Dáil debates

Tuesday, 17 February 2004

4:00 pm

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Last year I had the opportunity to meet the relatives of the victims of the Omagh bomb. This was one of the most sobering meetings I have ever attended. Over two hours, people made their case cogently that what they are in pursuit of is the truth. Why, the day before we debate the Nally report in the Dáil, has a visit to Omagh been arranged suddenly for the Taoiseach? Is this just a cynical exercise by the Taoiseach for a photo opportunity? Would he not have been far better employed to stay in Government Buildings, meet the families of the victims of the Omagh bomb and atrocity and give them a briefing on elements of the Nally report which he could discuss with them? Perhaps, as was discussed in the House, he could give them an edited version of that report without interfering or infringing upon State security.

It appears to me and to the public at large that in the Taoiseach's reply to a parliamentary question some weeks ago concerning visits outside his jurisdiction, this visit was not mentioned. When was this visit arranged and what is the purpose of the visit? Why did the Taoiseach not take the preferred path of meeting the families of the victims in Dublin, where they will happen to be on that day? On the day before the Dáil debates the Nally report, why is it not possible to give an edited version of the report to the families who time and again have said that what they want from this is the simple truth?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will visit Northern Ireland on Thursday, as I do regularly. I have a number of engagements which have been arranged for some time. I will be in Coleraine University, Derry and Belfast to discuss the Belfast partnership and a number of other issues. One of the engagements I have is in Omagh.

The Nally report was to be debated by the House last Friday so had that gone ahead it would have been completed before my visit. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, on previous occasions, made the committee aware of the issues in so far as he has been able to do so. Over the years I have met many of the people connected with Omagh. I have been involved in many of their fundraising efforts and have kept in touch with them. I will participate in a reception by the leaders of the civic society and councils in Omagh.

When talking about international visits abroad in the context of the EU, I do not include Northern Ireland, or perhaps I included the fact that I would be in Northern Ireland a number of times between now and the summer.

Photo of Enda KennyEnda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am well aware of the time the Taoiseach has spent over the past number of years dealing with the Good Friday Agreement and the attempts to bring about a peaceful solution to the problems of Northern Ireland and cross-Border activities.

Will the Taoiseach confirm if he is to meet with the families of the victims of the Omagh bomb in Dublin, at an appropriate time convenient to him? Will he consent to giving the families of the victims a briefing on the essential elements of the Nally report that do not infringe State security? Will he further undertake to give the families an appropriate edited version of the Nally report which they can peruse?

In so doing, does the Taoiseach not consider that he would be far more genuine towards the plight of the families and their quest for truth than the perception that will emanate from a visit to Omagh for a photo opportunity without meeting the families of victims to explain what he can to them?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Whether or not there are photographers in Omagh is a matter for the photographers. Needless to say, I could not care less. I met representatives of the Omagh groups as far back as 22 August 1998 and continue to do so.

As far as the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform or me for that matter, being able to brief people on facts and information regarding the Nally report — although it is appropriate that the Minister would undertake this — I assure Deputy Kenny that in so far as it is legally watertight to give that information, I have no difficulty in doing that. That would be a good thing.

As the Deputy is aware, if we could give the whole report it would resolve many issues for them as well because a lot of things being said about the Nally report have to do with people clutching on to things where they believe there might be something in it, but as we both know, there is no such information in it.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

One of the recommendations in the DIRT report was that dormant accounts in financial institutions ought to be transferred to the Exchequer to be administered for socially beneficial purposes. This recommendation was taken on board by the Minister for Finance in the 2001 Act when he provided for the establishment of an independent board that would disburse this money in accordance with stated objectives to assist people who are socially, educationally and economically disadvantaged, including people with disabilities. The board was duly appointed and statutory provision was made to permit the Minister to direct and issue guidelines.

Notwithstanding that, after the Dáil closed for the Christmas recess, a couple of days before Christmas, the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, issued a statement saying that he would take over the administration of this fund of in excess of €100 million.

How can the Taoiseach justify the Minister intervening to use these moneys, which were not the State's moneys, as a further political slush fund in the way that the lottery funds have been disbursed down the years? When will this legislation promised by the Minister on 19 December be brought before the House? No doubt it will be in time for the local elections.

These were moneys taken over from the financial institutions from the funds of people with dormant accounts. They were meant to be used for socially beneficial reasons in disadvantaged communities. Now we find that having appointed the board, the Minister is not happy and will assert his right to disburse these moneys.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The heads of the legislation have been approved, but I am not sure when the Bill will be before the House. The plan for the dormant accounts board was published in early November and, as Deputy Rabbitte stated, it was to be used for those affected by economic and social disadvantage, educational disadvantage and persons with a disability. These were the three categories highlighted in that plan from last November. The plan was to create a framework within which the board would disburse the resources. If I recall correctly, the original figure was quite small and the figure that came forward in that plan was somewhere in the order of €30 million, just short of it or just over it. The plan was to provide for levels of disbursement particularly for ring-fenced areas. A number of categories were highlighted where there were already programmes for the disadvantaged. The board remains in place as an advisory board.

At the last Government meeting at Christmas time, we said we would review the arrangements to make sure the projects would be evaluated, that we would look at the additional resources, would continue to have the board advise and prioritise, that its recommendations would be considered by Government and that there would be a disbursement plan.

Photo of Jim O'KeeffeJim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

An election plan.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In the context of the need to ensure appropriate capacity and to evaluate the applications——

Photo of Ruairi QuinnRuairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Can we have a translation of that please?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——and to ensure that there is maximum transparency of disbursements, the Government's view was that the objectives of disbursements should remain unchanged, that we would make decisions on disbursements and that the Government would have an involvement in that.

One of the main reasons for that was that an applicant or organisation could apply under half a dozen different categories under half a dozen different Votes, if there was not any way of bringing them together. One would not be able to do that transparently.

The board will still evaluate the applications and it will still act in an advisory capacity. To do that requires legislation and the legislation will come before the House.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is an entirely disingenuous reply by the Taoiseach. He took me through a description of the process. We know what it is; the question is why the Minister felt it necessary to abrogate his legislation and promise amending legislation so he can get his hands on the money.

It is blatantly disingenuous to imply that an applicant might rip-off the system by applying under six different headings and that the Cabinet will be able to sort this out. The fact of the matter is that is why the independent board was established. That is why the independent board was going to make decisions on what projects should or should not be assisted. It is a blatant political gimmick to get their hands on this money for political purposes.

Whatever one associates with the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, it is not transparency. I never understood any answer he gave me on any controversial issue. The most disgraceful and dishonest act of this Government was the commitment that the Taoiseach made in advance of the last general election that £2 billion would be transferred under the RAPID programme to areas of disadvantage and it did not last until the election was over. Some £2 billion was promised to disadvantaged communities and the Minister, Deputy Ó Cuív, pulled the plug on the entire lot after £5 million had been wasted in agreeing plans that the Taoiseach said would be funded. He is now going to use this as a fig leaf; a disbursement plan, this is a disbursement electoral gimmick and a disgraceful take-over for political purposes of moneys that were not the Government's in the first place.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not know if the legislation will even be through before summer, but the important thing about the dormant accounts fund——

Seán Ryan (Dublin North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The money will be allocated anyway.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Taoiseach promised it would.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——but the important decisions——

Photo of Ruairi QuinnRuairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister, Deputy McCreevy should keep a straight face. I know he is laughing.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The important issue is that the moneys be used for areas of disadvantage. If Deputy Rabbitte thinks that the dormant accounts money will resolve some of the major projects, like Ballymun where we are spending €250 million, then he has another think coming. The money in dormant accounts fund should be used to greatest effect in areas of need.

Photo of Kathleen LynchKathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The needs will be candidates in danger.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ministers are responsible to the House and to the Committee of Public Accounts for moneys that are spent, and it will be the same for this money. I do not see the difficulty of having the money with an independent advisory group that will work with the Minister. It is a small amount of money in the overall context——

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is a hell of a lot more than was dispersed under RAPID.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is €30 million.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is €110 million.

Photo of Rory O'HanlonRory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Allow the Taoiseach to conclude.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is less than €30 million annually.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is only €30 million because the Taoiseach says so.

Photo of Rory O'HanlonRory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Rabbitte should allow the Taoiseach to conclude.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is small in terms of what is spent on the youth services facilities fund, CLÁR, RAPID and other schemes for social inclusion.

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is not for rebuilding Ballymun.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are spending €250 million in Ballymun and the entire fund would not cover it. The advisory board is in place. I do not see why anyone would get excited about how the resources are allocated.

Photo of Rory O'HanlonRory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I call Deputy Joe Higgins.

Seán Ryan (Dublin North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Taoiseach accept the recommendations of the board?

Photo of Rory O'HanlonRory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Deputy Seán Ryan is not the leader of Deputy Higgins' party.

Seán Ryan (Dublin North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would not want to be either.

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is okay. We in the Socialist Party are very choosy about who we accept as members.

Seán Ryan (Dublin North, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy found that out.

Photo of Rory O'HanlonRory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Allow Deputy Higgins to continue without interruption.

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am much happier where I am now than where I was ten years ago.

Photo of Brendan HowlinBrendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

So are we.

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The usual suspects, from well paid newspaper editors to even better paid businessmen, have lined up to attack modestly paid bus drivers for organising a four hour protest yesterday for the protection of public transport in this city and country. The Taoiseach, who is not paid too badly in contrast to bus drivers, was, as usual, found among the chorus of condemnation and said there was no logic to their actions. Where is the logic in the compulsive obsession of the Minister for Transport to privatise one quarter of Dublin's bus services? The EU benchmarking report on European public transport found that Dublin Bus operates in the worst traffic of any EU capital, Government subvention to Dublin Bus is among the lowest in the EU, and we have the lowest ratio of drivers to buses in five major EU capitals and the lowest costs per bus. Where is the logic in handing over one quarter of the capital's crucial public transport service, possibly including garages and facilities, to multinational bus companies based in London, Hamburg and elsewhere? Is €20 billion in repatriated profits not enough to be sent from this country annually?

Is it not the case that the Minister for Transport's right-wing economic thinking is driving this and, despite all logic, is driving the Government to accept the privatisation agenda? Does the Taoiseach not think that the public transport services and the bus service in Dublin is best controlled as a fully publicly owned company, democratically organised and run in the interests of the public and with decent conditions for the workers rather than being handed over to unaccountable multinationals?

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy asked me one question in his contribution: whether I said yesterday that I did not see the logic of the stoppage. I said this. Yesterday's dispute was about the fact that an independent chairman had not been appointed. That is what I passed comment on and that is what the dispute was about. All the other issues the Deputy raised are interesting and I hope they are debated in due course.

The reason I said what I did was because the Minister for Transport met the general secretary of the ICTU and representatives of the CIE unions on 26 January. I was involved in the meetings around this. Arising from that meeting, it was agreed to resume discussions under an independent chairperson. Following this meeting, officials from the Department of Transport were in regular contact with the trade unions regarding the basis for the resumed discussions and the appointment of an independent chairperson, as sought by the unions.

Following the confirmation from the trade unions on Friday, 30 January that they were prepared to re-enter discussions, the Department of Transport and the Department of the Taoiseach jointly approached the Labour Relations Commission on 3 February seeking the nomination of an independent chairperson. A number of issues regarding the role and selection of the appropriate person who would act as an independent chair caused difficulties for the Labour Relations Commission. This delayed the nomination of the independent chairperson until 13 February — last Friday — when Kevin Foley was nominated by the LRC and was accepted by both sides. This was the position when I left my office on Friday last. Even though we had decided to resume talks, the unions decided to proceed with the industrial action. I said that I did not see the logic of this.

Photo of Joe HigginsJoe Higgins (Dublin West, Socialist Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Does the Taoiseach accept that the bus drivers were not out for a stroll yesterday but were expressing the depth of their anger at the privatisation plans of the Minister for Transport? Does the Taoiseach accept that bus drivers, especially those in Dublin, work an extremely difficult, stressful and responsible job where, unfortunately, they are open to aggression and violence? Why does the Taoiseach propose a system that will eventually lead to a worsening of conditions, longer hours and pressure on pay? This is the record of private multinational bus companies. Does the Taoiseach not know that privatisation has been a disaster for workers and the travelling public in parts of Britain, for example?

Will the Taoiseach check the Napoleonic tendencies of the Minister for Transport regarding crucial areas of the public service? Will transport workers be forced to have an all-out strike before the Minister and the Government returns to logic?

Photo of Pat RabbittePat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Napoleon would never have got into the Dublin Port tunnel.

Photo of Bertie AhernBertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As with most Members, I would be genuinely concerned about the conditions and future of workers in Dublin Bus and other parts of the transport sector. It is for this reason that we should be honest with them and inform them that, for a number of years, the legal view has been that the 1932 Act will be struck down sooner or later — as has happened in other areas — and will open up the transport area to private operators. This is the position and we must tell the truth to transport workers.

To deal with this, we have been trying for some time to have meaningful discussions and much good work has taken place. Most of the trade union leaders recognise the difficulties and know that progress must be made. I am glad to note that a meeting took place this morning between the CIE unions and the Department of Transport to discuss the arrangements for the resumed talks. It is better that these issues are dealt with; otherwise, it is quite clear what will happen in due course. This is the best way of protecting the rights and conditions of workers for the future.