Taoiseach

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the moneys which have been expended in his Department by area and projects to date, under the RAPID and CLÁR programmes. [25862/02]

The Taoiseach: My Department is not responsible for any expenditure in relation to RAPID or CLÁR areas or projects.

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the additional resources being made available to the Central Statistics Office to allow for compilation of statistics on poverty in Irish society compared to similar statistics available in other European countries [2073/03]

Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Ms Hanafin): At the end of 2001, the EU Commission put forward a proposal for a Council and Parliament regulation to initiate an annual series of EU-wide surveys on income and living conditions, EU-SILC, from January 2003. This survey will serve as the main source of statistics on poverty and related issues throughout the Union. However, examination of the proposal has been slower than originally expected and the regulation will not now be adopted until the middle of this year. As a result, the mandatory starting date for the surveys has been put back to January 2004, although countries in a position to commence in 2003 are encouraged to do so. These surveys will replace the voluntary European Community household panel surveys which were conducted in most EU countries, including Ireland, up until 2001.

The allocation to the CSO in the Abridged Estimates Volume for 2003 did not include explicit provision for conducting the survey in 2003. However, a range of Departments concerned with social inclusion and combating poverty considered that priority should be given to commencing the survey in 2003. Accordingly, discussions are ongoing about a transfer of a total of €900,000 from the budgets of nine Departments to the CSO and this, together with a grant of approximately €300,000 from the EU Commission, should enable the office to start the survey in June of this year.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the number of nominations and appointments made by him since 6 June 2002; and the number of and areas where vacancies for such appointments will arise and when. [11860/03]
The Taoiseach: The bodies under the aegis of my Department are: the National Statistics Board, the National Economic and Social Council, the National Economic and Social Forum, the Information Society Commission, the National Centre for Partnership and Performance, the Law Reform Commission and International Financial Services Centre groups.

The following are the changes which are in addition to those stated by me in the House on 11 March 2003. International Financial Services Centre Groups: Mr. Michael Jackson, Matheson Ormsby Prentice, accepted appointment to the IFSC funds working group on 6 March 2003; Mr. Walter Brazil, AIB Capital Markets, was appointed to the Clearing House Group following his appointment as chairman of the IFSC Banking and Treasury Group on 1 May 2003; Mr. John Goggin, Bank of Ireland Outsourcing Services Limited, was appointed to the IFSC Banking and Treasury Group on 1 May 2003. He succeeded Mr. Ken Slattery of Bank of Ireland Corporate Banking who resigned.

Membership of the National Economic and Social Forum comprises representatives from the following four strands: Oireachtas - 15 members based on the composition of the Oireachtas; employer organisations, trade unions and farming organisations - 15 members nominated by business organisations, ICTU and agricultural organisations; voluntary and community sector - 15 members nominated by non-governmental organisations; central Government, local government and independents - 15 members, of which five representatives of Government Departments, five nominated by local government bodies and five independent members nominated by Government. The Government also appoints a chairperson and deputy chairperson. The deputy chairperson is a representative of the Department of the Taoiseach.

The composition of the Oireachtas strand of the forum has changed since June 2002 to reflect the changed composition of the Houses. Members are nominated by the political parties and Independents and some of these vacancies remain to be filled. No other changes have been made since June 2002. The term of office of the current NESF ended at the end of March 2003 and it is expected to be reconstituted shortly.

The term of office of the National Statistics Board will expire in July 2003. The Statistics Act 1993 provides that the board consist of eight members comprising the following seven persons appointed by the Taoiseach: (a) five persons of proven ability and experience in relevant fields, two of whom shall be nominated by the Taoiseach and three of whom shall be nominated by such organisation or organisations as the Taoiseach considers to be representative of the users of official statistics and providers of information under the Act; (b) an assistant secretary or equivalent or higher grade in the Department of the Taoiseach; and (c) an assistant secretary or equivalent or higher grade in the Department of Finance, together with the director general of the CSO, ex officio. The chairperson is appointed by the Taoiseach from among the members of the Board appointed under (a) above.

The term of office of the current National Economic and Social Council expired at the end of March 2003 and it is expected to be reconstituted shortly. Membership of the council is comprised of a chairperson and five persons nominated by agricultural and farming organisations; five persons nominated by business and employers organisations; five persons nominated by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions; five persons nominated by community and voluntary organisations; ten other persons nominated by Government, including five Secretaries General of Government Departments and a representative of local government. There are no other vacancies anticipated in the foreseeable future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle: Having once been nominated by the Taoiseach to the National Economic and Social Council, I accept much of what he says in relation to his room for manoeuvre in nominations to boards within his own Department. Will he accept that the current system brings about a small gene pool from which to select? Very often, particularly among the social partners, one finds individuals who are members of more than one body in the social partnership process. There is a need to broaden the process through advertising or the establishment of a public appointments commission that would mirror the local appointments commission. We need to open up this process so that as many people as possible know what is available in terms of public service positions and how to go about filling them.

On Deputy Sargent's question, will the Taoiseach consider, at the very least, a suitable adaptation of Standing Orders of Dáil committees to allow for some form of questioning by the chairpersons of nominated public bodies to ensure we know at least the background of the individuals concerned and the strategic vision they have in the roles they are asked to perform? That would be an excellent role for the committees of this House.

The Taoiseach: I am not unreasonable in such matters. Deputy Boyle is correct in saying that sometimes individuals end up as members of a number of committees. It is hard to ensure that does not happen. I am against making being overly bureaucratic, I would rather matters are settled in a more meaningful way. I am in favour of a number of people becoming involved. I have tried to do so in regard to financial services boards where I have asked that they not put forward people from the same companies but should try to involve new people. I am not against exploring how we can broaden this area.

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach his views on whether his Department's share of the more than €10 million spent by Departments in 2002 on public relations, marketing and advertising represents best value for money; and the plans which exist to reduce spending in this area. [14671/03]
The Taoiseach: The amount spent by my Department in 2002 on advertising was €284,367.24. This includes €41,690 spent on public notice advertising in the media and in Iris Oifigiúl. This advertising was placed in the media by an advertising agency who were chosen following an open tender competition. As the Deputy will be aware, one of the main criteria in awarding Government contracts in an open tender process is cost and value for money. The remainder of the expenditure on advertising was, €242,677.24 which was in respect of the National Forum on Europe, which comes under the auspices of my Department. The bulk of this was for advertising in the national and provincial media and related to meetings of the forum around the country. This advertising was purely informational and served to inform the public of the forum meetings in their area, the aim of which is to promote and foster a greater understanding of the EU. My Department did not incur any costs in 2002 on outside public relations and marketing consultants.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the population according to the most recent census of population of each island, contrasting these figures with the levels found at the previous census. [14430/03]
Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Ms Hanafin): There were 9,280 persons enumerated on offshore islands according to the 1996 Census of Population. The population of each island is set out, together with the corresponding population for 1991, in a table which I propose to circulate in the Official Report. The corresponding information from the 2002 census will be available on 3 July.

Table A Population of inhabited islands off the coast, 1991 and 1996

County
Island
Persons 1991
Persons 1996

Clare
Inishmore (or Deer)
1
1

Cork
Ballycottin
4
27

Bear
216
212

Clear
132
145

Dursey
20
9

Garinish
1
1

Haulbowline
307
110

Inchydoney
109
102

Inishbeg
17
19

Inishodriscol (or Hare)
22
16

Long
11
9

Ringarogy
71
76

Sherkin
93
98

Spike
113
103

Whiddy
34
34

Donegal
Aran
596
602

Aughnish
6
3

Cruit
77
70

Inishbofin
3
24

Inishfree Upper
19
15

Island Roy
13
15

Tory
119
169

Dublin Co. Borough
North Bull
26
22

Fingal
Lambay
8
8

Galway
Annaghvaan
103
104

Furnace
56
59

Gorumna
1082
1057

Illaunmore
2
1

Inchaghaun
1
3

Inishbarra
1
1

Inishbofin
181
200

Inisheer
270
274

Inisheltia
3
0

Inishmaan
216
191

Inishmore
836
838

Inishnee
47
33

Inishtravin
4
3

Lettermore
508
503

Lettermullan
196
204

Mweenish
149
150

Omey
12
4

Rossroe
28
23

Rusheennacholla
4
3

Kerry
Beginish
5
2

Carrig
8
13

Dinish
5
0

Great Blasket
4
0

Skellig Rock Great
0
4

Rossmore
7
8

Tarbert
17
13

Valencia
680
676

Mayo
Achill
2802
2718

Clare
137
136

Clynish
5
5

Collan More
5
0

Inishbiggle
51
48

Inishcottle
10
7

Inishgort
2
2

Inishlyre
6
7

Inishnakillew
7
6

Inishturk
78
83

Sligo
Inishmulclohy (or Coney Island)
5
6

Wexford
Bannow
7
5

Saltee Island Great
6
0

Tuskar Rock
5
0

Total

9569
9280

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle: Has the Government any intention of addressing the anomaly whereby citizens who are aged 18 years can vote for Members of this House but cannot be Members themselves? That is surely an anomaly which should be tackled. I seek clarification of the reply the Taoiseach gave earlier regarding immunity from prosecution for Members travelling to and from this House. He appeared to indicate it would not hold up in a court of law. My understanding is the Constitution would take precedence and the provision has been used as a precedent for a Member of the Oireachtas in the past. The signal should be sent out that this is a constitutional provision whose time is past. Will the Taoiseach make a strong statement along those lines?

The Taoiseach: I will not rise to that, a Cheann Comhairle. On Deputy McManus's point, yes, the basis of what the Whips agreed is set down in the report. The procedures have to be worked out as to how we operate it, but it was cross-community. There is no doubt about that.

On the 18 to 21 age question raised by Deputy Boyle, that was agreed on one of the earlier reports. It was agreed that it will be changed in a future referendum. It was agreed under the 'National Parliament' to reduce the age of eligibility from 21 to 18. It has therefore already gone forward as a recommendation which the Government has agreed to. It is a matter of just getting a suitable opportunity to put it forward.

I agree that the provision preventing a Member being stopped or arrested going to or from the Houses of the Oireachtas is superfluous. I do not know when someone tried to use it last. Personally I do not believe it would hold up now if anyone tried to use it. It had a very distinct purpose. It was about a very different time and it had a value in those days. To try to use that now---------

Mr. Rabbitte: Could one be stopped on a bike?

The Taoiseach: One could. I remember the last time I heard it argued in the House. It is not so many years ago when there was a large protest outside the House and Members found it difficult to get in. That was a slightly different provision from this one. It did come up recently and I know that is why Deputy Boyle has raised it. Even in its original form, it applied only when a House was in session. The fact that it comes up now does not do the Houses any good.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle: The general question I would like to put to the Taoiseach is a further development of what Deputy Rabbitte has said. In light of the reorganisation of the Office of the Attorney General, is the Government asking questions as to how, when and to what extent the office should be involved in issues such as that described by Deputy Rabbitte? I instance what the Taoiseach has told the House in the past about a series of 16 meetings that took place which the Office of the Attorney General-----

An Ceann Comhairle: I have to rule the Deputy out of order because he is talking about a specific instance. The questions before the House are general questions about organisational changes.

Mr. Boyle: The general questions I am asking relate to the how, the when and the what.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy's question should be specifically related to the three questions before the House.

Mr. Boyle: In light of the experience that has been mentioned, I would like to know about the how, the when and the what of the changes in the Office of the Attorney General. I ask a specific question in that regard. The Taoiseach has said in the past that the Attorney General was physically present at the meetings. I think he meant that the Office of the Attorney General was represented at the meetings.

The Taoiseach: Yes.

Mr. Boyle: The Attorney General did not physically attend any of these meetings.

The Taoiseach: No, but certain personnel from his office were present.

Mr. Boyle: It is important that this detail is placed on the record. In light of that experience, I would like to know the extent to which the Attorney General should be physically present when issues of importance, with major expenditure implications, are involved. This is crucial to the central question about the reorganisation of the Office of the Attorney General. I am asking about the how, the when and the what.

The Taoiseach: It is a matter of office organisation. The Attorney General is present for most meetings of the Cabinet or Cabinet sub-committees. He attends most meetings of Cabinet sub-committees with his staff. The Attorney General is not present when most of the details are being discussed with Departments. In such circumstances, the meeting would be attended by the Secretary General or whoever the relevant person is under the divisions of EU law or criminal law.

I can correct what I may have said by confirming that personnel from the Office of the Attorney General were present at the 12 meetings. That is how the system operates. I am not quibbling about this, but it is not the case that the Attorney General has to be present when Ministers are dealing with or having a discussion on any issue. Of course they should answer the letters and their Departments should not ignore the Attorney General's letters. There should be communication. In any event, each Minister meets the Attorney General at least once a week. The Attorney General probably meets those Ministers who are involved in Cabinet sub-committees two or three times each week. There should not be delays or difficulties in either response or correspondence.

Mr. Boyle: The Government attempted to amend the OECD report's references on regulatory reform in which its performance was referred to as sluggish with regard to public houses, pharmacies and the legal profession. Does the Taoiseach consider this criticism fair and has the Government initiated any action since to address it?

The Taoiseach: Yes, we have taken on board the criticisms in the professional reports and other reports, of which there are several, including one on the licensed trade. We are implementing the report on the pharmacies. There are others on professional services, the electricity sector, communications and many more. We have developed the best model from looking at what is happening in Europe, examining research by the European Commission and the OECD and implementing it. We have tried to deal with the criticism in a direct manner. We accepted it at the time and have tried to implement a best practice model. This is what some of the working groups to which I referred are actively doing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the amount of imported soya in the most recent year for which statistics are available from the USA and Brazil. [24556/03]
Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach (Ms Hanafin): The information requested by the Deputy is presented in the following table. July 2003 is the latest month for which data are available.

Imports of Soya Products from USA and Brazil

2001

2002

Jan - Jul 2003

€(000)
Tonnes
€(000)
Tonnes
€(000)
Tonnes

Brazil

Soya Bean Flour and Meal
96
373
-
-
-
-

Soya Bean Oilcake
16,449
66,579
20,671
70,347
17,309
74,615

Soya Beans
1,330
5,945
1,156
5,207
1,058
4,667

Total
17,875
72,897
21,827
75,554
18,367
79,282

USA

Soya Bean Flour and Meal
441
1,708
829
3,379
87
284

Soya Bean Oilcake
32,801
136,779
19,599
85,910
3,383
16,606

Soya Beans
2,973
12,414
5,500
25,734
1,756
9,649

Total
36,215
150,901
25,928
115,023
5,226
26,539

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach his views on whether the representation of the community and voluntary sector within the social partnership process is adequate and appropriate. [28579/03]

The Taoiseach: I propose to take Questions 1 to 6 together.

As Deputies will recall, I reported to the House on 1 October, 2003, that I attended the inaugural plenary meeting on Sustaining Progress on 18 July, 2003, together with the Tánaiste and the Minister for Finance. In addition to my attendance at the July plenary meeting on an annual basis, of course, I also meet with representatives of individual partner organisations on a regular basis.

As Deputies will also be aware, the second Sustaining Progress plenary meeting took place on 24 October, 2003, in Dublin Castle. I did not attend this meeting but was represented by officials from my Department.

Presentations were made by the Department of Finance on the Medium Term Economic Outlook and by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, in conjunction with the Department of Education and Science, on Lifelong Learning. A presentation was also made by the ESRI on the mid-term evaluation of the NDP.

A detailed progress report on the implementation of Sustaining Progress was presented to the social partners at that meeting. A copy of the report and relevant powerpoint presentations has been laid in the Oireachtas Library.

As Deputies are aware, the membership of the Community and Voluntary Pillar of Social Partnership was expanded following on from ratification of Sustaining Progress. The Pillar now has fifteen member organistations, which have endorsed Sustaining Progress, six on an indivdual basis and nine organistions in the strands of Older People, Disability, Housing, Children, Rural, Local/Voluntary and Care. The membership of the Pillar changed both as a result of the review of participation in social partnership, which included an examination of ways in which to maximise the potential contribution of the Community and Voluntary Pillar and the decision of two organisations not to accept Sustaining Progress.

In regard to those community and voluntary organisations which have not ratified Sustaining Progress, Departments have been advised that there may be areas where the expertise of these organisations or their constituent members will be relevant to the policymaking and implementation process. These organisations may be invited to participate on particular committees or working groups in the light of their particular expertise. This will, of course, be determined by the nature of the task or issue in question and is primarily a matter for each Department.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the anticipated increases in telephone costs to his Department after the recent telephone rental price rises. [5613/04]

The Taoiseach: The increase in line rental costs by Eircom to the Department after the recent increase in telephone line rentals is €238.37 per month or €2,860 for a full year.

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the number of full time civil servants in his Department who first entered the service as political advisers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [5912/04]

The Taoiseach: There are no full time civil servants in my Department who first entered the service as political advisers.

Mr. Boyle: On the question posed by Deputy Sargent in regard to the nationality and citizenship of fathers, in the statistics the Minister of State quoted from the Dublin maternity hospitals. Is it true that the CSO has no statistics in this regard and the information she has supplied to the House contains no information about the citizenship of the fathers of children born in these maternity hospitals? The question asked was not about the nationality or citizenship of the mother but about her place of birth. My birth certificate states that I was born in Chicago, Illinois, United States of America. My father was born in Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, and my mother was born in Cork, Ireland. This information, given in the current context in Ireland some 40 years later, would give spurious statistics such as those just quoted to the House by the Minister of State.

Ms Hanafin: The information is as I have given it.

Mr. Boyle: It is how the Minister of State wants it be.

Ms Hanafin: The information I have given comes from the hospitals and is based on the system they have devised.

Mr. Boyle: It is not national information.

An Ceann Comhairle: The Deputy should allow the Minister of State speak without interruption.

Ms Hanafin: This is the information the hospitals have given. The Central Statistics Office can gather more information on the new automatic civil registration system but it is only used on a very limited scale at present.

Mr. Boyle: Does the Minister of State accept that fathers are not taken into account and that the place of birth rather than nationality is recorded?

Ms Hanafin: People should be encouraged to ensure that the details of fathers are put on birth certificates and so on.

Mr. Boyle: We are not talking about the standard procedures that relate to parliamentary questions, where Members abide by Standing Orders of three and five days. In some cases, we receive a response and not an answer. We are talking about a fast track.

An Ceann Comhairle: Will the Deputy put his question?

Mr. Boyle: The question is about the fast tracking facility for certain Independent Members of the House. Should this procedure be properly accounted for? Quite rightly, the expenses of Members for travel, accommodation and constituency offices are accounted for every year. Should not the time spent by civil servants specifically accommodating the Independent Members be accounted for also? There are at least half a dozen civil servants in the offices of the Ministers and the Ministers of State of each Department working solely on constituency work and this is not accounted for in terms of public accountability. Does the Taoiseach agree that this should be accounted for?

The Taoiseach Questions are tabled time and time again on the cost of the facilities in Ministers’ offices and that information is in the public domain.

A different arrangement applied during the previous Dáil because Independent Deputies were asked to support the Government in office on a weekly basis. This type of arrangement dates back to the 1950s and applied also in the 1970s, where the Government of the day would explain, brief and assist Independent Members in various ways. This is all quite proper. It is not as necessary or as formal in this Dáil as in the last Dáil, where the Government required the support of four Independent Deputies to enable legislation to be passed. It was a proper parliamentary procedure to brief them and keep them informed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle: Does the Taoiseach have any plans to extend to those appointed to public bodies the remit of regulations on the acceptance and declaration of gifts as they currently apply to elected representatives in light of the report that the outgoing representatives of Aer Rianta have received gifts to the value of €9,000?

An Ceann Comhairle: That does not arise. The Deputy should table a question to the appropriate Minister.

Mr. Boyle: The central question arises. Does the Government have plans to change the regulations and extend the remit?

An Ceann Comhairle: Is legislation in that area promised?

Mr. Rabbitte: Someone has to keep a watching brief.

The Taoiseach: I have sympathy with the Deputy’s point. If I receive, as I do in my position, a gift to the value of more than €600 I must give it up. All of us in this House work hard and none of us could receive such a gift. Quite frankly I do not believe it is appropriate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle: Regarding the possibility of a referendum on the Presidency, I know the Taoiseach has answered the question relating to how a President is nominated. Is the Government considering shortening the length of the presidential term? The seven-year term in Ireland is longer than in most countries. France had a term of similar length but is now attempting to shorten it to five years. Is the Government considering changing the Constitution in that regard, and holding a referendum on such a change?

The Taoiseach: To the best of my knowledge, that was considered when the report on the Presidency was issued by the All-Party Committee on the Constitution, but I do not think any change has been made in that area. I will check that. Changes were recommended in other areas. What action we take depends on the statements made in the report by the all-party committee.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle: Are statistics being gathered as regards tourists who access the island through the Belfast city airports and through Larne ferryport? Is the Central Statistics Office engaged in surveying visitors who are touring the whole island, having accessed the country at those particular points?

Mr. Kitt: As I said in an earlier response, that is a matter for North-South co-operation, which should pertain with regard to the restoration of the Northern Ireland Executive and the sort of North-South ministerial co-operation we had in the past.

Mr. Boyle: So we do not know, basically.

Mr. Kitt: No. Clearly, these figures are based on our own jurisdiction. In the context of tourism information being shared on a North-South basis, that will be part of the agenda moving forward.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To ask the Taoiseach if statistics are maintained on the value of the packaging industry here in terms of GDP, both as a percentage and in money terms; and if such information will be supplied.

-Dan Boyle

for WRITTEN answer on 1/2/2005

The exact information requested by the Deputy is not available. However, statistics are available from the annual Census of Industrial Production in respect of the sector 'Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products'. The relevant details for 2002 are set out in the following table:

Sector (NACE categories)
Number of local units
Gross Output
Net Output (i.e. gross output minus industrial inputs)

No.
€m
€m

All industries
5,535
99,966
60,373

of which:

21 - Manufacture of pulp, paper and paper products
120
753
402

of which:

2112 - Manufacture of paper and paperboard
13
42
20

2121 - Manufacture of corrugated paper and paperboard and of containers of paper and paperboard
54
339
163

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QUESTION NO: 1

To ask the Taoiseach the measures which will be put in place at the expiration of the current Sustaining Progress partnership agreement to ensure that community and voluntary sector representation in this process will be strengthened and increased.

- Dan Boyle

QUESTION NO: 2To ask the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joe Higgins.

QUESTION NO: 3

To ask the Taoiseach when the next quarterly meeting of the social partners under the Sustaining Progress agreement will be held; the details of the likely agenda; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Pat Rabbitte.

QUESTION NO: 4

To ask the Taoiseach his views on whether there should be another national agreement when the terms of Sustaining Progress expire; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Pat Rabbitte.

QUESTION NO: 5

To ask the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Enda Kenny.QUESTION NO: 6

To ask the Taoiseach when he will next meet the parties to the Sustaining Progress agreement; the priorities for the meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin.

QUESTION NO: 7

To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joe Higgins.

QUESTION NO: 8

To ask the Taoiseach when he will next meet with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Trevor Sargent.

QUESTION NO: 9

To ask the Taoiseach the details of the likely agenda for his next meeting with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Trevor Sargent.

I propose to take Questions 1 to 9 together.

Social Partnership has been of enormous benefit to Ireland both socially and economically. Since the Programme for National Recovery in 1987, the stability it provides has allowed for record levels of growth and enhanced social inclusion. In recent times of more moderate growth, the processes of Social Partnership have helped maintain competitiveness and a pro jobs environment while enhancing a co-ordinated and comprehensive approach to inclusiveness issues. I can assure the House that I am committed to the implementation of Sustaining Progress which is operative to the end of 2005 and to the development of further national agreements in future.

I attended a meeting of the Social Partners in Government Buildings on 13 December, 2004 to mark the publication of two important reports, the Second Progress Report on the Implementation of the Affordable Housing Initiative, by Mr. Des Geraghty, former President of SIPTU, and the Social Trends Report Women and Men in Ireland, 2004 by the Central Statistics Office. Copies of both Reports have been laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.

The next quarterly plenary meeting of the Social Partners is set to take place on 18 February. While the agenda remains to be finalised, a presentation by my own Department on the EU Commission’s Response to the Second Wim Kok Report and to National Inputs will be a key feature.

Formal meetings, such as these, complement the meetings which I hold with representatives of the social partners on a regular basis. I will continue to meet with the social partners regularly, and as required, over the remainder of the lifetime of Sustaining Progress.

As Deputies will be aware, the membership of the Community and Voluntary Pillar of Social Partnership was expanded following on from ratification of Sustaining Progress.

The Pillar now has fifteen member organisations, which have endorsed Sustaining Progress, six on an individual basis and nine organisations in the strands of Older People, Disability, Housing, Children, Rural, Local/Voluntary and Care. The membership of the Pillar changed both as a result of the review of participation in social partnership, which included an examination of ways in which to maximise the potential contribution of the Community and Voluntary Pillar, and the decision of two organisations not to accept Sustaining Progress.

In regard to those community and voluntary organisations which have not ratified Sustaining Progress, Departments were advised that they should continue to be consulted in areas where the expertise of these organisations or their constituent members would be relevant to the policymaking and implementation process. These organisations have on occasion been invited to participate on particular committees or working groups in the light of their particular expertise. This is, of course, determined by the nature of the task or issue in question and is primarily a matter for each Department.

Any further applications for membership of the Community and Voluntary Pillar will be considered in consultation with that Pillar and in the context of future negotiations on a successor agreement.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To ask the Taoiseach the annual fees paid to each chairperson and director in each statutory body under the remit of his Department.

- Dan Boyle

for WRITTEN answer on 12/04/2005

The annual stipend fee for the Chairperson of the National Statistics Board is

€7618.43. The other bodies under the aegis of my Department are non-statutory.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QUESTION NO: 2

To ask the Taoiseach his views on whether the critique of Sustaining Progress in a mid-term review report issued by the community platform network is justified.

- Dan Boyle.

QUESTION NO: 3

To ask the Taoiseach his views on whether the community and voluntary pillar within the social partnership process is properly reflective of the wider community and voluntary sector.

- Dan Boyle.

QUESTION NO: 4

To ask the Taoiseach when he will next meet the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Enda Kenny.

QUESTION NO: 5

To ask the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the social partners under Sustaining Progress is due; the likely agenda for the meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Pat Rabbitte.

QUESTION NO: 6

To ask the Taoiseach when the next meeting of the social partners is planned; the agenda for the meeting; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Trevor Sargent.

QUESTION NO: 7

To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on his recent contacts with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joe Higgins.

QUESTION NO: 8

To ask the Taoiseach when he next expects to meet with the social partners; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

- Joe Higgins.

I propose to take Questions 1 to 8 together.

As Deputies will be aware, the membership of the Community and Voluntary Pillar of Social Partnership was expanded following on from ratification of Sustaining Progress.

The membership of the Pillar changed both as a result of the review of participation in social partnership, which included an examination of ways in which to maximise the potential contribution of the Community and Voluntary Pillar, and the decision of two organisations not to accept Sustaining Progress.

There is no facility for groups joining Partnership during the course of an agreement. We are now of course in the final year of Sustaining Progress, and we will be beginning negotiations on a successor agreement later in the year.

In the context of those talks, we may review the composition of the Community and Voluntary Pillar and consider applications from groups not currently involved in social partnership.

The Community Platform was a social partner under the PPF but chose not to endorse Sustaining Progress and are therefore not currently part of the partnership process. I have not received a copy of their mid-term review of Sustaining Progress. However, as Deputies will recall, there was a formal mid-term review of Sustaining Progress in Summer of last year. This mid-term review incorporated the views of all of the Pillars of partnership, including the Community and Voluntary Pillar. It included among other elements a detailed Report on the 10 Special Initiatives of the agreement, which was presented to the Plenary meeting last July. That review recorded considerable progress that had been made in each of the Special Initiatives. Detailed and comprehensive Reports were laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas.

The most recent quarterly plenary meeting of the Social Partners took place on 5 May. I was represented at that meeting by officials of my Department.

The agenda for the meeting included the Rural Transport Initiative and a presentation by the CSO on their report Measuring Ireland's Progress 2004 which shows the progress made in Ireland in important economic, social and environmental areas. As well as showing developments over time, the report benchmarks the situation in Ireland against other EU Member States. The eighth progress report on the implementation of Sustaining Progress was also presented to the meeting. A copy of the reports and relevant powerpoint presentations have been laid in the Oireachtas Library. The date of the next quaterly plenary meeting of the Social Partners is 14 July, 2005.

I will attend that meeting along with the Tánaiste and the Minister for Finance. While the Agenda is not set, I envisage that the meeting will address progress to date under Sustaining Progress and key issues and priorities for the future.

Formal meetings such as these, complement the meetings which I hold with representatives of the social partners on a regular basis. I will continue to meet with the social partners regularly, and as required, over the remainder of the lifetime of Sustaining Progress.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question No: 76

To ask the Taoiseach the extent to which his Department sources fair trade products for use in same.

Reply:

Fair Trade Tea and Coffee is served during meetings held in my Department. My Department will continue to seek opportunities to use Fair Trade products.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Question No: 75

To ask the Taoiseach the current nominations of vacancies to boards of statutory agencies under the remit of his Department.

Reply: There are no current nominations of vacancies to boards of statutory agencies under the remit of my Department.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mr. Boyle: Last week on the Order of Business I asked the Taoiseach about secondary legislation in regard to the ability of fee simples to be purchased to acquire State property at reduced prices. There were two attempts at emergency legislation in this regard in the last session. The Taoiseach undertook to return with information as to whether the Government plans either secondary legislation or further emergency legislation to ensure this loophole is closed. However, I have received no further information.

The Tánaiste: I must return to the Deputy on this as I am not familiar with the matter.

Mr. Boyle: That is the answer I got last week.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2nd November 2005

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the costs involved to the office of the Attorney General in having to defend actions against the Government in relation to the non-compliance or non-application of European Union directives (details supplied).

The Taoiseach: The information set out as follows shows the fees paid to counsel in regard to each case. No other fees were paid out by the office of the Chief State Solicitor which carries out this function under the aegis of the office of the Attorney General.

Case Amount
€
C-67/99 19,538.96
C-117/00 5,400.00
C-316/00 No fees paid
C- 67/02 No fees paid
C-494/01 30,120.90
C-257/03 1,261.17
C-120/01 No fees paid
Case Amount
C-282/02 5,808.00
C-392/96 No fees paid
C-410/02 5,000.00
C-330/02 No fees paid
C-418/04 10,648.00
C-406/03 1,573.00
C-256/03 No fees paid
C-396/01 4,294.29
C-413/03 5,000.00
C-461/99 No fees paid
C-354/99 No fees paid

Where it states “no fees paid” this means that either no external counsel was used or no demand for fees has been received as of yet.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

22nd November 2005

EU Directives.

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach, further to Question No. 177 of 2 November 2005, the position regarding the costs of payments to European Union and European Court of Justice counsel; and the administrative costs to his Department in contesting the court actions.

The Taoiseach: The fees referred to in the reply to Question No. 177 of 2 November 2005 are the only costs paid to counsel to date by the Office of the Chief State Solicitor. As regards administrative costs, the relevant cases were assigned to legal staff in the Chief State Solicitor’s office as part of their overall caseload and, accordingly, it is not possible to determine the precise costs in individual cases. As the Department of the Taoiseach was not involved in any of the cases, the question of administrative costs for my Department does not arise.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

29th November 2005

Tourism Revenue.

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach the estimated expenditure, classified by route of travel, by tourism visitors here since 2000, excluding the lower international fares; if the figures will be adjusted to take account of general inflation; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Mr. Kitt: The Central Statistics Office publishes annual figures on the estimated total earnings from all visits to Ireland. These figures include a breakdown into the following categories for overseas travel routes: air cross-channel, sea cross-channel, continental and transatlantic. I propose to circulate in the Official Report a table showing the relevant figures for the years 2000-04. Expenditure by Overseas Visitors to Ireland classified by Route 2000 - 2004 (€m)

Route 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Air Cross-Channel 1,145 1,244 1,282 1,334 1,388
Sea Cross-Channel 485 513 566 515 487
Continental 603 690 747 794 841
Transatlantic 385 445 451 555 488
All Overseas Routes 2,617 2,893 3,045 3,198 3,204

The figures in the table exclude all fares received by Irish carriers. The table shows a total of €3.2 billion spent by overseas visitors in 2004, an increase of 22.4% on the figure of €2.6 billion in 2000. Over the same period the consumer price index increased by 16%. The all-items consumer price index is the official measure of inflation for Ireland. Based on changes in the CPI, the annual average increase was 16% between 2000 and 2004.

A separate analysis of travel to Ireland by “lower” or “higher” international fares and the resulting visitor expenditure is not possible. The figures given for each route exclude fares. A separate estimate of fares received by Irish carriers is given in Table 1 of the CSO annual release on tourism and travel. It is expected that tourism and travel estimates for the year 2005 will be published in spring 2006.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

30th November 2005

Mr. Boyle asked the Taoiseach: Given that the Book of Estimates submitted in recent weeks indicates less money in each category on consultancy expenditure for every Department, does the Government expect to make less use of consultancies in the coming year? Is this recognition that there has been an overuse of consultancies in the past? Given that parliamentary questions have been answered to the effect that since 1998, across all Departments, there have been more than——

An Ceann Comhairle: This question refers specifically to the Department of the Taoiseach.

Mr. Boyle: I am getting to the Department of the Taoiseach.

An Ceann Comhairle: I should prefer if the Deputy would come directly to it.

Mr. Boyle: There have been 3,000 consultancies in general by the Government. The Taoiseach has indicated earlier that we will be supplied with tables to indicate how that applies specifically to his Department. We have not been given the answers as regards overall cost. Without the House having the tables directly before us, will the Taoiseach at least tell us beforehand the numbers of consultancies that have applied to his Department and the overall cost?

The Taoiseach: The number is 70 consultancies across my Department, effectively for a nine-year period. That is about an average of eight per annum. A good number of those relate to the change management agenda under CMOD, as indicated in my answer to Deputy Kenny. Some of those are paid for by them as well as the performance and development issues. Some of them relate to the period for the year before and during the EU Presidency. In departmental terms there is not a great deal. In the social policy area, surrounding social partnership issues in the main, there are eight. On independent evaluations - the point I was making to Deputy Ó Caoláin - there are two. The Civil Service modernisation programme, which is the big one, accounts for 28. There is only one for IT, namely, the one I spoke about in my answer to Deputy Kenny. In training career development there are three. In ICT there are three, seven for the Presidency, seven under the heading e-Cabinet and four that do not fall into any of these categories. Money spent over the period amounted to €2,818,388. Most of these projects would have involved enhancements, improvements and developments.

It is the task of every Department to determine whether they are overusing the system. I hope my Department does not. However, at least there is some focus to the effect that if it happens, it occurs sparingly and under the two categories I have mentioned: either to enhance an existing system or develop a new one; or where an outside appraisal is required. The more internal staff who can do the work the better. My Department is not large, with just over 220 people working in it. However, we try hard not to become involved in consultancies unless something meaningful is required. A fair degree of thought is put into that.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------