Notes from the full Council meeting, 9th February 2015

1. Minutes of Meeting of the Council held on 26th January, 2015.

Confirmed and seconded


[b]           VOTES OF SYMPATHY
2.  Votes of Sympathy (if any) to the relatives of:

(i)             members or employees of the Council,
(ii)           dignitaries of Church or State, or
(iii)           members of old I.R.A. and Cumann na mBan.

Cllr O’Flynn (FF) and Cllr O’Shea (Ind) both offered votes of sympathy.


3.  Disposal of Property: Section 183 of the Local Government Act, 2001:
Disposal of 13 Masseytown, Macroom, Co. Cork.

Proposed and agreed.


4.  Corporate Policy Group:

(a)            Approval of attendance by Council members at Conferences on the Conference List for January, 2015 approved by the Corporate Policy Group at their meeting on the 3rd February, 2015.

Proposed and agreed.


(b)           Arts Grant Scheme 2015.

Arts Officer gave full report:

  • There were 203 applications this year
  • €150,000 was available in total
  • The Council has made 134 recommendations for assistance through grant funding – this is the largest number of grants given out for some time.
  • The increased level of applications has put pressure on their ability to deal with applications.
  • The range of applications reflects the range of activity which occurs in the arts in the county.  One striking feature is that most of the applications are coming from the community and voluntary sector (44%).  They are the bedrock of activity, embedded in local communities.  Very important in terms of public activities also, e.g. festivals.  So 60% of the overall allocation will go to this sector.
  • Many of these organisations think outside the box and involve themselves in other interest groups, e.g. special needs groups, young people, etc.  Many of proposals from these groups are forward thinking and project based.  We welcome this.
  • There were 50 applications from creative artists.  These were the single largest grouping.  Recommending 15 of these applications for grant aid.  If we don’t support artists, we are doing a disservice to the arts.  They are creating new work.
  • Festivals are very welcome.  They contribute to local economy.  A broad range of innovative festivals is coming through this year.  Festivals in Clonakilty, Kanturk and Skibbereen were noted in particular.  These will receive the single largest allocation (36%) from the grant scheme this year.

Click here for Arts Grants report.

Some members spoke (Cllrs O’Flynn (FF), Mary Hegarty (FG), O’Laoghaire (SF))

Cllr O’Flynn particularly worried about late applications, one of which relates to his area.

Cllr Mullane:  There are 25,000 travelling communities.  Need to iron out prejudices.  Sad that only one project relating to travellers applied and that project didn’t get funding.

Cllr J Murphy (SF):  Concurred with Cllr O’Flynn about the late applications.

Cllr Dawson (FG):  Also agreed it was a shame about the late applications.

Cllr Forde (FG):  Would like to see a permanent exhibition for our artists in the foyer of County Hall.  Would like us to use our local artwork in street furniture.  Thinks urban areas lose out somewhat over West Cork when it comes to the arts.  They are very organised in West Cork.

Cllr Cullinane (Ind):  There was a separate grant before Christmas for instruments.  Also agrees with Cllr Forde on West Cork doing well from this grant.  Two identical situations with Fota House and Kilworth.  Kilworth did so much better than Fota.  Why?  What are the criteria that determined this?

Cllr A Moynihan (FF):  Funds that are not drawn down, can these be redistributed to groups who were unsuccessful this time round?

Cllr G Murphy (FG):  Disingenous of some councillors to be asking for more money through the arts grants.  This same group of councillors asks for more money for everything but they are the very one who wanted to reduce the Local Property Tax.

Cllr McCarthy (Lab):  Please reconsider the late applications.  These groups depend on them.

Cllr Sheppard (FG):  Can we on a municipal level not permit funding to go to these groups who got funding under the arts scheme?

Arts Officer:

  • Late applications – we get these every year and it is always difficult because we have to set a rule.  Organisations know when they have to have the forms back.  From an administrative point of view, chaos would result if we didn’t do this.  A letter of offer will go to every organisation awarded funding.  There is one month for the organisation to decide whether to accept it or not.  We will look at the late applications if any of the funding is not used.
  • Travelling community project – selection panel awards marks for very clear criteria.  Issues of social background do not come into it.  The allocation is made on the basis of the marks.  Aware of the artist and her work is very good.  But the competition was strong this year so simply have to go on the panel’s recommendations.
  • Kilworth vs Fota house – Centre running on a voluntary basis is running a programme of activities right through the year.  But Fota House is running only a few programme items a year.  It’s a scale issue.

CE:  Thanks the Arts Officer.  Still have €2.8m offered across the Municipal Districts between the grants schemes and the Town Development Fund.  Thinks there is a great opportunity for the Municipal Districts to do something special for the arts.  There is no rule saying that a successful applicant in the arts scheme cannot be funded by the Municipal District, but a grant for the arts is something that should be taken into account when distributing municipal grants.

Cllr Mullane (SF):  Can you clarify that there was only one application from the travelling community?  Saddened that this only application has been refused.

Cllr B Moynihan (FF):  Confirming that €150k is the total amount of funding?

Cllr O’Flynn (FF):  Cannot go back to the local groups and say that they didn’t succeed in getting them funding.  Just some small funding?  Knows that in the case of one organisation, the secretary was seriously ill and in the case of another, they were changing secretaries.  These organisations are the catalyst that keeps these communities turning over.

CE:  Doesn’t encourage any further detailed discussion on particular applications.  Suggests looking at late applications through the Municipal Districts.  Funding not taken up will be reconsidered for reallocation.

Arts Officer:  To Cllr Forde – We work closely with Cork textiles network.  Thinks proposal is interesting.  If you are putting an exhibition together, you have to look after it.  Sculptures in urban areas is a very interesting idea.

Cllr McCarthy (Lab) also spoke about the late applications.

Arts Officer:  Several of the applications related to the travelling community.  That is something we welcome and they are contained within the recommendations but not made explicit.


5.  Report from the Chief Executive on the Land Aggregation Scheme.

CE:  There were incorrect comments in the media about lands that we retain.  This report was prepared to correct those comments.

He goes through the report.  Click here for report: LAGS report

Cllr McGrath (FF):  > €48m of public money is significant funding.  The report details that this has left us with 18 sites and outstanding loans of €20m which were not taken up under the LAGS system.  It is frustrating for Members because we cannot carry out a forensic analysis of this issue.  Appreciates the report but it is a page and a half long.  We don’t know if the purchases were as a result of poor management at the time or what.  This is difficult.  There has been a form of restructuring done on the outstanding loan and the interest rate of 2% is reasonable.  But this whole issue does deserve further analysis and debate.  We don’t have the wherewithal to do it here this morning.  The government seems to want to readdress social housing.  But it is 4 months since the national programme and we as a Council haven’t yet been told what funding we are getting from national government.  Would like the CE to go into more detail on the communications from the department in the last 4 months.

Cllr Murphy (FG):  Thanks CE for report.  The debt is a massive financial burden on the Council.  Have we any proposal to go back to the Department and ask that the burden of debt is taken off us?  Is the land that we spoke of referring to housing land only?  Glad the land bought is not undevelopable nor unsuitable for housing.  See if voluntary housing agencies are involved here.  It is only 2 months since the budget and Cllr McGrath can’t expect to have detailed responses from government yet.

Cllr O’Grady (SF):  When it was brought out, the LAGS scheme was christened NAMA for local authorities.  Would like to know what government oversight there was on the purchase of these lands.  This all smacks of the Celtic Tiger – lands being purchased at massive prices.  Did the Department cherrypick the sites it wanted to take into LAGS? Did it give reasons for refusals?  Thanks for report.

Cllr O’Shea (Ind):  Welcomes report.  Loan of €20m is substantial and is concerned about it.  We were encouraged by the Department in 2006 to go buy these lands and when the LAGS came into operation in 2010 the Department came back and refused to take in all the lands.  It is unfair.  Who chooses the site we start social building on?  Report doesn’t tell us the acreage involved.  That would be worthwhile.

Cllr McCarthy (Lab):  Very concerned.  €28m is a lot of money.  Thinks the Department needs to be contacted.  What are the reasons that the sites weren’t accepted into LAGS?

Councillor Kieran McCarthy’s motion is taken next.

“That this Council provides a written report on Lands purchased for the purpose of housing across the county which have been since deemed unsuitable by the Dept. of Environment, Community and Local Government.”

Cllr K McCarthy (SF):  Very regrettable that the Cllrs learned about these lands through the media.  Understand similar queries have been made to other Councils around the State.  Cork and Galway were the only two Councils that wouldn’t reply.  Did the Department cherrypick in its refusals to LAGS?  How many houses can we expect to see built on these sites, if any?  Thinking of areas like Carrigtwohill where people can no longer rent because of caps on rent allowance.  Department and our own housing department here are out of touch.  Asks again how many houses could be built on these lands.  Waste of taxpayers money in the purchase of these sites.  How many families might be housed if people did their jobs properly.  Hopes Members will be given information directly in future rather than reading it in the media.  Repeats the questions again.  Why was the FoI request refused?

Cllr Mullane (SF):  A site in Kanturk was purchased for €1m.  The Council was advised by the Department not to buy it for afforestation.  The Council did buy it.  Is this included here?  If not, how many more pieces of land are there like this around?

Cllr Lombard (FG):  What happens the land gone into LAGS?  Who will develop these lands?  Will this be the real stumbling block to getting social housing advanced?  Kilnagleary, Carrigaline – key sites have been developed here  in the last few years to benefit the community.

Cllr Forde (FG):  Understands why some of the lands were put into LAGS.  Thinks this report throws up more questions than it answers.  She had proposed a motion in relation to housing for the Southern Committee meeting next week.  Is very disappointed to get back an email to this proposed motion saying that the CPG has decided that housing issues should not be discussed until March.  Wants us to put aside a day to debate all aspects of housing.  We never give it the time it needs.  It is the single biggest issue with this Council.

Mayor:  It was decided that members needed time to discuss the changes to local government boundaries.  The Southern Committee meeting was proposed to be devoted to that unless Cllr Forde has an alternative proposal.

Cllr Harris (ind):  Don’t think we can criticise the Council for having taken the best advice of the time in 2006.  But can something be done with the loan using the negotiating power of the Council?

CE:  There is no question mark over the purchase of these lands.  One of the lands in question was purchased in 2006; the others were purchased between 2000 – 2003.  This was actually before the boom.  They went through the usual rigours before purchase.  Comments about people not doing their jobs properly are not appropriate.  Our housing department is more than in touch.  Lands gone into LAGS are available for housing.  Have also an agreement with Department of Education that if a site is required, these lands will be available for this.  Lands can be brought back in if we want them to support our social housing programme.  We have had much interaction between government officials and our housing department in relation to the social housing programme.  Turnkey schemes, voluntary bodies and direct building will meet our targets for house provision.  There is a significant amount of work done and we will deliver on that programme.  Can’t comment on whether the Housing Sustainable Agency cherrypicked the sites they took on board.  But regardless, the lands are still available to us.  Kanturk, Bottlehill – these are sites that are not included here.  They were bought for a totally different purpose.

Cllr K McCarthy (SF):  Welcomes that the land is still there and may yet be used.  Stands over the remarks he made and doesn’t make them lightly.  Makes his comments based on evidence before him.

CE:  Appalling comment from any member of this council to say that housing staff are out of touch.  They are expert in their field.  Absolutely rejects this.

Cllr K McCarthy (SF):  The cap system on the rent allowance is not working.  It’s not fair, it needs to be changed.  Knows people are getting letters every day offering them houses that they cannot afford because of the cap on the rent.  The housing department should know better.

Cllr Mullane pursued the Kanturk purchase but the CE says it is not relevant to the LAGS.  He says he will answer questions on anything but he had prepared a response in relation to the LAGS.  Cllr Mullane says she will bring a motion in relation to the Kanturk land.

Cllr McGrath (FF):  How much of the landbank is being looked at with respect to the housing programme?  How many of the 18 sites are under consideration?

Cllr Lombard (FG):  Welcomes the report and clarification.  Welcomes that land from LAGS can be used by local authority and other agencies.  Very positive.

Cllr K Murphy (FG):  Voluntary housing agency programme.  Can we pursue this?  They seem to be gone to sleep at the moment.

CE:  We will be making limited use of the first of the 18 sites in the first phase of the programme.  We are actively engaging with voluntary bodies and they will be a part of our delivery of the first phase of social housing.


[f]            NOTICES OF MOTION
6.              Councillor Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire:
That in light of the significant lack of Housing available to low and middle income earners, Cork County Council agrees to explore the establishment of an Arms Length Housing Trust.”

Cllr O’Laoghaire (SF):  Over 200,000 people are in need of housing in the State.  Like many local authorities across Ireland, the amount of social  housing built in Cork has not been anywhere close to that required.  Private market is unable to support the need.  Promise to deliver on houses this year but fears that this may not be successful.  This is a longer term issue.  Housing generates its own income.  There is money available to build houses from other sources, e.g. EU.  Cork County Council is limited in what sources it can borrow from.  But an Arms Length Housing Trust established under Cork County Council’s direction wouldn’t be subject to these rules regarding from where it could borrow from, etc.  Loans of this type could allow units to be developed in a regular way over a longer period.  Would be more sustainable in provision and delivery.  Could be a new departure for Cork.  Proposal is a strong one and a sound one.

Cllr O’Grady (SF):  Seconds the motion.  Social housing has been placed within the owner occupier and rental housing systems.  Approved housing bodies have replaced house provision by local authorities.  These bodies have neither the vision nor ability to succeed local authorities.  Government gave them no direction or advice.  This approach means that we lose the valuable staff resource in local authority housing departments.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF):  We expect the voluntary housing bodies that are there to take the role of the Council.  Rejects Cllr Murphy’s earlier comments that Cluaid has gone to sleep of late.  Not true.  They have housed so many.  A Housing Trust would put the Council back in full control of housing again.

CE:  Easiest thing would be to refer the motion to the housing SPC.  Housing Trusts are being used in the UK as an independent company regulated by the local authority.  The Housing Finance Agency would let the Housing Trust borrow money from it.  A Trust would be treated as an approved housing body.  It would require approval from the DoE and there is a procedure for that.  Even if the Housing Trust were established, it would have to fund itself.  The Trust would be borrowing at a higher rate than the County Council can borrow for a period of up to probably 25 years.  There is no way that the annual rents that would be received from housing applicants would be cover the loan payback.  We don’t see that it would be financially sustainable without significant subvention from the Department.  At the moment, the voluntary housing bodies are being subvented in this way.  Thinks we just drive on with the social housing programme and follow turnkey schemes delivered through the private sector, local authority direct build and the voluntary housing sector.

Cllr O’Laoghaire (SF):  Agrees the motion should go to the SPC.  If we are already subventing voluntary housing bodies, there is no harm in looking at funding this also.  There would be income which would give it relative independence to function in a financially sound way.  This is an important proposal which is being considered in other local authorities.


7.              Councillor Des O’Grady:
“To request a written report on the separate bank account held by Cork County Council to hold any monies accruing to the Council from the sale of dwellings. This report to list the amount of money currently held in this account, the amount held on 1st January 2014 and the separate amounts used for the provision of housing, the refurbishment /maintenance of existing housing, or any other related purpose during 2014.”

Click here for official response to motion: Response to O’Grady’s motion

CE:  Good report issued by the Director of Services.  We are required to account for this money separately but we are not required to have a separate bank account for it.  We still have to supplement some of the national funding for voids.  We are lucky that we had the level of funding available to do that because we have gained significant value from it.


8.              Councillor Seamus McGrath:
“To request a report outlining the total cost to Cork County Council from the employment of external consultants for the year 2014.  The figure should include all professional consultancy fess paid to non Council employees, including amounts paid on projects funded by Government grants.  Separately, to outline the amounts spent on external legal services for the years 2012, 2013,2014.”

Click here for official response to motion: Response to Cllr McGrath’s motion on consultants

Cllr McGrath (FF): Has had similar motions in the past seeking this information.  Accepts that external consultants need to be employed on occasion.  But believes that we as a Council have an over dependency on consultants.  We used consultants to examine the feasibility of public lighting on the Carrigaline to Crosshaven walkway, for example.  Flooding in the Glen in Glenbrook would be another example.  Nearly €40k has been spent on consultants to date to design the flood prevention scheme and there has been no progress on the ground since 2009.  The Council has employed legal advice to interpret new legislation.  Surely there is formal advice provided by the Department?  Do all the Councils employ legal advice for this?   €6.8m is being spent on external consultants.  Over €3m on legal services but we have a legal department in the Council.  Asks that CE would review this and would make sure that the use of consultants is signed off at a very high level to ensure that they are employed only when aboslutely necessary.

Cllr A Moynihan (FF):  Supports and seconds.  There is a huge breadth of expertise in County Hall.  Why does Roads and Transportation stand out so much above the others?

Cllr O’Keeffe (FF):  Are outside people being brought in because of the reduction in staff numbers and consequent loss of expertise?

Cllr O’Grady (SF):  Has the same question.  And how much of the €6.8m came out of governemnt resources and how much covered by the Council itself?

CE:  Engagement of consultants is a necessary part of our business.  Advancement of schemes is so technical we have no option.  We are also down so many staff, we have no option.  Significant loss of internal resource.  We are not replacing that loss with consultants but we couldn’t advance the number of schemes that we do without consultants.  We’ve had 41 NRA schemes advanced over the last 5 years.  Very clear procedures for engagement.  All consultants are advertised.  Have to have 3 quotes.  Value for money derives from our own management of the contract afterwards.  The  Council is down 37% on professional technical staff.

Cllr McGrath (FF):  Disappointed with the CE’s response.  Doesn’t see any acknowledgement that we can make savings in this area.  Wants us to put new safeguards in place to ensure that overspend in this area isn’t happening.


9.              Councillor Rachel McCarthy:
“That Cork County Council resolves to support the local community in their objections to plans to erect six 131m high wind turbines in the townlands of Barnadivane (Kneeves), Lackareagh, Gurranereagh, Lisarda and Terelton.”

Mayor:  Was concerned that we might not be able to debate this because it is a live planning application.  The planning department must be seen to be impartial.  Could run the risk of the applicant taking a judicial review because the Chamber put undue pressure on the outcome.  Has never seen a live planning application being discussed in the Chamber in all his time in the Council.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF):  There is always a first time but this is the first time we’ve been told the motion wouldn’t be discussed.

Mayor:  Is very sympathetic and is meeting representatives this afternoon but still not ok to debate in open Chamber.  Would be prejudicial.

Cllr R McCarthy (SF):  There was no public consultation on this and this is one of the big issues.  Locals weren’t even aware that the planning application had been made.

Mayor:  There will be public involvement in the planning process.

CE:  In the event that the motion is debated, I will have to leave because I am the ultimate decision-maker in relation to all planning applications in the authority.

Mayor:  Anyone can put a motion down under current standing orders.  But planning is a serious issue and there is a process for councillors to engage with the planning authority.  Can’t allow a prejudicial situation to develop.  Am looking for the support of the Chamber in not debating this.  Could be prejudicial to those in the community also.

Cllr A Moynihan (FF):  There is an aspect that is not part of the motion that is of local concern.  Relates to the substation.  Could we change the motion to include the substation?

Cllr Hegarty (FG):  You need to be very firm about this Mayor.

Cllr O’Laoghaire (SF):  This advice should have been provided in advance of the meeting.

Chamber agrees not to discuss but the Mayor agrees it is fair to say that the advice should have been provided in advance of the meeting.


11.             Councillor Melissa Mullane:
“That this Council provides a written report on the outstanding bonds which were provided by developers as security that works would be completed in accordance with planning permission conditions set down by this local authority.  It should include the number of current enforcement proceedings in place to draw down existing bonds from financial institutions and the time limits if any on these bonds and if any have lapsed with works unfinished on developments.”

Click here for official response to motion: Response to Cllr Mullane’s motion on bonds

Cllr Mullane (SF):  Was told that if a developer has not carried out works within 6 months, the Council will call in the bond.  We are not doing enough.  Very distressing for the people living in unfinished estates.  Irish Water has no problems going into the estates to install meters but will not fix the water supply.  It is sad that developers were allowed to get away with work which was substandard and unfinished.

Cllr Fitzgerald (FF):  Much good work has been done in estates by Cork County Council personnel.  The bonds are the issue.  Draw down some funds and finish off the estates.  This is very important.

Cllr G Murphy (FG):  Everyone that his been involved in this realises its an extremely complex situation.  Lots of developers and financial institutions who are reluctant to get involved.  3 estates engineers in the county.  They are doing everything possible to dry to deal with this complex situation.  Very difficult job.  But progress needs to be made on it.  Maybe professional consultants could help?

Cllr K McCarthy (SF):  We have an estate in Cobh which has sewage for 3 weeks spilling out on to the road.  Irish Water won’t touch it.  The Senior Engineer here can’t touch it because it’s a private estate.  The developer is responsible.  The bonds are there and the bonds should be drawn down.

Cllr O’Keeffe (FF):  What action are we taking with the financial institutions?  Cork County Council is always blamed by the public when it is often the financial institutions which are to blame.

Cllr O’Shea (Ind):  The report details that there are 586 residential estates with bonds in place.  That means that they have not been finished.  Andrew Hind is working on a number of high profile unfinished estates.  In many cases, a developer has gone into receivership, a technical claim has been made on the bond and nothing else has happened.

Cllr Hegarty (FG):  Thinks many of the Council people are doing a good job.  Extra resources have to be put into this particular section.  Have to ask the Department for extra support for the people in this department who are quite overworked.  Also very frustrating for residents.

Cllr Doyle (FF):  We are under constant pressure from estates to get the County Council to draw down the bonds.  Cork County Council is often blamed wrongly.  Some estates in his area are becoming a H&S issue.  But where the estates have been finished and a programme of maintenance worked out with the Council, it has really worked.

Cllr Murphy (FG):  Sometimes the bond is not sufficient.  This is a problem.  Supports the motion.  The bond was always the last resort.  But now we have no other way of ensuring an estate is looked after unless the bond is drawn down more quickly.

Cllr Mullane (SF):  We are not doing enough.  These institutions have to play ball with us.  Knows not all institutions are problematic but it is not ok that even some are not. There is an onus on Cork County Council.  We are the ones who gave the planning.  We didn’t go out and check whether the work was being done properly because if we did, this wouldn’t be happening.

CE:  There are not 586 problem estates or problem bonds in the county.  We are pursuing 104 live ones.  We are trying to work these through.  In some of those cases we have instigated legal proceedings.  Will not indicate how many.  It is a difficult environment to work in.  Inevitable that there will be tensions between the institutions, etc.  We have had success.  We have pressure on technical staff.  None of the bonds has expired; they will be pursued.


12.            Councillor Declan Hurley:
“That this Council request the HSE (South) to outline and confirm their plans to upgrade Community Hospitals and Older Care facilities such as St Joseph’s Ward, Bantry General Hospital and Castletownbere Community Hospital, which are under threat of closure if they don’t meet the HIQA standards, which all nursing homes must meet by July 2015.”

Cllr Hurley (Ind):  The worst affected county is Cork.  1 in 10 beds meet HIQA standards.  The public is entitled to know what the HSE is planning.  The number of beds available in the county would need to increase by 59% in order to accommodate current needs.  New legislation means that buildings constructed decades ago need major refurbishment.  HSE has known since 2009 that they would have to meet these standards by July 2015.  Yet they have done nothing.  Now so many community hospitals are threatened with closure.  Is worried that there is a creeping policy of privatisation by stealth.  Asking HSE now to disclose its plans.  €36m was allocated to HSE to cover upgrades to nursing homes.

Cllr PJ Murphy (FF):  Has been working with HSE in the Castletownbere area to generate alternative options but the issue is a ticking timebomb.  Capital investment has to be put in right now to get this problem solved.  HIQA guidelines are worthy but elderly people also like the company of a ward.  Nursing care – nurses are worrried about single rooms and minding people with constant supervision.  Easier to look after a number of people at the same time.  Willl have a serious knock on effect on acute beds and overcrowing because stepdown units will not be available.

Cllr R MCCarthy (SF):  Fully supports.  Adds concern that the 2 community hospitals in Bandon have also been listed.  Would go further and ask for funds to bring the nursing homes up to standards.  In Bandon, they are waiting for years for an extension.  Community hospitals provide a second to none level of care.  It is very personal.  Heard discussion during the week that home help hours are being increased in a ploy to keep people out of community hospitals.  Would like Cork County Council to write to the Minister and ask where the expansion at the Bandon Community Hsopital is at.  We were promised this by the last Minister for Health.

Many other councillors commented on this motion, on the value of the work done by the community hospitals, on the money already given to the HSE for the doing up of community hosopitals, on the new HIQA standards and the fact that not all elderly people want to be in single rooms.

Agreed that the buck stops at the Minister’s door and that we should also get on to him.  The Council will contact the HSE and the Minister for Health.


13.            Councillor Noel Collins:
“With a view to addressing a very serious shortage and crisis in social housing and the resultant consequences for waiting applicants, Cork County Council call on the Government to spend money from the anglo promissory note, on a major social housing construction programme.”

Deferred until next meeting.


14.            Councillor Ger Keohane:
“That this Council calls on the Financial regulator to review the current interest rate on loans from licenced moneylenders and that caps on interest rates should be at a maximum of 40% APR.”

Deferred until next meeting.



15.            Liadh Ní Riada, MEP:
Letter dated 12th January, 2015, in response to Council’s letter of 26th November, 2014, regarding the fluoridation of water.

Click here to view letter: Liadh Ni Riada

16.            Iarnród Eireann:
Letter dated 29th January, 2015, in response to Council’s motion of 12th January, 2015, regarding the closure of public toilets in train stations.

Click here to view letter: Iarnrod Eireann

17.            AILG:
Training Dates for Elected Members 2015.