Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen debate -
Thursday, 27 Jun 2024

Decisions on Public Petitions Received

An Cathaoirleach

I propose that the petitions considered by the committee at this meeting and previous meetings may be published and that the replies from the Departments and other bodies may also be published. Is that agreed? Agreed.

We have three petitions for consideration today. First is No. P00028/24, "Credit unions" from Mr. Brian Gould. It states:

My Petition is to amend the Credit Union Act 1997. The Credit Union Act 1997 as amended, Section 56B which covers the Nomination Committee of Credit Unions. The Nomination Committee can block or stop a Credit Union Member from standing for Election as Board Member or the Oversight Committee. A member needs the Permission to stand for Elections Section 56 (B). The Credit Union Act 1997 as amended does not specifically proscribe an appeals process. An organisation, clique or political party group could extend its influence over a Credit Union through the Nomination Committee. The Nomination Committee is made up of Board of Directors. It can also only allow current Board of Directors or Oversight Committee members to stand for Election.

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 same views.

The secretariat forwarded the correspondence from the Department of Finance to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and received a response earlier this year. The recommendation is that the correspondence from the petitioner be forwarded to the Department of Finance for comment within 14 days, and that the committee write to the Department to ask for details of any impediment to amending legislation relating to the appeal of selection of the oversight committee and inform the petitioner of same. Do the members have a view?

Senator Gerard P. Craughwell

Going back to when we looked at this, what we have now asked is if there is an impediment to changing the legislation, that should be dealt with by the Department. Typically, when we are talking about credit unions, it is a double-edged sword. We never know the reason a person may want to put in an appeal but, by and large, any position that is in the public arena should have an appeals mechanism in place if you are not able to do it. The Department may have very strict rationale as to why an appeal is not allowed. The decision that is made is the one we should go with.

An Cathaoirleach

That is agreed. The second petition is No. P00040/24, "Request for mental health facilities", from Ms Ann O'Mahony. It states:

I am petitioning for help for my sister who is living on the streets the past four years due to her mental health we have had her sectioned under the mental health act and she was released the same day, she hasn’t showered or changed her clothes in over 4 years, she is now walking the streets in her bare feet and weighing only 5 stone. She was arrested recently and had a psychotic episode but when a doctor came to assess her, she was then brought to a homeless shelter as she didn’t meet the requirements for the mental health act. As a family we have hit a brick wall at every stage trying to get help for my sister who is severely suffering. After meeting with Gardai, Doctors, Solicitors, T.D and the mental health unit this petition is our last hope as a family to get our sister and daughter the help she desperately needs.

The secretariat wrote to the Department of Health seeking a response advising of its views within 14 days. The secretariat received the response on 14 June 2024. It is a long response. The recommendation is that the correspondence from the Department of Health be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and to write to the Mental Health Commission for further advice. Do members have any views?

Senator Gerard P. Craughwell

The Chairman and other members of the committee have shown great compassion for this case but mental health issues are always down to the professionals working in the field. I do not believe this committee is in a position to dictate to the local mental health assessors how this person should be treated. It is a heartbreaking case. The Chairman made that point himself when speaking to me. We cannot force the State to take this woman into care or force this woman to be in care, under lockdown. It is a horrible situation for the family. The decision of the Chairman is to write to the family and give them the answer from the HSE. If they want to come back, by all means, we will look at it, but I cannot see any way that we can intervene.

An Cathaoirleach

Other than writing to the Mental Health Commission to see if it can give us any other advice for the family. That is what we discussed in private session. It is a heartbreaking story to see a family member like that. I hope the Mental Health Commission will be able to come back with different advice for the family. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Third is petition No. P00047/2024, “Vote against any WHO pandemic treaty and reform”, from Mr. C McMahon. It states:

Mussolini famously said, "Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power".

[The] WHO treaty if it were to pass would give an unelected organisation total power over world governments health policies.

The WHO is funded by private individuals and corporations, this could lead to health tyranny the likes of Aldous Huxley would have nightmares about.

This treaty must or any change in health policy relating to WHO treaty should be stopped.

A review must be conducted into [the] WHO and [the] Government response to the Covid pandemic. Leo Varadkar himself said the response was "quite totalitarian".

This type of Government overreach must never happen again.

Action taken to resolve the issue of concern before submitting the petition.

Petitions signed against, contact TDs to vote against.

The background is the secretariat wrote to the Department of Health seeking a response advising of its views within 14 days. The secretariat received a response from the Department of Health on 18 June. The recommendation is that we publish the response from the Department of Health and that the correspondence from the Department of Health be forwarded to the petitioner. In consideration of the response from the Department of Health, the petition cannot be progressed further by the joint committee on public petitions and the petitioner has been advised of same. Do members have any views?

Senator Gerard P. Craughwell

This is something that will pass through the Houses of the Oireachtas. It does not have any place in the petitions committee. It is up to the Legislature, which is put there by the public.

An Cathaoirleach

When it passes through the Houses, if this person wishes to submit a new petition at that stage, so be it. There is nothing we can do at this stage so we will deem it closed. Is that agreed? Agreed.

That concludes our consideration of public petitions 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 an issue of public policy.

Is there any other business? Do members have any issues they wish to raise? No.

I thank the staff again for all the work they do on our behalf. We discussed at a private meeting yesterday that from now on we will not look favourably on any petitions that go as far as abusing the staff here. They do a mountain of work on our behalf. On behalf of the committee, to Martha, Barbara, Alex, Ciaran and all the rest, I thank you for doing what you do for us. It makes our job very easy.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.05 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Thursday, 4 July 2024.