Dáil debates

Wednesday, 27 March 2013

Animal Health and Welfare Bill 2012 [Seanad]: Report Stage (Resumed)

 

5:35 pm

Photo of Simon CoveneySimon Coveney (Cork South Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

We are all at the same thing here. Section 37(1) states: "The Minister may for the purposes of enforcing this Act or an EU measure, appoint in writing, such persons or classes of person as he or she considers appropriate to be authorised officers for the exercise of all or any of the functions conferred on an authorised officer under this Act specified in the appointment." I do not want to be appointing some officer from the ISPCA, for example, as an authorised officer for certain jobs but then have people asking what are his or her experience and qualifications. I would then have to define the qualifications in law. Once one introduces a requirement to preclude certain people from being made authorised officers, then one has to define what it is based on. What is a qualification in this area? Some people may have years of experience but few qualifications. That is why I deliberately left it open, so that a Minister may only appoint someone appropriate to do a specific job.

Let us take an example in which Ireland has a significant animal disease outbreak, forcing me to appoint hundreds of authorised officers to get a handle on sectioning off large areas of land and give them powers to act on my behalf for a specific period and reason. I do not want to be tied down dealing with qualifications and experience. I will need to be able appoint somebody appropriate for the job quickly.

My amendment, No. 33, does not propose to appoint somebody under section 37(3) under a service agreement. My thinking is that a person with a lot of experience of dealing with cases of animal cruelty and management, particularly in an urban environment, would be useful for our Department. However, people going onto farms need to have the experience to understand farm practices and so forth. There was a genuine concern that there would be people entering farms who would pursue animal welfare concerns but without an understanding of farm practices. My amendment deals with these concerns. I have also spoken with the animal welfare organisations on this matter, and they are not looking to go onto farms. They want to be able to do their jobs in partnership with my Department as authorised officers in certain cases, so they can effectively deal with animal cruelty and abuse cases in private homes and urban environments. They would be a fantastic asset to my Department. They would also have to deal with cases on public lands. For example, there have been some horrific horse welfare cases in the past ten days that I have had to deal with in Cork and other parts of Ireland, where horses are starving to death in fields. In these cases, I would be happy to have the help of authorised officers from various sources who have experience of dealing with animal welfare but who are not necessarily veterinary practitioners or departmental employees.

Regarding Deputy Clare Daly's concerns, we will not necessarily have to employ a whole new raft of people. One can appoint an authorised officer who is currently employed by the Department, a local authority or the ISPCA, for example. They would not be taken on and paid for this role but would be given extra powers under the law to do their own job more effectively. This is not about recruitment but about giving the extra powers of an authorised officer to people who are already employed in this area so they can do their jobs more effectively

I feel my amendment deals with the concerns raised by Deputy Ó Cuív, while amendments Nos. 30 and 34 may actually preclude the persons whom the Deputies wish to see appointed to these positions from being appointed. Accordingly, I will not be accepting these amendments.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.