While I was hoping to have the opportunity to listen first to the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, this is an important issue that must be dealt with. I cannot see a relevant Minister on the other side of the House to do so.
Adjournment Debate.
Health Services.
The Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Barry Andrews, is present.
Very well. The issue is that the Irish Family Planning Association, IFPA, has been obliged to suspend all its family planning services for the remainder of the year. The Minister of State will be aware the Irish Family Planning Association provides a national service to medical card holders and the reason it has been obliged to suspend its service for the final quarter of the year is that the Department of Health and Children has failed to provide the necessary funding. Moreover, that Department has failed to increase the level of funding for the past two years.
No family planning services will be available as a result of the failure to provide an increase in funding. Second, the number of medical cards has increased substantially. An additional 78,000 medical cards, as well as a number of GP-only cards, have been granted to citizens in the past 12 months. When the quantity of medical cards increases, the service providers should have ample funds to deal with the services required by such medical card holders. However, exactly the same sum of money has been made available. The annual allocation from the HSE to the IFPA is a meagre €290,000, which has not increased for the past couple of years. As the IFPA is a not-for-profit charity organisation, it has no means of fundraising and must bear any over-expenditure on its annual allocation itself. At present, it is €60,000 over budget and has no means of paying off that money. It now faces a bleak winter of being obliged to turn away medical card holders. It is a catch-22 situation.
The IFPA provides its services to the most vulnerable people in Ireland, such as young people, particularly in respect of teenage pregnancies, the unemployed, people with a disability, minority groups, ethnic women, single parents and those on low incomes. Such services are essential in reducing the numbers of unwanted and unplanned pregnancies and in providing women with family planning and primary health care. The services are provided on a national basis and their suspension will result in many women being unable to access family planning services for the next three months.
Cost-effective analyses indicate that for every euro spent on providing family planning services, more than four euro is saved on maternity services. The experience of the IFPA is typical of the dysfunctional manner in which the Government goes about its business. It makes a Cabinet decision to increase the number of medical cards but expects the service providers to operate with the same budget and staff numbers.
The budget will be announced next Tuesday and the budget increase must reflect the rising cost of providing comprehensive family planning services, the recent increase in the number of medical card holders and the increase in annual inflation rates. Something must be done immediately to ensure the HSE will increase the IFPA's budget in order that the necessary services and care will be provided for women and young people with medical cards between now and the year's end.
I will be taking this Adjournment matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney. I thank the Deputy for raising this issue as it provides me with an opportunity to reaffirm the Government's commitment to the provision of family planning services.
Under the provisions of the Health (Family Planning) (Amendment) Act 1992 and the Health (Family Planning) Regulations 1992, the Health Service Executive is obliged to ensure that an equitable, accessible and comprehensive family planning service is provided nationally. The legislation requires health boards, now the Health Service Executive, to make available comprehensive family planning services, either directly or by way of an arrangement with another body. The Department of Health and Children issued guidelines to the health boards in 1995 on the provision of family planning services for all persons in their respective areas who needed such services. These services are provided primarily through general practitioners, non-governmental organisations and, to some extent, maternity hospitals and units.
The Irish Family Planning Association is one of a number of bodies offering a range of services designed to support reproductive choice. The Health Service Executive grant aids the Irish Family Planning Association on an annual basis to supply a quantum of service for this funding. The executive has indicated that arrangements are in place with the Irish Family Planning Association for the provision of family planning services to medical card holders at their centres in Cathal Brugha Street and Tallaght in Dublin as an alternative to the normal GP services.
The level of funding is limited to an agreed allocation discussed at various local service level agreement meetings throughout the year. The HSE has indicated that the IFPA was advised in July of this year that additional funding would not be made available to address expenditure overruns and that the association was requested to review the service to ensure that it remained within its available budget allocation. However, it is understood from the HSE that the IFPA has exceeded its budget in recent years, despite clear agreements in place for funding. Clearly, the HSE and those bodies funded by the HSE must operate within the resources made available to them in any given year. The HSE remains available to work with the Irish Family Planning Association to prioritise service provision within the allocated budget agreed to operate the service.
Family planning services continue to be available free of charge to medical card and GP-only card holders through their GPs. If a GP does not provide family planning services, he or she is obliged to refer a patient to a GP who will provide such services.
Job Losses.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for allowing me the opportunity to raise this highly important matter. It was a sad day at Shannon Airport last Monday when the announcement filtered through to Aer Lingus staff there. Nearly all the 300 Aer Lingus staff employed in Shannon are to be written off by a single stroke of a pen. The jobs of all check-in staff, baggage handlers and cargo staff are to be outsourced to lower-paid workers. The cabin crew base is to be abolished and American crews will be brought in to do the cabin crews' jobs. This is an appalling way for a company to treat staff that have given such dedicated service and have shown such great loyalty to the airline for many years. Although many of the staff involved chose to stay with the airline to help it to return to profitability, this is the thanks they have received. Many of them have huge mortgages, young families and little prospect of finding alternative employment in an aviation business which, like other sectors of the economy, is experiencing a serious decline.
The Aer Lingus workers in Shannon are the sacrificial lambs who are bearing the brunt of the Government's failure to act last year to secure the Shannon to Heathrow service. Shannon bore the brunt of the crisis arising from the attacks in New York on 11 September 2001. Every time Aer Lingus gets flu, unfortunately Shannon appears to get pneumonia. Last year, Aer Lingus walked away from the profitable Shannon to Heathrow route that carried 360,000 people and opened a new base in Belfast. According to my verifiable analysis of its load factors, Belfast's average load factor was only 45% for the first five months of this year, compared to the average load factor of 70% out of Shannon. We were told this was being done for sound commercial reasons. Although we now know differently, no one is to be held to account.
Were these proposals to be implemented, it would be the beginning of the end of the green uniform in Shannon. I have travelled with Aer Lingus many times and have enjoyed its hospitality and friendliness. As for the check-in, boarding, baggage handling, ramp, maintenance and cargo staff, as well as the cabin crew, the green uniform and the céad míle fáilte is what they are all about and is what they know best. They are great ambassadors for Irish tourism and many American tourists choose to fly with Aer Lingus to experience the céad míle fáilte and a real sense of Irishness. I fear that wiping out one of its greatest assets, namely, its staff, will do irreversible damage to the airline's brand name.
Aer Lingus, with the support of the Government, has for several years operated a policy of consolidating its business outside of Shannon Airport. Following the Irish Ferries debacle, the Protection of Employment (Exceptional Collective Redundancies and Related Matters) Act was passed in the Oireachtas. Is this any different from what happened at Irish Ferries?
Another part of the Aer Lingus proposal is to reduce the number of long-haul aircraft from nine to eight. The objective of Aer Lingus is to walk away completely from Shannon Airport. It might commit to service the airport next summer but beyond that I have significant doubts about its plans. There are 65 US companies based in the region, employing 11,000 people, which are dependent on direct daily US services. If we are to sustain these companies and maintain some level of competitiveness in the region, it is essential we have direct daily services.
Last year the Government let us down again on Shannon Airport. It gave its blessing to Aer Lingus in seeking to axe the Shannon-Heathrow route and ignored pleas to intervene from all sectors of business, the tourism industry and trade unions in the region. These sectors are still reeling from that decision and only this week Woodstock Hotel, a landmark in Ennis, closed with the loss of 40 jobs as a result of the loss of Heathrow Airport connectivity. I see the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Gormley, is present with the Minister of State. They came into the House last year and voted in favour of this decision. Will the Government turn its back on Aer Lingus workers at Shannon Airport for the second time in a year? I appeal to the Minister to intervene. The Government holds a 25% shareholding in Aer Lingus. All avenues must be explored to resolve the crisis. While the Government continues to claim Aer Lingus is a private commercial company, it has Government appointed directors sitting on the board. Did they support this decision? Does the Government support the decision to replace existing staff with other workers, either lower paid or from some other country?
Will the Government impress on Aer Lingus management the importance of sitting down with its staff to find alternatives to these draconian measures? Aer Lingus and Shannon Airport have a proud tradition and a wonderful history in aviation. Little did we think as we approached the 30th anniversary of the departure of Pope John Paul II to the United States from Shannon Airport in September 1979 on the Aer Lingus flagship, St. Patrick, that this was the final chapter in the airline’s close association with the airport. I appeal to the Minister to intervene and ensure the proud association of Aer Lingus and Shannon Airport continues and that Aer Lingus workers at the airport will continue to fly the green flag.
I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. He will be aware that the commercial decisions of Aer Lingus are a matter for the board and management of the company and that it is not open to the Government to intervene. Aer Lingus is an independent company and must make decisions on a commercial basis. It is understood the cost savings are necessary in order that the airline can remain competitive. These measures, we understand, will strengthen the long-term viability of transatlantic services at Shannon Airport.
The Government regrets the announcement by Aer Lingus of its intention to outsource part of its operations outside Ireland, with a view to reducing costs and maintaining its ability to compete in what we all accept is a very challenging aviation market. Any potential loss of jobs is regrettable, all the more so in the current international economic climate.
It is very much in Ireland's interest that Aer Lingus maintains its role as a major provider of air services to and from Ireland. The Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, is keenly aware of the human considerations at issue. The industrial relations machinery of the State is available to provide any necessary assistance in resolving challenges faced by management and employees of the company. It is encouraging to note that SIPTU has agreed to enter into a process with the Labour Relations Commission and, in the light of the wider global economic circumstances, the Minister urges all sides to take a sensible approach in dealing with the cost saving proposals.
The State has given a mandate to its three representatives on the board relating to wider government, aviation or regional development policies but this mandate is subject to the overriding obligations of directors pursuant to company law to uphold their fiduciary duties and protect the interests of all shareholders. From an Irish economy perspective, the overarching priority for aviation is that Ireland maintains the highest possible level of connectivity between Ireland and key business and tourism markets. This is all the more important in times of global economic turbulence. The problems facing the international aviation industry are well known and we have seen recent business failures of established airlines such as XL and Zoom, while some well known flag carrier European airlines are experiencing severe difficulty.
The Minister is aware that the Shannon Airport Authority has been having discussions with Aer Lingus to identify costs savings with a view to bolstering the prospects of future development of its transatlantic services. However, in framing any proposals to support Aer Lingus transatlantic services, the airport authority must ensure such assistance is provided on a commercial basis and also made available to other airlines.
Naval Service Vessels.
The sinking of the Asgard II on 11 September was greeted with much sadness and shock. The Asgard II had served the country well since its commissioning in 1981, having been designed specifically for training purposes. The training vessel carried thousands of trainees and docked in hundreds of ports. It was a great ambassador for the country. It was fortunate nobody was injured when the ship sank and thanks to the speedy action taken by Captain Newport and his crew, everybody returned safely.
It has been said the Asgard II will hardly be salvageable, although I understand a survey is being carried out on the ship which is 70 m under water. It has been indicated that it will take approximately €5.6 million to build a replacement. Now that there are major cutbacks and a reduction in tax receipts, there is surely a case to be made that the Government can make a saving.
The Jeanie Johnston was built at a cost of approximately €16 million and was the subject of much criticism at the time. It is now available to the Government and everybody concerned with it is more than willing to allow it to be used by the State.
I will give a brief overview of what has happened with the Jeanie Johnston since its commissioning. From 2003 to 2005 it carried over 300 sail trainees and 1,400 passengers. In 2006 Rivercruise Ireland took over operation of the ship and from 2006 to 2008 it carried approximately 980 sail trainees and over 2,500 passengers.
The Jeanie Johnston’s first voyages in 2002 were from Cork to Fenit to Dublin. In January 2003 it sailed from Dublin to Belfast to Waterford and back to Fenit for its maiden transatlantic voyage to West Palm Beach, Florida and up along the east coast of the United States and Canada before returning to Fenit. Since 2006 it has visited the Belgian port of Ostend, the French ports of Brest and Cherbourg and the Spanish ports of La Coruna and Porto de Ferrol. She has also visited the UK ports of Bristol, Glasgow, Liverpool and Milford Haven.
The operation of the Jeanie Johnston has been self-funded since 2004 and over 200,000 people have visited during its port visits since 2002. It is primarily promoted as a sail training vessel and available for private sailing charters and functions. As I indicated, the vessel has proved to be very successful. It is regularly invited to maritime festivals all over Europe. In 2005 the Parade of Sail out of Waterford was led by three Irish ships, the Asgard II, the Dunbrody and the Jeanie Johnston, as part of the Tall Ships festival. The Jeanie Johnston continued with the fleet to join the Tall Ships festival in Cherbourg. In 2007 it was involved in the re-enactment of the pilgrimage from Ireland to Santiago de Compostela and the flight of the earls voyage from Rathmullan to Quilleboeff. In 2008 it was involved in the opening of the Southampton boat show and the principal attraction at the Cork Week international sailing competition at Crosshaven. Its crew was twice asked to re-enact the pilgrimage to Santiago de Compostela, from Waterford and Dublin.
This is an opportunity for the State to save money. The ship is available and I have outlined its track record, which is impeccable. It has proved to be a very robust vessel on the high seas and has crossed the north Atlantic. It has withstood all the tests expected of it to prove it is a very good training vessel.
As the House will be aware, on 11 September the national sail training vessel, Asgard II, sank in the Bay of Biscay off the coast of France. The ship was on a cruise from Falmouth in the United Kingdom to La Rochelle and on board were five crew and 20 trainees, all of whom were evacuated successfully and are safe and well. The decision to abandon the vessel and take to the life rafts was made by the captain because the vessel was taking in water at a far greater rate than the pumps could handle. Weather conditions at the time were moderate and all trainees and crew were rescued by the French lifeboat service and taken to the island of Belle He.
I compliment the captain and crew of Asgard II on the professional manner in which all the trainees were quickly and safely taken off the vessel. I also pay tribute to the French lifeboat service for quickly coming to the location and bringing everybody safely ashore. Following a meeting of the board of Coiste an Asgard and subsequent consultations with insurance company representatives, it was decided to undertake an initial survey of the vessel to establish her status prior to any decisions being made on salvage.
The vessel was recently located on the seabed in 80 m of water, close to where she sank. The initial underwater inspection has been carried out using a remotely operated vehicle. This indicates that the vessel is upright and largely intact. Damage to one of the hull planks has been observed but it is not possible, at this stage, to determine whether this has resulted from impact with the seabed or was the original cause of the sinking. Until further detailed investigations are carried out, it is not possible to state whether Asgard II can be salvaged.
The board of Coiste an Asgard is considering the question of procuring a suitable temporary replacement vessel for Asgard II. In that regard a number of factors must be taken into account, including the suitability of the vessel for sail training, number and qualifications of crew required and operation and maintenance costs. The availability of funding will also be a key factor. At this stage the Minister for Defence is not in a position to indicate when a decision may be made as to whether to procure a temporary replacement vessel. If it is decided to procure a temporary replacement vessel, all options will be considered.
Appointments to State Boards.
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for permitting to raise this issue on the Adjournment. I ask the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to explain the circumstances in which he appointed to the Private Residential Tenancies Board two members of local authorities who are ineligible to serve on the board. As a result of these appointments, more than 100 decisions taken by the board have been set aside. Furthermore, this debate offers the Minister an opportunity to outline the steps being taken to have the board's decisions reconsidered and indicate whether he intends to review procedures for making appointments to State boards.
A question must be asked about the legality of the Minister's appointments. Under the relevant legislation, the Residential Tenancies Act 2004, a person who is a member of a local authority "shall be disqualified" from becoming a member of the board. In light of the unambiguous nature of this statement, has the Minister acted inappropriately and performed his duties in an illegal manner by appointing the two persons in question? A second legal issue arises regarding the matter of redress in the 100 decisions taken by the board since the appointments were made. Has a precedent been set which will expose the Private Residential Tenancies Board to legal liability?
The Minister must answer a further series of questions. Upon whose recommendations were the two individuals in question appointed? For how long had they served before the matter came to the attention of the board? When did it come to the Minister's attention that two appointments had been made illegally? What specific action did he take on receiving this information? What expenses were the two appointees paid for their participation in meetings of the Private Residential Tenancies Board?
It appears from an examination of the appointments process that little consideration was given to the procedures and protocols clearly laid down in the Act, whereas every consideration was given to political cronyism. The Minister's actions are a reflection of a "one for us and one for them" approach. Is this the lesson the Green Party wishes members of the public to learn from its experience in government?
The Minister's illegal appointment of two councillors, one member of Fianna Fáil and one member of the Green Party, to the Private Residential Tenancies Board did not appear to be a source of embarrassment to him when he sauntered into the House this morning before attempting to saunter out again. His lack of embarrassment is typified in his refusal to come to the House earlier to make a statement on the issue and allow Deputies to have a proper debate. Instead, he will read a few lines and walk out the door at the close of business. This is not the way the House should operate.
The Minister was afforded an opportunity to have this issue aired prior to the Adjournment debate, which would allow Deputies to discuss the issue in an informed fashion. Instead, he has chosen to read out the document he is holding to his chest before running out the door.
The Minister's appetite for appointing advisers is well established. We know, for example, that he has a team of six people in his constituency office, four special advisers in his departmental office and three staff in his press office. The total annual cost of these staff to the taxpayer is €800,000. One may have expected someone with such substantial resources at his disposal to have taken time to read the relevant legislation before appointing a member of his party to a State board. The wording of the Act is unambiguous and leaves no room for interpretation.
The immediate fall-out from the Minister's cock-up has been that more than 100 enforcements and rulings have been set aside, resulting in landlords and tenants being left in limbo. No one is certain what is the current position and the long-term fall-out from this development can only be determined when we know the circumstances in which the two individuals in question were appointed and how the matter came to the board's attention. Judging from the legislation, however, the appointments were illegal. What legal liabilities does the board now face?
This cock-up opens up the possibility that the propriety of other appointments made by the Minister since taking office may also be questioned. A full audit should be carried out of all such appointments and a report placed before the Dáil.
The Residential Tenancies Act of 2004 instituted a comprehensive reform of the private rental sector. It set out a modern legislative code which strengthens tenants' rights and supports a more professional approach by landlords. One of the central ingredients of the Act was the establishment of the Private Residential Tenancies Board, PRTB, which has a central role in the registration of tenancies and with the resolution of disputes between tenants and landlords.
Appointments to the board are made by me, as Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The Act specifies that the maximum number of board members shall be 15 and the minimum number shall be nine and, in making those appointments, a mix of legal, professional, operational and other skills is sought. Given the quasi-judicial nature of the board and its regular interactions with the courts, legal representation on the board has always been very useful. When considering further appointments to the board some months ago, I was particularly mindful that the existing board was strongly of the view that a barrister member would be helpful. Accordingly, on 30 June last, I appointed Vincent P. Martin, a barrister-at-law and member of Monaghan County Council to the board. I also appointed Dessie Larkin, a member of Donegal County Council with extensive experience. Both appointments were for the period up to 31 December 2012.
Last month, it was brought to my Department's attention that these appointments were made in error as section 169 of the Act not alone precludes members of the Oireachtas from membership of the board, but also members of local authorities. This provision was overlooked in my Department when the appointments were being made. The result is that both appointments were ultra vires, or invalid, and my office made contact in mid-September with both the individuals in question to advise them of this.
Deputy Ciarán Lynch will have no difficulty in principle with the fact that the people I chose to appoint to this board were councillors. Only yesterday his Labour Party colleague, Senator Michael McCarthy, called on the Government to allow councillors to continue membership of harbour boards.
The Minister is a practised hand at reading scripts.
I am also aware that, during the various debates in the House and the Seanad on the establishment of the HSE and Health Information and Quality Authority, Opposition parties, including the Labour Party, called for councillors to be represented on these bodies.
The Minister broke the law. He should not refer to debates in the Seanad.
The Deputy should allow the Minister to continue without interruption.
Neither of the two appointees participated in any tribunals of the board, that is, three person appeal hearings. They had, however, attended five board meetings between 4 July and September. While all decisions at the relevant meetings were taken by consensus and with an attendance well in excess of the quorum of five, the board took legal advice on the matter and, in the interests of legal certainty, it agreed that all cases considered at meetings attended by the two gentlemen in question should be considered afresh.
This was done on 19 September when approximately 120 cases brought to the board between 4 July and 9 September were considered anew. Fresh determination orders and decisions were made and communicated thereafter to the parties.
I take this opportunity to emphasise that no decisions were "set aside", as stated in today's edition of The Irish Times. Every case in question was reviewed by the board, which then issued legally correct determination orders and decisions.
It also needs to be stressed that it is PRTB policy to pursue a criminal prosecution when requested in all cases of non-compliance with its orders. In the case of an over-holding tenant, the PRTB will always initially take a civil prosecution, as this would then allow the landlord to recover possession of the property. From time to time, certain issues arise in a case, making it economically unviable to pursue a prosecution. This might be where insufficient information is available as to the whereabouts of the non-compliant party and significant costs would be incurred in establishing this, and where there is little or no chance of recovery of these costs or the financial amounts awarded in the determination order. I stress that the board’s policy is to pursue enforcement of its orders, while being mindful of the need to ensure value for money for taxpayers.
I assure the House that the PRTB has made significant progress since its establishment and it is heartening that less than 1% of tenancies end in a dispute. While critical cases such as those involving illegal eviction or serious anti-social behaviour are fast-tracked by the board and handled within weeks, the board is acutely aware that the average length of time to deal with cases needs to be significantly reduced. It has taken decisive steps in this regard, including proposals for amendment to the Act, several in-house operational initiatives and the design of an ICT strategy to optimise the resources available to it. I advise the Deputy that, as Minister, I have secured an increase in the permanent staff cohort from 26 to 40——
The question is who brought this matter to the Minister's attention.
——and I am confident that the collective impact of these initiatives will provide a sound platform from which the board should be able to discharge its functions efficiently and effectively.
I will take no lectures from the Deputy on cronyism. His party has practised it and brought it to a fine art.
Once again, the Minister is talking about this side of the House as if he were sitting here. Who brought this matter to his attention?
We operate transparent decision-making in appointments. We have appointed three people associated with the Deputy's party to boards.
Will the Minister answer to the House as to who brought this matter to his attention?
It is something that his party would not have the generosity or the foresight to do.
The Minister failed to answer that question in this House.
The Dáil adjourned at 5.25 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 14 October 2008.