Priority Questions.
1 D’fhiafraigh Mr. O’Dowd den Aire Gnóthaí Pobail, Tuaithe agus Gaeltachta an ndéanfaidh sé ráiteas faoin dul chun cinn atá déanta aige chun stádas oifigiúil oibre a bhaint amach don Ghaeilge san Aontas Eorpach. [16975/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraDírím aird an Teachta ar an bhfreagra a thug mé ar Cheisteanna Dála Uimh. 105 agus 143 ar 27 Aibreán 2004 maidir le stádas na Gaeilge san Aontas Eorpach.
Mar a cuireadh in iúl sa fhreagra sin, agus mar a dúirt mé arís le linn na díospóireachta le déanaí sa Teach seo faoin gceist, bunaíodh grúpa oibre chun anailís a dhéanamh ar an méid gur féidir a bhaint amach agus na féidearthachtaí atá ann chun dul chun cinn a dhéanamh. Tá obair an ghrúpa críochnaithe anois agus tá a thuarascáil á breithniú ag na hAirí cuí. Táim ag tnúth leis go gcuirfear an cheist faoi bhráid an Rialtais go han-luath.
Tá súil agam go dtuigfidh an Teachta cén fáth nach bhfuil sé i gceist agam a thuilleadh a rá faoin gceist go dtí go mbeidh deis fhoirmiúil ag an Rialtas scrúdú iomlán a dhéanamh ar an gcás.
Go raibh maith ag an Aire, ach cuirim an cheist arís. Cén dul chun cinn atá déanta? Ós rud é go bhfuil obair an choiste thart, mar atá ráite ag an Aire, cén fáth nach bhfuil sé sásta tuarascáil an choiste a fhoilsiú láithreach agus a thabhairt faoi bhráid na Dála agus an tSeanaid mar is í toil an tSeanaid agus na Dála go mbeidh stádas oifigiúil ag an Ghaeilge san Aontas Eorpach?
Mar is eol don Teachta, is é an gnás a bhíonn ann nuair a bhíonn coiste eadránach mar seo ar bun gur chuig an Rialtas a thagann an tuarascáil, in éineacht le moltaí a chur faoi bhráid an Rialtais. Mar sin, ní bheadh ceist ar bith go dtabharfaí an tuarascáil faoi bhráid na Dála nó faoi bhráid an tSeanaid go dtí go mbeadh sé sin déanta.
Níl mé sásta leis sin. Tá a fhios ag gach duine a bhfuil suim aige nó aici sa Ghaeilge go bhfuil an tuarascáil seo an-mhall ar fad. Dúirt an Taoiseach nach dtógfadh sé níos mó ná ocht seachtaine agus tá an t-am sin thart anois. Tá gach Gaeilgeoir sa tír ag féachaint ar an dáta, 11 Meitheamh, chun vótáil ar son na Gaeilge nó ina coinne. Is í tuairim a lán Ghaeilgeoirí nach bhfuil an obair déanta ag an Aire nó ag an Rialtas maidir le stádas na Gaeilge agus níl siad sásta ar chor ar bith. Níl mé féin sásta leis an bhfreagra a thug an tAire mar níl aon eolas nua ann.
Tá eolas nua ann, dá mbeadh an Teachta ag éisteacht go cúramach. Dúirt mé go bhfuil obair an choiste críochnaithe agus go bhfuil an tuarascáil réidh. Mar sin, ní haon mhaith a rá gur thóg sé an méid sin achair agus nach bhfuil sé críochnaithe. Tá sé críochnaithe.
Níl sé le feiceáil.
Sin ceist eile ar fad. Is iomaí rud luachmhar faoin talamh nach bhfuil le feiceáil ach ní hionann sin is a rá nach bhfuil sé ann. Ta ór agus airgead agus rudaí faoi thalamh nach bhfuil le feiceáil. Ní hionann rud a bheith le feiceáil agus a bheith ann i do bhos.
Tá an Ghaeilge ann ach níl sí aitheanta mar theanga oifigiúil go fóill.
Tá rud amháin aisteach. Bíonn an Fhreasúra ag casaoid má fhógraíonn an Rialtas rud a fhógraítear gach uile bhliain gur fógra toghcháin atá i gceist. Anois, tá ball den Fhreasúra ag tabhairt amach nach bhfuil mé sásta an córas a bhriseadh de bharr go bhfuil toghchán ar siúl. Leanfaidh mé agus cuirfear an tuarascáil faoi bhráid an Rialtais. Ansin tógfar cinneadh cén chaoi le dul ar aghaidh. Ní dheifreofar mise san obair seo. Déanfaidh mé í le stuaim agus ar mhaithe leis an nGaeilge.
Is ceist do na Gaeilgeoirí é cén breithiúnas a dhéanfaidh siad. Ceapaim féin go mba cheart do Ghaeilgeoirí an-bhreithiúnas a thabhairt don Rialtas seo mar tá go leor rudaí déanta. Tá Acht teanga achtaithe, rud nach ndearna aon Rialtas cheana, agus tá go leor scéimeanna nua curtha ar bun. Táimid ag breithniú an cháis seo ach sin ceist do Ghaeilgeoirí. Is ceist domsa, mar Ghaeilgeoir agus mar dhuine a bhfuil spéis aige sa Ghaeilge, agus don Rialtas, a bhfuil spéis aige sa Ghaeilge, an rud is fearr a dhéanamh ó thaobh na tíre agus ó thaobh na Gaeilge de. Bíodh an Teachta cinnte go ndéanfar sin.
2 Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the position in regard to plans to decentralise Forás na Gaeilge to County Donegal; the latest discussions he has had with his counterpart in the Northern Ireland Office (details supplied) on gaining the approval of the North-South Ministerial Council for the move; if he envisages objections coming forth from the council; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16977/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs the Deputy is aware, progress on the proposed decentralisation of staff of Forás na Gaeilge to Gaoth Dobhair, County Donegal, is subject to and awaits the agreement of the North-South Ministerial Council.
I met the Minister, Angela Smith MP, who has co-responsibility for the North-South Language Body, on 12 May 2004. One of the matters discussed was the proposed decentralisation and it was agreed that the ongoing process of assessment in this regard should be brought forward by our respective Departments in consultation with Forás na Gaeilge.
Will the Minister not agree that the Government's decentralisation programme in general has all the signs of something that was made up on the back of a cigarette packet in that there was no prior agreement with the unions and no consultation with anybody? Is it not all the more difficult because it was decided that a cross-Border body in which the Minister is involved would decentralise without any thought to the serious damage it could do to the Good Friday Agreement having regard to the fact that the long-held view is that the Agreement will not be changed? What is the position on the Minister's discussions with his counterpart in Northern Ireland? Is she satisfied with what the Minister is proposing or are we into a situation where there will be no going forward from here?
I assure the Deputy that there will be full progress on all these matters. On decentralisation, we appear to be getting a funny message from the Opposition. It reminds me somewhat of Sir Humphrey Appleby in the "Yes, Prime Minister" series — one never opposes anything but instead puts all sorts of barriers in the way and hopes it never happens. The Opposition will be disappointed. Decentralisation will go ahead in full.
The issue of Forás na Gaeilge must have the assent of the authorities in the North. We are agreed on the way forward on that issue but I would point out to the Deputy that one of the other bodies under my remit is Waterways Ireland, whose headquarters is located in a decentralised location in the North, Enniskillen. There is nothing in the Good Friday Agreement that states North-South Bodies must be in London, Belfast or Dublin.
Furthermore, there is already a precedent for one of the bodies having its head office in a decentralised location in Northern Ireland. I would point out further that there are two parts to the language body, that is, the Forás Ultach and the Forás na Gaeilge. The Forás Ultach already has its offices in Belfast and Donegal and I cannot understand why anybody would think it strange that if the Ulster Scots body has its two offices, the one in Donegal and the one in Belfast, its sister body, the Forás na Gaeilge, would also have its two offices in Donegal and Belfast.
The Minister is avoiding the question. An announcement was made in the budget that a cross-Border body would be decentralised to Gweedore. There had been no prior consultation with the British authorities on that. Is that the way we operate in co-operation? I do not believe that is the case. Will the Minister also outline how the staff in Forás na Gaeilge are dealing with this issue? Are they happy to go, and what happens to those who decide they do not want to be decentralised? Will they be without a job?
The Deputy has raised two issues and I will try to deal with them separately. If the Deputy refers to the budget document he got on budget day in December he will see that it explicitly states that since Forás na Gaelige is a North-South Body, the intention signalled by the Government that day was subject to agreement with the British authorities. Therefore, we did not make a unilateral decision. We said the decision was subject to agreement. One party must always initiate a decision. It is wrong to say we unilaterally decided. The budget document made it quite clear that we were aware that we required agreement for that.
The process of getting agreement is proceeding. I had a meeting recently with the Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Ms Angela Smith, and it was agreed that we would meet again in the near future. We will progress that matter.
Subject to the consent of the Northern authorities, the same procedures will apply to the staff of Foras na Gaeilge as to the wider public service. The Deputy is aware of those procedures. The central applications process is described in the Mullarkey report. The staff of Foras na Gaeilge will be in the same position as the staff of the other public bodies which are subject to decentralisation. They are not a case apart, once the agreement of the Northern authorities is received.
3 Dr. Cowley asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs if he will consider the institution of a special Government scheme to ensure the better development of the north and western half of County Mayo; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [17110/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraI introduced the CLÁR programme in October 2001 to address depopulation as well as the decline and lack of services in rural areas. An Agreed Programme for Government contained a commitment to annual funding for the CLÁR programme and to consider additional areas for inclusion in light of the 2002 population census data. The Government decided on the additional areas for inclusion in the CLÁR programme and I announced these on 17 January 2003. Areas in 18 counties are now included in the programme and there are no plans for any further review of the boundary of CLÁR areas.
Of the 152 district electoral divisions in County Mayo, 104 are now included in the CLÁR programme with the majority of these in the northern, western and southern parts of the county. Five Leader groups operate in County Mayo as follows: Comhar Iorrais; South-West Mayo; Western Rural Development; Meitheal Forbartha na Gaeltachta; and Comhdháil Oileán na hÉireann. Each of these groups received an allocation of funding under the programme in July 2001 for the period of the programme to the end of 2006 totalling €9,960,700 to support bottom-up initiatives on economic and social development in the Mayo area. The new rural social scheme, which I recently launched, will provide much-needed support for low-income farmers in counties such as Mayo with relatively high numbers of farmers in the farm assist scheme. Special assistance is available under the Gaeltacht and islands schemes in parts of the north and west of the country.
In the circumstances, I believe the above schemes are appropriate and effective in terms of their objectives in helping rural communities.
I thank the Minister for his reply. It is obvious that Mayo has been divided into two areas, with the north and west of the county in crisis due to a declining population. The last census shows that 40% of the county's land area, the north and the west, has only 20% of its population. It is the only region in the State which is in demographic crisis. If this continues the north and west of Mayo, from Killala to Newport, will be entirely deserted by the end of the century. Professor Séamus Caulfield has authenticated this, based on census figures. There has been a net loss of 1,109 people in the six years since the last census from a population of 2,765. In 16 years, north and west Mayo have lost 3,650 people from a population of 5,306 whereas the population of the south and east of the county has risen. There are two Mayos and urgent action is necessary.
CLÁR is a very good programme but it is underfunded. We need a special tax incentive scheme. CLÁR is not going to help the hotels which have closed. In Achill alone, the Sliabh Mór and Atlantic hotels, Boley House, the Abu Teanga and the Atoka restaurants and scores of bed and breakfasts have closed. CLÁR will not address this problem. There is a need for a proper tax incentive scheme because this area is in crisis.
A hotel in County Mayo incurs the same costs as a hotel in O'Connell Street in Dublin. Insurance costs have quadrupled in the past few years. Hotels in County Mayo have greater heating costs because Mayo has a damper climate, although it is a beautiful place. These hotels have a short four to six week holiday period.
A special case must be made for the north-west Mayo area. Otherwise the population will disappear. The census figures show it to be the most economically deprived area in Ireland. Will the Minister consider a tax incentive scheme for north-west Mayo? The area needs it. Otherwise the people will no longer be there.
It would have been more appropriate for the Deputy to submit a question about a tax incentive scheme to the Minister for Finance. I do not have the power to introduce tax incentive schemes.
The CLÁR programme is dealing incisively with the problem of depopulation in Mayo. East Mayo has also suffered continuous population decline. The CLÁR programme takes the growing areas of Ballina, Westport, Castlebar and south Mayo, which is growing because of Galway's influence, out of County Mayo and concentrates on those areas which are losing population. The population of the new, expanded CLÁR areas was 54,726 in 1996 and had declined to 54,264 in 2002. This is a lower rate of decline than previously.
Tax incentive schemes are a matter for the Minister for Finance and I will be discussing the issue with him. Tax incentives are not the panacea for all ills. The holiday resort tax incentive scheme was given to the Achill area. Considering the cost of the scheme to the Exchequer, because tax foregone is the equivalent of money spent, I have serious doubts about its long-term effect in Achill. It brought mobile finance and plenty of building owned by outsiders but did not leave much money in the area.
There is a plan to build a very large hotel in Belmullet, which shows that it is not all doom and gloom.
4 Mr. Crawford asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the reason the new rural social scheme has been introduced on a pilot basis to only eight out of 38 areas eligible for this scheme; if officials from the Department of Social and Family Affairs will be responsible for paying participants on the scheme; and the way in which he envisages this scheme will function as a supplementary source of income for farmers, in view of the fact that participants have no guarantee of employment after 12 months and with each scheme only being given a three-year commitment. [16976/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraI launched the rural social scheme on 17 May 2004. The scheme will be delivered at a local level by the Leader groups, and in the Gaeltacht by the Leader groups in conjunction with Údarás na Gaeltachta. In order to ensure the smooth operation of the scheme, the implementation of the scheme is being phased in and the following eight groups were selected for the first phase: Arigna Catchment Area Community Development, covering north Roscommon and all of County Leitrim; Cavan/Monaghan Rural Development; IRD. Duhallow, covering north-west Cork and part of east Kerry; Galway Rural Development; Inishowen Rural Development; South-West Mayo Development; MFG/Údarás na Gaeltachta; and WORD in Wexford.
I expect the scheme will be made available in the remaining 27 Leader areas over the next two months and this phasing approach has been broadly welcomed by Leader groups.
It is intended that payments to participants on the scheme will generally be made by Area Development Management Limited on behalf of the Leader companies. It is anticipated that the involvement of the Department of Social and Family Affairs in direct payments, if required for technical reasons, may only arise in very limited cases.
The scheme will act as a supplementary source of income for farmers and fishermen who are allocated places on the scheme. Participants will initially go on the scheme for one year but this can be extended. In the event that there is greater demand than places available at the end of the first year, priority will be given to new entrants. However, those who have completed their one-year period of participation on the scheme can re-apply the following year when the same conditions will apply.
I welcome the scheme. However, it was announced on 3 December last and was re-announced on 17 May. The scheme has been re-announced for election purposes. I have checked with some of the chosen groups and they tell me they will not be in a position to discuss matters with potential participants for a number of weeks. To suggest all the schemes will be up and running in two months is an exaggeration. Will the Minister indicate when people are likely to become involved in the schemes?
I previously raised the matter of the involvement of a number of groups in this scheme. As I understand it, the new system is to be administered at Leader level. However, ADM is responsible for making payment to the workers. Why did the Minister not secure the agreement of the Department of Social and Family Affairs to use current structures for the making of such payments? Is there a difficulty within the organisations involved? The Cabinet is supposed to deal with such matters. Will the Minister explain why the Department of Social and Family Affairs will not involve itself in this scheme? Why is there not one overseer, such as FÁS, to deal with these matters?
Roll-out of the scheme was delayed, in part, by our consideration of the involvement of the Department of Social and Family Affairs in the making of such payments. The difficulty which arises is that that Department is responsible for social welfare payments which, I am sure the Deputy is aware, are strict payments. What is involved in this scheme are payroll payments including normal deductions and so on. In that regard what was needed was a structure similar to that available to all Departments, including the Department of Social and Family Affairs, in terms of its staff but not as regards payments to clients. We had to consider organisations which had experience in payroll payments.
We then considered the possibility of each Leader company undertaking its own payroll but some had more experience in that regard than others. To ensure there were no difficulties in that regard, we felt it was simpler to give one company with a good computer programme responsibility for all payments. However, matters such as time sheets and the feeding of information will be done through the Leader companies.
The Deputy also asked why we did not use FÁS, rather than the Leader companies, as the intermediary agency? FÁS is involved in training. I wish to make it clear that this is not a training scheme, it is a work scheme. It would, therefore, have been inappropriate to use FÁS as the organiser on the ground. The Deputy also asked about roll-out. I understand that five Leader companies will this week place advertisements seeking applications in that regard. There is enormous interest in the scheme. Leader should have completed its interview and selection process by the end June or first week in July.
The remainder of the Leader companies will get involved when they are ready, an issue which we discussed with Comdháil Oilean na hÉireann which felt not all companies were ready at this stage. As soon as they are organisationally ready they will roll-out the scheme. I expect that first participants will commence working, allowing for recruitment and so on, in the last week of June or first week of July with other participants joining some two months later.
The time allowed for this question has expired. In fairness to other Deputies I must apply the same system to all.
I congratulate the Minister on ensuring the advertisements will be placed next week. However, I am not suggesting FÁS should run the scheme but that it should be involved in co-ordination of it to ensure there is no duplication.
I accept the Deputy's point.
5 Mr. O’Shea asked the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the progress made to date in his Department on the implementation of the provisions of the Official Languages Act 2003; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [16978/04]
Amharc ar fhreagraAs indicated previously in reply to questions in this House on the Official Languages Act 2003, my Department is engaged in ongoing work regarding implementation of the Act on which considerable progress has been made. In particular I have commenced Part 5, which relates to placenames, with effect from 30 October 2003. Seven placename orders have been made and a further order on Gaeltacht placenames is in draft form and will be published as a draft to allow my Department to shortly undertake public consultations. I obtained Government approval for an action plan on the phased implementation of the Act, which was published before Christmas; made a commencement order on 19 January to give force to most of the Act's provisions as from that date and with effect from 1 May 2004 in the case of section 10, which specifies a limited number of key documents to be published simultaneously in both official languages; and made regulations to prescribe the largescale definitive maps of the State produced by Ordnance Survey Ireland for the purposes of Part 5 of the Act. The effect of these regulations will be to ensure that only the official, Irish language, placename of Gaeltacht areas will be used on such maps as they are next revised from 1 January 2005 onwards. I have also published a bilingual booklet, Act na dTeangacha Oifigiúla 2003: Osradharc, which gives an overview of the main provisions of the Act as well as answers to a number of the most common questions asked about it and made provision of €500,000 in the Estimates for my Department for 2004 to establish Oifig Choimisinéir na dTeangacha Oifigiúla a bhunú. As the Deputy is aware, Seán Ó Cuirreáin was appointed as Coimisinéir Teanga by the President with effect from 23 February 2004.
Additional information not given on the floor of the House.
My Department is continuing to provide briefing sessions for public bodies on request to further inform them of the implications of the Act and to discuss its specific implications for them; has written to each of the approximately 650 public bodies covered by the Act on two occasions to provide them with information about it and developments in its implementation; and has established an interdepartmental working group to advise it on the drawing-up of statutory guidelines under paragraph 12 of the Act. Work on the guidelines is at an advanced stage and I expect to be in a position to publish and circulate them in draft form to all public bodies within a month for comment and observations, so that work can commence on schemes by the first round of public bodies in September.
My Department has also circulated draft heads of regulations under section 9(1) of the Act regarding the use of the Irish language or, the Irish and English languages, on oral announcements, stationery, signage and on advertisements to all Departments; has held bilateral meetings with a number of Departments-public bodies to discuss specific implications and issues that arise for them; and has established a working group to make recommendations on provision of Irish translation services to meet the State's obligations under section 7 of the Act regarding simultaneous publication of Acts of the Oireachtas in the Irish and English languages. The work of the group has been completed and my Department is exploring the feasibility of a number of possible ways forward and is also keeping the list of public bodies under review to ensure that any new bodies are included by regulation for the purposes of the Act.
As regards the scheme, which bodies, including Departments, will have to submit for approval before they are considered to be operating within the terms of the Act? It was my understanding that a sample would emanate from the Minister's Department. Has that happened? If so, when will it be available to other Departments? Other Departments will only proceed with their plans having had sight of his Department's plans.
Has research been conducted regarding the number of people required by various Departments to undertake work in the Irish language? If so, does it indicate a sufficiency of people in the various Departments and State agencies to implement the provisions of the Act? I recently raised the issue of a newspaper report arising from a meeting of the Association of Chief Executives of State agencies. Have chief executives made known to the Minister or his Department their concerns in the interim?
The answer to the Deputy's final question is, "No". I replied in detail to a reasonable letter which I received from a commercial semi-State body. The letter related to its concern regarding implementation of the Act, given it is a commercial body as opposed to a private company. The Deputy will be aware we made specific provision in that regard when discussing the legislation in this House. I replied in detail to questions on the matter. Nobody has voiced general concerns regarding implementation of the Act. Most chief executives accept I am merely carrying out the will of the Oireachtas.
Considerable progress has been made by Departments in relation to the drawing up of a sample scheme. I hope to be in a position to publish it in the near future. The Deputy will note from my reply that my Department has made incredible progress in that regard. Work is also ongoing regarding recognition by the European Union of Irish as an official language. A relatively small number of staff at my Department are dealing with that issue.
My Department has established an interdepartmental working group to advise us on the drawing up of statutory guidelines under paragraph 12 of the Act. Work on the guidelines is at an advanced stage and I expect to be in a position to publish and circulate them in draft form to all public bodies within a month for comment and observations so that work on the scheme by the first round of public bodies can commence in September. We are making progress on all fronts. There is an enormous amount of work involved but I am satisfied that considerable progress is being made. In that regard, the commissioner is already in place and operating in the context of those parts of the Act currently in operation.
The Minister's reply outlined some developments that are to be welcomed. However, we are all concerned about whether there are sufficient fluent Irish speakers to provide the service within Departments and State agencies when schemes are agreed. What is the position on officials in Departments who have the requisite fluency in the Irish language but who do not want to become involved at that level?
The Deputy has touched upon a problem that we foresaw when we began drafting the Bill. It is an issue over which I received some criticism from Irish language bodies. The Deputy might remember our debating it in the House. I recognised from the beginning that one may work in a certain Department but may not want to work through the Irish language or be connected with work in that regard. Such people might be specialists in all sorts of areas. The Act stipulates that each plan be based initially on the current resources in each Department or body. If these resources are very limited, the first thing one must do is recognise that. As the Deputy knows, there is continuous recruitment in the public service. Therefore, I expect bodies to accept the current level of resources — if it is nil, it is nil — and then state how they intend to address this in their plans through the use of outside translation services, for example, and by way of a recruitment policy that would build incrementally on existing resources, taking into account the total possible pool of relevant people. In this context, young people who attend gaelscoileanna and who do courses through Irish at third level will suddenly find that new vistas are opening up because people will require their services, both in general terms and specifically because they can work bilingually within the State.
