I call Deputy Martin Ferris.
Topical Issue Debate
School Patronage
I understand the order of speakers has been amended and that Deputy Anne Ferris's matter will be dealt with first as I have to leave immediately after I have replied to it.
My apologies but I did not have that information. I call Deputy Anne Ferris. It is a case of two Deputies called Ferris.
I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and Deputy Martin Ferris and apologise for the confusion.
I am pleased that this matter has been chosen for debate as I have been contacted by many parents across Wicklow who want an Educate Together secondary school for their children. I welcomed the statement by the Minister, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, of his intention to look at the issue of patronage for the primary sector. I thought it was high time that someone got to grips with this issue as I believe the great mix and diversity, which makes up Irish society, is not currently reflected in our school system. Educate Together is a relatively recent addition to the short list of patron bodies to govern our schools. However, it is one that has gone from strength to strength since the first school - the Dalkey School Project - was established in Dalkey in the late 1970s. There have been 65 schools brought into operation across the country under the ethos of Educate Together and I understand more primary schools are to open this year and next year. Five of these schools are within the north Wicklow and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown area. They include schools in Wicklow town, Greystones, Dalkey, Monkstown and in my home town of Bray. However, there is a problem as these students cannot progress to a nearby Educate Together secondary school as there is none in existence.
At the beginning of his term as Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Quinn took the important step of recognising Educate Together as a patron body for second-level schools. This commitment is welcome and I do not underestimate the significance of this recognition, given that a new second-level patronage body has not been recognised by the State since the 1930s. When the Minister announced the new school builds to meet our growing population I was hopeful that the school at the Blacklion site in Greystones would be among the first second-level schools to attain Educate Together recognition. This was not to be, however, although I know that sites in Drogheda, Blanchardstown and Lucan did attain this patronage. I know that good campaigns by parents were run on behalf of the interested patron bodies for the Greystones site, but ultimately the Church of Ireland was selected as patron. While I wish the school all the very best and I congratulate the parents and staff who are to embark on setting up this exciting project, a problem remains. The five Educate Together primary schools to which I referred earlier, still have no secondary school nearby to which parents can send their children. It is clear that this facility should be made available.
Research undertaken by Trinity College Dublin, demonstrated that over 90% of parents whose children attend Educate Together primary schools would send them to an Educate Together second-level school if such were available. This research is clearly reflected in the number of parents who wish to gain patronage at the Blacklion site in Greystones, with a total of 1,440 expressions of interest for such patronage.
It is also worth noting that the VEC school in Kilcoole is over-subscribed from its own catchment area and that there is no viable multidenominational option for students in the Bray-Greystones area.
Concerns have also been expressed to me that multidenominational admission policy does not adequately address the requirement for full equality and parity of esteem for students of all beliefs. Therefore, the question arises as to what provision will be made by the Department to meet the needs of parents and families looking for a nearby second-level Educate Together school in the Wicklow-south Dublin area.
I am taking this issue on behalf of my colleague, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, the Minister for Education and Skills. As Deputy Ferris will be aware, the Minister announced in June of last year that up to the year 2016 a total of 20 new primary and 20 new post-primary schools are to be established across a number of locations, to cater for our increased pupil numbers. Included in that announcement is a new post-primary school planned for Greystones in County Wicklow and which is scheduled to commence in September 2014. The Minister also announced new criteria and arrangements for the recognition and determination of patronage of these new primary and second-level schools. The new arrangements published by my Department include the establishment of a new schools establishment group, an independent advisory group to advise him on the patronage of the new schools following its consideration of a report prepared by departmental officials.
These new arrangements provide a balanced approach in allowing applications to be made by prospective patrons for the establishment of schools. The criteria to be applied in respect of patronage decisions place a particular emphasis on parental demand for plurality and diversity of patronage. In accordance with the application and patron selection process put in place by the Department, an invitation for applications for patronage of the new post-primary schools issued in July 2011. The closing date for receipt of applications from prospective patrons, having been extended to accommodate the possible submission of joint patronage applications, was 13 January 2012.
Applications for patronage of the new post-primary school in Greystones were received from Church of Ireland, Educate Together and County Wicklow VEC. All the applicant patron bodies proposed to establish multidenominational schools in response to parental wishes. There is only one post-primary school in the Greystones feeder area, namely, St. David's Holy Faith school, an English-medium Catholic school under the patronage of the Holy Faith Sisters. The provision of a multidenominational school would serve to increase the diversity of school provision and broaden parental choice in the area. All applicants agreed to comply with the relevant requirements set out by the Department and submitted very comprehensive applications. All were assessed in line with the published criteria which clearly state patron bodies proposing schools will be asked to provide evidence of parental demand. There was a considerable difference in expressed demand as between the different applications. All other matters being equal, on the basis of parental demand, the recommendation was that patronage of the new school in Greystones be awarded to the Church of Ireland.
Departmental officials submitted a report to the new schools advisory committee in June 2012 for its consideration and a further submission to the Minister for consideration and final decision. On 25 July the Minister announced his decisions on the patronage of 14 new post-primary schools to be established in 2013 and 2014. The combination of the existing provision and the establishment of a new multidenominational post-primary school in the Greystones area will cater for the needs of all pupils in the area. My Department will continue to monitor enrolments in the area to ensure there is sufficient school accommodation to meet projected future demands. Such is the scale of the projected growth in our post-primary pupil population that the Minister expects there will be a need to establish more new schools to meet the future demand for additional pupil places post-2016. The area referred to by the Deputy is one of several areas of population growth under consideration in this context. When the locations where further new schools will be provided are finalised and announced during 2013, it will be open to patron bodies, including Educate Together, to make an application for patronage in respect of any of them.
As I understand it, the new Church of Ireland school in Greystones will cater only for children in the Greystones area. Educate Together will continue its campaign for a new secondary school to service the larger area to which I referred. As I said, there are five primary schools under the patronage of that body in the Wicklow-Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown area. In most cases, the parents of the children attending these schools would like them to be able to avail of an Educate Together secondary education, either in County Wicklow or south Dublin. The demand for Educate Together schools at both primary and secondary level continues to grow.
I welcome the Minister, Deputy Ruairí Quinn's engagement on the issue of school patronage and the decision to nominate Educate Together as a patron for secondary schools. However, there are many parents in County Wicklow who are very disappointed that their children cannot progress to a secondary school of the same ethos within their area. There is a significant urgency to this issue as the children currently in Educate Together primary schools progress through the system. I will convey the Minister of State's response to the parents concerned and advise them to contact the Department when the new round of schools is announced.
Like the Deputy, I strongly welcomed the decision by the Minister to award patron status within the post-primary school system to Educate Together. As in County Wicklow, there is a significant number of Educate Together primary schools in County Galway. As those children move through the primary school system, I fully expect parental demand for a post-primary option to increase. As I said, another round of new school announcements is expected in response to the very serious demographic challenges arising in the school system. I have every confidence that Educate Together will feature in these announcements, if parental demand is sufficient. The statistics certainly suggest we can expect to see a significant number of secondary schools opening throughout the country under the patronage of Educate Together.
Banks Recapitalisation
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this important issue for debate. The statement last night by the Finance Ministers of Germany, the Netherlands and Finland can only be seen as a major setback to the efforts to secure an overall deal on this country's bank debt. It is all very fine for the Taoiseach to insist that the summit statement from last June still stands, but that is no good to Ireland unless it is implemented. The bottom line is that the June summit agreement will not be implemented without the support of the Germans, Dutch and Finns. That is why we must treat last night's statement with extreme seriousness.
The noises coming from Berlin, in particular, have not been favourable for some time. Last month the German Finance Minister, Mr. Wolfgang Schäuble, indicated that Germany would oppose any Irish debt-relief proposal which would, in its view, send a negative signal to financial markets. Earlier this month the Chancellor, Mrs. Angela Merkel, expressed the view that Ireland was on a good path to recovery and she saw no need for changes to the bailout programme. If the statement issued by the three Finance Ministers last night accurately reflects the current views of the German, Dutch and Finnish Governments, it is devastating news for Ireland. A failure to do a deal on bank debt changes everything. Such a failure jeopardises our ability to exit the bailout and return to the markets. It means tougher budgets in the years ahead. Above all, it means that Ireland's debt position will become unsustainable in the absence of economic growth.
The statement sets out the position that direct European Stability Mechanism, ESM, recapitalisation can only take place once the "single supervisory mechanism is established and its effectiveness has been determined". Although we more or less knew this to be the case, it underlines the fact that a timely deal is unlikely. The statement indicates that while the ESM may take direct responsibility for problems that occur under the new supervision regime, legacy assets should remain the responsibility of national authorities. That is the key issue, as well as the stipulation that recapitalisation should occur using estimated real economic values. In other words, there will be no free lunch from the ESM.
What most concerns me is the impression among our European colleagues that everything is fine in this country, that we are back in the markets, meeting all the requirements under the bailout programme and ticking all the boxes. We must offer our colleagues a more honest assessment of where we are at. Such an assessment would acknowledge that day-to-day life for many Irish people is miserable because of the prevailing economic conditions. Without a deal on bank debt, the prospects for recovery will be nowhere near as favourable as they could be. That is the bottom line.
Last March the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, while on a visit to the United States, said that if the world economy were to pick up, the Irish economy would take off like a rocket. Unfortunately, the world economy has not revived and the Irish economy has not taken off like a rocket. In fact, the domestic economy continues to shrink. I am all for speaking positively about the economy, but all such talk must be grounded in reality. In May the Minister told a Bloomberg economic summit that the economy was in a much better position now than it was last year. That is not borne out by the statistics for unemployment, emigration, projected economic growth and tax receipts. In recent months, for example, tax receipts have been below what they were in the same period last year.
Will the Minister give his honest response to what was said last night? Is he disappointed by it? Where does it leave us in terms of negotiating and securing an overall deal on bank debt? I accept that he is genuinely seeking to secure such a deal, as evidenced by his travels to the various European capitals to meet his ministerial counterparts. However, we must call a spade a spade and acknowledge that last night's statement is a major setback. I look forward to hearing the Minister's honest assessment of the situation.
I welcome the opportunity to reply to Deputy McGrath. The Deputy should speak with a certain amount of modesty because all of the renegotiation being conducted by the Government on the bailout programme amounts to a series of attempts to unwind the deal made by the Fianna Fáil-led Government which got us into difficulty in the first instance. It made all the arrangements for the bailout and recapitalisation of the banks which we are now trying to unwind. There is also a danger that the Deputy will fall into the Sinn Féin trap-----
There is no fear of that.
-----of wishing the Government to fail in order that the Fianna Fáil Party can have a political opportunity to rebuild.
That is not the case.
That is a trap he should avoid as it will not get him anywhere.
I have noted yesterday's statement by three finance Ministers from Germany, the Netherlands and Finland. The statement addresses issues already decided upon by eurozone leaders when they met in Brussels on 29 June. As the Taoiseach set out this morning, the Heads of State and Government made two important decisions on 29 June, the first of which was to "affirm that it is imperative to break the vicious circle between banks and sovereigns." The second, which related specifically to Ireland, was the following:
The Eurogroup will examine the situation of the Irish financial sector with the view of further improving the sustainability of the well-performing adjustment programme. Similar cases will be treated equally.
I emphasise the reference to equal treatment.
Since that date, work has been proceeding on both of these elements. Officials from my Department have travelled to several capitals. I travelled to Paris, Berlin, Rome and on to the informal ECOFIN meeting in Cyprus two weeks ago, during which I had constructive talks with my colleagues. The Taoiseach met with several colleagues last week in Rome and all agreed that the imperative is to move ahead urgently to implement all of the important decisions taken on 29 June. I also draw the attention of the House to comments from the European Commission this morning, which set out that the agreement of 29 June was clear regarding the European Stability Mechanism and breaking the "vicious cycle" between sovereign and banking debt.
We are engaged in a diplomatic offensive to implement the decision of 29 June to break the link between banks and the sovereign and enhance the sustainability of our debt. I acknowledge that the three Ministers and their officials whom I met in their capitals, as well as other EU finance Ministers, have been helpful in moving forward the technical discussions with the troika, namely, the European Central Bank, the European Commission and the International Monetary Fund, on the banking debt issue in respect of Irish needs.
It is in the nature of EU business that differences of interpretation may arise. However, one thing is clear - the principle of breaking the link between sovereigns and banks has been agreed by the Heads of State and Government. No one has questioned this. That being so, our ambassadors in the relevant capitals and senior officials in Dublin are today urgently making contact to follow up on developments.
This morning, a number of Deputies were disingenuous in attributing statements to my Department. As those who read the statement from the three finance Ministers will have seen, they made reference to the recent positive reviews of the Irish and Portuguese EU-IMF programmes, which is welcome. The strong implementation of reforms is one of the reasons Ireland's global reputation has improved so significantly and has led to record levels of foreign investment in the State. The Government is committed to restoring confidence at home and internationally and the recognition by the three Ministers of the sacrifices that the Irish people have made should be welcomed.
Ireland will be fully engaged in the process by the euro group and Heads of State and Government on how this will happen. In putting forward our ideas, we must be conscious that other member states will also put forward their proposals. However, as was pointed out by the Taoiseach this morning and my Department yesterday afternoon, Ireland's position is clear in this regard. Work is continuing in line with the summit agreement of 29 June to break the link between banks and sovereigns and on the principle that similar cases will be treated equally. As I stated, the European Commission reinforced this point this morning.
It is worth pointing out that the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and I, along with ambassadors and senior officials, have been vocal in our view that the vicious cycle between banking and sovereign debt should be broken. I remind the Deputy of the letter the Taoiseach sent to his fellow leaders earlier this year setting out the Government's position. We want to continue to work in a constructive spirit to enhance the sustainability of our debt. We have made strong, solid progress in implementing the terms of our EU-IMF programme and have lived up to all of our commitments. The financial markets have recognised this, as reflected in the reduction of our bond spreads in recent months. To be clear, Heads of State and Government made a decision on these issues and we continue to work within that framework to deliver the best possible outcome for the Irish taxpayer.
I thank the Minister for his response. I will ignore the political swipe he made, which sounds rather tired at this stage, and focus instead on the substance of the issue. He referred to differences of interpretation. What we read last night from the finance Ministers of Germany, the Netherlands and Finland was not a new interpretation of the summit statement from the end of June. The three Ministers rewrote the statement and made fundamental changes which are, without question, to Ireland's disadvantage. That is the nub of the issue, but the Minister appears to be in denial and gives the impression that last night's statement was not significant. In fact, it marked a shift in position. If the statement of the three finance Ministers reflects the views of their respective Governments, it is an extremely serious matter. Either the Minister does not recognise that or he does not wish to admit it. I want to have an open and honest debate on the issue.
The Minister referred to the reduction in bond spreads in recent months. This is a positive development and the National Treasury Management Agency has made good progress in this regard. However, the reduction has been connected in no small part to the summit statement issued at the end of June. The markets have priced in that Ireland will secure a deal on its banking debt. This progress will be reversed, as we saw today, if it appears the deal struck at the summit will not be implemented. The fundamental issue is whether countries will be treated equally. According to the statement issued last night, countries would not be treated equally for reasons of timing because Ireland has recapitalised its banks whereas countries such as Spain have not yet done so. We need to address that issue.
I ask the Minister to set out what milestones lie ahead. Where is all of this going? We know it will take some time to establish the new European banking supervisory body. What level of engagement is taking place between the Minister and his officials and our European colleagues? Will he raise the issues referred to in last night's statement directly with his colleagues in the euro group? Will they be raised at Heads of State and Government level? Will clarification be provided on whether all Governments remain resolutely committed to the principles enshrined in the statement issued following the June summit? What action will the Government take in response to last night's statement?
The Deputy may be tired of what he describes as political swipes, but when he and his leader get up on a rhetorical and moral high horse and lecture us on the way we are renegotiating, it is valid to point out that what we are renegotiating is the bad deal entered into by the Fianna Fáil-led Government.
We are seeking parliamentary accountability.
That is what we are doing so a little modesty would not go astray. I presume the Deputy saw the statement issued by the European Commission this morning. I will quote Mr. Olivier Bailly, a Commission spokesman, who stated at a media briefing that eurozone Governments should move "quickly" to break the link between bank troubles and sovereign debt. The agreement reached in June by eurozone governments was, Mr. Bailly said, "extremely clear" in expressing a determination to sever this tie. "Our position regarding breaking the vicious circle between the banks and the sovereign is very clear," he said. "We already showed our determination that for us, this should be done quickly." The Commission, speaking for the whole Community rather than three Governments, is setting out the position, which is the position that was in the communiqué issued at the Heads of State and Government meeting on 29 June.
In that case, last night's statement is irrelevant.
Nothing is irrelevant; everybody is advancing negotiating positions. However, there are 27 countries in the European Community and a spokesman for the Commission, which speaks for the Community, stated this morning that the policy remains the same as that outlined at the Heads of State and Government meeting of 29 June. He also noted that member states should move quickly to implement this policy. That is the position.
On the general effect, the Deputy used words to the effect that last night's statement represented a major démarche by the three countries in question. The markets are not taking it that way. Irish bond spreads went out by 20 basis points today. Given that they can rise by ten or 15 points in a normal day, 20 basis points is not an extreme reaction by the markets. Spanish bond prices went out by 40 basis points, which is not dramatic for Spain because there is movement every day. It is not that what was said was irrelevant - it is significant and everything must be taken into account - but in the broader scheme of things, it was a statement issued following a meeting in Helsinki attended by three Finance Ministers.
Obviously we take note of it and it goes into the mix of negotiation. However, there are other views. The view outlined by the Commission is the view expressed by the Taoiseach here this morning. That is the official position of the Community. We will see how these matters work out as the weeks go by. The European decision-making process is always a bit untidy. Anytime one has to get 27 governments to agree, it never runs in straight lines. We must take the statement for what it is. It was made, we know what it contains and one can measure its effect as the days go by. So far today, it has not dislodged the Commission from restating the position as stated by the European Council on 29 June and the markets have more or less taken it in their stride. The markets move every day but the movement today was relatively small.
Television Reception
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy O'Dowd, to the House.
I have correspondence from a party colleague, Councillor Mickey Doherty, regarding his and his community's concerns with the switchover to Saorview on 24 October. Included is a petition of 25 names representing Meenavanaghan, Cross, The Cloghan and Lemacrossan in an area of east Inishowen besides Quigley's Point. The demographics of the area show 75% of the community is elderly. The advice from Saorview is that once the switchover happens on 24 October, these communities will not be capable of receiving television coverage through Saorview. They have been advised to apply through Saorsat which will take upwards of 12 months to get, as well as an additional €170. I do not believe that is a fair option or solution for the people living in these communities.
The local television experts have done their research into the availability of television coverage in these geographical pockets. The existing mast in the area is not part of the Saorview upgrade. Even the largest television mast in Buncrana will be no good as an option. RTE will recommission some of the masts in Glenties and Clonmany, to ensure coverage in these areas. Saorview is of the opinion that channel 45 from Moville will suffice but I do not believe that will be a feasible option.
I do not know what research the Minister's officials have done into this matter at this early stage. The information the Minister will make available this afternoon may not reassure the communities in question. Accordingly, will his officials investigate this particular issue in depth? It may be a micro-issue and could be repeated in other parts.
My colleague, Councillor Doherty, believes this is an issue of great concern to the communities in question. Up to 75% of the population in them are elderly. From a fairness and community point of view, as well as preventing rural isolation, television is a necessary communication mechanism. If the Minister does not have an update on the matter today, will he use his offices to research this issue because it concerns a great number of people in east Inishowen?
I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. RTE has built, owns and controls the Saorview TV network and is responsible for its roll-out, coverage and operation. This is in accordance with Part 8 of the Broadcasting Act 2009 which provides that the development of the RTE network is an operational matter for RTE and, therefore, not one in which the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources has a function.
I have, however, had inquiries made about the coverage in Donegal as raised by Deputy McHugh. Section 130 of the Broadcasting Act 2009 Act provides that RTE must roll out a national digital TV network to the same extent as its existing analogue network. In this regard, the analogue network covers 98% of the population and the Saorview network will also provide 98% population coverage.
Work has been ongoing right across the country to prepare the transmission sites for the move from analogue to digital terrestrial television. However, it is impossible to cover 100% of the population by terrestrial means. Reasons for this include local topography, for example. Regarding Donegal, I have been informed by RTE Networks Limited, RTENL, that as well as having ten of the 55 Saorview transmission sites located in county Donegal - Glencolumkill, Aranmore, Glenties, Magheroarty, Fanad, Malin, Moville, Holywell Hill, Letterkenny and Ballybofey - a large part of south County Donegal is covered by the large Truskmore transmission sites on the Sligo-Leitrim border. As the Deputy correctly stated, the existing mast in the area referred to is not part of the Saorview upgrade.
Notwithstanding this, Saorview, over the old analogue network coverage in Donegal, will give an improvement in terrestrial availability of 6% for RTE One and RTE Two, an improvement in terrestrial availability of 11% for TG4 and an improvement in terrestrial availability of 51% for TV3. I have also contacted RTENL on the townlands around Quigley's Point. I have been informed that Quigley's Point and its environs are covered by Saorview from a transmission site located near Ballymacarthur, to the north of Moville. Further information on coverage is available on the Saorview coverage checker on www.Saorview.ie.
Furthermore, according to RTENL, the majority of homes in the areas of Meenavanaghan, Cross, The Cloghan and Lemacrossan can avail of Saorview or Saorsat. The latter is, of course, RTE's free-to-air satellite service which was officially launched earlier this year and is, therefore, already available to homes in the area. RTE is not obliged to provide this satellite service and is doing so on its own initiative. With this satellite service, Ireland will have a national TV network covering 100% of the population, for the first time. Currently, Saorsat provides access to RTE 1, RTE Two, RTE NewsNow, RTE +1, TG4, RTE's Digital Teletext service and a number of digital radio channels. TV3 has not yet made a decision as to its carriage on the service.
According to RTENL, the cost differential between a Saorview and Saorsat, including full installation, is in the order of €100. Should a home wish to pick up the UK free-to-air, FTA, satellite services, as well as the Irish services, households can opt for a satellite installation that provides access to both. This option is about €50 cheaper than a full installation that provides for a combination of Saorview and the UK FTA satellite services. RTENL has developed an information booklet on Saorsat which is available on www.rtenl.ie.
Should the Deputy have further questions, I will be happy to pass them to RTENL on his behalf for direct reply.
I acknowledge the research the Minister of State and his Department have done in this subject. He has provided options. Locally, there are concerns and what we are trying to do here is reassure people. There seem to be options albeit more expensive ones which comes back to the fairness issue. If this continues to be an issue, I acknowledge there is an option for the Minister to pass it on to RTENL.
Sometimes we take for granted certain services. There is a concern that if Saorsat is not in an area, it could take 12 months to commission. I welcome the fact the Minister is keeping an open line. I accept he does not have a direct influence with RTE but at the same time, people do bump into each other and they could highlight an issue.
Those from Meenavanaghan, Cross and Lemacrossan who did not get tickets for last Sunday's all-Ireland football final watched it on their old television sets with excellent coverage.
Like the good people of Kerry, once one all-Ireland final is over, we start thinking about the next one. I hope they will be in a position to avail of coverage of the all-Ireland final in 12 months time. I am not predicting who will be in it, but it is important that they have coverage.
I will bring the Deputy's views to the attention of the Department which will communicate directly with him on the issues he has raised.
Missing Persons
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me the opportunity to speak. I raised this issue last week and he assured me I would have an opportunity to raise it in the Topical Issue debate. I appreciate being given that opportunity.
I congratulate the Donegal team. It is seldom we have an opportunity to congratulate it here, but I suppose once every 20 years is not too bad.
What about County Louth?
I wish we could say the same for the people of County Louth, but they have their own bone to pick with the Meath team.
Earlier this year there was a tragic event off Glandore when five fishermen lost their lives. Michael Hayes was the skipper of the boat involved. The bodies of all five fishermen were found, which was a tremendous comfort to their families because at least their lost loved ones had a grave to go to. That was a major help in the healing process. In 2006 the Maggie B was lost. On 10 January 2007 the Père Charles was lost outside Dunmore East. The following night the Honeydew II was lost west of Helvick Head. Nine people in total were lost on these three fishing vessels and no body has ever been recovered. Like anyone who has lost loved ones, the families live in hope that at some stage the remains will be found and that they will have a grave to which to take their loved ones.
I understand that more than two years ago some remains, including a skull, were discovered off Helvick Head and that two femur bones were discovered off Hook Head. They are believed to be the bones of a male between 25 and 30 years old. Two years ago the Garda chief superintendent in charge in Wexford, John Roche, applied for special funding to carry out a special DNA test on the bones to discover whose they were since the initials test proved inconclusive. Consideration is now being afforded by the Garda authorities to having a nuclear and mitochondrial DNA analysis conducted on the remains. My understanding is that the chief superintendent in Wexford at the time applied for funding to carry out these special tests which it was estimated would cost between €9,000 and €12,000 and were to be carried out in Wales. Regrettably, the Department of Justice and Equality did not make the money available. All of this was kept under the radar and no one knew anything about it until such time as a detective sergeant retired recently. There was a report on 3 September on "Six-one news" on the discovery of these bones off Helvick Head and Hook Head and the story became public. As a result, the families of those whose remains are lost continue to hope some of these remains might be those of one of their loved ones. Two of the people lost on the Père Charles outside Dunmore East were members of the Hennessy family. I know the family well. There is considerable hope that they will be able to discover some part of the remains of their loved ones.
I seek an assurance from the Minister of State and the Government that, for the sake of €9,000 or €12,000 or whatever it would cost, the State will carry out these tests and that the Department will make the money available in order that we can ascertain whether the parts of a skull and the femur bones discovered have any connection with the people lost on any of the vessels mentioned. There is dreadful anxiety for loved ones when they know that remains have been found but they do not know whether they are those of their loved ones. I appeal to the Minister of State to do everything in his power to try to ensure that at least the families know whether these discoveries have anything to do with their loved ones.
I thank the Deputy for raising this important matter which I am taking on behalf of the Minister for Justice and Equality who regrets that he is unable to be present. He is aware of the concerns expressed by the Deputy relating to the finding of human remains off the coast of counties Wexford and Waterford. It is natural that these developments cause renewed sadness and heightened expectations for the families of those who were lost in the sinking of the boats referred to by the Deputy, including the Maggie B in 2006 and the Père Charles and the Honeydew II in 2007. We all sympathise with the desire to have some closure and resolution for those who have been sadly bereaved through the loss of loved ones at sea.
In cases of missing persons, whether at sea or on land, An Garda Síochána do all in its power to assist families and friends of those who have been lost. Where remains are recovered, either on land or at sea, the question arises of the feasibility of carrying out appropriate tests to help to determine if the remains can be identified. The Minister has been informed by the Garda authorities that inquiries to establish the identity of the human remains found have not yielded positive results to date and consideration is now being afforded by the Garda authorities to having a nuclear and mitochondrial DNA analysis conducted on the remains.
The advances provided by DNA testing are of considerable value to An Garda Síochána not only in criminal investigations but also in the identification of missing persons. Certain tests are carried out by the Forensic Science Laboratory in Ireland; other less frequently required specialised testing may be carried out abroad. While the DNA testing available here and abroad is often very effective, the advice to the Minister is that it is not always technically viable. The Garda authorities have advised the Minister that an expert assessment is being carried out of the merits of performing the tests mentioned by the Deputy. This is not simply a budgetary matter as has been suggested. The advice to the Minister is that further testing may not be successful since the extraction of DNA profiles from bones that have been in the water for a long period is rather difficult because the sea has been found to cause substantial degrading of DNA material.
It is beyond the scope of the debate to make detailed scientific judgments. Therefore, the Minister believes this assessment should be allowed to proceed and its outcome taken on board by the Garda. He acknowledges the concerns of the Deputy and others to ensure all that can be reasonably done to help the families is actually done. He shares that concern, but he is also mindful of the need not to do anything which might give rise to undue expectations about the possibilities that the available tests might provide. Accordingly, he considers that the best course of action is to await the outcome of the assessment before making more conclusive comments on the matter.
I am a little confused because there appears to be no absolute commitment to continue with the testing procedures, including the more scientific testing procedures now available. It is necessary to do so. There is a contradiction because the information I have is that the Garda chief superintendent in Wexford applied for funding to carry out testing and was not given funding. The fact is that the funding has been applied for. The Minister of State suggested that if the Garda looked for funding, it would be made available. I hope this is a misunderstanding rather than anything else. If funding could be found to ascertain whether the remains found can be linked with the people missing at sea, it would be appreciated.
I appreciate that the fact the remains have been at sea for a long time makes it more difficult to prove scientifically whether they belong to missing persons but the Department should at least try to see if they can be linked to those who have been lost at sea off the south, south-west and south-east coasts.
On behalf of the Minister, I thank Deputy Martin Ferris again for raising this matter which has given us the opportunity for a useful and important discussion. It is clear that all in this House share the general concern to support the families of those who, tragically, have been lost of sea and to help them pursue any reasonable avenue for the recovery and identification of the remains of their loved ones.
The Minister will, of course, raise the points expressed by Deputy Ferris with the Garda authorities. He is also confident that the gardaí are doing all that they reasonably can to assist the families concerned. The Minister is hopeful that when the assessment, which is currently awaited by the Garda authorities, is finalised there will be more clarity on the possibilities of effective testing of the remains which have been found. I will bring the views of Deputy Ferris directly to the Minister and the Department's attention.