Category Archives: National News

   Senator Averil Power: I wish to raise the proposal for a south-east Fingal drugs and alcohol project, sent to the Department by the Howth Sutton Community Council in January of this year.  Basically, the request is that the Department replace a project that was serving this area up until the middle of last year.  There was a Howth-based project that was providing a service for Howth, Sutton, Baldoyle, Bayside and the surrounding areas but there were difficulties with that project.  Since it has closed, there is an enormous gap in services in the area, particularly in terms of prevention.  The proposal was put forward by the community council following a considerable amount of research done through the local schools and youth services as well as with parents and residents of the area, on the needs of the community in terms of drug and alcohol abuse prevention and diversion projects.  That research, which was submitted to the Department, showed clearly a gap in such services in that area.

  The proposal was submitted in January.  Since then, the community council has been finding it very difficult to get a straight answer regarding what is happening with the proposal.  I wrote to the Department on behalf of the council and received a reply to the effect that the issue is a matter for the drugs task force.  However, the drugs task force has said that it has been given a very clear message from the Department that it is being funded on an existing services only basis for this year and that it cannot approve replacement projects.  It seems that this very worthwhile initiative, the need for which has been well established through research and analysis, may not be funded by the Government.  The community council has not been able to get a straight answer on this question.  Money was available in the past through a previous project.  Funding was allocated to this area but now it is being left without a service.  I appreciate that money is tight within the Department and that cuts have been necessary.  However, of all of the services that need to be protected, drug projects are one of the most important.  It takes so long to get the right services up and running in areas that have struggled for many years with drug misuse problems.  In that context, it is a shame that the budget in general is taking a hit and while it is no reflection on the Minister of State, Deputy Alex White, it does reflect the broader priorities of Government.  All Ministers should ensure that this service area is supported.  The amount of money involved is relatively small in the greater scheme of things. 

  I tabled this matter on the Adjournment in order to bring it to the attention of the Minister of State, who is already aware of the proposal.  I hope he can give me positive news today.  The community council, which carried out the research and submitted the proposal, is a very professional organisation and is representative of all of the community bodies in the broader community.  If any organisation is capable of getting a project like this off the ground and running it for a relatively small sum of money, it is the Howth Sutton Community Council.  I hope the Minister of State has had a chance to read the proposal and that he can give me a positive answer, rather than just saying that it is an issue for the drugs task force.

   Minister of State at the Department of Health (Deputy Alex White): On 7 January last, my Department received a proposal from the Howth Sutton Community Council for funding to establish a drugs and alcohol prevention project in south-east Fingal, which would serve communities in Baldoyle, Bayside, Sutton and Howth.  The council wishes to set up a project to address a gap in service provision, as outlined by the Senator, that has arisen as a result of the closure in June 2012 of a community-based drugs project serving the Howth Sutton peninsula.  Funding for the latter project was withdrawn by the HSE as a result of deficits in governance, financial control and accountability that emerged during an audit of the project.

  The need for support within communities around prevention education for young people and support for families has been identified by Howth Sutton Community Council on the basis of findings from a strategic evaluation of projects conducted by Dublin north-east local drugs task force in late 2011.  This evaluation included the former project serving the Howth Sutton peninsula.  Supplementary research undertaken with local schools and community actors in late 2012 also informed the research findings.

  The key recommendations arising from the research are that a project be developed in partnership with existing community and statutory agencies, which would work with schools, youth and family support groups to develop local strategies for substance misuse education and prevention.  The proposal envisages that the project would initially focus on prevention, education and family support, with expansion into client-case management to be undertaken in the medium term if resources become available.  The cost of the project, which would involve hiring a co-ordinator and a project worker, is estimated at €79,000 per annum.

  As the Senator will be aware drugs task forces play a key role in assessing the nature of the drug problem in their areas and co-ordinating action at local level so that there is a targeted response to the drug problem in local communities.  A total of €29.951 million has been allocated to the drugs initiative in 2013, the majority of which contributes to the running of community-based drugs projects supported by local and regional drugs task forces.  This includes an allocation of €988,234 to the Dublin north-east local drugs task force, LDTF, which has responsibility for tackling the drug problem in the south-east Fingal area.

  It is a matter for each drugs task force to decide which projects to support based on agreed priorities for their area within the overall budget available to them.  The allocation to Dublin north-east LDTF was determined on the basis of the community-based drugs projects it recommended for funding in 2013.

  I have been in contact with Howth Sutton Community Council and have advised it to submit the proposal to Dublin north-east LDTF for consideration.  I have indicated that my Department will consider the proposal if it has been recommended by the task force.  At this stage, the drugs task forces have been advised of their allocations for 2013.  The funding of any additional measures is contingent upon the resources which are available to me for the year.

  I wish to explain that to the House again.  I do not have a discretionary budget.  In general it is not a question of making an application to the Minister and for the Minister or departmental officials to review the project.  I can see that this is a project of merit and I agree there is a gap in this area.  I know the need that exists as the Senator has very carefully and persuasively outlined to the House.  However, I cannot deal with the matter unless it comes to me by way of a recommendation from the local drugs task force.  I have explained that to the local drugs task force and have also responded to Howth Sutton Community Council.  However, if we were to seek to identify funding – difficult as that would be – it would inevitably affect the funding that would then not be available for other activities because I have a limited amount of funding available.  While the Senator makes her case very well, there is a finite amount of funding.  I could certainly not reallocate for 2013 unless I took money from somewhere else.  We will need to see how matters are for 2014, but I also expect resources to be finite next year.  I regret that resources are so limited, particularly in this area where the need is so great.  However, we know why resources are limited and what has caused the overall financial situation the country faces.  I am trying to do my best, as are the local drugs task forces with the funding available to them.

   Senator Averil Power: I thank the Minister of State for acknowledging the merit of the proposal and that a gap exists.  While the Minister of State has advised it that it should make a proposal to the local drugs task force, at the same time the Department has clearly advised the local drugs task force not to recommend new projects.  My understanding is that it has been advised that its funding is only on the basis of existing services and there is no scope for others.  This project is purely a restoration and it is not looking for anything new.  The implicit suggestion is that if it wants to restore a project, it must cut other projects within the task force area.  Obviously that puts any local drugs task force in an impossible position because the needs across a wider area are so huge.  There have already been cuts in services so it puts it in an impossible position to suggest the only way to get approval is to cut other services in the area.

  This is money that was taken out of the pot for the Dublin north-east area local drugs task force to be used nationally, so it is only fair that it should at least be back in the pot rather than be taken from other local services.  It is an impossible position for everybody involved.  It is a really worthwhile project, as the Minister of State has acknowledged.  At this stage we are almost half way through 2013 and I hope he will look at it again for next year.  If the Minister of State has time I invite him to meet some of the people involved and hear the case from them directly.  I know he has already acknowledged the merits of the project, but he might feel more strongly about it if he could see the professionalism of the people involved and the potential for the initiative if it could get off the ground.

   Deputy Alex White: I certainly would be amenable to meeting the people involved and seeing the project.  I want the Senator to be clear that there is no file or proposal on my desk that I have not read, in case the House might have that impression.  We have not advised the local drugs task force not to recommend new projects.  However, as the Senator has picked up correctly, we have said that the funding the local drugs task force has this year is its funding for this year.  Of course 2014 is a new year and everything will be considered afresh, but there will still be a finite amount of resources.  I know the history of what has happened here and I must have regard to that.  The local drugs task force has a new chairman and a new co-ordinator.  I am not saying anything about anyone who went before, but I think that is very helpful.  They are very well organised and are very good people.  We will do everything we can to assist but it is not a question of a dilatory approach on my part or that of the Department.  These things are processed through the local drugs task forces.

Senator Averil Power: I welcome the Minister of State. I raise this matter because the Department of Children and Youth Affairs is currently considering proposals from the City of Dublin Youth Services Board on the funding for youth work services announced in the last budget. I want to draw the Minister of State’s attention to the devastating impact the proposed cuts will have on youth services. I would like the Government to reconsider them. The youth work services provided to young people are invaluable, particularly in disadvantaged areas. I am sure the Minister of State knows that a small investment can have a huge impact. This country spends just €4 per week on each young person who is served by the youth work system.
Indecon undertook an economic assessment of this sector last year. It showed that for every €1 the State invests in this area, it saves over €2 in the long term. Obviously, this investment has a positive social impact on young people who benefit from these services. The figures show that it makes economic sense to invest in youth work because it saves the State more money in the long term. It is important to remember that for every paid member of staff who works in a youth service, there are dozens of volunteers. The paid staff are needed to leverage, manage and train the volunteers, particularly following the recent move towards greater professionalisation in this sector. Staff are trained to ensure they deliver a quality service. I know from the services in my local area that a significant emphasis is placed on reviewing and undertaking needs analysis of what is being provided. The whole sector has become much more professionalised over the last few years.
This sector is struggling as a result of the substantial cuts it has suffered in recent years. While groups and services initially responded as best they could by trying to rationalise and do more with less, they have had to cut hours and staff. Over the last year or two, they have increasingly had to cut programmes. As a result, some young people are not receiving the services they used to receive. In my local area, I am familiar with the services that are provided in places like Darndale, Kilbarrack, Kilmore West, Donnycarney and Coolock. I understand the impact that services like St. Monica’s service in Edenmore and the Trinity service in Donaghmede can have on the confidence of young people in some of the most disadvantaged parts of the country. The needs of young people who have left school and are not in education and training are not being met by the State in its other areas of activity. Young people from disadvantaged areas who are at risk of leaving school early often do not have the self-confidence or self-esteem to take up the opportunities that are available to them. I have seen how the staff and volunteers involved in youth services and youth work have been able to boost the self-esteem and confidence of young people and get them to take up formal education, apply for jobs and have confidence in their own ability to take up opportunities.
It is shame that cuts are being imposed in this area at a time when unemployment is such a problem, particularly among young people. This country’s rate of youth unemployment is shockingly high. I appreciate that cuts have to be made. I understand that the Government has to make savings somewhere. The imposition of cuts in this area is particularly short-sighted, however, given that the Indecon report and other research shows that youth services save more money in the long term. The services have not yet been told exactly how much they will lose. There has been a great deal of speculation and there is a great deal of fear. According to rumours in north Dublin, cuts of between 2% and 14% will be made. I am not sure if the Minister of State can confirm that. Such cuts, particularly at the upper end of the scale, are of concern. For many of these services, a cut of 14% would result in the loss of a member of staff. They might not be able to continue to offer a programme that currently serves young people who badly need it. I would like the Government to reconsider its approach and to find savings elsewhere. There is a social and economic case for doing so. I do not doubt that cuts of this nature would have a devastating impact on youth work services.

Deputy Ciarán Cannon: I welcome the opportunity to address this issue. I thank Senator Power for raising it. The Department of Children and Youth Affairs is providing €53.173 million in 2013 to support the delivery of youth work programmes and youth services to all young people, including those from disadvantaged communities, by the voluntary youth work sector. Youth work programmes and youth services are delivered to approximately 400,000 young people by over 1,400 youth work personnel, who in turn support a large volunteer base of approximately 40,000 people. Like all areas of the public sector, the Department of Children and Youth Affairs has had to find savings as part of the Government’s collective effort to reduce this country’s unsustainable day-to-day deficit.
The comprehensive review of expenditure, which was published in December 2011, clearly sets out the savings required from the Department in 2012, 2013 and 2014. The review, which is available on the website of the Department of Public Expenditure, contains a detailed seven-page chapter outlining the savings required from youth work funding schemes. The overall level of savings required under the comprehensive review of expenditure in respect of 2013 amounts to almost 10%. The funding allocations for 2013 were notified to the administering bodies in recent weeks. The Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, and officials from her Department have met representatives of the youth sector in recent months with a view to determining how best to minimise the impact on youth services of the 2013 budget reduction in the challenging budgetary situation that we currently face. Administering bodies have been advised to consider salary levels, conditions and administrative costs across their projects and services, if these have not already been addressed. Every effort is being made to safeguard front-line youth services and services for the most vulnerable young people as far as possible.
The Department, in trying to maximise the use of the available funding for youth services and programmes, has given the local grant administering bodies – normally the VECs – the flexibility to propose the reconfiguration of the allocations provided, having regard to the knowledge available to these bodies about the needs of young people at local level. In this context, the City of Dublin Youth Services Board, as the local grant administering body in the Dublin city area, submitted a proposal to the Department last week requesting that percentage reductions, different from those outlined in the comprehensive review of expenditure, should be applied to projects in the Dublin city area. The proposed rationale of the board is to seek to minimise disruption to front-line youth provision and to protect smaller projects. It should be noted that under the board’s proposals, most projects would receive a significantly lower reduction. However, the City of Dublin Youth Services Board has also proposed that some larger projects should receive greater reductions. The Department is currently examining the board’s proposals. At the request of the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, officials from her Department met representatives of the board last Friday to discuss the proposals. The Department will advise the City of Dublin Youth Services Board of the outcome of its examination shortly.
It should be noted that no cut in the funding provided to support local voluntary youth clubs has been provided for under the comprehensive review of expenditure. This modest funding of more than €1 million plays an important role in supporting volunteer-led youth groups and promoting and leveraging valuable voluntary activity in youth work. Some €1.5 million in capital funding is being provided in 2013 for youth cafes and youth projects. The Department will announce further details of the application process for the 2013 funding programmes soon. Funding of €500,000 was provided in 2012 for the development of a number of youth cafes which had applied for previous youth cafe funding schemes. With respect to future funding provision, the Department has commenced a comprehensive value for money review of youth funding. The outcome of that review is expected by the middle of the year. The Department has also prioritised the improvement of quality provision in youth work through the publication and ongoing implementation of a national quality standards framework for youth work. The Department has also developed national quality standards for volunteer-led youth groups. Those standards were launched by the Minister, Deputy Fitzgerald, on Monday of this week.

Senator Averil Power: The Minister of State said that the Department is considering the proposals that have been made by the City of Dublin Youth Services Board. I sought a debate on this matter to ask for the whole approach to be reconsidered in that context. One of the problems is that greater cuts will be imposed on some projects than on others, as the Minister of State mentioned. The VECs and the City of Dublin Youth Services Board have essentially been placed in the invidious position of having to try to choose between equally worthy initiatives. I invite the Minister of State and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs to visit the projects I mentioned to see the work they are doing in communities that have struggled for a long time. A great deal of work had to be done to get these projects off the ground. They built up a position of strength over the years before the succession of funding cuts of recent years. It is unfair for projects to be pitted against each other.
The Minister of State suggested that this process will be good for smaller projects because a smaller cut will be imposed on them. That does not assist larger services like Sphere 17 in Darndale, which is one of the biggest projects in my local area.
Under the rationale set out by the Minister of State, the project will suffer severe cuts, despite serving one the most disadvantaged areas in the country. The City of Dublin Youth Services Board faces an impossible choice as it weighs up the merits of the various projects, each of which deserves continued support in its own right. I urge that the Minister would reconsider the approach that has been taken to this issue. I invite the Minister and Minister of State to visit the projects in question to see for themselves the work that is being doing in the areas concerned, the difference the projects are making and the amount of money they are saving the State in other areas.

Acting Chairman (Senator Terry Leyden): That is a nice invitation.

Deputy Ciarán Cannon: Perhaps I will be able to take it up at some point and I would certainly like to do so. The Minister for Children and Youth Affairs is actively engaging with the providers of youth services in each of the relevant areas and the City of Dublin Youth Services Board, the entity responsible for the overall administration of services. She is obliged to find a 10% saving in her 2013 budget. If she had not undertaken this engagement, she would have been accused of being dictatorial and irresponsible. The implication of the Senator’s contribution is that by carrying out this engagement, the Minister is somehow pitting one service against another. This was not the Minister’s intention and it is not the outcome of the engagement. She is seeking to use the wisdom of the City of Dublin Youth Services Board and its experience in administering services across the city of Dublin to determine how exactly we will implement the required saving across the sector in a manner that minimises its impact on front-line services. Her engagement was important and will prove fruitful. It did not have any negative elements and its outcome will be available shortly. With the co-operation and collaboration of the City of Dublin Youth Services Board, we will succeed in minimising, as best we can, the negative impact of this saving in 2013.

Averil welcomes the introduction the Employment Equality (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2013 in the Seanad but expresses her concern that the current wording may still allow for discrimination against LGBT teachers, doctors and other staff.

Senator Averil Power: I welcome the Minister of State to the House and commend her personal commitment to this issue over many years. She is the right person, given that commitment, to discuss this issue with us in the House.

The Taoiseach spoke for all of us last week when he apologised unreservedly to the women incarcerated in the Magdalen laundries for the hurt done to them and the stigma they suffered. I was very proud of the Taoiseach last Wednesday not only in terms of his words but the genuine, warm and sincere manner in which they were delivered. I know what he said meant a great deal to the 1,000 survivors of the Magdalen laundries. My only regret is that more than 9,000 women never got to hear those words. I regret they were not delivered earlier.

The McAleese report documents the collusion of the State in the Magdalen laundries, in terms of State authorities being directly responsible for the admission of one quarter of all women to the laundries.

In the broader sense, it shows how the State facilitated 100% of the admissions to the laundries by allowing them to operate in the first place, by having gardaí bring women back after they had run away and by State agencies, such as hospitals, contracting their services. I found it very upsetting to read personal accounts of what women were subjected to. There was hard labour for no pay and cruel forms of emotional and physical punishment. Women who had done nothing wrong were there just because they were poor, because they had a disability in some of the most cruel cases or because they were orphans. There is no doubt some of the most vulnerable women were subjected to horrible cruelty by the people who ran the institutions. There is no doubt they were also failed by a Government that was meant to protect them and by wider society, which was indifferent to their suffering. It was a society, as we now know when we look back at how women were treated for so long, that tolerated forced adoption. It means there are now so many adults put up for adoption as kids who know nothing about their history. It is an issue we will return to in this House with the debate on the adoption information Bill. What went on is a scar on all of us.

I was proud when the Taoiseach apologised on behalf of all of us. His apology was significant and genuine. I hope it is the start of a process for the women. It cannot be the end and no amount of compensation will make up for what they went through. The least we can do is make the remaining years of their lives a little easier through helping with matters such as medical needs, counselling and housing. It is the least we owe them, not as a form of charity but as payment for the hours they worked and for the hard work they did. Financial compensation is the least we can do and I welcome the process started by the appointment of Mr. Justice Quirke.

I also welcome the additional information provided by the Minister of State today. I seek clarification on a number of issues. I am sure the Minister of State received a list of questions from the Justice for Magdalenes group. Will Mr. Justice Quirke be asked to implement the process he recommended? I am not sure the Minister of State has thought about this and whether he will be part of rolling it out. Will the process have statutory footing with independent statutory powers? Is it envisaged people will have access to an independent appeals process?

The Minister of State raised the issue of support provided by some of the UK services. The survivor groups have raised the need for a dedicated helpline in the Department. The Justice for Magdalenes group has been running a volunteer service but its members are overwhelmed and are not in a position to give women the support they need. Will specific measures be put in place to help women who are still institutionalised to ensure they have advocacy and people working on their behalf? Are steps being taken to ensure the sons and daughters of Magdalen survivors and other relatives, including victims who have been adopted, will have access to their records? As someone who was adopted as a child, a matter I have spoken about previously, I find it difficult to speak about adoption and some of these issues. But for the grace of God, I could have been born 20 years earlier, and I think about what we did to mothers like my mother, who got pregnant when they were unmarried. We must do everything we can to help the Magdalen women who suffered in those homes but there is a broader issue in modern Ireland with regard to other people who have suffered and how we deal with adoption and other vulnerable groups in our society.

An excellent article by Carl O’Brien in The Irish Times on Saturday raised the case of some of the vulnerable groups in modern Ireland. They are still in a terrible position and include those living in direct provision, as raised by Senators van Turnhout and Ó Clochartaigh in this House on several occasions. Children in entirely unsuitable accommodation share toilets with adults of the opposite sex. Another case is people with mental health problems and disabilities in institutionalised care that is not properly inspected. We still have people being sent to adult institutions when we accept it is not right. Minors end up in adult prisons rife with drugs and intimidation. Unfortunately, they come out worse at the end. Steps are in place to change that but if the Taoiseach’s apology is to be meaningful and to mark a watershed for the country, we must examine the practices in place and ensure it cannot happen again. I hate the idea that another Minister of State would have to sit in that seat and apologise to people to whom society has turned a blind eye and has not served.

I welcome the statement that the Minister of State and the Minister for Justice and Equality will meet the religious orders. It is vital they accept moral and financial responsibility for what women were subjected to. I have been astonished by the silence over the past week. I hope that changes after the meeting and that the religious orders step up to the plate. I welcome this event and I commend the personal commitment of the Minister of State and hope that today the women here to hear us and the families of those who have passed away can finally see their mothers and grandmothers get justice.

Senator Averil Power: I wish to raise the proposed introduction of paid parking in Howth. I am not opposed to paid parking in all circumstances as it makes sense in certain cases. In Malahide it was the businesses which sought the introduction of paid parking because they were having a problem with people parking for the entire day which made it impossible for shoppers and visitors to park for short periods during the day. It also makes sense in Dublin city centre for the same reason, as there is a shortage of spaces and one needs to free them up to give the maximum number of people an opportunity to use them. This is absolutely not the case in Howth. Apart from a few fine days during the summer, there is never a problem with parking on the harbour.

Not only is it unnecessary to introduce paid parking in Howth, it would have a major negative impact on the area and put people off travelling there to shop in marine businesses such as fishmongers, restaurants and other retail businesses in the village. It would put people off travelling out to walk the pier and Howth Head and to use the marine resources. Marine leisure is a huge draw for Howth. Howth Yacht Club is the biggest water sports club in Ireland with 1,700 members. People go scuba diving, sea kayaking and angling in Howth. It has a wide range of water sports and has become more popular in recent years. A huge amount of activity takes place there. One of the reasons it is so attractive to such a wide range of users is because of the free parking. It is a difficult enough place to reach and is somewhere people go for the day. People do not pop in and out for half an hour but make the journey to spend the day.

I have tabled this Adjournment matter to raise this issue, which came as a shock. It is contrary to the marine development plan of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine which was launched by the Taoiseach and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Coveney, the first key objective of which was stakeholder consultation whereby people would be asked when major decisions would be made. Local businesses were shocked to discover this was being considered without any consultation having taken place. Rumours had been circulating for months that it was being considered. It then emerged the local authority and the Garda had been asked for their views on an informal basis but local businesses had not.

There is huge opposition to the proposal. Representatives from the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine met some harbour users on 7 February and the points I have made were articulated strongly by a wide range of groups. Written submissions have been made by the yacht club, the sea kayaking club and the Howth Sutton Baldoyle chamber of commerce and the Howth Sutton community council. There is a wide range of opposition to the proposals.

I have written to the Minister, Deputy Coveney, on this and I am awaiting a detailed response outlining the logic behind this. Has a cost-benefit analysis of the proposal been conducted? As I have outlined, there are many reasons to be against its introduction in terms of the impact on businesses, community groups and a wide range of users. It seems the only potential logic, if there is one, is that it would make money, but no evidence has been put forward to show this is the case. We know where paid parking has been introduced in other villages and towns throughout the country that it has been a disaster and one in three schemes is losing money.

It has been reported that local authorities around the country are losing millions of euro due to pay parking. There are many reasons against it and no case has been put forward to any of the interest groups that have been in touch with the Department showing that a proper feasibility analysis and cost-benefit analysis have been carried out.

Have such analyses been carried out by the Department? If so, what is the estimated income and on what charging structure, for example, hourly and daily rates, is that estimate based? What is the estimated cost of operating the system? Installing parking meters incurs a significant start-up cost and the ongoing cost of policing the system needs to be taken into account. Has an analysis of the likely loss of revenue to the State from other sources been conducted? Undoubtedly, Howth’s struggling businesses will be driven out of business by extra charges. Jobs will be lost. Have these factors been taken into account? Has the experience in other areas been considered? In Dún Laoghaire, for example, the Irish Sailing Association has written to the Department highlighting the problems brought about by the introduction of pay parking.

If the Minister of State cannot tell me whether such an analysis has been done, it will be shocking. Such a significant decision should only be based on proper research and analysis. However, if an analysis has been done, will it be published so that the stakeholders can see the rationale on which the Department has based its decision?

Deputy John Perry: I thank the Senator for raising this matter. I convey the Minister, Deputy Coveney’s regrets for being unable to be present. In terms of the issues raised and to set the context, Howth is one of six fishery harbour centres operated by the State, each of whose primary purpose is to provide facilities and services for the fishing industry and fisheries-related activities. Howth fishery harbour is, first and foremost, a working fishery harbour. As such, commercial traffic servicing the fishing side and the various ancillary enterprises requires full access with appropriate parking arrangements. Social harbour users such as the yacht club and others also require reasonable access to parking. A large number of parking spaces in the fishery harbour are currently being taken up by commuters using the nearby DART service during the working week.

All users need to be accommodated in a safe and secure facility. It is generally acknowledged that traffic and parking management within the fishery harbour centre needs to be addressed, particularly in light of the concerns raised about safety and emergency access by the Coast Guard, the life boat service and the Garda. The introduction of pay parking is only one of a number of measures being introduced to address these concerns.

There has been significant capital investment in the fishery harbour centres in recent years, underpinning the fisheries side and, in parallel, their expanding use for leisure and marine tourism and other maritime enterprises. Howth in particular has a long tradition in both respects. In the current economic climate, the State must be fully committed to maximising the return on its investment. Furthermore, the Minister’s Department is required to ensure that the fishery harbour centres are run on a financially sound basis. It is in these contexts that he is giving consideration to the introduction of a charge for parking facilities within Howth fishery harbour centre, just as a charge is made for using any other of its facilities.

As provided under the Fishery Harbour Centres Act 1968, all income generated by the fishery harbour centres goes into a ring-fenced fishery harbour centres fund that is used exclusively for day-to-day operating, management and development costs. It is the only source of income available for this purpose. Without it, fishery harbour centres would not function and could not provide a service to their customers, namely, the harbour users and the visiting public. In the Minister’s opinion, it is illogical that some harbour users would expect to continue to use such a facility free of charge while other harbour users, those who are already paying into the fund for using the harbour facilities, are effectively paying for its upkeep.

The introduction of pay parking at Howth fishery harbour centre was originally examined in detail in 2007 in the context of a proposed Howth traffic and parking management plan in conjunction with Fingal County Council. The Senator has undoubtedly seen that report. However, the plan did not proceed. There was widespread public consultation at the time and all of the various views expressed and submissions made are still on file. The Minister is well aware of the concerns as then expressed and is in receipt of new correspondence on this matter on an ongoing basis.

Departmental officials have formally and informally met officials of Fingal County Council’s operations department regarding the plans to introduce pay parking as well as other traffic management enhancements. Officials have also met the Garda about this and other related matters and Department engineers have met some of the harbour’s business tenants individually about new traffic management, road markings, etc. Departmental officials also attended a recent harbour users forum where pay parking was on the agenda.

The current rates and charges order, SI 214 of 2012, provides for a charge for parking in the fishery harbour centres. No tariff has yet been fixed for Howth, but with approximately 500 parking spaces within the boundaries of the fishery harbour centre, it is clear that a source of revenue exists in the form of this State asset, which was not provided and cannot be maintained for free.

A detailed scheme for pay parking is being developed by departmental officials and the Minister is determined that it will be fair to all users of the harbour while ensuring that everyone pays a fair share. I do not doubt that the Minister has carried out due diligence in terms of a cost-benefit analysis or that the report will be on file with Fingal County Council. The new parking arrangements will include pay and display parking for harbour visitors and a permit management system for business users. Regular harbour users will have noticed that all currently available parking spaces have been identified and marked recently.

The Department has asked the planning department of Fingal County Council for guidance on the latter’s requirements concerning possible environmental and visual impacts of pay and display machines and associated directional signage and will be pleased to take account of any requirement and recommendation the planning department might have.

The additional revenues to be generated from pay parking at the Howth fishery harbour centre will be re-invested in facilities and enhancements that would not otherwise have been possible, given the current financial constraints. These improvements can only be of benefit to the marine and leisure tourism sectors and local economies in general. In the long term, the Minister believes that harbour users and Howth people in general will recognise the benefits that will accrue from this previously untapped resource.

Senator Averil Power: I thank the Minister of State for his attendance and reply. As I appreciate that he is providing the answer on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Coveney, I understand that he is not in a position to answer some of my more detailed questions. However, the reply presents no evidence of this measure having been thought through properly. It is laden with language about the principle that users should pay, but the logic of a cost-benefit analysis is not evident. There is no evidence that the Department has considered the real cost of introducing charges.

As with previous responses from the Department on this issue, the Minister of State’s reply focused on the marine aspect. While I appreciate that this is the main focus of the Department of the marine, we are supposed to have a whole-of-government approach. It is everyone’s responsibility at the Cabinet table to look beyond their individual Departments to the impact of measures on local businesses, community groups and jobs. If people lose their jobs in Howth businesses, they will go on social welfare.

I respect the fact that the Minister of State is not in a position to answer my questions, but will he raise the issue with the Minister? This is a serious matter. People will lose jobs because others will be put off the idea of travelling to Howth. The area has a small population and is dependent on tourism. The charging measure should have been thought through properly. From the reply, I have no confidence that it was. Will the Minister of State ask the Minister to correspond with me directly with the answers to my more specific questions on a cost-benefit analysis?

Deputy John Perry: The reply was comprehensive. There are 500 car parking spaces in Howth, a prosperous part of Dublin. There was a study in 2007, with due diligence carried out then. All the information and cost-benefit analysis is with Fingal County Council. Taking into account the emergency services that use the facilities and enhancement of the region, it is an important issue. This is one of the six State-owned harbours. The matter was initiated in 2007, during the last Administration.

Senator Averil Power: It did not proceed at that time for very good reasons.

Deputy John Perry: The legacy of the last Government is unfortunately still being felt. That was a time when the country was awash with money but no decision was made to benefit any business community. I have no doubt that the interaction involving business people will lead to collaboration that will benefit the region. I am from a business background and we cannot assume that it is good having 500 car parking spaces free of charge. I come from Sligo town, which does not have anything close to Howth Harbour’s locational advantages or amenities but there is still paid parking, even in centres that are out of town. A reasonable charge would allow the State reinvest some of the money.

The Minister, Deputy Coveney, is open to any reasonable suggestion for a new parking regime. I assure the House that he will try to be fair to all users of the harbour while ensuring that everybody would pay a fair share. The day when the country was awash with money that could be thrown at everything is gone and a cost benefit has been carried out for this proposal.

Senator Averil Power: I have a brief observation.

An Cathaoirleach: There is no provision for more supplementary questions.

Senator Averil Power: The reality of the impact is understood by local businesses, who must live with the reality of other extra charges placed on them. There is a genuine fear about the issue and I am not raising it for any reason other than they are worried that business will be lost.

Deputy John Perry: The business people will approve of it.

An Cathaoirleach: There is no provision in Standing Orders for this.

Senator Averil Power: I raise an issue I have raised on several occasions in the House over the past 16 months, namely, the plight of the Priory Hall residents in Donaghmede. Families who as you know were forced to move out of their homes overnight in October or November of 2011. They have now just come through their second Christmas in temporary accommodation, still living with uncertainty about the future. All that is certain is that they are not going back to Priory Hall. The building was not fit for purpose when they left it and is now worse because it has been abandoned for the past 16 months. Yet the Residents are still waiting for a long-term solution and still wondering what they will do about their mortgages and when the millstone of their Priory Hall apartments will be taken from around their necks.
There has been a resolution process in place for several months bringing together the stakeholders to agree on a long-term solution. I tabled this Adjournment debate to ask the Minister of State if there is progress to be reported. I hope there is, because the continuing uncertainty is a nightmare for the families. It is also crazy from the State’s point of view because the longer this goes on, the greater the cost to the State. Before Christmas, it was reported that Dublin City Council had spent €2 million on Priory Hall since the residents were evacuated. That relates to the cost of short-term accommodation and the costs of securing a derelict building that should, at this stage, be knocked down. I want to raise the issue with the Minister of State to ensure it continues to be a Government priority and, hopefully, to bring a greater sense of urgency to the resolution process. Does the Minister of State have news to report and when we will finally see a solution for the residents of Priory Hall?

Deputy Dinny McGinley: I thank Senator Power for raising this matter and and for pursuing it.On behalf of the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Hogan, let me again acknowledge the stressful situation being faced by the Priory Hall residents who have been out of their homes for almost 16 months as the Senator has stated. I share the wishes of all concerned who would like to see this matter resolved. A Supreme Court hearing on an appeal by Dublin City Council against an order to pay for accommodation, storage and ancillary costs of residents forced to vacate their apartments at Priory Hall had been scheduled to take place on Tuesday, 24 April 2012, however on Friday, 20 April 2012, the Supreme Court agreed to adjourn these proceedings to allow for a conciliation process between the parties. The conciliation process is being chaired by retired judge Mr. Justice Finnegan, former judge of the Supreme Court and president of the High Court, and provides an appropriate context for the parties concerned to work together towards identifying a way forward in relation to this complex problem. Neither the Minister, Deputy Hogan, nor his Department are a party to the legal proceedings and have no direct role or involvement in relation to the conciliation process. Out of respect for the process approved by the Supreme Court and for the retired Mr. Justice Finnegan, the Minister has consistently declined to make any comment on the matter other than to urge all stakeholders to engage fully with it and this remains his position. No one at this point can anticipate the outcome of the process and it is important that all concerned now afford Mr. Justice Finnegan the opportunity to complete the task which he has been given.
Dublin City Council has made commendable efforts to provide for the needs of residents to date and continues to work proactively on behalf of the residents towards achieving the necessary and longed-for resolution of the issues at Priory Hall. Dublin City Council remains committed to taking every reasonable step in its power to achieve this objective and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government will continue to liaise closely with the council in this regard.
In particular the council, with the assistance of the Department, in consultation with NAMA, has secured alternative temporary accommodation for many of the residents. The council, with some assistance from the Department, continues to bear the cost of such accommodation and has confirmed that it will continue to do so while the conciliation process is under way.
In the circumstances, I urge all concerned to allow Mr. Justice Finnegan the opportunity to complete the task he has been given.

Senator Averil Power: I thank the Minister of State for being present in the House to give this reply. I must take issue with the point made in the reply that the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government is not a party to the proceedings. Yes, the Department is not directly a party to the proceedings but Dublin City Council is, and the Department is responsible to this House for the actions of the local authorities around the country, including Dublin City Council.
As I said, Dublin City Council has spent more than €2 million of taxpayers’ money to date on short-term accommodation and on the security of the Priory Hall building. If the council had risen to its responsibilities and accepted from the start that it had played a part in bringing this disaster about in the first place and engaged with the residents, this could have been avoided. Instead it fought them through the courts and did everything possible to avoid being part of the solution to the problem. The residents unanimously agreed to be part of the resolution process and see it as a very positive thing. I agree that Mr. Justice Finnegan must be allowed to do his work but I take issue with the statement that the Department does not have a responsibility. The Department has a responsibility to put pressure on Dublin City Council as a direct party to the resolution process to ensure it does everything it can to bring about a positive resolution. Of course the banks are involved. Of course this whole debacle is a result of the disgusting and unscrupulous practices of a particular developer as well. However, I would like to see a more hands-on approach from the Government, because the Department is responsible for the Dublin City Council. We passed legislation in this House at 6 a.m. this morning for the liquidation of IBRC and I understand that, as a consequence, Priory Hall will be under NAMA. The Government has a relationship with NAMA and more pressure needs to be brought to bear on the State agencies involved to bring about a final solution as soon as possible and end this nightmare for the residents.

Deputy Dinny McGinley: I thank the Senator for her contribution. In the Minister’s absence I will bring it to his attention and I will ask him, if it is necessary to get in touch with the Senator on these matters.

I have met Mr. Giambrone a couple of times to discuss this issue and the group will know from that and from my correspondence with the Minister for Social Protection that I fully support the group’s work on this.

It is beyond time we gave proper recognition to transgender people and I share the views that have been outlined about the legislation. It is very important because we have an opportunity to learn from the countries that went before us. We are one of the last countries to give transgender people the recognition and support they deserve. We have the opportunity to learn from the weaknesses in the British legislation. It is unfortunate, however, that the report earlier this year stated we should copy the British legislation. I was at the conference of our sister party in England, the Liberal Democrats, and I met the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender group and one of the issues we discussed was the deficiencies in the British legislation that the party is now working to change. We have the opportunity to avoid that from the outset and go with best practice, such as the Argentinian experience, or to look elsewhere and get this right from the start rather than making the mistakes others made ten or 15 years ago.

Have there been any signals from the Department about where we are at on this? When I wrote to the Minister during the summer, she had a date in the autumn set for coming to the Seanad to discuss the legislation, and that was put back. Would the group have a better idea about the timeframe from its engagement with the Department? I sent the group’s criticisms to the Minister and she replied that they were being considered, but it was a general response rather than saying whether she agreed with the issues.

Forced divorce is a crazy concept and I appreciate this is part of the broader picture in respect of marriage equality because that is legally where things are tied up. I would like to see a clearer response from the Department. I have not seen it myself so does the group know what the Department is thinking now?

As an adopted person, I have always been deeply conflicted on the issue of abortion. When people speak about unwanted pregnancies, I cannot help but to reflect on the fact that I was the unplanned daughter of a single woman. When she became pregnant in 1978, she did not have the option of keeping me such that I could grow up as part of her family. I am grateful that through adoption I was given a chance to be part of another family and to get to know my birth mother and half-siblings later in life. When some individuals on the pro-choice side speak about abortion as a simple women’s rights issue, without a thought for the life of the unborn child, it upsets me greatly. The lack of compassion some of the most extreme pro-life groups extend to women in distress, particularly those who are victims of rape or whose lives are at risk, is just as distressing. My view is that while abortion is never desirable, in some circumstances the consequences of it not being available are worse. We do not yet know if the termination for which Savita is said to have pleaded would have resulted in her life being saved. Perhaps we will never know with absolute certainty, even after the various investigations have concluded. What is clear, and was clear long before her death, is that the failure to legislate for the judgment in the X case has left doctors in an unacceptable legal limbo and women without the protection they deserved.

Senator Jim Walsh: No doctor is—–

Senator Averil Power: I appreciate that abortion is an emotive and sensitive issue. I understand some Members of this House, including some members of my own party, to which Senator Jim Walsh will attest when he makes his contribution, have deeply-held moral or religious objections to abortion in any circumstance. However, as legislators, we have a responsibility to uphold the Constitution and it is clear from the judgment in the case of A, B and C v. Ireland that the Oireachtas has failed to fulfil that responsibility. According to the European Court of Human Rights, the lack of legislation has resulted in “a striking discordance between the theoretical right to a lawful abortion in Ireland on grounds of a relevant risk to a woman’s life and the reality of its practical implementation”. It is clear from the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights that Ireland is required to put in place an effective and accessible procedure to enable women to establish whether they qualify for a termination in the State in accordance with the test set out in the X case criteria. Maintaining the status quo is not an option. It is past time for us to legislate for the judgment in the X case. It is past time to give proper and practical recognition to the constitutional rights of pregnant women whose lives are at risk. It is past time to give doctors a clear legal framework in which they can act to protect mothers’ lives without the chilling effect of the 1961 Act hanging over them.

I welcome the expert group’s report which, like Senator Fiach Mac Conghail, I have read in detail. I have considered each of the options put forward in it. My belief is that a combination of legislation and regulations is the most sensible approach. Primary legislation would give us the legal strength we need on this issue, while regulations would mean the legislation would not have to be excessively detailed. The regulations would put the meat on the bones of the legislative position. I hope legislation will be brought before the House as soon as possible after Christmas, as we have already had too much of a delay on the issue.

However, I am also conscious that when we legislate for the judgment in the X case, we will still be leaving some of the most vulnerable women in the country without the support they deserve – victims of rape and women whose babies have fatal foetal abnormalities which the expert group has stated are generally thought to be outside the scope of the X case. I would like to read from an e-mail I received from a woman who has faced such circumstances:

I had always been someone who said I would never have an abortion – unfortunately I didn’t know what lay ahead for me. I was with my husband 10 years when we decided … to have children. Much to our delight after ten months I finally fell pregnant. I did everything right, I took care of myself [and took] folic acid … My bump grew and I began to feel my lovely baby kick me and move about. I finally received my appointment for my first scan at 22 weeks … and here all changed. When I had my scan I was told that my beautiful daughter had a condition called anencephaly [which meant that she] had no hope of surviving and would die without a doubt. If she survived the pregnancy, she would probably die at birth or within a few hours. To say we were heartbroken is an understatement … How would I cope emotionally? How could I keep growing day by day and feel this baby inside me? How would I deal with the questions from well meaning people – when is your baby due [they would ask me]? How could I watch my perfect baby struggle and die in my arms? After much deliberation, I felt it would be too difficult to continue with the pregnancy knowing our daughter was going to die and I opted for a termination in the UK … Because of our laws, I was not allowed receive any help from the hospital here …. I wanted this baby so much but [I knew] she was going to die – no medical intervention could prevent this. It was the most difficult thing in my life. I had to leave my home, my comfortable surroundings and travel to a strange country …. [it] was difficult enough …. without having the added problems of travelling to the UK …. I could have had all my family around me. I could have had my own comforts. I could have seen my lovely daughter and buried her close to me. Now, I will never know what she looked like and I have no place to visit her.

The lady who sent me that e-mail said she never thought she would have an abortion. However, it is clear from the circumstances she outlined in her e-mail that this is not a black and white issue. My personal experience and the circumstances of my own birth mean I will never support abortion on demand. It just does not sit with me. It is not a choice between two extremes. It is not a choice between no termination in any circumstance and a fully liberalised regime.

It is certainly not a choice between the current Irish system and that in place in the United Kingdom, although Senator Rónán Mullen may have implied that it was. As Senator Deirdre Clune rightly pointed out, that is comparing apples and oranges. Nobody is suggesting we introduce the UK system here. We should legislate for the judgment in the X case, but we should also have a referendum to let the people decide whether abortion should be available to victims of rape and incest and women whose babies cannot survive outside the womb.

I thank the representatives of Comhairle na nÓg for coming in and for their presentation. I was delighted to see the emphasis on mental health. For the last several months Deputy McConalogue and I have been working on a paper on youth mental health for which we spent the summer consulting groups such as Headstrong, Jigsaw and student councils to find out what works. We found that programmes developed and run by young people are often more powerful than those delivered by teachers or parents. This is the type of initiative we need to support. Many of the suggestions made by the witnesses are in our paper and I can provide copies of it at the end of the meeting. I would love to hear their feedback on what we should prioritise. It is a huge issue but it has not been taken on by the education sector to the extent that it should have been. One in four students has a psychological problem at any given time. It is an educational issue because if people are unhappy or experiencing bullying they cannot get the education they need. The education system needs to do all it can to support students with their personal development.

It is a disgrace that some schools are not providing RSE programmes, whether because they are not regarded as a priority or because of individual teachers’ sensitivities about teaching programmes. Every school should be offering their students a full relationship and sexuality education programme. LGBT issues and homophobic bullying should also be addressed as part of these programmes. Every student should be supported in feeling comfortable about his our her body image and sexual orientation. This committee should push to ensure this happens. It is ridiculous that survey after survey finds patchy implementation of a programme that should be a priority. The SPHE programme for senior cycle is still in development and needs to be put in place. I have made this point in the Seanad to the Minister for Education and Skills. Personal development is as important to young people’s education as maths, science and other areas of the curriculum.

I hope we will have an opportunity to meet representatives from Comhairle na nÓg more frequently. When we discuss issues of general interest to students we should consider a procedure that would allow us to consult its national executive or at least inform it of our agenda for next year. I do not see why we cannot ask Comhairle na nÓg for its perspectives on the issues we examine. When we dealing with education and other issues that affect students it is essential that we hear the voice of those who represent students. I have not been approached by my local comhairle, although the national office has e-mailed me. I would like to hear from my local comhairle and I am sure other members think likewise.

I will conclude with an apology because the national anti-bullying coalition is currently making a presentation on bullying and I must leave because I promised I would attend that meeting. I was delighted to have an opportunity to hear the witnesses’ presentation.

I thank the delegation for attending the meeting at such short notice. It is disappointing, however, we do not have any Department officials or the Minister here which is a matter the committee should consider. The questions about students’ access to services, sitting examinations at Christmas and submitting projects can only be answered by the Minister. It is not the job of Student Universal Support Ireland, SUSI, to answer these questions. I have had telephone calls and e-mails about students dropping out because they cannot submit projects due this week. The committee needs to call in the Department, the Higher Education Authority and the institutes of technology to sort out how this is causing distress to students as it appears it will continue for several weeks.

In theory the centralised system is good and City of Dublin VEC is the right organisation to run it as it has a good track record in this area. My concern is that from the very start it was not given the resources it needed to properly process these claims. This is evident from the fact staffing levels have changed several times since this started. Ms Stewart informed the committee how many extra staff she has been given. How many did she ask for? How many staff does SUSI need to ensure every application is decided on by Christmas? As Deputy Clare Daly pointed out, on SUSI’s best estimate there will still be thousands of students who will not have a grant by Christmas. It is important the committee is given the information it needs to put pressure on a cross-party basis on the Department to ensure SUSI is given the staff it needs to sort out this mess.

The delegation pointed out that there is only one formal complaint of lost documents. I have had several complaints to my office about documents being lost in the system. Is this an issue with quality checking with the external provider? I appreciate quality analysis was part of the original tender. What quality monitoring process is in place now?

In regard to providing services in colleges, during my time as an elected representative at Trinity College, the students’ union, and its welfare officers in particular, were at the front line of helping students. I understand that SUSI has not yet put a system in place, which is a big gap. Will Ms Stewart consider putting such a system in place so that student union welfare officers can assist students? Will she ensure that more information is given out over helplines? The usual reply I receive to inquiries is that SUSI has issued a response to the student concerned, which is not particularly helpful because I am then required to get back in touch with the student to identify the gaps. If SUSI is going to deal with public representatives it must be able to provide an adequate amount of information.