Speech Archive MARCH 2005
Each speech listed here is an edited speech. If you'd like to see the speech or debate in full, please go to the Oireachtas website and click on "Seanad Eireann" and then "Seanad Debates" and click on the relevant date as listed with each speech on this page.
Migrant Workers In Ireland (24/03/05)
Student -Deportation (24/03/05)
West Link Bridge & National Toll Roads (23/03/05)
Road Speed Limits (23/03/05)
Further Education (23/03/05)
Class Sizes & Untrained Teachers (23/03/05)
Student - Deportation (22/03/05)
Travers Report (10/03/05)
Suicide/Alcohol (10/03/05)
IRA Statement on McCartney Killers(09/03/05)
Untrained Teachers (09/03/05)
Health (Amendment) Bill 2005 - Pensions (09/03/05)
Travers Report (09/03/05)
Untrained Teachers (08/03/05)
Travers Report (08/03/05)
National Pensions Reserve Fund (03/03/05)
Western Rail Corridor (03/03/05)
Waste Management (02/03/05)
Influenza Pandemic (02/03/05)
Migrant Workers In Ireland
24/03/05 - I wish to comment on the issue to which Senator Brian Hayes referred. The situation is quite appalling. We have witnessed both sides of the migration debate recently. On one hand, people protested outside the gates of Leinster House on behalf of the Nigerian student. On the other, Deputy Joe Higgins has been raising the issue of GAMA Construction Ireland Limited for a number of weeks. People stated, when the Deputy first aired his concerns, that what he was saying could not be true and challenged him to speak on the matter outside the House, which he did. It now appears that he has been proven right and that matters appear to be even worse than he originally indicated. These people operate in Dickensian working and service conditions. They have no rights or supports and are not subject to health and safety regulations, which is appalling.
I understand that a member of the clergy in County Kilkenny has carried out a review on migrants involved in agricultural work in his area. He discovered that a number of these individuals are living in hay sheds, are being paid €2 per day and are being fed with white bread covered in brown sauce. This has only occurred in a small number of cases and does not reflect what happens on the majority of farms. Even so, it highlights the position in which Ireland finds itself in 2005. We must put a stop to this type of behaviour and Senator Brian Hayes’s proposal might offer us a way forward in that regard. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment must come before the House to explain how he intends to put a stop to it.
The Minister has spoken about the number of inspectors involved but the problem is growing. We discovered this morning that RTE is investigating a situation that has arisen in respect of Irish Ferries which involves a person who is running - on behalf of another employer - a beauty parlour on one of the company’s vessels, who is being paid exploitative wages, who does not have security of tenure and who only gets three days off each month. What happened when the matter was highlighted by RTE? The woman in question was sacked.
People must put aside the idea that this is a “lefty” issue. These interests to which I refer are undercutting decent employers. GAMA Construction is putting decent employers, contractors and those who tender honestly, openly and legally for business at a loss. For humane, legal and commercial reasons, this type of behaviour cannot be allowed to continue because it is wrong. I ask that the Minister come before the House to discuss this issue.
Back to top of the page
Student - Deportation
24/03/05 - I also congratulate the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on having the self-confidence and flexibility to listen to advice. He attracted much criticism in respect of this matter but he obviously realised that there was a need for him to intervene. There have not been many examples of Ministers intervening on issues in such a public way or of their being prepared to change their minds. The Minister should be congratulated on his actions. I thank the Leader for raising this issue with him on behalf of the House. We should communicate to him our deep appreciation in respect of his intervention.
Back to top of the page
West Link Bridge and National Toll Roads
23/03/05 - I do not know what it would cost to buy out the toll bridges but, on a very rough calculation, if NTR is earning €25 million or €30 million a year — this would probably rise to €40 million with the extra lanes — and that is capitalised at 5%, the sum involved is significant. If buying back the toll bridges was to cost as much as Luas, there would be a public outcry. We should take them back and do whatever appropriate deal can be done in that context. According to the Government amendment, the extra lanes are intended to increase the capacity of the M50. That could be amended to read “increase the income to NTR and the Government”. NTR’s point that €1 of every €1.80 goes to the Government is significant.
This causes extraordinary and unquantifiable angst to people during the day. It increases costs relating to child minding and productivity and increases the stress experiences by those who are delayed on the M50 each day. This is not all the fault of NTR. On each occasion a plan has been drawn up, it has been wrong. There are good reasons for this. In some cases, for example, nobody could have anticipated the significant increase in traffic. Extra lanes are about to be opened on the toll plaza.
Senator Morrissey has frequently raised the issue of placing large park and ride facilities at every junction on the M50. The absence of these is a problem. Making such facilities available would also require the provision of bus services to carry passengers along the radial routes, not the M50, into the city.
Does the Minister know that there is no free public park and ride facility on the north side of Dublin? Many people park their cars in the car parks of pubs on the N1, N2 and N3 before catching buses to work at 6 a.m. As part of any increase in lanes, NTR should be required to pay for the new lanes that will generate extra money. There should be a significant park and ride facility at each junction on the motorway.
In addition to extra lanes, a rail line should be laid alongside the M50. I do not understand why that is not done with every new road. It would provide a contact point for the length of the M50 and open a new range of possibilities to ease traffic in Dublin. Motorists would then get something back for funding the motorway.
I have referred on many occasions to toll bridges. What bothers me most about the deal done 30 years ago are not just the issues raised by Senator Ross. I accept the argument that much of what happened could not be anticipated. I resented at the time that taxpayers were funding the building of a 20 km or 30 km road while another crowd was building a bridge across it and gaining from it. I am on record at the time as saying it was a bad deal. As we move forward, we must examine the broader issues. I am absolutely certain that the points raised by Senator Ross about the public view on this issue are correct. There is public anxiety and public opposition to this project. There is no support for the 20% increase which happened and more money being put into the coffers of NTR and the Government at the expense of people who are responsible for productivity in this country.
We heard this morning that a 6% increase in economic growth is expected over the next number of years. This is being delivered by the people who are being charged to get to work to deliver this economic growth. This is neither correct nor necessary. It does not fit in with the plan to share wealth.
We need to find a legal means to extricate ourselves from this situation. I do not believe we can afford to pay a capitalised amount based on the current significant and extraordinary income. The more we increase the income, the more difficult this will become. We should attempt to reduce toll charges before there are any negotiations on a buy-out. Agreeing to increased toll charges, while talking about a buy-out, is simply spending money to line the coffers of National Toll Roads which already has plenty money. We need to pull back from this. I do not blame the company. It exists to make a profit; that is its God. The bottom line is that the company’s job is to make a profit. It is up to us to put restraints on it and give it back to the people. We should introduce Bertie’s socialism to modern Ireland. This is an amenable step forward towards that particular philosophy.
Back to top of the page
Road Speed Limits
23/03/05 -I completely reject the criticism [in the Seanad] of the Garda. This is the kind of argument constantly used by politicians. Both sides of the House passed the legislation [re National Speed Limits] in question. The legislation was introduced by one side and was implemented by the other side following the change of Government in 1996. Attitudes changed on both sides immediately.
As I understand it, Senator Brian Hayes said that gardaí are being directed by certain members of the force to increase the number of penalty points given. When the legislation was introduced, the only objections to the speed limits came from these benches. Senator Ross and I proposed that there should also be a capacity to have a minimum speed limit and that this power should be given to local authorities. There was no support for our proposal. People are now shedding crocodile tears and criticising gardaí for implementing the stupid laws that we passed. Some of the speed limits are far too low and some of them are far too high.
It is up to us to change those limits and not to blame the Garda for implementing legislation passed by the Houses, however well or officiously they do it. It is too easy to blame those at the end of the line. As Senator Brian Hayes stated, individual gardaí operating speed monitoring equipment will be held to blame. That is understandable. However, whether it is on his or her volition or on the authority or at the direction of senior gardaí, he or she is merely implementing a law that was passed with acclamation from both sides of the House. The idea that more discretion should be given to local authorities should not even be entertained.
Back to top of the page
Further Education
23/03/05 - I want to talk tonight about further education which in many instances is the forgotten sector in Irish education. The reason it is forgotten is because this is the only country in Europe that does not have a deliberate and separate further education sector within the education system. We are talking about people who in some instances have lost the chance of education. We are talking about people who failed to get the benefit of the education system. We are talking about mature students and people who are interested in courses and qualifications which are not provided in any other place.
There are more mature students enrolled in post-leaving certificate education, or further education, than there are in third level colleges, which is crucially important. I am proposing that the State recognise this sector. It should recognise the recommendations in the McIver report and the Minister (for Education and Science) and the Minister of State should take on board the issues contained therein and provide a time line for their implementation. The Minister of State and I had this discussion many times in other places. This is the heart and soul of education because it is where people can find and develop their potential in ways that have not been available to them in the other sectors. This is why we need to take a serious interest in the issue. If we do not do so, we may not be legally in breach of the European directive on lifelong education, but we will certainly be in breach of the spirit of the directive. We are certainly in breach of the global agreements on the need for lifelong education. We have not brought to a conclusion the commitment given to the trade union movement and the social partners during the discussions on the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. At that stage lifelong education was recognised as an important sector. There was a determination that it should progress and there was a decision to establish the McIver group in order to advise the Government on how it should move on. This has been done. There are a series of recommendations which should be put in place.
An amazing range of post-leaving certificate courses is currently available. These include music and art, in different forms, sound engineering, media studies, journalism, animation, pre-nursing, social care, alternative medicine, outdoor pursuits, computers and business. These are crucial areas which are an amazing success story. There are almost 30,000 pupils enrolled in these courses throughout the country, some in extremely large colleges. The profile of people interested in these courses are people who have not been able by reason of their physical means or social milieu to continue education at a particular point. This is one of the areas to which they can return. People can also take up these courses directly after doing their leaving certificate.
A whole range of people take up these courses. It is an opportunity for people to take up what is referred to as second chance education. However, I would say to the Minister of State that this is not second chance education. In some instances people go from no chance education to new chance education, which is what it is for some of these people.One of the recommendations in the McIver report — this is crucial evidence in terms of reflecting what we need to do — is that there should be a comprehensive arrangement for child care because single parents will be attending these courses.
I am asking for a distinct and separate sector. I am asking for computer access, with computer back-up and technical support for all students and groups involved in the sector. As well as IT and computerisation, there should be access to libraries, books and librarian support. There should be a management structure which would ensure that the further education sector could move forward. There should be huge diversity, a clear definition and public recognition of the sector. These are some of the issues I am asking the Minister of State to take on board.
I was speaking to some people who are involved in the sector and I asked them for examples of how people move on. They gave me the names of well known people in RTE, TV3 and people working in various organisations who are huge success stories. This is an area in which the Minister of State could make a name for himself and where Bertie’s new socialism could find articulation.
Back to top of the page
Class Sizes and Untrained Teachers
23/03/05 - Another issue of relevance this week is the circulation of frightening statistics on class sizes and teacher numbers by the Irish National Teachers Organisation. I support the point that Senator Browne made yesterday that the Minister for Education and Science should provide an indication of her thinking on class sizes, special educational needs, rural schools, etc. The Leader will be sympathetic about these issues because she tried to address them when there were far fewer resources available. There will be 1,700 teachers available for employment in primary schools in 2006. If a situation arises where there are untrained personnel in schools, 1,000 or more teachers unemployed and excessively large classes, there will be absolute outrage on the part of parents.
Back to top of the page
Student - Deportation
22/03/05 - Many people of my age grew up in a culture where the counter of every corner shop had a donation box seeking to help the education of children in Africa. Added to that was the iconic imagery of African schoolchildren playing hurling or Gaelic football under the watchful eye of an Irish Christian Brother or priest in Africa. Having been rooted in that culture and background it is very hard to accept the sight of an African-Irish schoolboy in an Irish school uniform being exiled to a country where he has no protection, family or support.
This is the issue that bothers me. I do not say this as any personal criticism of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I have defended him and I do not believe him to be racist nor do I believe many of the things that have been said about him. However, there is a time for flexibility and this is one such time. When I spoke on the Immigration Bill, I said there would be times when we would need to stand together and state it was right that people be turned back or be kept in the country. This is one of those times.
I say to the Leader, as a teacher herself, that three months before the leaving certificate examination is not the time to expel a child from a school, never mind expelling one from the country. We should revisit the issue and ask that flexibility be brought to bear. As a teacher, public representative and citizen of the country, it is impossible to accept this was what we had in mind. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said when putting through the legislation that he would be open and flexible on the issue of children born after the implementation of the Supreme Court decision. He has honoured that commitment and I accept this issue is outside the bounds of what we sought on that occasion. However, this situation indicates why flexibility is necessary. Will the Leader ask the Minister to reinvestigate this matter and show some flexibility in this regard?
Back to top of the page
Travers Report
10/03/05 - I hold no party political brief on these issues. However, I believe it is important to put matters on the record. If I have a criticism to make of Deputy Martin it is, as Senator Browne said, that this was a serious and important issue which he should have followed up. I do not agree that it would be reasonable to expect a Minister to have to examine documentation that was being sent by a Secretary General to an Attorney General. That is not normal practice. Neither would it be reasonable, in terms of turn around time through the Attorney General, that a Minister would expect to have advice back from the Attorney General in a short period of time. It does not happen that way and these are the facts.
I move on to the matters of political responsibility and the Accounting Officer. Under the 1924 Act, the Accounting Officer is the Secretary General. He clearly made errors. To be fair, he has explained how that could have happened. The former Minister, Deputy Martin, has explained how it could have happened and so has Mr. Travers. The Department is extraordinarily busy and has never had a more difficult time than during the past two years. Anyone can understand how a hard-working person, with an impeccable reputation until this matter, could have made a mistake.
It is important to record that it is grossly unfair for people to equate this with issues such as corruption, bribery and dishonesty. This man gained nothing, there was no profit and he has suffered badly from it. At most, he made a serious error of judgment or a serious omission. He did nothing dishonest or corrupt and made no personal gain. As Accounting Officer he had to take responsibility on an accounting matter. He has taken responsibility and is gone.
Under the Act, the Minister is the person with political responsibility. Therefore, he cannot say with one bound that he is free. What should a Minister do in this situation? Is it reasonable to expect that he should take responsibility for every neglect by omission or commission in his Department? For example, if somebody at a high level in the Department did some illegal, underhand or unfair dastardly act to line his or her pockets, would we expect the Minister to take responsibility? The best analogy I can give is the recent Act passed in this House regarding the requirement of directors to ensure that they take responsibility for signing off on compliance in their companies. The directors must say that they have put in place structures to ensure they have complied in every way with what is required and that to the best of their knowledge they have acted honourably and in compliance with all parts of the law.
In this situation, the structures were in place. The structure was a paper trail. Why did they not deal with it? The simple answer lies in the three different statements of the Secretary General. The paper trail stopped at his office. He admitted that he broke the system by taking the document from his office without recording it out and that wherever he brought it, he did not record it in. He has accepted responsibility for that. Can a Minister be held responsible for that? I do not know. It is the Opposition’s job to make the Minister feel responsible, but it is not my job as an Independent Senator.
I look at the matter from all sides and come to my conclusion which I want to put on the record of the House. This matter is a sorry mess. I am irritated by what I have heard here over the past week about what was legal or illegal. The Supreme Court judgment was very clear. The illegality did not refer to the retrospective element, but to the private property element, something in the Constitution against which Senator Ryan and I have argued for many years. It was on the basis of the dastardly private property section in the Constitution, in as much as the person’s pension was concerned to be his or her private property, that the Department was found to have acted unconstitutionally and without a legal framework.
In that regard, every Minister who sat in the Department and got this legal advice over the years must be answerable in as much as Deputy Martin. There is nothing in what I have read to say that he is more or less responsible than the first few Ministers who dealt with this matter. I do not know what people did in between.
Back to top of the page
Suicide/Alcohol
10/03/05 - The issue of suicide, the reasons for it and the way we should address the problem have been discussed in the House on many occasions but it is a subject on which we have very little in terms of facts. I would like to have a further discussion on the problem, particularly the connection between suicide and alcohol consumption. I came across some figures during the week which will be of major help in coming to some understanding of the problem of suicide. More than 80% of suicide victims had consumed alcohol a short time previous to their suicide. More important, and this is a frightening figure which nobody can ignore, is that suicides have increased by 43% over the past 12 to 15 years during which time the consumption of alcohol increased by 42% to 43%. That is a clear connection about which we should be concerned. Recognising that alcohol has both a depressive and a uninhibiting impact on personalities, creating impulsive behaviour, this is an issue of which I was not aware the last time we discussed the consumption of alcohol. Colleagues on both sides of the House have often asked whether there is any explanation for the increase in suicides. This is a clear connection which should be recorded in a debate here. I am grateful to the Irish National Alliance for Action on Alcohol, which made those figures available during the course of the week. We could have a discussion on this matter and get a view from the Government.
Back to top of the page
IRA Statement on McCartney Killers
09/03/05 - I absolutely agree with Senator Finucane that the outrage that has greeted the Provisional IRA statement is perfectly understandable. However, I would also like to sound a note of caution. Whereas we are all of one mind in the Irish political landscape, North and South, in pubs and other places around Ireland, many people will say that shooting or getting rid of the perpetrators is the right way to deal with them. We have a great deal of education to carry out to explain to people that this is utterly unacceptable for reasons that affect every citizen of the State.
It is crucially important to record the further comment of the McCartney family today that they sought justice rather than revenge. That is so articulately expressed that it puts in context the importance of justice in a democracy.
Back to top of the page
Untrained Teachers
09/03/05 - I made the point yesterday on the Order of Business that I felt the current arrangements in primary schools whereby untrained personnel have responsibility for the so-called “teaching” of children is another pot waiting to boil over on the Government. It could certainly lead to a class action on the part of parents seeking to question the Government ignoring the constitutional imperative requiring it to provide for free primary education. That must imply professional standards, something mentioned later in the Constitution. I say this because, if it takes me 17 years to convince the Government to do so, at least my concern will have been recorded time and time again. I respectfully ask the Leader to bring this formally to the attention of the Attorney General to reassure ourselves that this problem does not need a solution at this stage.
Back to top of the page
Health (Amendment) Bill 2005 - Pensions
09/03/05 - I would like to make a brief intervention on the Bill. I have spoken over the past week or so with a number of different groups that have concerns about some of the elements in it. I do not oppose the levying of some form of payment; there should be some form of payment where people can afford it. I am clear on the Supreme Court’s reflection on this fact. The court did not object to the retrospective element of it. However, the court ruled that it was depriving people of their private property. It was a constitutional point about the protection of private property.
I agree in principle with the general thinking behind the argument that a person in a nursing home whose only income is his or her pension should be prepared to pay a significant portion of it towards the costs of their care. If we could look at the practice of “a third, a third and a third” used in many parts of the professions and if a person in a nursing home could keep one third of that money for himself or herself and pay 65% or 66.3%, it would be considerably fairer and easier. I am making this point on a human level because the amounts of money are not hugely significant to the State but the amount of disposable income for people in nursing homes is very important. It is about having the money to buy the little things like a present for a grandchild, to be able to give at some stage at some time.
I ask the Government to have a rethink on the Bill. I am aware that it will not accept amendments here because I am sure that the last thing it wants to do is to bring this Bill back into the House. However, I consider there is a need to put down an amendment, to discuss this part of the Bill further and to hear the rationale. If we accept the rationale that there should be some element of payment, could I ask the Minister to ask for an examination of how it should be implemented?
We should ease back when implementing this policy and recognise how we can significantly help people. We are faced with paying back an amount that the pundits put at up to €2 billion. I do not know if this figure is correct in terms of the assessment of the total cost of the mistakes that were made over the past 20 years or so. I will not dwell on this aspect now as we will be debating the whole issue in the House tomorrow. However, I would ask the Minister to outline how much it would cost the State in net terms if we reduce the amount demanded of pensioners to two thirds of their pension. Reducing the amount to this level would give a great element of independence and dignity to people who have given their all to this country and show that the political establishment empathises with them. The Government should reflect on this.
Back to top of the page
Travers Report
09/03/05 - The Travers report that we will be discussing is also very topical today, since the person who seems to be accepting responsibility for long-term and systemic corporate failure, the Secretary General of the Department, is apparently leaving it. That is perfectly understandable; we have seen such situations in several places in recent years. However, it would be the height of cynicism, utterly unacceptable and impossible to explain in a democracy if that person were rewarded with some similar or promoted position anywhere else. I feel sadness for the person concerned, since I am sure he is very hard-working, but this matter needs closure and his entitlements should not be augmented. Leaving the Department should not be the gateway to some other similar or promoted position in the public service. I do not say that in any personal manner, but I would like to have it on the record.
Back to top of the page
Untrained Teachers
08/03/05 - I wish to refer to a related matter. We have faced a long court action and much discussion, argument and controversy about nursing homes. With regard to the question of unqualified and untrained teachers in national schools, the Government is walking itself into another difficult situation and leaving itself open to legal action. The requirement in the Constitution that the State provide for free primary education implies free professional primary education. Now that teachers are available there is no longer any excuse for not having fully qualified, fully trained teachers in primary schools. We should ask the Minister to attend the House to discuss this. It is only a matter of time before the Government faces a class action on a constitutional basis alleging it is not complying with its constitutional imperative in this area.
Back to top of the page
Travers Report
08/03/05 - Given what we often discussed and the points made in the House during the debate on Seanad reform, it would be wrong to ignore the Travers report for this week. We should debate it tonight after taking the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill or tomorrow morning. We have space to deal with it at either time and I would like to hear the Leader’s view on this. Today’s business can proceed as planned and I do not propose any change to it. I do not foresee the slightest difficulty in debating the report this evening or tomorrow morning and it is crucial we do so.
The point made by Senator Finucane is a crucial one. This will be the test to ascertain where blame lies and how it is dealt with, who is responsible for what went wrong, where we go from here and what conclusions or recommendations can be extrapolated from the report, if it contains conclusions, which I presume it must. It is important for Members to have a view on this matter at an early stage. If the report is published this afternoon, there is not the slightest reason we cannot debate it today and put the matter on the record.
Back to top of the page
National Pensions Reserve Fund
03/03/05 - A throwaway comment made by the Taoiseach yesterday about the future of the national pensions reserve fund warrants further examination because it was extraordinarily interesting. He said demographic factors might mean it will no longer be necessary, within a short number of years, for us to continue to pay 1% of GNP into the national pensions reserve fund each year. The Taoiseach’s statement coincided with the news yesterday that three quarters of the new jobs created in this country last year were taken by immigrant workers. Both factors indicate clearly that change is coming. The Taoiseach is probably right. The national pensions reserve fund was established some years ago on the basis that within 20 years, two or three people would be depending on every working person. As a consequence of the influx of workers from other countries, it no longer looks like that ratio will be accurate.
I would like the Government to outline the current position in this regard. The basis on which the Government makes its plans is never properly explained to this House. We often discuss health, education and housing, but I would like a Minister to come to the House to discuss related matters such as demographics, the birth rate and our dependency ratio. Decisions are made on the basis of a logical extrapolation of information that is available. It is simply a statistical exercise. We need to hear from somebody who makes judgments on the likely position in 15 or 20 years.
The release of moneys from the national pensions reserve fund would have a significant impact on infrastructural projects. It would be the most significant thing we could do. I have supported the national pensions reserve fund from the beginning, when it needed to be established. That does not mean it has to be continued, however. We need to consider how the moneys can be released. I would like the Minister for Finance to indicate how he thinks this matter will develop.
Back to top of page
Western Rail Corridor
03/03/05 - I ask the House to welcome the Government’s indication yesterday that it intends to support what it calls the “western rail corridor”, which is referred to by Senators as the “Sligo-Waterford-Rosslare line”. I have raised this issue in the House at least three times a year for the past 15 years. The House would appreciate an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Minister for Transport, or another representative of the Government. I would like to know how the project will proceed. For example, what timeframe will it have? The last time the matter was raised in the House, Senators were told that the McCann report would be ready by early February of this year, but it now seems that it will not be ready until the middle of April.
I would like the relevant authorities to produce a plan that indicates clearly that the project will be pursued almost immediately. Plans should be put in place to start working on the railway line in three or four areas and not just at the top or bottom of it. I would like this House to propose to the Government that the project should begin in three or four places - south of Sligo, between Tuam and Galway and between Ennis and Galway, for example.
The proposed link from the Limerick-Ennis line to Shannon Airport was not mentioned by the Government yesterday. The reopening of the western rail corridor is the single most significant prospect in the BMW region. There will be a working north-south infrastructural link of quality in that area for the first time. We should ensure that we keep our foot on the pedal in this regard by giving the project every encouragement and continuing the discussion in this House. I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on the matter as soon as the McCann report is presented and available. I think the proposal will receive wide support on both sides of the House.
Back to top of the page
Waste Management
02/03/05 - The biggest problem in dealing with waste is that people do not want to take responsibility for it. The biggest argument is always about in whose backyard the waste will be disposed. An honest debate on incinerators is needed. I agree with Senator Brady’s comments. While I am no expert in the area, all I have read leads me to believe we must acknowledge the part incinerators have in waste management. Unless it is proved otherwise, incineration is cleaner than other methods of disposal. We were all raised with the backyard burning approach to getting rid of waste, which still happens. However, the most basic scientific studies show that this throws more dioxins into the atmosphere than an incinerator. I have argued this point with my Green colleagues.
Exporting thousands of tonnes of waste every year to China cannot continue. If people get excited and energised by the costs and waste of energy involved in importing kiwi fruits from New Zealand, they should be equally energised about Ireland sending its dirt to China to be dealt with there. That is not good practice for the future. Landfill is finished and we cannot continue to employ this method.
I agree with Senator Bannon that recycling is simply not happening. Every week in my house, the car is loaded up with materials to go from north County Dublin into a city bring centre, as there are not enough in my area. After Christmas, all the bottle banks were spilling their contents on to the road, as they were not emptied. This problem must be examined.
Waste management needs to be examined on an individual basis. Too much of the debate has taken place on a national and local level. I want the debate to take place on a household level. Every house needs a green bin but this is not happening. For example, there are no green bins in the Fingal County Council area, a council which I consider progressive. Every house must have a composter in the back garden, with large houses required to have heat driven turbo composters. Any user of a composter knows how impossible it is to fill them. I congratulate Fingal County Council on being the first to introduce the pay-by-volume bin collection system. One only pays when one puts one’s bin out, a huge incentive for people to delay putting their bins out.
There is also a national public and governmental responsibility to keep our country clean. Some waste collections must be done. Will the Minister recognise that some people, such as the elderly, cannot afford to pay for waste collection, even on a volume basis? To resolve this, a national waiver scheme must be introduced to bring uniformity to the matter. I am sick and tired of hearing debates on the difference in collection charges between Fingal, South County Dublin, Kildare and Kerry County Councils. An element of conformity must be introduced.
We can learn much from young people on recycling. Every house should be required to have a green bin and a composter. The introduction of turbo composters should be examined. A real and unbiased debate, without spin, is needed on incinerators. I know of no country that has implemented an acceptable national waste disposal programme without including incineration. Can communities be incentivised through tax breaks to take responsibility for their waste? As long as a community looks after the waste from its nearest town, it will be understandably resentful. The bottle banks must be in clean, easily accessible locations with safe parking and must be emptied regularly. I have studied some newer models in other countries and much progress has been made in new approaches. Is it necessary for the bottles to be colour sorted between green, brown and clear? Colour sorting only slows the process. We should be proud that we were the first country in Europe to get rid of the plastic bag. It was an extraordinary move. People complied with the regulation, showing themselves to be flexible. That other countries have followed suit is a good sign.
Will the Minister take on board the idea of a community in a set geographical area, such as a peninsula, taking responsibility for its own waste disposal and energy requirements? The new 1.6 MW generators in west Kerry could look after all that area’s electricity needs and, by my calculations, could even sell some. It would also be possible to have some type of waste disposal scheme. One could offer the residents of a community tax breaks if it looked after its energy requirements and its waste. That is worth thinking about. It is creative and is worth doing to see how it works.
Back to top of the page
Influenza Pandemic
02/03/05 - In 1917 millions of people died from an influenza pandemic which had devastating effects in every continent. A similar situation and circumstances which led to that outbreak are coming into place at this time. There is a very strong likelihood, articulated by international medical experts, that there could be another flu pandemic looming on the horizon. The manner in which science and medicine have developed in the past 100 years means it is possible to have significant safeguards against such an outbreak and various countries are preparing for this scenario.
The Government was embarrassed a few years ago by the lack of preparedness in the case of nuclear fallout and the distribution of iodine tablets. I do not wish the country to be caught out in the same way in the event of a flu pandemic. I presume this issue is under consideration by the Department of Health and Children. The House should be reassured that the country has sufficient stock of anti-viral medicines or whatever is required to deal with this situation. I ask that the Minister for Health and Children come to the House to reassure us.
Back to top of the page
Seanad debates are available in full on the Oireachtas Website
Each speech listed here is an edited speech. If you'd like to see the speech or debate in full, please go to the Oireachtas website and click on "Seanad Eireann" and then "Seanad Debates" and click on the relevant date as listed with each speech on this page.
Migrant Workers In Ireland (24/03/05)
Student -Deportation (24/03/05)
West Link Bridge & National Toll Roads (23/03/05)
Road Speed Limits (23/03/05)
Further Education (23/03/05)
Class Sizes & Untrained Teachers (23/03/05)
Student - Deportation (22/03/05)
Travers Report (10/03/05)
Suicide/Alcohol (10/03/05)
IRA Statement on McCartney Killers(09/03/05)
Untrained Teachers (09/03/05)
Health (Amendment) Bill 2005 - Pensions (09/03/05)
Travers Report (09/03/05)
Untrained Teachers (08/03/05)
Travers Report (08/03/05)
National Pensions Reserve Fund (03/03/05)
Western Rail Corridor (03/03/05)
Waste Management (02/03/05)
Influenza Pandemic (02/03/05)
Migrant Workers In Ireland
24/03/05 - I wish to comment on the issue to which Senator Brian Hayes referred. The situation is quite appalling. We have witnessed both sides of the migration debate recently. On one hand, people protested outside the gates of Leinster House on behalf of the Nigerian student. On the other, Deputy Joe Higgins has been raising the issue of GAMA Construction Ireland Limited for a number of weeks. People stated, when the Deputy first aired his concerns, that what he was saying could not be true and challenged him to speak on the matter outside the House, which he did. It now appears that he has been proven right and that matters appear to be even worse than he originally indicated. These people operate in Dickensian working and service conditions. They have no rights or supports and are not subject to health and safety regulations, which is appalling.
I understand that a member of the clergy in County Kilkenny has carried out a review on migrants involved in agricultural work in his area. He discovered that a number of these individuals are living in hay sheds, are being paid €2 per day and are being fed with white bread covered in brown sauce. This has only occurred in a small number of cases and does not reflect what happens on the majority of farms. Even so, it highlights the position in which Ireland finds itself in 2005. We must put a stop to this type of behaviour and Senator Brian Hayes’s proposal might offer us a way forward in that regard. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment must come before the House to explain how he intends to put a stop to it.
The Minister has spoken about the number of inspectors involved but the problem is growing. We discovered this morning that RTE is investigating a situation that has arisen in respect of Irish Ferries which involves a person who is running - on behalf of another employer - a beauty parlour on one of the company’s vessels, who is being paid exploitative wages, who does not have security of tenure and who only gets three days off each month. What happened when the matter was highlighted by RTE? The woman in question was sacked.
People must put aside the idea that this is a “lefty” issue. These interests to which I refer are undercutting decent employers. GAMA Construction is putting decent employers, contractors and those who tender honestly, openly and legally for business at a loss. For humane, legal and commercial reasons, this type of behaviour cannot be allowed to continue because it is wrong. I ask that the Minister come before the House to discuss this issue.
Back to top of the page
Student - Deportation
24/03/05 - I also congratulate the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform on having the self-confidence and flexibility to listen to advice. He attracted much criticism in respect of this matter but he obviously realised that there was a need for him to intervene. There have not been many examples of Ministers intervening on issues in such a public way or of their being prepared to change their minds. The Minister should be congratulated on his actions. I thank the Leader for raising this issue with him on behalf of the House. We should communicate to him our deep appreciation in respect of his intervention.
Back to top of the page
West Link Bridge and National Toll Roads
23/03/05 - I do not know what it would cost to buy out the toll bridges but, on a very rough calculation, if NTR is earning €25 million or €30 million a year — this would probably rise to €40 million with the extra lanes — and that is capitalised at 5%, the sum involved is significant. If buying back the toll bridges was to cost as much as Luas, there would be a public outcry. We should take them back and do whatever appropriate deal can be done in that context. According to the Government amendment, the extra lanes are intended to increase the capacity of the M50. That could be amended to read “increase the income to NTR and the Government”. NTR’s point that €1 of every €1.80 goes to the Government is significant.
This causes extraordinary and unquantifiable angst to people during the day. It increases costs relating to child minding and productivity and increases the stress experiences by those who are delayed on the M50 each day. This is not all the fault of NTR. On each occasion a plan has been drawn up, it has been wrong. There are good reasons for this. In some cases, for example, nobody could have anticipated the significant increase in traffic. Extra lanes are about to be opened on the toll plaza.
Senator Morrissey has frequently raised the issue of placing large park and ride facilities at every junction on the M50. The absence of these is a problem. Making such facilities available would also require the provision of bus services to carry passengers along the radial routes, not the M50, into the city.
Does the Minister know that there is no free public park and ride facility on the north side of Dublin? Many people park their cars in the car parks of pubs on the N1, N2 and N3 before catching buses to work at 6 a.m. As part of any increase in lanes, NTR should be required to pay for the new lanes that will generate extra money. There should be a significant park and ride facility at each junction on the motorway.
In addition to extra lanes, a rail line should be laid alongside the M50. I do not understand why that is not done with every new road. It would provide a contact point for the length of the M50 and open a new range of possibilities to ease traffic in Dublin. Motorists would then get something back for funding the motorway.
I have referred on many occasions to toll bridges. What bothers me most about the deal done 30 years ago are not just the issues raised by Senator Ross. I accept the argument that much of what happened could not be anticipated. I resented at the time that taxpayers were funding the building of a 20 km or 30 km road while another crowd was building a bridge across it and gaining from it. I am on record at the time as saying it was a bad deal. As we move forward, we must examine the broader issues. I am absolutely certain that the points raised by Senator Ross about the public view on this issue are correct. There is public anxiety and public opposition to this project. There is no support for the 20% increase which happened and more money being put into the coffers of NTR and the Government at the expense of people who are responsible for productivity in this country.
We heard this morning that a 6% increase in economic growth is expected over the next number of years. This is being delivered by the people who are being charged to get to work to deliver this economic growth. This is neither correct nor necessary. It does not fit in with the plan to share wealth.
We need to find a legal means to extricate ourselves from this situation. I do not believe we can afford to pay a capitalised amount based on the current significant and extraordinary income. The more we increase the income, the more difficult this will become. We should attempt to reduce toll charges before there are any negotiations on a buy-out. Agreeing to increased toll charges, while talking about a buy-out, is simply spending money to line the coffers of National Toll Roads which already has plenty money. We need to pull back from this. I do not blame the company. It exists to make a profit; that is its God. The bottom line is that the company’s job is to make a profit. It is up to us to put restraints on it and give it back to the people. We should introduce Bertie’s socialism to modern Ireland. This is an amenable step forward towards that particular philosophy.
Back to top of the page
Road Speed Limits
23/03/05 -I completely reject the criticism [in the Seanad] of the Garda. This is the kind of argument constantly used by politicians. Both sides of the House passed the legislation [re National Speed Limits] in question. The legislation was introduced by one side and was implemented by the other side following the change of Government in 1996. Attitudes changed on both sides immediately.
As I understand it, Senator Brian Hayes said that gardaí are being directed by certain members of the force to increase the number of penalty points given. When the legislation was introduced, the only objections to the speed limits came from these benches. Senator Ross and I proposed that there should also be a capacity to have a minimum speed limit and that this power should be given to local authorities. There was no support for our proposal. People are now shedding crocodile tears and criticising gardaí for implementing the stupid laws that we passed. Some of the speed limits are far too low and some of them are far too high.
It is up to us to change those limits and not to blame the Garda for implementing legislation passed by the Houses, however well or officiously they do it. It is too easy to blame those at the end of the line. As Senator Brian Hayes stated, individual gardaí operating speed monitoring equipment will be held to blame. That is understandable. However, whether it is on his or her volition or on the authority or at the direction of senior gardaí, he or she is merely implementing a law that was passed with acclamation from both sides of the House. The idea that more discretion should be given to local authorities should not even be entertained.
Back to top of the page
Further Education
23/03/05 - I want to talk tonight about further education which in many instances is the forgotten sector in Irish education. The reason it is forgotten is because this is the only country in Europe that does not have a deliberate and separate further education sector within the education system. We are talking about people who in some instances have lost the chance of education. We are talking about people who failed to get the benefit of the education system. We are talking about mature students and people who are interested in courses and qualifications which are not provided in any other place.
There are more mature students enrolled in post-leaving certificate education, or further education, than there are in third level colleges, which is crucially important. I am proposing that the State recognise this sector. It should recognise the recommendations in the McIver report and the Minister (for Education and Science) and the Minister of State should take on board the issues contained therein and provide a time line for their implementation. The Minister of State and I had this discussion many times in other places. This is the heart and soul of education because it is where people can find and develop their potential in ways that have not been available to them in the other sectors. This is why we need to take a serious interest in the issue. If we do not do so, we may not be legally in breach of the European directive on lifelong education, but we will certainly be in breach of the spirit of the directive. We are certainly in breach of the global agreements on the need for lifelong education. We have not brought to a conclusion the commitment given to the trade union movement and the social partners during the discussions on the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness. At that stage lifelong education was recognised as an important sector. There was a determination that it should progress and there was a decision to establish the McIver group in order to advise the Government on how it should move on. This has been done. There are a series of recommendations which should be put in place.
An amazing range of post-leaving certificate courses is currently available. These include music and art, in different forms, sound engineering, media studies, journalism, animation, pre-nursing, social care, alternative medicine, outdoor pursuits, computers and business. These are crucial areas which are an amazing success story. There are almost 30,000 pupils enrolled in these courses throughout the country, some in extremely large colleges. The profile of people interested in these courses are people who have not been able by reason of their physical means or social milieu to continue education at a particular point. This is one of the areas to which they can return. People can also take up these courses directly after doing their leaving certificate.
A whole range of people take up these courses. It is an opportunity for people to take up what is referred to as second chance education. However, I would say to the Minister of State that this is not second chance education. In some instances people go from no chance education to new chance education, which is what it is for some of these people.One of the recommendations in the McIver report — this is crucial evidence in terms of reflecting what we need to do — is that there should be a comprehensive arrangement for child care because single parents will be attending these courses.
I am asking for a distinct and separate sector. I am asking for computer access, with computer back-up and technical support for all students and groups involved in the sector. As well as IT and computerisation, there should be access to libraries, books and librarian support. There should be a management structure which would ensure that the further education sector could move forward. There should be huge diversity, a clear definition and public recognition of the sector. These are some of the issues I am asking the Minister of State to take on board.
I was speaking to some people who are involved in the sector and I asked them for examples of how people move on. They gave me the names of well known people in RTE, TV3 and people working in various organisations who are huge success stories. This is an area in which the Minister of State could make a name for himself and where Bertie’s new socialism could find articulation.
Back to top of the page
Class Sizes and Untrained Teachers
23/03/05 - Another issue of relevance this week is the circulation of frightening statistics on class sizes and teacher numbers by the Irish National Teachers Organisation. I support the point that Senator Browne made yesterday that the Minister for Education and Science should provide an indication of her thinking on class sizes, special educational needs, rural schools, etc. The Leader will be sympathetic about these issues because she tried to address them when there were far fewer resources available. There will be 1,700 teachers available for employment in primary schools in 2006. If a situation arises where there are untrained personnel in schools, 1,000 or more teachers unemployed and excessively large classes, there will be absolute outrage on the part of parents.
Back to top of the page
Student - Deportation
22/03/05 - Many people of my age grew up in a culture where the counter of every corner shop had a donation box seeking to help the education of children in Africa. Added to that was the iconic imagery of African schoolchildren playing hurling or Gaelic football under the watchful eye of an Irish Christian Brother or priest in Africa. Having been rooted in that culture and background it is very hard to accept the sight of an African-Irish schoolboy in an Irish school uniform being exiled to a country where he has no protection, family or support.
This is the issue that bothers me. I do not say this as any personal criticism of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. I have defended him and I do not believe him to be racist nor do I believe many of the things that have been said about him. However, there is a time for flexibility and this is one such time. When I spoke on the Immigration Bill, I said there would be times when we would need to stand together and state it was right that people be turned back or be kept in the country. This is one of those times.
I say to the Leader, as a teacher herself, that three months before the leaving certificate examination is not the time to expel a child from a school, never mind expelling one from the country. We should revisit the issue and ask that flexibility be brought to bear. As a teacher, public representative and citizen of the country, it is impossible to accept this was what we had in mind. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform said when putting through the legislation that he would be open and flexible on the issue of children born after the implementation of the Supreme Court decision. He has honoured that commitment and I accept this issue is outside the bounds of what we sought on that occasion. However, this situation indicates why flexibility is necessary. Will the Leader ask the Minister to reinvestigate this matter and show some flexibility in this regard?
Back to top of the page
Travers Report
10/03/05 - I hold no party political brief on these issues. However, I believe it is important to put matters on the record. If I have a criticism to make of Deputy Martin it is, as Senator Browne said, that this was a serious and important issue which he should have followed up. I do not agree that it would be reasonable to expect a Minister to have to examine documentation that was being sent by a Secretary General to an Attorney General. That is not normal practice. Neither would it be reasonable, in terms of turn around time through the Attorney General, that a Minister would expect to have advice back from the Attorney General in a short period of time. It does not happen that way and these are the facts.
I move on to the matters of political responsibility and the Accounting Officer. Under the 1924 Act, the Accounting Officer is the Secretary General. He clearly made errors. To be fair, he has explained how that could have happened. The former Minister, Deputy Martin, has explained how it could have happened and so has Mr. Travers. The Department is extraordinarily busy and has never had a more difficult time than during the past two years. Anyone can understand how a hard-working person, with an impeccable reputation until this matter, could have made a mistake.
It is important to record that it is grossly unfair for people to equate this with issues such as corruption, bribery and dishonesty. This man gained nothing, there was no profit and he has suffered badly from it. At most, he made a serious error of judgment or a serious omission. He did nothing dishonest or corrupt and made no personal gain. As Accounting Officer he had to take responsibility on an accounting matter. He has taken responsibility and is gone.
Under the Act, the Minister is the person with political responsibility. Therefore, he cannot say with one bound that he is free. What should a Minister do in this situation? Is it reasonable to expect that he should take responsibility for every neglect by omission or commission in his Department? For example, if somebody at a high level in the Department did some illegal, underhand or unfair dastardly act to line his or her pockets, would we expect the Minister to take responsibility? The best analogy I can give is the recent Act passed in this House regarding the requirement of directors to ensure that they take responsibility for signing off on compliance in their companies. The directors must say that they have put in place structures to ensure they have complied in every way with what is required and that to the best of their knowledge they have acted honourably and in compliance with all parts of the law.
In this situation, the structures were in place. The structure was a paper trail. Why did they not deal with it? The simple answer lies in the three different statements of the Secretary General. The paper trail stopped at his office. He admitted that he broke the system by taking the document from his office without recording it out and that wherever he brought it, he did not record it in. He has accepted responsibility for that. Can a Minister be held responsible for that? I do not know. It is the Opposition’s job to make the Minister feel responsible, but it is not my job as an Independent Senator.
I look at the matter from all sides and come to my conclusion which I want to put on the record of the House. This matter is a sorry mess. I am irritated by what I have heard here over the past week about what was legal or illegal. The Supreme Court judgment was very clear. The illegality did not refer to the retrospective element, but to the private property element, something in the Constitution against which Senator Ryan and I have argued for many years. It was on the basis of the dastardly private property section in the Constitution, in as much as the person’s pension was concerned to be his or her private property, that the Department was found to have acted unconstitutionally and without a legal framework.
In that regard, every Minister who sat in the Department and got this legal advice over the years must be answerable in as much as Deputy Martin. There is nothing in what I have read to say that he is more or less responsible than the first few Ministers who dealt with this matter. I do not know what people did in between.
Back to top of the page
Suicide/Alcohol
10/03/05 - The issue of suicide, the reasons for it and the way we should address the problem have been discussed in the House on many occasions but it is a subject on which we have very little in terms of facts. I would like to have a further discussion on the problem, particularly the connection between suicide and alcohol consumption. I came across some figures during the week which will be of major help in coming to some understanding of the problem of suicide. More than 80% of suicide victims had consumed alcohol a short time previous to their suicide. More important, and this is a frightening figure which nobody can ignore, is that suicides have increased by 43% over the past 12 to 15 years during which time the consumption of alcohol increased by 42% to 43%. That is a clear connection about which we should be concerned. Recognising that alcohol has both a depressive and a uninhibiting impact on personalities, creating impulsive behaviour, this is an issue of which I was not aware the last time we discussed the consumption of alcohol. Colleagues on both sides of the House have often asked whether there is any explanation for the increase in suicides. This is a clear connection which should be recorded in a debate here. I am grateful to the Irish National Alliance for Action on Alcohol, which made those figures available during the course of the week. We could have a discussion on this matter and get a view from the Government.
Back to top of the page
IRA Statement on McCartney Killers
09/03/05 - I absolutely agree with Senator Finucane that the outrage that has greeted the Provisional IRA statement is perfectly understandable. However, I would also like to sound a note of caution. Whereas we are all of one mind in the Irish political landscape, North and South, in pubs and other places around Ireland, many people will say that shooting or getting rid of the perpetrators is the right way to deal with them. We have a great deal of education to carry out to explain to people that this is utterly unacceptable for reasons that affect every citizen of the State.
It is crucially important to record the further comment of the McCartney family today that they sought justice rather than revenge. That is so articulately expressed that it puts in context the importance of justice in a democracy.
Back to top of the page
Untrained Teachers
09/03/05 - I made the point yesterday on the Order of Business that I felt the current arrangements in primary schools whereby untrained personnel have responsibility for the so-called “teaching” of children is another pot waiting to boil over on the Government. It could certainly lead to a class action on the part of parents seeking to question the Government ignoring the constitutional imperative requiring it to provide for free primary education. That must imply professional standards, something mentioned later in the Constitution. I say this because, if it takes me 17 years to convince the Government to do so, at least my concern will have been recorded time and time again. I respectfully ask the Leader to bring this formally to the attention of the Attorney General to reassure ourselves that this problem does not need a solution at this stage.
Back to top of the page
Health (Amendment) Bill 2005 - Pensions
09/03/05 - I would like to make a brief intervention on the Bill. I have spoken over the past week or so with a number of different groups that have concerns about some of the elements in it. I do not oppose the levying of some form of payment; there should be some form of payment where people can afford it. I am clear on the Supreme Court’s reflection on this fact. The court did not object to the retrospective element of it. However, the court ruled that it was depriving people of their private property. It was a constitutional point about the protection of private property.
I agree in principle with the general thinking behind the argument that a person in a nursing home whose only income is his or her pension should be prepared to pay a significant portion of it towards the costs of their care. If we could look at the practice of “a third, a third and a third” used in many parts of the professions and if a person in a nursing home could keep one third of that money for himself or herself and pay 65% or 66.3%, it would be considerably fairer and easier. I am making this point on a human level because the amounts of money are not hugely significant to the State but the amount of disposable income for people in nursing homes is very important. It is about having the money to buy the little things like a present for a grandchild, to be able to give at some stage at some time.
I ask the Government to have a rethink on the Bill. I am aware that it will not accept amendments here because I am sure that the last thing it wants to do is to bring this Bill back into the House. However, I consider there is a need to put down an amendment, to discuss this part of the Bill further and to hear the rationale. If we accept the rationale that there should be some element of payment, could I ask the Minister to ask for an examination of how it should be implemented?
We should ease back when implementing this policy and recognise how we can significantly help people. We are faced with paying back an amount that the pundits put at up to €2 billion. I do not know if this figure is correct in terms of the assessment of the total cost of the mistakes that were made over the past 20 years or so. I will not dwell on this aspect now as we will be debating the whole issue in the House tomorrow. However, I would ask the Minister to outline how much it would cost the State in net terms if we reduce the amount demanded of pensioners to two thirds of their pension. Reducing the amount to this level would give a great element of independence and dignity to people who have given their all to this country and show that the political establishment empathises with them. The Government should reflect on this.
Back to top of the page
Travers Report
09/03/05 - The Travers report that we will be discussing is also very topical today, since the person who seems to be accepting responsibility for long-term and systemic corporate failure, the Secretary General of the Department, is apparently leaving it. That is perfectly understandable; we have seen such situations in several places in recent years. However, it would be the height of cynicism, utterly unacceptable and impossible to explain in a democracy if that person were rewarded with some similar or promoted position anywhere else. I feel sadness for the person concerned, since I am sure he is very hard-working, but this matter needs closure and his entitlements should not be augmented. Leaving the Department should not be the gateway to some other similar or promoted position in the public service. I do not say that in any personal manner, but I would like to have it on the record.
Back to top of the page
Untrained Teachers
08/03/05 - I wish to refer to a related matter. We have faced a long court action and much discussion, argument and controversy about nursing homes. With regard to the question of unqualified and untrained teachers in national schools, the Government is walking itself into another difficult situation and leaving itself open to legal action. The requirement in the Constitution that the State provide for free primary education implies free professional primary education. Now that teachers are available there is no longer any excuse for not having fully qualified, fully trained teachers in primary schools. We should ask the Minister to attend the House to discuss this. It is only a matter of time before the Government faces a class action on a constitutional basis alleging it is not complying with its constitutional imperative in this area.
Back to top of the page
Travers Report
08/03/05 - Given what we often discussed and the points made in the House during the debate on Seanad reform, it would be wrong to ignore the Travers report for this week. We should debate it tonight after taking the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill or tomorrow morning. We have space to deal with it at either time and I would like to hear the Leader’s view on this. Today’s business can proceed as planned and I do not propose any change to it. I do not foresee the slightest difficulty in debating the report this evening or tomorrow morning and it is crucial we do so.
The point made by Senator Finucane is a crucial one. This will be the test to ascertain where blame lies and how it is dealt with, who is responsible for what went wrong, where we go from here and what conclusions or recommendations can be extrapolated from the report, if it contains conclusions, which I presume it must. It is important for Members to have a view on this matter at an early stage. If the report is published this afternoon, there is not the slightest reason we cannot debate it today and put the matter on the record.
Back to top of the page
National Pensions Reserve Fund
03/03/05 - A throwaway comment made by the Taoiseach yesterday about the future of the national pensions reserve fund warrants further examination because it was extraordinarily interesting. He said demographic factors might mean it will no longer be necessary, within a short number of years, for us to continue to pay 1% of GNP into the national pensions reserve fund each year. The Taoiseach’s statement coincided with the news yesterday that three quarters of the new jobs created in this country last year were taken by immigrant workers. Both factors indicate clearly that change is coming. The Taoiseach is probably right. The national pensions reserve fund was established some years ago on the basis that within 20 years, two or three people would be depending on every working person. As a consequence of the influx of workers from other countries, it no longer looks like that ratio will be accurate.
I would like the Government to outline the current position in this regard. The basis on which the Government makes its plans is never properly explained to this House. We often discuss health, education and housing, but I would like a Minister to come to the House to discuss related matters such as demographics, the birth rate and our dependency ratio. Decisions are made on the basis of a logical extrapolation of information that is available. It is simply a statistical exercise. We need to hear from somebody who makes judgments on the likely position in 15 or 20 years.
The release of moneys from the national pensions reserve fund would have a significant impact on infrastructural projects. It would be the most significant thing we could do. I have supported the national pensions reserve fund from the beginning, when it needed to be established. That does not mean it has to be continued, however. We need to consider how the moneys can be released. I would like the Minister for Finance to indicate how he thinks this matter will develop.
Back to top of page
Western Rail Corridor
03/03/05 - I ask the House to welcome the Government’s indication yesterday that it intends to support what it calls the “western rail corridor”, which is referred to by Senators as the “Sligo-Waterford-Rosslare line”. I have raised this issue in the House at least three times a year for the past 15 years. The House would appreciate an opportunity to discuss the matter with the Minister for Transport, or another representative of the Government. I would like to know how the project will proceed. For example, what timeframe will it have? The last time the matter was raised in the House, Senators were told that the McCann report would be ready by early February of this year, but it now seems that it will not be ready until the middle of April.
I would like the relevant authorities to produce a plan that indicates clearly that the project will be pursued almost immediately. Plans should be put in place to start working on the railway line in three or four areas and not just at the top or bottom of it. I would like this House to propose to the Government that the project should begin in three or four places - south of Sligo, between Tuam and Galway and between Ennis and Galway, for example.
The proposed link from the Limerick-Ennis line to Shannon Airport was not mentioned by the Government yesterday. The reopening of the western rail corridor is the single most significant prospect in the BMW region. There will be a working north-south infrastructural link of quality in that area for the first time. We should ensure that we keep our foot on the pedal in this regard by giving the project every encouragement and continuing the discussion in this House. I ask the Leader to arrange a debate on the matter as soon as the McCann report is presented and available. I think the proposal will receive wide support on both sides of the House.
Back to top of the page
Waste Management
02/03/05 - The biggest problem in dealing with waste is that people do not want to take responsibility for it. The biggest argument is always about in whose backyard the waste will be disposed. An honest debate on incinerators is needed. I agree with Senator Brady’s comments. While I am no expert in the area, all I have read leads me to believe we must acknowledge the part incinerators have in waste management. Unless it is proved otherwise, incineration is cleaner than other methods of disposal. We were all raised with the backyard burning approach to getting rid of waste, which still happens. However, the most basic scientific studies show that this throws more dioxins into the atmosphere than an incinerator. I have argued this point with my Green colleagues.
Exporting thousands of tonnes of waste every year to China cannot continue. If people get excited and energised by the costs and waste of energy involved in importing kiwi fruits from New Zealand, they should be equally energised about Ireland sending its dirt to China to be dealt with there. That is not good practice for the future. Landfill is finished and we cannot continue to employ this method.
I agree with Senator Bannon that recycling is simply not happening. Every week in my house, the car is loaded up with materials to go from north County Dublin into a city bring centre, as there are not enough in my area. After Christmas, all the bottle banks were spilling their contents on to the road, as they were not emptied. This problem must be examined.
Waste management needs to be examined on an individual basis. Too much of the debate has taken place on a national and local level. I want the debate to take place on a household level. Every house needs a green bin but this is not happening. For example, there are no green bins in the Fingal County Council area, a council which I consider progressive. Every house must have a composter in the back garden, with large houses required to have heat driven turbo composters. Any user of a composter knows how impossible it is to fill them. I congratulate Fingal County Council on being the first to introduce the pay-by-volume bin collection system. One only pays when one puts one’s bin out, a huge incentive for people to delay putting their bins out.
There is also a national public and governmental responsibility to keep our country clean. Some waste collections must be done. Will the Minister recognise that some people, such as the elderly, cannot afford to pay for waste collection, even on a volume basis? To resolve this, a national waiver scheme must be introduced to bring uniformity to the matter. I am sick and tired of hearing debates on the difference in collection charges between Fingal, South County Dublin, Kildare and Kerry County Councils. An element of conformity must be introduced.
We can learn much from young people on recycling. Every house should be required to have a green bin and a composter. The introduction of turbo composters should be examined. A real and unbiased debate, without spin, is needed on incinerators. I know of no country that has implemented an acceptable national waste disposal programme without including incineration. Can communities be incentivised through tax breaks to take responsibility for their waste? As long as a community looks after the waste from its nearest town, it will be understandably resentful. The bottle banks must be in clean, easily accessible locations with safe parking and must be emptied regularly. I have studied some newer models in other countries and much progress has been made in new approaches. Is it necessary for the bottles to be colour sorted between green, brown and clear? Colour sorting only slows the process. We should be proud that we were the first country in Europe to get rid of the plastic bag. It was an extraordinary move. People complied with the regulation, showing themselves to be flexible. That other countries have followed suit is a good sign.
Will the Minister take on board the idea of a community in a set geographical area, such as a peninsula, taking responsibility for its own waste disposal and energy requirements? The new 1.6 MW generators in west Kerry could look after all that area’s electricity needs and, by my calculations, could even sell some. It would also be possible to have some type of waste disposal scheme. One could offer the residents of a community tax breaks if it looked after its energy requirements and its waste. That is worth thinking about. It is creative and is worth doing to see how it works.
Back to top of the page
Influenza Pandemic
02/03/05 - In 1917 millions of people died from an influenza pandemic which had devastating effects in every continent. A similar situation and circumstances which led to that outbreak are coming into place at this time. There is a very strong likelihood, articulated by international medical experts, that there could be another flu pandemic looming on the horizon. The manner in which science and medicine have developed in the past 100 years means it is possible to have significant safeguards against such an outbreak and various countries are preparing for this scenario.
The Government was embarrassed a few years ago by the lack of preparedness in the case of nuclear fallout and the distribution of iodine tablets. I do not wish the country to be caught out in the same way in the event of a flu pandemic. I presume this issue is under consideration by the Department of Health and Children. The House should be reassured that the country has sufficient stock of anti-viral medicines or whatever is required to deal with this situation. I ask that the Minister for Health and Children come to the House to reassure us.
Back to top of the page
Seanad debates are available in full on the Oireachtas Website