I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Damien English.
Commencement Matters
Schools Building Projects Status
Gaelscoil Iarfhlatha in Tuam is seeking clarity on the matter of its proposed new school building. As far back as 2012 the school community was assured that a new school building would be delivered, as promised, in 2015. However, I am advised that there is no sign of this happening. Instead, according to the most recent updates from the Department, the project has not yet passed the site acquisition stage.
The protracted process and the lack of clarity for the school is deeply frustrating for students, management and teachers. A number of children are being taught in substandard temporary accommodation that has been in place for almost 20 years, which is wrong. The pupils and teachers of Gaelscoil Iarfhlatha need more than simply being put on the long finger; they need a new school building and the Department of Education and Skills has committed to providing it this year. They need to know now with absolute certainty and clarity when work on a new building will commence and how soon the school will be operational so that the children can at last be taught in a fit-for-purpose environment.
I stand with the pupils, teachers, parents and management of Gaelscoil Iarfhlatha in urging the Minister of State in the strongest possible terms to bring clarity to this situation and progress this long-standing issue for the students and teachers. I look forward to his response.
I thank the Senator for raising this issue which gives me the opportunity to clarify the position and report progress.
The five-year construction plan announced in March 2012 outlines the major school projects which will commence construction over the duration of the plan. A project in respect of Gaelscoil Iarfhlatha has been included in the plan and is scheduled to proceed to construction in 2015-16. I can advise that officials from my Department have been working closely with Galway County Council officials with regard to securing a suitable site to facilitate the delivery of permanent school accommodation for Gaelscoil Iarfhlatha in Tuam. A suitable site has been identified and the site acquisition process is at an advanced stage. However, during the conveyancing process issues outside the control of the Department have emerged which need to be addressed as part of due diligence in order for the conveyancing process to be satisfactorily completed. As the site acquisition is at conveyancing stage with legal issues being progressed and due to commercial sensitivities it would not be appropriate to provide further information at this stage.
Once the acquisition of the site is finalised this will enable the building project for the Gaelscoil to be progressed towards the construction stage. Under the Department's rapid design and build programme, the tender process for a building contractor has been running in parallel with the site acquisition process. The appointment of the contractor will be concluded when the site acquisition process is complete.
The officials from my Department are aware of the pressing need to acquire the site in order to facilitate the provision of a new school building. In that regard, every effort is being made to advance the process to allow the project proceed to construction as soon as possible. I thank the Senator for raising the matter and hope this reply outlines the current position. I offer apologies from my senior colleague who is in Boston.
I appreciate the Minister of State's response, but it is a non-response. It has not shed any light on the question I raised. There is an urgent need to expedite the building of the school and the site acquisition in the first place. I ask that the Department deal assiduously with the issues raised. It is very important for it to consider a timeline for delivery of a school building and, first and foremost as a matter of urgency, for the acquisition of a site. I would appreciate a response from the Department in this regard as soon as possible.
I wish to clarify that the Department's officials recognise the urgency of the situation and are doing all in their power to resolve it. The issues which arose are outside the control of the Department and are within its gift to resolve. However, it is endeavouring to resolve them. They arose at a late stage of the conveyancing process. It is a legal matter which will have to be resolved. The Department wants to expedite the resolution of the issue and is working very hard in that regard. I hope we will see light very soon. The process will progress very fast thereafter.
Bioenergy Strategy Implementation
I welcome the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources, Deputy Alex White. As line Minister with responsibility for this important policy area, I look forward to his response. I have expressed the view on more than one occasion that the bioenergy sector has been the poor relation or Cinderella of the broad renewable energy industry. There is an apparent disregard at Department level and within the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, for the role bioenergy can play in achieving our renewable energy targets, displacing CO2 emissions, reducing imports of fossil fuels and creating jobs.
For two years, the Department dragged its heels on publishing a bioenergy policy perspective. While I am glad it has finally been produced, the delay has led to certain problems, particularly with regard to the introduction of a renewable heat incentive, RHI. It is important for the industry to know what supports will be provided and the infrastructure around the transfer from fossil fuels, namely, oil and gas, to renewables, including biomass and bioenergy. However, the start-up date for the scheme is given as some time in 2016. This uncertainty and delay has had the unforeseen consequence of impeding and stalling the sector and bringing about a chilling effect. I could refer to numerous large-scale projects that were cancelled, put on hold or are in limbo because the developers are not willing to proceed without knowing at what stage the RHI will be implemented and what terms and criteria will apply.
It is in the Minister's gift to address this issue and bring some clarity to the situation, either by bringing forward the date of implementation, actually fixing an implementation date or, even at this juncture, outlining the criteria and standards that will apply when the scheme is introduced. That would enable people to proceed with investment and advance planning for such developments. The current uncertainty is having a negative impact on the sector and obstructing job creation in rural areas and within the regions. The bioenergy sector has a large contribution to make. In fact, an as yet unpublished SEAI report indicates there are 5,000 sustainable jobs to be created in the sector if it is given its head and the opportunity to grow and prosper. Unfortunately, many of the relevant companies have relocated to the United Kingdom, which is light years ahead of us on this issue.
We must take a more vigorous and committed approach to the sector. We need, in the first instance, a domestic equivalent to the RHI scheme in the United Kingdom.
Why should we be subsidising oil and gas furnaces through the Better Homes scheme when we should be subsidising bioenergy? As the Minister knows, once families install boilers and heating systems, there is a 20-year commitment over a system's lifetime to importing oil and gas. This is counterproductive to the Government's objective of reaching our 2020 renewable targets, making our contribution towards addressing climate change, removing carbon from the system and creating sustainable jobs instead of importing fossil fuels.
As the Minister is aware, the commitment in the policy is to replace 200,000 tonnes of oil per year by 2020. It would be a major boon to the economy if we were to do so via investing in bioenergy systems. Will the Minister intervene in this matter? It is within his gift. Were clarity brought to the situation, it would help. This has the added benefit of helping the Minister to achieve his objectives as regards the 2020 targets on renewable energy and so on.
I thank the Senator for raising this issue and welcome the opportunity to address Senators on the topic.
The Senator referred to Ireland's national renewable energy action plan, NREAP, which states that we aim to meet our overall 16% renewable energy target by 2020 by achieving 40% of electricity demand from renewable sources, as well as 10% in transport and 12% in heating. I agree that energy from biomass has a critical role in meeting these ambitions for 2020 and beyond. It may interest the Senator and colleagues to know that provisional figures for 2014 show that biomass accounted for 3.6 percentage points of the 8.6 percentage points delivered by renewables, representing something in the order of 40%, which is not insignificant.
Recognising the potential to develop the bioenergy sector significantly and to address the challenges involved, I published a draft bioenergy plan last October. Analysis underpinning the draft plan demonstrates that an additional bioenergy-focused measure in the heating sector would represent the most cost-effective means of meeting a number of our policy goals. It is, therefore, my intention, subject to further Government approval and state aid clearance, to introduce a renewable heat incentive, RHI, in 2016. This would encourage larger heat users to change to systems that produce heat from renewable sources. The scheme is being designed to increase the amount of heat generated from renewable sources, including biomass.
There has been no delay in developing the scheme. Work is under way on developing its terms and conditions, the criteria and so on to which the Senator referred, including those relating to support tariffs and eligible technologies. These must be designed appropriately in order to ensure the objectives of the scheme are met cost-effectively. It is important that the scheme provide maximum value for money and minimise cost to the Exchequer.
The first of three public consultations which are required to be held during the development of the RHI will commence shortly. In the meantime, my officials are considering the best ways of supporting continued investment in renewable heating solutions.
I thank the Minister for his answer. I appreciate that the RHI must be structured and work properly, but we are not trying to reinvent the wheel. Such schemes already operate in Northern Ireland and the rest of the United Knigdom. We are playing catch-up. I urge the Minister to put in place interim arrangements such as the triple E register standard, which is already in operation and approved by the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, to ensure that people do not need to wait until 2016 before they can start the process of planning and seeking finance to prepare for such installations. As the Minister stated, many commercial and industrial operators would gladly embrace this technology, which is of considerable benefit in terms of job creation. We could embark on exemplar projects that would need to spend a great deal of time in the pipeline such as district heating systems for clusters of buildings, hospitals, prisons and schools in Portlaoise. Bringing forward the date or improving clarity would be helpful in terms of import substitution, our CO2 targets and job creation.
I reassure the Senator that the scheme will be introduced as soon as possible. We must put together relatively complex elements of a new scheme in terms of how to incentivise and how to fund it.
We have to apply for state aid approval in respect of many of these types of measures, as the Senator will be aware, but there has been no delay in bringing the scheme forward. I appreciate his enthusiasm for this sector, to which he has referred in the House previously. He is right and it is up to me to ensure the scheme is brought forward as soon as possible. That is what I will do but it will be 2016 before we can implement the scheme we intend putting in place. I understand and have sympathy with the Senator's frustration on giving an advance indication of what the criteria will be. However, the criteria constitute the scheme. We are not in a position to introduce a scheme gradually. We must ensure it is done properly and that there is proper consultation on it. The Senator and the House should be assured that there will no inordinate delay in bringing forward this important scheme, to which I, in particular, am committed.
Wind Energy Guidelines
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit ach bhí mé ag súil leis an Aire, an Teachta Ó Ceallaigh. I was hoping the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government would be in attendance, but the Minister of State is attached to the Department, which is fair enough.
This is an important issue in respect of the guidelines with which An Bord Pleanála will have to comply in making decisions on planning applications for wind turbine developments, an issue which I have raised in the House previously. There has been an inordinate delay in revising the 2006 guidelines, which are out of date. Draft guidelines were published at the end of 2013 and little has happened since. I am sure work has been going on but it is a year and a half since the then Minister published draft guidelines, which were unacceptable, and there was a public consultation process after that. Little has happened with the exception of two applications being made to the board relating to north Meath. One is on appeal from the county council for a small development of large turbines near Nobber while the other application is by the Element power company for a massive development across north Meath.
What will be included in the guidelines? RTE radio knew the other day and it had a good wind of what was happening. It is important that Parliament should know before a leak to RTE to try to help the Government parties and the Labour Party, in particular. We need to know whether the guidelines will be acceptable to local communities. What I hear about 700 m will not be acceptable and there are other issues surrounding the guidelines. What is the position on applications currently before An Bord Pleanála? Should the developers not withdraw them, presumably to comply with the revised guidelines, or is it the case that the old guidelines will continue to apply? No one will give a straight answer on this. One Fine Gael Deputy in Meath East says they will not apply while another Fine Gael Deputy says they will. The people deserve to know exactly what is going on in this regard because there should be fairness in planning. People should know what rules will apply. Will the Minister change the rules in the middle of the game to suit residents or will he leave the guidelines as they are to suit developers? That is the choice the Government has to make.
The 2006 guidelines are out of date and there has been criticism that Fianna Fáil should have revised them previously, but the reality is the turbines proposed for north Meath were not available during the lifetime of the previous Government. They are brand new and it is about time the Government reacted properly to them. We need to know. There will be an oral hearing in Kells on 16 June. Anyone who will speak at the hearing will have to know what are the relevant planning guidelines. There is a planning application for another project before An Bord Pleanála, which is probably nearing decision. We need to know and there needs to be fairness. It is not good enough to say they will be published shortly because I have heard that at least twice during Commencement debates. We need to know the exact facts.
I thank the Senator for raising this important issue. Proposals for wind energy developments are subject to the statutory requirements of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended, in the same manner as other proposed developments.
Planning applications are made to the relevant local planning authorities, with a right of appeal to An Bord Pleanála. In the case of wind development proposals which meet the statutory threshold criteria for classification as strategic infrastructure developments under the Planning and Development Acts, applications must be submitted directly to An Bord Pleanála. Planning authorities, including An Bord Pleanála, are required to have regard to my Department's wind energy development guidelines, which were published in June 2006, in making determinations on wind farm development proposals. These guidelines provide advice for planning authorities on catering for wind energy through their development plans and the development management process. The guidelines are also intended to ensure a consistency of approach throughout the country in the identification of suitable locations for wind energy developments and the treatment of planning applications relating to such developments.
As the Senator noted, in December 2013 my Department published proposed draft revisions to the noise, setbacks and shadow-flicker aspects of the 2006 wind energy development guidelines. These draft revisions proposed the setting of a more stringent day-and-night noise limit of 40 decibels for future energy developments, a mandatory minimum setback of 500 m between a wind turbine and the nearest dwelling - for amenity considerations - and the complete elimination of shadow flicker between wind turbines and neighbouring dwellings. A public consultation process was initiated on these proposed draft revisions to the guidelines and this ran until 21 February 2014. My Department received submissions from 7,500 organisations and members of the public during this public consultation process. It is intended that the revisions to the 2006 wind energy development guidelines will be finalised as soon as possible. In this regard, account must be taken of the extensive response to the public consultation process in framing the final guidelines. Further work is also advancing to develop technical appendices to assist planning authorities with the practical application of the noise measurement aspects of the wind guidelines. The revisions to the wind energy development guidelines 2006, when finalised, will be issued under section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, as amended. In the interim, the 2006 guidelines will continue to apply to existing planning applications, including those currently with An Bord Pleanála.
It is a matter for the relevant planning authority to make the appropriate determination in respect of a planning application or appeal, having regard to relevant planning guidelines issued by my Department. However, as indicated, these guidelines are issued for guidance purposes to assist planning authorities in the performance of their functions. Ultimately, it falls to planning authorities - be they the local planning authorities or An Bord Pleanála - to decide on individual applications based on the specific merits or otherwise of individual planning applications.
There is no question but that the Minister of State's reply is extremely disappointing. We have moved on from a nod and a wink being given to wind farm developers to it being stated absolutely explicitly that the existing guidelines apply to those applications which are with An Bord Pleanála. This will come as a shock to some Fine Gael Deputies who earlier today informed us that the new guidelines would apply. It will certainly be a source of extreme annoyance to members of the public in north Meath that the cards are stacked against them, particularly because the guidelines to which the Minister of State refers really have no relevance regarding the kind of super-turbine it is proposed to build there. All planning existing applications should be the subject of a moratorium until the new guidelines are brought forward. When the guidelines emerge, we can then put in place a proper planning process. What is happening is completely improper.
My knowledge of the planning process is that whatever is introduced does not apply retrospectively. If, therefore, a new guideline were to be introduced today, it would not apply to planning applications made previously.
I also suggest to the Senator that if he seeks a moratorium on it, perhaps he needs to speak to the local authorities because, as indicated in the response and as the Minister has outlined, he is only issuing guidelines and that is what they are, namely, guidelines. It is up to the planning authority or, in this case, the local authority, or An Bord Pleanála, to adjudicate on individual planning applications. To my knowledge, this has always been the case.
Services for People with Disabilities
I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Kathleen Lynch.
I thank the Cathaoirleach and welcome the Minister of State. I tabled this Commencement motion last week and coincidentally, there was a report on Newstalk this morning by Kieran Cuddihy, who obtained figures through a freedom of information request regarding national waiting times for children with mild to profound intellectual or physical difficulties who were waiting for assessment. They show that 12,650 children nationally are waiting for assessments, of whom 3,300 are waiting for longer than the three months that is the Health Service Executive, HSE, and the Government's own benchmark. As for children waiting for treatment, 4,500 are waiting for longer than three months, while 7,908 are waiting for treatment.
I am dealing with a number of families and wish to give the Minister of State a flavour of their stories, because each individual case has its own personal story to it. These are parents who are battling to get services for their child who may suffer from a mild to a severe disability, be it intellectual or physical. One such story concerned a child called Harvey, whose general practitioner, GP, referred him to the early intervention team in September 2013. On 19 September 2013, the parents received a letter from the speech and language therapist regarding the referrals with a questionnaire attached. On 29 November 2013, Harvey was assessed by the speech and language therapist and the conclusion in her report pertaining to autism stated Harvey was demonstrating some clinically significant markers for autism, that this would be monitored in subsequent sessions and onward referral would be made to the autism team, as required, and with parental consent.
The occupational therapist's report which was based on an assessment carried out on 11 March and 14 April 2014 again referred Harvey on to the autism spectrum disorder, ASD, team for a diagnostic assessment. The family was told this would happen in February or March 2014 but that date came and went. It is now approaching June 2015 and the family still awaits that diagnostic assessment. It had a private assessment carried out, which is accepted by the Department of Education and Skills but not by the HSE, which is the provider of the child services. I have to hand another e-mail from other parents stating their child did not get proper support due to a significant delay in diagnosing and assessing their child. Their son has ASD and received a private diagnosis when he was two years old. While he receives appropriate resources in school, he is almost seven and the HSE only diagnosed him this year after a long road and battle.
As Members are aware, early intervention is hugely important and these children have complex needs and need multiple therapies. The question I specifically asked the Minister of State, because this is also relevant to where I come from in Waterford and is a national issue now that it has been highlighted, is how many speech, language and occupational therapists are in the public system in County Waterford. How long are children with mild to profound intellectual or physical disabilities in Waterford city and county waiting to be assessed? There appears to be a problem with assessment waiting times and these are stories from parents of children who do not deserve to be obliged to battle the State to get support for their children. They simply do not deserve that, as the resources should be provided as quickly as possible and under the timeframes to which the Government has committed. Consequently, I raise these issues on their behalf as they have asked me to so do.
Last year, 80 speech and language therapy posts were announced, not all of which were filled and none of which went to Waterford. As another 120 further posts are to be announced, how many of those posts will be delivered in Waterford? It is not just therapists as there also is a need for both child psychiatrists and clinical psychologists, as this is a joined-up system.
The final point I will make is I visited the Sacred Heart Centre in Waterford city, where the staff provide fantastic support. It is a joint venture between the Department of Education and Skills and the HSE, but the building is dilapidated.
The children have complex needs and the building is not fit for purpose. There is a real need for resources to be put into this area. Unfortunately, due to waiting times and the lack of therapists, staff and capacity in the system, children are waiting longer than they should. The children in question have complex needs and we should not fail them. We should provide parents with every possible support because, as the Minister of State and I are well aware, early intervention is critical.
I agree with most of what the Senator said, but it is important to read his exact question, because what he said in his contribution is not exactly what he asked in writing, so I do not have the entire answer to the issues raised. The Senator inquired about
the need for the Minister for Health to outline how many speech and language therapist and clinical psychologist posts exist in the public system in Waterford city and county, how many are vacant, how many of the 80 posts announced last year were allocated to Waterford and how many of the additional 120 posts will be allocated to Waterford and to outline waiting times for assessment for children referred with a mild to severe intellectual or physical disability.
There is no reference to the other areas of psychology to which he referred in his contribution. That is by way of explanation, because I do not wish the Senator to say subsequently that I did not answer the entire question.
I thank the Senator for raising the issue. The Government is committed to the development of therapy services for children with a disability, including speech and language therapy and psychology services. Health-related therapy supports and interventions for children with a disability can be accessed through both the HSE's primary care services and its disability services, depending on the level of need. Speech and language therapy services in Waterford are provided by HSE teams in primary care and disability services, as well as by the Brothers of Charity and the Central Remedial Clinic regional service. There are 15 approved speech and language therapists, or 14.81 in whole-time equivalent terms, in the Waterford service overall. Six speech and language therapists provide services to the general population of children in primary care. Five speech and language therapists are assigned to the children's specialist disability services in Waterford. The remainder look after adults, mental health and other needs.
In addition to these dedicated posts in Waterford, the Central Remedial Clinic regional service provides more specialised speech therapy for particular children with physical and sensory disability across the whole south-east region. I understand three of the 15 speech and language posts are vacant in Waterford. The filling of a permanent replacement post has been approved and a new post holder is due to take up duty next month. The local HSE community health organisation management in Waterford has prioritised the filling of the other two posts which are temporarily vacant due to maternity leave. I understand, however, it has proved difficult to secure appropriately qualified staff to take up these temporary positions.
I also understand there are three psychologists employed in Waterford disability services. In addition, a number of psychologists are employed in child and adolescent mental health services, CAMHS, and in primary care services in Waterford. The HSE has advised that 13 assessment of need applications under Part 2 of the Disability Act 2005 were received in Waterford for the first quarter of 2015. A total of 12 of those were commenced within the statutory timeframe. A total of 22 applications, which have been on hand for over six months, are overdue for completion in Waterford. On this point, I stress that while any delay in the assessment of a child is not desirable, the assessment process under the Disability Act can take place in parallel with any interventions deemed necessary, and guidance to this effect has been issued to front-line staff. I would be interested to hear from Senator Cullinane whether that is happening. I will explain the situation in a little more detail later. Importantly, the HSE has commenced the reconfiguration of children's disability services into geographically based children's disability network teams as part of the Progressing Disability Services for Children and Young People programme. The objective of the programme is to provide one clear referral pathway for all children from zero to 18 years old, irrespective of the nature of their disability or where they live or attend school. The transition to this service delivery model is governed by a consultation and engagement process with all stakeholders, including service users and their families.
A number of HSE community health care organisations are successfully implementing this programme which requires significant preparatory work in engaging with families, schools and local communities. It also involves implementing new policies, procedures and protocols in respect of multidisciplinary and multi-agency working. Once this preparatory work has been completed, additional posts will be provided to support the implementation of the new model of service. Waterford, which has been working with the other counties in the local HSE community health organisation area, has put in place the required governance structure to allow for the provision of additional posts in 2015. Additional funding of €4 million has been allocated to the programme in 2015, equating to €6 million in a full year. In all, 120 new therapy posts will be provided across the country in 2015 and work on finalising the specific allocation of these posts is nearing completion. The HSE has informed me that, in this context, Waterford and the south east are being prioritised for therapy posts in 2015.
I will explain the reason for the parallel operation of services that sometimes occurs. Strict compliance with the law would require a diagnosis before an intervention may take place. It has been made clear to front-line staff - I have stated this several times in this Chamber and elsewhere - that intervention at an early age should not be delayed because a diagnosis has not yet been provided. When a child has a difficulty with speech, it should not be necessary to wait for a diagnosis before speech therapy services are provided. Similarly, physiotherapy services should be provided to a child who lacks balance or cannot sit up. I could rattle off a list of difficulties children may experience but it is not necessary to do so. The necessary interventions should not hinge on the provision of a diagnosis, as occurred in the past.
The progressing disabilities programme for children aged from birth to 18 years has been rolled out in several areas. It is an incredible programme which does exactly what I have described. For example, children are not required to be signed up for a specific service or visit a particular service provider and intervention takes place in the community.
Once the 120 posts in this year's allocation have been provided, we will identify gaps in services and assess what further supports are needed to fill these gaps. We have already done this in the area of mental health. While no one denies that we are still far from where we should be, we should be able to do things better and in a more smooth manner. The progressing disabilities programme is the way forward in this regard. I fully agree with the approach of ensuring governance is in place before assessing which areas have the greatest need. In that context, Waterford has been prioritised.
I welcome the Minister of State's response and the decision to prioritise Waterford city and county once the 120 new posts have been delivered. I am concerned, however, that 22 applications have been in hand for more than six months and their completion is long overdue. Perhaps some of the cases I cited are among this group of 22. I will forward to the Minister of State e-mails I have received asking questions and expressing concern as they provide evidence of the heartbreaking struggle of parents. They would also allow her to make up her mind as to whether children are receiving the treatment they need while assessments are ongoing. From my contact with parents, including e-mails I have received, it is clear that this is not always the case on the ground.
I do not wish to make a political football of this issue. My only objective is to ensure the necessary capacity and posts are in place and the children in question receive the supports they need. When people contact me to tell me these types of story, I have a duty, as a public representative, to raise the issues directly with the relevant Minister.
I appeal to the Minister of State to consider the case of the centre in Lady Lane, Waterford, which provides a fantastic service for children. My view, which is shared by many parents, is that the building in which the service is located is not fit for purpose and a new, state-of-the-art facility is required. I am informed that children receive early intervention and support until the age of six years, at which point they lose their supports. An holistic review of services is required and the centre in Waterford should be replaced with a state-of-the-art facility to ensure children have all the resources they need in the best possible setting.
I will examine any information the Senator forwards to me.
I am not in the habit of making promises which, I suppose, the Senator knows. The progressing disability services programme is genuinely for people aged 0 to 18 years, but if it does not have proper governance, it could go the way of all others. That is why we are insisting that the type of preparatory work necessary to make sure it works should be done. I believe that is the position in Waterford, which is why we will move on in terms of prioritisation. If the Senator wants to send me the information, I will consider it.
Sitting suspended at 3.15 p.m. and resumed at 3.30 p.m.