Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen debate -
Thursday, 19 Sep 2024

Decisions on Public Petitions Received

An Cathaoirleach

Next is the consideration of public petitions. I propose that the petitions considered by the committee at this meeting and previous meetings may be published; and that the replies from the Department and other bodies may also be published. Is that agreed? Agreed.

We have seven petitions for consideration today. The first is No. P00021/22, the Kiltimagh water scheme, from Mr. Tom Carney. It goes:

We are a village of about twenty families in Kiltimagh, County Mayo. The age ranges between twelve months and 88 years old. We have never had a drinking water supply in our village. We started back in 2012 working with Mayo County Council. ...

Fast forward finally getting funding for a water supply to all homes in 2019. Since them we have hit road blocks with Mayo Council and ... [Uisce Éireann]. All funding is in place and all family’s had contributed €1500 to €3000 each [from the] household. We provided all maps worked with approved contractors all to no avail. Irish water and Mayo council don’t get along and we will never get a water supply. We have [petitioned] every political figure in [M]ayo. To no avail again. Mayo Council and Irish water don’t get along. I have at least sixty emails and letters to council and [Uisce Éireann]. I have three very young children and buying bottled water has my family struggle day in day out. All the same for the village.

The background to this is the secretariat wrote to the following requesting a progress report as agreed with the petition, who appeared before this committee on 4 July 2024. First, there was a replied received from Uisce Éireann. Second, there was a reply received from Mayo County Council. Third, there was a reply received from the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage. Fourth, there was a reply received from the Department Rural and Community Development. Fifth, as for the Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications, there was no reply there.

The committee recommends that the response from Mayo County Council be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days, the response from Uisce Éireann be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and the response from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days.

Given several urgent requests for update from the petitioner during the recess, members were contacted individually to confirm if they were happy that these responses be forwarded to the petitioner. The majority of the members of this committee agreed. Those items of correspondence were then forwarded to the petitioner on 27 August 2024. I spoke to the clerk to the committee on that and we agreed to contact the members and most of the members agreed that we could send on the correspondence to Mr. Carney.

I suppose we are asking the Minister for a progress report just to keep track of what seems to be an urgent situation. It is urgent, but it has been going on for so long as well.

We also note that Irish Water has confirmed that the design is finished and it is waiting on a connection agreement or an offer being issued subject to the confirmation from Mayo County Council as to whether the funding application will be successful.

Meanwhile, the housing Minister has told us that, in terms of the additional funding, the local authority wrote to the Department on 17 May on funding for the water connection project and the Department has met with the local authority on this. The progress, he says, is expected to conclude in the coming weeks. At our private meeting yesterday, we agreed to ask the Minister for the progress report to keep track of what is going on.

If we are happy with that, are those responses agreed? Agreed.

The next petition is No. P00035/22, to amend the Child Care Act 1991 to provide HIQA with the necessary powers to sanction Tusla - Child and Family Agency when it fails to meet its statutory obligations. The Alliance of Birth Mothers Campaigning for Justice is requesting that the committee initiate the necessary steps to amend the Child Care Act 1991, as amended in 2011, to provide HIQA with powers to sanction Tusla when it fails to meet its statutory obligations.

The Alliance of Birth Mothers Campaigning for Justice is Ireland's leading advocacy group for birth mothers whose children had been taken into care by Tusla. HIQA carries out inspections in each of Tusla's 17 service areas. HIQA publishes the results of these inspections, the vast majority of which find serious non-compliance in one or more standards inspected.

HIQA does not have the power under the Child Care 1991 to sanction Tusla. The latest report published by HIQA of 8 June 2022 found that the Cork service area, which has 26% of the total child population of Ireland, was compliant in only two of the 12 standards inspected.

The background to this is that the secretariat received correspondence from Tusla based on the appearance of the Alliance of Birth Mothers Campaigning for Justice before the committee on 13 June 2024. The secretariat received an email on 28 August 2024 in relation to petition No. P00035/22 to provide HIQA with the necessary powers to sanction Tusla - Child and Family Agency when it fails to meet its statutory obligations and Deputy Mattie McGrath was requesting an update. A reply was issued to Deputy McGrath advising that this petition would be before the committee again for further consideration at its private meeting on Wednesday, 18 September, and its public meeting on Thursday, 19 September 2024 whereby the members would agreed on any further action.

The committee recommends that the correspondence from Tusla be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days, asks whether the secretariat can find out what happens if Tusla is not compliant, and write to Tusla to ask what kind of database it is using to track children in its care and if there is a follow-up on children going into care.

The appearance of the alliance of birth mothers contained a lot of information and a lot of concern and details. Deputy Buckley chaired that meeting on my behalf that day; I was not available. The committee was informed of the petitioners' views that there is dysfunction in Tusla that is leading to the failure to protect some of the children that it has taken into State care. They outline media reports on the matter, including the time it takes for a child sexual abuse case to get to court because of ongoing problems in data-sharing. They state children are being held in care for twice as long as the legal limit and raised the unknown whereabouts of certain children, evidence of unregulated accommodation, as well as issues with vetting. There was also a discussion on whether Tusla has a centralised database on the number of children missing from State care and whether it has a centralised database on the number of babies a few days old who it takes into State care and if section 39 does not legislate for sanctions when Tusla has been non-compliant.

We have agreed to follow up with Tusla on the concerns expressed regarding the sanctions that can be placed on Tusla for noncompliance. We have also agreed to pursue the matter of databases and how they account for and keep records on all children in care. I suggest that a transcript of the committee meeting be issued to Tusla for a full response. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. P0002/24 is titled "Fairness for existing work permit holders: We want to stay and contribute". It is from Mr. Ka Wai Ho. It states:

As an individual deeply affected by the recent change in the minimum salary requirement for General Employment Permits, I am seeking your support through this petition. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment has announced an increase to €39,000, effective from January 2025. This sudden and significant increase has left many permit holders, including myself, facing an uncertain future in Ireland.

While I understand and respect the government's need to regulate in the best interest of the nation, I am deeply concerned about the potential impact this change could have on my life and the lives of many others. We have made Ireland our home, contributing to its economic growth and societal diversity.

This petition is not in opposition to the policy change, but rather a plea for consideration for those of us who are existing permit holders. The prospect of potentially having to leave the country due to not meeting the new salary requirement is deeply unsettling.

I urge the government to consider a transition plan or a grandfather clause for existing permit holders, allowing those of us who have been contributing to Irish society to continue to do so without fear of displacement.

I kindly request your support in this matter. Your signature can help ensure that my voice, and the voices of others in my situation, are heard. Thank you for your consideration.

The action taken to resolve the issue before submitting the petition was to reach out to the Minister of State, Deputy Richmond, to express concerns about the new minimum salary requirement for general employment permits and to ask for clarification regarding whether this change will apply to existing permit holders. All local TDs in County Wexford were also contacted to seek their assistance and guidance on this matter. These actions demonstrate the petitioner's commitment to resolving the issue through open communication and dialogue with relevant parties. The petitioner has made a sincere effort to understand the implications of the new policy, seek clarification and explore possible solutions within his professional environment.

The background to this is that the secretariat forwarded the correspondence from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment to the petitioner for comment within 14 days, as agreed at the meeting of 11 July 2024, and received two responses from the petitioner, on 8 and 10 August 2024. The committee recommends that the correspondence from the petitioner be forwarded to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment for comment within 14 days.

The petitioner has genuine concerns and welcomes the responses he has received. As he has said, he has been quite open about it and sees where the Minister is coming from. Maybe something will emerge from the response. We will see. Do any of the members have other views to express?

Deputy Pat Buckley

No.

An Cathaoirleach

No. P00013/24 is titled "Justice and recognition for the state abused", and is from Mx Corwyn Bertrand-Fuchs. It states:

I want recognition for those abused in the state-run homes. I want a public apology and the last abusive children's home still open closed. Separate public petition underway.

The actions requested by the petitioner are recognition for those abused in the State-run homes, a public apology and the last abusive children's home still open to be closed. The background here is that correspondence from the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth was forwarded to the petitioner in June 2024. The secretariat received a response from the petitioner on 4 July 2024.

The committee recommends that the correspondence from the petitioner be forwarded to the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth for comment within 14 days. The petition is in its early days and we have received a response in respect of the petitioner's submission to the Department outlining the action plan for survivors of the former residents of mother and baby and county home institutions.

I am still not convinced that the response deals with the specific situation in which the petitioner finds themselves. I suggest that we ask the petitioner to outline if they feel the same. If that is the case, I suggest that the response include all scenarios and homes being covered. It seems to be the case here that the petitioner does not seem to be happy that everything is being covered. While we are forwarding the Department's response to the petitioner, I also suggest that we get back in touch with the Department to request that it respond to the petitioner's specific scenario and determine if we can find out information concerning the location where the petitioner was resident and see if that home or institution, whichever it may be, comes under the remit of this committee or the Department itself. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. P00028/24, titled "Credit unions", is from Mr. Brian Gould. It states: "My Petition is to amend the Credit Union Act 1997, Section 56B, which covers the Nomination Committee of Credit Unions." The background here is that the secretariat forwarded the correspondence from the petitioner to the Department of Finance for comment within 14 days, after it was discussed at our committee meeting in June, and a response was received. The committee recommends publishing the response from the Department of Finance and that the correspondence from the Department be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. There has been considerable over-and-back communication between the petitioner, the Department and the staff here. In the latest response from the Department, particular reference is made to the nominating committee as requested by the petitioner. The same is the case regarding the appeals process. We will await the petitioner's response to the details provided by the Department before making any other recommendations, if people are happy with that. Is that agreed? Agreed.

No. P00033/24 is titled “Toxic Fumes on Aer Lingus Flights - Severe and Increasing danger to public health and safety - Urgent” and is from Captain Tom O'Riordain. It states:

On the 5th of June 2023, whilst operating as a Captain on an Aer Lingus flight I was poisoned by toxic fumes and rushed to Beaumont hospital by emergency ambulance, where I stayed for five days. I had reported fumes on this particular aircraft when operating the previous day. We were assured the issue had been resolved, it was not. Aer Lingus failed to locate and isolate the source of the fumes. The aircraft was released for service in an unsafe state, putting both crew and public at high risk. After my poisoning, oil was found in the engine of the aircraft and the engine was removed.

Aer Lingus have experienced 22 such fume events between January 2023 and January 2024. This is verifiable from internal data, along with information that the trend is increasing. This is a public danger issue, in that both crew and passengers may have experienced toxic fume exposure without their knowledge. The Department of Transport and A.A.I.U have failed to class my particular incident as a "serious incident" in alignment with I.C.A.O Annex 13, definition of a "serious incident". They have yet to confirm whether all 22 fume incidents were investigated and the outcomes.

The background to this is that the secretariat forwarded the correspondence from the petitioner to the Department of Transport for comment within 14 days, as agreed at the meeting of 20 June 2024, and received a response including an attachment from the air accident investigation unit, AAIU.

The committee recommends that the correspondence from the Department of Transport be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and that the correspondence from the air accident investigation unit be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days.

There is a lot of detail in this petition. I thank the petitioner for bringing it forward. We have received responses in the course of addressing this petition from the Irish Aviation Authority, IAA, the air accident investigation unit, Aer Lingus and the Department of Transport. There are several factors to take into account here. These include the prohibition on the IAA, AAIU and the Department from discussing aviation safety occurrences, reports, safety sensitive information, any information related to protected disclosures, certification on air conditioning systems and other matters. There are also matters in hand regarding the involvement of the appropriate regulatory bodies. This committee must take note of this situation because our terms of reference preclude us from considering a petition that deals with matters more appropriate to a regulatory public body or a body established for the purpose of redress.

As I have outlined, given that this matter is an ongoing case with the IAA, we can no longer proceed with the petition as far as I am concerned.

Does anybody else have a comment on this or is that agreed?

Senator Eugene Murphy

I agree with the Chair's assessment. Obviously, there is an ongoing investigation there with relevant authorities. At this stage, from my perspective, it would be wrong of us to have anything to do with it.

Deputy Pat Buckley

In fairness to all the separate entities there, their responses were very comprehensive. It is about being fair as well. When issues like this come up, there is a procedure that you have to respect and honour. I would definitely and wholeheartedly agree with the Chair's recommendation on that.

An Cathaoirleach

I propose we write to the petitioner and inform them that we are closing this because of that. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Next is P00036/24, "Action needed for derelict buildings in Youghal, County Cork", from Ms Irene Karrouze. It states:

Many of you will know my parents have lived at 31 Friar Street for the past 52 years, they take pride in their house and maintain it to a good standard. They have worked hard, pay their taxes including their property tax. They are adjoined to 30 Friar Street, once a historical building now vacant and left to ruin. Living next to a derelict building has a very negative impact if you are attached. 30 Friar Street has no roof therefore the weather is causing the interior of the building to collapse causing damp and infestation of rodents especially in the winter months. Going to bed every night not knowing if the wall your bed is against may collapse is very stressful for my parents. This is compounded by the concerns over the potential danger to pedestrians if the beam collapses and falls through one of the front windows onto Friar Street. My father has asked the town hall councillors for help over this matter for over three years. As there has been no action to remedy any of the safety concerns he has asked me to help. Since January 2023 we have contacted the Councillors at Youghal town hall, the Garda station, requested freedom of information (FOI), Ombudsman, Director of service, East Cork Municipal District officer, CEO Cork County Council. Ireland has a Derelict site act and a Local government (Sanitary Services) Act 1964 that can be served on behalf of the Town council to ensure the safety of buildings to prevent public liability. A notice was served to the owner of 30 Friar Street in September 2022 with 8 weeks to respond. The owners of the property did not respond to the request. My parents were told that under Tort law it is their responsibility for the upkeep of their property and to go after the owners themselves if the property is causing a nuisance! However, the Director of Service has promised some remedial work but this has not happened. We have 100 vacant properties in Youghal and about 9 could be defined as derelict. Without the support of the Town Hall to use the law to protect this town and its residents these buildings are going to become liabilities for all and health and safety hazards for those in close proximity. As we have failed to progress this matter using all avenues available to us, resulting in no signs of a resolution or progress in any form, could we please ask for your help and support? 30 Friar Street is at risk of further deterioration and potential collapse in the coming months. The facade of the building is listed due to its historic interest. There are likely many other buildings across our town with similar fates. If you think that Cork County Council should prioritise the plight of derelict buildings, could you please sign this petition as putting pressure on this issue may support my parents and the health and safety risks, they inevitability face as the building continues to deteriorate.

With regard to action taken to resolve the issues before submitting the petition, they went through all the usual avenues, starting with home insurance, logging it with the Garda station, the local council, director of services, the CEO of Cork County Council and social media, with a story published in a national newspaper.

An update, and as agreed at the meeting of 11 July 2024, is that the secretariat wrote to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to try to get the answers for the petitioner and received the response. It is in the summary note. The secretariat forwarded correspondence from the petitioner to Cork County Council for comment within 14 days as agreed in the meeting of 11 July 2024, and received a response.

The recommendations are that we publish the response from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage; that we publish the response from Cork County Council; that the correspondence from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days; that the correspondence from Cork County Council will be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days; and that a request be made to Cork County Council for a timeline on when the issue will be rectified.

In April, the council informed us of the property being served with a section 11 notice, and on 16 April, advised that the owners had until 30 April to carry out the works prescribed in the notice. On 24 July, the council informed us that it had initiated legal proceedings against the owners and cannot comment any further as a result.

As we are all aware, dereliction is a scourge in all our towns and villages, especially when it poses a risk, particularly to a house next door to it. This should be taken more seriously by all our councils because we see in all the councils that some of the derelict buildings are a disgrace and an eyesore in all our towns and villages.

We have agreed to also request a timeline from Cork County Council on when the issue will be rectified but I would also suggest that we raise the safety concerns with it, and what actions it will take in the meantime to rectify those. Would it be worth asking where responsibility for this lies in cases where the council had been notified? With the difficulties in establishing ownership, who is responsible if the adjoining wall collapses or if one of the beams falls, like has been said? Have any members anything else to add?

Deputy Pat Buckley

In fairness to the family, and in fairness to Cork County Council as well, there has been a lot of to and fro. I understand that when there is a notice served, and so on and so forth, there are time limits on this but there seems to be a gap in trying to find out who actually owns that property. Surely there is a land register there. For these families, I know what it is like because there is no roof on it. With whatever water is going in, there is dampness and it is going into the buildings on either side. They are right. A lot of the buildings in Youghal have massive historic value. Many people do not even know that Youghal was a walled town. There are still parts of that wall there. There is history there, and the people of Youghal are proud of that.

Certainly, the timeframe is a very important one and it needs to go back to the family that there is a timeframe. I do not know if it requires a compulsory purchase order to take that property over if it is derelict, under the grounds of health and safety, to rectify the concerns. We saw it a couple of years ago in Cork city. On three occasions, buildings were neglected but it was too late and they fell down. Unfortunately, there was a young lady killed there a number of years ago as well. I would be interested to see what Cork County Council will come back with as to what the plan is. It is certainly more urgent now. They have been contacting an awful lot of Departments there and I think that, probably, the Youghal municipal council could have a part to play as well. I would like to follow that up and try to keep that going because we are coming into another winter now. It does not enhance the chances of what is left of that building staying up. I thank the Chair.

An Cathaoirleach

What I have always seen, since I was on the council in 2012, is that if you put a compulsory purchase order on it you will find out fairly quickly who actually owns the building.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Absolutely.

An Cathaoirleach

You might have difficulty when you are asking them to do something but that changes as soon as the owners think they may lose that building.

Senator Eugene Murphy

We have some similar cases up and down the country. I am satisfied to see what comes back and we will take it from there.

An Cathaoirleach

That is agreed so. 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.

Next is any other business. Members of this committee were asked if they wish to merge the private and public sessions so that they take place on one day instead of two. The majority have confirmed that they are in agreement with this, so this was agreed in the private session yesterday. Can we agree formally that this will be the case from next week onwards? Agreed.

Do members have any other issues they wish to raise?

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, I have one or two little things. I want to thank the secretariat here, including Alex and the whole crew.

We had that family in over the Mary Kate ship a long time ago, and we were just looking for updates on that because it is going back nearly six months now.

The committee had agreed that we would appoint a marine barrister to review all the records of that beam trawler. I do not know what the progress is on that.

I would like to give a little update on another matter. I know the gang affected by the flooding in east Cork, particularly in Mogeely and Gleann Fia. Their situation is very different. I see it from the correspondence here. It has been a bit slow. I love the way the lady on the correspondence said all they were asking for was for the Government to look at Gleann Fia with a value-for-money view and to protect them for future flooding as opposed to a full relocation cost at the site value of over 100 residents. Under the minor flood mitigation scheme, some money has now become available so it might progress their issues a bit faster. I flag with the committee that I have met with other families in different estates. There is a tranche of money coming out. I might as well put it on the record that the flood gates that you can attach to your windows and front and back doors are probably after tripling, if not quadrupling, in price since the floods. Those who make them now know that there is grant money available. That is putting families under pressure. However, the houses in Gleann Fia are very different because they are timber-framed and are vented. There is a major need for land mitigation. The OPW has visited it but I want to keep it on record to keep it hot.

Finally, I see correspondence back from Cork County Council about a matter that has been ongoing for a long time in Cobh. The Cathaoirleach would be familiar with Deepwater Quay in Cobh. It is about a right of way. I will record a quote here from Cork County Council. It has been very fair but I wish to flag this:

As regards that particular property, Cork County Council is aware that the Deep Water Quay at Cobh is private property owned by the Port of Cork. Cork County Council is aware that claims have been made that there is a public right of way over it but those claims are disputed by the Port of Cork, and the dispute has been subject to litigation and it is accordingly not the role of Cork County Council to adjudicate upon that dispute.

It goes on to say:

Given the ongoing dispute before the Courts concerning the right of way over the Deep Water Quay, it is not appropriate at this time for Cork County Council to consider the alleged public right of way for inclusion in the County Development Plan.

I am surprised. The next county development plan is in 2028. God only knows if they will still be fighting or litigating in the courts over this. I thought the Port of Cork belonged to the people. I want to flag that. They were on about different planning and development Acts, including the 2000 Act. It is very interesting that it can be changed through a county development plan. I am interested in the suggestion that we will have to wait for the next one in 2028. When I sat on Cork County Council, a county development plan could be amended at any time. I have been involved in stuff like that. Would it be possible to write back to Cork County Council? I notice there is something legal there but that barrier can be removed. If the Port of Cork is part of Cork, Cork County Council is part of Cork, Cobh is part of Cork and the quay is part of Cork, why cannot we change the development plan now to include this right of way along the quays? Tourism down around Cobh is absolutely massive. What I love about Cobh is that all the entities, including the Tidy Towns committee, the chamber of commerce and the sports clubs, work together. This is another valued amenity. We should not try to fix something that is not broken. Would it be possible to write to Cork County Council to ask or suggest that the existing county development plan be amended, with the agreement of those who are looking for the right of way to be returned, Cork County Council and the Port of Cork?

An Cathaoirleach

If the Deputy proposes that, I will second it. If there are no objections, we can write such a letter.

Deputy Pat Buckley

That is grand.

An Cathaoirleach

I will vouch for what the Deputy said about all the groups working together in Cobh.

Deputy Pat Buckley

It is unbelievable.

An Cathaoirleach

I have seen it in action down there. It is unbelievable when they get together, especially around festival time.

Deputy Pat Buckley

By God, they know how to turn on a party.

An Cathaoirleach

They do.

Regarding the flooding issue, is that the estate where a farmer------

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, that is the one where the farmer-----

An Cathaoirleach

-----let his field flood?

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, he let the field flood and then they-----

An Cathaoirleach

Is that knocked or is it still in the pipeline?

Deputy Pat Buckley

From the correspondence I am getting, they are not really interested because once the water is released it has to go into a culvert. I think it is the OPW that is claiming that further downstream it will get into Castlemartyr and that could cause more problems there. I have met representatives of Cork County Council privately on this and discussed it all. They were immensely honest with me. However, there are barriers between the OPW, Cork County Council and Inland Fisheries Ireland. There is friction and it is not progressing. It may not be the best solution for the residents here but it is a quick win that we want. I was at a meeting for other areas in east Cork, including Tír Cluain. Those ones are suited to a barrier. It is not the best preventative measure but it is the first preventative measure if anything happens, God forbid. I give credit to the Minister. When I flagged this flooding, there was an issue with a bridge, and that has been removed. There was a massive issue with undergrowth along the riverbank and massive mounds of gravel were building up. They were removed only a number of weeks ago. This was in progress. I have no problem saying on record that the issue in this regard was not the OPW, the county council or the Government; it was Inland Fisheries Ireland. I am asking for a common-sense approach on this. It may not be the best solution, but there are quick-fix solutions for these people.

I am fortunate where I am now. I live up a hill but every time I hear of flooding, I am looking at these people. I have met the families. They are absolutely broken. While we are at it, when the new humanitarian fund came out, many families in estates who were part of the council housing stock were looked after but if you bought a house privately, you were on your own. You did not get a skip. Your insurance company is still fighting with you. I have met people who have had to hire solicitors to fight insurance companies to give them what they were entitled to after that flood. I have seen the devastation of it. It has broken people mentally. We have seen it, and it is mentioned on one page in the correspondence. They were very swift to act when it came to businesses because they are rate-payers. The minute you go out of the rate-paying area and there is no money coming back, it starts to get complicated, messy and slow. I appeal to all of them to do the quick fixes now and hopefully we will not be facing another bad winter this year. They are going to have to do something at some stage.

An Cathaoirleach

It is in the returns we have seen that there are different issues. Everyone has difficulties. In many different Departments, everything is just spun around in a circle and moved on to someone else.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes.

An Cathaoirleach

Coming back to that flooding and what the Deputy said, if businesses have doubled or tripled the prices of flood defences, it is a shame on them.

Deputy Pat Buckley

It is absolutely disgraceful.

An Cathaoirleach

It is disgraceful that they are making profits on people's misery. We all know they are in business but exploiting people who are in those kinds of situations is a shame on them.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes. I said that at a private meeting which went on until 10.30 p.m. I listened to the reality of those people and heard about how it affects them and their fear. They put all their life savings into a house which they wanted to make a home but it is now just a house again because of the damage. They cannot get insurance. That is not happening. They are afraid to invest back into their homes unless they have the tiniest bit of support. They are not looking for a miracle. They want someone to say that if the water comes up 2 ft this time, it will not come in their backdoor because we will have the proper things in place. I thank the Government for putting money aside for the grants. You give credit where credit is due. There is price-gouging now and it is at the expense and misfortune of those who were flooded. It is not fair.

I just wanted to flag that as well.

An Cathaoirleach

As there are no other issues that members wish to raise, the committee will adjourn until 1.30 p.m. on Thursday, 26 September when we will meet first in private session.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.30 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Thursday, 26 September 2024.