Apologies have been received from Deputy Martin Browne. Before we begin, I remind members that, in the context of the Covid-19 restrictions, only the Chairman or Vice Chairman and staff are present in the committee room. All members must join remotely from somewhere else in the parliamentary precincts. The secretariat will issue an invitation to join the meeting on Microsoft Teams. Members may not participate in the meeting if they are outside the parliamentary precincts. Members are asked to mute their microphones except when they are making a contribution and to use the raise your hand function on Teams to indicate. It should be noted that messages sent on the chat function are visible to all participants. Speaking slots will be prioritised for members of the committee.
The first item of business is a statement by the Vice Chairman on behalf of the joint committee in respect of a complaint regarding Dr. Finbarr Heslin arising from further correspondence after the meeting of 12 November 2019. The joint committee has been sent correspondence by Dr. Heslin, who took issue with a statement made on 12 November 2019 before the Joint Committee on Agriculture, Food and the Marine of the previous Dáil. Dr. Heslin was not present at this meeting and had no opportunity to respond to the statement made. An issue arises in addressing Dr. Heslin's complaint in that the committee in question no longer exists because of the dissolution of the previous Dáil. Joint committees are established by each Dáil and Seanad to shadow relevant Departments as constituted by the Government. This committee was constituted by a different Government and Seanad and is not a continuation of any committee of the last parliament session. As such, there is no obligation on the committee to respond.
In the ordinary course of events, the committee would not seek to traverse the work of a previous committee. However, the committee is mindful of the decision made by the committee of the Thirty-Second Dáil and Twenty-Fifth Seanad to allow a statement to be read into the record in order to address Dr. Heslin's concerns. In the interim, the Dáil and Seanad were dissolved and no further action could be taken. In these circumstances, through no fault of the committee of the Thirty-Second Dáil and Twenty-Fifth Seanad, this matter was left only partly addressed. The committee is mindful of addressing the matter and can do so by removing it or bringing the matter to a close.
Dr. Heslin's concerns appear to be twofold. First, he takes issue with a statement made by a witness regarding the veracity of an assessment made in an RTÉ documentary on the greyhound industry. As a matter of principle, it must be said that witnesses appearing before the committee have the right to state the facts at hand and members have the right to question the testimony given by the witnesses with a different viewpoint, which is not always compatible. It is not the responsibility or role of a committee to adjudicate on these statements or on whether witnesses are agreeable. However, the committee notes for the record that, while witnesses from the Irish Greyhound Board called into question the accuracy of some statements made by Dr. Heslin in the RTÉ documentary, Dr. Heslin continues to stand over every statement he made in that documentary and has provided this committee with a detailed explanation as to why he maintains these positions are correct.
Second, Dr. Heslin takes issue with a statement made by Deputy Cahill during the hearings as a member of the committee in the Thirty-Second Dáil regarding Dr. Heslin's contribution. Dr. Heslin believes that the Deputy questioned whether he had breached the ethics of this profession. Dr. Heslin wishes to state for the record that for 26 years he has practised and consulted in the area of animal welfare both in Ireland and in Europe and that his reputation for upholding the cause of animal welfare, including the welfare of greyhounds, is beyond reproach. The committee is agreeable to noting this position. However, for the sake of completeness, the committee notes that after reviewing the statements made by Deputy Cahill, it does not believe that he stated that there was a breach of the ethics of Dr. Heslin's profession but insists that he was referring to a disagreement between witnesses regarding the factual accuracy of the statements made by Dr. Heslin. The committee has no issue with Deputy Cahill's contributions. The committee does not anticipate taking this matter any further and wishes to consider it closed.
