Topical Issue Debate

Radio Broadcasting

Deputy Seán Kyne

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Ann Phelan, and I thank the Ceann Comhairle's office for choosing this topical issue, which I first submitted on 30 September. It has taken a while. It was deferred from last week. We all are aware what happened yesterday.

Connemara Community Radio is a community based and run radio station broadcasting for ten hours a day, from 11 a.m. to 9 p.m. It has two full-time administration staff and up to 90 volunteers to service its programmes. They started broadcasting on 1 July 1995. It has a franchised area of 11,500 people in Ireland. As it is a big tourism area the listenership increases during the summer. Perhaps more importantly, it has a significant Internet following because of immigration and they are able to monitor where those are listening in. They listen from America, Australia and the United Kingdom. They are able to see exactly when the peak listenership is, which is at local news time. It is interesting what they can do. They run an important local service.

Connemara Local Radio has had various funding streams over the years. Latterly, it has been funded through the local and community development programme, LCDP, where it got a contract, from 2010 to 2015, with the funding ending at the end of this year. There is growing concern within the community that this important local resource would run out of funding and they have been pursuing a number of suggestions in that regard. They have the full backing of the local community in terms of ensuring they continue with their programming. They cover local news and spread it through the different parishes in the Connemara area, from Ballyconneely to Roundstone, Cashel, Letterfrack and Renvyle, and they have a broadcast studio in Inishbofen.

They also give valuable service to young persons who are interested in learning about media and broadcasting. As a local politician, I have been interviewed on many occasions by young enthusiastic and energetic persons who were learning their trade and putting politicians under pressure, as they should do. Most importantly, as I said, it is providing that local service link.

The LCDP delivered innovated responses to social inclusion issues. With the additional support of community development programme resources, it was best placed to respond to the local needs of the community. Efficient strategies were put in place to increase social inclusion and reduce consistent poverty in the locality. The programme has delivered and this community resource has been successful since 1995.

The station has been pursuing other sources of funding. It attempted to apply for funding under the social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, in the Department for Social Protection but that was not successful. I understand that recently it applied under the community services programme of the Department, through Pobal, which covers a number of different Departments. In her role as the Minister of State for with responsibility for rural affairs, Deputy Ann Phelan, would cover many Departments as well.

I understand that the station has applied under the community services programme and is receiving positive vibes in this regard.

A relatively small amount of funding is provided. Initially the amount provided was €139,000, but due to cutbacks the funding was reduced to €89,000. An excellent service was provided for such a small amount of money. Two full-time staff are employed, nine part-time staff that are on community employment, CE, and Tús schemes and 90 volunteers. It goes to show the importance of the service in the community that so many people are prepared to volunteer to keep the show on the road. A local radio station is a great resource and people want to keep it open. I hope that through a combination of the efforts of various Departments and agencies a package will be put together to keep Connemara Community Radio on air after 1 January 2015.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Ann Phelan)

I understand the Deputy's concern, as local radio services are extremely important in isolated rural areas in particular. That aspect of the matter is not lost on me. As the Deputy outlined, the group in question is currently in receipt of funding through the local and community development programme, LCDP, and has been advised that it will be funded under LCDP for the remainder of 2014.

The social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, is one of the key priorities of Government and its overall indicative budget for 2015 has been maintained close to 2014 levels. The programme's target groups are children and families from disadvantaged areas, lone parents, new communities, including refugees and asylum seekers, people living in disadvantaged communities, people with disabilities, the Roma community, the unemployed, including those not on the live register, Travellers, and young unemployed people from disadvantaged areas.

In accordance with the public spending code, legal advice, good practice internationally and in order to ensure the optimum delivery of services to clients, the programme is subject to a public procurement process, which is currently under way. Stage one, which is expression of interest, has been completed by the radio station. Stage two - invitation to tender - commenced on 20 October, and will involve the successful applicants from stage one being invited to apply to one or more local community development committees, in local authority areas, to deliver the programme. Contracts for SICAP will be determined following the outcome of the procurement process.

The public procurement process is a competitive process that is open to local development companies, other not-for-profit community groups, commercial firms and national organisations that can provide the services to be tendered for to deliver the new programme. In stage one, joint applications were encouraged and organisations of varying sizes, for example, smaller organisations working in consortia with larger organisations, were invited to submit joint applications. I understand that some small groups, such as Connemara Community Radio, faced a number of challenges in competing in the stage one process. The results of stage one were released on 24 September and I can confirm that while Connemara Community Radio did submit an expression of interest, as the Deputy outlined, its application was unsuccessful.

The Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, is now considering the implications of this outcome for Connemara Community Radio. I understand discussions have opened between the Department of Social Protection and the relevant parties regarding the group making an application to a more appropriate funding stream such as the community services programme. The Deputy is probably already aware of the information.

The proposals outlined in the document, Putting People First - Action Programme for Effective Local Government, seek to position local government "as the primary vehicle of governance and public service at local level - leading economic, social and community development, delivering efficient and good value services, and representing citizens and local communities effectively and accountably". As part of the programme of reform of local government, local community development committees, LCDCs, are being established in all local authority areas. The committees, comprising public and private socio-economic interests, will have responsibility for local and community development programmes on an area basis, including the social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP. They will develop, co-ordinate and implement a more coherent and integrated approach to local and community development than heretofore, with the aim of reducing duplication and overlap and optimising the use of available resources for the benefit of citizens and communities.

Deputy Seán Kyne

I thank the Minister of State for her comprehensive reply. Connemara Community Radio, based in Letterfrack, has applied for the community services programme and I am hopeful we will get good news in that regard. It is important that the Minister of State, Deputy Ann Phelan, would relay to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, that the pressure should be kept on to ensure a comprehensive package is provided. Connemara Community Radio provides a hugely successful programme for €89,000. It provides an excellent service for local people and the diaspora. An overall package could be provided for a relatively small amount. I hope the provision of a small, extra amount could be found in either the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government or the Departments in which the Minister of State serves.

I am sure the Minister of State, Deputy Ann Phelan, is familiar with beautiful Connemara and Letterfrack, which has a long history, not all of it positive. In the past 40 years the community has set up initiatives such as Connemara West and forums involved in projects such as the community radio. A lovely campus is located in the Ellis Hall in Letterfrack which houses several groups, including a GMIT furniture college. As a result, the village hosts 500 students and a very successful local radio station. I hope that through the efforts of the Minister of State, Deputy Ann Phelan, and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, we can ensure there is a package for Connemara Community Radio from January that will allow it to continue to deliver its important programme.

Deputy Ann Phelan

I will pursue the matter with the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly. I am aware of how important such services are for rural areas, in particular in Connemara. I am most familiar with Connemara West and all the good things it does. I urge the Deputy to pursue also the application through the Department of Social Protection. I am happy to provide him with any help or advice I can. I will make contact with the Minister of State in the Department of Social Protection, Deputy Kevin Humphreys, to see whether we can pursue the application in conjunction with his Department.

Strategic Infrastructure Provision

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

Many constituents in Dublin Bay North were astonished recently to learn of a proposal by Fingleton White & Co. Ltd. and the Independent Pipeline Co. Ltd. for a 16 km aviation fuel pipeline from Dublin Port to Dublin Airport. The kerosene pipeline route is proposed to pass along the Malahide Road through a densely populated residential region, including East Wall, Fairview, Marino, Clontarf, Donnycarney, Artane, Coolock, Darndale, Ayrfield, Clare Hall and Burnell, along the R139 - the former N32 - and the M1 and up to the airport. The proposal is a major change of route from the 2001 Fingleton White oil pipeline plan of 11.1 km which was to run from the port up East Wall Road, through Ballybough onto Richmond Road and up through Drumcondra and Gracepark Road onto Griffith Avenue and the Swords Road through Whitehall to the airport.

I note the grave concerns and consternation of residents from East Wall, Drumcondra and Whitehall during the planning process on this earlier An Bord Pleanála approved plan, PL 29N. 122692. The same concerns are now shared by my Dublin Bay North constituents.

I understand that no revised version of the 2001 plan has yet been submitted to Dublin City Council but I note that Fingleton White approached An Bord Pleanála in 2009 and 2010 and the board's inspector decided that under section 37B of the Planning and Development Acts 2000 to 2006, the new proposal was considered to be strategic infrastructure and that planning applications must be made in the first instance to both Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council. This attempt by the developer to circumvent the democratic local authorities reflects the total lack of consultation by the proposers with residents and public representatives in the densely populated areas now proposed for this kerosene pipeline. With the exception of two poorly publicised briefings in September, none of the dozen or so affected parishes have received information on this proposal. During the earlier 1999 to 2001 planning process significant health and safety issues were raised by residents' groups but amazingly, no environmental impact study was submitted with the proposal. Furthermore, in their brief press releases, the proposers make no mention of an EIS for the current plan.

We are informed that the 200 mm diameter pipeline will be made of continuous welded steel with an outer wall of 12.7 mm and that it will be laid 1.5 m below the road, with 1.2 m of cover. However, there is no explanation whatsoever as to why a much longer route of 4.4 km through densely populated areas is being proposed now rather than simply seeking an extension of the 2001 permission.

With regard to health and safety, in 1999 to 2001 and now, constituents rightly ask why such a pipeline - if needed at all - is not simply brought across open country from Bremore or Drogheda Port down to the airport. A review of accident history in the EU, the US and elsewhere, shows that fuel pipelines can be very hazardous. Even a cursory check on pipelines safety records reveals a disturbing litany of disasters in each decade since the 1960s. In the US there have been many serious oil pipeline incidents on the extensive American oil and gas pipeline networks. In 1976, for example, an oil pipeline ruptured in Los Angeles and killed nine people. Further afield, a 1998 oil pipeline explosion in the Niger delta killed about 1,200 people and in 2006 a similar incident outside Lagos killed 200 people. Stricter EU legislation has meant there have been relatively few notable incidents involving oil pipelines in Europe but in 2004 there was a major gas pipeline rupture at Ghislenghein in Belgium where 24 people were killed and 132 seriously injured. It is clear that leak detection systems for oil pipelines are critical aspects of such infrastructure but in the earlier proposal in this matter and now there is little or no information on such safety mechanisms and standards.

It beggars belief that according to Fingleton White of the six routes allegedly ear-marked by the developers in so called preplanning discussions the Malahide road route came out as the optimal route. Constituents ask why this pipeline and any such route is needed at all. They correctly point to the presence of the €800 million port tunnel which over the past eight years has diverted heavy commercial traffic, including aviation fuel trucks, out of Dublin Port along the 4.5 km tunnel out past Santry and just 2 km further north along the M1 to Dublin Airport. The port tunnel was planned and developed from 1993 and it is one of the greatest infrastructural projects in the history of the State. Aviation fuel trucks make up 1.5% of the traffic in the tunnel. Maximising its usage of commercial and other vehicles is a core objective of sustainable Dublin transport policy. In both the US and EU legislation there seems to be no safe set-back distance for pipelines from family homes and public facilities.

This kerosene pipeline proposal through densely populated residential districts seems to be a half-baked, ill thought-out, kite-flying exercise by Fingleton White. I believe that no cost-benefit analysis will show that the use of an expensively built and possibly very dangerous oil pipeline through residential areas of Dublin Bay North is more cost-effective and safer for citizens than the existing simple system of oil transport utilising the Dublin Port tunnel which was a key reason for its construction.

Deputy Ann Phelan

I thank the Deputy for helping to raise awareness of the issue. I am taking this Topical Issue matter on behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly. The Department has no involvement with this project, nor has the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. I understand from newspaper reports that a company called the Independent Pipeline Company, which is backed by a County Laois-based engineering concern, Fingleton White and Dublin-based fuel transporters Reynolds Logistics, intends to submit planning applications to both Dublin City Council and Fingal County Council in the coming weeks for an aviation fuel pipeline between Dublin Port and Dublin Airport. In effect, the proposal is a private development. As the proposed pipeline would traverse the functional areas of two planning authorities, planning applications are required to be submitted to the two concerned planning authorities.

The role of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, with regard to the planning system is primarily to provide and update the legislative and policy framework, including the provision of policy guidance to the planning authorities, including An Bord Pleanála, so that they can carry out their prescribed planning functions. This legislative framework comprises the Planning and Development Acts 2000 to 2014 and the Planning and Development Regulations 2001 to 2013. The Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government, has issued a large number of policy guidance documents in the form of planning guidelines under section 28 of the Planning and Development Act, to which planning authorities and An Bord Pleanála are obliged to have regard in the exercise of their planning functions.

Therefore, in this particular case, if and when planning applications are lodged in respect of the proposed aviation fuel pipeline, the decision as to whether to grant planning permission, with or without conditions, will be a matter for the relevant planning authorities in the first instance. Given the scale of the proposed project, it will be a requirement that consultation with relevant statutory bodies and with the public is carried out as part of the planning application process. When ultimately making their decisions on the planning applications under section 34 of the Planning and Development Act, the planning authorities concerned will be required to consider the overall proper planning and sustainable development of the area, having regard to among other things, the provisions of the respective local development plans, any submissions or observations received on the planning applications and, where relevant, any relevant policy of the Government.

In addition, the requirements of the environmental impact assessment directive and the habitats directive, which have been transposed in our planning legislation, must also be considered. Accordingly, any environmental impacts of the project will be fully assessed, while also having regard to any inputs in this connection from the consultation process with relevant statutory bodies and the public.

The possibility of lodging an appeal against any decision of a planning authority is, of course, a fundamental feature of the planning system. The applicant or developer, as well as any person who made a submission on the original planning application, may appeal the decision of a planning authority to An Bord Pleanála, the independent statutory appeals board. In such instance, An Bord Pleanála is required to review the entire case and ultimately reaches its own determination on the matter, in line with the proper planning and sustainable development of the area.

Deputy Thomas P. Broughan

I thank the Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Kelly, who contacted me to apologise for being unable to be here. The Minister of State's reply with regard to the consultation process is unsatisfactory. My constituents believe that this project is of major significance to strategic infrastructure, whatever its planning connotation and that the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, should both be consulted directly. It seems incredible that we learn about this major plan from press releases rather than from engagement with the Government and with the local authorities.

What power has the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government with regard to environmental impact statements? This is a major infrastructural project costing at least €20 million and possibly more which will involve the promoters being given way-leave along the major traffic arteries of Dublin city. What power has the Minister to insist that an environmental impact statement would be produced?

In the previous instalment of this madcap proposal in 1991 to 2001, the Health and Safety Authority said that Ireland had no legislation covering aviation fuel pipelines and that the HSE and the HSA had no statutory remit with regard to the safety standards of the proposal. I do not believe this situation has changed. Are regulations in place to govern aviation fuel pipelines? I imagine legislation would have been drafted if we had discovered oil off the south-west coast. Hopefully there will be oil discoveries in the future off the coast of Connacht and Munster. There is a significant lacuna in such legislation.

Is it not incumbent on the Minister to bring forward legislation before this can even be considered? The Malahide Road is an impossible location because it is such a busy key artery in the north city and Dublin Bay North. It is unconscionable to hold it up for a year or more. The Dublin Port tunnel was specifically built for this purpose and aviation fuel trucks make up only 1.5% of the traffic. Surely we do not need this madcap half-baked proposal.

Deputy Ann Phelan

I draw the Deputy's attention to the fact environmental impact statements are part of the planning process. They have been transposed into legislation. The proposed construction of the fuel pipeline from Dublin Port to Dublin Airport is a private development. It will be required to go through the full rigours of the planning process. Consideration of a planning application will require consideration of the overall proper planning and sustainable development of the area. Local development plans will have to be taken into account.

I commend the Deputy on raising awareness about this. People complain about the public consultation aspect of our planning process. It is extremely important that people know what developments are taking place in their area so they can make a submission and make their views known. The planning authority will take all submissions into consideration and deliberate on them. The planning process is not necessarily there to help the developer. It is also there for the public, but the public must engage with it. I understand the Deputy is raising awareness about this.

Agrifood Sector

Deputy Seamus Kirk

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this important item with regard to what has been happening on the issue of cattle rustling over the past number of years. Cattle rustling has been around for a while but there has been a serious intensification of activity in this most nefarious area in recent times. Cattle farmers in Border counties, including Louth, Monaghan and Armagh, have been severely affected.

Many beef farmers are in dire financial circumstances because of the prices available for their produce over the past six months and longer. Now we have an added dimension whereby farmers who buy cattle at the mart find they are gone from the field the next day. It is costing tens of thousands of euro. In many instances the livestock were bought with bank loans.

The obvious question is where are the livestock going. I must reiterate the point livestock are being stolen north of the Border also. At least one and perhaps two illegal abattoirs have been located, but clearly there must be more. We are speaking about thousands of top quality animals, not exclusively but in the main continental-style beef cattle, which have caught the eye of nefarious people.

This begs the question of what we do about it. Is it possible to establish a task force? Is it possible for the Garda Síochána and the PSNI to work more closely together and in greater harmony on the issue? What is the position of the veterinary sections of the respective Departments with responsibility for agriculture in Dublin and Stormont?

These livestock are disappearing off the face of the earth. Quite clearly they are going into illegal abattoirs because the traceability system established over a period of time is quite robust. Given the fact there are Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine inspectors in legal slaughtering premises it is very hard to imagine they allow unvouched and unvalidated livestock into the food chain.

When these animals are slaughtered, they are going into the food chain. What is the outlet for them? People suggest that perhaps it is the catering sector, which is a significant segment of the food sector. Surely there must be a system whereby individuals trading in the area must vouch for, or can be compelled to vouch for, the source of their meat.

Is legislation adequate to cater for this phenomenon, which is not exclusive to the Border counties? Animals have been stolen elsewhere throughout the country, although it seems to be focused on the Border area. It appears cross-Border traffic in stolen livestock is quite active.

I have raised a number of questions and I await the response of the Minister of State on them. I am positive and supportive of any initiative to tackle it. I have had too many broken-hearted farmers stand in my constituency clinic complaining about this issue. We seem to be able to do nothing about it.

Deputy Ann Phelan

I thank the Deputy for raising this very important issue. I understand these are very valuable animals and in some cases the money to buy them was borrowed, so the investment is gone.

The integrity of our beef industry is of the utmost importance to the economy and to Ireland's worldwide reputation as a food-producing country. I assure the Deputy that every step is taken to safeguard this industry, and this is achieved by ensuring the highest standards are applied and maintained in the production of Irish food.

I am aware of the incidence of stolen livestock in the country. Theft is primarily a matter for An Garda Síochána and any incidents involving theft of livestock should be reported to the Garda Síochána in the first place. The number of cattle reported stolen since 1 January 2012 is 555, out of a total population of 6.9 million animals. The Garda frequently requests the assistance of staff from the Department who have expertise in the areas of animal tagging and registration, animal movement, animal health and animal welfare, and who have access to the animal identification and movement database. There is ongoing contact between departmental staff and An Garda Síochána in this regard.

There is also close liaison with the relevant authorities in Northern Ireland aimed at addressing the issue of stolen livestock. A cross-Border liaison group comprising the Garda, the Department's investigations division, the PSNI and the Northern Irish Department of Agriculture and Rural Development investigate the theft of livestock on a Border-county basis. I draw the Deputy's attention to the fact that a recent operation involving the Department's investigation division and the Garda resulted in the discovery of an illegal abattoir near the Border and the subsequent questioning of two persons. This matter is under investigation at present.

Under EU law, primary responsibility for the traceability and safety of food placed on the market lies with food business operators, FBOs. The role of the Department is to verify the compliance of FBOs with this requirement. Significant resources are devoted to this task. This is done by a combination of comprehensive animal identification systems, inspection of establishments and auditing the food safety management systems which operators are required to have in place. These controls are applied at various stages in the food supply chain.

When animals are presented for slaughter at meat plants, an ante mortem examination is carried out prior to slaughter, and following the slaughter, a post mortem examination is carried out to determine the suitability of the meat for entry into the food chain. This level of examination meets the hygiene package standard as laid down by the EU and ensures the integrity of the food chain.

The Department has a permanent veterinary presence at all its approved slaughter plants. Controls at stand-alone secondary processing plants are carried out at a frequency based on risk assessment for each plant. Smaller abattoirs are supervised by local authorities.

Checks are also conducted at retail level by the HSE, working under the aegis of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland which has an overarching supervisory role in this area.

The presence of extensive checks by the Department and other competent authorities, of course, does not absolve the FBO of prime responsibility for compliance with the rules. Responsibility for compliance with traceability requirements rests in the first instance with FBOs. FBOs in Ireland are responsible for carrying out checks to ensure that their ingredients come from EU approved plants. They must also have a system in place to identify the source of inputs and destination of outputs - referred to as one step forward and one step back.

When members of the public provide information to the authorities about any suspicious or illegal activity concerning the movement of cattle, it is treated in confidence and it greatly assists in the investigations that follow. I therefore ask members of the public to continue their support in that regard. Farmers who have heavily invested in rearing animals and bringing them to the point of slaughter are the real victims of this crime. I am aware of the devastating impact that the theft of animals has on the individual farmers.

Tackling the crime of cattle rustling can only be done with the combined efforts of gardaí, staff from my Department and the general public. I assure the Deputy and the House that my Department will provide whatever assistance is required towards combating these crimes.

Deputy Seamus Kirk

I thank the Minister of State for her response. I am pleased to hear that a task force has been established. There may be a need to broaden the task force and incorporate into its membership representatives from the farming organisations because at the end of the day members of the farming organisations are nearer to the issue we are discussing. As they are familiar with the problems they could bring considerable focus to bear on tackling the problem. We have a range of farming organisations with which we are all familiar. I ask the Department to consider the possibility of the different groupings establishing a liaison arrangement to ensure the Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine and An Garda Síochána are up to speed and familiar with the difficulties on the ground.

Deputy Ann Phelan

I thank the Deputy for his positive contribution. What is required now is vigilance. As the Deputy will know, even when an animal strays off the farm and dies of natural causes, that animal's identification tag is pursued to ensure it was disposed of in a correct way and for traceability purposes is removed from the national database. When one is doing one's farming records, all that has to be followed up.

I accept what the Deputy is saying. It is difficult to understand how such animals can in some cases disappear. However, we know they are disappearing into something. I appeal to farmers in the area, gardaí and members of the public to be very vigilant. This is the way forward. The same happened with fuel laundering. It is possible to reduce the impact by keeping vigilant and ensuring that everybody is informed and doing their job. I thank the Deputy for raising this very important issue.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 23 Oct 2014