Vol. 252 No. 13
I understand Senator Mac Lochlainn is on his way.
We cannot even allow the Senator to draw his breath. We are about six minutes through the eight minutes allocated. I ask him to outline his case as briefly as possible. I cannot allow supplementary questions on this. In fairness, Senator O'Donnell was kind enough to ask the Minister of State to wait, and the Minister of State has another appointment as well.
I thank the Minister of State.
I know it is a very important issue for the Senator.
This matter was originally scheduled as the fourth Commencement matter. Obviously, that was rescheduled. I apologise to the Cathaoirleach. These things change quickly in here.
The Minister now knows that the report that was recently published was delayed by a year. That is a year in which families in Donegal have had to endure more concern and more alarm as their homes are literally falling apart around them. There is not a week that goes by, particularly recently since the report has been published, in which I have not spoken to families, by either meeting them at their homes or speaking to them on the phone, who have taken me through the concerns they have. They are totally devastated.
The report proves very clearly that there was a failure of State regulation and building control. If we look at the eight recommendations, they all focus on the need to make serious improvements in this area. We are now a year behind schedule in terms of the report. I appeal to the Minister of State to introduce a redress scheme for the families involved similar to the pyrite scheme in Dublin and north Leinster.
They are facing a situation whereby they are looking at their gables falling apart. I talked to a family who have Bison slab, concrete floor and another wooden floor above that. What are they to do in such a situation? They are worried that the roof could literally fall down over their heads. That is what people are facing right now. They have waited a year. This has been delayed because of the delay in the report.
Similar to the pyrite situation, the Government needs to introduce a redress scheme to allow families to immediately bring in qualified engineers to assess the work that needs to be done on these houses and to put in place the resources to allow them to rebuild their homes and lives. Thousands of families are affected in Donegal. Hundreds of council homes are affected. I appeal to the Minister of State to urgently bring in a redress scheme to give hope to these families so that they can rebuild their homes and lives.
I intend to share time in my subsequent contribution with Senator Conway-Walsh.
We will allow Senator Conway-Walsh to raise a supplementary question. The Senator can come in after that. Today has gone skew-ways because another Minister of State could not come in earlier and we were waiting. The Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy English, has an appointment as well. We will allow you to come in, Senator.
I understand that things can change. I am sorry that I could not wait any longer. We have some appointments booked up as well.
I thank Senator Mac Lochlainn for raising this important issue - I recognise it as such. I thank Deputy Mac Lochlainn's colleagues in Donegal and Mayo as well. Colleagues across parties and in both Houses have been raising this issue with me directly during the past year since I took up this role, as have many others as well. The issue concerns many people and all sides want it to be sorted out.
I wish to acknowledge the difficult and distressing situations that certain home owners in Donegal and Mayo are facing on account of damage to the structural integrity of their homes. I have seen some of these damaged homes first-hand and I have met the home owners in Donegal and Mayo, so I understand clearly the difficulties they face. I understand the hassle it has caused to their lives as well as the financial and health impacts in recent years since they have had to deal with this.
I firmly believe that the parties responsible for poor workmanship and the supply of defective materials should face up to their responsibilities and take appropriate actions to provide remedies for the affected home owners in these cases and in other cases also. The expert panel on concrete blocks was established by my Department in 2016 to investigate problems that have emerged in the concrete block work of certain dwellings in counties Donegal and Mayo.
I will outline the terms of reference of the panel. The first term was to identify, in so far as it is possible, the numbers of private dwellings that appear to be affected by defects in the block work in the counties of Donegal and Mayo. We now have a rough idea of numbers. We know the minimum numbers and also what the maximum would be in both counties. It is important that we have collected that data. The second term was to carry out a desktop study, which would include a consultation process with affected home owners, public representatives, local authorities, product manufacturers, building professionals, testing laboratories, industry stakeholders and other relevant parties, to establish the nature of the problem in the affected dwellings. That work is being carried out now. It is useful to help us provide the solutions that are needed as well. The next term was to outline a range of technical options for remediation and the means by which those technical options could be applied. Again, we have that information. Finally, the group was to submit a report within six months.
I received the report of the expert panel on 6 June 2017. It is comprehensive and addresses all areas of the terms of reference. I published the report one week later on 13 June 2017. The report has eight recommendations. My Department has already taken action to implement recommendations one and two as priorities. Recommendation one relates to the testing and categorisation protocol. The Department met the National Standards Authority of Ireland recently to discuss the establishment of a technical committee to scope and fast-track the development of a standardised protocol. That is the first recommendation because it is most important to get the protocol right. I have dealt with these schemes in the past and it is important that part is dealt with; it will take away some of the grey area for home owners also.
Recommendation two relates to competent professional oversight. My Department has been in contact with Engineers Ireland with regard to the establishment of a register of competent engineers for home owner affected parties' reference. Engineers Ireland provided assurance that the organisation will collaborate with the Department, NSAI and others on measures to establish such a register. Again, that is highly important and we will do it as quickly as we can. We are not delaying on these recommendations in any way.
I fully appreciate and understand the urgency of this matter to the affected home owners and I will continue to monitor progress closely. We will meet the residents in both counties soon. In light of the information contained in the report, my Department and I are currently considering what further actions may be required to assist the parties directly involved in reaching a satisfactory resolution to the problems that have emerged in the two counties.
I will allow Senator Conway-Walsh to raise a matter about her own county, Mayo.
The Minister will know there are 345 homes affected in County Mayo. This is not good enough, not by a long shot. People want a redress scheme. They are grateful to the Minister for doing the report in the first instance, but all the language he has used today suggests that what people really need will be hidden behind these lines. We must face up to the fact that these home owners were let down. They were sold materials that were not fit for purpose. That was clearly stated in the report. The State had an obligation to protect them in that regard. We failed to do that. We failed to implement the legislation already there, and we failed to have the legislation that would further protect these home owners.
Nothing short of a redress scheme will fix this problem. We can talk about it for years. We can write volumes of reports. That will not cut the mustard. We need a redress scheme, and we need it now. There are two ways we can get this scheme. As this is a housing issue, can the money needed be found within the amounts allocated to housing or will there be a line in the budget for a redress scheme? They are the two questions those of us in County Mayo, and in County Donegal, need answered. I thank my colleague, Senator Mac Lochlainn, for raising this important issue again, which we have been driving for over a year.
Everyone here has been driving this issue for well over a year. I recognise that. It is cross-party, and I want to be clear on that. I am conscious of the effects in Donegal and Mayo. It would be wrong of anyone to try to claim this issue. People are being affected. It is not a political issue. I have met these people. I have told them that I will do my job to help them get a resolution. No one is claiming anything here.
We would never do that because it is the home owners who are central to this issue.
The residents I have met fully understand that. I met the Mica Action Group in Donegal and other groups in Mayo also. They understood that a report had to be done. We had to gather the evidence and get solutions. I have had it for a couple of weeks. We will deal with it. These people want to know that the houses will be fixed. I told them I will work with them on that, and that is as far we are going until I get a chance to go through the report and all the recommendations. I want to be clear on that. I only got it myself a few weeks ago, and the residents understand that. I will meet them in the coming weeks to discuss this with them. Where we can move on with recommendations, we will do that straight away, and we did that immediately with recommendations 1 and 2. That is the way we will continue with regard to the rest of the recommendations. They will be dealt with as urgently as possible and where I can make decisions, I will do so.
When will it be put in place?
I want to acknowledge the Minister's indulgence when I know he is under pressure, and that of Senator O'Donnell, who was prepared to wait. The Minister of State, Deputy D'Arcy was here as well. Tá na laethanta saoire ag teacht, le cúnamh Dé.
The Cathaoirleach might let me know when I am coming to the end of my time.
I will ring the bell when the Senator has 30 seconds left.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy D'Arcy, to the Chamber again. This issue is in connection with the mid-term review of the national capital investment plan. It is an issue I feel very strongly about. The review took place in the month of April. More particularly, at that time I held a public information meeting in the Great National South Court Hotel, Raheen, in Limerick city, on Tuesday, 18 April to encourage people to make submissions on the M20, which is the Limerick to Cork motorway. I regard it as the single most important piece of infrastructure Ireland needs. I would go so far as to say that without it, we cannot have balanced regional development. Dublin is bursting at the seams, so to speak. It is doing exceptionally well, but I am of the view that Dublin can only take so much capacity. We are a relatively small island, but if we cannot have motorway connection from Cork to Limerick to Galway, and we cannot get from, say, Cork to Limerick in an hour and Cork to Galway in two hours, we do not have balanced regional development.
The existing motorway from Limerick to Cork, in particular from Limerick to Mallow, is impossible to travel on. Anyone who knows it will know about the bottlenecks at Charleville and Buttevant, in particular down by the quarry. This matter is very much to the fore in people's minds, in particular in Limerick but also in Cork and everywhere along the western seaboard, including Galway, because we need to have connection. The Minister of State might indicate how the mid-term capital review is progressing, the anticipated timeframe for the collation of information, and where the M20 stands in this process.
At the start of this year, the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, agreed to my proposal to allocate €1 million to Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, formerly the National Roads Authority, to allow for the recommencement of planning work in respect of the M20. I thank him for that. The allocation has allowed TII to recommence planning, engage consultants and do the pre-planning work required before the main design feature gets under way. As we stand, no further time is being lost. The key element now is to ensure that when the mid-term capital review is complete, we can effectively get the planning and design phase under way for the M20 with immediate effect. We can do it on a staged basis. The part between Limerick and Mallow is the most critical. That is where considerable time is lost. We must ensure that the M20 project is commenced. The mid-term capital review last April was very welcome. There is considerable demand for the project in Limerick. Well over 200 people attended the public consultation meeting I held in the South Court Hotel on Tuesday, 18 April. What people now want to see is action.
The Taoiseach is on record as saying he will look for this to be in place by 2023. That is extremely achievable but on the basis that the M20, the Limerick-Cork motorway, gets the green light under the mid-term capital review. We must see the design, route selection and construction taking place by 2023.
The Programme for a Partnership Government committed to additional capital investment over the period of the capital plan to 2021, to be allocated on the basis of the outcome of a review of that plan. This review is ongoing. The process will guide and inform the decision by the Government on revised capital allocations made to Departments at budget time in October. The review is also an important input to the long-term ten-year capital plan, intended to be finalised before the end of the year. Submissions on the review and the additional funding available for allocation were sought from Departments in January 2017 and are currently under review by my Department.
With regard to conducting the review of the capital plan, it is a matter for each Department in the first instance to identify its sectoral priorities and projects in its submission for any additional funding under the review. The recommendations made by each Department will play an important role in ensuring that the additional funding is aligned with priorities, in terms of overall economic and social returns from increased capital investment, for example. A public consultation process was also held in April to ascertain the views of the public and key stakeholders on what our national infrastructural priorities should be. This consultation also sought views on infrastructure investment priorities beyond the period of the capital plan. This will also help to formulate the longer-term ten-year plan.
The assessment of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform of the submissions received as part of the review will be based on relevant evidence and research, such as on infrastructural capacity and demand analysis carried out by the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service. The Department is liaising closely with the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government in order to ensure close alignment with the emerging teams of the new national planning framework, due this year.
Alongside the capital review, a public investment management assessment, PIMA, is being carried out by the International Monetary Fund, IMF, this month. It will evaluates the design and effectiveness of the institutions which shape decision-making at the three key stages of the public investment cycle, namely, planning investment, the allocation of investment to the right sectors and implementing investment. The IMF's assessment will contribute to the analysis of the systems in place, the planning allocation and delivering on future infrastructure priorities in the context of the ten-year plan. All of this work being carried out by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform will ensure additional capital measures available will be targeted at priority capital infrastructure required to support Ireland’s medium-term growth potential and underpin social cohesion. It is expected the review process will be completed in quarter three of 2017 to enable the Government to make the final decisions in due course on how the remaining capital should be allocated
Does the Minister of State expect the review to take place before the announcement of the budget in October? If so, will it happen in September? Is the Government looking at various funding mechanisms for capital projects such as European Investment Bank funding? Will he outline the discussions taking place in that regard? How important is a project of the magnitude of the M20 Limerick-Cork motorway project in the Government's priorities in the context of balanced regional development?
There is a clear understanding and realisation the development of infrastructure of this type benefits sectors and regions. When speaking about my area of responsibility, financial services, it is important for the body politic to understand infrastructure development should be viewed not on a county by county but a regional basis. Anywhere there is an improvement in connectivity, whether it be broadband, motorways or rail services, a sector will improve. We understand this and are clear that these areas need to be improved. I personally would consider the M20 project as one of the priorities of the State. Two of the State’s largest urban areas are not connected with a motorway of a sufficient standard. However, I cannot predict what the dynamics of the review will be when it is concluded in quarter three this year, but I anticipate that the project will be one of the priorities. The importance of the motorway must be accepted.
As the Minister of State travelled from Wexford yesterday evening, I am sure the extension of the M11, including the Enniscorthy bypass, was close to his heart. I could have done with a motorway yesterday coming from west Cork.
The Cathaoirleach will have one next year.
I hope I will still be Cathaoirleach next year.
I welcome the Minister of State. This is the first opportunity I have had to congratulate him on his promotion and wish him well in his new role.
I refer to the new travel-mileage expenses rate which took effect for all public servants on 1 April this year. The new rate was negotiated by the Civil Service unions with the Department of Finance. It had the added dimension of the Haddington Road agreement in which the unions and employers came up with a new rate and method of calculating mileage expenses incurred by public servants. Across the public service those most acutely affected are members of State boards and county councillors.
I was disappointed to learn from those bodies that no consultation took place on this issue with the representative bodies, either the Local Authority Members Association, LAMA, or the Association of Irish Local Government, AILG.
The new rate for travel expenses differs from the old one in that there are four different categories as opposed to two heretofore. One significant effect of the new rates is that for the first 1,500 km a year that a claimant might travel, the rate drops from 0.6088 per kilometre down to 0.4479 per kilometre which results on a return journey in a drop of approximately 26%.
In practical terms, as I stated earlier, those most affected by this will be local authority members who would struggle to get up to 1,500 km through any group they might form part of, whether that be an education and training board, ETB, or a health fora. Members of the north-east health forum who would travel to a meeting in Kells would leave Monaghan town, for example, at 12 o'clock for a meeting at 2 p.m. and would not be back home again until 6 p.m. - that is six hours. Many of them will find it difficult to afford to be able to go to that type of meeting, which is disappointing bearing in mind that it is important, for example, on a health forum, that we have community voices heard. This makes it more difficult.
I suppose a disappointing aspect of it as well is that when one considers this along with other cuts that local authority members have experienced in recent times, it makes the role of the county councillor that more difficult. Indeed, in my own constituency, Cavan-Monaghan, in the past couple of weeks we had two councillors resign purely because they are holding down full-time jobs and were finding it impossible to manage the two.
It would be difficult to get a single arrangement with Revenue and whoever for county councillors on this issue, but I would ask if that could be looked at. More importantly, we need to look at the issue of terms and conditions for local authority members in the round, and this will form part of it. We need to make it more attractive for local authority members to carry on and not resign because we depend on them to be the voice of the community in the future.
The mileage rates are designed to reimburse an officer for the costs incurred in using his or her own car on official business. The rates are set based on a methodology agreed with the staff associations. The methodology takes account of both overhead costs, such as car cost and insurance, and also running costs such as fuel costs and maintenance.
Under the Haddington Road agreement, a commitment was given to review the travel and subsistence arrangements in the public service. As part of this review, discussions on the motor mileage rates took place between Department officials and the staff associations from autumn 2015.
As the Senator will be aware, the formula underpinning the motor mileage rates was reviewed this year with a view to reflecting increased efficiencies and improvements in motor technology. The revised rates are based on an agreed methodology that reflects changes in technology, road conditions, commuter behaviour and car ownership patterns.
Some of the key changes of this review involved the following: an increase in the number of distance bands, from two to four, allowing a more nuanced reimbursement regime focused on officers who do significant work-related driving; a lower recoupment rate for the first 1,500 km; an increased recoupment rate from 1,501 km to 5,500 km focussed on officers who do such longer work-related driving; more beneficial reimbursement rates for cars with lower engine sizes and emissions; and the formula for calculating mileage now assumes an officer replaces his or her car every four years rather than every three years.
This changed the way the mileage bands are structured. Under the previous system, officers moved to a lower mileage rate after they had travelled 4,000 miles. Part of the focus of the review was to ensure that those officers who undertake significant work-related driving are adequately compensated for using their own car for official business. In order to allow this, it was deemed necessary to designate an initial mileage period where recoupment costs were lower.
In December 2016, Department officials and the staff associations met the adjudicator under the Civil Service conciliation and arbitration scheme to determine the upper threshold for the first distance band. The adjudicator determined that 1,500 km was appropriate.
This was accepted by the parties. Although the revised rates were introduced in April, it was agreed that mileage accumulated by officers from January to March could count in using the new banding system. As such, officers who accumulated mileage during the period would be closer to reaching band 2. The Senator may wish to note that the revised arrangements provide for more beneficial reimbursement rates for cars with lower engine sizes and emissions. For an officer driving a car with an engine size of less than 1,200 cc, there is only a nominal reduction of up to €16 per annum in comparison with previous rates.
The Senator may wish to note that it is intended to review the motor travel rates after a period of three years in 2020.
I thank the Minister of State for his response. I note that the rates will be up for review again in three years' time. If it is possible during that time, consultation with the two representative bodies for local authority members, the Local Authority Members Association and the Association of Irish Local Government, would be welcome. As I said, while I am sure it was not designed as such, those who struggle to reach 1,500 miles will be the worst affected. I, therefore, ask that, in the round, when the Minister of State is talking to his Government colleagues, the position of local authority members be kept in mind at all times.
I will certainly do that for the Senator.
I thank the Minister of State and the Senator.
