Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The revelations by Martin Wall on Monday in The Irish Times, following the release of correspondence between the Government and the HSE through a freedom of information request, confirms what I have said for some time, that, in essence, there was a fundamental lack of transparency at the heart of the process for providing money for health in 2018. There is a clear attempt by the Government to cover up the truth on the challenges facing the health services in 2018. The Government published a spending plan for health in the full knowledge that it will not be sufficient. I am not talking about the usual toing and froing or the arguments and counter arguments between the Government and the HSE but clearly there has been an attempt to paper over the gaps and to hide the truth from the public. The attempt to paper over the disagreement was made by putting in a figure of €346 million in value for money savings. We now know, however, that in the days after the publication of the plan, the HSE director general said that the targets will not be realised. This was subsequently revealed by The Irish Timesalso.

The correspondence shows that there was an understanding, or that assumptions were made, to keep off the books potentially hundreds of millions of euro in other risks. For example, there was no provision for pay pressures, €68 million of which was in the earlier draft. Was this a reference to the employees of hospices and disability organisations who had balloted for strike action and who have been denied their fair pay by the Government? The Government also instructed the HSE not to include any sum in the plan to deal with a carryover of its financial deficit from 2017. The director general of the HSE has estimated other significant challenges facing the HSE, but the Government clearly wanted the financial difficulties played down in the published service plan. Departmental correspondence states:

The financial challenges need to be addressed only once (in the financial section?). Details on the assumptions and arrangements to address financial challenge should be contained in the letter accompanying the NSP [national service plan] rather than included in the main document.

Decoded, the HSE is being told to bury the negative stuff as effectively as it can, and not to put it upfront because the public might see it too clearly.

There are also revelations about Sláintecare. The Taoiseach has repeatedly said that the Government is committed to Sláintecare but the HSE director general has said the plan is challenging because he would have to develop the service plan "in the absence of an agreed implementation plan and transition funding for Sláintecare". A sum of €3 billion was supposed to have been provided. The HSE director general was told by the Department that he was "overly focused" on a transition fund as it has not been approved yet. Clearly, this reveals a fundamental lack of commitment to the implementation of Sláintecare.

There is much more in this correspondence. The HSE pointed out that the plan would be challenging in terms of "performance and protecting patient safety". The Department's response was to warn the HSE that it was using "unacceptable language". Why has the Government gone to such lengths to prevent the truth from coming out and to prevent the HSE from telling it as it is with regard to the challenges facing the health services in 2018?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As I have said before in this House, the 2018 national service plan sets out a budget of almost €15 billion for the HSE. This is the largest budget for our public health service since the foundation of the State and it represents an increase of more than €600 million on 2017. This is a substantial increase in funding levels. This comes on top of a health service that was already well funded. When the total amount of health spend is divided by the number of people in the country, Ireland is among the top five countries in the world for health spend per head, and by some estimates Ireland is perhaps in the top one or two.

That comes after a period that included a recession and during which spending was above the average in the western world. The HSE produced its service plan in consultation with the Department of Health. The plan was approved by the HSE's leadership team in accordance with the law. It was noted by the Cabinet in December before publication. A number of measures and actions are under way to begin the process of turning the Sláintecare proposals into an implementation plan. As the Deputy is aware, the report of the all-party committee sets out a shared vision for our health service. It is a plan for a plan. It calls for an implementation plan and that is being worked on by the Minister for Health. We hope to have it ready in the next couple of months.

We have also completed the capacity review, which will feed into the ten-year infrastructure investment plan that is to be published in the next couple of weeks. A group has been established to look into the separation of public and private practice, as recommended in the Sláintecare report, and is meeting under the chairmanship of Dr. Donal de Buitléir. In addition, we have taken some steps towards the implementation of some of the things that are called for in the plan, such as the extension of the GP visit card scheme and reductions in prescription charges and in the cost of the drug payment scheme. All of these real and concrete actions are provided for in the budget.

I have often heard Deputy Micheál Martin calling for an honest debate about health care and health funding. I agree that we should have an honest debate. Fundamentally, if we are serious about facilitating real improvements in our health service, we all need to acknowledge the false proposition that is always put forward that there is somehow a direct connection between money and resources, on the one hand, and outcomes for patients, on the other. We know it is not the case that there is such a connection. The Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service's report on the funding of our hospitals shows that in one year when there was no increase in funding for hospitals, activity increased by 7%, and that in another year when there was an increase in funding for hospitals, activity decreased.

If we want to have an honest debate about a health service that works and provides patients with the standard of care and the outcomes they deserve, we need to get away from the false analysis that there is a direct connection between money and resources, on the one hand, and patient outcomes and services, on the other. I would mention as evidence of my contention that it is a very indirect connection, at best, the fact that we spend so much but do not get the return we need. It seems to me that the difficulty we have had for many years with the running of our health service is that rather than trying to manage health services within an ever-expanding budget, as other agencies do, the HSE does something very different - it monetises every problem and passes it on to the Department of Health in the full knowledge that those documents will either be released under freedom of information or will be leaked, usually to the journalist Deputy Micheál Martin mentioned.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There was no greater leaker of information than the Taoiseach during his time as a Cabinet Minister.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

WikiLeaks No. 2.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It ill behoves him to be lecturing anybody about leaking or revealing all sorts of information from the Government.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I object to that, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could I equally say-----

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would just caution that Deputy Micheál Martin that he is making an accusation against a Minister of the Government.

Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He has lots of evidence.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If it is true-----

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach has made very serious allegations against the HSE.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the cap fits, wear it.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

He has accused the HSE of teeing up things for freedom of information and for leaking.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I can only warn the Deputy.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The point is that if the Taoiseach really wants an honest debate, he should stop trying to suppress organisations in terms of their annual reports and annual service plans. He did not answer the basic question I asked. Why did the Government edit the HSE's drafts of the service plan so heavily? Why did it say that the language was unacceptable and that the HSE was being too negative? The Government wanted to put a gloss and a spin on it to hide the truth from the public. In the weeks running up to Christmas, the Department had grave concern about what the HSE intended to say in the 2018 service plan. It was adamant that details of assumptions which underpin the health budget for 2018 - for example, no provision was being made in the financial figures for up to €68 million in potential pay pressures, or a potential charge of €170 million - would be left out of the publicly released plan and referred to in private correspondence only. The Government wanted to keep stuff private to hide it from the public.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach to respond.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The public knows this. The employees of hospices know this. The employees of disability organisations know this. They were denied fair treatment in the shape of an equivalent pay scale to HSE employees. The HSE was clearly saying that this was coming down the tracks, but the Government was saying "No, bury that, the public does not need to know that".

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Martin, please.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If the Taoiseach wants honesty, he should stop trying to edit the news and prevent the truth from coming out.

Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Some co-operation, please.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the Deputy's attachment to the HSE. As it is his creation, after all, he should know well what are the provisions of the Health Act 2004. The 2004 Act provides that the HSE service plan is not just written by the HSE; it is written by the HSE in consultation with the Minister for Health and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs. That is what happens. When a draft is produced, a Minister may not be satisfied with it.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government hid the figures.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The legislation specifically provides for the Minister to seek an extension or to seek changes.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government hid figures that have been transparently verified.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is what is set out in the 2004 Act.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It does not allow the Government to bury the truth.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the creator of the HSE and the person who wrote the Health Act 2004, Deputy Micheál Martin should be well aware of that and should not be trying to misrepresent it.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government should have included the deficit and the carryover, but instead it buried them.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In terms of trying to cover up anything, everyone knows full well that correspondence is released under freedom of information. The idea that these things could never be kept out of the public domain is absurd. These things are always released under freedom of information if they are not leaked beforehand. Quite frankly, we have had years of this. Certainly, there are no secrets in the Department of Health or the HSE.

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

"LeoLeaks".

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is also the case that the HSE and the Minister come before the Oireachtas committee on a quarterly basis. Indeed, I think that is happening today.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You should not start fighting now because you are all the same.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Seven cases are being taken against the State by current and former serving members of the Air Corps. They believe that they have been forced to take this action by the State's failure to protect them from their exposure to toxic chemicals during their service, which led to serious, chronic and fatal illnesses, including cancer. While those cases will ultimately be dealt with by the courts, that does not prevent the State from taking action. As early as the 1990s, numerous State-commissioned reports highlighted health and safety concerns about chemical exposure at Casement Aerodrome in Baldonnel, but no action was taken at the time. In fact, these reports mysteriously disappeared or were ordered to be shredded. Even after litigation commenced in 2013, basic health and safety precautions were not implemented at Baldonnel. It appears it was only after the Health and Safety Authority conducted an inspection in 2016 that personnel were provided with basic precautions like personal protection equipment such as gloves and overalls.

Hundreds, if not thousands, of personnel who have passed through Baldonnel may be suffering from chronic and even fatal illnesses as a result of exposure to toxic chemicals during their service. There is also a possibility that family members have been affected, as evidence suggests that there is a higher rate of a variety of health conditions among spouses and children, including stillbirths and miscarriages. The Government has taken no action to find out the extent of this scandal or to ascertain how many people might be suffering as a result of it. Instead, it is fighting tooth and nail through the courts to force sick people to take gruelling journeys in search of justice. By comparison, the Australian Government has set up a board of inquiry to conduct a thorough investigation into similar matters. It commissioned a survey of health outcomes for the relevant personnel and their families and put in place a health care system for those who were affected.

As the Taoiseach knows, a protected disclosure from one of the whistleblowers was recently released publicly. It makes for harrowing reading. It lists 56 deaths of former serving Air Corps personnel at an average age of 48. All of the cases listed relate specifically to people who died before they reached the age of 66. The disclosure is based on research done by the whistleblower in the absence of any State-funded investigation into these matters, but it is by no means exhaustive. I believe another number of deaths have been identified since it was published. It is clear that successive Governments have failed in their duty of care to the men and women who served in the Air Corps. This Government has an opportunity to do the right thing. We do not want to be here in ten years' time with a higher death toll, having failed to address this scandal. Has the Taoiseach read the disclosure? Has he responded to the whistleblower in question? Does he accept that the time has come to order a full inquiry into these matters?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As the Deputy said, a number of cases are currently before the courts. While I have absolutely no doubt that the serious ill-health suffered by some former members of the Air Corps is real, it has not been proven whether this array of illnesses could be caused by chemical exposure. Obviously, these cases will be heard in the courts, which will hear all the evidence and, on that basis, make a determination on the claim or allegation that all of these illnesses were caused by chemical exposure. I think that is the right way for this to proceed. The health and well-being of men and women of the Air Corps are, of course, matters of huge concern and interest for the Government.

The Minister of State has ensured that allegations relating to exposure to chemical and toxic substances while working in Baldonnell were independently reviewed. Before considering any further steps, the Minister of State has asked those who made the disclosures for their views. He is examining options for next steps in the process in light of the views he has received from those who made the allegations in the context of ongoing litigation.

The independent report considers the Defence Forces' health and safety regime and its current policy and application. In respect of historic matters, as litigation had commenced before protected disclosures were made, the report states that the courts are now the most appropriate forum for such matters to be assessed and are the best place to assess all the evidence. Although the report finds that the Defence Forces' regime appears to be capable of meeting the statutory requirements, it makes a number of observations, including in respect of documentation, health surveillance and exposure monitoring. It also observes that the Health and Safety Authority is the appropriate statutory body to deal with such allegations.

Separately, and in parallel to this independent review, following an inspection in 2016, the Air Corps has continued to work with the Health and Safety Authority to improve its health and safety regime. It should be noted that there is a significant overlap between the recommendations of the HSA and those of the independent reviewer. The military authorities have informed the Minister of State that the HSA has formally noted the high level of co-operation received from the Air Corps and the considerable progress made to date by the Defence Forces towards the implementation of safety management systems for the control of hazardous substances.

Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is no denying that things are better in the Air Corps. However, what the Taoiseach has just read out does not in any way address the legacy of bad management and a bad health and safety record there. I do not know if the Taoiseach remembers that he is also Minister for Defence. He has a direct responsibility to look into these matters. He is also a medical doctor and will understand the list of illnesses that has been provided to his Minister of State, which includes very serious and often fatal conditions, as the other disclosure indicated. We do not know how many people have been exposed in an unprotected way because nobody has carried out a survey. The Australians did not wait for the courts to adjudicate fully, they acted immediately.

There is a list of chemicals, albeit a partial one, which was given to Deputy Lisa Chambers. How many of the people involved have been exposed? As the Taoiseach is aware, if a doctor does not know what people have been exposed to, he cannot help, diagnose, prescribe or direct medical procedures. This is about saving lives. Will the Taoiseach act now not in respect of the specific cases but on the legacy of all of those who are suffering in the general public?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Deputy is absolutely correct; I am Minister for Defence. The Government has delegated responsibility for defence matters to the Minister of State, Deputy Kehoe, whom I fully trust to deal with this issue appropriately.

I am a medical doctor and have seen the list of illnesses that these former members of the Air Corps and their families have suffered. It is a very long and extensive list of illnesses, including the most common illnesses which most people may encounter, namely, cancer, cardiovascular disease, suicide and miscarriages by their partners. As a medical doctor, it is not possible for me to say if exposure to chemicals caused all or any of these illnesses because they are commonplace in the community at large. If it was one specific illness resulting from a known chemical that caused such an illness, that would be one thing. These are not the allegations that are being made, however. There is litigation before the courts, which are best placed to assess the evidence and see whether the allegations are supported by it.

Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I wonder if the Taoiseach listened to an interview on Monday on RedFM, a Cork radio station, with a woman called Sarah. In short, Sarah is a victim of rape who was refused morning-after contraception and ended up having to go to Britain for a late abortion at great expense and trauma. In the context of a debate about unrestricted access to abortion up to 12 weeks versus restrictions, I think the interview should be required listening for everybody in the Cabinet and all other Members of the Dáil. It gets to the heart of the experience of many women in this country regarding contraception and abortion.

Sarah's experience is particularly harrowing. She was violated by a so-called friend, dismissed by a garda when she went to report the matter and disbelieved by a pharmacist. Her experience of the search for emergency contraception is mirrored by multiple accounts from women over many years. This has been raised in parliamentary questions for years, including by me in 2015, in the context of how medically unnecessary it is and also how it acts as a barrier to access. Now we have seen the consequences of this. Sarah said she was asked a series of invasive questions by a pharmacist, who said she did not believe her and did not give her access to the medication.

Some, including the Tánaiste and other Deputies, are proposing to give the same powers to doctors by introducing a rape ground within abortion legislation. The joint committee proved that this will not and cannot work for precisely the reasons Sarah experienced. Would the Taoiseach agree that it is ignorant and irresponsible of the Tánaiste and others like him to ignore that committee's research and to try to pretend that what they are proposing, which just ignores reality, can work?

This case to which I refer concerns a woman in the Tánaiste's native city. Sarah's testimony on the radio was very brave. There are a few things people should listen to before we legislate down the road on this issue. Sarah said, "I am against forced pregnancy." She said she was a living, breathing human being playing a role in society while the foetus was a potential human being. In other words, the rights of the person who is pregnant should trump other rights. She said we need to respect women to make these decisions, not to judge about good and bad abortions.

Would the Taoiseach agree that this interview underlines that access must be based on the person who is affected making the decision, not an arbitrator, the doctor, the State or whoever else? If we do not legislate for abortion up to 12 weeks on request, the abortion trail will continue and women like Sarah will continue to be counselled by taxi drivers in London, telling them to lie down in the back of the taxi. Do we want that to continue to be the case?

Is the Taoiseach going to lift the requirement for a consultation for emergency contraception and make it available over the counter, thereby ensuring that women will not have to endure the type of questioning to which I refer? Is the whole Government going to listen to the lessons of Sarah's story and unite behind the committee's recommendations for unrestricted access?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I did not have an opportunity to hear that interview but I will make a point of doing so once I have time. I certainly pay tribute to and have a lot of respect for people who are willing to share their personal stories of adversity when it comes to sexual violence and crisis pregnancies. In respect of whether any medicine is available over the counter, that is not a decision for the Government, nor should it be. That decision is made by a body called the Health Products Regulatory Authority, HPRA. It decides whether a medicine should be available over the counter on patient safety grounds. There are some medicines which, if used inappropriately or if taken by a patient who has other illnesses or perhaps allergies, can cause enormous harm. If something is not available over the counter and a prescription only medicine, it is thus for good scientific and medical reasons. I would not like it to be the case that politicians or people in this House were to take that power away from medical experts and into their own hands under any circumstances. We will not be doing that.

As I said in recent days, the all-party Oireachtas committee did not pluck its proposals out of thin air. It considered the evidence very carefully and reached conclusions. Those conclusions, certainly to me and, I think, most Members, make a lot of sense. We risk re-victimising women if in some way we ask them to prove to their doctors or whoever else that they were victims of sexual violence. I certainly would not like that to be our law.

It is, however, important to recognise that Article 43.3.3° - the eighth amendment - is a feature of our Constitution and it will not be possible for this House to legislate for lawful termination of pregnancies in any circumstance if it remains in place. There is a two-step process here.

The first step involves the referendum passing, which would untie the hands of this Oireachtas to change the law, and the second step is for this Oireachtas to change the law, as it should, based on the evidence and based on public opinion.

Fundamentally, this means not trusting politicians but rather trusting women and their doctors. We should trust women in the first 12 weeks of their pregnancy to decide what is best for them and whether or not they want to continue that pregnancy beyond 12 weeks, and trusting doctors to allow it on medical grounds.

Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the fact that the Taoiseach said he will listen to the interview, but he might bring the Tánaiste to sit and listen to it with him.

The first issue is that Sarah was not asked if she had allergies. She was asked about her sex life. That is the reality of it. The morning after pill is safer than paracetamol or Nurofen. One can go to the counter and get it without any questioning. Someone can give advice as to its safety, but this is different, because women are actually being interrogated. Can the Taoiseach imagine this happening in a small town or village? This incident occurred in a major retail chain.

The process in question adds to the cost, because once a woman has a consultation, the price of the medication goes up. This is another barrier to access for poorer or vulnerable younger women. In Boots in Cork city centre, it costs €60, while on the Lower Kilmacud Road in Stillorgan it costs €15.50. These are the variations. Women are actually looking up maps on the Internet to see where they can get the morning after pill. That is a ludicrous situation in this day and age.

On the substantive issue of abortion, it will be up to the public to decide to repeal the eighth amendment, but only this Dáil can legislate for abortion. I hope it listens to the public and what it is saying, because the public are ahead of the politicians.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If she has not done so already, Sarah should make a complaint to the Pharmaceutical Society of Ireland, the professional body which regulates pharmacists. If there was any inappropriate or invasive questioning, it will be able to take that issue further. However, it is relatively standard practice that when somebody requests emergency contraception, a practitioner would try to give advice on contraception more broadly. For example, it may be the correct choice for an individual at a particular point in time, but it may also be advisable that she goes on more regular contraception. Sometimes pharmacists and doctors will offer people advice in that area. Certainly that should not happen in an invasive way or take the form of an interrogation. It should always be respectful, seeking information only. If the woman the Deputy mentioned feels that she was treated badly by a pharmacist or by a doctor, I would encourage her to make a complaint.

Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On January 17, the Taoiseach spoke in the European Parliament. Following his speech, he faced questions from the leader of the Greens-European Free Alliance, Philippe Lamberts, who told him that Ireland was the worst country for tackling climate change in Europe and was very likely to miss its 2020 targets, which might potentially cost this State €400 million. In reply to his questions, the Taoiseach agreed that Ireland is laggardly when it comes to climate change and he said that he wanted to see the electrification of our railways.

I live in the constituency of Cork South West, where for up to 150 km there is absolutely no rail, which puts huge pressure on our depleted roads. In the mid-1850s, there was rail from Cork through Innishannon, Bandon to Clonakilty, Skibbereen through Ballydehob, and all the way to Schull and Mizen Head, and on the north side through Dunmanway and Drimoleague to Bantry. Remember that this was the 1850s, and it allowed people to both travel and do business throughout west Cork but now, 168 years later, we have nothing. Will the Taoiseach sanction a study on how we can bring rail back to west Cork, if only as far as Bandon, to start once again opening up west Cork as a place where strong business can be done? The pressure on our roads due to a lack of rail or any type of proper public transport means that the roads throughout Cork South West are in a depleted state.

Representatives have pleaded time and time again for money to be spent on the roads in west Cork. The bypass in Bandon remains unfinished, and has been for decades now. Innishannon is a bottleneck for workers and all drivers who try to come and go through it in the morning and evenings. Long-suffering drivers might have to stay behind vehicles from Clonakilty to Skibbereen for 50 minutes, a journey which should take 25 minutes. The sheer frustration for long-suffering motorists is palpable in what we are led to believe is a modern era.

In my 32 years of driving, the biggest job carried out and completed on the N71 road has been the Skibbereen bypass in 2003, all of 15 years ago. All other moneys to west Cork have been for simple repairs, which have left a lot to be desired. I ask the Taoiseach to work with me and my colleagues in Cork South West to find the funding from the Minister for Finance, Deputy Paschal Donohue's Department and to work with the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Shane Ross, to carry out proper works on west Cork roads, to create passing bays on our N71 and the R586 from Bandon through Ballineen, Dunmanway, Drimoleague to Bantry and to allow bypasses in Innishannon and Bandon to be completed simply to put west Cork on a level playing pitch with other counties. Over the past 18 years proper works could have been carried out on west Cork roads by two of the Taoiseach's predecessors, but this did not happen. The Taoiseach has a chance to bring rail and a proper road structure to west Cork. Will he do this?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have a long way to go to meet our obligations under the climate change agreements that we have signed up to, and also to reduce our emissions. We have 2020 targets, which are going to be very difficult to meet, and 2030 targets which may be somewhat more realistic to meet.

We should not forget the ways in which Ireland is different from other countries. We had a lost decade, ten years during which we were not able to afford investment in public transport, new energy and other things. That is changing now, and the ten-year investment plan in infrastructure will have a huge section on climate change and will outline some of the things we intend to do in those areas. We also have a very different economy. Many countries are achieving their climate change reduction targets because heavy industry is dying out and they are able to close down heavy polluting industries. We never had those industries in the first place. We have a lot of agriculture, which produces a lot of emissions. However, the emissions produced from agriculture are lower relative to the amount of food we produce than is the case in other countries. We have to bear in mind that we achieve nothing by displacing production from Ireland to another country.

The Deputy mentioned money from the Minister, Deputy Donohue's Department. Money does not come from the Minister's Department but rather from the people. It comes from the taxpayer and the taxes that are paid by hard working people and businesses all over the country, including in Cork. Given that it is the people's money, we have to make decisions on how it is best spent, and when it comes to transport investment, in some parts of the country that will mean investment in roads. In other parts of the country, it will mean investment in public transport and railways. It is not feasible, realistic, affordable or honest to say that we can do both in all areas. We have to make decisions as to the parts of the country in which it makes sense to invest in buses and rail and the parts of the country in which it makes sense to improve our road network. It is impossible to do both-----

Mattie McGrath (Tipperary, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Everything goes to Dublin.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----and we have to be honest about that. I would expect that the kind of investment we are going to see in the next number of decades will be based around buses, public transport and railways in our cities rather than in roads. Outside our cities, in more rural areas, there will be massive investment in our roadways. That is what makes the most sense. The biggest road project completed in the past two years was the Gort-Tuam motorway, which I turned the sod on and the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport opened only a few months ago. That is part of a new motorway network that will connect Galway to Limerick, as it does already, and then on to Cork via the M20. What makes sense in terms of transport planning is investment in the roads between the cities and in rural areas, but within the cities not spending any more money on building new roads because that will not solve the traffic problems. The money in the cities will be spent on buses and railways.

Michael Collins (Cork South West, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Taoiseach said that the money does not come from Minister Donohoe's Department as such but that it comes from the taxpayers. The people of Cork South West have been taxpayers for many, many decades and have got absolutely nothing back when the amount of tax they have paid for their roads is taken into consideration. I do not believe that the Taoiseach fully realises the crisis that has hit west Cork roads. In the leading article in the Southern Star newspaper in west Cork last week, it was reported that in 2015 there were claims by motorists for damage to vehicles from bad roads in County Cork amounting to a total of €30,000. In 2016, the figures obtained show that this had increased to €46,000 in one year. I have no doubt that the figures, when released, for 2017 and 2018 will show a dramatic increase because roads are continuing to deteriorate.

Up to 80% do not claim for damage done to their cars. Last week, the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, made €417 million available nationally, €44 million of which will come to Cork county, but it is estimated that County Cork will need over €500 million to bring the roads up to an acceptable standard. What was given by the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport is less than 10% of what is required. This is a genuine crisis throughout rural Ireland and west Cork and I call on the Taoiseach again to examine it as a matter of real urgency and to increase the funding made available to the local authority.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Funding for roads essentially comes from two sources, either grants from central Government or from local revenues such as commercial rates, local property tax and other ways in which local authorities have revenue. To a certain extent, therefore, local authorities can raise revenue and spend it on the roads or other priorities if they wish to do so, and there is also funding from central Government. While the roads budget was reduced significantly as a consequence of the economic crisis and the recession, we have been in a position in recent years to increase funding for national, rural, regional and local roads. That will continue, but it will not be possible to do everything in one year.