Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 30 Apr 2014

Vol. 839 No. 1

Topical Issue Debate

Live Exports

Deputy Michael McNamara

I commend the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine on holding a beef summit, which took place on the day the Dáil went into recess for Easter. While I welcome that it was held, I am afraid I cannot welcome the results of the summit, which have been very disappointing. In the two weeks since the summit was held, beef prices have barely increased. O3 steers increased by 0.3% in the first week and last week only increased by one cent per kilogram. With regard to R class, there was no change in the first week and there was a very minor change of 0.8% from €3.75 per kilogram up to €3.78 last week.

The biggest problem facing agriculture in the country is that many farmers have significant numbers of young bulls on their hands largely because the beef factories encouraged farmers to accumulate them. Again, the prices have increased by 0.6% in the first week and 1.7% in the second week. However, at the moment the price for R-class animals is €3.55 per kilogram, whereas last year it was €4.11 per kilogram. Farmers are facing considerable losses.

When addressing the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine recently, Mr. Paddy Gernon of the Irish Cattle Exporters Association outlined that there is a market for those young bulls in Libya and other places but said he could not get boats to take them there because of the licensing regime that pertains in this State. I tabled a parliamentary question asking how many boats were licensed to take cattle to Libya and the Minister very proudly told me that there were two boats and that Ireland operates the strictest regime in Europe for the live export of animals. I was told that EU Council regulation No. 1/2005 on animal transport provides for stricter rules to be applied by member states than those set down at EU level. While that is true, that regulation also requires the adoption of rules in the field of transport of animals in order to eliminate technical barriers to trade in live animals and to allow market organisations to operate smoothly. The Department seems to have entirely forgotten that objective of the regulation, because the only organisation that can classify boats as being fit is the International Association of Classification Societies. That is an extremely restrictive practice not operated by any other state. I find it hard to believe that states such as the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Sweden do not take animal rights seriously and that we are the only state that does. I question why we make it so hard to send cattle outside the State and particularly to third countries such as those in north Africa when Bord Bia advises that there is a market there. The Irish Cattle Exporters Association has advised there is a market there but its members cannot get the boats.

Another worrying development is the number of feeding lots being taken up by processors. Last week the Limerick executive of the IFA passed a motion calling for any farmer who gives his or her feeding lots over to processors to fill to be expelled from the IFA. The number of feeding lots that processors are taking up, particularly in Munster, enables them to manipulate the market at will. If prices start to rise - clearly they have not risen in any way since the summit - they can release thousands of cattle into the market to drive the prices down. At the moment we have a very serious issue with regard to our livestock and increasingly have competition issues. I want to know what the Department is going to do about it.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Tom Hayes)

I thank the Deputy for giving me the opportunity to clarify the issue. The Deputy seeks to address the crisis in beef prices by facilitating live exports. The trade, whether to other EU member states or to third countries, serves a dual purpose in stimulating price competition for domestic cattle and satisfying a real demand in overseas markets for specific types of animal. It thus complements the processing beef trade by providing alternative market outlets, thereby underpinning the meat and livestock industry generally. Currently, two ships have been approved by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for live exports to third countries. The facilitation of this trade by the Department is a key component of our strategy for the beef sector.

To date this year, exports of live cattle are up by almost 21,000 head or 23%, principally on the back of large increases in the calf and finished cattle categories. Shipments to Britain are up by 46% while live exports to Northern Ireland in the period amounted to 13,300 head compared with 11,335 animals for the same period in 2013 - an increase of 17% over the year. Indications from live exporters are that the higher level of live exports will continue, and live export volumes were further boosted by a recent shipment of 2,500 animals to Libya.

There are also acknowledged constraints in the trade of live cattle to Northern Ireland brought about by the marketing strategy operated by the UK retail chains regarding cattle born in the Republic but exported live for finishing and processing in Northern Ireland or Great Britain. The long-standing policy of those retailers that buy Irish beef is to market UK and Irish beef separately. This means that beef must be sourced from animals originating in one country - that is born, reared and slaughtered in the same country - thus decreasing the attractiveness of Irish-born cattle for Northern Ireland meat plants whose customers are large UK retailers. In addition, logistical difficulties arise when a small number of Irish-born animals are slaughtered in a UK meat plant. Under mandatory EU labelling rules, these carcasses have to be deboned in a separate batch and packaged and labelled accordingly, thereby incurring additional costs for the processor.

While Bord Bia has repeatedly raised the issue of stocking beef from Irish-born cattle slaughtered in the UK with British retailers over the years, there are no indications that their marketing policy is likely to be reversed soon. These are commercial decisions, of course. Nevertheless, Bord Bia, in its ongoing interactions with British customers, will continue to pursue all opportunities to maximise the potential of the beef and livestock trade with our largest trading partner. This will include a new €500,000 marketing initiative for Bord Bia to intensify its promotion of Irish beef in the UK and selected continental markets.

Despite what the Deputy said, the recent beef round-table conference in Dublin Castle on 17 April represented a very useful and constructive engagement opportunity from all sides of the beef industry.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

I am sorry to intervene, but the Minister of State's time is up. I ask him to wind up because I do not believe he will have enough time to conclude the entire statement.

Deputy Tom Hayes

The Deputy has raised this and we need to provide clarification. Mr. Michael Dowling, the chairman of the beef activation group, has been asked to review the implementation of that group's recommendations and consider some issues raised at the beef round-table conference. It has been agreed that it will meet on a quarterly basis. This reporting system will be dealt with at the next meeting. There are several issues regarding rural development, the new plans that are coming in and many other issues that were addressed at that round-table conference. I believe they were quite constructive. Anyone who participated in it, particularly those representing the industry and the farming organisations, was quite satisfied with it.

Deputy Michael McNamara

I do not know if the farming organisations are satisfied with it, but the farmers are not and I am not. Let us consider the figure: 0% increase; 0.3% reduction; 0.3% increase; 1% increase; 1% increase; 0.6% increase; 0.3% increase. These are across the various classifications of steers and young bulls. The figures speak for themselves. They are not my figures or the IFA's but are the figures of the Department's agency, Bord Bia. There has not been an improvement.

The Minister of State seems to accept that it is okay that only two boats are licensed to ship to North Africa from an island nation. He made much of the number of exports to Northern Ireland. I am open to correction but I doubt very much livestock were exported to Northern Ireland in boats. In the case of Britain, it is roll-on roll-off. There are even problems there but, as the Minister of State well knows, one does not require specific licensed boats to take cattle to Britain and that the only place we need them to go to is to third countries, such as Libya, but there are only two boats.

The issue is that the Minister of State's Department is proud of the fact it operates the most restrictive regime in Europe. I would like to know why. Is it really about animal safety or is it about subverting competition and protecting particular processors? Will the Department do something about the fact feed lots across this State are being filled by processors which gives them the power to subvert competition and to hammer beef prices? As soon as prices rise, they open those feed lots and release thousands of cattle to drive down the prices. Will this anti-competitive practise be investigated because if it is not, many farmers who had cattle in sheds all winter and who have cattle in sheds now will be in trouble? They are losing money on every head of cattle because, as I said, prices are way down on this time last year. The Minister of State knows that, as do I. The prices for store cattle at the marts are not down. People are looking at losses unless something is done. If nothing is done, the Minister of State can rename Agriculture House, Goodman House.

Deputy Tom Hayes

The Deputy made much of two or three issues. I am proud Ireland has a strict regime in regard to the standard of boats.

Deputy Michael McNamara

So am I.

Deputy Tom Hayes

It is very important we have top class conditions because the type of animal we produce is a top class one. One does not send animals in boats in very poor condition. That is important because animals can die. As the Deputy knows, they have to travel a long way by sea and they have to be maintained. I do not think the Department or anybody in this country would stand over a regime unless it was strict, which it has to be.

The fact of the matter is that the figures have risen. The Department is committed to allowing a free market. It is important competition is the life of the trade, whether for the processors or the live industry. It is very important to have both.

Deputy Michael McNamara

Look at the figures for beef prices.

Deputy Tom Hayes

I know a little bit because I happen to buy cattle. What needs to happen is for us to produce an animal which the market demands. As the Deputy knows, there is a changing trend, in particular in England, in regard to the type of animal needed. There was a flooding of the market in the past few months with bull beef which was not needed. Following the round-table discussions, that is now being discussed.

Deputy Michael McNamara

What about the Libyan and Tunisian markets?

Deputy Tom Hayes

The reality is that we need a market and a beef industry in this country in which people have confidence. The round-table discussions, the reporting back by Mr. Michael Dowling and what he will put in place in the coming months will help the beef industry. I accept people must be sure because a lot of money is being invested. The Deputy made the point that the processors are buying the feed lots all over the country. The reason for that is that some farmers cannot finance it. It is very expensive to buy a lot of animals to fill a feed lot. It is an issue which needs to be addressed over a period of time and I certainly hope the round-table discussions will deal with that.

Flood Relief Schemes Funding

Deputy Billy Timmins

I support the points raised by Deputy McNamara. Farmers are suffering due to the beef prices. Hopefully, the Department will put in place a scheme that can assist them in ascertaining what the market demands.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting my topic and the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, for coming to the House despite a very busy schedule. I wish him well in the election. I sincerely hope he is elected and that Europe's gain is this House's loss.

The flood relief scheme in Arklow is the topic under debate. It is more than ten years since I sat with Oireachtas Members and members of Arklow Town Council following the floods in the early part of the last decade. The then Minister of State with responsibility for the OPW, Mr. Martin Cullen, committed that if a scheme could be devised which could prevent flooding in the future, the funding would be provided for it. We struggled on for a long number of years under the illusion that something was being done. Several reports were done on the issue but nothing happened.

Following the change in Government in 2011 and inquiring from the Minister's office as to what the situation was, I was dismayed to find that the file was lying in a cupboard and very little had been done. I acknowledge the work the Minister has done over the past couple of years in providing funding to consultants to devise a scheme for Arklow which would prevent flooding, in particular in the lower part of the town, the Ferrybank area and the Sea Road where the Avoca River meets the Irish Sea. Much preparatory work has been carried out and my understanding is that all reports are complete.

In 2012, €42,000 was granted by the Department to build a flood protection wall along the edge of the Avoca River in the town and a small amount of money - €5,000 to €6,000 - was given to clear out the river. Is the funding available for the scheme? When will it be provided? When can the council start to put the process in place? This is very important. The people of Arklow have waited several political generations, or 30 to 40 years, for this funding. Will the Minister of State outline when that funding will be provided?

Minister of State at the Department of Finance (Deputy Brian Hayes)

I thank Deputy Timmins for giving me the opportunity to address this matter. I know he has taken a particular interest in the issue over many years.

A flood relief scheme for the town of Arklow is being advanced by Arklow Town Council in partnership with the Office of Public Works and my Department, which is providing the funding. The project is being overseen by a steering group which comprises representatives of Arklow Town Council, the council's consultants and the OPW. The scheme is moving through all the required stages of design and development and has progressed to a stage where a feasibility report is nearing finalisation following detailed consultations between Arklow Town Council, the council's engineering consultants and the OPW.

As the Deputy might be aware, I met a delegation from Arklow Town Council in regard to the proposed scheme in November 2013 and I indicated at that meeting that there is an absolute commitment on all sides to progress and complete a flood relief scheme for Arklow to ensure that the people and businesses of the town are protected from the terrible flooding that devastated the town in previous years. I want to restate that commitment to the House and to Deputy Timmins again today and to confirm that, on the basis that a viable, cost beneficial scheme is proposed to the OPW, then funding for this will be made available as required. The Arklow scheme is provided for in the OPW's multi-annual capital expenditure profiles.

As the Deputy said, the Arklow scheme has been a long time in preparation and I can understand the local frustration over the length of time it has taken to get to a point of construction. It is, however, in the nature of flood defence schemes which involve complex civil engineering works within a river environment in an urban setting that the amount of planning and preparation required is necessarily very detailed and takes a long time to complete. I might mention in this context, however, that the OPW provided funding to Wicklow County Council in 2012 under the minor flood mitigation works scheme to carry out interim flood relief works in Arklow. These works, comprising the construction of a new flood protection wall, have been completed and offer protection to properties and businesses in the Riverwalk-town centre area of the town.

As I mentioned earlier, a feasibility study to identify possible flood mitigation measures for Arklow town in nearing completion. This study was commissioned by Arklow Town Council but funded by the OPW. In addition, environmental consultants were appointed by the OPW to carry out an environmental impact statement and to work in tandem with the engineering consultants in identifying environmentally acceptable measures.

It was also necessary to commission separate surveys of the quay walls and an assessment report on Arklow Bridge when it became evident that a number of potential flood alleviation measures might impact on the bridge. All of these assessments have now been brought together in a draft final feasibility report on the scheme by Arklow Town Council's consultants. The purpose of the report is to identify and assess using technical, environmental and economic criteria the viability of a range of flood relief measures for Arklow. Based on this assessment, the report is to identify and recommend a preferred flood relief scheme and to prepare an outline design of the recommended scheme.

The OPW has been engaged over the past year or two in extensive consultation and discussions with our colleagues in Arklow Town Council and the consultants. The latest draft of the feasibility report was submitted by Arklow Town Council to the OPW in late 2013. The report has been examined in detail within the OPW and the OPW has very recently written to Arklow Town Council seeking clarification on a number of mainly technical issues. I am confident that any remaining issues can be resolved without undue delay and that Arklow Town Council will be in a position to finalise the feasibility report for the scheme shortly. When the report is finalised, and provided the preferred scheme is economically and environmentally viable, the OPW and Arklow Town Council, in conjunction with Wicklow County Council, will decide on the most effective means of progressing the project through the next stages of detailed design, planning and statutory consents and procurement of a works contractor. Pending that, it is not possible to give a definite date or timescale. However, I assure the Deputy that the OPW will work constructively with the local authority to ensure the scheme is progressed as quickly as possible.

Deputy Billy Timmins

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. It is ironic that we are talking about flood relief in Arklow when there has been a dramatic shortage of water in the greater north Wicklow area – Greystones, Enniskerry and Kilmacanogue - in recent days. The area is supplied by the Vartry river, which also supplies a large part of Dublin city. Ironically, Dublin city has not suffered but Wicklow has. I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, to pass on to his colleague the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government my concerns on water shortages in north Wicklow and the ongoing problems with the reservoir, and to liaise with Irish Water to ensure the shortages are resolved.

I would have liked to hear a definitive start date. I note that the Minister for Finance is present in the Chamber. I am sure he will have no difficulty providing the funding to the Minister of State shortly as, hopefully, a going-away present, so that he can make an announcement in the coming weeks. I note the provision for the scheme in the capital profile of the Department. A feasibility study has been completed; it has gone back to the OPW and it is currently with Arklow Town Council. The Minister of State indicated in his response that he could not provide a timeframe, but could he take a stab at doing so? Could he also indicate whether the outstanding technical issues are major or minor?

Deputy Brian Hayes

I will take the last question first. We are at a very advanced stage with the feasibility report. We have gone back to Arklow Town Council for a number of observations and I expect the issue to be resolved by the summer. Once the report is back with us we will know the preferred design and the cost-benefit ratio, which will clearly be strong, given that 600 properties are involved, of which 450 are houses and the rest are commercial premises. Once we have the report back I am very confident that the OPW will be able to profile the work as part of its multi-annual plan. One of the benefits of having a multi-annual envelope of funds available for this and other schemes is that we can get going on it in a relatively short time, because I understand the work will take years, with a lot of disruption to the town and the community. We must undergo a planning process and a design process and we need the public to buy into it, because it will cause disruption to the commercial life of the town, as is the case in many parts of the country I visited recently, such as Fermoy and Mitchelstown. It takes time to develop a scheme in all of those areas. I reassure the Deputy that we are very aware of the importance of the scheme for Arklow and County Wicklow. It is a priority for us and we have funds in place as part of the existing multi-annual financial framework. As soon as we get the feasibility issues over the line, especially on the cost-benefit side, we can then get going on the design, planning and consultation stages with the community.

I reassure Deputy Timmins that the funds are very much in place for the scheme. It is a major priority for us. We have a huge responsibility to the local area, which has been dramatically affected in the past two decades on more than six different occasions. The life of the town has been badly affected by flood and storm damage. The complication in this case is due to there being a problem with the sea and with the river. A fluvial event with the sea coming in could mean a disaster for the town. Providing a solution is hydrologically complex and we must get it right before we commit the funds, but I assure the Deputy that the funding is in place.

Insurance Industry

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

That concludes Topical Issue No. 2. We now move on to No. 3. Three Deputies have made a submission on the issue. For clarification purposes, each of the three Deputies has two minutes to speak initially, followed by the Minister for Finance, who will have four minutes, and then each of the Deputies will have a further one minute supplementary followed by a final two minutes from the Minister.

Deputy Pearse Doherty

We are all aware of the terrible news that Setanta Insurance has closed down, leaving 75,000 customers on this island high and dry – policyholders who had in good faith renewed with Setanta, many in recent months, and others who took out their policies prior to that.

The situation exposes the weakness in our regulatory system, because this company was not regulated in Ireland. It availed of EU rules that allowed it to be regulated in another EU jurisdiction while operating solely in this jurisdiction. I urge the Minister to address two concerns. The first is the most pressing one that affects the 75,000 policyholders. Many of them have contacted me. It is clear that a large section of the client base for the insurance company was self-employed people, in particular small businesses with vans, such as those in the construction industry or other businesses requiring vans. They seek clarity on the legal position, whether they are legally covered, what the situation is with the money they paid out a couple of weeks ago to renew their cover, why the State does not protect them, and whether they have any comeback.

I was contacted by one person from County Monaghan who was informed by an insurance broker that he or she needed to continue to pay the premium for the rest of the year despite the fact that the person is now not insured, the reason being that the broker paid Setanta Insurance in full up front. Questions arise in that regard also. How do we ensure this does not happen in future at an EU level?

I urge the Minister to address a couple of issues. What role will be played by the insurance compensation fund? Does the Government plan to take any offsetting measures, particularly given that many small and medium enterprises are being hard hit?

Deputy Ciara Conway

As Deputy Doherty outlined, we understand that more than 75,000 people who had policies with Setanta Insurance have been left in the lurch. Those affected are predominantly self-employed people. There is a question mark over the status of their insurance cover. Questions also arise about those who still owe money and what the position is in that regard.

I understand the liquidators are due to have a meeting this week. Will the Government be represented at the meeting? I have been contacted by a number of constituents about those who have outstanding claims with Setanta Insurance – people whose lives have been torn asunder because of road traffic accidents and injury at work who have been unable to work and who have sustained lifelong injuries and are currently awaiting payment. Will the claims Setanta cannot pay be met by the compensation fund, given that the insurer is not regulated in this country?

I understand that the Irish Brokers Association has called for a complete overhaul of the insurance regulation following the liquidation of Setanta. Mr. John Bissett, the association's president, said the system needs to be completely overhauled so that companies cannot simply pick the most lax jurisdictions. It is our job as legislators, and as a Government, to protect consumers. What we had was a company primarily owned by Irish people and principally based in Ireland selling exclusively to Irish citizens but regulated elsewhere.

I refer to the poignant case of a young woman who, along with her family, was hit by a drunk driver who was insured by Setanta. There were two fatalities in the accident and even though no money will replace those lives, she will be unable to work again because of the injuries she sustained and both her and her young son are without her partner. What will be done for these people?

Deputy Michael McGrath

I thank the Minister for attending this discussion. The other Deputies have covered the main issues but I would like to lend my support to the 75,000 policyholders of Setanta Insurance Company Limited who have been at least inconvenienced and, in a great many cases, are out of pocket as a result of the collapse of the firm. What assistance is available from the State to them in the context of the Insurance Compensation Fund, ICF to deal with outstanding claims which were not concluded by the firm prior to going into liquidation? What is the position of people who recently renewed their policies and who face the prospect of having to take out a new policy to ensure they have continuity of cover? People who have a Setanta policy are legally covered under the Road Traffic Acts in the sense that they have insurance but the policy may not be of any value if an accident happens.

This raises a broader question as to how many similar companies operate in Ireland but are not regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland. Many people have not drawn this distinction. If they take out insurance in this country, they assume that the insurance provider is regulated by the Central Bank and is not merely regulated in another EU jurisdiction and regulated here for conduct of business purposes. We need at least to scope the extent of this problem.

What will be the impact of banking union and the single supervisory mechanism on the future regulation of the insurance sector on a pan-European basis?

Minister for Finance (Deputy Michael Noonan)

I thank the three Members for raising this important issue and for their contributions to this exchange of views.

Setanta Insurance Company Limited is a Maltese incorporated company, which was both authorised and prudentially supervised by the Malta Financial Services Authority, MFSA. While its financial position is not supervised by the Central Bank of Ireland, as it has no role in that regard, the firm is supervised by the bank for conduct of business rules, that is, consumer protection obligations. I understand that the Central Bank has been in ongoing contact with the MFSA in respect of Setanta in recent times.

Under EU law governing non-life insurance, an insurer is required to inform the regulator in its home member state - its home regulator - that it intends to pursue business in another member state. The home regulator must then provide the host regulator with a certificate attesting that the insurer covers the EU solvency capital requirement, as well as the nature of the business which the insurer intends to undertake. The insurer may start to pursue business from the date that the certificate is communicated to the host regulator, in this case the Central Bank of Ireland.

Setanta was regulated at EU regulatory level in accordance with a directive known as solvency I, which currently places requirements on the amount of regulatory capital European insurance companies must hold against unforeseen events. I understand that Setanta met its EU regulatory obligations and under EU law was, therefore, entitled to trade across EU borders. Following negotiations that were completed at European level in November 2013, a new regime known as solvency II will commence on 1 January 2016, which will further strengthen the EU regulatory framework. The solvency II EU directive sets out new, stronger Union-wide requirements on capital adequacy and risk management for insurers with the key aim of increasing policyholder protection. The new regime will also ensure greater co-operation between supervisors.

On 16 April 2014, Setanta Insurance Company Limited determined that it was insolvent. This means that Setanta did not have sufficient funds to honour its full obligations towards claimants, policyholders and other creditors. Policyholders can expect to be given two months' cancellation notification, in accordance with the Central Bank of Ireland's consumer protection code 2012, during which period cover will remain in force. While policies will remain valid until the required notice period has been served, it is important to be clear that the amounts due under claims may not be fully recoverable in all circumstances. In this light, it is important to note that the Central Bank has advised all Setanta policyholders to arrange alternative cover without delay.

At a creditors meeting held in Malta today, a liquidator, Mr. Paul Mercieca, was formally appointed by the creditors and was approved by the Maltese regulator. The company has now, therefore, been formally placed into liquidation. The Motor Insurance Bureau of Ireland, MIBI, has indicated that it intends to accept all third party claims connected to Setanta policies. MIBI is a non-profit-making organisation, which was established by agreement between the Government and those companies underwriting motor insurance in Ireland. The principal role of MIBI is to compensate innocent victims of accidents caused by uninsured and unidentified vehicles. First party claims on personal insurance policies will be payable from the ICF. Claimants will be eligible for 65% of the amount due or €825,000, whichever is the lesser

I am informed that Insurance Ireland made arrangements for its member insurance companies to be open over the Easter period to assist Setanta policyholders in arranging alternative cover. In addition, the Insurance Ireland declined cases agreement was available to policyholders of Setanta. The current declined cases agreement was drawn up in 1981 and is adhered to by all motor insurers in Ireland. I am further informed that under the agreement, the insurance market will not refuse to provide insurance to an individual seeking insurance if he or she has approached at least three insurers and has not been able to obtain cover from them. I understand that Insurance Ireland is also making information available to those who have queries, complaints or difficulties in respect of this matter.

The Central Bank is in ongoing contact with the MFSA regarding Setanta, the impact on policyholders and the provision for relevant and appropriate information, particularly in regard to claims. The Central Bank has written to all brokers and has instructed them to write to all policyholders who hold a current Setanta motor insurance policy and inform them of the urgency of making alternative motor insurance arrangements. The Department of Finance and the Central Bank will review the circumstances relating to Setanta and will report to me on what lessons can be learned and how the regulatory framework can be strengthened. The European Commission has also indicated that it will review whatever issues are raised relating to the regulatory framework which require action.

Deputy Ciara Conway

I thank the Minister for his reply. However, I am concerned that "claimants will only be eligible for 65% of the amount due or €825,000, whichever is the lesser". The case I cited will involve a much greater sum. What will be done to ensure such lax regulation, albeit under EU law, cannot continue? This was a primarily Irish company selling to Irish consumers but it was regulated elsewhere. This is the kind of practice we would like to banish to the past in order that consumers can be protected. I refer not only to those who have suffered loss or injury in a car accident, but also those who are self-employed and trying to keep a business going given a significant number of Setanta's customers were self-employed.

What comfort can the Minister offer to these people who are so badly and desperately in need of good news?

Deputy Michael McGrath

I thank the Minister very much for his reply which clarifies that the premiums paid by policyholders to Setanta Insurance are gone and none of the funds open in respect of claims can deal with the issue of refunding premium payments which have been made. The lesson for insurance consumers is to check immediately whether the company providing their insurance is regulated in Ireland. It will come as news to a great many people they have an insurance policy in Ireland which is provided by a firm which is not regulated here and the Central Bank of Ireland has no role whatsoever in prudential supervision. This is a risk and exposure. While the new system of pan-European supervision and regulation gets up and running and becomes stronger consumers must deal with this risk. If anything, greater awareness of the potential exposure faced by people having a policy provided by a company not regulated in Ireland is something we should all learn.

Deputy Michael Noonan

To reply to Deputy Conway, I cannot comment on an individual case and I have no idea what the liability might be. It is not clear yet from Malta, because the company only went into liquidation today, whether there are assets which partially support the outstanding claims of the company. I am sure it will be clarified in due course.

The insurance compensation scheme we operate here between the State and insurance companies is committed to covering 65% or something over €800,000, whichever is the lesser amount. While people are insured to drive for two months after the first announcement was made I strongly advise them to seek new insurance immediately because while they will be driving in accordance with the Road Traffic Act they will not necessarily be covered, or covered adequately, for any claims they may have to make themselves or claims which might be made by third parties.

I take Deputy McGrath's point and I see this as the start of a wider debate. The provision of insurance across State boundaries in the European Union is part of the single market in financial services. It is something we all support. We must be sure regulation is adequate and I have no evidence yet there was any inadequacy in the Maltese regulation. It is a member of the eurozone as well as being a member of the European Union. We will see, and I will communicate to the Dáil in due course as further information comes to hand.

Child Abuse

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

Cynthia Owen was the victim of the most barbaric and heinous crime imaginable.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

I am obliged to tell the Deputy it is strictly prohibited to mention names and make charges in such a case by ruling of Standing Orders.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

This Topical Issues matter is about this person.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

It is listed as "details supplied". I feel obliged to remind the Deputy he is restricted from mentioning names.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

It is in the public domain and the issue is about this person. As a ten and 11 year old child she was ritually abused and raped by, she says, members of her own family, members of the community and, she alleges, three senior gardaí from the area. When she was 11 a child, Noleen, issued from this abuse who shortly afterwards was murdered and found in a plastic bag down a lane having been stabbed more than 40 times with knitting needles. One of the gardaí-----

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

I am obliged to intervene and draw the Deputy's attention to the fact charges cannot be made in the House.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I am not making a charge. These are facts in the public domain.

Acting Chairman: (Deputy Derek Keating)

The Deputy is referring to charges that have been made.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

These are facts in the public domain. I am well aware of the legal constraints.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

They are allegations and not charges.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I said there were allegations but some of it is fact. I distinguished between the allegations and the facts and I will continue to do so. The Acting Chairman has completely thrown me.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

I do not apologise for doing so because I am obliged to draw the Deputy's attention to the fact-----

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I do not understand why this Topical Issues matter was selected if there is a problem with it.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

The Deputy is prohibited from mentioning names.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

It was selected by the Ceann Comhairle.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

My time is being run down.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

I am only following Standing Orders of the House.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

One of the people accused by Cynthia Owen as being one of the abusers was one of the gardaí who arrived on the scene when her baby was found. Evidence of the murder of the baby was lost and contaminated and the investigation into this most heinous of crimes was closed down after six weeks. No one was ever brought to trial for it. Cynthia alleges the abuse continued as did the abuse of her siblings, three of whom later took their own lives.

The Minister, Deputy Shatter, is aware of all of this because he acted as solicitor for a period for Cynthia Owen. A coroner's inquest confirmed the baby murdered was Cynthia Owen's baby meaning, and this is beyond doubt, a crime was committed. She was raped as a child and her baby was murdered. Incredibly, no one has ever been brought to justice for this.

In recent weeks I asked the Minister, on foot of representations from Cynthia and her legal representative, Gerry Dunne, whether the Minister would meet with them to discuss reopening the investigation into this case. He stated he would not do so because it might raise unrealistic expectations and he referred to the Gageby report on this matter, which was published in 2007. This response is completely unacceptable because the Gageby report was a paper review. Mr. Gageby refused to talk to Cynthia Owen even though she offered to give evidence. Her solicitor reports that only a few weeks before being appointed to this position Mr. Gageby stated publicly, at a national prosecutors' conference, that he believed cases of rape and abuse more than 15 years old should not be investigated. He stated counsellors and psychologists working in this area usually gave unreliable evidence. This was a very biased position to take on an examination of such a serious issue. The examination was a travesty.

The Minister is well aware of the facts because he represented Ms Owen for a while. Cynthia Owen is asking for an independent public sworn inquiry to reopen the case and examine how the investigation was conducted and get justice. This is a very reasonable request. She has written to the Minister and the Taoiseach-----

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

The Deputy is over time.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

The Acting Chairman took one minute of my time.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

Not for the first time I draw the Deputy's attention to the Standing Orders which prevail.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

She is asking for a sworn independent inquiry into this matter. Will the Minister positively respond to this?

Deputy Finian McGrath

Hear, hear.

Minister for Justice and Equality (Deputy Alan Shatter)

I thank the Deputy for raising the matter. This is a matter with which I have an intimate knowledge because for a period of time I represented de bono Cynthia Owen in my law firm and tried to be of assistance to her. I am aware of background information and I do not know whether the Deputy is aware of everything of which I am aware. This is a case which greatly troubled me during the period of time I sought to be of assistance to her. I emphasise I sought to be of assistance to her de bono and there was no question of being paid anything in case the Deputy wants to make some allegation about this. This was an issue I took, and still take, with great seriousness.

I fully understand the detailed concerns that have been raised about the infant who died in such terrible circumstances and I am, of course, deeply conscious of the ongoing profound trauma and distress of the mother of the child concerned. The House will be aware that concerns raised by myself and many others regarding this case led to the appointment in 2007 of an independent senior counsel, Mr. Patrick Gageby, by the then Minister, to conduct a thorough examination of the matters relating to this tragic death. It is regrettable the Deputy would use this House to defame Mr. Gageby and he should withdraw the comments he made.

Mr. Gageby is a well-respected senior counsel who was appointed by my predecessor to examine this matter. It was a time when I was raising this issue from the Opposition benches as well as publicly.

Mr. Gageby's terms of reference provided for a comprehensive review of all of the relevant information concerning the death of the child in question, as well as the complaints made regarding the Garda investigations into the incident. Mr. Gageby reported in September 2007 and, having considered the report's recommendations, the then Minister accepted its findings. In keeping with those findings, he decided against establishing a further inquiry. I am aware that a summary of Mr. Gageby's views was furnished to the individual's then solicitors and, ultimately, they were given access to the full report. The request was made by my predecessor that the report be published and I understand the person concerned and her lawyer were not agreeable to the publication of Mr. Gageby's report. I am not privy to the reason this was so, but simply am telling this to the Deputy because I would prefer there to be transparency to the extent of its being published.

In so far as the question of a criminal investigation into the case is concerned, it is important to note that in addition to the original Garda investigation, a number of further Garda investigations have been carried out over the years in response to statements made to the Garda by the mother of the infant. On foot of these investigations, files were submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions, DPP, who on each occasion directed that no prosecution take place. A further investigation file also was submitted to the DPP in the context of matters which came to light following the coroner's inquest in 2007 and again, no direction to prosecute was received. In so far as the question of any further criminal investigations into these distressing events is concerned, Members will appreciate that I have no function with regard to the initiation, management or direction of criminal investigations, which are a matter for the Garda authorities, nor in respect of the prosecution of offences, which is a matter for the DPP. It of course remains at all times a matter for the Garda authorities to consider the question of any further criminal investigation.

I can also inform the House that I received a petition with a significant number of signatures on behalf of the mother of the child concerned on 4 April calling for an independent inquiry. Further correspondence also was received from her legal representatives raising complex issues of concern. On foot of this, I sought a full report from the Garda authorities on the issues raised and on the contact which I understand is taking place between local Garda management and the person's legal representatives, which contact preceded the petition received on 4 April. In this regard, I am advised that senior local Garda management has met with the legal representative of the person in question to assess the issues of concern which have been raised and with a view to attempting to resolve these concerns. I am advised that the most recent meeting took place on 31 March 2014. I understand that some further inquiries have been conducted and the matter is presently ongoing. As soon as I receive and consider the report I have sought, I will be in a position to communicate further with the person in question, including with respect to her call for a further inquiry into these matters.

I assure the Deputy that I take this matter with the greatest of seriousness and indeed took it so seriously that at an early stage following my appointment, I made inquiries within my Department with regard to it. The Deputy does not need to convince me of the tragic background. I emphasise to the Deputy that a range of allegations has been made, and I will not prejudge the truth of those allegations, but the background circumstances as described by the individual in question are troubling and tragic. However, in the context of where matters stand so far, it certainly has been the view of the DPP that there is not sufficient evidence to warrant the taking of a prosecution in the matter. Should something now emerge as a result of the further inquiries that are being conducted, I will treat it with great care and seriousness.

Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett

I accept that some matters are simply at the level of allegations, but some aspects are not allegations but facts. The coroner's court established that the baby, Noleen, who was murdered, stabbed 44 times and left in a lane, was Cynthia Owen's. As Cynthia Owen was 11 years old, therefore it follows directly that she was raped. There is no question but that an absolutely heinous crime was committed against a child. Nobody has been prosecuted for that, even though the victim of this crime has stated who she says committed that crime. The fact she states it does not make it fact, but it certainly seems to me is the basis for requiring a proper investigation of that case. It is absolutely extraordinary that the victim was not interviewed in a review of this case carried out in 2007, despite the fact that the victim and her representative contacted the senior counsel, Mr. Gageby, and said, please interview us. How can that be constituted as a serious inquiry into this most heinous of crimes? I do not wish to cast aspersions on anyone, but I cannot fathom how in a situation such as this the victim would not have her request to be interviewed about the crimes committed against her acceded to by someone looking at the case. She therefore begs for justice and for the allegations she has made and the crimes committed against her to be investigated properly.

I am glad to see that in the last few weeks there seems to have been movement on this, and if the Minister said there is confusion about publishing reports and so on, that is a reason for him to meet them to clarify these matters if it would help to move this forward. However, I do not understand why the Minister refuses to meet them. Having spoken to Ms Cynthia Owen's solicitor this morning, they wish to know what is the timescale for the Garda to report back to the Minister about its investigations bearing in mind that the only gardaí investigating this are gardaí serving in the Dún Laoghaire area where the crime was committed, albeit a new generation of gardaí. This is not to cast aspersions on them by any means, but this matter is so serious, and given that there is an allegation that gardaí were involved in the abuse and the alleged cover-up, there must be a commitment to something more serious in respect of an investigation of these matters. A sworn public inquiry is what Ms Cynthia Owen has asked for and what I believe any fair person looking at it would say she deserves.

Deputy Alan Shatter

I can only reiterate to the Deputy these are serious matters. Unfortunately, I cannot require that a prosecution take place. It is a matter for the DPP to be assured that the evidence available merits prosecuting an identified individual or identified individuals and that there is evidence sufficiently persuasive to indicate a reasonable possibility of a prosecution being successful.

Deputy Billy Kelleher

That is a fair change of attitude on the part of the Minister.

Deputy Alan Shatter

The review of the papers by Mr. Gageby, the engagement by the gardaí-----

Deputy Timmy Dooley

The Minister had a different tune when he was on this side of the House.

Deputy Alan Shatter

There is no point in a member of Fianna Fáil shouting at me when these were matters put to bed by that party in government in 2007.

Deputy Billy Kelleher

The Minister made promises to act when he was over here.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

He made promises when he was over here.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Derek Keating)

Please allow the Minister to respond.

Deputy Alan Shatter

Perhaps the Deputy might contain himself just for once. This is a serious issue and the Deputy should not play politics with it.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

The Minister shows no consistency.

Deputy Alan Shatter

Moreover, the Deputy should not make the pretence that he had any previous interest in it, because he had not.

Deputy Timmy Dooley

The Minister shows no consistency.

Deputy Alan Shatter

This is a serious issue. I assure Deputy Boyd Barrett, with whom I frequently disagree, that this is an issue on which there is no disagreement between us. If this issue can be advanced in a manner that would bring some closure to it and that would ensure that identifiable individuals who can be properly prosecuted will be prosecuted, that would be a desirable outcome. The holding of a statutory inquiry will not achieve that outcome. It may achieve the outcome of an investigation of the investigation but it will not automatically lead to any prosecution by the DPP. This is an issue I raised with An Garda Síochána well before the petition was received by me. I wish to see what comes back to me. While I cannot give the Deputy a timeframe, I hope that within the next couple of months I will have an insight as to whether there is finally something additional the Garda can produce that is of relevance to the possibility of a prosecution.

I am advised that in the past there has been extensive engagement with the woman concerned and with her current lawyer and I am told there has been recent engagement. I am told the Garda Síochána understands all the allegations made and the history of this matter as it has been recounted to it. It is a case of what evidence exists and whether there is a basis for taking a prosecution. I would hope within the next two months to have a greater insight into that than I have now. With regard to Mr. Gageby's report, he is a very eminent senior counsel who frequently acts in the courts defending individuals on a broad range of charges. I do not know if he prosecutes on occasions as I am not that familiar with his legal practice but I know he regularly appears in the courts. He is an expert in criminal matters. I understand that in his review of the matter he concluded that there was not a basis for the holding of the type of inquiry being suggested. There was no further that this could go, based on the information currently available.

Let me see what additional information comes available. I ask Deputy Boyd Barrett to assume that for once we are on the same side on this issue, and that if I can take this forward in a way that is of benefit and of assistance to the woman concerned in bringing closure to her life on what is an alleged dreadful set of circumstances, I would be very pleased to be able to do so.