1. Why was the decision made not the insist on passports/ enforcement of Balai? How do ROI and NI intend to uphold the purpose of the Balai directive if it is not enforcing them? 2. Has there been any correspondence with the EU on the legality/ acceptability of this unofficial arrangement. Please provide me with any correspondence between DAFM and the relevant EU authority on this issue. 3. What is the current position where someone is found to be in breach of the Balai directive between NI and ROI? At what point do DAFM and DARDNI consider the situation to be of sufficient severity to take action? 4. Please provide correspondence with the authorities in Wales, England and Scotland which advise them of this unofficial arrangement. 5. Could please furnish me with the following information under the FOIA: a. correspondence between DARDNI and DAFM regarding the decision not to insist on on pet passports/ compliance with Balai between January 2015 and present. please also provide any correspondence or information which relates to any review of this position. b. You allude to a letter that was going to be sent to all local authorities about the movement of dogs between the two states and compliance with the Dog Breeding establishment Act. Please provide me with a copy of that letter, and any other communication of this type from 18 January 2016 to present. c. You advise that DAFM would be interested in any communications regarding movements of dogs which appear to take place to avoid passporting/ Balai requirements. Please provide me under the FOIA with any information provided to DAFM on this issue from any local authority, ISPCA, rescue or the like. 6. I understand that on 23 June 2016 DAFM were advised of a substantial number of