Micheál Martin
Ceist:1. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he or his officials are concerned about possible delays in any commitments made in the programme for Government; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [40520/13]
Ceisteanna - Questions (Resumed)
Programme for Government Implementation
Joe Higgins
Ceist:2. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the implementation of the Programme for Government. [45915/13]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 and 2 together.
The programme for Government sets out the detailed and ambitious work programme for the Government, with progress being reported on an annual basis. In the two reports published to date, the Government has reported progress on two thirds of its commitments. The next report will be published in March.
The timeline for the delivery of the commitments is over the lifetime of the Government, and the pace of delivery will vary for each commitment. Many commitments have already been delivered in full and there are others in respect of which substantial work is under way. The Government is past the halfway point of its term and has completed or make substantial progress on well in excess of half of its commitments.
As part of the annual reporting process, the Government highlights commitments where significant issues arise that may have an impact on their delivery. Seven such commitments have been set out in the reports published to date. In such cases, the Government will continue to work to find alternate and innovative ways to deliver the underlying objectives of such commitments. For example, in its first year the Government signalled that the Exchequer investment was not available to make progress on the Dublin Institute of Technology's campus development at Grangegorman. However, the announcement in 2012 of the €2.25 billion job-rich stimulus package provided an opportunity to revisit this. I am pleased to say the project is progressing well under a public-private partnership arrangement.
The Government continues to work hard on implementing the programme for Government and will continue to report progress on an annual basis to the House.
The Taoiseach will be aware that the programme for Government contains a promise that the Government will ensure it is open and transparent in its work. The debacle on the establishment of Irish Water gives the lie to that tale; it is anything but the case. I noticed on St. Stephen's Day that a major report was published by the Minister for Health on health. There seems to be a tendency to bury anything that is contentious at an opportune moment.
By publishing it.
The Minister, Deputy Reilly, issued the health insurance report on 26 December. It was a very cynical way of trying to bury a story. It was probably one of the most cynical moves I have seen in a long time.
Outrageous.
The key issue I want to focus on in terms of the programme for Government concerns those with chronic long-term illnesses. The programme for Government was very emphatic that they would be given medical cards. I have been raising with the Taoiseach the issue of discretionary medical cards. He needs to be accountable to us regarding the absolute failure to meet the objective in this regard. Yesterday, I came across a person with multiple sclerosis who had a medical card for many years but who received communication again from the authorities to say her medical card is now gone.
I met the mother of a 15 year old child recently. At six years of age, the child had a tumour which caused life-long visual impairment. The child had a medical card but a month or two before Christmas, unbelievably, it was taken away. That decision has been appealed. A number of Deputies, including the Minister for Health, would have received a heart-rending e-mail from a family that is extraordinarily distressed, in health terms, with a very sick young baby and a parent with health issues too. The parent had fought to retain his child's card and managed to do so. He did not realise that his own card was under review because the expiry date is some years away. One can imagine his shock when, on going into the local pharmacy, he discovered from the pharmacist that he had lost his medical card. The devastation that news caused to himself and his wife was extraordinary. We are hearing stories about medical cards-----
Would the Deputy mind putting a question to the Taoiseach? He has been speaking for nearly five minutes now.
I am putting a question on the programme for Government. The question that I tabled asks if the Taoiseach is concerned about possible delays in any commitments made in the programme for Government. One of the clear and explicit commitments given was that people with chronic, long-term illnesses would have access to medical cards but the opposite has been the case. Up and down the country people with long-term illnesses have lost their medical cards and are continuing to lose them. Ask any GP in the country and he or she will tell you that when patients attend, it is the GP who has to tell them that their cards have been withdrawn having looked up the patient files on their computers. What is going on is a shambles. It is unbelievably cruel to families and I do not know how the Taoiseach can stand over it. I have spent the last nine months in this House asking the Taoiseach questions about discretionary medical cards and about the behaviour of the authorities and the Department of Health but I have heard denial after denial. Despite what we heard before Christmas, I am shocked to see that it still going on. This random process through which medical cards are being taken from people is still going on. It is a scandal. It is cruel and shameful and is hitting those who need cards the most because of chronic and serious illnesses. These are the people whom the Government is hurting the most and I do not understand why the Government continues to do it.
Deputy Martin is absolutely right and perfectly in order to raise questions like that here. This is one of many issues that the Deputy can raise, as leader of his party. The Deputy, having been in the Department himself previously, is well aware of what the situation was and how it has evolved to the point now where everybody starts on the same basis. In other words, there has been no change in the criteria for medical card eligibility. There are more cards issued now than ever before and money has been included in this year's budget for further new cards. Deputy Martin raised the case of a young boy with a tumour whose medical card was taken away and frankly, I do not understand that either, so let us find out about it. Deputy Martin raised medical card cases here before, as did Deputy Adams and I brought them to the attention of the people who deal with medical cards. Some cards were approved, as was correct, while others were not, for reasons that were explained.
One change that was made before Christmas is that when a person's card is coming up for review, he or she will now receive three months' notice. In that context, I do not understand how, in the case mentioned by the Deputy, the person was informed by his or her pharmacist that his medical card was withdrawn. The system was centralised so that people would be contacted and would know in advance that card X was up for review in three months' time and so forth. I am happy to follow through on those two cases for Deputy Martin.
The Minister of Health was also sent the e-mail to which I referred.
The director general of the HSE is examining the issue of discretion in the awarding of medical cards. The HSE set up a group to review how to meet the needs of those with life-long medical conditions, of whom the number is significant. The Minister for Health will report to the House on that review in due course.
There were 620 commitments in the programme for Government and of these, 144 were completed, substantial work is underway on a further 236, some progress has been made on 168 and there are 67 commitments upon which work has not started at all. In the case of my Department, 40 commitments were made in the programme for Government, of which 17 are complete, 14 are well under way, some progress has been made on five and four have not been started at all. Obviously, the next report will be released in March.
The Government decided not to proceed with the plan to give medical cards to all those on the long-term illness scheme because it would have involved considerable legislative difficulties and created a huge administrative burden for what was always intended to be a temporary measure before providing free GP care for all and moving to a system of universal health insurance. I am happy to investigate the two cases raised by the Deputy. If he gives me the details, I will see that the cases are at least explained because what the Deputy outlined should not have happened.
The Taoiseach is three years in office and if the Government survives a five-year term, then we are 60% of the way now. Therefore, the shape of what the Government promised three years ago should be evident to our people by now. One of the promises made was that this Government would be entirely different to the regime that preceded it in the matter of how public affairs were conducted, particularly in regard to transparency and openness on the part of the State and State institutions. Does the Taoiseach agree that three years into its term, the Government's commitments on transparency and openness have been blown out of the water, coincidentally by the creation of the monster that is Irish Water and by how it has conducted itself? Does the Taoiseach agree, in the matter of Irish Water and the scandalous amount of taxpayers' funds that have been allocated to slush-fund-loving consultancies, which have made a fortune on the backs of the Irish taxpayer for decades, that instead of transparency, his Government has given the people opaqueness and instead of openness, it has given a continuation of secrecy? Is that the reality of what we face? Would the Taoiseach agree that his fine words and his supposed aspirations of three years ago have drowned in the re-emergence of crony capitalism in this State, particularly in the way that private consultancies are able to continue to have transfused to them tens of millions of euro of taxpayers' funds, the detail of which we know nothing about? Can the Taoiseach explain and defend that?
The situation is entirely different to that which this Government met when it came into office. We were blocked out of the international markets. We had no name, no standing, no credibility, could not borrow money, were in hock up to our necks and had quarterly visits from the troika. Even Deputy Higgins should be glad that we exited the bailout programme in December, the first eurozone country to do so.
Even he should give some recognition to the fact that yesterday five-year moneys were cheaper than those of Great Britain, for the first time in so many years, and very close to American levels. Even Deputy Higgins should understand that the decision by the rating agency Moody's last week has implications in terms of our international standing and attractiveness for further continued investment from sovereign wealth funds that were prohibited from considering Ireland for investment because we did not have adequate rating from the major rating agencies. Even he should understand that the unemployment rate has dropped consistently for 18 months and currently stands at 12.4% as of December 2013. Deputy Higgins may or may not accept the fact that the figures show that 58,000 new jobs were created last year and that the trend is moving in the right direction.
When Deputy Higgins speaks of transparency, he should recognise that Irish Water – Uisce Éireann – has been in before the Committee of Public Accounts and the Joint Committee on the Environment, Culture and the Gaeltacht, dealing with matters to do with the environment and finance, and will continue to do so as necessary. I understand that at the Committee of Public Accounts the chief executive gave a long, detailed and exhaustive presentation on the service being delivered by expert agencies.
Deputy Higgins should be aware that the closed treasure chest that has been there for so long in respect of section 38 and 39 entities is now being opened by the Government in terms of full transparency as to what went on. The current nauseating controversy surrounding the CRC will be beneficial in the future for charities all over the country because the Government has responded. The Minister for Justice and Equality will appoint a regulator - I hope this will be before the end of February - and a board will be set up to implement the Act properly. Charities that are properly endorsed and produce annual accounts that are published on their websites and by the regulator will have the endorsement of being charities that can and should be supported. In that sense we continue to recognise the importance of the service provided by the personnel who work in the CRC to the patrons who use its services and the many people who contribute to that worthy cause.
I called to the CRC last week on a purely private visit. The young professional staff to whom I spoke are devastated by what happened. The Committee of Public Accounts and all the members thereon have been diligent in the hours they have spent there. It appears they will be busy in the time ahead also. That is about transparency, openness and accountability. We will continue in that mode because it is in the interests of the people.
The situation is very different from what it was three years ago. I hope that in the next 12 months we will see a further improvement both in the capacity of the Irish economy to respond and in people’s living standards. I note the comments today from the Irish League of Credit Unions that at long last more people are in a position to save some money, although not all that we would like to see.
The property tax will take it all back.
If Deputy Higgins wants to castigate the Irish League of Credit Unions he should do so.
Was the news wrong?
The comment by the league is an indication that people are now in a position to save some money, but it is not all that we would like because we are still in a very challenging position. The economic engine of our country is in a very different position from three years ago and all of the details in that regard are fully available to the Deputy and to every other citizen and will continue to be so.
Last week the CEO of the HSE confirmed that he would not be able to deliver promised services on the current level of funding. A range of additional services are listed in the programme for Government in elderly care and acute hospitals. That is a very serious statement from the CEO. It is the first time I have heard a CEO being so emphatic in that regard. It has also been confirmed that the Taoiseach and his Cabinet colleagues amended the HSE service plan to try to cover up the fact. Such interference in the plan that was presented to Cabinet is also a first. The language was changed because the members of Cabinet did not like what it said about the incapacity to fulfil promises and provide the services that were required. The Taoiseach owes it to people, including all those involved in the health service, to list what services will not be provided. What area of the programme for Government will not be provided for this year and what services will not be provided? The people legally responsible for delivering services said they could provide a list of what they cannot do that is required. Why is the Government hiding the information? They cannot provide the list to us. Does the Taoiseach consider it acceptable that the Cabinet should rewrite a national service plan behind closed doors in Government Buildings?
I suggest that the Taoiseach visit some accident and emergency departments. The accident and emergency consultants issued a very strong statement today. I also urge him to visit some of the services that have been closed as a result of decisions taken by the Government. I will provide the details on the cases I raised earlier with regard to medical cards. I refer to medical cards and not GP-only cards. That is the new game in town. A medical card for people with disabilities is far more comprehensive than anything a GP card could ever give. The Government must be aware of that and not try to pull a con trick in terms of reducing everything to GP-only cards for everyone. We have given the Taoiseach details of lots of individual cases. That is not the issue. The policy the Government is pursuing is cruel and shameful and it is hurting the sickest people. People at the front line cannot believe what the Government is up to. They cannot comprehend why the Government would visit such cruelty on people by taking cards from deserving cases on the grounds of medical need such as chronic illness. It flies in the face of the programme for Government. The Minister of State, Deputy White, should not nod his head. It does.
We have spent more than 20 minutes on these questions.
People elected the Government on the basis that it would give a medical card to everyone with a chronic illness and the Government has done the exact opposite; it started taking thousands of medical cards from people.
That is a separate issue.
The issue relates to the programme for Government. Will the Taoiseach change the policy?
Of course the scandalous abuse of charities should be outed, but it should not hide the scandal whereby people with disabilities and vulnerable people should not have to depend on the charity of whoever happens to be able to throw some money in a bucket. I note that the Taoiseach did not comment on the return – it never really went away – of crony capitalism, with companies that have made a fortune from the taxpayer, for example, advising the Government on the privatisation of public assets, which is a reactionary course to take, and advising local authorities on the white elephant of the incinerator in Ringsend, all back in the mix. They are allowed to rip off the taxpayer and provided for by the Administration to a scandalous degree.
The other issue the Taoiseach raised related to the Irish League of Credit Unions. Its survey did state that since 2012 there had been a pretty modest pick-up in the disposable income of individuals and families at the end of the month. The Taoiseach was quick to jump on that. What he did not go on to say is that, for example, the property tax, which the Government is demanding this year from low- and middle-income working people around the country, will negate that. Whatever little pick-up there was will be gone.
Did the Taoiseach notice that it said 40% of households had had to sacrifice on clothing, footwear and groceries to pay his property tax to, in turn, pay off the bondholders, the bankers and the golden circles in the European financial markets? Is that something to be proud of? Is that what he promised three years ago?
Deputy Micheál Martin referred to the comments made by the chief executive officer of the HSE on the challenging year ahead. The chief executive officer said it would be a challenging year and that it might not be possible to deliver in full all programmes. As some of them are demand-led, it is impossible for anyone to say in advance what the demand will actually be.
I was referring to promised services.
The overall service provided has not diminished in its impact or effect. While costs have been extracted from the delivery of health services, there has been no diminution in their quality.
The Deputy claimed the Government had interfered with the HSE's annual plan when it certainly did not. The duty and responsibility of the Minister for Health are to either accept or not accept the draft plan submitted by the HSE. The Budget Statement was announced in the House. In turn, the HSE, based on the budget figures provided for the Department of Health, prepared a draft health service plan which was, in turn, sent to the Minister for Health who examined it for several weeks. He then brought it to the Cabinet and made recommendations to change it. He did so for good reasons. The original draft plan, arising from the budget figures, proposed that €113 million be saved in medical card provision through a probity check. The Minister for Health and the Minister of State with responsibility for that area analysed this and concluded it was obvious that this was not an achievable figure. The figure was then reduced to €23 million. It was not a case of interfering with the draft plan submitted by the HSE but of the Minister amending the plan for certain reasons.
I said the language had changed.
While it will be a challenging year, I expect it will be one that will be delivered on fully. The Minister of State, Deputy Alex White, has pointed on many occasions to the savings of €25 million made in terms of the eligibility of the over-70s for a medical card, as well as the €23 million savings with other measures concerning medical cards, yet extra moneys are included in this year’s budget for new medical cards.
Deputy Joe Higgins again referred to cronyism and capitalism. I have to say he is as consistent as the waves on the Irish Sea; he keeps rolling in with the same argument on cronyism and capitalism. However, the job and mandate given to the Government is to sort out the public finances and get the country back to work. The economy is moving in the right direction, but we still have many challenges ahead, the greatest of which will be to continue to be competitive, extract costs from the way we deliver services for the people and, thereby, create jobs for those at home. That is the fundamental mandate given to us by the people. In that sense, we will continue, through the programme for Government, to deliver on the remaining commitments on the work under way. I have already given my view to each Minister on the whole range of commitments in respect of their Departments for which they have responsibility. Some of these are contingent on others being delivered. In March we will report on the progress made and again sometime later this year.
There are two commitments in the programme for Government which the Government has abandoned or completely failed to deliver on, the first of which, following on from Deputy Joe Higgins' question, is in the area of transparency and accountability. The democratic revolution, with a new openness and transparency, was central to the programme, as well as the Taoiseach’s speech when he was nominated for office. Last week we had the debacle over Irish Water, with the gross, obscene pay-out to private consultants, as well as the high salaries of its executives, and with the obscenity ongoing in the Central Remedial Clinic, with cronies of the former Fianna Fáil Government and the Bertie Ahern Drumcondra mafia. Can the Taoiseach, with a straight face, forgive the public for thinking the commitment to transparency and accountability has actually turned into a turf war between the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael mafias of cronies fighting over the spoils, while ordinary people are hammered by cuts, unemployment and poverty? They are struggling, while there is a feeding frenzy among the pigs at the trough of public moneys. Much of this has to do with the persistence of quangos and corporate subsidiaries such as Irish Water and other semi-State bodies which are at one remove from government responsibility and accountability. The Taoiseach is doing nothing about this. In fact, he is doing the opposite by continuing to set up these quangos from which we cannot get accurate information on what is going on in their areas.
There are other questions coming up, some of which have been tabled by the Deputy, but there will not be enough time to deal with them.
I will be brief. The Taoiseach committed in the programme for Government to end homelessness by 2016. He has failed abysmally on this commitment. The levels of homelessness have not improved one iota but are getting worse, facts confirmed by all agencies and individuals dealing with the problem, including Fr. Peter McVerry. What does the Taoiseach have to say about this? Far from delivering on his promise to eradicate homelessness, the Taoiseach’s policies, cutting of rent allowances and failure to deliver social housing have actually worsened the homelessness crisis.
There are 620 commitments in the programme for Government. I could take the Taoiseach through the commitments as other Teachtaí have done, pointing out where he has torn them up. However, what is more important is the vision of the programme. What are its core values?
I believe citizens have fundamental rights - the right to a wraparound health service, to a home, to a clean environment, to a job, as well as a real republic of this century. I also believe one should not be a lesser citizen because one has disabilities. Whatever about the Government’s intentions, however, the fact is that if one has a disability, one is not really a citizen. On Friday, by chance, I met two families, both with children with Down’s syndrome who had been denied medical cards. One of them was a three year old girl, Lillie. She still cannot walk, talk, swallow or eat solids. She is prone, as children with Down’s syndrome are, to sickness, but she has no medical card. This week the mother of a very good friend of mine, Donnacha Rynne, a wonderful young man with profound disabilities from Miltown Malbay, had a letter in The Irish Times, decrying the fact that her son could not get a wheelchair, while someone in the CRC ripped off the charity of other citizens. This should not just be about dealing with individual cases but about changing the system. The programme for Government states, “We will pin down accountability for results at every level of public service - from Ministers down - with clear consequences for success and failure”. Uisce Éireann is a case in point. We tried for 18 months to get answers to questions on how this project was being put together but did not get any. It is not just about a series of commitments but about what sort of Ireland, state, island, republic we want to see. In the Government’s three years in office there has been clear evidence that the Ireland coming from this programme will be nothing like that envisioned in the 1916 Proclamation.
What I wish to see is a Republic where citizens can be proud to hold citizenship, where the economy is well run, where services are provided for those who need them and where, when a health issue arises, people have access to treatment based on their requirements, as distinct from what they have in their pockets. I wish to see a country in which there is opportunity for young people and, as I have stated many times, that proves to be the best country in the world in which to do business, the best country in which to raise a family and the best country in which to grow old with a sense of dignity and respect. Given the economic situation the Government inherited, it is not possible to do this overnight, so that is what I want from government. The mandate given to me and to the Government, comprising these two parties of Fine Gael and the Labour Party, is to sort out the public finances, run them properly and put the country back to work. This means the Deputy also has an involvement in this, with any constructive suggestions he has to make about employment opportunities, internships, apprenticeships and attractiveness as a location for investment. However, the Deputy's general theory is to be opposed to all things pertaining to Europe. He wanted it to go away with its money when we were deeply in debt, which would have led to a very different situation. Deputy Adams should note I do not agree that because a person has a disability he or she is deemed to be a non-citizen. The Deputy, together with every taxpayer in the country and the Exchequer, provides substantial moneys to a range of organisations to provide services for persons with a range of disabilities. Everyone accepts this. The situation has now arisen whereby in the case of the Central Remedial Clinic, the Committee of Public Accounts, the watchdog for the public, has been obliged to involve itself for hours on end and was given a litany of facts that were not the truth before Christmas in respect of certain matters. That is a committee doing its job in the interests of the public, and this will apply to all charities in order that they can prove they are in compliance with what is good public policy.
I listened to some of the presentation given by the chief executive of Irish Water in which he gave an exhaustive, comprehensive and detailed account of the expenditure and the services received for that expenditure in the setting up of a major public utility. The Deputy's own party representatives were on those committees, asked relevant questions and made their comments, the same as anyone else. Is there anything in there that still is not public enough for information to be had by people? I think that-----
Yes. I would like to know much the individuals were paid.
-----obviously is an issue. Consequently, when Deputy Adams talks about pinning down accountability, what can be more transparent or accountable than a seven-hour involvement by the Committee of Public Accounts on national television in the public forum of the committees of this House asking questions in the public interest? Clearly, every party and every Deputy who serves on those committees has that opportunity.
Deputy Boyd Barrett stated that the programme for Government had been abandoned. I have already pointed out to him-----
I referred to the transparency and accountability elements.
-----the issues that have been delivered upon, and the same applies to him. I hear his comments outside the House very frequently and it is the same record. Fair play to the Deputy; he is in the hit parade with that. However, it does not deal with the measures of accountability that are being-----
Consistency is a good thing, not a bad thing.
What is more transparent than the Committee of Public Accounts or an Oireachtas committee of all Members of the House asking questions-----
One should not be obliged to wait that long.
-----and dealing with issues that apply with regard to different matters nationwide?
Direct-----
Answer the questions here.
Yes, the salaries of those involved in Irish Water are known. However, Deputy Boyd Barrett should note that the salaries and pensions of some personnel in the news recently were not known-----
Do we know the hourly rates of the consultants? One hundred euro an hour.
-----and because they were not known, they are now subject to transparency, inquisition and accountability in the public interest. Does the Deputy think it fair that such a situation should continue in which members of the public did not know where their hard-earned money was going, in the belief that when they contributed to charity X, the money should go towards what was intended? As I stated, this is nauseating for some people.
It is.
This is the reason the Oireachtas and its committees are playing their part in bringing about that transparency and accountability, which is the way it should be. The Deputy stated that ordinary people were being hammered. Deputy Boyd Barrett should note that these are the same ordinary people who give their direct debits or donate a few euro or a few cent to the flag days, the collection boxes and the Santa bear collections because they believe in a service that is being provided. It is the same people who work in and use that service. It is of fundamental importance that they understand that their charity, whatever it might be, is properly run and absolutely audited above board and that such audits are published in order that people can choose in the knowledge that if they contribute to charity X, their money is going where it is intended.
The question of homelessness was raised. This issue has been going on for a very long time. The Government has a stated policy objective to end homelessness by the end of 2016, and the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, is dealing with this. Clearly, the four Dublin local authorities operate as a single region, with Dublin City Council acting as the leading authority, as this provides a more strategic approach when addressing homelessness. A lot of money has been paid out in this regard over the past few years. I understand the Minister of State has set up a high-level task force comprising Mark Kennedy of Mazars, Sylda Langford, a former civil servant, and Tony Fahey of UCD. That group has met representatives of the State and the non-governmental sector on an ongoing basis since its appointment and it sent its first report to the Minister of State on 19 December last. I might state that I recently saw a picture of a man in the newspaper who was described as having been homeless for ten years. How can this be? He has been homeless for ten years, yet we have all the agencies that deal with these cases.
Because council houses are not being built.
Clearly, as Deputy Boyd Barrett is well aware, there will always be a number of rough sleepers or short-term homeless people. However, when one considers Dublin, with its problems in this regard, it is clear that this is an issue that must be dealt with-----
One hundred thousand families need housing.
-----and housing supply and the opportunity to get into hostels - dry hostels and wet hostels - are important considerations in this regard. Substantial moneys have been allocated, and this morning I raised this with the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, at the Cabinet. I acknowledge to Deputy Boyd Barrett that we need to get a fix on this. I do not understand how someone can be homeless for ten years if he or she is genuinely in need of a home.
Because the housing list is 14 years long.
Deputy Boyd Barrett knows as well as do I that there are some unfortunate cases in which there are psychiatric challenges or problems or in which there may be psychological difficulties. The rough sleepers count, which takes place regularly, confirms that a minimum of 139 persons were sleeping rough across the Dublin region on a given night. These are the official figures from November 2013. This compared with a count from April 2013 of 94 people who were sleeping rough on the night in question. In 2013, €23 million was spent on emergency accommodation in Dublin alone, with 1,500 beds provided nightly to homeless people in Dublin. However, the increasing number of rough sleepers in Dublin reflects the gravity of the challenge facing everyone in this Chamber. This is the reason the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, has taken a particular interest in this issue now. The Government has put together a small group of effective people who know what they are talking about. I personally told the Minister of State that any assistance that can be given from the Office of the Taoiseach to deal with this effectively will be given. The Minister of State at the Department of Health, who is present, the Minister of State with responsibility for housing and Dublin City Council all are involved in this regard. Let us have an opportunity to discuss this in greater detail at some time in the future.
I would welcome this as soon as possible.
A total of €31.9 million, or 69% of the national total of €45 million, went to the Dublin region. From that perspective, this is an issue with which the Government must deal. As we approach 2016, the centenary of the Rising, I would like to think the legacy the Government will leave behind it for the start of the new century from 2016 onwards will be a city that has been cleaned up. I want it to be a situation in which there is not a homelessness problem, as these issues have been dealt with, and, in respect of the major buildings of the capital city, that the Government has put them in a position in which the next generation, 100 years on, can ask what they have got here. As Deputy Adams asked, what kind of Republic do we want? I want to see a country that is well run, in which the economy is efficient, where services are delivered for people, where the young can be proud of the adventure of life and where older citizens can be respected for the contribution they have made.
That is the challenge of politics and the people will judge us in due course as one Government. They are my ambitions to deliver for the people. It is never easy; it is always challenging, but it is always good to have an ambition that sets out a future for the country.
The Government should build a few council houses.
What about the bondholders and European financiers?
Northern Ireland Issues
Gerry Adams
Ceist:3. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach his priorities for the forthcoming plenary meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council in County Armagh in November. [40791/13]
Joe McHugh
Ceist:4. Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Taoiseach if he will provide an update on his engagements with the British Government and with the Northern Ireland Executive; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [44105/13]
Joe McHugh
Ceist:5. Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Taoiseach if he will provide an update on his recent discussions with Mr. Bill Clinton, former President of the United States of America, in respect of Northern Ireland. [44109/13]
Joe McHugh
Ceist:6. Deputy Joe McHugh asked the Taoiseach if he will set out his Department's plans for promoting greater co-operation between Britain and the Republic of Ireland in addressing policy concerns at meetings of EU Heads of Government. [44112/13]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:7. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he has recently met representatives of the Northern Ireland Executive. [45916/13]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:8. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he spoke to the British Prime Minister David Cameron at the recent European Council meeting in Brussels on matters relating to the North of Ireland and the peace process; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47673/13]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:9. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when he next plans to visit the North of Ireland; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47697/13]
Micheál Martin
Ceist:10. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has met members of the Northern Ireland Executive recently; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47758/13]
Micheál Martin
Ceist:11. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach if he has visited Northern Ireland recently; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [47847/13]
Micheál Martin
Ceist:12. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the particular areas of youth unemployment that were discussed at the British-Irish Council meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [50146/13]
Micheál Martin
Ceist:13. Deputy Micheál Martin asked the Taoiseach the specific actions he will take on youth unemployment following the British-Irish Council meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [50147/13]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:14. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he spoke to the British Prime Minister David Cameron regarding the planned State visit to Britain next April by President Michael D. Higgins; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [50213/13]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:15. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the 21st British-Irish Council summit; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [50216/13]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:16. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his visit to the Messines and the Menin Gate in December; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [50217/13]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:17. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the recent North-South meeting in Armagh. [53719/13]
Joe Higgins
Ceist:18. Deputy Joe Higgins asked the Taoiseach if he will report on his visit to the Messines and the Menin Gate in December; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53721/13]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Ceist:19. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if he will report on recent meetings he has had with Northern Ireland Executive representatives; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [53849/13]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:20. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach if he had meetings with British Prime Minister David Cameron at the European Council meeting on19 December, 2013; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [55567/13]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:21. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach his plans to meet with the British Prime Minister David Cameron. [2225/14]
Gerry Adams
Ceist:22. Deputy Gerry Adams asked the Taoiseach when he plans to hold a debate in Dáil Éireann on Northern Ireland. [2232/14]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 22, inclusive, together.
The last occasion on which I answered oral questions on Northern Ireland issues was in September last year. There are 45 parliamentary questions tabled on this subject. Therefore, in the light of previous representations, I have decided to take questions in two groups and on a thematic basis to allow for a more structured debate on the issues raised by Deputies. This group deals primarily with engagement with Prime Minister Cameron, the Northern Ireland Executive and various meetings, including the North-South Ministerial Council and the British-Irish Council. Questions relating to the Haass talks will be dealt with together in the next group. There are 20 questions in this group.
I attended a very constructive plenary meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council in Armagh on 8 November chaired by First Minister Robinson and Deputy First Minister McGuinness. The programme for Government includes a commitment to work for greater cross-Border economic co-operation to accelerate the process of recovery and the creation of jobs on the island. The other members of the Government and I avail of all opportunities, including meetings within the framework of the North-South Ministerial Council, to have constructive engagement with Northern Ministers on matters of mutual economic interest, advance initiatives designed to boost economic activity on the island and seek practical co-operation in providing services.
At the last plenary meeting in November 2013 we had an open and productive discussion about a number of issues that were important to people on all parts of the island. We also discussed youth employment and how we could work together to tackle this issue, which is of vital importance to both jurisdictions. Regarding the St. Andrew's Agreement review, we agreed that Ministers would examine priorities at sectoral meetings, especially as they might affect economic recovery, job creation, the best use of public funds and the most effective delivery of public services. This was further discussed at a North-South Ministerial Council institutional meeting earlier this month. We discussed the fiscal and economic challenges facing both jurisdictions and the opportunities for more practical co-operation. We are keen to ensure a preliminary package of new priorities will be ready for consideration at the next meeting in June this year. I would like to see further co-operation that would help to create more employment and boost exports and economic activity. I have in mind, for example, opportunities to develop synergies in increasing our joint draw down of innovation funding under Horizon 2020. There would also be merit in examining the potential to develop cross-Border clusters of economic activity. Before the plenary meeting, I addressed a joint sport and reconciliation conference in Armagh together with the First Minister, the Deputy First Minister and the Tánaiste. I endorsed the collaboration between the three sports organisations, the GAA, the IRFU and the IFA, to tackle racism, sectarianism and division.
While in Armagh, I also took the opportunity to meet the CEOs of the North-South Implementation Bodies to discuss their work programmes and also to get their views on growing their respective areas of activity. I also had the opportunity to meet briefly the SDLP leader, Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, on the margins of the SDLP annual conference. On 10 November I attended the Sunday Remembrance Day wreath laying ceremony at the cenotaph in Enniskillen. I went to pay my respects to all of the war dead who had given their lives in the world wars. In advance of the wreath laying ceremony at the cenotaph I met briefly members of the South East Fermanagh Federation and Minister Arlene Foster in the Clinton Centre. I attended the service of remembrance in St. McCartin's Cathedral. After the service I met Dean Kenneth Hall and Canon Peter O'Reilly, together with members of the Church of Ireland Vestry and members of the local parish council. I commend Dean Hall and Canon O'Reilly and all of the people of Enniskillen for their collective work and leadership in fostering cross-community relations and also in maintaining the dignity and importance of Remembrance Day. I also met members of the Royal British Legion and their families in the Legion Hall.
I attended the 21st British-Irish Council summit hosted by the Jersey Chief Minister in Jersey on 15 November. We had a very productive discussion on economic issues and addressed the topics of creative industries and youth employment, which are important issues across all of our administrations. We had a short video presentation on Jersey's advance to work scheme, which provides young people with approximately three months work experience and employment training, supported by a mentor. We also exchanged views and examined progress on the various policy initiatives and programmes aimed at helping young people into employment in each member administration and reviewed the latest relevant statistics. By way of follow up to the summit meeting, all British-Irish Council work sectors have been asked to consider the issue of generating employment opportunities for young people in their work programmes and report on the matter at the next British-Irish Council summit in Guernsey in June 2014.
On my Department's plans for promoting greater co-operation between Britain and the Republic of Ireland in addressing policy concerns at meetings of EU Heads of Government, our two countries have shared common membership of the European Union for almost 40 years. As partners in the European Union, we are firm supporters of the Single Market and continue to work together to encourage an outward-facing European Union which promotes growth and job creation. We share a desire to reduce the burden of regulation, particularly on small and medium enterprises, and believe the Single Market should, in particular, take advantage of digital opportunities, reflecting the growing importance of online commerce and trade, opening up services markets and establishing a genuine, efficient and effective internal market in energy. We also share a commitment to build a robust, dynamic and competitive financial services sector across the European Union that provides vital support for citizens and businesses and creates sustainable employment. During Ireland's Presidency of the European Union in the first half of 2013 we worked closely across the range of EU dossiers. We will continue to consult each other on key EU policy issues. Since the publication of the joint statement, British-Irish Relations – the Next Decade, by Prime Minister Cameron and I in March 2012 we have been making good progress in driving closer co-operation between Britain and Ireland. A joint British-Irish economic study, Evaluating the value of the economic relationship between the United Kingdom and Ireland, was published in July 2013 and helped to inform areas for closer co-operation.
Two plenary meetings of Secretaries General and Permanent Secretaries have taken place to date - in November 2012 in London and in September 2013 in Dublin. These meetings provide a platform to consider progress to date and map out future work. Both the Prime Minister and I are committed to meeting together at annual summits to review and oversee progress in the broad areas outlined in the joint statement. I expect our next review will take place in March.
On 9 October I had an informal meeting with former US President Bill Clinton when he visited Dublin to attend an event organised by Philanthropy Ireland. The President is a very good friend of Ireland and remains keenly interested in our progress. Our meeting was a useful opportunity to thank him again for his ongoing support for and interest in Ireland. As Deputies are aware, he has been a major influence on the Northern Ireland peace process during the years and we discussed the current situation in Northern Ireland, including the talks chaired by Richard Haass.
On 19 December 2013 Prime Minister Cameron and I visited the war graves in Flanders to commemorate and honour all those Irish and British soldiers who had died in the First World War. During the visit the Prime Minister and I laid wreaths at the Irish Peace Park in Messines and at Menin Gate. We visited Tyne Cot and paid our respects at the war graves of the 36th (Ulster) Division, the 16th (Irish) Division and the 10th (Irish) Division, as well as visiting the lone grave of Willie Redmond. Following that visit I attended the European Council meeting in Brussels.
I warmly welcome the official confirmation that President Higgins will pay a state visit to the United Kingdom this year. This is a further demonstration of the warm and positive relationship between Ireland and the United Kingdom. The state visit in April, following on the very successful visit to Ireland by Queen Elizabeth in 2011, will be a wonderful opportunity to deepen the relationship.
The Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Alan Shatter, is examining the Smithwick report with a view to making a submission to the Government in the coming weeks. He has already had preliminary discussions with the Garda Commissioner. He has met his Northern Ireland counterpart, David Forde, as well as the Garda Commissioner and the Chief Constable of the PSNI and the report was one of the items on the agenda. On 4 December the Tánaiste informed the House that he agreed that the Government would make time available to have the Smithwick report discussed in the House. Perhaps that occasion might also be used for a wider debate on Northern Ireland, should the party Whips so wish.
Just six minutes and 40 seconds remain for this business and four Deputies have questions. Deputy Adams has nine questions, Deputy Martin has four, Deputy Joe Higgins has three and Deputy Boyd Barrett has one. I suggest that if we allow two minutes for the Taoiseach to reply to the supplementary questions, we should allocate a maximum of two minutes to Deputy Adams, a minute to Deputies Martin and Higgins and whatever is left to Deputy Boyd Barrett. Is that agreed? Agreed. Deputies should put all of their supplementaries together as best they can.
This is not a criticism of the Ceann Comhairle, as I know he is doing his best with the time he has, but it is unsatisfactory to have just over six minutes. I submitted nine questions and we have not discussed the North here on Oral Questions since September.
The Deputy is wasting time now.
I am making a political point.
I allowed the Deputy in earlier on a supplementary although he had no question submitted. Let us be fair now.
In Question No. 22, I asked the Taoiseach when he plans to hold a debate in the Dáil on Northern Ireland. He made a commitment to doing this twice and I would like to see that debate take place. There is a huge amount happening in the North and there is a huge amount the Government could be doing, but it is not doing it. The attitude here among Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Labour Party is condescending and patronising towards the parties in the North. I want to see the parties here organised in the North and want to see them knitted into the life of society there. I particularly want to see the Government here facing up to the British Government in ensuring it fulfils its obligations under international treaties. We cannot expect the Unionist leaders who want to dilute, diminish, slow down and protect change to embrace new dispensations when the British Government is not doing so.
I will limit my remarks to say to the Taoiseach that we need a full debate on these issues. The Taoiseach needs to organise some way - on a monthly or some other basis - that we can come in here and give time to deal with nine questions in detail. There is no way I can deal with my nine questions in the time I have been allocated here. I will not deal with the substance of my questions now, but simply ask the Taoiseach to set aside not just sufficient time for a debate, but to provide a systematic way of discussing these hugely important questions. The Taoiseach has said we should not take the peace for granted and we should not. Let us do our jobs and focus on building the peace.
I agree we need a debate on Northern Ireland and it is much to be regretted that the defining characteristic of Government policy over the past three years has been a hands-off policy.
There has been a lack of any co-ordinated development in regard to the Border region. The crystallisation of this was the failure to go ahead with the Narrow Water bridge project. I find it incomprehensible that the Taoiseach, along with the British Prime Minister and the Northern Ireland Executive, did not make this happen. The project had the support of communities on both sides of the Border. If that was ten or 20 years ago, we would have given our right arm to have that level of commitment from all sides and traditions. Apart from its socio-economic value, which was proven in the value for money study, the project's importance in terms of bridging communities from different traditions would have been immense.
European funding had been allocated for the project, but there was a failure of political will to make it happen. Why was that and why did the Taoiseach not insist on knocking heads together to make it happen and ensure we availed of the European funding that was available? The failure to do so was huge in terms of the economy of the Border region and North-South relations.
The First World War was a crime of appalling proportions which inflicted hell on earth by the ruling classes of both Germany and Britain in pursuit of greater access to markets and greed for each other's colonies. Millions of victims were working class youth in uniform and others. I put it to the Taoiseach that it is not appropriate that he should participate uncritically with modern day representatives of the British ruling class in ceremonies supposedly commemorating the innocent victims, when those people have never acknowledged the extent of the crime for which they and the German ruling class were responsible.
One of the Taoiseach's party information bulletins states that Fine Gael embraced other traditions as it developed in Ireland, including the Irish Parliamentary Party of Redmond. In 2014, the year commemorating the 100th anniversary of the launch of the nightmare of the First World War, has the Taoiseach any plans to apologise for the baleful crime of the Irish Parliamentary Party and its leadership in whipping up support for the World War atrocities and being responsible for tens of thousands of youth from this country participating and dying in the process?
I endorse the call for a debate on the North because there are many issues and we need some kind of regular space to discuss these.
While we all want to see greater levels of all-Ireland co-operation and common work North and South, there are worrying signs that we are co-operating or echoing one another in the wrong areas. Last week, in the Royal Victoria Hospital there was a trolley crisis, with 46 people on trolleys. People before Profit representatives in Belfast tell me that is as a direct result of the closure of the city hospital. This parallels what is happening here, with the resurgence in the trolley crisis because, as a doctor from St. Vincent's said recently, of the closure of the 24 hour accident and emergency facility in Loughlinstown. This is a worrying sign of us co-operating and adopting common policies in the wrong areas and of applying austerity and cutbacks in a way that is detrimental to public services. This ultimately fuels the sectarian conflict, as different communities struggle and compete with one another for ever reducing resources.
I thank the Deputies for their questions. There will be a debate on Northern Ireland the week after next. Deputies have raised issues they wish to be debated here. We will have the Health Service Executive plan next week and a debate on Northern Ireland, the Haass talks and all of that the following week and everybody will have the opportunity to contribute to that.
Deputy Martin raised the issue of the Narrow Water bridge. We supported this in principle. Unfortunately, the problem was that while the estimate was for it to cost €18 million, the tender price came in at over €30 million. The local authority in County Louth had undertaken to make up the shortfall and the European moneys were due to be allocated. If those moneys were not allocated within a specific time, they would be allocated elsewhere and that is what happened. The Northern Ireland Executive and the Government agreed that we would keep this project alive.
It is over.
Yes, but it seems the Deputy is suggesting that because Louth County Council said it would make up the shortfall, we should ask taxpayers here to write another cheque for €14 million, on top of what we were already contributing.
The Taoiseach should have got it sorted in the time.
The point is there was an estimate of what the bridge would cost, but when the tenders came in they were almost double that. The Deputy seems to think we can just write cheques as happened before. This is a different era. I support the concept of a bridge at Narrow Water. I met the people on both sides and the bridge would be a tangible benefit. The project is not dead. We must revive it, but it will be a different bridge when it is built.
I attended the ceremonies at Flanders - at the peace park - put together by Paddy Harte and Glen Barr. It was a privilege to be there and the ceremony was both nostalgic and emotional. Seeing an officer of Óglaigh na hÉireann giving advice to the British Prime Minister in respect of the location for wreath laying and the protocol to be followed was symbolic of a new era of the relationship between both our countries, following on the attendance of the Queen of England and former Uachtarán na hÉireann many years ago, on the first occasion where those two formidable women met. We also visited the Menin Gate Memorial at Messines.
It is a powerful statement when the local guide shows one of the names of the Royal Dublin Fusiliers who were blown up or shot and never recovered and whose place of final rest is unknown. There are more than 51,000 names, many from this city and country. The Irish Parliamentary Party had a very particular view about associating itself with the Great War, the war to end all wars, in the context of the Home Rule Bill. Everybody made up their own minds, either for King and country or for the freedom of small nations. No doubt the Deputy has been in Flanders and visited the grave of Willie Redmond who, when he was shot, was carried on the back of a Protestant soldier to where he was given attention in the local hospital, which is now the location of his grave. It is a powerful reminder of why we have the European Union. The fact that 60 million people, mostly men, were slaughtered in the two world wars speaks for itself.
To answer Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett, we will have a debate the week after next on Northern Ireland.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.