I propose to take question Nos. 195 and 197 to 199, inclusive, together.
The Congregation of the Christian Brothers have not raised with me any requirement to pass the proposed sale of lands, currently used by a post-primary school as playing pitches, to the Charities Regulatory Authority for examination and approval. Referral to the Charities Regulatory Authority is not a matter for my Department. The functions of the Charities Regulator are set out in the Charities Acts (as amended). It is a matter for the Congregation to comply with any relevant regulations in relation to land disposal.
In respect of the proposed disposal of lands adjacent to the post-primary school referred to by the Deputy, my Department understands from the Christian Brothers Congregation that the lands proposed for sale are the subject of contractual arrangement between the Congregation and a developer. My Department has written to the Christian Brothers Congregation seeking clarification on a number of points, including whether the land in question is now the subject of a legally-binding agreement. The Congregation have advised that they will reply to my Department in the coming weeks.
The Christian Brothers congregation has an outstanding redress contribution of €8.8 million. I appreciate that the Christian Brothers wish to follow through on their commitments, having already paid €21.2 million of their voluntary cash offer. I would hope that the Congregation also takes educational needs fully into account during its deliberations.
In the case of the primary school referred to by the Deputy, the lands in question are owned by another Congregation. The lands proposed for sale are outside the boundary of the school site which has been agreed by the school patron.
My Department does not have statutory CPO powers. Given the cost of land acquisitions generally, where my Department has requested a local authority to purchase land under CPO, it has been for the purposes of constructing a new school building. I understand that the school communities referred to by the Deputy wish to retain the right to use the land in question for recreational purposes and playing pitches.
For the reasons stated above, a CPO would not be appropriate in the circumstances.