Martin bites refugee pet
€1M A MONTH TO HOME UKRAINIAN PETS HERE ■ HE SAYS THERE WAS ‘CONTEXT’ AND IT SHOWED ‘THE BEST OF US’
TANAISTE Micheal Martin was forced to defend the amount of money being spent on pets for Ukrainian refugees, after revealed it was costing taxpayers up to €1 million a month.
Mr Martin was quizzed about the huge spend in the Dail yesterday following our revelations that more than 1,800 dogs, cats and other animals were put up in hotels and other State-funded accommodation at taxpayers’ expense.
Context
MONEY IS GONE TO THE DOGS: A dog in a transit centre after its owners fled Ukraine — it’s now emerged the State paid for pets to be accommodated in Irish hotels
He defended the spend, insisting there was “a context at the time” and that it was only “one aspect” of a humanitarian response to the Ukraine crisis “that reflected the best of what we are as a people”.
It comes as The Star can now reveal how officials in the Department of Integration pushed back Star revealed that 1,806 dogs, cats against moves to end the practice and other animals had been put up of paying for the pets. in hotels and other State-funded
Emails seen by us show that senior accommodation at a cost of up to figures argued against plans to pull €1m a month. the plug on the practice, citing the These included both pets that had importance of pets to children, and travelled here from Ukraine with the unpleasantness of having to their owners, and animals refugees inform owners of the policy change at acquired since arriving in Ireland. reception centres. The issue was raised in the Dail
Another official feared the State yesterday by Clare TD Michael McNamara, could be sued for breach of con- who had described the expenditure tract if it suddenly stopped paying as “ridiculous” and said for pet accommodation. the Government was “taking the
This week, an investigation by p**s out of the Irish taxpayer”.
The
The policy remained in force for the first eight months of the crisis but internal emails show that discussions about ending the practice began on August 29, 2022.
One official set out this position in a group email, advocating that “from this point on, we don’t accommodate pets – certainly not if purchased here”.
“We’ve significant constraints – notwithstanding what other countries do…we make our own calls,” he added.
However, there was pushback over the proposed policy change, with a principal officer in the Department arguing that “pets are extremely important to children”.
She pointed to a recent study, which had found that 50 per cent of children had pets and saw pets as part of their family.
Another official foresaw difficulties with telling Ukrainian refugees that their pets would not be accommodated at the State’s expense.
“Who has that conversation with the ‘Person with the Pet’... I don’t think I could ask my team to have those onsite discussions,” she wrote.
In response, a Department official suggested sending letters about the changes instead. “Do we write to them then?” she asked.
Another argument was outlined by a principal officer, who said “unilaterally” stopping the payments