Niall Collins (Limerick, Fianna Fail)

I am pleased to have an opportunity to raise this topical matter, which is very pertinent to our capital city. The Minister of State will agree that the privatisation of the refuse service that has taken place in Dublin has been an exemplary case study in how not to transfer a service from the public sector to the private sector. A great deal of uncertainty has evolved as part of the fall-out from the transition process.

I will set out where it all began to go wrong. When the initial decision was taken, the members of Dublin City Council were not consulted in any shape or fashion. They were told that a decision had been taken and given a week's notice of the privatisation of the service. It is deplorable that local public representatives who were democratically elected in the Dublin City Council administrative area were not given more than a week's notice of such a major decision. The Fianna Fáil group on the council called an emergency meeting, with the support of the Fine Gael and Labour Party councillors who control the council but it did not get any degree of satisfaction in this respect.

It is not good enough that the private service provider, Greyhound, is not providing the level of refuse service that was formerly provided by Dublin City Council. Bins are not being collected on the designated day. Bins are being collected at irregular hours of the day and night. The service is wholly inadequate. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, is in attendance. Her senior colleague in Dublin City Council's parent Department - the Minister, Deputy Hogan - should have ensured there was a seamless transition when an important service like refuse collection was the subject of such a major change.

The contract that was agreed between Dublin City Council and Greyhound is shrouded in secrecy and confidentiality. Dublin City Council has form in this regard. We are familiar with the issues that have developed with Covanta in the case of the proposed Poolbeg incinerator at Ringsend. We have been told that commercial sensitivities and issues of confidentiality are at stake. That is not good enough, given that section 136 of the Local Government Act 2001 provides that if councillors pass a resolution looking for information, as was the case in this instance, it is incumbent on the management and the executive of the council to put that information into the public domain.

Approximately 40,000 people currently benefit from refuse waivers. I understand the waivers will run out at some stage. What will happen to those people when their waivers expire? I suggest we will have a major litter problem in Dublin. The only response we have seen from Dublin City Council to date has been to remove many of its bins from public areas, on the basis that they are being stuffed with domestic refuse. That is the wrong way of dealing with the issue. A growing litter problem could have a negative impact on tourism and this country's Presidency of the EU, for example.

The issue of the upfront payment has been partially resolved. Issues with upfront payments arose in other administrative areas after companies developed commercial difficulties. I suggest that a bond system should be used. The Minister, Deputy Hogan, should consider asking these companies to put in place a bond in case issues arise with regard to people who have made upfront payments.

I will not speak at length about the service level agreement because I do not have enough time. If Dublin City Council were to publish the service level agreement it arrived at with Greyhound during the negotiations, it would be informative for the public. What is the up-to-date position in the Department on this issue? Where will those who currently have waivers, many of whom are old age pensioners who are having to deal with issues like the household charge, stand when their waivers run out? Will Dublin City Council put in place a plan to assist the approximately 40,000 people who hold waivers?

See this speech in context