Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen debate -
Thursday, 16 May 2024

Decisions on Public Petitions Received

An Cathaoirleach

The next item is the consideration of public petitions. I propose that the petitions that are considered by the committee at this meeting and during previous meetings are published and that the replies from the Departments and other bodies may also be published. Is that agreed? Agreed.

We have four petitions for consideration today, the first of which is P00021/24, which is titled "4 day week", and is from Mr. Liam Doran. This petition relates to a request for a four-day week to be brought in, first in the Public Service. The background to this petition is that the secretariat sought the views of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. We received responses from both Departments on 22 February 2024. The two of them came in on the same day. This committee recommends publishing the response from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment and publishing the response from the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. I propose that the correspondence from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment is forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and that the correspondence from the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. Do members have any views on this?

Deputy Pat Buckley

No, Chair, but I agree with that. We have seen what has come back and it is fairly substantive.

An Cathaoirleach

Yes. The responses from both Departments have indicated that now is not the right time. It might be worth following up with them about whether they have considered when the right time would be. Also, to run a pilot programme like this, one would probably need more follow-up than just the likes of the public body because there would be fundamental changes. Are the recommendations agreed? Agreed.

The next petition is P00028/24 titled "Credit Unions" and is from Mr. Brian Gould. This petition relates to a request to amend the Credit Union Act 1997 and the Credit Union Act 1997, as amended, section 56(b), which covers the nomination committee for the credit unions. The nomination committee can block or stop a credit union member from standing for election as a board member or a member of the oversight committee. A member needs permission to stand for election under section 56(b). The Credit Union Act 1997, as amended, does not specifically prescribe an appeals process. An organisation, clique, political party or group could extend its influence over a credit union through the nomination committee. The nomination committee comprises board directors and can also allow current members of boards of directors or members of the oversight committee to stand for election.

Regarding unintended consequences, the nomination committee could keep the same board of directors or oversight committee in office for 12 years, or only allow people with the same views. First, the petition requests for an appeals process to be inserted into the Credit Union Act 1997, as amended, and second, that all members who wish to stand for the board of directors or the oversight committee should be notified about whether or not they are allowed to stand at least 14 days before an AGM, so that they can challenge a decision taken by the nomination committee.

The background to this petition is that the secretariat sought the views of the Department of Finance and received a response on 6 March 2024. The recommendation of the committee is to publish the response from the Department of Finance and that the correspondence from the Department of Finance is forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. Do members have any views on that?

Deputy Pat Buckley

I agree with that. We received a comprehensive response from the Secretary General. We will see what the petitioner says.

An Cathaoirleach

The correspondence from the Department of Finance clearly states that there may be a misinterpretation of the relevant parts of the Credit Union Act on behalf of the petitioner. I suggest that we await the petitioner’s response in case a more detailed analysis of the Act is required. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Next, we will deal with P00029/24, which is titled "Ireland, Open up an emergency admission program for Sudanese people fleeing war" and is from the Sudanese community in Ireland. This petition calls on the Irish Government to provide a safe haven for the Sudanese people affected by the ongoing war in Sudan. The Sudanese community in Ireland is urging the Government to introduce an emergency admission programme specifically for Sudanese nationals. The implementation of this programme would ensure that Sudanese refugees fleeing war would receive the necessary resources and support to rebuild their lives and create a better future for themselves. The petition appeals for the consideration of the following groups related to Sudanese residents in Ireland: naturalised Irish citizens; UK, EU and EEA citizens originally from Sudan and living in Ireland; spouse or de facto; spouse or civil partner; adults and minor children; a related minor child without parents for whom they have parental responsibility, such as a sibling, orphan niece, nephew or grandchild; parents; grandparents; and adult siblings or any other vulnerable adult who is a close family member who does not have a spouse, partner or other close relatives to support them. The petitioner believes that Ireland has a longstanding tradition of providing refuge to those in need and hopes that the Irish Government will recognise the urgency of this situation and take swift action to support the Sudanese people affected by the war.

The background to this petition is that the secretariat sought the views of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Department of Justice and received their responses on 26 February 2024 and 12 March 2024, respectively. The recommendation of the committee is to publish the responses from the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of Justice, and that the responses from the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of Justice are forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. Do members have any views on that?

Deputy Pat Buckley

I agree with that.

An Cathaoirleach

The Department of Justice has no plans to establish such a programme for people from Sudan joining family members here but it is open to people affected who have been here to apply for a visa. We will wait to hear the response from the petitioner once they receive the correspondence. Is that agreed?

Deputy Pat Buckley

Agreed.

An Cathaoirleach

Petition No. P00030/24, entitled "Request for Oireachtas Investigation into IHREC Funding Allocation", was submitted by Mr. Brian Hogan. This petition relates to the funding allocation and potential conflicts of interest regarding the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC. Under the 2022 gross Estimate provision for Vote 25, the IHREC received Exchequer funding of €7.614 million, with €4.356 million allocated for pay-related expenditure and €3.258 million for non-pay expenditure. The recent revelation that a charity received a grant from the IHREC has raised concerns. The petitioner sought clarification from the IHREC on these matters but unfortunately received a vague and generic response that did not address the issue of transparency and the safeguards that are crucial in the handling of public funds. He says that this lack of clear communication and transparency is disconcerting and raises questions about the IHREC's commitment to accountability. He hopes it is not another RTÉ situation and, as such, urges the Oireachtas to initiate a thorough investigation into these matters to ensure the integrity of IHREC operations and the proper use of public funds. The petitioner says that this apparent overlap between the IHREC funding allocation and the involvement of a member in a beneficiary organisation is a matter of public interest and requires careful scrutiny. He requests a transparent and comprehensive investigation to maintain public trust in the IHREC.

The secretariat has sought the views of IHREC and received a response on 21 March 2024. The committee recommends that we publish the response from IHREC and that the correspondence be forwarded to the petitioner for information. It is also recommended that we attach a detailed response to a query from Mr. Hogan on 14 November 2023. The petition cannot be progressed further by the Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen and should be closed and that the petitioner advised of same. The name of the charity should not be published. Do members have any views or is that agreed?

Deputy Pat Buckley

I agree with that.

An Cathaoirleach

That concludes our consideration of public petitions for this afternoon. I invite members of the public to submit petitions via our online portal, which is available at petitions.oireachtas.ie. A petition may be addressed to the Houses of the Oireachtas on a matter of general public concern or interest or on an issue of public policy. We will move on to any other business. Do members have any issues they wish to raise?

Deputy Pat Buckley

No.

An Cathaoirleach

Before we go, I thank Leo Bollins for stepping in for Martha Dowling for the past couple of meetings. I wish Martha all the best. She is recuperating from a cold. I also thank Alex Alino, Barbara Hughes, Ciaran McConway and all of the rest of the secretariat staff who do a great deal of work here on our behalf. As we say at the end of every meeting, "Thank you and well done".

The joint committee adjourned at 3.04 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Thursday, 23 May 2024.