professional representation for his own emoluments, the millions of euro he has taken from the Ryanair company. At the same time, he will not allow the same rights to the workers of Ryanair. Apart from the Ryanair workers who have informed me of this, the High Court declared Michael O'Leary a classic bully.

In their communications to me, Aer Lingus workers have referred to the airline's valuable Dublin Airport assets and the importance of its London airport slots. What will be the impact on the Dublin Airport Authority being faced by a monopoly with a single large operator? This is what the Minister has allowed to happen. Aer Lingus workers refer to Ryanair's takeover of Buzz Airline where, despite Michael O'Leary's many promises to the workforce, in a short time 400 jobs went down the tubes. The letters also refer to the bilateral arrangement with the United States. What will happen to Aer Lingus if it becomes a company with less than 50% Irish ownership?

These letters show great and real distress. Many of the workers have also informed me how distressed they were that their local Fianna Fáil representatives refused to reply to their e-mails or telephone calls. This is particularly reprehensible as these Members trouped through the lobbies to vote through the privatisation of the company. This Saturday, all Aer Lingus workers must visit each of their Fianna Fáil representatives: Deputies Martin Brady and Woods of Dublin North-East; Deputies Haughey and Callely of Dublin North-Central; Deputies Carey and Noel Ahern of Dublin North-West; the outgoing — is it any wonder — Deputies Glennon and Wright of Dublin North; Deputy Brian Lenihan of Dublin West; and Deputy Fitzpatrick of Dublin Central. We must not forget the guy who styles himself the great Dublin northsider — the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern. Each of these representatives allowed the privatisation of the airline that now threatens 3,500 jobs and families in Dublin's north side. This is what the Minister for Transport has achieved.

The Minister for Transport has played a personal role in the disaster we have on our hands. Over the past two years, he devoted a large amount of his time and energy to the privatisation of Aer Lingus, often to the detriment of many other areas of his responsibility. For purely ideological reasons, the Minister was determined to ram through the privatisation of our national airline. We are all reaping the rewards of that recklessness.

The Minister put forward various arguments for the privatisation of Aer Lingus, all spurious. He cannot make any of them stand up. Over the past two years he was warned from this side of the House, the airline's workers and various commentators of the potential consequences of his actions. He ignored those warnings and went ahead recklessly, ceding all control of our national airline. We do not know what the future holds for it. We are facing the appalling vista of Ryanair gobbling up the company. We are moving from the situation where we have two healthy airlines, providing competition and choice for airline travellers, to a potential monopoly of 85% of the routes out of the country.

The Minister made several claims for the need to privatise Aer Lingus. The principal claim was in respect of the company's need for access to capital. That was based on the understanding that there would be agreements on the open skies policy. The Minister spoke about it as if the open skies policy was to be agreed in a matter of months. He claimed Aer Lingus urgently required capital to buy new aircraft to avail of the policy's opportunities. Those discussions have run into the sand and no one knows if the open skies will ever happen. The very basis for the Minister's argument was spurious.

This morning the Aer Lingus CEO, Mr. Dermot Mannion, confirmed that it will be purchasing two additional long-haul aircraft next year but it does not know the situation after that. There was no need for a flotation or additional capital. There were no difficulties in the Minister providing additional funding to the airline. Apart from that, the airline would have had no difficulty in raising funding through loans or leasing arrangements for new aircraft.

The Minister has jeopardised our national airline's future. He has thrown it to the wolves of the Stock Exchange. There is a serious risk of airline travellers having no choice and being tied into an airline that controls over 85% of the national aviation business. The Minister has been reckless in the extreme, but it is the Irish people who will have to pay the price. I am particularly concerned about the implications for the Aer Lingus staff. The Minister and his colleagues have thrown them to the wolves too with no regard for the critical role Aer Lingus plays in the life of the north side of Dublin. Shame on them.

Due to market and regulatory constraints I am restricted in what I can say to the House on the matter.

It is the Government's firm belief that Ireland's strategic interest in aviation is best served by the provision of regular, safe, cost-effective and competitive air services linking the country to key business and tourism markets around the world. In developing our overall aviation policy, the Government has sought to promote competitiveness, flexibility and consumer choice and, in particular, a diversity of product offerings to satisfy different consumer needs. This includes point-to-point services operated by low-cost carriers. It also provides for services that facilitate onward international connections through access to hubs and interlining with other carriers.

On the basis of the information available to date I do not consider the Government's and Ireland's strategic objectives would be well served by a takeover of Aer Lingus by Ryanair. It clearly raises fundamental questions for aviation policy, competition and regulation issues. All these questions are being examined carefully.

The Government remains fully committed to competition in aviation markets. It will not be selling its shares in Aer Lingus. It is rigorously opposed to the emergence of a new monopoly in Irish aviation. With the State's shareholding in excess of 25.1%, it ensures another company cannot acquire the 75% threshold that is required to force de-listing. The State's shareholding is 28.3%. It also means that the Aer Lingus's memorandum and articles of association cannot be changed.

That has yet to be tested.

When the Ryanair offer is formally made, it will be a matter for the board of directors of Aer Lingus to evaluate the offer and to express an opinion to shareholders. Aer Lingus has already said that the approach is wholly opportunistic and has advised shareholders to take no action on the offer.

Takeovers of listed companies are subject to regulatory controls, both under takeover rules and competition rules. The takeover code prescribes the timetable and procedures under which bids are conducted. There is a question as to whether jurisdiction for the purposes of merger clearance rests with the European Commission or member states. European jurisdiction applies where certain thresholds relating to the turnover of the entities concerned are exceeded both in aggregate terms and in at least three member states. While it is expected that jurisdiction will lie with the European Commission, the question of jurisdiction can only be resolved when a formal notification has been made and the Commission can access the necessary turnover information.

Under the applicable EU law, where it is established that a proposed merger falls within the jurisdiction of the European Commission, a member state may nevertheless request that the case be referred back to it for the application of its own national merger laws in certain limited circumstances. It is a matter for the Irish Competition Authority, which is independent in the exercise of its functions, to form a view as to whether such a request is appropriate. The decision on whether to grant such national jurisdiction lies with the European Commission.

My Department and the Department of Finance are working closely with advisers to prepare a case for submission to the European Commission. The Departments are also consulting with the Office of the Attorney General. Officials of my Department will meet the Competition Directorate of the European Commission later this week to make an initial presentation on the proposed take-over bid.

The Government is firmly of the view that Ireland's economic interests are best served by having as many airlines as possible competing vigorously and seeking to exploit all possible opportunities for new services. It wants to see a strong Aer Lingus and a strong Ryanair competing with each other.

That is what we have.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 19 October 2006.
Barr
Roinn