Adjournment Motion Speech on the need for additional funding for County and City Enterprise Boards
Thursday 24th June 2010
Senator James Carroll
“Go raibh maith agat a Chathaoirleach chun seans a labhairt faoi an gá le airgead breise a thabhairt go dtí na mBord contae agus cathair fiontar.
An t-Aire, I was elected to Louth County Council last June and I was elected within 2 weeks from the first Council meeting to the Louth County Enterprise Board. This was my priority after getting elected. Trying to get jobs moving is essential not only in my constituency of “Louth/East Meath” but throughout the entire country.
Louth County Enterprise Board is the primary agency in County Louth dedicated to the development of micro-enterprise. The Board has been in existence now for over 15 years and its experienced staff has provided advice, counselling, training, finance and resource development support to well over 4,000 local enterprises.
However, as of recent weeks, they have zero money to assist new and start-up businesses for the rest of 2010. I think for the sake of 60 million or even 30 million nationally among all the boards, we could see new businesses flourish and thrive.
Former head of IDA Ireland, Padraic White is the chairman of the Louth Economic Forum. This transformative group are drawing up a 9 point action plan for making County Louth the number one place to do business. We need to make Ireland Inc the number one place to do business. The Louth Economic Forum nine point strategy is:
1. FDI
2. Sustainable Energy
3. Indigenous Industry
4. Tourism and Heritage
5. Education and Training
6. Agricultural and Fisheries
7. Broadband
8. Making Louth the best County to do business
9. Drogheda-Dundalk-Newry Economic Corridor
We need to be assisting the County Enterprise Board structure to help local authorities like Louth to have the foundation to allow these goals to be achieved. I look forward to the Minister’s reply.”
In all of last week’s manoeuvrings and shenanigans, the passing of the Croke Park agreement went unnoticed and undiscussed. I encourage the Leader to have a debate on this and on the role and importance of the public sector and the function it performs, before the Seanad rises for the summer.
I welcome the opening of the new emergency department in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda. The media and newspaper campaign in recent months often prided itself on having public and private sector workers on opposite sides in television and radio studios and on the centre pages which led to a societal divide. I hope the passing of the Croke Park deal will allow us to move on to a new level of public sector reform and agreement leading to improvements and enhancements. It is especially important to have the new Minister of State with responsibility for public sector reform, Deputy Dara Calleary, one of the youngest Members of the Dáil, appear in the House before it rises for the summer. I welcome the passing of the Croke Park deal and pay tribute to the public sector workers who passed it and hope those who did not support it will see the light in the coming months and years following the transformation which will occur.
Below is the speech delivered by the Seanad speech by the Minister for Justice and Law Reform, Dermot Ahern on the new “Criminal Justice (Psychoactive Substances) Bill:2010″:
A Cathaoirligh,
I am very pleased to initiate the Criminal Justice (Psychoactive
Substances) Bill 2010 in the upper house. I would like at the outset to
express my appreciation to this House for agreeing to deal with this Bill
at short notice.
This is a robust, innovative and urgent Bill. In it I am providing that it
will be an offence to sell, import or export unregulated psychoactive
substances for human consumption. In addition, and very importantly, I am
providing powers for the Gardaí and the courts to issue prohibition and
closure orders in respect of persons or premises where the sale of such
products continues despite notice to cease.
Over the last year, we have seen the emergence of a new problem in our
society with the proliferation of retail outlets known as head shops. These
shops have appeared on the main streets and in the suburbs of our cities
and even in villages and towns throughout the country. These outlets are
engaged in the sale of a range of unregulated psychoactive substances.
This trade operates behind a veil of technical legality with products
marketed as “legal highs”. This approach gives the impression that they are
safe to use, thus enticing people, including teenagers and young adults,
who would not ordinarily take illegal drugs, to purchase them. Of course,
they also attract the drug-using population who consume these products as
alternatives, or in addition, to controlled drugs such as cannabis, cocaine
and heroin.
The products are sold with no information on content, no directions for use
and no standards of quality control of quality or safety are applied. On
the contrary, there is a deliberate attempt at circumventing the legal
framework for control of medicinal products by labelling them as “bath
salts” or “plant food”.
There are serious medical concerns that these unregulated products may be
as harmful as illegal drugs such as cocaine and ecstasy. Only this week, a
coroner in Kildare warned of the dangers of head shop products following
the tragic death of a 19 year old woman who had taken two head shop
products, mephedrone and butylone, together with prescribed drugs, alcohol
and heroin. I should mention that the two products in question have since
been controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Acts by the Minister for Health
and Children.
I have a further serious concern. It is that head shops are also acting as
an unprecedented gateway to illicit drug abuse and criminality especially
for our young people.
The House will not be surprised therefore to hear that I put little store
by the argument that it is somehow wrong to criminalise the sale of these
products because by doing so we increase the market potential for drug
traffickers. These products can be equal to controlled drugs in the threat
they present to public health and safety. I believe that those who trade
in them should not be allowed to escape the application of the law. Nor
should they be allowed to avail of any veneer of respectability. It is a
dangerous trade which operates without regard to the consequences for its
customers or for society in terms of health and safety, addiction and
criminality.
This Bill is part of the Government’s multi-pronged approach targeting the
activities of head shops.
The primary vehicles for regulating psychoactive substances are the Misuse
of Drugs Acts 1977 to 2007. On foot of the Government Order of 11 May, the
Minister for Health and Children made the necessary statutory instruments
to make the possession and sale of certain substances subject to criminal
sanctions under the Misuse of Drugs Acts. The regulations covered the
mainstream of substances then commonly being sold in head shops including
synthetic cannabinoids (SPICE products), benzylpiperazine (BZP)
derivatives, mephedrone, methylone and related cathinones, GBL and 1,4 BD.
I am advised that following the making of these orders, of the 102 head
shops then open, many closed but about 36 re-opened shortly afterwards
reportedly selling different substances. In the last couple of weeks the
tally of shops re-opening has risen and I understand that the records of
the Garda National Drugs Unit indicate that 48 head shops were trading
nationwide on 10 June.
Such a trend does not surprise me but I do not intend to allow it to
continue. Experience has shown that new psychoactive substances can quickly
emerge. There is now a big international market for these products and
skilled chemists in places as far away as China are ready and eager to use
their expertise to create new products in response to the lure of large
profit associated with this market. We have seen how quickly products such
as “Whack” and “Amplified” have come onto the Irish market following the
banning of mephedrone and other such substances by the Minister for Health
and Children. The National Poisons Information Centre has received reports
of patients presenting to hospital emergency departments with symptoms of
extreme agitation and anxiety having consumed this product. The Minister
for Health and Children is, of course, monitoring the sale of such products
with a view to listing them as controlled drugs if that proves necessary.
However, it is clear that there will always be a time lag before such new
substances can be made subject to control under the Misuse of Drugs Acts.
The speedy emergence of such substances is indicative of the need for a
more general criminal law “catch-all” approach to the sale of dangerous
psychoactive substances. It is my strong belief that such an approach, as
contained in this Bill, is necessary to criminalise the sale of
psychoactive substances as they emerge. In this way I am acting quickly to
prevent the sale of unsafe products, especially to young people. I am
stepping in now to stymie any re-growth potential in the head shop
industry.
The focus of the Bill is on seeking to ensure that the sale or supply of
substances, which may not be specifically proscribed under the Misuse of
Drugs Act, but which have psychoactive effects, for human consumption will
be a criminal offence. The offence can be prosecuted as an arrestable
offence, attracting a penalty of up to 5 years imprisonment. This puts the
offence into the serious category and as such it will automatically be
subject to various powers such as the power of arrest. I might say that it
is also my intention to ensure that such offences under this Act are
treated as serious offences for which bail can be refused. Accordingly, I
will bring forward an amendment to this Bill to add these offences to the
Schedule to the Bail Act 1997.
Some criticism has been voiced that this Bill will not work because it does
not incorporate a structure to bring together expertise to identify
psychoactive substances. This criticism misses two important points.
Firstly, under existing arrangements, when considering whether substances
should be controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act, the Minister for Health
and Children already has access to expertise on drug misuse and harm.
Controlling substances under the Misuse of Drugs Act is an ongoing process
which involves national and international cooperation and engagement.
Substances are scheduled under the Act in accordance with Ireland’s
obligations under international conventions and EU Council decisions or
where there is evidence that the substances are causing significant harm to
public health in Ireland. At a national level, the DepartmeD
offence, attracting a penalty of up to 5 years imprisonment. This puts the
offence into the serious category and as such it will automatically be
subject to various powers such as the power of arrest. I might say that it
is also my intention to ensure that such offences under this Act are
treated as serious offences for which bail can be refused. Accordingly, I
will bring forward an amendment to this Bill to add these offences to the
Schedule to the Bail Act 1997.
Some criticism has been voiced that this Bill will not work because it does
not incorporate a structure to bring together expertise to identify
psychoactive substances. This criticism misses two important points.
Firstly, under existing arrangements, when considering whether substances
should be controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act, the Minister for Health
and Children already has access to expertise on drug misuse and harm.
Controlling substances under the Misuse of Drugs Act is an ongoing process
which involves national and international cooperation and engagement.
Substances are scheduled under the Act in accordance with Ireland’s
obligations under international conventions and EU Council decisions or
where there is evidence that the substances are causing significant harm to
public health in Ireland. At a national level, the Department of Health and
Children works closely with my Department, the Office of the Minister for
Drugs, the National Advisory Committee on Drugs, the Gardai, the Customs
Service, the Forensic Science Laboratory, the Irish Medicines Board, the
Health Research Board and others to monitor emerging trends in the
development of new psychoactive substances. At an international level, the
Department engages with the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug
Addiction and the United Nations Office of Drug Control regarding
international trends in the emergence of new substances and drug control.
I will not, particularly in the current state of the public finances,
contemplate the duplication of the extensive controls operated under the
Misuse of Drugs Acts. This Bill is, in fact a recognition that while the
specific identification and control of substances is invaluable as a
long-term approach, no matter what expertise is available, it will not deal
sufficiently on its own with the creative capacity of the head shop
industry to seek to circumvent the law on controlled drugs by constantly
developing new products. It is for this reason that I am proposing in this
Bill a catch-all approach to ensure that the criminal law can deal with
those who seek to undermine the controls operated by the Minister for
Health and Children on the sale of dangerous psychoactive substances.
In my Bill, I am also providing an immediate legal weapon to the Gardaí and
to the courts. I am providing that the Gardaí can apply to the courts for a
prohibition order prohibiting any person from selling a psychoactive
substance for human consumption, where the person refuses to obey a Garda
prohibition notice to cease such trade. The procedure in question, unlike a
criminal prosecution, is a civil procedure. It is similar to procedures in
other legislation, such as the Food Safety Authority of Ireland Act 1998,
which provide for immediate action in circumstances where public health or
safety may be at risk. Accordingly, the onus of proof is on the balance of
probabilities which is less onerous than that applying to the prosecution
of criminal offences. Breach of the order will be a criminal offence. In
addition, I am providing that the court can order the closure of a premises
where an order has been breached, in addition to any other penalty that the
court may impose.
Under the terms of this Bill, those who sell unregulated potentially
dangerous substances for their psychoactive effect will also risk criminal
investigation and prosecution. The prosecution may take time to gather the
necessary criminal evidence. But head shop traders should be under no
illusion. Those who thought they were safe to peddle newly-marketed
substances may also find themselves in due course defending their position
before the criminal courts.
I should point out that the legislation is designed so that it can have no
impact on legitimate trade. It will not apply to products which can be
legally sold for human consumption, such as medicines and food.
The Bill is intended to operate in conjunction with a number of other
avenues which are being pursued, including regulations under the Misuse of
Drugs Acts. A number of such measures are already in train. The activities
of head shops are being closely monitored on an ongoing basis by An Garda
Síochána and Revenue’s Customs Service, with a view to ensuring that no
substances that are currently illegal are being sold. The HSE, in
association with partner agencies under the Drugs Strategy, is finalising a
national drugs awareness campaign that will focus on the dangers of
psychoactive substances available through head shops. The National Advisory
Committee on Drugs has been asked to carry out some targeted research in
this area. In addition, as part of the multi-pronged approach, relevant
Government agencies are reviewing existing legislative provisions to
establish if head shops are liable for prosecution under a range of
legislation.
The General Scheme of the Bill was notified to the European Commission
under the Technical Standards Directives. The notification invoked the
emergency procedure, which means that the usual three-month “standstill”
period would not apply. I am pleased to say that the Commission has
accepted the need for urgent legislation on this matter.
Main Provisions of the Bill
I will now turn to the main provisions of the Bill.
Section 1 defines terms used in the Bill.
Section 2 excludes from the scope of the Bill products which are subject to
licence, authorisation or other control. These include medicinal products,
animal remedies, intoxicating liquor, tobacco and food. Controlled drugs,
which are subject to the Misuse of Drugs Acts, are also excluded to avoid
duplication. The section also provides that the Minister can by order
exclude other products. This provision has been included in the unlikely
event that a legitimate substance inadvertently comes within the scope of
the legislation.
Section 3 provides for the offences of selling, importing and exporting
psychoactive substances for human consumption. Subsection (1) provides for
the offence of selling a psychoactive substance knowing or being reckless
as to whether it is being acquired or supplied for human consumption. The
definition of selling is broad and by means of section 1 includes
supplying, distributing, offering for sale and being in possession for
sale. It includes sale over the internet or home delivery services within
this jurisdiction.
Subsection (2) provides that it will be an offence to import or export a
psychoactive substance for human consumption.
Subsections (3) provides for a rebuttable presumption that the accused knew
or was reckless as to whether the substance was being supplied or acquired
for human consumption where, notwithstanding any indication given on
packaging, etc. that a substance is not for human consumption, the court is
satisfied, having regard to indications that the substance may have
psychoactive effects, the presence of drugs paraphernalia at the place to
which the application relates and whether there is a reasonable alternative
lawful purpose for the substance, taking into account its cost and
quantity, that it is reasonable to assume that the accused had such
knowledge or was so reckless.
Subsection (4) provides that the court may be satisfied of the matters
referred to in subsection (3) notwithstanding any oral or written statement
or indication given on packaging, etc. that the substance in question is
not psychoactive or is not intended or fit for human consumption.
Subsection (5) provides that it is a defence for a person accused of an
offence under this section to prove that he or she is a person referred to
in section 6(2), which ensures that the lawful professional activities of
doctors, pharmacists, etc. will be outside the scope of the offence
provisions.
Section 4 creates the offence of selling an object knowing that it will be
used to cultivate by hydroponic means any plant, fungus, etc. in
contravention of section 17 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977. Hydroponic
cultivation is the cultivation of plants in liquid containing nutrients,
without soil, and under controlled conditions of light, temperature and
humidity. This method of cultivation is known to be used for the purpose of
growing cannabis indoors. it is also known to be one of the products
commonly sold in head shops.
I am, however, aware that this type of equipment can be sold by garden
centres for legitimate purposes. For this reason, I am providing that it is
only an offence to sell such products when the person knows that the
product will be used for the cultivation of substances in contravention of
the Misuse of Drugs Act.
In the General Scheme of this Bill, I provided for an offence of selling
any pipe or other object made or adapted for use in connection with the
consumption of a controlled drug or psychoactive substance. However, in
view of the urgency of this Bill, I have decided not to proceed with this
provision as there are difficulties to be overcome in dealing with the fact
that such objects can have legitimate uses.
Section 5 provides for the offence of advertising a psychoactive substance
or object to which section 4 applies. Subsection (1) provides that it will
be an offence for a person to publish or display any advertisement knowing
or being reckless as to whether the advertisement indicates an intention to
sell, import or export a psychoactive substance for human consumption or to
sell any object for use in cultivating by hydroponic means any plant, etc.
in contravention of section 17 of the Act of 1977. It will also be an
offence to publish an advertisement promoting the consumption of a
substance for its psychoactive effect and providing information on how or
where a psychoactive substance may be obtained, or to publish an
advertisement providing information on how an object may be used to
cultivate by hydroponic means any plant, etc. in contravention of section
17 of the Act of 1977.
Subsection (2) provides that it is a defence for a person accused of an
offence under this section to prove that he or she is a person referred in
section 6(2), which ensures that the lawful professional activities of
doctors, pharmacists, etc. will be outside the scope of the offence
provisions.
Section 6 provides that certain categories of persons, such as doctors,
dentists, etc. who sell or advertise psychoactive substances will not
commit an offence if their actions are lawful for the purpose of their
profession.
Section 7 provides that a Garda Superintendent (or higher) may serve a
prohibition notice on a person where he or she believes that the person is
unlawfully selling psychoactive substances for human consumption,
unlawfully selling hydroponic equipment or advertising psychoactive
substances. A prohibition notice will specify the activities in respect of
which the Garda opinion is held and the reasons for it, will direct the
person to cease forthwith the activities specified in the notice and set
out the possible consequences of failure to comply with the direction
specified in the notice.
Section 8 provides that where a Garda Superintendent (or higher) is of
opinion that a person is not in compliance with a direction contained in a
prohibition notice, he or she may apply to the District Court, on notice to
the person concerned, for an order prohibiting the person from engaging in
specified activities. The court may make a prohibition order if having
considered the evidence before it and all the circumstances of the case, it
is satisfied that the person against whom the order is sought has engaged
in an activity specified in the prohibition notice and it is necessary to
prevent the person from continuing to engage in such activity. The
circumstances which the court may take into account include indications
that the substance may have psychoactive effects, the presence of drugs
paraphernalia at the place to which the application relates and whether
there is a reasonable alternative lawful purpose for the substance or
object, taking into account its cost and quantity.
The court may decide not to make a prohibition order where it considers
that making the order would be unjust in all the circumstances of the case.
This is a civil rather than criminal procedure so the proof required will
be on the balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt. A
person who fails to comply with a prohibition order will be guilty of an
offence. A person who is the subject of a prohibition order may appeal the
order to the Circuit Court. Section 9 makes provision for the variation of
prohibition orders by the District Court.
Section 10 provides that where a person is convicted of an offence under
section 3, 4, 5 or 8(6), the court may make a closure order where the
activities are being carried out at a specified place. A person who fails
to comply with a closure order will be guilty of an offence. Section 11
provides that the District Court may vary or discharge a closure order on
application by the occupier or owner of the place concerned or a Garda
Superintendent and sets out the procedure for such applications.
Sections 12, 13 and 16 provide for Garda powers to search suspects and
search and seize in relation to places, vehicles, etc. Section 14 extends
those powers to officers of Customs and Excise in cases of unlawful
importation or exportation of psychoactive substances. Section 15 provides
for an offence of obstructing a Garda or customs officer in the exercise of
his or her functions under the Bill.
Section 17 makes provision for the designation of laboratories for the
examination of substances for the purposes of the Bill. The Forensic
Science Laboratory is specifically designated as such a laboratory.
Section 18 contains provisions relating to evidence in proceedings under
the Bill.
Section 19 provides for the disposal of things seized for use in evidence
in criminal proceedings under the Bill.
Section 20 provides that a person guilty of an offence under the Bill is
liable on summary conviction to a fine of €5,000 or imprisonment for up to
12 months or both or on conviction on indictment to a fine or to
imprisonment not exceeding 5 years or both. It also includes standard
provisions regarding offences by bodies corporate and forfeiture of
substances, etc. on conviction for an offence under the Bill.
Section 21 is a technical jurisdiction clause.
Section 22 is a standard provision regarding expenses incurred in the
administration of the Bill.
Section 23 extends the powers of search and seizure of Customs officers at
ports and
The new Emergency Department at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda has opened and is taking in patients this morning.
The new unit is three times larger than the old Department which allows for more patients to be treated in better conditions than before.
The Department cost €11.5m to build and it means a huge improvement for staff and patients both in conditions and ease of treatment.
As well as more space, equipment and treatment bays, the new Emergency Unit also allows children to be cared for in a specially designed area of the Department, separate to where the adults are treated.
This opening is essential but I accept that there are concerns over staffing and resources especially as more and more patients will be treated here because A&E services in other hospitals in the area will be reduced.
We have started to see signs that the economy is starting to fight back. We have seen jobs announcements which will provide relief to people, yesterday’s VAT increase by the UK Government, the car scrappage scheme has seen a doubling in car sales and the new PRSI holiday has the potential to create many thousands of jobs. I am particularly heartened to see the Labour Party being probed to articulate what their vague proposals actually mean and how much they will cost and from what will Labour take money to pay for other projects. I have had enough of Labour sitting on the fence on issues where there are two sides but where we are all in agreement,Labour jump up and down demanding stuff. This policy won’t work forever,Mr Gilmore.
The new Minister for Enterprise,Trade and Innovation Batt O’Keeffe TD is really getting stuck into his new brief. Today,he wrote an Op-Ed in the Irish Examiner and I think it is worthwhile reading this and examining it to get some balance into the debate because the national media do not seem to want to let a balanced analysis take place. Please see below….
Op-ed by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation, Batt O’Keeffe TD
“This Government is getting Ireland working again.
We are taking the steps necessary to protect and create jobs for our people.
We know that the best way to get people back to work is to get our house in order – and we are doing that by fixing the banking system; restoring order to the public finances; regaining our competitiveness; and creating jobs.
The economic fight-back is on.
Because of the steps we have taken, led by the Taoiseach, our country is emerging from recession.
Earlier this week, Bloxham Stockbrokers’ Irish Quarterly Economic Outlook said it expected the economy to grow by 0.5pc this year on a Gross Domestic Product basis, compared to its previous projection in March of a contraction of 0.75pc.
The Central Bank and Economic Social and Research Institute has forecasted positive growth in the second half of this year.
The European Commission and Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has predicted 3pc growth next year.
Our competitiveness is improving.
Unit labour costs have fallen over 5pc; construction costs are down 14pc; commercial rental prices have dropped 18pc; electricity costs are down between 5pc and 10pc; and gas charges for medium-sized businesses are about 11pc below the European Union average.
At the same time, our manufacturing output increased by 7pc in the first quarter of this year, headline retail sales volumes are steadily rising, and new car sales are up 30pc.
Opposition parties and some interest groups are fond of criticising the Government for the absence of a ‘jobs plan’.
Labour talks in vague terms about more capital investment and a ‘jobs fund’ while Fine Gael’s NewERA plan touts spending on green energy projects and smart electricity meters.
What the parties are really doing is failing to acknowledge the suite of measures the Government has introduced to protect and generate jobs while at the same time rehashing our policies on job creation and passing them off as their own.
This week, the Taoiseach launched the Employer Job (PRSI) Incentive Scheme which could create up to 10,000 new jobs in one year by saving employers taking on a worker unemployed for six months or more €3,000.
The Irish Congress of Trade Unions criticised the Government this week for not investing in capital projects.
We are investing almost €40 billion over the next six years in labour-intensive infrastructure.
At 5pc of Gross National Product, our capital investment plan is twice the European average.
This year’s €579 million school building programme is creating more than 5,300 jobs in the construction industry.
The capital investment programme in roads and public transport is generating some 20,000 jobs this year.
The national retrofit and water investment programmes are creating 9,000 jobs between them.
The Metro North rail project in North Dublin will create about 6,000 jobs during construction.
Firms backed by the Government’s job creation agencies, IDA Ireland and Enterprise Ireland, support 500,000 jobs or 30pc of the entire workforce.
They contribute €33 billion in payroll, materials and services costs, which represents about 26pc of gross national product, and pay €3 billion or 78pc of all corporation tax.
In the past six months, we have announced over 1,200 high-quality jobs through IDA Ireland investment wins such as eBay, IBM, Hertz, Pay Pal and Zurich Insurance.
Enterprise Ireland, which helps indigenous firms to develop export markets, has created almost 1,000 jobs in the same period.
The agencies’ pipeline for new jobs this year and beyond is strong.
The Green Enterprise Action Group has p
There was good news today for Louth retailers as the UK Government has announced that VAT rates are to increase from next January according to local Fianna Fáil Senator James Carroll.
“The UK Government announced today in their Budget that VAT rates are to increase from 17.5% to 20% in January. This increase coupled with the decline in the value of the euro against sterling is good news for Louth retailers.”
“In recent times cross-border shopping has hit Louth retailers hard having a terrible impact not just on border towns like Dundalk but also further south in Drogheda.”
“This increase in UK VAT should increase consumer demand in Louth and encourage people to shop local. This in turn will help to safeguard local retail jobs and businesses.”
“It was estimated that cross border shopping cost the Irish economy up to €600 million in lost revenue.”
“I am hopeful that this VAT increase in the UK will have a positive impact for Louth retailers,” concluded Senator Carroll.
I thank the Minister for attending. This is my first time to be in the House when the Minister is present. At 26 I am the youngest Member of the Seanad and I am aware the Minister was a Member in her 20s also. I understand she was the youngest ever Member and if I have half the success in my political life that the Minister has had I will be delighted.
I have six key points that I would like the Minister to address. The first concerns the impact of the 1 July deadline on health services nationally. The second is on the status of the transformation programmes in light of the cuts in last December’s budget and being conscious of next December’s budget. Third is the reasons for her rejection of the universal health service model. I am aware that when the Progressive Democrats Party was formed that was an area its members examined but then turned away from. The fourth point concerns the Minister’s update on the co-location plans. The fifth point is on healthy eating lifestyles, which I believe must be advocated in a far more direct way, and whether the Minister has any plans in that regard. The sixth is about delivering political accountability. It is my belief that there is a need for the Minister for Health and Children to have more power to get and give answers to public representatives to deliver full accountability.
On the first point about the status of health services post-1 July, the Minster’s brief is possibly the most unpopular and unwanted but it is also one of the most influential and powerful. While there is constant good and bad news on occasion, I would like to raise the issue, which has also been raised by my colleague, Senator Dearey, of Louth County Hospital in Dundalk, which according to the HSE is due to close as an acute hospital from 1 July as a result of the shortage of junior doctors. I ask the Minister to expand on that when replying.
There has been talk of three particular areas being hit — anaesthetics, emergency medicine and general medicine. I ask the Minister to elaborate on that because as we all know, people’s greatest fears is about their health and the health service, whether it is to do with their children, parents or grandparents, and having a safe structure in place in the various regions throughout the country is of vital importance. I hope the Minister can allay some of those fears today.
My second point concerns the new emergency department opening in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda. That was an ongoing issue when I was elected to the county council last June. It was a matter of great importance. People who have been inside the new accident and emergency department have said it is magnificent, and it is an important step for us locally. My mother, who was a nurse in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital — she trained there in 1966 — is horrified when she hears the bad stories that come out about the hospital but it is a fine hospital. It has a fantastic reputation both nationally and internationally and while it has taken somewhat of a battering locally, the new €11.5 million emergency department will provide a great service. The new medical assessment unit, MAU, that will also open in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital will also help alleviate pressure. I hope that will deliver major change for the whole area.
The emergency department in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital was part of the transformation, which is my second point in terms of the way the transformation programmes will be affected by the cuts in recent budgets, and especially in light of the upcoming budget. Professor Drumm has said that a plan for a reduction in staff will not be met this year because of a slowdown in the number of retirements.
On my third point, I heard the Minister say in the past in the Dáil that when the Progressive Democrats were formed they were in favour of a universal health service but that she turned away from that view. Fine Gael’s model for a new health and health insurance system is based on the Dutch model. Has the Minister examined this model and those of other countries? Were there reasons she decided not to follow them?
In the last general election, different stances were taken on hospital co-location. Some argued it was correct as a private patient should not be taking up a public bed. Others claimed it was giving more effect to a two-tier system. Currently, there is the perception the co-location plans are on ice. Will the Minister elaborate on the policy’s future?
As the youngest Member of the House, I tend to be more aware of the calls for healthy lifestyles. When I was in University College Dublin not too many years ago, healthy eating was not one of my priorities, to which many of my friends can testify. I recall reading Alan Carr’s book on how to stop smoking and how he got into making his own juice smoothies every morning. Having to do something for my health, I decided to try this for a while. Five years later, I am still making a smoothie every morning and it has transformed my health. I no longer get the colds and flu that I used to when at school and college.
The HSE says obesity costs the taxpayer €1.8 billion each year. If a certain cancer or other ailment was costing as much, there would be a clamour to take direct action and introduce a screening programme. Instead of just putting up warning posters, we should be involved in direct preventive action against obesity such as getting schools to get their transition year students make smoothies for school consumption. This would be much better than having school children full of Coke and Pepsi running hyper around the place.
The creation of the HSE made sense, particularly with delivering best practice in one health board to all areas. However, not everything was done right in the transition. Up to 90% was done right but the other 10%, such as delivering more accountability to Members of the Oireachtas, was not.
Gabhaim buíochas leat, a Chathaoirligh, as ucht deis a thabhairt dom labhairt ar an rún muiníne sa Taoiseach agus sa Rialtas. Tá áthas an domhain orm seans a bheith agam ráiteas a dhéanamh ag an am seo.
To table a motion of no confidence in the Taoiseach is truly extraordinary. The Opposition has now done so in less than three years in the case of two Taoisigh which has been unheard of in our democracy. The world’s media watch when any such motion is moved. My humble advice to Opposition Members is to tread carefully because their time will come when they will be members of a Government. As Senator O’Toole highlighted half an hour ago, tabling such motions is unheralded and unnecessary.
I accept mistakes were made by the Government. Yesterday the Taoiseach acknowledged property incentives should have been removed long before he abolished them in December 2005. The international aspect to this crisis, to which Senator O’Reilly referred, is not acknowledged enough by the Opposition or the media. There is also the discrepancy in the Opposition’s stance on economic issues before and after 2007. It is extraordinary to recall what was stated in its manifestos from 2002 to 2007 and see its stance on this motion.
Louth Fianna Fáil Senator James Carroll has welcomed a Government initiative to exempt employers from PRSI to assist with job creation.
“The Employer Job PRSI Incentive Scheme will save an employer in the region of €3,000 from the annual cost of employing an additional worker. This will make it easier for employers to create new jobs.”
“The Scheme is deliberately targeted towards those who have been unemployed for six months or more. As there is a risk for those who are unemployed for over six months will become long-term unemployed it is important that we target support at these people.”
“The Scheme will be open to any employer who created jobs in 2010 and hired someone who was unemployed for over 6 months. Upon approval of the application to the Scheme employers will not have to pay PRSI for 12 months from the date of acceptance. I am pleased that the Scheme is being administered in this way to include those employed from the beginning of the year.”
“It is hoped that this Scheme will support employers to create new jobs and is only one of a number of initiatives being implemented by the Government.”
“Employers must meet certain criteria to participate in the Scheme. As well as the employee being unemployed for at least 6 months, the job must full time and a new position. Employers will be limited to a maximum new jobs to equal 5% of the existing workforce or for smaller companies, 5 new jobs. The jobs must also last for 6 months or more. Positions that are for shorter periods the employer will have to replay the PRSI amount to the Government.”
“Louth employers who are interested in the Scheme can get more information at www.welfare.ie or by calling 1890 927 999.”
“I am hopeful that this Scheme will assist local employers and those who are currently unemployed. It is vital that we give every practical support possible to those who are endeavouring to create local jobs,” concluded Senator Carroll.
In many aspects the Merchant Shipping Bill is like a miscellaneous provisions Bill in that it ties in other elements that are needed. The Merchant Shipping Bill is vital legislation. It has a strategy for two elements but primarily maritime safety. The Bill, which was published last May, is primarily about Irish ships and ships in Irish waters. Senator Donohoe said that not many maritime issues arise in Dublin Central but it is interesting to see the various elements within this Bill.
The Bill has two layers, so to speak, primarily national and international. We studied international public law in UCD and a key element of that was the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, an audit of which is due to be done in September. This is vital legislation in that it covers the legislative provisions in place. In that international audit we will be asked about the provisions we have put in place, and this Bill will be a key element of that. I look forward to the enabling features of this Bill being put in place.
A key aim of the Bill is to improve the safety of life at sea and as Senator Ellis stated, a key element of that is access for people with reduced mobility. That is important.
I know Senator Mary White has taken on this issue and it is one on which I will also campaign. While mandatory requirements for ships and trawlers will be put in place, I would like voluntary codes of practice to be introduced before moving to full mandatory procedures.
The legislation covers many vessels, from large tankers to jet skis. It will, for example, regulate construction rules, from passenger vessels to cargo ships, survey and radio rules, the carrying of chemical tanker fuels and high speed craft. It will also strengthen regulatory provisions to improve maritime safety.
Another element of the legislation, touched on by Senator McCarthy, concerns the raising of sunken vessels. While there is no express provision in statute for this, the Bill will provide for new parameters to allow different actions to be taken in this regard.
Section 36 will provide for the giving of the force of law to the Maritime Labour Convention 2006. This is key to the employment and social rights of seafarers on Irish ships and to ensure there are proper working conditions. The final draft of the Bill contains a provision for a commencement order in this regard in section 36, which I welcome.
The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Innovation may need to make regulations for the Bill’s employment aspects. As Senators Ellis and McCarthy pointed out, ship workers’ conditions are a source of serious concern for many. I hope we can put in place procedures and structures which will protect them at all times.
The Bill will confirm and validate the actions of the Marine Casualty Investigation Board after it was found its original commencement order was defective. The Attorney General gave advice on this matter.
I welcome the introduction of the Bill and look forward to further debating certain aspects of it on Committee Stage. I hope it will have a swift passage through the House.
Contact Senator James Carroll, Seanad Eireann, Leinster House, Dublin 2
Tel: 01-6184374
Ogra.ie | FiannaFáil.ie | Louth County Council | Meath County Council | Houses of the Oireachtas
Website by Strawberry Media