Paul Gogarty - Recent appearances (From KildareStreet.com)

Social Welfare Code | Written Answers

2010-07-08T22:00:00+00:00

Question 461: To ask the Minister for Social Protection his plans, if any, regarding proposals by the Department of Finance to abolish welfare payments such as the one parent family allowance and disability allowance for community employment participants; if his attention has been drawn to the potential negative implications for access to schemes and the delivery of services in communities; if an analysis has been carried out to assess the likelihood that staffing levels and the sustainability of community projects such as community childcare; if an assessment has been carried out as to whether any such plan would be a discriminatory and counter productive disincentive in view of the fact that only directly employed workers would be entitled to the OPFA or disability payment in the future with CE workers not receiving the payment; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [31260/10]

Swimming Pool Projects | Written Answers

2010-07-08T22:00:00+00:00

Question 427: To ask the Minister for Tourism, Culture and Sport if a special case separate to the swimming pool programme could be made for a town (details supplied) in County Dublin with the local authorities advised of same along with the application; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that South Dublin County Council did not apply under the old programme in 2000 due to its belief that such a project required it to await the guidelines on public or private partnership as indicated in responses to this Deputy in Dáil Éireann in 2003, 2004 and 2005; if her further attention has been drawn to the fact that while the local authority did indicate in 2006 that it was willing to build a pool out of its own resources, with Exchequer funding desirable but not necessary, it has now suffered a loss of revenue stream due to the downturn and cannot now fund out of its own resources. [31261/10]

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T16:00:00+00:00

Hear, hear.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T16:00:00+00:00

It has been shown many times.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T16:00:00+00:00

Self regulation is no regulation.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T15:00:00+00:00

This is nothing to do-----

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T15:00:00+00:00

What about comely maidens?

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T15:00:00+00:00

I would like to see more amendments debated rather than go into a debate on the rural wedge.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T15:00:00+00:00

The Minister has made a genuine effort to take on board the concerns members have raised but for the purposes of this legislation, the definition of a breeding bitch is to cover and ensure there are no loopholes. It does not matter that the greyhound does not give birth until one year later. That is not the reason it is being done.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T15:00:00+00:00

I am drawing a comparison and I am sorry if the Deputies do not like it.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T15:00:00+00:00

I get confused at times. Deputy Sheehan asked when is a heifer a cow, when is a puppy a bitch. There is no absolute comparison. A girl does not have to be pregnant to become a woman. One must have common sense.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T14:00:00+00:00

I did not even say 25%. The Deputy should get his facts right. It is not that it matters. If I were gay, I would-----

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T14:00:00+00:00

Rezoning rural land.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T14:00:00+00:00

Corporate donations.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T14:00:00+00:00

Deputy Sheahan is fishing in the wrong pond.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Committee and Remaining Stages | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T14:00:00+00:00

It is all bull, just as the Deputy lied about me being 50% homosexual. It is total bull.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T13:00:00+00:00

Where is Dublin 4?

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T13:00:00+00:00

Go easy on them.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T13:00:00+00:00

I welcome the Bill. Various amendments have been proposed and, to be frank, I do not care whether the provisions are inserted in this Bill or in the Greyhound Industry Act 1958, so long as they are put through. In the debate on a Private Members’ motion last December, Fine Gael’s Front Bench spokesman, Deputy Coveney, alluded to the issue of regulation thus:

Light-handed regulation and cosy relationships between senior bankers, the Regulator’s office, the Central Bank, the Department of Finance and, ultimately, Government has resulted in misinformation, market deception and deliberate concealment of vital information from shareholders, the markets and the public relating to the financial health of certain banks.

The Taoiseach has acknowledged the regulatory failures that have occurred within the banking sector and the Office of the Financial Regulator. That is why new measures have been introduced in those areas. However, when it comes to the legislation before us today, it seems we have learned absolutely nothing.

Thus far in the debate in this House and in the media we have had the alarming spectacle of some Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Deputies speaking about the dangers of over-regulation of the greyhound racing sector. There seems to be an arrogance in the higher echelons of the greyhound sector, no more than in the banking sector, that seeks to tell others to butt out because they know nothing about it. That is that attitude which led to the systematic failure of the banking system. The Minister, Deputy Gormley, in proposing this legislation, which deals primarily with puppy farming, is seeking to ensure that dog breeding is properly regulated and monitored and that shoddy practice is no longer given the nod and the wink.

As far as animal welfare is concerned, both Bord na gCon and the Irish Coursing Club, ICC, seem to be untouchable enclaves. There is no regulation other than self-regulation, and that is a dangerous thing as events in the Catholic Church and in the banking sector have shown. If people are doing good work within the sector, they should have no fear of regulation. The genuine concerns of Members have been recognised by the Minister in his amendments. I am pleased there seems to be a consensus emerging that those amendments are satisfactory. As I said, I do not care whether it is through this Bill or through legislation that is the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food that regulation is introduced.

My colleague, Deputy Maureen O’Sullivan, tabled the same parliamentary question earlier this year to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and the Minister at what was then the Department of Arts, Sport and Tourism, asking, in each case, whether that particular Department was responsible for overseeing the welfare of greyhounds. Her question requested the number of kennel inspections carried out by Bord na gCon in the last five years, the number of licences revoked and so on. This information should be readily on record under the 1958 Act. However, the question was disallowed on the basis that the inspection of kennels is part of the functions of Bord na gCon and is not an issue for which any of the Ministers concerned is responsible to Dáil Éireann. In other words, nobody is responsible.

The 1958 Act, as it currently stands, does not regulate. Whether through an amendment to that Act or the measures in this Bill, provision must be made for the regulation of the industry. All dogs have a right to a basic quality of life. There are no kennel inspections of the greyhound breeding industry, and that must be rectified. I hope that through the amendment of the 1958 Act, as proposed by the Minister, proper regulation will be instated. I particularly welcome the legislation in terms of preventing and monitoring the inhumane treatment of puppies that has given this country a bad reputation throughout Europe.

Dog Breeding Establishments Bill 2009: Second Stage (Resumed) | Dáil debates

2010-07-08T13:00:00+00:00

I propose to share time with the Minister of State, Deputy White, and Deputy O’Donoghue.