Dáil debates
Wednesday, 9 February 2005
Leaders' Questions.
10:30 am
Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Last night up to 700 people with disabilities, their families, their carers and their advocates attended at the RDS to express their anger and frustration at what they perceive to be shortcomings in the Disability Bill 2004. In addition to the anger and frustration they expressed, there was a distinct feeling of having been through this previously. They thought, when the 2001 Bill was withdrawn and the Disability Legislation Consultation Group was set up, that the Government was involved in genuine dialogue with the various groups and the representatives of the disability sector. The legislation produced in September 2004 bears little resemblance to what the members of the group thought they were helping to frame in consultation with the Government.
This Bill has been described as fundamentally flawed by many groups, including the Human Rights Commission. The definition of disability is so restrictive that it almost certainly excludes from its provisions persons with mental illness and those with disability who need episodic as distinct from continuous service. What should have been landmark and progressive legislation is now perceived as regressive and excluding.
In the The Irish Times this morning, the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Fahey, stated he would be happy to respond in writing to submissions. Given that the Disability Legislation Consultation Group sent recommendations to the Department last October, why has it taken the Department until now to give an answer? Will the Taoiseach see to it that the correspondence is comprehensively and fully dealt with?
The Second Stage speeches, particularly of Government representatives, were largely self-congratulatory in tone. The Taoiseach did a good day's work yesterday in dealing with the issue of the release of the killers of Detective Garda McCabe. We discussed at some length in this House the breach of trust by the republican movement. What has dragged on here for seven years in terms of the disability sector is a national breach of trust by the Government and the Taoiseach has a responsibility and the authority to ensure that it is sorted out in the interests of that sector.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Bill is still before the House. It has not yet passed Second Stage. Discussions are ongoing. The Disability Legislation Consultation Group has been very much involved in the process over a number of years. I have attended a number of meetings with the leadership of the movement and we have discussed the framework for the Bill extensively. The remaining issue of concern prior to Christmas was funding and how we would roll that out on a multi-annual basis. We have dealt with that.
In our discussions the groups involved, who I find to be reasonable people, put forward various cases. I will examine the issue of the letters which was raised by Deputy Kenny. However, it is good legislation. In framing it we examined models in other parts of the world, in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States of America, the UK and in different parts of Europe, and our legislation is very progressive.
There are demands from some people for some kind of rights based legislation that is lawyer driven, but such legislation does not exist anywhere in the organised world and neither would it be appropriate. Our strategy is rights based but it is not lawyer driven. Under the approach we have adopted people are entitled to an independent assessment of their needs, for which they have fought for many years, and I totally understand why they did that. There is a statement of services to which they are entitled. There is access to an appeal system to deal with complaints regarding the assessment of the service. If a service statement is laid out and people are not getting the service, there is an appeals process to deal with it. There is ultimate access to the courts to enforce the decisions of an independent appeals process. That is a very strong and significant power. There are transparent multi-annual funding commitments for current and capital spending and, most important, there is a clear and transparent sectoral commitment to provide for the needs of people with disabilities.
The Government's approach has been to develop a really good, powerful, strong, well resourced and clear Bill, which is welcomed by everybody. There is also the Comhairle (Amendment) Bill 2004 and the six outline sectoral plans in the key departmental areas, something for which the disability lobby groups and organisations have fought over many years. There is also a commitment to funding not only for this year but until the end of the decade.
I accept there are still issues the relevant groups want considered when we are amending the Bill. The Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, has already discussed these matters with me and with the Minister for Finance and we will respond on them.
Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Taoiseach could not have been at last night's meeting but I am sure he had representatives there. If all of the matters the Taoiseach has mentioned are included, why is there so much frustration, so much anger and a feeling of having been let down on the part of so many of the people who are involved with disability groups, who are carers or advocates, or who have family members who are affected?
Is it correct that the Taoiseach stated he does not favour rights based legislation?
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do not favour rights based legislation that is lawyer driven.
Olivia Mitchell (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is there another kind?
Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Most things in this country are lawyer driven. Does the Taoiseach favour rights based legislation that is not lawyer driven?
Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The definition being accorded to disability is not clear. Does it mean that episodic treatment, or treatment on an occasional basis as distinct from continuous treatment, will be available to persons who require it? Can the Taoiseach confirm that the entire mental health area will be included? It appears as if the legislation excludes thousands of people who feel they should be included in legislation of this nature. I understand the Irish Human Rights Commission issued a statement some time ago to the effect it does not support the Bill. Perhaps the Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Fahey, would be good enough to call in the different groups for a face to face interaction on their concerns and frustrations. I am sure he is sufficiently concerned to do that.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On the issue of episodic treatment, if the assessment of needs say it is required that is covered. The Deputy asked me to clarify the rights based issue. We have said all along that the strategy is a rights based approach but it is wrong that the ultimate system is to get a person who has a disability into court in order to get his or her assessment of need. I have met many of the groups——
Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They have rights but they are not enforced.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Taoiseach without interruption, please.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The strategy is rights based.
Jim O'Keeffe (Cork South West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They are not enforced.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is Leaders' Questions. The Taoiseach is entitled to be heard in silence in the same way as Deputy Kenny when he was putting the question.
Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are fed up of the courts. I was there last night.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Deputy will leave the House if he does not behave himself.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy McGrath is right because that is the issue. What we are endeavouring to do in the legislation is to provide for an independent assessment of needs where a disabled person can be assessed independent of the system.
Kathleen Lynch (Cork North Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They can go and go and go.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
When I want to give an answer the Deputies will not listen. There is a statement of services to which they are entitled, there is access to an appeals process to deal with complaints about the assessment of service, there is ultimate access to the courts if that is required——
David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is not, they are barred.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask Deputies to remain silent.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In regard to the transfer of the multi-annual programme, we have given €2.5 billion in the period up to the end of the decade. Deputy Kenny asked what was the objective of the Bill. The Bill puts in place a framework for the provision of health and personal social services for people with a disability. That is what it is endeavouring to do. It allows for systematic development and improvement to these services, it requires that public services and buildings are made accessible for them, it also obliges public bodies to be proactive in employing people with disabilities, it restricts the use of information from genetic testing and establishes centres for excellence. All of those issues are contained in the Bill, they were all of the demands. I accept that there are still some issues of concern with which the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, is dealing with the groups. He will continue to meet with the groups and we will continue to try to address those issues on Committee Stage.
David Stanton (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
He does not want to meet them.
Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Taoiseach is on public record as is the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform in deploring the lack of co-operation by the British authorities in the matter of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings. We share that regret on this side of the House but it should be noted in passing that, for example, some of the documents being sought are of the highest sensitivity in terms of intelligence and security considerations. I raise the separate matter where civil litigation is taking place, arising from the single worst atrocity of the last almost 30 years of violence in Northern Ireland. I refer to the case being taken by the Omagh families for civil compensation against persons suspected of involvement or being complicit in that atrocity. In this case, the co-operation of the Irish State is being sought by the families concerned and so far it is not forthcoming. The families have already suffered one setback in the courts here where a conviction was quashed because of the manner of handling of that case by some gardaí. Earlier this week, the Special Criminal Court felt it had to refuse to release the transcripts of certain trials. The Special Criminal Court felt it did not have jurisdiction to release these papers. These papers and proceedings are the verbatim account of what transpired in public court. The Northern Ireland courts have made clear that they want to evaluate what transpired for themselves and they are not prepared to make an order against the Irish authorities.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy Rabbitte——
Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They are looking for co-operation. The transcripts to which I have referred can be transferred to the National Archives in the normal way after 30 years but, under section 8 of the relevant legislation, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, may transfer them earlier than that to the National Archives which is directly within the responsibility of the Taoiseach. We are talking about documents that are now inaccessible for, perhaps, arcane reasons which can be transferred to a place where they may be accessed and be beneficial to the efforts of the Omagh families to prosecute the civil actions concerned.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The issue of the transfer of the documents has not been brought to my attention within the Administration. There was no question of the Government being asked for these papers or of my involvement in these issues. It is totally a matter for the courts but I understand the point the Deputy is making that they cannot deal with this issue but if they had these papers they could be of assistance to them. The only way I could look at that issue would be to take legal advice. To date and in the process of the case no request has been made to me even though I deal regularly with the families and the different groups related to Omagh. In this case no request has been made and we would have to take legal advice on whether those papers can be made available, or made available in the way the Deputy has stated by putting them into the archives early, under section 8 of the 1975 Act. I have not discussed this issue with the Attorney General. Given that the Deputy has raised the issue I will check the legal position.
Pat Rabbitte (Dublin South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I do not want to press the Taoiseach further on this issue. It is a critically important matter for the Omagh families concerned who have not merely endured such an atrocity but other setbacks. The decision appears to be a procedural one of the Special Criminal Court that it feels unable to release these documents although, I repeat, they are no more than a verbatim account of what transpired in public court. It has decided it does not have jurisdiction and has suggested that the only court that might have jurisdiction would be the High Court but legal opinion is divided. The High Court may well say these are papers proper to an another court. What is at issue is that lawyers on behalf of the Omagh families need access to these documents. The Northern Ireland courts have made it clear they need access to the documents. I am suggesting a route which I am advised would allow access to documents that are not otherwise accessible whereby the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has the power, as an exception to the 30 year rule, to cause them to be transferred to the National Archives where they can be accessed by anybody.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I take the point. I appreciate the importance of the papers. I have read the newspaper reports on it but as I said I have had no request within the system. I have not discussed the matter with either the Minister or the Attorney General. I am not aware of the legal complexities. Perhaps the Deputy's suggestion is a way around it but the best course of action for me is to consult with the Attorney General and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will the Taoiseach explain why the Government, and he as Taoiseach, is refusing to grasp the opportunity to save and create jobs in Carlow and other places around the country affected by the closure of the Carlow sugar factory? Why is he refusing to realise the potential of the biofuels sector? Does he understand why so many people such as farmers and economists are quite baffled at the Government's failure to seize the opportunity? This is an opportunity which is available to turn around a decline in agriculture as well as helping the lives of thousands of people affected by the Greencore decision. It could help reduce dependence on fossil fuels. The country spends €100 million a week on fuel imports. It could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve the balance of payments. The country is currently paying approximately €35 million a year on carbon credits.
Is the Taoiseach aware of the EU directives since May 2003 which require Ireland to have a minimum of 2% of transport fuel sourced from biofuel by this year and 5.75% by 2010? Is he aware that other member states have worked and achieved considerable progress? Finland has granted a 100% exemption from CO2 tax to biofuel as has the Czech Republic on its use as motor fuel. Austria also operates a tax exemption for biofuels as has the UK with a 20% exemption per litre. Germany offers a full exemption on biofuels from 1 January, and there are also such exemptions in France and Italy. Why is Ireland dragging its feet on this matter?
In the words of the Government backbencher, Deputy Fiona O'Malley, Ireland is currently stuck at zero. This is an appalling indictment of the failure to realise a potential. We are not even asking for what was originally proposed but simply that best practice be followed. I note that today the Minister for Agriculture and Food is meeting the IFA president to discuss the Carlow sugar factory. Will the Taoiseach indicate that the Government has a plan for the biofuel sector? The Finance Bill makes no provisions in this regard. Will the Taoiseach at least say the Finance Bill will be amended to allow Ireland catch up on other countries which are streets ahead of us in this area?
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was provided for in last year's Finance Bill.
Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It has not been implemented.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Allow the Taoiseach without interruption.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The provisions are in last year's Finance Act so it is not necessary to include them in this year's Bill. For some time the Government has been in discussions with the European Union on the State-aid issue and the methods which we can use to input resources. The Minister informs me that those discussions are ongoing and it is hoped they will be completed. The Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture and Food, Deputy Browne and the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, are preparing a package which is under discussion with the Department of Finance. The question whether this plan can be implemented is based on the State-aid issue. If this issue is resolved positively, the Ministers have the plan ready to present to the Department of Finance. The Government is in a position to move on this issue but we must first await the resolution of the question of the ability of the State to put in resources.
Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am baffled why the Taoiseach regards Ireland as being so much in the doghouse with the European Commission. Finland, the Czech Republic, Austria, the UK, Germany, France and Italy can all move ahead whereas Ireland is waiting patiently. There is more energy and interest from this Government in the stallion tax than in the livelihoods of people who are affected by an economic downturn in agriculture. I ask the Taoiseach to give this matter his full attention. There is catching up to be done. There is no quota for biofuel. The Carlow sugar factory is processing 660,000 tonnes per annum. Those farmers are looking at a very bleak future while the Taoiseach talks about waiting in the wings for the European Commission to do something about it while other countries have managed to garner huge——
Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is a precedent.
Noel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Deputy cannot have it both ways.
Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It seems the Minister for Defence is suddenly some kind of expert.
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Allow Deputy Sargent without interruption.
Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I suggest he talks to his Taoiseach if he is interested in the procedure because other countries have followed the procedure and have managed to win out and achieve considerable employment potential.
Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The other countries got permission.
Trevor Sargent (Dublin North, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
People are asking why this Government is so much more loyal to the oil sheikhs of OPEC than it is to the farmers struggling in this country when the potential of the oil fields of Ireland — which is effectively what is under discussion — are not being realised. In the interests of farmers, factory workers, motorists and every taxpayer, will the Taoiseach give this matter the priority it has not received and develop the sector, as has been done by other law-abiding countries which have followed procedure? There needs to be movement from the Government on this issue. It needs to stop thinking about the stallion tax and start thinking about exemption on biofuels.
Willie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The old tax shelters.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As the Deputy is familiar with the situation in the other countries he will be aware they have gone through precisely the same procedure.
Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It did not take them a whole year.
Michael Ahern (Cork East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has the Deputy any evidence of that?
Rory O'Hanlon (Cavan-Monaghan, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I remind Deputies it is Leaders' Questions.
Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They are all looking for evidence now.
Bertie Ahern (Dublin Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a question of approval for State aid. It is an EU State-aid issue. This process must be followed before the Government can invest resources. The other countries have followed this process and Ireland is in the process of doing it. Both the Department of Agriculture and Food and the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources have a plan. The power to implement it is contained in the Finance Act and it is a question of obtaining State-aid approval. Other countries have been given approval but the Government cannot proceed without that approval. Otherwise I would be answering questions in this House on the reasons Ireland was before the European Court of Justice for its failure to follow procedure, which is an issue that is raised regularly. The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources has already stated that the Government is committed to the implementation of the plan in this area.
Dan Boyle (Cork South Central, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The stallion tax will be before that.