I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this sensitive issue. It relates to the employment practices and recruitment policy of Safefood, an all-island agency responsible for food protection on the island of Ireland. It saddens me to raise this issue. Is the Minister of State informing me that he is not taking the adjournment? The Minister is not in the Chamber yet. Must I wait for a Government representative to appear? It is somewhat strange considering Deputy Smith is the Minister of State in the Department of Agriculture and Food.
Adjournment Debate.
Cross-Border Projects.
The Food Safety Authority comes under the Department of Health and Children.
I realise that but it is part of the Deputy's responsibility.
The Deputy may proceed.
If the Leas-Cheann Comhairle will allow me I will give the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Brian Lenihan, the opportunity to hear how I opened my contribution.
This is an issue of some sensitivity and relates to the recruitment practices and employment policy of Safefood, one of the important North-South bodies established in recent years. It saddens me that it is necessary to raise this matter. As I will explain, I have used other mechanisms to ascertain information but that information has not been of a sufficient standard or appropriate. It particularly saddens me as a Cork Deputy, as Safefood is based in the Cork area, however there are important issues of accountability that the Minister of State on behalf of the Government should take the opportunity to place on the record.
My interest in this issue was sparked by a constituent, Mr. John Masson of Currabinny, County Cork, who applied for a position of co-ordinator of the research team on investigating the spread and control of cryptosporidium. This was a five-year, part-time position that paid €10,000 per year. That position is subject to hearings in authorities in this State and Northern Ireland and I do not want to compromise the decision. However, it is clear the process, which involved only three candidates, seems to have been solved by some form of osmosis and Safefood is guilty, at the very least, of gross discourtesy to two candidates on how decisions were made, who was given the eventual position and the appropriate qualifications that such persons have. One of the candidates is my constituent and another, Dr. John Moore from Ballymena, County Antrim, is in the Gallery. As I said, the position will be ascertained by both authorities in the North and the South. It leaves a bad taste about the confidence in which the agency can be held.
I have asked two parliamentary questions in this House, both of which were addressed to the Office of the Taoiseach, given that he had prime responsibility for establishing North-South bodies on behalf of the Government. Both questions were referred to the Minister for Health and Children, who has responsibility for Safefood, and she, as the senior Minister transferred them to her Minister of State, Deputy Seán Power. The answers received on the number of complaints against Safefood on recruitment practices and employment policies were incorrect and this has added more fuel to the fire.
Were there two complaints?
There were more than two complaints and I will explain how that arose. Either Safefood has supplied the Minister with incorrect information or — I do not even want to think in these terms — the House has been misled. I subsequently received a communication from Dr. Cherie Millar, also from Ballymena, County Antrim, who in 2004 applied for a full-time position as chief specialist of microbiology with the science and technical directorate of Safefood. This ongoing complaint was not recorded in either of the answers to my recent questions. I seek a reply and if it is not in the Minister's prepared answer it should be supplied at the soonest opportunity. It leads to an accumulated lack of confidence that the information supplied by Safefood and the practices it deploys are not what they should be. It is vital that recruitment by all-island bodies is seen to be done correctly. The essence of Dr. Millar's complaint, which was subsequently sent in a substantial portfolio to the Taoiseach, was that the employment statement published by Safefood was not followed and in a key respect was demonstrably flawed. Advertisements for this important position were placed only in The Irish News, Lá and Foinse but not in the media of the other tradition in Northern Ireland, namely The Belfast Newsletter or The Belfast Telegraph. On these grounds a substantial wrong has been done on recruitment procedures.
The other issue I would like to raise is that Safefood has, either unwittingly or intentionally, offended people. In issuing invitations to a network for scientists and doctors involved in the study of cryptosporidium it sent out a series of mixed messages to many scientists who work on the island of Ireland, another of whom is in the Gallery tonight——
I should point out that it is not in order to refer to people in the public Gallery.
I respect the Leas-Cheann Comhairle's ruling on that.
It is a Standing Order.
I am merely pointing out the source of my information, which I received from Dr. Rao. This doctor received an invitation from Safefood, as did other doctors of foreign extraction including Chinese and Japanese. The invitation was framed in such a way that it seemed to exclude people working in the field who may not have been Irish. To send out documentation of this nature speaks of a culture in Safefood that must be addressed quickly. On those grounds, the fact that ongoing complaints are being dealt with by authorities North and South, that wrong information has been supplied in answers to two parliamentary questions and that Safefood is sending information that is needlessly insensitive to the feelings of the people with whom it should be working closely, I appeal to the Minister to pass on the information to the Government, particularly to the four Ministers who have been contacted on this, the Taoiseach, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and the Minister for Health and Children, to implement the parity of esteem that should exist in all North-South bodies and to give meaning to the respect agenda about which we hear others in the House speak.
I am taking this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children. I thank Deputy Boyle for raising this matter as it gives the Minister an opportunity to outline to this House the position on this matter. The Food Safety Promotion Board, Safefood, is a North-South implementation body established under the Good Friday Agreement. Its remit is to promote awareness and knowledge of food safety issues on an all-island basis. The Deputy has raised this issue via parliamentary questions on four previous occasions this year, the most recent being Question No. 230 on Tuesday, 4 April last. In replying to those questions the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Seán Power, stated the Department was not aware of complaints on employment practices or recruitment procedures. However, the Department was advised that Safefood has received two complaints on the appointment of a co-ordinator for a research network on cryptosporidium. Deputy Boyle maintains there were more than two and I will draw this to the attention of the Department.
The co-ordinator's role attracts a grant of €10,000 per annum for a period of five years to facilitate the setting up and maintenance of the research network, but it is not considered by Safefood to be a contract of employment.
The complaints are currently being processed by the appropriate employment equality machinery, one within this jurisdiction and one within Northern Ireland. Officials of the Department have been advised by Safefood that no additional complaints of this nature are being dealt with by the body. The position as set out previously to the Deputy remains unchanged and the Tánaiste fails to see how this issue could have been addressed more fully.
National Health Strategy.
I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss the need for a national sexual health strategy and I always take the opportunity to do so when it arises. I have been afforded the opportunity this week because it is National Condom Week.
Fewer than 100 people have died worldwide of the avian flu virus, yet the international community is galvanised in an extraordinary way to tackle it. The Government has put together a plan in this regard involving the Ministers for Health and Children, Agriculture and Food, and Finance. This is commendable, but the approach to sexually transmitted diseases is not so commendable.
Last month the Joint Committee on Health and Children heard from Dr. Susan Clarke, a consultant in the field of infectious diseases at St. James's Hospital, and the statistics she outlined are quite alarming. There has been an increase in the incidence of chlamydia in Ireland in the order of 2,000% in ten years, a 426% increase in the incidence of herpes in five years and a 45% increase in gonorrhea over two years. These figures are from 2003 and 2004. There was a 12% increase in the incidence of sexually transmitted infections. Dr. Clarke introduced her figures by issuing a caveat to the effect that these infections are widely recognised as under-reported. The increase in sexually transmitted infections represents a runaway problem despite the fact that a certain condom manufacturer is highlighting what can be achieved through condom use in protecting against sexually transmitted diseases, not to mention HIV and AIDS.
The usual suspects condemn any highlighting of increased use of condoms or sexual activity generally. Sexual health is the one area in which people are criticised for trying to inform and educate the public. The figures speak for themselves. It is high time we had a national sexual health strategy. The good news is that we do not need to reinvent the wheel. The Minister of State is probably aware that the former North Eastern Health Board had prepared a sexual health strategy. Much of the groundwork has, therefore, been done in this area and I hope, on foot of the alarming and unreported annual increases in sexually transmitted infections, we finally grasp the nettle.
Young people are looking for access to services and information that is presented in a non-judgmental way, but unfortunately they do not always get that. In an article in The Irish Times this week, a commentator stated it is most unfortunate that people are being asked to consider the use of condoms. The commentator is an individual with particular religious beliefs, which I respect, but it is not sensible to tell people not to use a product that is very effective in combating sexually transmitted diseases.
In the United Kingdom a group of young students has launched a campaign called Just Say Know. "Know" is rooted in the word "knowledge", which is what the students want. There is no point in keeping people in the dark about sexual activity. Statistics show how sexually active young people really are. Given that our population partly comprises such people, we need to face the reality and inform them.
A core element of the Just Say Know campaign is to demand from the UK Government services in both the education and health sectors. Those behind the campaign are perfectly right to do so. In any other area of health one is provided with the necessary information. Why are people not presented with information on sexual health? Is it because of our traditions and prudishness regarding the subject? I hope we can overcome this and consider seriously the development of a national sexual health strategy.
We need to be mature in our approach and it is important that we educate and protect the young. If we do not do so and fail to treat sexually transmitted diseases, many difficulties associated with infertility will arise. I hope, therefore, that the Minister will listen to my request to devise a national sexual health strategy.
I am speaking on behalf of my colleague, the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney. I thank the Deputy for raising this matter.
The Department of Health and Children has supported sexual health at strategic and executive levels across the health sector for a number of years. At national level, policy has been formulated clearly in the report of the national AIDS strategy committee, the national health promotion strategy and the strategy of the Crisis Pregnancy Agency. All these strategies contribute to maintaining and improving sexual health in terms of education and awareness, service delivery, capacity building and research and surveillance.
The National Health Promotion Strategy 2000-2005 recognises that sexuality is an integral part of being human and healthy sexual relationships can contribute to an overall sense of well-being. The strategic aim is to promote sexual health and safer sexual practices among the population.
The health promotion unit of the Department works closely with the Health Service Executive on a range of awareness and education initiatives and interventions. These include working in partnership with the Department of Education and Science, the Health Service Executive and other youth structures to support schools and other bodies in the introduction and delivery of social personal and health education, of which relationships and sexuality education is an integral part. Included also is a national public awareness advertising campaign to promote sexual health. It is aimed at men and women in the 18 to 35 age group and is designed to increase awareness of safe sex and sexually transmitted infections.
The overall goals are to increase safe sexual practices and reduce the incidence of sexually transmitted infections and unwanted pregnancies among young people. The campaign runs in third level colleges, places of entertainment, such as pubs, clubs and discos, and youth venues and health centres. The initiatives also include the production of a range of awareness-raising leaflets on STIs and safe sex practices, and these are available nationwide.
In response to the specific issues regarding unplanned pregnancy, the Crisis Pregnancy Agency was established by statutory instrument in 2001 and is funded in its entirety by the Department of Health and Children. The agency is a planning and co-ordinating body established to formulate and implement a strategy to address the issue of crisis pregnancy through a reduction in the number of crisis pregnancies by the provision of education, advice and contraceptive services, a reduction in the number of women with crisis pregnancies who opt for abortion by offering services and supports which make other options more attractive and the provision of counselling and medical services after crisis pregnancy.
The first strategy to address the issue of crisis pregnancy was officially launched in November 2003 and provides a framework for understanding the causes and consequences of crisis pregnancy and a clear set of actions to address the complex and interacting factors that contribute to the experience of a crisis pregnancy. The agency works on an ongoing basis with statutory and non-statutory agencies to ensure successful implementation of the strategy.
The Crisis Pregnancy Agency is committed to the use of research as a basis for understanding behaviour, assessing need, building on previous practice and promoting the use of evidence-based practice. The goal of the agency's research programme is to foster greater understanding of the contributory factors and solutions to sexual risk taking and crisis pregnancy at individual, community, policy and social level.
Through the national AIDS strategy committee and the structures in place to implement the recommendations of the AIDS strategy, more than €6 million additional annual funding has been provided to health services since 1997. This has been used to address the treatment of HIV-AIDS and other STIs and to develop, deliver and expand initiatives, in partnership with NGOs, for vulnerable groups, such as sex workers, drug users, and those from migrant populations who come from high endemic areas for HIV as well as homosexual men.
At present there are seven consultants specialising in the treatment of HIV-AIDS and STIs, five of whom are in Dublin and one of whom deals with children. In addition, routine antenatal testing was introduced in 1999 and is effective in identifying women who are HIV positive at an early stage in pregnancy which allows for treatment to greatly reduce the perinatal transmission rate.
In recent years with the growth in demand for services and significantly increased government investment, all of the key national players from the statutory and non-statutory sector have come together under the guidance of the Department and the Crisis Pregnancy Agency to plan a common way forward. This has resulted in the first ever national survey of sexual knowledge, attitudes and behaviours in Ireland. This study is now in its final stages and has been carried out in line with those in other European countries. The research is being carried out by a consortium from the Economic and Social Research Institute, the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Trinity College and an independent research consultant.
The aim of the research is the collection of reliable nationally representative baseline information. The key issues on which the research will focus include social and demographic characteristics, risk reduction practices, adverse and positive outcomes and the degree of knowledge and learning about sex. The first of four reports detailing the research findings will be published in September of this year. It is intended that the findings will inform all future sexual health policy and practice developments.
National Development Plan.
I welcome the opportunity to speak of the under spending in the National Development Plan 2000-2006. The plan was negotiated under Agenda 2000 and set up the BMW and the southern and eastern regions for the purposes of drawing down EU structural funding. Is under spending in breach of a legally binding agreement between Ireland and the EU? The National Development Plan 2000-2006 states the position negotiated under Agenda 2000. The agreement was made under the community support framework for Ireland 2000-06. I tabled a question on the status of the situation to the Minister for Finance. He states that the regulations do not permit the transfer of the overall allocation of Structural Funds between the BMW region and the southern and eastern region. A transfer of resources has not been sought by the Government and no proposals have been considered for such action. The reply informs us that the BMW region has under spent to the tune of €3.6 billion in the National Development Plan 2000-2006.
If the Minister informs us he has kept within the regulations of the Community Support Framework as far as Structural Funds are concerned, it is clear that the under spending is occurring within the Exchequer funding of the plan. While that may not be in breach of the regulations and the legally binding contract, it goes against the spirit of the National Development Plan 2000-2006 in which the Government committed Exchequer funding as well as EU Structural Funds. The National Development Plan 2000-2006 is a contract between the Government and the people. The under spending must be rectified but it is difficult to understand how this can be achieved. If the Government spent an extra €10 million per day for the next year, it would not make up the ground it has lost.
More than one year ago the Minister of State at the Department of Finance stated on behalf of the senior Minister that the Government was committed to redressing the imbalance. In 2002 the Government supported the campaign for regionalisation. It fought the battle to retain Objective One status in the BMW region, resulting in Objective One and transition funding for the rest of the country. Having won the battle and drawn up the national development plan to put it into effect, the Government is now going against the spirit of its policy as outlined in the National Development Plan 2000-2006.
It is a disgrace.
The gap between the east and west is widening. In recent weeks my attempts to discuss an issue have been rejected by the Ceann Comhairle. I asked the Minister for Finance about the under spending on national roads but the question was transferred to the Department of Transport. The Minister for Transport informed me that there is under spending of €500 million on national roads in the BMW region. My efforts to raise this matter on the Adjournment were refused by the Ceann Comhairle on the basis that the Minister was not answerable to the Dáil on this question and that the NRA was responsible. This is part of the National Development Plan 2000-2006 for which the Government is responsible. This is utter nonsense and I could use stronger language to express myself.
There is disbelief in County Mayo and the BMW region at this situation. The county council has sent several deputations to the NRA seeking the delivery of roads included in the National Development Plan 2000-2006, including the N5 from Castlebar to Westport, the N26 from Bohola to Ballina, the Ballinrobe bypass, the Castlebar orbital route, the Westport ring road, the Castlebar to Claremorris road and the Castlebar to Belmullet road, which is a regional route. When the deputations meet the NRA they are told they should be happy with the Charlestown bypass. In a response from the Minister on 29 March I am informed that there is under spending of €500 million on national roads. As there is no investment in infrastructure, jobs are not being created and this affects every aspect of the development plan. If there are no jobs, no power and no access to our county, the gap between east and west is widening and the Government has only six months to honour its obligation. When the new plan comes into effect in 2007 we are aware that it will be non-specific, making it more difficult to hold the Government accountable. The Government should not think this shortfall can be made up.
Deputy Cooper-Flynn should have spoken up before now.
Deputy Cowley is trying to piggyback on this issue.
Deputy Cooper-Flynn had many years in which to speak up.
The sad reality is that Deputy Cowley must piggyback on many other issues also. It is sad that this is the only way in which he can get attention. He is devoid of all original notions.
I am glad the Deputy is speaking up now.
I speak on an issue that is important to the people of County Mayo and I am being heckled by a Deputy from my county who has no regard for the serious issues affecting the people of our county. If he thinks wasting time is a valuable contribution as a Deputy for the county he is seriously mistaken.
I am delighted she is speaking up now but she should have done it years ago.
The Minister for Finance apologises for not responding to this debate. Ireland will draw down its full entitlements under the Structural Funds for each region. This means that investments will continue to take place in both regions leading to further improvements in living standards. These large-scale co-financed investments have occurred in roads, water services, child care, enterprise, and in the other extensive range of areas involved. Enterprises, employees, parents and children, commuters and others have benefited as a result through, for example, expanded service availability, access to employment and improved transport infrastructure. The Minister emphasises that the results achieved with the resources from the Structural Funds have been good based on independent analysis. The update evaluation of the Community support framework completed by independent consultants states that an analysis of data on Ireland's relative performance within the EU in the broad infrastructural and socio-economic areas that are co-financed shows it to be above the EU performance economically. The analysis also states that, while the Border, midlands and west region has not yet converged with the southern and eastern region, it has converged with the EU average.
Agenda 2000 was the negotiation process on the European Union's financial perspectives from 2000 to 2006. That determined Ireland's allocation of €3.3 billion in Structural Funds for the current programme period of 2000 to 2006. Ireland's allocation of Structural Funds is governed by the regulations and an agreement between the Government and the European Commission known as the Community Support Framework for Ireland 2000-2006.
To prepare for the framework, the Government, with the agreement of the European Commission and the Statistical Office of the European Communities, made new regionalisation arrangements changing Ireland's single region status with the aim of retaining Objective One status for the greatest possible area and optimising Ireland's entitlement to Structural Funds for the period to the end of 2006. As the Deputy stated, the outcome was the designation of two regions for Structural Funds purposes.
The Border, midlands and west region, incorporating the existing regional authorities of Border, west and midlands areas, retained full Objective One status for the full period from 2000 to 2006 because its gross domestic product at the time was less than 75% of the EU average. The remaining five regional authorities of Dublin, mid-east, south-east, south-west and mid-west were grouped into the NUTS II southern and eastern region. That region qualified for phasing-out arrangements under Objective One because it was a region that had qualified for Objective One levels of funding under the previous planning period but that now had a GDP above 75% of the average.
Under the Community Support Framework for Ireland 2000-2006, the country was allocated €3.3 billion in Structural Funds for the period. Of that allocation, the BMW region qualified for Structural Funds of €1.4 billion, with the balance of €1.9 billion going to the southern and eastern region. Regionalisation has the effect of increasing the Structural Funds allocation to the BMW region and of allowing that region to receive EU co-funding of up to 75% for individual projects, whereas the southern and eastern region only receives EU co-funding of 50%. Where state aid applies, lower rates are applicable. It should be emphasised that the Structural Fund regulations do not permit the transfer of the overall allocation of Structural Funds between the BMW and the southern and eastern regions. No transfer of the resources has been sought by the Government, and no proposals for such action are being considered.
Under the Structural Fund regulations, expenditure on co-funded measures must be incurred before the end of December 2008 to be eligible for the drawdown of Structural Funds for the 2000 to 2006 programming period. Reports to the monitoring committees for each of the operational programmes for the period January 2000 to December 2005 indicated that expenditure on co-funded measures for each region is on target. Based on those reports, the Minister expects that both regions' entitlement to Structural Funds will be fully drawn down in line with the timetable set out in the regulations. In those circumstances the proposal outlined in the Deputy's motion is not expected to arise.
Citizenship Applications.
I am grateful to the Ceann Comhairle for the opportunity to raise this important matter. Will the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform explain why the wait for a certificate of naturalisation from his Department's citizenship section is, without exception, over two years?
I am aware of the situation because of the case of a consultant plastic surgeon who is giving sterling service to the Irish health service and who was five years of age when she first came here. She attended school here but left when she was 13, to return at the age of 19 to study medicine in Ireland. She has been living here for more than half of her 29 years on this earth. Both her parents are naturalised Irish citizens and have lived here for the past 20 years. Her father is a consultant pathologist also giving sterling service to the health service in the west. Both he and his daughter pay their taxes to the State.
This girl has been in Ireland for 18 years. She is a Catholic, and she is now a consultant plastic surgeon. She holds an Iraqi passport, which is problematic for her as she must renew it every two years. She is employed in Ireland full-time and regularly travels abroad to represent her profession at various conferences she is required to attend. It is galling that she must apply for permission before leaving Ireland, where she has been all her life, where all her friends are, where her family is based, and which she regards as home. She must seek a visa to be allowed to re-enter the country.
It does not seem right that her situation should be so in a country that she regards as her own and of which her father and mother have been naturalised citizens for the past 20 years. This is her permanent home and the only place that she has known as such; it is where all her friends are. The passport she holds is also problematic, since she has difficulty securing visas to visit certain countries. She feels that her lack of an Irish passport interferes with her professional career and future prospects. Like her father, she has dedicated her life to the care of the Irish people.
I ask that the Minister examine this case. I know that a timetable is involved. When I previously asked a question, I was told by the Minister, Deputy McDowell, that the average processing time for a naturalisation application was 24 months. I was also told by the Minister that it would be September 2007 before the file was presented to him for a decision although it was received in his Department's citizenship section on 26 September 2005. That is a 24-month period. Will the Minister examine the case as a priority in view of the special circumstances of the case, which I suggest dictate a speedier response than two years? I hope the Minister will look into the situation.
I thank the Deputy for raising a very important humane issue. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, who cannot be present, has asked me to respond to the matter raised by the Deputy.
The average processing time for applications for certificates of naturalisation is 24 months. The lengthy processing time for such applications is primarily due to the significant increase in the volume of applications received in recent years. In the three-year period from 2000 to 2002, a total of 6,009 applications for naturalisation were received. However, in the following three-year period, from 2003 to 2005, the number of applications received increased by over 100% to 12,177. With almost 2,000 applications received in the first four months of 2006, the increase in applications being received shows no sign of slowing.
At the start of 2001, the average processing time for an application for naturalisation was two and a half years. Additional staff were assigned to the citizenship section of the Department and by the beginning of 2002, the average processing time had been reduced to 15 months. However, the processing time started to rise again as officials began to process the 3,574 applications received in 2002.
The Minister has informed the House on a number of occasions that the major reduction in the number of asylum applications has given him an opportunity to refocus resources in areas of service provision for non-nationals. Since November 2004, the number of staff working exclusively on citizenship matters has doubled to 41. This resulted in a stabilising of the processing time at 24 months, notwithstanding the continuing increase in the volume of applications being received. Citizenship is but one of the services provided by the Irish naturalisation and immigration service. Other sections within the broad immigration area, such as those dealing with visas and residency applications, have also been expanded to cope with the additional workload in those areas. While Department officials continue to examine ways to reduce processing times, in view of the significant increase in the volume of applications being received it is unlikely that an early reduction can be achieved in the current processing time of 24 months.
The application for naturalisation of the person referred to by the Deputy was received in the Department on 26 September 2005. Officials in the citizenship section are processing applications which were received in the first quarter of 2004 and it is estimated that approximately 6,300 applications are awaiting processing before the application of the individual in question is reached.
All persons awaiting decisions on their applications require or desire to be Irish citizens for a variety of reasons. Some wish to become part of Irish society because they have settled here and wish to become integrated into our community and way of life. Others may wish to avoid the necessity of having to register with the Garda Síochána or seek visas when travelling outside the State. However, naturalisation is not an entitlement, it is a privilege and an honour granted by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Consequently, the Minister has the responsibility to ensure that all applications are processed in a way which preserves the necessary checks and balances to ensure that the naturalisation process is not undervalued and is given only to persons who are suitably qualified.
The Minister has informed the House on a number of occasions in response to parliamentary questions that applications for naturalisation are dealt with as far as possible in chronological order and that this policy is only departed from in very exceptional circumstances. The details supplied by the Deputy on the matter raised in the House tonight seem to suggest that the person concerned is inconvenienced by our immigration requirements while travelling abroad. A possible solution to this problem, while she is awaiting a decision on her application, would be to apply to the Department for a multiple re-entry visa, thereby obviating the need to apply for a re-entry visa each time she travels abroad. I understand that she applied for and was granted such multiple re-entry visas in the past.
Having regard to all of the circumstances involved, the Minister does not consider it appropriate to expedite the processing of the application of the person concerned. Based on the current processing time of 24 months the person concerned can expect a decision on her application in or around 2007.
The Dáil adjourned at 9.15 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 10 May 2006.