I propose to take Questions Nos. 440 and 441 together.
The Department of Agriculture Food and Marine (DAFM) is the lead Department as regards the re-opened pilot case concerning finfish aquaculture and I am advised that DAFM sought the observations of my Department on 7 January and observations were returned ahead of the deadline of 15 January. Further observations were subsequently sought by DAFM on 3 February with date for return of 12 February and my Department responded on that date.
All observations in this matter were supported by fact-based scientific and technical research from the Departments statutory scientific advisors, Inland Fisheries Ireland. This research has been extensively peer reviewed and published in reputable scientific journals.
The matter referred to in these Questions relates to a request by a third party to the Office of the Ombudsman for redress for maladministration based on the actions of DAFM in relation to the pilot case. The Office of the Ombudsman is a statutorily independent function and it would not be appropriate to make public comment on matters it has reported on. Where someone is dissatisfied with the outcome of the Ombudsman’s consideration, this should be communicated to that Office in the first instance.