I agree with all the Deputy's sentiments. Without repeating them, I concur that there is a real do-nothing approach to this issue while our communities are screaming out for action. Going through any town or village, one will see disposed nitrous oxide canisters. That is a concern and should set off an alarm bell at any time, but particularly at this time of year. Coming up to Hallowe'en, as has happened in previous years, a lot of these nitrous oxide canisters will end up on bonfires throughout the State, which poses its own risks. These things contain compressed gas. Once they explode, they become missiles. It is beyond me how a child or someone else has not been killed by an exploding nitrous oxide canister. We know people, predominantly children, are ending up in hospital. In my constituency, a number of children have gone into hospital with spinal injuries and issues as a result of the inhalation of nitrous oxide.
The responses we have had are do-nothing responses. There is no co-ordinated approach. A total of €3 million has been allocated but local authorities are being left to their own devices. There is no system of disposal for communities that want such a solution. The failure to regulate the usage of nitrous oxide is one issue. The other issue is the illegal dumping of the canisters, with no waste facility willing to take them because of the explosions that have occurred at those facilities. No recycling facility will take them. Householders are going out and doing the right thing, whether by way of Tidy Towns groups or otherwise, but they do not know what to do with these containers.
The approach the Government is taking is to set up a working group. That is what the Department is telling us.
It has said that a working group has been established, chaired by the regional waste management planning offices with Local Government Management Agency support, to address the issue of the disposal of the nitrous oxide canisters. Another group has been set up to spend a long time talking about it, while the core issue is the regulation. We know there is legislation in place. Unfortunately, it was kicked down the road by the Government when it was brought forward by Deputy Mark Ward. Instead of advancing the legislation and dealing with the core issue - the regulation of nitrous oxide - unfortunately there is a do-nothing approach. The working group has been established. We need an update on its work. I ask that we follow up on this and get that information. We need to know the terms of reference of that working group, as well as what it is looking at and what it hopes to achieve. Ultimately, we need legislation to be passed. We need local authorities to be empowered to be able to deal with the fallout from the dumping of these lethal canisters. Is it agreed to note and publish that piece of correspondence? Agreed.
No. R2026/0409, dated 24 August 2026, is from the Secretary General of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine and is a response to the committee's request for further information. It was flagged by me. Again, this concerns the levy of €26 million being imposed on the Department of agriculture. I want to draw attention to one line from the Secretary General within the correspondence. He said it is obviously very challenging to identify €26 million of reduced expenditure for 2027 at this stage of the 2026 calendar year across the administration budget and the four programmes under the Department's Vote. He went on to say that the Department continues to engage with the Department of Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation on efficiency and reform proposals. The difficulties imposed by the levy are very clear. I wish to highlight that. Is it agreed to publish and note that piece of correspondence? Agreed.
No. R2026/0410, dated 25 August 2026, is from the assistant secretary general of the Department of Rural and Community Development and the Gaeltacht in response to the committee's request for further information. Is it agreed to note and publish that piece of correspondence? Agreed.
No. R2026/0411, dated 25 August 2026, is from the Secretary General of the Department of Education and Youth in response to the committee's request for information. Is it agreed to note and publish that piece of correspondence? Agreed.
No. R2026/0412, dated 25 August 2026, is from the Secretary General of the Department of Finance in response to the committee's request for information. Is it agreed to note and publish that? Agreed.
No. R2026/0413, dated 25 August 2026, is from the chief executive officer of the HSE in response to the committee's request for further information regarding car parking charges. That was flagged by me. Deputy Bennett wants to come in on this as well. I note the information. It is an issue to which we have given considerable attention at this committee in light of the level of revenue generated by hospital car parking charges over the past five years. Over €73 million has been generated. It is shocking. Testimony from a number of hospitals makes it clear that they deem it now to be a valuable source of revenue due to the underfunding of our hospitals. Some eight years after a review carried out by the HSE at the request of the then Minister for Health, Deputy Simon Harris, another review is being carried out. That speaks volumes about the failure to deal with the issue of hospital car parking charges, something that causes huge pressures for families and people undergoing treatment. I listened to organisations speak about this, in particular the Irish Cancer Society and others. They have said when someone is sick and undergoing treatment there is a financial impact, only for people to be then faced with an additional financial burden in the form of having to pay for car parking charges.
The failure to regulate means that it is a free-for-all for hospitals. St. Vincent's University Hospital increased its maximum rate to €17 per day. If you do the maths on that, that means someone would have to pay €120 a week at the maximum rate simply to access a hospital in order to undergo treatment. We do not need a review. Rather, we need a process to ultimately abolish car parking charges. The response gave no real information on the review that has been initiated. It has given no timeframe for when the work will be concluded. We need more information on the timeframe for the review. It referred to reducing or capping costs. It is a lot of the same language that was used in 2018, which ultimately led to no solution being brought forward to address this issue. We need further information on how long the process will take. We need to know whether it is an attempt to kick the issue down the road again and not deal with it.
