We have two petitions to consider. P00008/25 is entitled "Justice and Safety” and from Mr. C.J. Gaffney. Mr. Gaffney states:

We are calling on the Government to compensate us out of the European Maritime Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund (EMFAF) which was offered at our meeting in Brussels and confirmed by the documents and radio interview contained in the links... [we were sent] by ... MEP´s and senior EU officials, considering the unique and unprecedented circumstances of the case. We must have rights in this day and age. We are also asking for an official and impartial investigation in all aspects of the case on how such a dangerous vessel was certified as passing all stability criteria and continuously issued with valid sailing certification. This vessel was also accepted onto the Irish Register and issued with an Irish Fishing License, and as such, what was the role of the Irish Marine Survey Office in the handling this case. We can provide numerous independent surveys, reports and professional opinions to make this a very quick and easy report to compile, which on the grounds of Health and Safety, will have a major impact on saving Fishermen’s lives across the whole EU. To highlight how this could've happened and to stop it from happening again just as the Dutch have done. We even have [given] evidence ... of a German sister vessel to the Mary Kate, with it also having been found to be totally unseaworthy and having an inaccurate Stability Book, just like the Mary Kate. It’s a miracle these vessels didn’t capsize with a certain loss of all crew.

That is the petition, in a nutshell. The committee is asked to consider what its next steps will be. We can, of course, advise the petitioner to apply directly to the marine programmes division of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and that would be a worthwhile recommendation. Given the length of time this petition has been on the go for and acknowledging, as we must, the limitations of the committee, we do not have the power to give orders to the Department. We can, and it is open to the committee to agree, correspond with the Department and request a possible a meeting with the petitioner that might assist in some way, shape or form. I do not see any further role for our committee other than in writing that letter and making that request of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. My proposal is that we have exhausted our engagement on this petition, bar the writing of that letter, and, therefore, we should advise the petitioner to apply directly to the marine programmes division of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine for that compensation and request that meeting would take place, separate from the committee, and that we close the petition. Is that agreeable to committee members? It is agreed.

It has been very stressful. I understand that. I sat on this committee the previous time it discussed the petition. Unfortunately, sometimes you can only go so far with something. I agree with the recommendations and the proposal for the petitioner to meet with the Department and see where it goes from there. I thank the Chair.

I thank Deputy Buckley. The next petition for us to consider is P00010/25, "Reform of Insurance for Thatched Heritage Properties", submitted by Ms Katie McNelis. Ms McNelis says it is incredibly difficult in this country to obtain a quote for both residential and commercial thatched buildings. The majority of these buildings are on a protected structure list.

She says the people who own these buildings are obliged by law to maintain their upkeep to preserve our heritage, yet many people have a huge battle to get any insurance. The availability is one issue, the affordability is another and there is a disparity between regular property insurance and thatched property insurance in this country that is appalling in many cases. She says non-standard properties, such as thatched houses, pay up to four to five times more for insurance than regular houses. Given that thatched houses have many requirements to fulfil to obtain insurance, such as no open fires, etc., they are in many ways more regulated than a standard house. The petition states that many of these buildings are hundreds of years old and are expensive to maintain at the best of times, without including insurance. If this insurance situation is left to continue, it says, our heritage will suffer. It says our thatched heritage has been a big tourist attraction for years but sadly this will fade too if thatched businesses and residential housing cannot get insurance, and affordable insurance at that. It says it is time for the Government to step up to help with this issue and stop washing its hands of its responsibility to the citizens, and to try to reform insurance for our heritage properties.

This is another issue where a substantial amount of documentation has been submitted. It has been ongoing since 2021. My proposal is that we would invite in the petitioner to give us an update on the current state of insurance for thatched heritage properties. We have heard from a number of stakeholders already. We have heard from the Minister and from the credit unions, etc., so I think we can invite in the petitioner to give us an update if the committee members are agreeable to that.

Absolutely.

We have had the Minister of State in previously. There is a new Minister and if the committee is agreeable, we could invite him in also to see if there is an update. I suggest that when we do that, we would be very targeted in how we approach this. We want to be able to move matters along on behalf of the petitioner if we can. If the committee is agreed on that, we will invite in the new - or new to us, and certainly to this petition - Minister and the petitioner so that we can hear and get a proper and full update on where things are at to see if we can advance this. We have had discussions on this previously. I know members of the committee are well disposed towards being able to help if we can. We will certainly give that a go and we will try. If the committee is agreed, that is my proposal.

I agree with that and am looking forward to it.

Are there any other issues members would like to raise?

No, just to thank the staff here. We get the recommendations and it is sometimes a five-pager and we do our own reading afterwards but the work the case workers do is unbelievable-----

A lot of work always goes in.

-----so I thank them.

Absolutely. I echo that, as I know does Senator Andrews. We are blessed with the people we have working with us.

The committee is adjourned until 18 November, there being no meeting next week because we will be celebrating the inauguration of our new President-elect, Catherine Connolly. We will meet at 6 p.m. on 18 November 2025 in private and public session. Go raibh míle maith agaibh.