Seán Fleming (Laois, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I think the HSE acknowledges on a couple of occasions the unsatisfactory length of time it is taking. It does put its hands up and does not disguise this. In its own way it is important we release this letter today because many people are looking for it and there is significant information in it. Our discussion teasing out the issues here is probably helpful to the process. I ask the HSE please to listen to what is being said here this morning because we were told these matters should not have to go to court. If there are issues with the details of a protocol, I ask the HSE to try to sort them out without going to the High Court if at all possible. I think we would be unanimous on this if it could be done. I thank Deputy Murphy for raising the matter. Without her pursuing it the last day, we would not have this correspondence today. It is very useful for many people involved, especially the women directly affected.

The next item of correspondence is 1780 B from the HSE, providing information on the Deloitte report into governance arrangements in respect of section 38 and section 39 organisations. It is expected that we will be given a copy of this report in January.

The next item is 1782 B from Mr. Pat Smyth, interim CEO of Tusla, dated 4 December 2018, providing information requested by the committee on procedures to secure service level agreements and the memorandum of understanding on information-sharing with An Garda Síochána. We will note and publish this. The important aspects of this letter are the following. Regarding the memorandum of understanding on the sharing of information with An Garda Síochána, Tusla makes quite an issue of the data-sharing agreement and the legal services involved from both organisations. I think they are getting advice on this. Tusla states:

Once approved and signed off, Tusla and [An Garda Síochána] will agree an implementation strategy. The time frame for implementation has been set as Q1 2019.

That is useful. The other item Tusla gives is a full list of all the organisations with which it has commissioned a service level agreement. I think every one of these organisations bar one has signed a service level agreement, and that one exception is in the process of being - to use Tusla's words - "decommissioned" from dealing with Tusla. This is again progress on following up on these service level agreements. We started with the HSE, we found a weakness in Tusla, we referred to it in our periodic reports and Tusla seems to be 100% on top of the job. We will note and publish the correspondence.

The next item of correspondence is 1784 B from Mr. Liam Sloyan, chief executive of the National Treatment Purchase Fund, dated 5 December 2018, providing information requested by the committee on the review of the pricing mechanism for long-term residential care in private and voluntary nursing homes. It includes a note on the progress of the Deloitte prospectus review and a note on the nursing homes steering committee. We will note and publish this. People may be interested in it. It is a follow-on from the information we requested. There are copies of minutes of meetings and of records of information. That is useful.

The next item is 1785 B from Mr. Niall Cody, Chairman of the Revenue Commissioners, providing an information note on testing the constitutionality of excise law in a tax appeal case. This was mentioned at our meeting. He says it is not a matter for the Tax Appeals Commission to make any determination but, rather, it is a matter for the courts to decide constitutionality. He provides information on high-income individuals' restriction and a summary of section 485F, carry forward of excess relief for the years 2007 to 2016. This is as a result of a question I asked and it is good to get this in the public domain. The correspondence concerns one of the reasons some high-wealth individuals pay quite reduced amounts in tax. We understood that if they had losses, and if they had claimed this allowance and carried forward losses in a given year rather than using them all, they could carry them forward again.

Some people will be interested in that. We asked for details of the fines imposed by courts in respect of tobacco. We found them farcical. For the millions of euro involved the fines issued were farcical, and the situation has become more farcical now. Three cases went to court. One person was fined €12,000 and two individuals each received a fine of €5,000. One individual received a fine of €5,000. Any defendant who received a sentence had it fully suspended. There is zero deterrent to smuggling in Ireland as far as I can see. We talk about it every year. The revenue or some other body should be given the authority to impose very serious fines. All that happens is that smugglers lose one particular shipment. They carry on the next week with the next lorry-load. That is something we will have to come down on firmly in our periodic report. It is no wonder it is happening on this scale because there is zero enforcement and zero penalties relative to the scale of activity.

The next item is No. 1,786, from Ray Mitchell of the HSE-----