I need to read out the formal notices and will do so now.

I remind members of the constitutional requirement that they 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 they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, any member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting.

We will now move to the consideration of public petitions. We have ten petitions before us and we will take them all in order. If anyone has any comments, I will be happy to take them and we will make a recommendation and a decision on each one. The first petition is P00007/25 entitled "A Call to Ban Election Posters in Ireland". On the basis of the correspondence from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, it would be appropriate for us to close this petition and to notify the petitioner. Are members in agreement with that action? Do they have anything they would like to add on it?

Not really. Agreed.

P00017/25 is entitled the "Taking in Charge of Gleann Fia Housing Estate". We have received correspondence from Cork County Council and from Uisce Éireann. The proposal is that we would forward both sets of correspondence to the petitioners for their comment. Do members have any views on this?

I read the correspondence on this. This is all to do with the flooding in east Cork as well. The developer that had Gleann Fia, Hazelwood Developments Limited, went into liquidation in 2019. That happened. However, the response from Uisce Éireann is very ironic. First, it states:

With regard to the specifics of the petition, we would like to clarify the location referenced in the petition as "Glenn Fia, Mogeely". While there is a completed new housing development named Glenn Fia near Castlemartyr, the active site in question is Gleann Fia, located in Mogeely.

It has nothing to do with Castlemartyr. Gleann Fia is in Mogeely. Across the road from that is an adjacent housing estate called Páirc An Aonaigh. Páirc an Aonaigh has two phases done but its treatment plant goes into Gleann Fia's across the road. When that is flooded, it goes across the road-----

It goes across the road and fills up Gleann Fia.

-----so Uisce Éireann are not taking anything in charge. The ironic thing in the answer from Uisce Éireann is that it states:

To date, the developer has not contacted Uisce Éireann seeking the necessary inspections. As the developer has not completed the required works, Uisce Éireann has been unable to issue a Conformance Certificate. Once issued, this certificate will trigger a 12-month defects liability period. Upon successful inspection at the end of this period, a completion certificate will be issued.

It goes on to say,

In summary, the delay in taking the Gleann Fia pumping station in charge is due to the developer’s failure to complete and arrange inspection of the outstanding snag items. Uisce Éireann remains committed to progressing this matter once the developer fulfils their obligations.

The thing about this is that Uisce Éireann hired the developer to go in and do these works.

Therefore, the contract is with Uisce Éireann.

Yes.

But it has also written to us to say that-----

Yes. Uisce Éireann is blaming the developer, which it actually employed and hired to do these works after the other company went into liquidation. In the short version of the answer I have given, Uisce Éireann is saying it cannot take over the water and sewerage in Gleann Fia until Páirc an Aonaigh is finished, but there are three stages in Páirc an Aonaigh and only two stages are done. If it was all done in the morning, it would still be perhaps a year to two years before that would be resolved. It is a very-----

The difficulty is that Uisce Éireann is obviously trying to pass responsibility to the contractor. We have no control over the contractor. We may only correspond with Uisce Éireann.

If you are the boss of your company, the buck stops with you. No matter who you hire to do a job, you are responsible. Why can those in Uisce Éireann not come back here, hold up their hands, say they hired this company and that there is an ongoing issue? We are never going to get to the end of the Páirc an Aonaigh one because that is years away from being completed. However, the people across the road in Gleann Fia are going to suffer because of a technicality in wording that the developer has not fulfilled his duties but the developer is contracted to Uisce Éireann to do all that. Who is responsible for telling the contractor what to do? Who is responsible for assisting the developer to finish out or tick the boxes so the other people in the other estates will not be affected by excessive flooding? How do we get the answer? Do we write to Uisce Éireann and say that is not good enough?

We have correspondence from both Uisce Éireann and Cork County Council. Obviously, we are going to send that to the petitioners because that is right and appropriate.

I spoke to one of them before I came into the meeting and they said they will cut off the water between the two estates because they cannot risk being flooded. I put that on record. I will be very interested to see what the petitioners' response will be after this.

The response from the petitioners will guide whatever our next actions will be.

I thank the Chair for her patience and her indulgence.

Not at all. This is a very serious issue. The petitioners may not like the response as has been received but they are entitled to respond to us, and on the basis on what they send us, I propose we take that on board and respond accordingly. I hear the Deputy's frustration channelling their frustration.

It is crazy. I thank the Chair.

We will forward the correspondence, and on the basis of the petitioners' response, we will decide what our next course of action is. Is that agreed? Agreed.

P00019/25, submitted by Mr. Shane Cusack, is entitled "Enforce Punishments for Perjury in Court". As members can see from Mr. Cusack's submission, he is someone who has had experience of the family court system and, on the basis of that he has written to us, we have corresponded with the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration. The proposal is that we would forward that correspondence we have received back to the petitioner for his comment within 14 days. My instinct says we would see what way we would approach it based on the response of the petitioner to the Department's response. Is that agreed? Agreed.

P00022/25 is entitled "Reform of Seanad Éireann". This relates to the number of days Seanad Éireann sits in any given week. We have written to the Cathaoirleach of Seanad Éireann and the Cathaoirleach has responded. The proposal is that we will send that correspondence from the Cathaoirleach of the Seanad to the petitioner for his comment. On the basis of that, we will perhaps have a further discussion. Is that agreed? Agreed. I thank Senator Andrews and other members.

P00033/25 is entitled "Mandatory singing National Anthem and raising the Irish Flag in schools", submitted by Ms Joanne Fennell. We have received correspondence from the petitioner and the proposal is that this would be forwarded to the Department of Education and Youth. The Department has also corresponded with us. We have correspondence dated 1 September 2025, which has previously been sent to the petitioner. There is further correspondence to be sent to her but, on the basis of the correspondence sent on 1 September 2025, the recommendation is that we will close this petition as we cannot have any further involvement in it on the basis of what the Department is saying. Is that agreed? Go raibh míle maith agaibh.

P00041/25 is entitled "Fair Citizenship: 3 Years for Ukrainians Under Temporary Protection in Ireland". This petition relates to the establishment of citizenship and whether the time spent in any given state, but specifically this State, counts for the calculation of a right to apply for citizenship. I propose that we send the correspondence from the petitioner to the Department of Justice, Home Affairs and Migration for its comment within 14 days. Based on the response of the Department of justice, I am not certain, what, if any, work has been done on this. I understand it has to be a matter for consideration but I would be very interested to hear what the Department's view is. On the basis of that view, then we will take a decision on whether a hearing or further action is required or appropriate. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I think that is the correct approach.

I thank Deputy Smith.

P00062/25 is entitled "Mandatory Mental Health Breaks in Schools". The petitioner in this case feels very strongly, particularly in relation to secondary school students who struggle with school and mental health.

A total of 29% of students have admitted that their mental health is bad or really bad. Funnily enough, this is something that was very much under discussion at the Young Scientist and Technology Exhibition. I talked to a number of students who were doing projects specifically related to mental health and the impact in school. It is obviously something younger people are talking about. The proposal is we forward the correspondence from the Department of Education and Youth to the petitioner, but I recommend, with the committee's agreement, that we try to schedule a hearing with this petitioner at our earliest opportunity. It is something that feeds into a broader discussion that is happening anyway, but it would be good, very interesting and informative for us to have that. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Could I just add that we had an issue like this when we were on the mental health committee years ago and so on and so forth. I am not knocking the top psychologists or psychotherapists or whatever but I remember a conversation I had. These are the experts, the people who go to school every day, who meet their friends in classes and who know the issues that are going on. I would really love to see this petitioner come in. These people are the experts. They are the ones with the lived experience and they will educate us. I am looking forward to that.

I a hundred per cent agree with you, Deputy.

P00064/25 is from Ms Gráinne McLaughlin and is entitled "Housing Review". We have a response from the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage which we are going to forward to the petitioner for their comment within the next two weeks. Is that agreed? Agreed.

P00068/25 is titled "Inability to Progress from Stamp 1G to a General Employment Permit Due to Labour Market Needs Test – Impact on Qualified Irish Teachers". This is a contemporary issue inasmuch as some schools are struggling to recruit and retain teachers, but it is also a cross-departmental issue. It touches the Department of enterprise and the Department of Education and Youth. Sometimes people come to us because they cannot get satisfactory responses from Departments as something falls between the stools and obviously we do all we can to assist. There are two sets of correspondence. One is from the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment and one from the Department of Education and Youth. The proposal is we forward those to the petitioner for their comment. Is that agreed? Agreed.

P00070/25 is titled "Petition for Ireland to put Sepsis Management and Awareness on the agenda for its EU Presidency July 2026". This has come from the North-East Sepsis Awareness group. Do members have a view on this before I make the recommendation?

This is an excellent group. I know its members. They made a presentation in the audiovisual room during the lifetime of the previous Dáil. I have heard them on local radio stations and read interviews with them in print media as well. They have done powerful work advocating for the creation of better awareness among all of us about sepsis and the severity of the illness. I hope we will be in a position to forward the correspondence to the relevant Ministers and to the Taoiseach as well. I also suggest we invite North-East Sepsis Awareness to make a presentation to us. The group's whole work is about creating the awareness and ensuring that, at national, European and global levels, there are comprehensive strategies in place to counteract this very severe illness. In the document we have, I see that in 2020 the World Health Organization estimated there were 49 million cases of sepsis worldwide. Of those, 20 million were in children, which is nearly 50%. That year there were also 11 million sepsis-related deaths and 20% of all global deaths were caused by sepsis. If we were speaking ten or 12 years ago, sepsis would not have been as prevalent in our day-to-day conversations as it is today. With your agreement, a Chathaoirligh, and that of the committee, we should ask in these powerful advocates for the creation of awareness and the development of proper strategies. They are three young ladies who have done great work. A forum like this would be beneficial in getting the word out from these people who, through the personal and professional experience, can enlighten us so much.

Thank you, Deputy Smith. You make a very good point there. I am in full agreement with you. If we can we should definitely invite the petitioners in. As you suggested, we should also correspond with the Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade on the basis the petitioners have specifically linked this to the EU Presidency. If anyone in their family or personal life has had any experience of a loved one having sepsis, or of having it themselves, it is frightening to think how preventable it is and how deadly it can be. Anything we as a committee can do to raise awareness we should do. The proposal is we send the correspondence not just to the Department of Health, because obviously we have correspondence sent to that Department, but also to An Taoiseach and the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade. Is that agreed?

Absolutely agreed, Chair.

Thank you. That concludes the consideration of public petitions. I 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.

Do members have any other business?

Yes, it is in relation to the pet theft petition. The committee wrote to the Department of agriculture and I think the Department of justice. The response from the Department of agriculture is completely unsatisfactory. It hardly mentions the pet theft reform petition. It talks a lot about microchipping, which of course has failed and is that Department's remit. Most dogs in pounds are not registered or chipped and it is the same with rescues. There are a tiny number of prosecutions for microchipping, no enforcement and there is almost no prosecution for failure to comply with chipping. Most of the pet theft is from criminal groups and individuals. The response we got is really poor. We have not got a response from the Department of justice.

We have not received a response from the Department of justice. We will try to get that for our next meeting because it will be important. I think we were all very struck by the evidence given on the day by people who really love their pets. They were very obviously upset at the manner in which they feel their loss was not treated seriously and you could see it in them. The best thing for us to do is to hang fire until we see the response from the Department of justice to see if it adds any light. In the event the response from the Department of justice does not answer the questions raised, then I propose we have a further hearing with the officials from the relevant Departments, as appropriate.

North of the Border and in England they introduced a pet abduction Act in 2024. Animals - pets, dogs and cats - are sentient beings. In the Republic it is being treated like your bike or your car was stolen and it is so much more than that. North of the Border that has been recognised and it is important to have an aligned all-Ireland policy on pet theft. When you look at the rescues and the pressure they are under and then we get a response like that, it is just unacceptable.

Your sentiment is very much noted. The petitioners have very strong feelings not just for their pets but about this area and the inaction. I thought they put their case very well. Notwithstanding that, the correspondence we have is the correspondence we have. My proposal is we wait for the Department of justice to see what it says and to decide on the basis of that what the next course of action is. Is that agreed? Agreed.

As members do not have any other issues, I will adjourn the meeting. I thank members so much.