Adults found with a small quantity of controlled drugs for personal use may now be referred to the Health Service Executive instead of being prosecuted under Ireland’s new Health Referral Scheme.
The nationwide pilot scheme took effect on 1 September 2026. It gives An Garda Síochána an alternative response when dealing with an eligible person’s first drug-possession offence.
To qualify, a person must:
Be at least 18 years old.
Have no previous drug-possession conviction or adult caution.
Admit that the drugs were intended for personal use.
Agree to participate in the voluntary referral process.
The person must then contact the HSE and arrange an appointment with a trained SAOR practitioner. The appointment includes screening, discussion of the person’s substance use and support needs, and practical information and advice. Further treatment or specialist support may be recommended where appropriate.
This is therefore not necessarily a compulsory rehabilitation programme. It begins with a screening and brief intervention, followed by additional support when needed.
The Health Research Board explains the intervention. Anyone who declines the referral may instead be prosecuted under existing drugs legislation. Possession of a controlled drug remains a criminal offence under Section 3 of the Misuse of Drugs Act; the scheme does not legalise or decriminalise drug possession.
Garda Commissioner Mr Justin Kelly welcomed the initiative, saying it would allow Garda members to support harm reduction by directing eligible first-time offenders towards health services instead of the criminal justice system. The Government says the scheme is designed to encourage early engagement with support services, reduce drug-related harm and limit the potentially lasting consequences of a first possession offence. It is also intended to allow Garda resources to remain focused on drug dealing, organised crime and exploitation. The Department of Health describes it as a new health-led pathway.
Potential benefits:
It may help people address risky or problematic drug use at an early stage.
It can prevent a first offence from resulting in a conviction that affects employment, education or travel.
It treats some personal drug use as a health matter while retaining penalties for supply and trafficking.
It may reduce unnecessary pressure on Gardaí, prosecutors and the courts.
It can connect people with specialist services they might not otherwise approach.
Potential drawbacks:
Eligibility is limited to first-time offenders, leaving little scope for people whose repeated offending may be connected to addiction.
The decision depends partly on Garda discretion, which may raise concerns about consistency.
There is no single fixed quantity defining personal use; Gardaí assess factors such as the amount and how the drugs are packaged.
The scheme could place additional demand on already stretched health and addiction services.
Because possession remains illegal, critics may regard the initiative as too limited and argue that broader legal reform is needed.
Referral information remains relevant to how any later offence is handled, even though the first incident is diverted from prosecution.
The scheme represents a significant change in Ireland’s response to first-time personal drug possession, but its impact will ultimately depend on consistent implementation, adequate HSE resources and whether participants meaningfully engage with the support offered.
However, questions remain. Could participants be pressured to reveal the source of the drugs, and is the scheme genuinely focused on public health, or partly intended to ease pressure on Ireland’s overcrowded prisons?
Official information describes the scheme as voluntary and focused on screening, advice and support; it does not state that participants must identify a supplier. There is also no published evidence that reducing prison overcrowding is one of its stated objectives.
Undeclared milk and egg in a batch of Lemanfen Strawberry Waffle Rolls
Alert Summary dated Monday, 31st August 2026
Allergy Alert Notification: 2026.A25. Allergens: Milk and egg. Product Identification: Lemanfen Strawberry Waffle Rolls; pack size: 52 g. Batch Code: B26000006696; best-before date: 15/03/2027. Country Of Origin: China.
Message: The above batch of Lemanfen Strawberry Waffle Rolls contains milk and egg which are not declared in the list of ingredients. This may make the batch unsafe for consumers who are allergic to or intolerant of milk and/or egg and therefore, these consumers should not eat the implicated batch. The affected batch is being recalled.
A troubling controversy is developing around honey being sold in Ireland.
Many jars carry Irish-sounding names, familiar imagery or references to long-established Irish businesses. Yet the honey inside may be entirely imported. Until recently, labels could simply state “a blend of EU and non-EU honeys,” without identifying the countries involved or the proportions used.
Even more concerning is the possibility that some imported products are not pure honey at all.
A major European Commission investigation tested 320 consignments of honey entering the EU. It found that 147 or 46% of those tested, were suspected of containing added sugar syrups. Investigators also uncovered fraudulent practices involving additives and colourings, pollen removal and the falsification of information intended to conceal honey’s true origin.
This does not mean that 46% of every jar sold in Ireland is fake. The results concerned imported consignments tested during a particular investigation, and “suspected” adulteration is not automatically proof of fraud. Nevertheless, the findings expose a serious weakness in the honey supply chain.
Is adulterated honey dangerous?
It is important to be accurate about the risk. The European Commission considers the direct health risk from added sugar syrup to be very low, provided the syrup is food-grade and safe for human consumption. Honey is already naturally high in sugar, so adulteration with ordinary syrup does not normally make it acutely poisonous.
However, there are still legitimate concerns: If undeclared additives, colourings or other substances are used, consumers cannot know exactly what they are eating. False origin records and removed pollen weaken traceability, making it more difficult to identify suppliers or recall a product if contamination is discovered. Consumers with diabetes or those controlling their sugar intake may purchase honey believing it to be an authentic natural product when it could contain cheaper added syrups. All honey should, of course, be consumed carefully by anyone managing blood glucose. Adulterated products may not provide the composition, flavour or other qualities for which consumers deliberately choose genuine honey. Food fraud shows that someone in the supply chain is deliberately evading controls. Even where the adulterant itself is relatively harmless, that disregard for regulation damages confidence in the safety system.
There is also a separate safety warning applying to all honey, whether Irish or imported: it must never be given to a baby under 12 months old, because it can contain spores associated with infant botulism. Cooking or pasteurising honey does not provide a reliable safeguard for infants.
The danger to Irish beekeepers Ireland produces only a small proportion of the honey consumed in this country. Genuine Irish beekeepers face the impossible task of competing against extremely cheap imports, particularly when imported honey is packaged in a way that may leave shoppers believing they are supporting an Irish product. Foreign honey is not inherently unsafe or inferior, and importing it is entirely lawful. The problem is misleading presentation, concealed origins and the possibility of adulterated products being passed off as pure honey.
New EU labelling rules, effective from June 14th 2026, should improve transparency. Labels on newly produced blends must identify the countries of origin and their percentage shares, although older stock may remain on sale until exhausted.
Consumers should look beyond the brand name and imagery. Read the small print and look specifically for “Irish honey” or “100% Irish honey,” along with a clearly identified producer and place of origin. Remember, however, that consumers cannot reliably detect sophisticated adulteration by appearance, taste or whether the honey crystallises. Proper oversight and laboratory testing remain essential.
Irish consumers deserve honesty. Irish beekeepers deserve fair competition. And when a jar is sold as honey, its contents should be exactly that: genuine, traceable honey.
The recent meeting concerning the River Suir, held at Cahir House Hotel in Cahir, County Tipperary, on Wed 26th last, attracted a packed room of anglers, Tidy Towns personnel and environmentalists all united by their concern for the future of the river Suir. The meeting was chaired by Mr Derek Cagney, (National Secretary of the Trout Anglers Federation of Ireland and Chairman of the Cashel, Golden and Tipperary Anglers Association). Despite the strong public attendance and the importance of the issues under discussion, no politicians, elected councillors or other local Thurles representatives were seen to be present.
Meanwhile, independently a formal complaint has now been made once again by myself, directed at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning the continuing condition of the River Suir in Thurles town centre and the failure to respond by the known responsible body, namely Tipperary County Council.
The complaint, (EPA reference COM021813), concerns the stretch running from Eircode E41 NX94(Barry’s Bridge) along the full stretch of river running to and including the area Eircode E41 C6K7, (Slievenamon Road River Walk entrance).
Concerns have been raised about this watercourse repeatedly since approximately November 2013. Recent photographs, vidoes and observations indicate that serious problems remain, including:
abnormal, opaque or grey-looking water;
foam or surface scum;
dark material or sludge in the channel;
water suspected of containing domestic wastewater or run-off;
extensive rush and vegetation growth, sucking the oxygen from the shallow water;
bottles, drinks containers and other litter throughout the riverbed and floating on now stagnant, polluted water.
Loss of the River Suir Fountains at Barry’s Bridge It is deeply regrettable that Tipperary County Council removed the two fountains from the River Suir These fountains were more than decorative features. They enhanced this prominent riverside area, while helping to circulate and aerate the water. Although fountains cannot themselves remedy pollution or replace proper river management, their operation can improve local water movement and dissolved-oxygen levels. At a time when residents are reporting stagnant-looking water, excessive vegetation, algae, sludge and litter, their removal represents the loss of both a valued public amenity and a potentially beneficial source of aeration.
Tipperary County Council should now explain why the fountains were removed, what assessment preceded the decision and whether they will be again restored. Their return should form part of a wider, properly funded programme to investigate pollution, clean the channel and restore this neglected stretch of River,
Photographs alone cannot fully establish the composition or exact source of the water or material contained. That requires a professional inspection, laboratory testing and proper source-tracing. However, the visible conditions are sufficiently abnormal to justify an urgent investigation.
In September 2025, the EPA referred the matter to Tipperary County Council as I requested. The Council subsequently outlined immediate and planned actions, including a proposed catchment-management plan and pilot study, details of which I am not privy. In November 2025, the EPA informed me that it was satisfied, based on the Council’s response, that the Council was taking appropriate steps to fulfil its environmental responsibilities.
Alas however, the continuing conditions during 2026 now raises serious questions about whether those promised measures were ever implemented and whether they produced any measurable environmental improvement.
On 23rd August 2026, the EPA acknowledged my further correspondence. It has again referred the matter to Tipperary County Council and has stated that it will assess what further EPA action may be appropriate after reviewing the Council’s next response. An update has been promised within the next four weeks.
It has been made clear that another referral and exchange of correspondence will not, by themselves, clean this river, identify the source of any discharge or prevent the problem from recurring. The Council’s handling of the matter is itself a central part of this complaint. Independent oversight now requires verification of what is happening on the ground.
Dried-up riverbed in Thurles town centre.
It has been formally requested that a suitably qualified EPA officer conduct an unannounced inspection while the conditions are visible. I am available to meet an officer at the site and identify the affected locations.
The EPA have also been asked to:
inspect and photograph the affected watercourse;
arrange properly documented upstream and downstream sampling;
analyse the water for appropriate chemical, biological and microbiological indicators;
trace relevant drains, pipes, culverts and outfalls;
establish whether any discharge exists and whether it is authorised;
examine Tipperary County Council’s complaint, inspection and enforcement records;
obtain evidence that Tipperary County Council’s promised actions were completed;
specify deadlines for investigation, cleaning and remediation;
consider its statutory supervisory powers if the evidence shows that Tipperary County Council has not performed its environmental duties adequately.
The EPA’s own guidance states that people may complain about a council’s environmental performance where a problem has not been addressed within a reasonable period or properly investigated. It also states that the EPA may issue legal notices or direct a council to take action where its duties have not been performed adequately. Under section 63 of the Environmental Protection Agency Act 1992, as amended, the EPA oversees local authorities’ performance of their environmental-protection functions.
The EPA are being asked to prejudge whether an offence has occurred. A rigorous, evidence-based and independent investigation is being sought. If the EPA decides that an inspection is unnecessary, a reasoned written decision has been asked for, explaining what verified evidence supports that conclusion.
After approximately thirteen years of complaints, plans, promises and political assurances are no longer enough. The public is entitled to a clean watercourse, accountable environmental governance and clear answers about what has entered this section of the River Suir.
From today, August 30th, I will make the substantive correspondence and official responses publicly available, subject to the appropriate protection of personal information. Further photographs and updates will follow.
Most of Cabragh Road in Thurles was resurfaced over the past week, following the deterioration and collapse of sections of the road surface after water-service works were carried out some years ago.
Much of the new surface appears to have been finished to a good standard. However, several sections near homes and businesses; including the area entrance to O’Meara Oil, now appear to be incomplete and potentially hazardous.
As our photographs show, the newly laid asphalt ends in a rough, abrupt and raised edge beside an uneven pedestrian margin. Anyone walking out from town may suddenly encounter a section where the resurfacing covers only part of the available roadside space.
Pic: G. Willoughby.
This presents particular difficulties for:
► wheelchair and mobility-scooter users; ► parents pushing children in buggies; ► people using walking aids; ► older pedestrians and those with impaired balance; ► cyclists moving close to the road edge; and ► residents entering or leaving adjoining properties.
Small wheelchair castors or buggy wheels could catch against the raised lip or loose stone. A pedestrian attempting to avoid the uneven surface could also be forced closer to moving traffic.
Pic: G. Willoughby.
The unfinished edge may create further problems if it is not corrected promptly. Water could collect along the change in level instead of draining freely, increasing the risk of puddles, splashing and deterioration. Water entering an unsealed pavement edge can weaken it, while passing traffic may loosen the exposed aggregate and cause the asphalt to ravel or break away progressively.
The resulting loose stones could become an additional slipping or skidding hazard. Repeated vehicle loading may also widen the damaged edge, leaving potholes, crumbling margins and an even greater difference in level.
Pic: G. Willoughby.
Serious questions therefore arise: Why were these sections left at a different level? Was pedestrian and wheelchair access assessed before the work was accepted? Were drainage and connections to entrances properly examined? Has the resurfacing received a final inspection? Is the contractor expected to return and complete the margins?
Fresh road markings and a new running surface do not make a project complete if unsafe edges remain beside homes, businesses and pedestrian routes.
These locations should now be inspected urgently by Tipperary County Council, made safe without delay and brought to a properly finished, accessible and well-drained standard. The council provides an official service for reporting damaged roads and footpaths, including an online “Fix-it”facility, [which today same consultation portal, despite every attempt, refused access].
Which begs another question; Where have “Refresh Thurles” members vanished to? Note: Refresh Thurles members have failed to note that those working on this re-surfacing project, forgot to take their litter with them.
The public should not have to wait until somebody falls, a wheelchair becomes trapped or the newly laid surface begins to disintegrate before action is taken.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish.AcceptRead More
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Recent Comments