Joint Committee on Public Petitions and the Ombudsmen díospóireacht -
Thursday, 14 Dec 2023

Decisions on Public Petitions Received

An Cathaoirleach

I remind members of the constitutional requirement that members must be physically present within the confines of the place in which Parliament has chosen to sit, namely, Leinster House, in order to participate in public meetings. I will not permit a member to participate where he or she is not adhering to the constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

The first petition we have is Petition No. P00035/22 which is entitled "Amend the Child Care Act 1991 to provide HIQA with the necessary powers to sanction Tusla, Child and Family Agency when it fails to meet its statutory obligations". The petition is from Ms Anna Kavanagh. At our meeting on 15 November, it was agreed that the correspondence from the Ombudsman for Children be forwarded to the petitioner for comment within 14 days and that there could be a potential invitation for a Minister to appear depending on the response received. Do members have any views on that?

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I am happy that it will go to the ombudsman. I would also be happy if we could get this group and the Minister to come before the committee to discuss the matter in January after we receive a response from the Ombudsman for Children.

An Cathaoirleach

That was agreed at our previous meeting. The petitioner was waiting for the reply from the ombudsman. Has she received a reply?

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

The petitioner was not satisfied with it.

An Cathaoirleach

The petitioner was not satisfied with the reply given by the ombudsman, which suggested that the financial sanction could deplete the resources used to operate the system in which it operates and that, rather than sanction Tusla, a system of continuous improvement would bring about corrections to failings outlined by HIQA. The petitioner says the continuous improvement is not designed to deal with repeated failures, including the failure to implement action plans agreed with HIQA. Patients feel uncomfortable about complaining to HIQA inspectors because of a fear of recriminations and reprisals by social workers when they make complaints via Tusla's Tell Us system. The petitioner also states:

... HIQA has not made has not made any attempt to interview any of the mothers represented by our group; ABC (Alliance of Birthmothers Campaigning for Justice) in spite of the fact that ABC are the largest non-Tusla funded advocacy group for mothers affected by Tusla.

The petitioner also had other concerns. Do any members wish to come in on this?

Deputy Pat Buckley

I agree with the Cathaoirleach regarding accountability.

An Cathaoirleach

We will get the reply back from the ombudsman and give it to the petitioner.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

In the reply to the ombudsman's letter, the petitioner has also offered solutions. That is a good sign, particularly in the context of any person who actually replies in turn. There is the reply from the ombudsman and the petitioner has replied with solutions because she feels that sanctions have not worked for years. She has come back with solutions for problems that are there, which must be acknowledged. I thank the others members for supporting this petition. As Deputy Buckley said, it is about accountability. This is what we are looking for.

An Cathaoirleach

Would we be better off bringing in the group first to hear its concerns and solutions again before we bring in the ombudsman?

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

Yes.

Deputy Pat Buckley

Yes, 100%.

An Cathaoirleach

We will invite the group in and they can put their case to us. We will have their side of it before we ask the ombudsman to come before us. Is that agreed? Agreed. I will ask the secretariat to organise to invite the group in as early as possible in the new year. We will put this matter on the work programme. We will listen to their side of it.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I thank the Chairman.

An Cathaoirleach

Petition No. P00024/23 is "Electric Scooter Safety, Standards and Requirements". This is from Mr. Alexander-Marckus Edwards and relates to the recent press releases which state that powered personal transportation, PPT - in other words, electric scooters - should conform to a weight limit, including battery, and a power limit of 500 W and 25 kg respectively. The petitioner alleges that these limitations will make electric scooters considerably more dangerous, and that the lack of weight in the deck paired with a low-power motor will turn the front wheel into a fulcrum, which, in turn, will result in people hitting the road surface face first. Furthermore, the loss of safety features such as lights, suspension, and wider tyres will occur to maintain a weight requirement of 25 kg.

The recommendation is that correspondence from the petitioner be forwarded to the Department of Transport for comment within 14 days. Do members have views on that or is it agreed?

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I am into cars and I am into bikes. What scares me is that I saw a video clip recently of an electric scooter being used on the M50. It was doing 60 km/h in the middle lane in traffic. The rider was keeping up with the traffic in the middle lane. Scooters are ideal transport in and around the cities and towns to allow people to do what they have to do. The heavier they are, the faster they are going because they then turn from being scooters into motorbikes. The person riding the scooter is balancing on top. The bigger they get, the more horsepower they will need to fit in with the wider tyres being used. With increased horsepower, they will go faster. From the point of view of making scooters lighter, their value is being lowered because they cannot exceed a certain speed. The larger the scooter, the greater the increase in speed. What if somebody gets hit by one of these or a person falls off? If we lessen the weight of a scooter, we are also lessening the horsepower involved, which would be a good thing. If we lessen the weight, they cannot put out the power and they cannot be driven at speed.

I would like to see the recommendations that come back from the Minister for Transport on the matter. As they are getting bigger, these scooters are becoming more dangerous. When the riders realise they have so much power at their disposal, they are going onto main roads and motorways. They are exceeding the speed limit of about 50 km/h on the motorways. A bicycle cannot go on a motorway. Can a scooter with a high-horsepower motor go on a motorway if it exceeds the 50 km/h rule? It is the same as a tractor. A tractor can go on a motorway if it can exceed 50 km/h, and once it does not come below that speed. If these scooters get bigger, they will start doing this and their riders will put themselves and the people around them in danger. It is warranted to have lighter scooters because then they are not as powerful. This means that they will do what they are supposed to, which is take people from A to B safely. Bicycles are made lighter in order that the rider, in addition to his or her own weight, is not peddling a big lump of steel along the road. There is a reason scooters are lighter; it is because we do not want them to be any faster.

An Cathaoirleach

There has already been correspondence with the petitioner to which he has replied.

The secretariat received the petitioner’s response to the correspondence from the Department of Transport via JCPP-r-1307/2023, appendix B, on 20 October 2023. The petitioner believes that the Department of Transport's considerations do not consider the inherent dangers of riding an electric scooter or the heightened need for certain types of PPE, personal protective equipment, and that the age of 16 as a minimum is too young in general.

The petitioner made the following points. Unlike e-bikes, pedelecs, or pedal electric cycles, and other large diameter wheeled powered personal transportation, PPT, the electric scooter has smaller diameter wheels that make the machine more prone to flipping. The power output of the motors when pulling the brakes is so high that the petitioner's motors can bring him to a stop without issue before needing to use the friction brakes. It is safer to keep up with traffic than to remain in the cycle lanes as there is simply insufficient infrastructure in Dublin. The petitioner believes that high-speed electric scooters should have a place on our roads as they are safer at this time.

I do not believe electric scooters are safe. I agree with Deputy O'Donoghue on that because I see them in Dublin. When I am driving and I get a clear run, I find a scooter beside me and it will be keeping up. That is crazy and dangerous.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I agree 100% but it is not only that. It is one thing to have an electric scooter alongside the car when driving but I also have a truck licence. They travel alongside trucks, buses and ambulances. Regarding wind friction, the person on the scooter is standing up and is off balance. A racing bicycle can get up to 40 or 50 km/h if it is one of the newer, lighter models and depending on how fit the cyclist is. The rider is in control and balanced because he is sitting. However, people can come off an electric scooter fairly easily. Someone standing on a scooter that hits a stone or pebble could be catapulted under a vehicle like a truck or bus. This is why I have concerns. I do not believe there is a place for them on the roads. The infrastructure should be there for them and they have a certain use. They are designed to allow people to commute around an area, ideally a city where there is a high volume of traffic and people want to get from A to B without using a bicycle. They should be used for that purpose. Putting them on a main road-----

An Cathaoirleach

The petitioner is going against what the Deputy is saying. In summary, the petitioner believes it is safer for electric scooters to be heavier with shorter stopping distances. He argues that it is safer if they are more powerful, as it reduces the chances of the scooter getting stuck on a pothole, have wider wheels to avoid tram tracks and are faster to avoid getting hit by a car when a cycle lane merges with a road. He believes the rules of driving and owning a car should apply to scooters. Should we ask the petitioner to come before the committee?

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

Yes. I would love to have a debate with him.

An Cathaoirleach

We could invite him to appear before us for half a session for a debate on scooters. We can divide a meeting into two halves - one with this petitioner and possibly the second half with the Department.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

It would be interesting to hear both sides. It would be very democratic. Every day is a learning day.

An Cathaoirleach

Will the Deputy propose that we invite the petitioner to appear before the committee early in the new year and put his case? We can invite the Department to appear before us as well in the second session. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Petition No. P00030/23 is "Create a walking and cycling greenway on the closed railway from Sligo to Athenry" from Mr. Brendan Quinn. This petition relates to the closed railway line from Sligo through Collooney to Athenry. The line has been closed for over four decades and is lying idle. People along the route in small towns and villages in the west want to see something happen. The petition has garnered just over 26,000 signatures.

This has been over and back. As we said earlier, we are waiting on Mayo County Council to get back to us because part of its county management plan refers to this petition. It is a disgrace. The recommendation is that we forward a copy of the correspondence from the petitioner to the Department of Transport for comment within 14 days, forward a copy of the correspondence from Galway County Council to the petitioner for comment, send another reminder to Mayo County Council regarding the petition, specifically around MT09 of the county plan as it relates to the petition, and invite the petitioner to appear before the committee at its meeting in January 2024.

The petitioner was among witnesses in the public gallery earlier this year when the issue first came to the attention of the committee. Some Deputies from the area expressed local knowledge. It was one-sided so we said at that meeting that we would invite the petitioner and Deputies from the area to appear before the committee in the new year.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

A railway line in an area in Limerick is being reinstated and a greenway developed. We must be very careful where there are old railway lines. A big problem in Limerick was that some people had built houses that encroached on the railway line. For the future infrastructure of the country, we should allow for rail and a greenway and there should be joined-up thinking. It should not be one or the other. We should look at a plan to invest in both and even if the plan is long term, it should allow for both the railway line to be reinstated and a greenway. They are looking at this in respect of N-M20 so they can have both and look for future infrastructure. It is called forward planning. We need to get them together. You cannot have one without the other. You have to allow for both.

An Cathaoirleach

The secretariat received a response from Galway County Council regarding an update of the state of the greenway because, as the Deputy noted, there are two sides to it. Galway County Council does not want to go into it until the all-Ireland strategic review is completed because there is a push from one side to have a greenway and a push on the other side to reopen the railway corridor in the west. There is the argument that, as the Deputy noted, a greenway and railway line can work side by side. You do not just take over a railway line and close it forever more.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

That would be my concern.

An Cathaoirleach

We will go with the recommendations if members are happy to do so. We need to get the petitioner before us in the new year.

Petition No. P00043/23 is the "Invincibles Reinterment Campaign" from Mr. Aidan Lambert. The National Graves Association is requesting that the Government oblige the Office of Public Works to carry out the necessary excavation works to recover the remains of Joseph Brady, Daniel Curley, Michael Fagan, Thomas Caffrey and Timothy Kelly in what is commonly known as the Invincibles Yard at Kilmainham Gaol. The bodies of these five members of the Irish National Invincibles lie beneath the paving slabs of the yard where they were executed in 1883 for their part in the Phoenix Park assassinations. The families of the five men are represented by the National Graves Association and the wish of the families is for their relatives to be exhumed from Kilmainham Gaol and reinterred in consecrated ground at Glasnevin Cemetery.

The secretariat wrote to the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform and received a response, JCPP-r-1389/2023, dated 7 December 2023. The Department acknowledged that the subject matter is a very sensitive one and on that basis, the full response is produced. We have a response from the Secretary General, Mr. David Moloney. Do members have a view on it?

Deputy Pat Buckley

I know there was a previous response from the Department but it just seems to be giving excuses to avoid carrying out what the families are requesting. Looking at the recommendations, I would certainly go back to the petitioner and wait for a comment on that. I would like to see what is stopping any Department from exhuming the bodies and reinterring them. It just baffles me.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I agree with Deputy Buckley. It seems to be coming back with the same letter all the time regardless of whether it was a couple of years or two or three years ago. It is the same letter. The letter mentions the expense of doing it. Let us ask the Department what the expense of doing it is. Let us ask it for the facts. I do not want to get repetitive letters. I want a breakdown of the reasons this cannot be carried out. Then we can at least see whether it is an issue of expense and get a breakdown of that expense.

I do not just want a one-liner saying it could cost this or that. I want a breakdown based on other people whose bodies were exhumed already.

Deputy Pat Buckley

If I remember correctly going back years ago, it is on licence fees. As I said in the meeting, we took the remains of 92 nuns out of a graveyard in Youghal. To re-inter them we had to apply for an exemption licence to remove them. If the Department is using this as an excuse it is very wishy-washy.

An Cathaoirleach

That was one of the replies. One of the others referred to the fact that the bodies were buried in quicklime and that there may be the remains of executed prisoners in the same area. As we said at the private meeting earlier, with the technology nowadays I cannot see how that would be a major problem. If a skeleton is found, DNA tests can identify who is who.

I note there are three State bodies involved here. We have the Department of public expenditure, the OPW and the Department of housing and heritage. I think some of the excuses are being used because none of them wants to-----

Deputy Pat Buckley

It is not my baby.

An Cathaoirleach

It is not their problem.

The families who have sought to have the remains of their five relatives exhumed are just being sent around in circles all the time.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

In that case, perhaps we should write to the Departments and the OPW to request an explanation as to why they are not responsible for the matter. If each one can give us the reason, at the same time we ask each one which body does it believe is responsible. We will not be not asking them why they are not responsible; we will ask them who they believe to be responsible.

The Chair touched on another very interesting point. They said that there might have been other executed prisoners at the time. If they do this and perform DNA testing on the remains they find, they might actually find something that other families might have been chasing for years in respect of their loved ones. It might bring clarity to other families as well.

An Cathaoirleach

That may be the case. We will write to the three bodies asking who they feel is responsible. We will write to the OPW to get a breakdown on how much it would cost, going on past experience, to exhume the bodies.

Deputy Pat Buckley

If each body maintains that it is not its responsibility, then we request that it tells us what Department is responsible.

An Cathaoirleach

We want to find out which of the three is responsible for it. We will write to the National Graves Association as well to let it know what is going on.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

An Cathaoirleach

Our next business is No. P00038/23; that a general election be held soon. Mr. Flakner Zeke is the petitioner.

I will provide a brief summary on this. The petition is "That a general election be held soon to enable the people of Ireland to choose a new Dáil which will nominate a new Taoiseach." That has changed from "To hold a general election where the people of Ireland will elect a new Dáil which will nominate a Taoiseach and Government." New information was provided as requested via email on 9 November 2023. It states:

Gladly as the leader of team Galar I desire, like all my team mates, an election where the people of Ireland gets to choose the Government and leading party and leader. In other words, an election where the Government does not change the law and leader of Ireland but the public does.

In simple terms, the 2025 election should have zero intervention by the Government and the people of Dublin should get to choose the ruling party and leader. It is a change the people want to determine their own image and design themselves. I am not asking you this favour for myself, I am asking on behalf of the whole people of Ireland to have zero involvement of the Government in the 2025 election and the people get to choose who governs Ireland for the next couple of years.

There is more to it but for the recommendation there are two options for the committee to decide on. Option A is the committee does not think that it is in the public interest to change the Constitution or the law relating to the maximum duration of the Dáil or the dissolution of the Dáil. The committee writes to the petitioner outlining the constitutional and legal position and the committee’s view and invite the petitioner to reply.

Option B is that based on the above correspondence the petition be deemed closed and the petitioner informed.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I agree with option B.

An Cathaoirleach

Is Option B agreed? Agreed.

No. P00043/23 is a request for a meeting on the bilateral agreement between the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs and Egyptian Government officials regarding child abduction. The petitioner is Ms Mandy Kelly. This petition is a request by an Irish mother to have a meeting between the Department of Foreign Affairs officials and Egyptian Ministry officials regarding a proposed bilateral agreement on child abduction cases.

The request involves a case of two young innocent Irish boys being held in Egypt unlawfully by their father. An Irish High Court order was issued in December 2022 for their immediate return to Ireland. The father, an Egyptian national who resided in Ireland from June 2017 to March 2022, also attended proceedings, hence recognising the jurisdiction of the Irish courts. According to the petitioner, she has exhausted all options to date in securing the return of her children, the most recent event being a mediation meeting between the Chair of the good intentions committee supposedly set up by the ministry of justice in Egypt to assist where child kidnapping occurred.

There are three recommendations. The secretariat should forward the response from the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of Justice to the petitioner, as soon as it is received, if appropriate, for comment within 14 days. The second is to request legal advice from the Office of Parliamentary Legal Advisers, OPLA. Third, depending on the advice from the OPLA, is to consider inviting the petitioner to appear before the committee in the New Year.

Deputy Richard O'Donoghue

I need to step out as I have another meeting at 3 p.m. I wish all the staff and the committee a very happy Christmas.

An Cathaoirleach

The same to you Deputy.

Deputy Pat Buckley

I agree with the recommendations on the petition. We should get legal advice from the OPLA before it can be moved forward.

An Cathaoirleach

Ms Kelly met the Tánaiste on 21 November. The advice is that she engage with the legal system in Egypt and begin legal proceedings there. She has been told that the Department of Foreign Affairs cannot interfere in private legal matters. In the Department's view, this would best be done by appointing a lawyer in Egypt and engaging with the legal system there. The Department has contacted the Egyptian foreign ministry and Ministry of Justice, the good intentions committee, the Egyptian ambassador to Ireland and multiple diplomatic missions in Egypt. The Tánaiste contacted the Egyptian foreign minister on this matter as well. I know from speaking to colleagues that Deputy Matt Carthy has also made contact with the Egyptian ambassador. Chris McManus, MEP, has raised the matter in the European Council. All the advice seems to be for Ms Kelly go through the legal system in Egypt.

As the recommendations are to get the advice here, we are happy with the three recommendations put forward. Once we get the legal advice back, we will send it on to the petitioner with a view to bringing her in as a witness some time in the new year.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

That concludes our consideration of public petitions this afternoon. I wish to 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 Houses of the Oireachtas on a matter of general public concern or interest or an issue of public policy.

I wish all members, petitioners and staff a very happy Christmas and a prosperous new year. I also wish the secretariat all the best for the work they do on our behalf. You make our job very easy.

It is proposed that the committee now adjourns until 11 a.m. on Wednesday, 24 January 2024, when we will meet in private session and then until 1.30 p.m. on Thursday, 25 January 2024, when we will meet in public session. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I wish those behind the scenes and behind the cameras a happy Christmas. This committee is now adjourned.

The joint committee adjourned at 3 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 24 January 2024.