Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen debate -
Thursday, 17 Oct 2024

Decisions on Public Petitions Received

An Cathaoirleach

Next item 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 five petitions for consideration today. The first is No. P00002/24, "Fairness for Existing Work Permit Holders: We want to stay and contribute", 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 ... [upsetting].

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

Before submitting this petition, I have taken several proactive steps to address the issues of concern. These include:

1. I have reached out to Minister Richmond, expressing my concerns about the new minimum salary requirement for General Employment Permits and asking for clarification on whether this change will apply to existing permit holders.

2. I have contacted all local Wexford TDs, seeking their assistance and guidance on this matter. These actions demonstrate my commitment to resolving this issue through open communication and dialogue with relevant parties. I have made sincere efforts to understand the implications of the new policy, to seek clarifications, and to explore possible solutions within my professional environment

There will be a consultation in the coming weeks with all stakeholders to provide constructive feedback and how it might be sustainably implemented in the future. Officials will assess the submissions from this consultation in conjunction with other data collected and will make recommendations later this year.

The committee recommends that the response from Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment be published and the correspondence from that Department be forwarded to the petitioner for information. The committee also recommends, based on the response from the Department, the petition be closed and the petitioner encouraged to engage with the Department when it seeks submissions for feedback on its roadmap. Do the members have any views?

Senator Eugene Murphy

No.

An Cathaoirleach

This has been thoroughly examined through the correspondence in both directions. The amount of correspondence between the staff of the committee and the petitioner has been huge.

Senator Eugene Murphy

I also think it will not apply to existing work permit holders.

An Cathaoirleach

Will it not?

Senator Eugene Murphy

I do not think it will.

An Cathaoirleach

You do not think it will. The purpose of this committee is to decide that. We will close the petition and ask the petitioner to engage with the Department.

Senator Eugene Murphy

I fully support that.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I agree with that.

An Cathaoirleach

Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next petition is No. P00053/24 "Register the public Right of Way on Deepwater Quay, Cobh" on behalf of Save Cobh's Right of Way. It states:

Register the public Right of Way on Deepwater Quay, Cobh. That the public Right of Way over Deepwater Quay/Five Foot Way be formally registered. The right of way has been used uninterrupted and without permission for generations, up to 200 years.

Regarding action taken to resolve the issue of concern before submitting the petition, the petitioners have canvassed all local council members and TDs and collected several thousand signatures in support of the petition.

Regarding action taken by the secretariat, the secretariat wrote to Cork County Council on 24 June 2024 seeking a response advising of its views within 14 days. On 10 July 2024, the secretariat received a response from Cork County Council.

The committee recommends that the response from Cork County Council be published and the correspondence from Cork County Council be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. Do the members have any views?

Deputy Pat Buckley

There is a fairly comprehensive response from Cork County Council's chief executives, and I thank them for that. It is unfortunate but the correspondence states, "Given the ongoing dispute before the Courts concerning the right of way", so obviously they cannot comment.

An Cathaoirleach

Litigation is going ahead.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, they cannot comment. The last line mentioned the next county development plan, which will be made in 2028. I sat on Cork County Council a number of years ago. A county development plan can be amended, but it has to go through the council as a democratic vote. That is something I wanted to flag, but I agree. The petition needs to be sent back to the petitioner to see what the response will be and see where it goes. I wanted to flag that as it might be an option.

An Cathaoirleach

It may be. To be honest, the response from the council has been fulsome. The committee recommends that the response be sent to the petitioner, but while litigation is ongoing, our hands are probably tied. What Deputy Buckley mentioned may be a way out of it. Is that agreed? Agreed.

The next petition is No. P00055/24 "Connect Eating Disorder Care and Provide a Sufficient Level of Service" from Ms Amy Hanley. It states:

More direct routes to access Eating Disorder (ED) care are needed, and earlier interventions for sufferers and parents are required. A connection in service between physical and mental health, such as ED specialists and mental health services in acute hospitals, and NG options in all inpatient units are needed. Additional inpatient units or a reduction in catchment area restrictions are needed.

The petitioner is looking for action to be taken on the following three steps. More direct routes to access eating disorder care are needed, and earlier interventions for sufferers and parents are required. Additional inpatient units or a reduction in catchment area restrictions are needed. Consistent funding each year and ring-fenced funding is extremely important to maintain and improve services.

The action taken to resolve the issue of concern before submitting the petition was the submission of a complaint to HSE Your Service Your Say with no response. A complaint was submitted to the Ombudsman for Children’s office and the petitioner worked with an investigator, but they had little to no power in clinical matters when inpatient units would not accept her daughter. The petitioner contacted all her local TDs, but the most they could do was submit parliamentary questions and contact the HSE on her behalf. The petitioner also emailed Linn Dara directly to try to resolve the issue and it referred her to CAMHS, which referred her back to Linn Dara. The petitioner asked for a meeting with the HSE and was ignored. A TD tried to get them mediation with the HSE, but they never got anywhere with that.

Regarding action taken by the secretariat, the secretariat wrote to the Department of Health and the Health Service Executive on 24 June 2024 seeking a response advising of their views within 14 days. The secretariat received a response from the Department of Health on 8 July 2024 and from the HSE on 16 July 2024.

The recommendations are that we publish the responses from the Department of Health and the Health Service Executive and that the correspondence from the Department of Health and from the Health Service Executive be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. Do the members have any views?

Deputy Pat Buckley

It is a pity that the treatment is still being done abroad. A lot of money is being spent on that. The response from the HSE is fairly comprehensive. I am very interested to see what the petitioner comes back with. I am looking forward to what the response is.

An Cathaoirleach

It is a very appropriate petition. It is disappointing to hear that the petitioner received no response after she complained through the Your Service Your Say service.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I certainly agree with that.

An Cathaoirleach

There was a television programme about this during the week but I did not see it. It seems to have been shoved up an alleyway in an attempt to get-----

Deputy Pat Buckley

I do not see any pathways. There are no pathways in it.

An Cathaoirleach

There are no pathways. Even if there was something for her daughter, changes could be made so this would not happen again.

Deputy Pat Buckley

The response mentions CAMHS and CHO 4, which covers Cork and Kerry. We do not have to go into that but having 0.04 of a specialist is like having one negative on a racehorse. That will tell you what resources are going into it. As I said, I would like to see the response that comes back from the petitioner on this. At least then we will be able to follow up it for them but I expect some more detail.

An Cathaoirleach

I can confirm, having represented a family in these circumstances, that the gaps in the system are significant. When you try to change them, you are bounced from one place to another, which is very disappointing and heartbreaking for families. We will see what happens. Is it agreed that we will publish them and wait for responses to come back?

Deputy Pat Buckley

That is agreed.

An Cathaoirleach

The next petition is No. P00056/24, "A Review of Business Improvement District Scheme", from the Restaurants Association of Ireland. It states:

I am writing to you today in my capacity as CEO of the Restaurants Association of Ireland (RAI) which has a large number of restaurants, café, gastropubs and other food-led businesses that are members of the representative body in Dublin city. In light of a number of concerns raised by Restaurants Association of Ireland members and other businesses within the relevant area of Dublin city, I would like to petition the Committee to hold a meeting on the Business Improvement District (BIDs) scheme in Dublin city centre.

The petitioner "would like to petition the Committee to hold a meeting on the Business Improvement District (BIDs) scheme in Dublin city centre". The action taken to resolve the issue of concern before submitting the petition was as follows:

The Restaurants Association of Ireland as advocated to Local Authorities who conduct the plebiscite in order to mandate Business Improvement Districts. Unfortunately, the Local Authorities have referred to the current legislation which must be changed in order for the list of eligible voters [to] be published.

On 1 July 2024, the secretariat wrote to Dublin City Council seeking a response advising of its views within 14 days. On 3 July 2024, the secretariat received a response from Dublin City Council. The recommendation is that we publish the response from Dublin City Council and that the correspondence from Dublin City Council be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. Do members have any views on this?

Deputy Pat Buckley

No, but I have read about the plebiscites and the democratic process that took place in 2007, 2012, 2017 and 2022. There were 733 in favour and 476 against. The next one is in place until 2028. I understand where the petitioner is coming from but more dialogue with Dublin City Council is the way to go here. It is a democratic process and it seems to be a fair one, even though the petitioner might not agree with it. The only way to resolve this is to deal directly with Dublin City Council.

An Cathaoirleach

Yes, the Deputy is right. It must be with Dublin City Council. There does not seem to have been any formal process initiated between them.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I would certainly agree with the recommendations. Let us see what they come back with. You have to talk to people. If you do not have dialogue, you do not get anything done.

Senator Eugene Murphy

It is probably a bit premature for us. I agree with Deputy Buckley that there are more discussions to take place. I can absolutely understand the petitioner's concerns but we need to let this play out with Dublin City Council. If the situation arises, we can then be of some assistance to them.

An Cathaoirleach

Before we get more involved, there needs to be discussions between the petitioner and Dublin City Council with regard to this. Is that agreed?

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, agreed.

An Cathaoirleach

The next petition is No. P00057/24, “Stop Dublin Airport illegally routing flights over Ratoath and Ashbourne", from Mr. Eoin Keary. It states:

A petition was started due to the continuous noise pollution over Ratoath since August 2023 by Dublin Airport. Ratoath suffers from continuous noise pollution as a result on a route followed by aircraft directly over the town.

The petitioner is requesting that action be taken and wants "DAA to stop flying over the town and use alternative routes where are many and easy to do." The actions taken to resolve the issue of concern before submitting this petition include drawing up an online petition, making contact with Meath County Council and all local TDs and councillors, and contacting and meeting the DAA with Councillor Gillian Toole and Councillor Nick Killian to no avail. On 2 July 2024, the secretariat here wrote to the DAA seeking a response advising of their views within 14 days. On 16 August 2024, the secretariat received a response from the DAA. The recommendation is that we publish the response from the DAA and that the correspondence from the DAA be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days. Do members have any views on this?

Deputy Pat Buckley

No, other than to say that there has been much correspondence and more has to be done. The petitioner has committed the DAA to try to sort this out. We know it has spent a lot of money on other issues. Again, I agree that we should send off the response to the petitioner and see what they come back with. It is about everybody working together. I do not know. I am very interested in what the petitioner will come back with after that response from the DAA. I agree with it.

An Cathaoirleach

It is a timely petition in light of the current issues regarding overall airport capacity and the extra flights. I agree with Deputy Buckley. We need more detail about what is involved in the review that is taking place. We can make some sort of judgment on what type of consultation is involved between the petitioner and the DAA. If everyone is happy, is that agreed?

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, that is agreed.

Senator Eugene Murphy

Agreed.

An Cathaoirleach

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 Oireachtas on a matter of general public concern or interest or an issue of public policy. Next on the agenda is any other business. Do members have any issues they wish to raise?

Deputy Pat Buckley

No.

An Cathaoirleach

On behalf of the committee, I thank the secretariat again for all the work it does for us on a daily and weekly basis. It makes our job very easy. I thank all of the staff.

The joint committee adjourned at 3.17 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Thursday, 24 October 2024.