The Minister of State is very welcome.
Nithe i dtosach suíonna - Commencement Matters
Energy Prices
I thank the Minister of State for coming in to discuss this important issue. The cost of living, and particularly energy costs, is something I have picked up on from working with and visiting older people. I know a number of older people who have local authority homes changed over to electricity recently. One elderly lady who lives alone in a one-bedroom apartment with a kitchen-cum-sitting room received a bill for €750. That is a huge cost. Some of these people do not have the heating on all the time. This is about how we are addressing this issue. That particular lady was in fear of her next bill. My big concern is that some people did not put on their heating during the winter and instead suffered the cold.
While prices have started to come down a little bit, on the other hand we see energy companies making huge profits. There has to be a balance between those profits and the cost. As a Government, we should be doing something to support people. It is not just about older people, but it is about younger families as well.
I contacted some of the utility companies on people's behalf. One person was given a credit note for €300 because the company thought that it was a very high cost for somebody living alone. I am very grateful for that. However, not all the utility companies are as good at responding.
Families are also affected. If they have children playing sports, they are using showers every day. Running numerous showers and the other electrical appliances within the home drives up the bill. I look forward to hearing what the Minister of State has to say on how the Government is going to help to address this issue.
I thank the Senator for raising this topic. One of the most important things the Government does is trying to keep people, particularly the elderly, warm in their homes in the winter. First, I will outline the regulatory regime which we operate. There have been movements in global price and this has impacted households and businesses in Ireland. I will then talk about the Government's response.
Responsibility for regulation of the electricity market is solely a matter for the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU, the independent regulator. The CRU was assigned responsibility for the regulation of the Irish electricity sector following the enactment of the Electricity Regulation Act 1999. It is a function of the CRU to regulate the electricity market. The CRU ceased price setting for electricity and gas in 2011 and 2014 and prices are now set by suppliers. The CRU is accountable to a committee of the Oireachtas and not to the Minister. Officials from the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications have ongoing engagement with the CRU and the utility companies on the issue of prices, customer protections and related matters.
Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine and the reductions in energy supplies to Europe have caused unprecedented energy price spikes in European households. In the aftermath of the Ukraine invasion, and peaking during August last year, wholesale gas spot prices were trading at 13 times their pre-pandemic level. This feeds directly into electricity prices paid by households and correlates strongly with the price of gas. Data supplied by the CRU indicates that estimated electricity and gas household bills are 67% and 80% higher, respectively, than in February of last year.
Due to high gas storage and warmer than normal winter conditions and policy efforts to reduce demand, wholesale gas prices have fallen dramatically and they are currently well below the peak values of last year. However, the wholesale price of gas is still about twice the level it was before the pandemic.
These huge increases in costs for consumers have caused real hardship for many people. This is most pronounced over the winter months when energy use is at its highest. That is why the Government has taken sustained action over the past year to support households and businesses to meet the cost-of-living challenges. Government has introduced considerable supports for households. There are specific measures to help people meet the cost of energy. These include lump sum payments to fuel allowance recipients, and a total of four €200 electricity credit payments applied to all domestic electricity accounts, including those with pay-as-you-go meters.
On 21 February Government announced a further €470 million package of measures to help social protection recipients from April to July and an extension to the reduced VAT on electricity and gas until October. On 13 December 2022, Government approved a new energy poverty action plan. This plan provides for, among other things, the establishment of a €10 million fund to further support people who are at risk of energy poverty. The Department will work with suppliers, relevant public bodies and NGOs to provide financial support to citizens experiencing difficulties in meeting their energy costs this winter. This will include pay-as-you-go gas and electricity customers. This new fund will be available to bolster hardship funds, which most suppliers have in place already.
People are advised to engage with their suppliers directly or to contact the Money Advice & Budgeting Service or Alone. These organisations can advocate on their behalf to suppliers. This is in addition to the existing sources of support such as the supplier hardship fund and the additional needs payment scheme operated by the Department of Social Protection. The objective of the new fund is to provide a further safeguard to help people who may not be able to access other sources of assistance. Again, I thank the Senator for raising this important topic.
I welcome the students and teachers from St. Pius X school in Terenure who are here as guests of Senator Catherine Ardagh. I hope you have a very good visit.
I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive response and I thank the Government for the €200 energy credits. I know people on social welfare will receive another one next week with their payments. This has been a help. In contacting the energy companies, I found that those providing electricity were much more amenable to answering questions than those providing gas.
That is only from my personal experience in contacting them on behalf of concerned citizens. In respect of these high profits that we see, I hope that the regulator and the people involved in working with them will be able to share that cost and bring down the cost for families.
I thank the Minister of State for explaining it. However, I would like a commitment that if costs are to rise again, it will be monitored.
The Senator referred to hardship funds and I referred to the fact that there is a new €10 million fund, which is on top of the hardship funds that were there already. As she mentioned, not all suppliers are taking part in hardship funds. Affected people who are worried about paying their bills can contact a supplier directly and ask for that. If they prefer, they can go to the Money Advice & Budgeting Service, MABS, or to Alone and have them advocate on their behalf.
The Senator mentioned that she felt that electricity suppliers are more responsive than gas suppliers. As I was not aware of that, I will take note of it.
I wish to add that we had extensions to welfare payments. We had targeted payments for welfare recipients specifically because when we analysed who needs the money most, that was the answer – double payments in some cases.
The windfall taxes that are coming in will be significant. They will be hundreds of millions of euro and they are ring-fenced for electricity and gas consumers. Again, those will be payments to try to cushion the blow. It does not do it all, but it helps. I think that when people get that €200 in their account, they notice it. The fact that this is going to be a fourth payment is something that people notice. The public service obligation, PSO, levy is gone now; it is actually a credit. We have done many things. It is not over, and we will keep looking at it. If there is anybody falling through the cracks, please contact me.
Road Safety Authority
Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit go dtí an Teach. I wish to raise an important issue of road safety. As the Minister of State will probably be aware – or perhaps he is not – the Road Safety Authority, RSA, does not release data about collisions to researchers and it has not done so for years. We need better research on road safety to save lives and the key indicator of safety on a road is the number of collisions. However, the RSA is not releasing incident-level data. It is especially important to get data on the lower-level incidents. Incidents that result in death will be reported on in the media, so researchers are able to fill in some of the blanks that way. However, the data on the number of lower-level incidents are much harder to come by. The best that the RSA is doing now is providing provisional data that are aggregated to the level of counties, which, let us face it, is of very little use to researchers looking at the safety of specific roads.
When accidents occur, we know that much data are collected by the Garda – GPRS, the type of road, the weather conditions and who was at fault. All of this would be immensely useful in locating black spots and making our roads safer.
The RSA used to share data on an online map up until 2016. It appears now to be using the excuse of the general data protection regulation, GDPR. We can all cite many examples of agencies that seem to want to hide behind GDPR when it suits them. However, this is the first situation I have come across where an agency in question is starting to use GDPR as an excuse two years before the GDPR came into effect.
In other jurisdictions, the data are available in a timely manner. Researchers can log on to the portal in the North, for example, and get figures for the last month. The same is the case in France, where GDPR applies. Therefore, clearly, the argument about GDPR just does not stack up. Meanwhile, I heard an example of one researcher who is trying to conduct a study using Irish data, but the latest they could find were from 2017 – six years out of date.
In March of last year, a spokesperson for the RSA told the Dublin Inquirer that the body was conducting an internal review on how GDPR impacted on how location data could be shared. We are still awaiting the outcome of that review 12 months later. It is five years since GDPR came into effect and seven years since the RSA started applying GDPR.
Dublin City Council requested the data on a number of collisions. Again, its committee was rebuffed. Even the National Transport Authority and Transport Infrastructure Ireland do not have access to the information. This is simply not acceptable when our transport system is in the middle of a crucial overhaul that we all agree has to happen in order for us to reach our emissions targets. In addition, it is something that we all want to happen in terms of the gridlock that we see in our city. If we want to design roads, cycling infrastructure and active transport, we have to have those data.
I looked at the parliamentary responses when this was queried previously. It seems to be the case that the Minister puts the blame back on the RSA to sort it out. It is not good enough. Under the Road Safety Authority Act 2006, it is clear that the Minister has responsibility for this issue.
Will the Minister use the powers available to the Government to direct the RSA to publish and distribute the statistics about road safety that our researchers are crying out for and that are particularly relevant to the National Transport Authority and Transport Infrastructure Ireland?
This is an important matter. I agree that having good collision data on road traffic incidents is absolutely vital to being able to bring down the rates overall and protect people.
The Road Safety Authority, in addition to providing a number of essential services, is responsible for public awareness and education in the road safety area. It is also the body with statutory responsibility for preparing our national road safety strategies, such as the current one, which runs until 2023. The RSA is also a centre of expertise nationally on road safety and, as such, provides advice to the Department, as well as to other relevant agencies. As a result, it is essential for the RSA to be able to conduct research and analysis in the area of road safety in order to perform its function.
It is important to emphasise that the RSA does publish a great deal of statistical material and analysis on road safety matters, which can be found on its website. This is an invaluable resource for anyone concerned with the area of road safety in Ireland. I want to stress this point, lest anyone might think that the RSA is not publishing statistics on road safety. In fact, it has published a great deal and continues to do so.
However, there is one very specific and very important issue where difficulties have arisen and where the Senator is quite right to refer to section 8. The Garda conducts investigations into road traffic collisions and produces detailed collision reports. These reports provide essential information on the causes of collisions, which in turn indicates the responses needed if we are to prevent future collisions. As such, the reports of these Garda investigations play an important role in road safety research.
The RSA has, in the past, received these data from the Garda but, following a review by An Garda Síochána, queries were raised about the appropriateness of sharing the data in the light of GDPR. The reason is that some collision reports, although not all, contain personally identifiable data of living persons. Even if names are not referred to in the reports, it might be possible to combine some of these reports with publicly available data and, in effect, identify a person. An Garda Síochána wishes to continue sharing these reports with the RSA but it is understandably concerned about the GDPR implications.
Following discussions between the Garda, the RSA and the Department, it appears that a way forward may be offered by section 8(1) of the Road Safety Authority Act. This allows the Minister to direct the RSA to gather and distribute information and statistics on road safety and to distribute the information to appropriate bodies to assist with national or international planning. Since the Act was passed in 2006, there has never been any such specific direction. Discussions between the RSA, the Garda and the Department have indicated that the issuing of such a direction in relation to the collision reports may resolve the issue.
Any proposal relating to possible sharing of personal data must be subject in the first place to consultation with the Data Protection Commissioner. A draft direction under section 8 has now been prepared by the Department, which is currently engaged in a process of consultation with the Data Protection Commissioner. When this consultation is concluded and if the outcome is favourable, a direction will be signed quickly to ensure the flow of the collision reports in question. Should the Data Protection Commission, DPC, not be satisfied with this approach following consultation, the Department will have to consider other ways of resolving the matter. This would most likely involve an amendment to the Road Safety Authority Act 2006.
I appreciate that now we are getting an acceptance that the Road Safety Authority Act allows for the Minister to issue that direction to the RSA. However, I am not sensing any urgency about it. It is 12 months since the review took place. This is happening in every other European country; they are able to give those monthly accessible data. We need to see a little bit of urgency around making sure. We are in that critical moment of transforming our road network and trying to encourage people to get active and get out of their cars and cycle and walk. We know the key to that is making it safer for them to do so. I would like to see some urgency, but I appreciate the fact that the Minister of State accepted that the Minister has the powers to do it. I hope that the resources will be made available to the RSA when that direction is given and the authority can do it in a speedy manner.
The Minister has drafted the direction. We have to have a consultation with the Data Protection Commissioner. We cannot predict how long the Data Protection Commissioner will take to decide on what we are trying to do and to decide whether the commission endorses it. If we arrive at a position where the Data Protection Commissioner says that it is fine or we can do it within certain constraints, we can issue the order right away. If the Data Protection Commissioner says we need further primary legislation to underpin this, we will need to publish and pass an amendment to the Road Safety Authority Act 2006, which we hope to do later this year. That is the situation we are in.
I agree that we need timely data. Our data should be as good as those of any other country. As I have used collision data in the past when I was a councillor to support requests for changes to road schemes or for sustainable travel schemes and so on, I see the value of it and I thank the Senator for raising the matter.
Vehicle Testing
I thank the Minister of State for taking this Commencement Matter today. It is timely, particularly in the context of the memorandum to Cabinet yesterday regarding the demand management strategy regarding traffic and managing congestion in the biggest urban centres in this country. It is particularly timely because one of the effects of SI 475 of 2022, which was set down by the Department of Transport, is at odds with the ambition and intention of that memo to Cabinet and the strategy referred to yesterday.
SI 475 refers to commercial vehicle roadworthiness test operators and testers regulations. For the record, it is important that we support improvement in and adherence to high standards regarding commercial vehicle testing in this country. The statutory instrument set down a number of improvements regarding the improvement of premises, introducing dimension tolerances for testing premises and removing the special conditions relating to drive throughs and heavy commercial vehicle, HCV, pit lengths. My issue with the statutory instrument involves the requirement for a drive through. The reality is that the statutory instrument will put a number of light goods vehicle testing centres out of business. I know of four centres in Dublin that will be put out of business. The Road Safety Authority has issued these centres with a three-year exemption to 2027 in order to comply with the regulations but they simply will not be able to comply. In the case of William O'Brien Motors in the north inner city, it is 8,500 sq. ft, of which 4,250 sq. ft is allocated to testing. If you were to walk into that centre, you would see that it has the capacity for 360° degree turn. It does not have the capacity for a drive through but everything else is in place and it is top of the range in terms of adherence to the standards that otherwise exist. It will never be able to meet the requirement for a drive through. There are premises in Coolock, Greenhills and Ballymun that also will be put out of business.
From a carbon emissions perspective and the perspective of reducing the time that any vehicle is on the road, it is bizarre that we would force light goods commercial vehicles to drive even further to be tested when we have these testing centres in locations close to businesses. William O'Brien Motors is located very close to the docklands and is the only testing centre in the inner city. It was asked by Dublin City Council in 2012 to relocate from a smaller premises to a different premises to serve the need in the city. It serves the needs of businesses coming from Tipperary, Limerick and other places across the country who come to the docklands early in the morning and get their vehicles tested because the vehicles need to be tested annually in contrast to private cars. This system works well. It works well for the inner city and companies in the docklands but the centre will be put out of business in three years' time. My plea to the Minister of State is for changes to be made to the statutory instrument and a bit of common sense to be applied. We want to adhere to standards but we should apply a bit of common sense to ensure the requirement for a drive through is removed.
I thank Senator Sherlock for putting her case very clearly. I have been asked by the Minister for Transport to respond on his behalf. The operation of all roadworthiness testing in the State, including commercial vehicle roadworthiness, CVR, testing, is the statutory responsibility of the Road Safety Authority. The minimum requirements for CVR testing are set in EU Directive No. 2014/45. The Authorisation of Commercial Vehicle Roadworthiness Test Operators and Testers (Amendment) Regulations 2022, SI 475 of 2022, prescribe standards as required by section 11(2) of the Road Safety Authority (Commercial Vehicle Roadworthiness) Act 2012. They introduce premises improvements, remove special conditions relating to drive throughs and HCV pit lengths and introduce dimension tolerances for testing premises.
The regulations delay the requirement to comply with the standard to have a drive-through facility on a CVR testing lane to 19 March 2027. This approach provides affected CVR test operators with a three-year grace period and allows three things. First, it allows premises that already meet the standards to be authorised for up to ten years. Second, it allows sufficient time for upgrading of premises that do not meet the standards and third, it allows CVR test operators to renew their authorisations using existing premises until 18 March 2027 and then, using upgraded premises that meet the new standards, to renew until 18 March 2034.
The requirement to have a drive through on a CVR testing lane is a long-standing one. It was listed as a preferred option 19 years ago in the 2004 premises and equipment guidelines issued by the Department of Transport, which state that "the design should be such that vehicles can drive in one end of the test lane and out the other wherever possible".
Ten years ago, the 2013 premises and equipment guidelines listed a drive through as a requirement for all CVR testing lanes. Special conditions in relation to drive throughs were granted on CVR test operator authorisations where this was not “physically possible” for the authorisation period from 18 February 2014 to 18 March 2024. These special conditions shall expire with the authorisations on 18 March 2024.
The RSA has been very clear in all communications relating to the requirement to have a drive through on CVR testing lanes. As outlined above, the legislation has extended the due date for the requirement to have a drive through from 2024 to 2027 in order to provide additional time for CVR test operators to upgrade their testing premises, if necessary.
A strategic review of the commercial vehicle testing model was completed on behalf of the RSA by BearingPoint in 2019. The strategic review specifically stated that all CVR testing lanes will be required to have a drive-through facility and that there would not be any special conditions relating to the drive-through requirement for the next ten-year authorisation period to 18 March 2034. This was communicated at the Society of the Irish Motor Industry, SIMI, vehicle testing network, VTN, conference and via RSA Notice 16/2019 on 11 November 2019. The RSA accepted the review findings as a blueprint for the delivery of CVR testing for the next CVR testing authorisation period from March 2024 to March 2034.
A drive-through facility is necessary to carry out CVR testing consistently, efficiently, effectively and safely and to future-proof the delivery of reliable CVR testing. All CVR testing lanes shall have a drive through in place by 18 March 2027. Any testing lane that does not have a drive through in place by that date will no longer be authorised to carry out CVR testing. This has been communicated since 2013 via premises and equipment guidelines, conditions of authorisation and correspondence and is now set out in legislation by SI 475 of 2022. There is no possibility for the Department or the RSA to deviate from the drive-through requirement.
I thank the Minister of State for the reply. We still do not have a technical explanation as to why there is a requirement for a drive through. I ask the Minister of State to ask the RSA and the Department for that technical explanation. Jobs will be lost because of this.
We will have a crazy situation whereby commercial vehicles will be in use for longer periods and will release more carbon emissions in order to get tested. Where is the consistency between the ambition of the Department to reduce emissions and what is going to happen on foot of SI 475? The reality is that people have to use commercial vehicles. If people want to tell me that commercial vehicles will not be driven around our main urban centres in the future, I want to hear that. Let us be clear about that, particularly if the RSA and the Department of Transport are saying it. Certainly, it seems commercial vehicles have to be used in urban centres. Failing to provide for testing centres in those places points to a lack of joined-up thinking on the part of the Department.
I thank the Cathaoirleach and Senator Sherlock. These guidelines have been flagged since 2004. They became mandatory in 2013. It is not as though they are being rushed in. There will be a further three years' grace, namely, from 2024 to 2027.
Senator Sherlock asked for a technical explanation beyond whatever has been provided to her so far. I am happy to go back to the Department and seek that on her behalf.
I appreciate that there will be a number of operators who will be impacted by this, but there is no possibility for the RSA to deviate from the requirement for a drive through on all commercial vehicle roadworthiness, CVR, testing lanes. The requirement has been communicated since 2013. Many CVR test operators have already invested in their premises in order to meet the requirements set out in SI 475 of 2022. Many others are in the process of upgrading their premises to meet these requirements. All newly authorised CVR test operators meet the requirements of the 2013 premises and equipment guidelines because you cannot get that authorisation unless you meet the rules.
Road Projects
I welcome the Minister of State. I have raised the issue of the Bandon relief road on a continuous basis in this Chamber. We have a major issue in west Cork with regard to infrastructure. We must acknowledge that an amazing amount of money has been spent in Bandon town in the past ten years. We have had a flood relief scheme. We have had a sewerage scheme. We have had many millions of euro spent on a plethora of projects that have really benefited the town.
The job now is about trying to get the traffic out of the town. Bandon is the biggest town in west Cork, with a half-completed relief road that was built more than 30 years ago. We are now trying to make sure that we get the vast numbers of cars and lorries out of the town. Those numbers are quite frightening. When you look at the traffic that goes through South Main Street in particular, I would estimate anything from 10,000 to 14,000 cars and trucks pass my office there every day of the week. This is killing the town. It is choking the town. This town has the potential to evolve and become a really vibrant location. Bandon could become the heart of west Cork but we need to get the lorries out of it. That is why the relief road is so important.
We have been on this journey for almost 30 years. There was a feasibility study done with the relevant unit in the Department in 2001. It is 20 years later and we are moving on. I worked out the phases, and it is quite a complex process. We are on phase 2 of a four-phase project. We are in stage 1 of phase 2 and are moving to stage 2 of the latter. The Minister of State can imagine the issue within the town as to where matters stand with regard to the project.
We went through public consultation last July. There were eight options proposed in the context of the first stage of this consultation. Those involved are supposed to come back to us in the second quarter of this year with a report and, hopefully, go to a preferred option by the end of this year. It is important that we stick to the timelines, which were announced last year. We need to get movement in order that we will have a preferred option on the table by the end of the year. It is imperative that we meet the timelines. If we do not meet them, everything will be dragged out.
I look at truck movements. It is killing us to have heavy trucks going through Bandon on a continuous basis. We need get them out of the town and onto the bypass. If we do not do so, I fear the town will not reach its full potential. Bandon's potential is quite amazing.
The Minister of State might provide an update. Have we stuck to the timelines? Has there been slippage? It was announced last July that stage 2 of phase 1 would be announced in quarter 2 of 2023. We need to make sure that the timelines are right. We also need to make sure that stage 3 of phase 2 will be announced by the fourth quarter of 2023.
I will return to the matter of phases and stages. If those involved could make it any more complex, they would do so. It is beyond belief what we are dealing with.
I thank Senator Lombard. I am taking this matter on behalf of the Minister for Transport, Deputy Eamon Ryan.
The Minister for Transport has responsibility for overall policy and Exchequer funding in relation to the national roads programme. Once funding arrangements have been put in place with Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, under the Roads Acts 1993 to 2015, and in line with the national development plan, NDP, the planning, design, improvement and upgrading of individual national roads becomes a matter for TIl, in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. TIl ultimately delivers the national roads programme in line with Project Ireland 2040, the national planning framework and the NDP.
One of these proposed schemes is an extension to the existing Bandon relief road. This road ties back into the existing road network via a steep downhill gradient. Traffic also needs to negotiate a number of roundabouts and priority junctions within the built-up area of Bandon. There is quite heavy traffic on the N71 in this area, with, as the Senator said, average daily traffic of between 9,000 and 14,000 vehicles. Heavy goods vehicles comprise approximately 5% of this traffic. The proposed relief road extension would involve bridging the R603 to remove the steep gradient and the construction of approximately 2.5 km of new single carriageway tying back into the existing N71, just to the west of the town. A public consultation was held by Cork County Council in June 2022 as part of the options selection process, and procurement of technical advisers is ongoing to advance the scheme based on the feedback received.
The route feasibility study for the Innishannon bypass - this is on another section of the N71 - was previously commenced but was not advanced to conclusion as the scheme is not included in the NDP. TII has advised that the advancement of the proposed scheme cannot be accommodated in the national roads programme at this point.
A feasibility study for the Bantry bypass was previously completed by Cork County Council. This related to phase 2 of the bypass route, from the hospital around the south of the town to link back into the N71. TII has been in discussions with the local authority on advancing this. However, it is proving difficult to do so due to constraints and terrain issues. Cork County Council has, however, progressed phase 1 of the bypass scheme to the north of the town and has obtained Part 8 planning for the scheme. This will connect the hospital to the N71. The local authority and TII will be discussing the possibility of progressing this scheme, pending available funding.
I thank the Minister of State for the response. There was probably nothing in it that I do not know. The only issue is the timelines. It is about making sure that TII and Cork County Council do not slip on these timelines. They announced them quite clearly last July. At that stage, they gave a commitment that stage 2 would be announced by quarter 2 of 2023. That was in the consultation documents that they published in July 2022. It is very important that we stick to these timelines and that is the key point of my argument this morning. I acknowledge the work that has been done. I understand that Cork County Council and TII have done a great deal of work on it, but there is a need to ensure that stage 2 is published by the end of quarter 2.
The most important part is that stage 3, the preferred route option, needs to be published by the end of quarter 4.
As stated, TII published these timelines last July. I am repeating myself at this point. If the Minister of State does not have the information here, he can revert to me just to make sure that TII is sticking to the timelines. I am deeply concerned about slippage.
I admire the Senator's tenacity in following up on this matter. He is right to do so. Of all State agencies involved in infrastructure provision, TII has been at the forefront. It is probably because TII has delivered so many road projects over many years that it has developed very strong in-house expertise. Of all agencies, TII's numbers or predictions for its projects and plans are the ones I would believe. TII is really able to deliver a road on time and on budget.
My Department has been renamed as the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. That name change is not just a marketing exercise. The Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform, Deputy Donohoe, has brought a memo to Cabinet to show how there is going to be a change of focus in the Department away from simply finding reasons as to why projects should be re-evaluated and towards making sure that they are delivered.
The Senator is right to follow up on these matters, but I have faith in TII. If he wants to meet afterwards in order to follow up on any specific questions he has about this road scheme or TII, I would be happy to do so.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 11.11 a.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 11.30 a.m.
Sitting suspended at 11.11 a.m. and resumed at 11.30 a.m.