Written Answers Nos. 189-195
189. Deputy John McGuinness asked the Minister for Health why a person was waiting five hours to have an operation and was discharged without having it; why the operation was on other dates; the date the operation will now be arranged for; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [11162/16]
View answerUnder the Health Act 2004, the Health Service Executive (HSE) is required to manage and deliver, or arrange to be delivered on its behalf, health and personal social services. Section 6 of the HSE Governance Act 2013 bars the Minister for Health from directing the HSE to provide a treatment or a personal service to any individual or to confer eligibility on any individual. The National Waiting List Management Policy, A standardised approach to managing scheduled care treatment for in-patient, day case and planned procedures, January 2014, has been developed to ensure that all administrative, managerial and clinical staff follow an agreed national minimum standard for the management and administration of waiting lists for scheduled care. This policy, which has been adopted by the Health Service Executive, sets out the processes that hospitals are to implement to manage waiting lists. In relation to the particular query raised, as this is a service matter, I have asked the HSE to respond to you directly. If you have not received a reply from the HSE within 15 working days please contact my Private Office and my officials will follow the matter up.
190. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine the statute under which the name of Bord na gCon was changed to the Irish Greyhound Board; the reason for this change; if he will revert to the name given in the Greyhound Industry Act 1958 which was Bord na gCon in the proposed new legislation for this sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10953/16]
View answerBord na gCon was established under the Greyhound Industry Act 1958 to provide for the improvement and development of the greyhound industry, greyhound racing and coursing and for the better control of greyhound race tracks and coursing grounds. There has been no change to the Bord na gCon name.
191. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine whether the €15 million to be invested in island communities during the course of the rural development programme as a special payment to assist island farmers in preserving traditional farming methods and preventing land abandonment as outlined on page 114 of the programme for Government is additional to the already operational island top-up on the payment for areas of natural constraint and the Aran life project; if it is, the nature of the projects this funding will be spent on; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10962/16]
View answerIreland’s Rural Development Programme contains two sub-measures which together form the Areas of Natural Constraint Scheme. These are the continuation of the previous support delivered under the Less Favoured Areas Scheme and a new targeted support for island farmers. This support for island farmers was included in the RDP in recognition of the specific constraints island farmers face. For example, island holdings are generally small and fragmented and farming these holdings is a low yield and labour intensive undertaking. In recognition of these constraints, the Areas of Natural Constraints Scheme includes higher rates of payment for island farmers as follows:
- €250 per hectare for the first 20 hectares of island land farmed
- €170 per hectare for hectares 20-34
- €70 per hectare for hectares 34-40
The €15 million commitment in the Programme for Government will underpin these payments and ensure sufficient funding is available in the RDP during the remainder of the term of the programme.
192. D'fhiafraigh Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív den Aire Talmhaíochta, Bia agus Mara cad é méid iomlán na híocaíochta a bhí dlite d’fheirmeoir (sonraí tugtha) faoin scéim um roghanna comhshaoil talmhaíochta (AEOS) do 2015; cén méid atá le baint as an íocaíocht sin mar phionóis atá gearrtha air do na blianta 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 agus 2015; cén méid atá íoctha leis go dáta faoi scéim 2015; cén fuílleach atá le híoc leis fós don bhliain 2015 agus cén uair a íocfar é; agus an ndéanfaidh sé ráiteas ina thaobh. [10969/16]
View answerChuir an duine a ainmnítear tús lena gconradh faoin Scéim um Roghanna Comhshaoil Talmhaíochta (an SRCT) an 1 Samhain 2010. Eisíodh an íocaíocht do bhlianta 2010-2014 na Scéime. Faoi Rialacháin an AE a rialaíonn an Scéim agus scéimeanna eile íocaíochta limistéarbhunaithe, is gá seiceáil chuimsitheach riaracháin a chríochnú, cros-seiceálacha san áireamh leis an gCóras Aitheanta Dáileachtaí Talún. Mar gheall go mbeidh a n-íocaíochtaí deiridh á bhfáil ag gach rannpháirtí san SRCT faoin scéim, críochnaíodh na hathsheiceálacha ar íocaíochtaí a rinneadh do gach bliain scéime sular próiseáladh an íocaíocht deiridh. D’aimsigh an tseiceáil seo neamhréireachtaí idir an méid a íocadh le haghaidh Cothabháil Balla Cloiche Traidisiúnta (CBCT) agus an méid atá le híoc, agus laghdaíodh an méid atá dlite don bhliain 2015, gearradh pionós, agus aisghabhadh na méideanna a íocadh do bhlianta 2010-2014 na scéime dá bharr. Chomh maith leis sin, gearradh pionós Traschomhlíonta 5%.
An méid atá Dlite don bhliain 2015 €2325.78
Asbhaintí iomlána €917.71
An íocaíocht atá dlite i ndiaidh na n-asbhaintí €1408.07
Eisíodh an íocaíocht deiridh a bhaineann le bliain 2015 na Scéime lúide na hasbhaintí a shonraítear thuas in dhá chuid. Íocadh 85%, arb ionann í agus suim €1059.21 an 29 Aibreán 2016 agus íocadh an fuílleach 15%, arb ionann í agus suim €348.86 an 3 Bealtaine 2016.
193. Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine when he will issue payment to a person (details supplied) under the agri-environment options scheme; the reason for the delay; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10971/16]
View answerMy Department has been investigating a number of cases involving the submission of invoices, which originated from one particular source, to verify and support their claims under the non-productive capital investment action of AEOS. It is known that in some cases the invoices submitted by participants, or their representatives, were for amounts greater than what was actually paid by the participants for the purchase of trees and hedgerow plants. Funding provided under the scheme comes partly from the EU and partly from the National Exchequer. There is a requirement and obligation to ensure that the expenditure claimed by scheme participants reflects the reality of what took place.
The person registered as the owner of the herd number cited was written to by the Department in September 2014 requesting the submission of alternative verifiable proof to support an invoice that was included in the claim for expenditure incurred. A number of letters have been exchanged since. However, no verification of the expenditure has been received.
A further letter issued to the person concerned on 14 October 2015 informing them of a determination made by the Department which included the clawback of undue payments already made and the imposition of penalties as set out in the EU Regulations. The person concerned was also offered the opportunity to have this determination reviewed within the Department by submitting additional information if they wished.
The person concerned sought a review and a final decision letter issued on 24 February 2016, again outlining the clawback of undue payments made and the penalties to be imposed. They were also advised of the option of appealing this decision to the Agriculture Appeals Office within three months of the date of the review letter.
A further letter issued to the person named on 31 March 2016 giving details of the amount to be recouped. There are no payments due to be made in this case.
194. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 25 of 5 May 2016, the welfare certification required from exporters of dogs to China and how this operates to protect dogs which are exported. [10990/16]
View answer196. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he is aware that 24 Irish greyhounds that were due to fly from Manchester to China on 12 May, 2016 did not go because of protests and complaints at the airport; and if he will take steps to ensure that the welfare of these greyhounds is secured upon their return to Ireland. [10992/16]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 194 and 196 together.
All exporters of dogs are required to provide veterinary certification in relation to (i) their compliance with identification requirements (Microchipping and pet passport where appropriate) (ii) their fitness for the intended journey (iii) their health status (iv) rabies vaccination requirements. Once these animal health and welfare certification requirements are met, dogs, including greyhounds, may be exported internationally.
Health certification arrangements are in place and exporters are also required to comply with the provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 1 of 2005 on the protection of animals during transport. A range of flight carriers make the appropriate arrangements for the safe transport of animals worldwide in accordance with the requirements of International Air Transport. The Irish Greyhound Board (IGB) has advised all owners involved in the export of greyhounds to only export to destinations that provide the expected levels of care and management as defined in the IGBs Code of Practice for the welfare of greyhounds. I fully endorse this view.
With regard to the 24 greyhounds, I understand that the greyhounds in question have returned to Ireland and were inspected by officers of my Department and found to be in good health.
195. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine further to Parliamentary Question No. 25 of 5 May 2016, the oversight mechanisms the Irish Greyhound Board has in place such that it has confidence that its advice to owners involved in the export of greyhounds to only export to destinations that provide the expected levels of care and management as defined in the IGB's code of practice for the welfare of greyhounds is being followed; and what sanctions the board has in place should it find that it is not. [10991/16]
View answerBord na gCon is responsible for the governance, regulation and development of the greyhound industry in the Republic of Ireland. Bord na gCon’s remit is to regulate all aspects of greyhound racing including the licensing of tracks; the issuing of permits to officials, bookmakers and trainers; and the implementation of the rules of racing. The wellbeing of greyhounds, including their physical and social environment, is at the core of Ireland’s greyhound industry. Bord na gCon is totally committed to the welfare of greyhounds and the promotion of the highest standards of care throughout the industry. In particular, Bord na gCon’s Code of Practice in relation to the welfare of greyhounds clearly sets out specific standards that all individuals engaged in the care and management of registered Greyhounds are expected to meet. The Code of Practice emphasises that owners and keepers must take full responsibility for the physical and social well-being of greyhounds in line with best welfare practice.
Oversight mechanisms in place regarding greyhound exports include inter-agency co-operation, co-operation with fellow members of International Greyhound Forum and from intelligence/information which is received from Welfare Officers during the course of investigations carried out under the Welfare of Greyhounds Act 2011. Where any breaches of welfare standards are identified under the Welfare of Greyhounds Act 2011, Bord na gCon takes stringent actions and prosecutions ensue in accordance with the Welfare of Greyhounds Act 2011. Bord na gCon expects the proper standard of welfare of greyhounds to be maintained in all jurisdictions worldwide and advises all owners involved in the export of greyhounds to only export to destinations that provide the expected levels of greyhound care and management as defined in the Code.
