DÁIL ÉIREANN PDF Free Download
1 / 199/199
100%
Vol. 1070
No. 3
Wednesday,
2 July 2025
DÍOSPÓIREACHTAÍ PARLAIMINTE
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
DÁIL ÉIREANN
TUAIRISC OIFIGIÚIL—Neamhcheartaithe
(OFFICIAL REPORT—Unrevised)
Insert Date Here
02/07/2025A00100Ábhair Shaincheisteanna Tráthúla - Topical Issue Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
02/07/2025A00300Saincheisteanna Tráthúla - Topical Issue Debate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
02/07/2025A00400Cybersecurity Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
02/07/2025B00400Road Projects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
02/07/2025C00400Medical Aids and Appliances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
02/07/2025D00500Hospital Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290
02/07/2025F00200Special Educational Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
02/07/2025G00600Nursing Homes: Motion [Private Members] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296
02/07/2025T00600Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders’ Questions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 329
02/07/2025X01000Ceisteanna ó na Comhaltaí Eile - Other Members’ Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
02/07/2025Y00200Ceisteanna ar Pholasaí nó ar Reachtaíocht - Questions on Policy or Legislation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342
02/07/2025HH00100All-Island Strategic Rail Review: Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350
02/07/2025KK00700Visit of Peruvian Delegation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358
02/07/2025KK00900All-Island Strategic Rail Review: Statements (Resumed) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358
02/07/2025RR00300Middle East: Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
02/07/2025KKK00200Message from Select Committee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
02/07/2025KKK00400Estimates for Public Services 2025: Messages from Select Committees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
02/07/2025KKK00600Defamation (Amendment) Bill 2024: Report Stage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413
02/07/2025WWW00100Social Welfare (Bereaved Partner’s Pension and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2025: Report and Final Stages
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
02/07/2025DDDD00100Criminal Justice (Terrorist Oences) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Second Stage (Resumed) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456
02/07/2025DDDD00400Criminal Justice (Terrorist Oences) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Referral to Select Committee . . . . . . . . . . . 459
02/07/2025DDDD00700 Transparency and Social Value in Public Procurement Bill 2024: Second Stage (Resumed) [Private Members]
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459
02/07/2025DDDD01300GPO and Moore Street Regeneration as a 1916 Cultural Quarter: Motion (Resumed) [Private Members] . . . 462
02/07/2025DDDD02100Nursing Homes: Motion (Resumed) [Private Members] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472
Dé Céadaoin, 2 Iúil 2025
Wednesday, 2 July 2025
Chuaigh an Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Aidan Farrelly) i gceannas ar 9 a.m.
Paidir agus Machnamh.
Prayer and Reection.
02/07/2025A00100Ábhair Shaincheisteanna Tráthúla - Topical Issue Matters
02/07/2025A00200An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Aidan Farrelly): I wish to advise the House of
the following matters in respect of which notice has been given under Standing Order 39 and
the name of the Member in each case:
Deputy Michael Cahill - To discuss a ban on pair trawling.
Deputy Catherine Ardagh - To discuss the need for all special schools to accept children at
dierent levels on the autism spectrum.
Deputy Malcolm Byrne - To discuss the level of preparedness for a major cyberattack on
the State.
Deputy Naoise Ó Cearúil - To discuss ongoing road safety issues on the Celbridge Road,
Maynooth.
Deputies Pearse Doherty, Pat the Cope Gallagher and Pádraig Mac Lochlainn - To discuss
Letterkenny University Hospital being overlooked as a location for a surgical hub.
Deputy Pat Buckley - To discuss the ood relief programme for Rathcormac, Castlemartyr,
Killeagh and Mogeely in County Cork.
Deputy Louis O’Hara - To discuss the urgent need for updated wind energy development
guidelines.
Deputy Colm Burke - To discuss the need for a national nursing home care policy.
Deputy David Cullinane - To discuss funding for capital developments at ports and shery
harbours in Waterford.
Deputy Donna McGettigan - To discuss issues aecting students, including fees, the accom-
modation crisis and cost-of-living crisis.
Deputy Erin McGreehan - To discuss making Louth County Hospital a location for a surgi-
DÁIL ÉIREANN
280
2 July 2025
281
cal hub for the north east.
Deputy Eoghan Kenny - To discuss a review of the policy on the provision of incontinence
products by the HSE.
Deputy Thomas Gould - To discuss the closure of the tenant in situ scheme in Cork city.
Deputy Darren O’Rourke - To discuss the current and estimated future shortage of GPs.
Deputies Paul Donnelly, Ruth Coppinger and Roderic O’Gorman - To discuss provision of
places in ASD classes in St. Mochta’s National School, Clonsilla.
Deputy Maurice Quinlivan - To discuss the crisis of capacity at University Hospital Limer-
ick.
Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire - To discuss the need for Cork Educate Together secondary
school to have a new building progressed.
Deputy Danny Healy-Rae - To discuss planned changes to roads infrastructure in Killarney.
The matters raised by Deputies Malcolm Byrne, Danny Healy-Rae, Eoghan Kenny, Pearse
Doherty, Pat the Cope Gallagher and Pádraig Mac Lochlainn, and Paul Donnelly, Ruth Cop-
pinger and Roderic O’Gorman have been selected for discussion.
02/07/2025A00300Saincheisteanna Tráthúla - Topical Issue Debate
02/07/2025A00400Cybersecurity Policy
02/07/2025A00500Deputy Malcolm Byrne: I thank the Minister for taking this critical issue. As he knows,
we all live in a digital world. It is one where computing in general has made our lives better
and easier and we are far more interconnected. Articial intelligence, quantum computing and
other technologies have the potential to deliver evermore eective and ecient public services.
However, as cyberspace becomes more critical to all of our lives, the risks and threats are also
increasing exponentially.
Our society depends on a free, open and secure cyberspace. Ireland should do everything
to support those values at a global level. In our engagement in multilateral eorts, we need to
ensure international law applies in cyberspace as much as it does on the ground. In that regard,
we have to support the work of the United Nations, the European Union and others in this eld.
Like other countries, there are challenges to Ireland in the cyberattacks we face, including those
from other states or malign actors aligned to those states, as well as those who want to hack
State infrastructure systems for nancial, political or ideological reasons.
I commend the work of the National Cyber Security Centre, NCSC. As the Minister knows,
it needs to continue to expand. In one of its most recent reports, it talked about 2023 as being its
busiest year. At that time, it received 5,200 cyber reports and while many were minor, it iden-
tied 721 cyber incidents that represented a threat to a network and required a response. The
National Cyber Security Centre has now found there is enough evidence and information in a
number of those cases to attribute activity to specic foreign intelligence and security agencies.
Dáil Éireann
282
We know that businesses are regularly hit by cyberattacks, but I want to talk about the po-
tential impact on critical State infrastructure. Everyone will remember May 2021, when the
HSE faced a major ransomware attack. We know that the costs to date have been more than
€150 million, not to mention the many lives that were undoubtedly lost as a result of the attack,
as well as delayed appointments and the impact on people’s health outcomes.
For security reasons, we often cannot discuss cyberattacks. When I put a question to every
Department as to how many cyberattacks they faced in recent years and how much they were
spending on cybersecurity, a lot of them replied that they could not answer for security reasons.
Interestingly, some of them were able to provide details on how much they were spending on
cybersecurity. Given the amounts involved, it shows most are taking it quite seriously.
It is important that we know the State has a plan in place to combat any major cyberattack
we face in the future and to address situations where critical infrastructure may be brought
down. This could be in health, transport, nancial services, Government payments or energy.
We need to have an all hands on deck approach if this is to happen, similar to what we have seen
with major weather events. I hope we have learned from the experiences of the HSE attack and
that we are constantly learning from eorts to attack critical State infrastructure.
The Minister will also be aware of the risk of destabilisation to the State when there is a
malicious cyberattack. The spread of misinformation and disinformation represents a threat
to democracy. Trust in Government and our provision of services can also be damaged when
critical infrastructure is brought down. Our sense of freedom to enjoy certain rights can also be
under threat. This issue needs to be taken seriously and I am glad the Minister is here today to
take the question.
02/07/2025A00600Minister for Justice, Home Aairs and Migration (Deputy Jim O’Callaghan): I thank
Deputy Byrne for raising this important issue. The reason I am here is because of the impor-
tance of it.
Deputy Byrne is well aware that cybersecurity threats pose a major risk to essential services
and critical sectors in Ireland and throughout the world. One of the consequences of being a
modern, successful economy is that this is the type of threat to which the country is exposed, I
regret to say. I therefore welcome that Deputy Byrne has raised this issue. It is important for
me to outline, not just to Deputy Byrne, but to the House, the measures taken by my Depart-
ment to ensure the State’s cybersecurity resilience and preparedness are where they should be.
Deputy Byrne referred to the 2021 ransomware attack on the HSE. That was a very signi-
cant event from the point of view of the country and our preparedness for such cyberattacks.
Since then, the National Cyber Security Centre has had a signicant increase in its resources. It
is essential that those resources have increased very signicantly. Back in 2011, the NCSC only
had four sta. At the end of 2024, it had 75 sta and an annual budget of €12 million. There is
also a commitment in budget 2025 that the number of sta will increase by a further 30, bring it
to more than 100 people working in the NCSC. The continued growth of the NCSC reects the
constantly evolving threat landscape and the importance of a resilient national network.
It is appropriate, and I welcome the fact, that the NCSC has come within the jurisdictional
control of the Department of justice. Considering the threat posed to the country, it is appropri-
ate that the Department of justice should have departmental and ministerial responsibility for
issues concerning cyber threat attacks.
2 July 2025
283
Deputy Byrne will also be aware that the European NIS2 directive also provides a major
step forward for overall European cybersecurity and resilience. It will enhance cyber risk man-
agement in Ireland, including generating signicant improvements in our capacity to protect
against and respond to major incidents. Last July, the Government gave its approval to the
priority drafting of the national cybersecurity Bill, which is currently being undertaken by my
Department. That Bill will transpose the NIS2 directive into Irish law. It will also enhance the
role of the NCSC, which will include national cybersecurity monitoring, resilience building, in-
formation sharing and the national incident response. It will give the NCSC specic powers to
engage in a range of scanning-type activities to identify systems vulnerable to specic exploits.
The national cyber emergency plan was published in May 2024, and it sets out the national
approach for responding to serious cybersecurity incidents that aect the condentiality, integ-
rity and availability of nationally important information technology and operational technology
systems and networks. The NCSC is currently working on the national cyber risk assessment
for 2025, which will take into account the changing international threat landscape.
As Deputy Byrne mentioned, it is regrettably the case that some of the attacks taking place
on national cybersecurity networks are emanating from malign state actors. It is important that
we be prepared in order to respond to and deter that.
Deputy Byrne referred to a number of international agreements. I am pleased to say that Ire-
land is an active participant in a number of UN and other international processes where issues
of cybersecurity arise. Among these is the UN open-ended working group on security of and
in the use of information and communication technologies, which was established to develop
norms, rules, and principles for responsible state behaviour in cyberspace. Ireland also par-
ticipates in the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, in particular as regards
cybersecurity, conict prevention and crisis management.
It is important to emphasise that we are prepared, but this is a constant risk and it is inevi-
table that we will be subject to further attacks in the future.
02/07/2025B00200Deputy Malcolm Byrne: Like the Minister, I welcome the fact that the NCSC is now
within the remit of the Department of justice. I welcome the fact that he is giving priority to the
cybersecurity Bill, but he might provide an outline as to when he envisages it coming before
the House. While I welcome the fact that the NCSC regularly carries out assessments of cyber
risk, I wonder if an assessment has been carried out as to exactly how vulnerable some of our
critical infrastructure happens to be. For instance, how easy might it be for a malign actor to
knock out the trac lights in Dublin, with the ensuing chaos that would result, or stop all bank
payments to public servants or social welfare recipients? What systems do we have in place
to seek assistance from or oer assistance to like-minded states if a cyberattack were to hap-
pen here? We need to co-operate, particularly with our EU partners. Similar to Storm Éowyn,
where we sought assistance from overseas, I believe we will need to seek and oer assistance
where like-minded countries are attacked.
This is a global issue and, therefore, when it comes to overseas aid, we should be oering
to help developing countries to build their cyber resilience, given the expertise in this country.
They are often subject to attacks by some of the rogue states in this area. We need at an interna-
tional level to start demanding accountability, particularly from the four states most responsible
for cyberattacks around the world: Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. They are engaged in
or sponsor cyberterrorism, cyberespionage and the spreading of misinformation and disinfor-
Dáil Éireann
284
mation, which represent threats not just to this State, but to others that share our values. In the
same way we rightly hold countries to account for actions in wars on the ground, we need to
hold them to account where they act in a malign way in cyberspace.
02/07/2025B00300Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I have had frequent meetings with the Garda Commissioner
and the head of the NCSC in respect of the threats to which this country is exposed as a result
of malign actors seeking to attack our cyber technology. It is important that I am updated on a
continuing basis.
I regret to say that the Deputy is correct, in that the threat does exist. It is a threat not just to
our national State-owned infrastructure, as he has indicated, but also to private enterprise within
the country. The NCSC is to the forefront in this matter, as am I. There is an obligation on State
agencies to ensure that each State agency has measures in place to ensure that it can withstand
whatever form of cyberattack is forthcoming. I know it will be impossible for all cyberattacks
to be withstood, but if we have preparedness and measures in place in State agencies, that at
least will increase and strengthen our resilience.
The Deputy also indicated issues in respect of private sector companies. They all have an
obligation to ensure, particularly if they are providing services to the public at large, that they
have measures and protections in place so that, be they banks, communications providers or
other agencies, their customers are protected in this respect. One of the reasons Ireland is an
attractive location for malign State actors or persons who are involved in trying to extract data
from private and public enterprises via ransomware is the important link between Europe and
the United States. That is a very signicant role, one that is now more apparent because of the
success of the Irish economy, and we really need to defend it.
The cybersecurity Bill was approved for priority drafting and I hope it will be introduced in
the not-too-distant future, but I will get back to the Deputy specically on that.
02/07/2025B00400Road Projects
02/07/2025B00500Deputy Danny Healy-Rae: I am glad to get the opportunity to raise this matter in the
Chamber. First, I have to explain the present setup. The national primary road coming into
Killarney from the Cork side is a very busy road as it is. It goes through what we know lo-
cally as Daly’s roundabout and then carries on to the old bypass, which has been built for over
50 years, to Tralee, Killorglin, all of mid-Kerry and wherever you want to go after that. Ap-
proximately 40,000 vehicles go through that roundabout each day, maybe 18,000 or 19,000 into
Killarney town and 21,000 on to the other places I mentioned. The roundabout itself works
perfectly. Most times when people reach it, they may have to queue to get from one side to the
other. Then they get relief when they go through the bypass. It works perfectly. I never see
it clogged or blocked. Even at that, the queues can be 3 miles or 4 miles backed up on either
side coming in from the Cork Road or coming in from the Tralee Road into Killarney, or indeed
coming up to Dr. Hans Liebherr Road if people are coming from Killorglin.
Now, under active travel, which the previous Government had in place, the present Govern-
ment proposes to take away the roundabout and instead put ve or six sets of trac lights there
on either side of the road and down to the Ballycasheen junction, where people come in from
the Cork side. Two sets of cycleways and footpaths are also proposed - there are footpaths
there already - and it is proposed to narrow the carriageway to 6 m, which I contend is not wide
2 July 2025
285
enough for the vehicles we have today. A suggested €3 million, TII locally and the council say,
is to be spent on it. I suggest it will cost a lot more.
It is premature. What we need now is to build an outer bypass, which we have been cam-
paigning for for 24 or 25 years. We have been promised €3 million for this year to progress that
and to bypass the town, starting outside at Lissivigeen, going northwards west through Kilcum-
min and coming out in Farranfore, bypassing the whole lot. All of what is proposed now would
be ne if that were done rst, but it must be remembered that the roundabout to be taken away
is on the N22, the national primary road into Killarney and the rest of Kerry.
Before this project goes ahead, I ask that temporary trac lights be placed at every point
where it is suggested there will be trac lights, and at the roundabout especially. Temporary
trac lights should be put there for a week or two - it should be two weeks - to ensure that they
will work and we will not have a complete disaster. We are bad enough with trac in Killarney
as it is. A similar project has been carried out in Fossa, where they narrowed the road. Two
large vehicles when they meet there cannot pass each other without stopping up altogether and
trying to inch their way past each other, what with mirrors and everything sticking out. It is not
right to do that. That is the N72, the national secondary road. What we are talking about here
is the national primary road, and to do this is very serious. Maura Healy-Rae has asked for the
temporary lights to be placed before the work is undertaken. I am asking the Department of
Transport go down, talk and look at this project with the ocials, if they are involved, and-----
02/07/2025B00600An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Aidan Farrelly): The Deputy will have a chance
to come back in.
02/07/2025B00700Deputy Danny Healy-Rae: All right. Sorry, a Chathaoirligh.
02/07/2025B00800Minister of State at the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport (Deputy
Charlie McConalogue): I thank Deputy Healy-Rae for raising this matter. I am glad to take it
on behalf of the Minister for Transport, who, as the Deputy knows, has responsibility for overall
policy and Exchequer funding relating to the national roads programme. Once funding arrange-
ments have been put in place with Transport Infrastructure Ireland, under the Roads Acts 1993
to 2015 and in line with the national development plan, the operation and management of indi-
vidual roads is a matter for TII, in conjunction with the local authorities concerned. Transport
Infrastructure Ireland ultimately delivers the national roads programme in line with Project Ire-
land 2040, the national planning framework and the national development plan. The Govern-
ment has earmarked €5.1 billion for capital spending on new national roads projects from 2021
to 2030 as part of the NDP. This funding will enable improved regional accessibility across the
country as well as compact growth, which are key national strategic outcomes. The funding
will provide for the development of numerous national road projects, including the completion
of projects already at construction stage and those close to it, as well as the development of a
number of others. An additional €2.9 billion was allocated for the protection and renewal of the
existing national road network.
As the greater portion of this funding becomes available in the second half of the decade,
this means there is a constraint on the funding available for new projects in 2025. However,
approximately €502 million of Exchequer capital funds has been provided for national roads
through Transport Infrastructure Ireland to local authorities this year. It is important to point
out that the programme for Government commits to continued investment in new roads infra-
structure to ensure that all parts of Ireland are connected to one another.
Dáil Éireann
286
This year, approximately €3 million was allocated for the construction of new national
roads in Kerry, with an additional €10.2 million allocated for the improvement of the existing
network. With regard to Daly’s roundabout in Killarney, which is the substance of the Deputy’s
question, I understand from Transport Infrastructure Ireland that Kerry County Council en-
gaged consultants to review safety and capacity issues on the N22 and its approaches and to
introduce improved active travel facilities at the N22-Park Road junction. A proposal for an
active travel-friendly Park Road roundabout with reduced lane lengths was not considered the
optimal solution for the location, with a signalised junction identied as the preferred solution
recommended by Kerry County Council. Details of the trac assessment work undertaken in
relation to the signalised junction proposal can be requested from the county council. As part
of the scheme, it is proposed to reallocate some of the existing road space on the carriageway
between Daly’s roundabout and Ballycasheen junction to provide space for a new active travel
facility. This would reduce the width of the existing carriageway down to 7 m to provide space
for the construction of a 2.5 m cycle track. This is in keeping with the commitment in the pro-
gramme for Government to continue to invest in dedicated infrastructure for walking and cy-
cling. Transport Infrastructure Ireland did not allocate funding for this scheme in 2024 or 2025.
Having regard to Kerry County Council’s recent approval of the scheme, it will be considered
for funding in the 2026 funding allocations.
02/07/2025C00200Deputy Danny Healy-Rae: I thank the Minister of State for his reply. He referred to roads
that were under construction or near it. This is not under construction. Planning has not yet
been granted. It is at the planning stage at present. Anyone who wants to make a submission
needs to make it before Friday evening. The people of Kerry need to know what is happening
because this will create chaos.
The Minister of State spoke about narrowing the road to 7 m. We have been told 6 m. As
I said, this went through Kerry County Council at an earlier stage. Maura Healy-Rae was the
only councillor who voted against it and she will continue to do so. Perhaps the others will
see now, because they are getting a second bite of the cherry, that this is wrong and the wrong
time. When the outer bypass is built, this will be ne. We must prioritise to ensure lorries,
buses, commercial vehicles, cars and all the vehicles going through this roundabout at present
continue to use this road as they have to the best of their ability. We are very worried that traf-
c lights will impede this. We all know if you change the system from a roundabout to trac
lights, you slow the whole thing down. Instead of being backed up three or four miles out the
Cork road and three miles out the Tralee road, it will be much farther and complete chaos will
ensue. I ask that whatever consultants were being dealt with put in temporary lights for a week
or two - preferably two - to see how the thing manages before they remove the roundabout.
When they remove the roundabout, it will be too late. We will not have the other bypass for
six or seven years yet, with everything going well. We hope and expect it will go well. I ask
that the €3 million proposed for use on this roundabout and these changes be added to the outer
bypass. If it cannot be spent there, spend it on the 650 local improvement scheme applicants
waiting for ten years or more.
02/07/2025C00300Deputy Charlie McConalogue: I will relay to Transport Infrastructure Ireland that the
Deputy has raised this matter in the Dáil. As I said, this has been strongly considered locally
through Kerry County Council. It engaged consultants to review safety and capacity issues on
the N22 and its approaches and to introduce improved active travel facilities at the N22-Park
Road junction. Coming out of that proposal and consideration by Kerry County Council and
those assessments, it made the decision that this was the best approach to address the issues. It
2 July 2025
287
is always appropriate and correct that these issues be given as much consideration as possible at
county council level in terms of the work and professional assessment by engineers and trans-
port engineers, also engaging thoroughly with local authority members in consideration of the
matter. From the information I have, that is what happened regarding the proposals currently
under consideration. The Deputy indicated they were at planning stage and there was an op-
portunity for people to participate and give their views in relation to that. It has come as a result
of signicant engagement, consideration and assessment as to the optimal approach to address
the issues at Daly’s roundabout.
I will pass on the matter the Deputy raised today. It will continue to get signicant consid-
eration locally through the county council and local consultation process. I know the Deputy
will stay actively involved in its consideration.
02/07/2025C00400Medical Aids and Appliances
02/07/2025C00500Deputy Eoghan Kenny: I wish to address the provision of incontinence products by the
HSE. Although the Minister of State is not the line Minister, I wish to raise this serious issue
for families across the country. Incontinence products are essential. They are used daily. I wish
to speak specically about incontinence products for children. I refer to a specic case raised
by a parent with me in relation to her son. I will read out some of her correspondence to me,
with her permission:
My son was born prematurely before 26 weeks in May 2021. In his rst few weeks,
he suered a lung haemorrhage, two brain haemorrhages and a bowel rupture that led to a
stoma for a year. He also experienced signicant eye issues and has since been discoursed
with cerebral palsy. Every step of the way has been a ght, and I have had to pay privately
for nearly every service he is entitled to under the CDNT system. I have remained quiet
until now, but the latest development has left me utterly shocked and disgusted. Now that
my son is four, he qualies for HSE-provided incontinence pads. However, he has yet to
receive any. He currently weights 21 kg and still wear Pampers size 8 - the largest I can nd
- despite them no longer tting properly. Pull-ups in size 9 are available, but they’re unsuit-
able as he wears and AFO. The most infuriating part of this situation is that I have been told
he will only be allocated four pads per day. He routinely goes through at least eight nap-
pies a day - and that’s while I’m still paying for them myself. To be told by a district nurse
not to change him if he is only wet - with the implication that he must sit in it to conserve
supplies - is not only medically unsound but dehumanising. After all he has been through,
particularly with his bowel and stoma history, I will not stand by while his dignity, comfort,
and skin integrity are compromised to meet a quote. Only last week, a doctor speaking on
a documentary about nursing home care highlighted how unacceptable it is to leave people
sitting in wet nappies. Why should it be any dierent for a four-year-old child with complex
medical needs?
The Minister of State will appreciate the distress, anger and disappointment felt by this
mother.
Her word “dehumanising” puts it lightly.
I tried to resolve this issue through a parliamentary question but the HSE response to me
was quite unclear. It stated that, based on a clinical nursing assessment, a public health nurse
Dáil Éireann
288
may prescribe containment products to assist with the management of incontinence and that
the provision of containment products is subject to parent-client engagement in a toileting pro-
gramme. It added that the clinical nurse specialist for continence in north Lee is currently
working with the child and his family. Furthermore, it stated the prescription of containment
products is in line with the child’s assessed requirements and that these will be monitored or
adjusted as necessary by the clinical nurse specialist. I am sure that is probably in the response
the Minister of State has.
Does the Minister of State know what the policy on incontinence product provision is?
How many products may be allocated to children with complex needs? This mother has been
told four is the limit; however, it has increased to six. The mother told a nurse she was lobbying
local TDs. Will the Minister of State provide clarity on the number for me?
The nurse the parent is engaging with in her community has met her only once and has never
met her child. That does not align with the clinical nursing assessment and the policy on the
prescribing of incontinence products as outlined in the parliamentary question. In the response,
the HSE highlighted engagement with a toileting programme. Of course, the mother wants her
son to be toilet trained at some stage, but that will not happen overnight. I ask the Minister of
State to engage on this specic case or ask his colleagues in government to do so to ensure the
child will be provided with the number of incontinence pads required per day.
02/07/2025D00200Deputy Charlie McConalogue: I thank Deputy Kenny for raising this matter. I am an-
swering on behalf of the Minister for Health.
I have the details and response on the guidelines and policy around incontinence pads. I
will give the Deputy these as part of my response but I assure him that I will be following this
case up further, on the back of his contribution, with the Department of Health and the HSE.
The guidelines and policy are focused on the fact that the approach has to be person centred. It
has to take into account the needs of the individual person, be it a child or adult, and has to be
appropriate. I will certainly be taking this up following on from the Deputy’s engagement on
the oor of the Dáil this morning.
The HSE provides a wide range of medical products and services under the community-
funded schemes to eligible persons in accordance with the Health Act 1970, as amended. These
are provided following assessment by a relevant health professional. The HSE oversees the
provision and supply of incontinence wear products for eligible persons across the country.
Provision is based on an appropriate clinical assessment and the determination of the most ap-
propriate products that will meet the individual’s needs.
The provision of clinically appropriate incontinence wear products to eligible persons is
administered within each health region under a national tender arrangement. The HSE advises
that this is a person-centred delivery system which allows the individual or their carer to vary
both the time of delivery and the amount of product delivered according to their specic needs.
It is also possible to alter the location for a particular delivery should the need arise.
The HSE also utilises the service provided by public health nurses and continence nurse
advisers to assess individual patient needs to ensure the supply of incontinence wear products
is appropriate.
As part of the national service improvement programme for the community-funded schemes,
the HSE has completed and implemented national guidelines in respect of incontinence wear
2 July 2025
289
products. These are published and are available on the HSE website.
Governance arrangements have been strengthened through the implementation of an inte-
grated electronic management system to support the ordering, supply and distribution of incon-
tinence wear products across all healthcare settings, including the home delivery service.
The HSE advises that in circumstances where a person does not hold full eligibility, such as
through a medical card or a long-term illness scheme card, reimbursement support for inconti-
nence wear products is provided under the drugs payment scheme, DPS. This scheme provides
for the refund of the amount by which expenditure on approved prescribed medicines or medi-
cal and surgical appliances, including incontinence wear, exceeds a named threshold in any
calendar month. The DPS is not means tested and is available to anyone ordinarily resident in
Ireland. The scheme threshold is €80 per month. While there are no set limits on the quantity,
the DPS claim must be supported by a valid prescription for the products.
That outlines the policy, oversight and guidance. At the core should be appropriate care and
supply for the individual. I will certainly take up the case with the Department and the Minister
for Health following the Deputy’s contribution.
02/07/2025D00300Deputy Eoghan Kenny: I thank the Minister of State. I appreciate that.
When I oered my sympathy to the family, including the parent, the parent told me directly
she did not want it. I appreciated that because, from a public representative’s point of view, it
was quite dicult for me that a parliamentary question did not outline specically whether the
child would be provided with the necessary incontinence products he so needs. At four years
old, the child, along with his mother, has gone through so much, as outlined in the mother’s
email that I read in my opening statement. The Minister of State knows himself that when an
email like that comes into your inbox, you directly engage on it because it is the on-the-ground
issues that are directly aecting people. Often they go unnoticed because parents are afraid
to speak up about them. They try to buy the incontinence products themselves. The Minister
will have noted from the email that the mother has paid for all CDNT provision from her own
pocket. This points to a systemic failure in our CDNT system.
What the Minister said about person-centred policy and further engagement is very wel-
come but, as he will have noted from my opening statement, the clinical nurse has never even
met the four-year-old child. That is the disappointing thing here. Perhaps there are several boys
and girls of the same age under the nurse’s remit but the fact that the nurse has not even met the
child is an issue. This is why I do not understand how a clinical assessment could have taken
place. It cannot just be a conversation between a parent and a nurse.
I cannot see on the HSE website the policy that the nurse has outlined to the parent, namely,
that four incontinence products is the maximum number that can be provided. The number
increased to six after the parent told the nurse that she had been lobbying local TDs. I ask the
Minister of State to ask the Minister, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, to engage with the parent on a
one-to-one basis.
02/07/2025D00400Deputy Charlie McConalogue: Certainly, I will. Obviously, the parents have been through
several challenges and the child has had a very dicult and challenging start to life. It is really
important from the point of view of the State that the health service we provide be appropriate
to the child’s needs. It is important that incontinence pads be appropriate to and sucient in
number for the child to meet all his needs. I will certainly engage with the Minister for Health
Dáil Éireann
290
and her Department on this case and ask that it be fully considered and responded to.
The Deputy raised the child development network therapies and teams. I am aware that
there have been recruitment challenges in various parts of the country, including my county and
the Deputy’s. The challenge has primarily been the availability of therapists. The Department
of Health, the Department of education and the Department of further education have been
working to ensure additional sta are trained to meet the needs. They have been seeking to
recruit and there have been improvements over the past year to two years in regard to increas-
ing the size of the team. There is signicant demand that is not being met but the objective is
to have more people coming through who can take up the positions and meet the needs. This is
essential to aected children, and supports are essential to families.
I thank the Deputy for raising this. I will ask the HSE to engage further.
02/07/2025D00500Hospital Services
02/07/2025D00600Deputy Pearse Doherty: There are only two of us raising this matter. Deputy Gallagher
sends his apologies. He got called away yesterday.
As the Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan, knows, the surgical hub is a key issue in Done-
gal. The hub has to be delivered in Letterkenny. It is not just a case of trying to ensure we
have the resources in the county. We have heard from an unprecedented number of doctors,
surgeons and consultants in Letterkenny hospital and they have told us that without the surgi-
cal hub there, they are at serious risk of losing accident and emergency services and maternity
services within a short period. That is why they and all the politicians in Donegal have come
together and made it very clear that we need to see a surgical hub delivered in Letterkenny. This
would not be to the detriment of Sligo – we believe the north-west region has been left behind
for far too long – but there has to be a location in Letterkenny. Last Friday, on local radio, we
had the Minister for State, Deputy Harkin, who, as we know, was part of the grubby deal with
Deputy Lowry to put this Government in place, stated on Highland Radio with Greg Hughes
that she secured the location of the surgical hub in Sligo as part of that deal. That is news to
us, the TDs who sat across the table from the Minister for about an hour and a half making the
case for the surgical hub because the Minister will eventually be the person who decides on the
location. It is news to us, having sat repeatedly in meetings with the HSE arguing the toss about
why the surgical hub should be in Letterkenny. I am sure it was news to the 160-plus surgeons,
consultants and doctors who signed the letter making very reasonable medical arguments for
the locations.
I want the Minister of State to come clean today. Has the Department ascertained whether
there is any secret deal in respect of the location of this surgical hub? That clarity is needed.
Has the Minister approached Deputy Marian Harkin to get clarity in this regard? I would like
the Minister for Health to listen to the concerns of the TDs here. As I said, Deputy Gallagher
would have liked to have been here as well. This is a cross-party issue because the issues in
Donegal are so important. As I said to the Minister, if she makes the decision based on the facts,
there is no doubt that the surgical hub will be located in Letterkenny. We need that decision
urgently but, most importantly, we need the right decision.
02/07/2025E00200Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: All we are asking for in Donegal is fair play. We are not
asking for special treatment; we are asking that our citizens do not have to travel long distances
2 July 2025
291
for care that should be provided in their own community. We are asking that our emergency
services not be allowed to collapse and that we have the necessary number of surgeons and
consultants in Letterkenny University Hospital. If there is to be only one surgical hub for the
north-west region, a huge region extending from the top of Donegal down into Roscommon,
I imagine, and that hub is not in Letterkenny, it will be a disaster for County Donegal and our
services. Those are not my words but those of the consultants. A presentation made to TDs was
extremely concerning. The Minister for Health, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, is very aware of that
and I thank her for engaging at the meeting last night. We need to have absolute clarity today
that no deal has been done on this.
To be clear, in Donegal we are not into divide and conquer. We want Sligo and Letterkenny
to have a surgical hub. We want all of the people to be treated the same. We want equal services
for all of our people. The HSE has pulled services away into Galway and neglected Donegal
for a long time but we are not turning this into a Sligo versus Donegal issue. We want a surgi-
cal hub and equal access for all our people. We want clarity, following the intervention from
Deputy Harkin, that a deal has not been done, there will be fairness for the people of Donegal,
all of the doctors and consultants will be listened to and the facts and evidence on the ground
about population numbers and demand will be listened to.
The nal message is this. We, in Donegal, will not be neglected anymore. This is a cross-
party matter now. We will not accept second-class citizenship. This issue has united us like no
other health matter has done before. It needs to be sorted out. We need clarity today that we
are going to get fairness in all of this.
02/07/2025E00300Minister of State at the Department of Education and Youth (Deputy Michael Moyni-
han): I thank Deputies Doherty and Mac Lochlainn for raising this issue. I understand the
apology made by our colleague, Deputy Pat the Cope Gallagher. I recognise the Deputies’
dedication to the people of Donegal and to the issue.
I will rst address the issue of locations for the surgical hubs. The programme for Gov-
ernment commits to establishing six new hubs, in south Dublin, north Dublin, Galway, Cork,
Limerick and Waterford, and exploring the provision of an additional surgical hub for the north
west. The programme for Government also committed to developing new elective treatment
centres in Cork, Galway and Dublin, signicantly increasing our capacity to deliver elective
care and driving down waiting times for everyone. Developments at the named surgical hub
sites are well under way. Building on the success of the Reeves day surgery unit in Tallaght, the
Minister for Health opened a new surgical unit in Mount Carmel in south Dublin in February
and we expect the rest to become operational over the next 18 months.
The Minister is clear that no matter where these new facilities are located, everyone should
have access to sucient and appropriate elective surgical capacity. The hubs, along with the
new elective treatment centres, will form a national network of elective care. This will enable
the delivery of care for all patients, not just those living in a particular location or catchment
area. No decision has yet been made on the location of the north-west surgical hub and the Min-
ister is taking time to consider and understand the situation in Donegal. This includes engage-
ment with local representatives, doctors and consultants. I know she was due to meet some of
them last night. She remains committed to positively engaging with everyone who is interested
in delivering the best healthcare for the people of Donegal.
Turning to Letterkenny University Hospital in particular, the Government is committed to
Dáil Éireann
292
the ongoing development of the hospital and has allocated signicant resources to meet the
needs of patients there. This has included an increase in the hospital’s budget by 57% over
the last ve years. In that time we have also seen stang grow by 25% and 28 new beds have
been opened. Recent capital projects completed at Letterkenny University Hospital include an
extension to the laboratory and works in the acute mental health unit. Several capital projects
are under way, including the expansion of the renal department, a pharmacy aseptic unit, a new
heating centre and a range of projects to increase capacity. Construction is also under way of a
110-bed community hospital in Letterkenny, representing an investment of €52 million for the
enhancement of services for older people.
Letterkenny University Hospital has also expressed plans for four key infrastructural proj-
ects, which form part of a development control plan within the HSE west and north-west health
region. These projects include bed expansion, emergency and urgent care capacity, critical care
capacity and an ambulatory care block. We understand these plans are being developed by the
hospital and will need to be further considered by the HSE before a decision can be made on
their inclusion in the capital programme. I hope the Deputies can see we are committed to the
people of Donegal. I look forward to continued engagement on these issues.
02/07/2025E00400Deputy Pearse Doherty: I thank the Minister of State for his response. He says no deci-
sion has been made yet. Will he give clarity in his response? It is not just Deputy Harkin who
has gone on local radio to say this; the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Healy-Rae has also
gone on and said she has secured this. We now have two Ministers of State who make up the
formation of the Government saying it. Does one hand know what the other is doing? Has the
Minister for Health or the Department claried with Deputy Harkin whether a deal exists - as
she claims - or not? Is this just the Minister of State suggesting that he has no knowledge of a
deal within the Department? They are two dierent things. We would like clarication on that.
Outside of a deal or not, this decision has to be made on the merits and the facts. As Deputy
Mac Lochlainn has said, there is absolutely no way we are going to allow this to happen. The
surgical hub not being delivered in Letterkenny is not just about resources not coming to Done-
gal. It is about the accident and emergency department closing down in the future, maternity
services closing down and our hospital being downgraded. Those are not my words; they are
the words of those on the front line. We will not accept it. That is why the Minister of Health
must make the right decision on the basis of facts.
02/07/2025E00500Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: This could not be more serious. As the Minister of State
will know from his Government colleagues, we have been told this very clearly. These doctors
and consultants have said publicly on local radio that our emergency services could be lost.
Imagine us losing an emergency department in Letterkenny University Hospital. That is how
serious our surgical services have gotten to. We are down to three permanent surgeons; it was
six not that long ago. We cannot attract the level of surgeons we need. If the Minister decides
the surgical hub for the north-west is in one place, Sligo, it is just a death knell. It is extremely
serious. I have never seen 171 doctors, consultants and GPs, sign a letter. I do not know any-
where in this State where this has happened. That is how serious this is. I will reiterate that we
are not playing the game of divide and conquer. Sligo, the north-west, Donegal and all of us
deserve this. There is an absolute unique case now for a surgical hub in Letterkenny and Sligo
to be delivered at exactly the same time to have the quality of services our people deserve, to
protect what we have and to protect our emergency services. This is where it is at. We need
that clarity between the Minister for Health and Deputy Harkin and a public statement of clari-
cation. If it is two surgical hubs that is ne but the Government should not play divide and
2 July 2025
293
conquer. It needs to get its act together on this issue.
02/07/2025E00600Deputy Michael Moynihan: Again, I thank Deputies Doherty and Mac Lochlainn for rais-
ing the issue. I will take back exactly what they have said regarding Letterkenny University
Hospital. The information I have is very clear. No decision has been made on the location of
the north-west surgical hubs. I understand meetings were held and there was engagement with
the Minister last night on this issue. I hear what the Deputies are saying about the challenges
in Letterkenny and Donegal, and I will bring that back to the Department and the Minister. I
cannot be clearer than what was in the statement I have in front of me from the Department.
I understand the issues the Deputies have raised. Without labouring the point, I will take the
points the Deputies raised back to the Department and seek clarication for them.
02/07/2025F00200Special Educational Needs
02/07/2025F00300Deputy Paul Donnelly: I know the Minister of State is aware of the issue in St. Mochta’s
National School and the two special classes. First and foremost, we should express our concern
for the parents and children involved in this situation.
St. Mochta’s agreed to open up two classes after long discussions and much dialogue with
the NCSE - one in temporary accommodation in the library and the other in December when
two modular classes were to be delivered. The principal then informed the parents they needed
to make the NCSE aware of their children, which all parents did. They were issued letters of
eligibility by the NCSE. In fact, one parent had already done so around October 2024. The
principal and patron were told they would be exempt from the 19 February deadline that was
imposed with regard to special classes for 2025. Unfortunately, they got an email last Friday
afternoon, the last day of school, from the NCSE saying that 11 of those 12 places have been
allocated, but not one of those allocations had been given to those six students who are in St.
Mochta’s school, including that one child who had a letter from October 2024. We have 17
to 18 parents who are deeply worried about how this is going. We need clarication from the
NCSE as to how it will resolve this for all of those parents. Every child, as we have always
said, deserves a place.
02/07/2025F00400Deputy Ruth Coppinger: To clarify, St. Mochta’s school in Clonsilla has 900 to 1,000
students. The management agreed to take on a huge cohort under pressure of school places in
Dublin West. Six pupils enrolled in that school have approval from the NCSE for special or
autism class provision, but they were not on the list that was sent to the school last Friday. We
have a bizarre situation where these parents would not have autism classes in the school that
they actually attend. That has to be rectied. We do not know how this happened because at
a meeting that was convened the other night, the management of the school told TDs that they
had verbal approval from the NCSE that these parents would be facilitated. It makes sense be-
cause the classes are not even ready yet. It would make sense to remain where they are and then
move in when the classes are ready. There is very little time to raise this. We are now in that
situation. The parents would have had legitimate expectations from the NCSE that they would
receive a placement in the special classes when they opened, and that was the understanding of
the principals.
I spoke to parents this morning in Dublin 15 who still do not have school places. One parent
has twins and another was campaigning with us last year. We still have a crisis of school places.
Dáil Éireann
294
02/07/2025F00500Deputy Roderic O’Gorman: I thank the Minister of State for attending. I understand the
NCSE is attempting address the crisis we have for places in special classes, and I know it is
acting quickly. However, the way it has acted in the context of St. Mochta’s is not the right
solution. St. Mochta’s has agreed to open two special classes - two ASD classes - in September
for 12 students. It currently has six students on its books attending the school, each of whom is
known to the NCSE. They also have letters with the clear recommendation they should be in
an ASD class attached to a mainstream school. The school has now been allocated 11 students
– every one of those deserves a place as well – but if the six students who are in St. Mochta’s
have to wait until those 11 students have moved on through the system, they will never receive
a place in a special class in St. Mochta’s because the new students are all across the age groups.
They are from junior infants all the way up to fourth class. The 12 new students - the students
St. Mochta’s has given the names for – are junior infants and senior infants students. They are
just starting their time in St. Mochta’s.
Every child in Dublin 15 deserves an appropriate place in the right school. We can address
and x this in St. Mochta’s. It is important that the Department and the NCSE engage with the
school and resolve this.
02/07/2025F00600Deputy Michael Moynihan: I thank the Deputies for raising this issue, and I fully accept
and understand the genuineness with which it is raised. I fully accept the Deputies’ bona des
in respect of this issue.
The Government is fully committed to supporting all children with additional needs to
achieve their full potential. It is a core priority of the work of the Department of education that
every child should receive a school place that meets their needs. There is a signicant body of
work being undertaken to ensure that this is the case. This includes the creation of more than
2,000 new special school classes in mainstream schools and 16 new special schools established
since 2019. Both the Minister, Deputy McEntee, and I meet with Department of education of-
cials and the NCSE on a weekly basis to track the progress of the provision of special classes
and special school placements.
An additional 399 new special education classes have been sanctioned for this school year.
Of these, 287 are at primary level and 112 are at post-primary level. These will be added to the
existing 3,335 special classes nationwide, increasing the number of special classes by 103%
since 2020. In addition, I also directed a school in County Kildare to open two new special
classes under section 37A of the Education Act 1998. In total, therefore, from the next aca-
demic year, there will be more than 3,700 special classes and 129 special schools in operation
throughout the country.
In recent years, the NCSE has advised the Department that after it had sanctioned new
special classes, some of the children being oered places in these new special classes were not
known to the NCSE. This was having a signicant impact on the NCSE’s ability to forward
plan for the provision of new special classes. To address this issue, the Department of educa-
tion issued a circular to all schools in October 2024 advising that parents of children seeking
special classes or special school places for the 2025-2026 school year would need to notify the
NCSE by 1 February. Schools were also asked to ensure that parents of children with special
educational needs in mainstream classes who may require a special class were aware of the
need to register with the NCSE by 1 February. This circular letter was developed after con-
sultation with school management bodies, special education advocacy groups and the National
Parents Council. The NCSE has advised that just under 3,300 valid notications were received
2 July 2025
295
by mid-February last via their new parent notication system. The priority for the NCSE and
for the Department has been to ensure that these children and young people are prioritised for
enrolment in special classes and in special schools.
Sixteen new special classes have been sanctioned by the NCSE in schools in the Dublin 15
local school planning area for the coming school year. These are part of the overall 98 new
special classes being provided across schools in Dublin. This is the single largest provision of
new special classes in both Dublin 15 and across Dublin. Two of these new special classes have
been sanctioned in St. Mochta’s in Dublin 15. As the Deputies know, this is a large primary
school serving the needs of the community in Clonsilla and the surrounding areas.
These are the rst special classes to be established at this school and they have been warmly
welcomed by all in the local community. I commend the school leadership, the board of man-
agement and the school patrons on working closely with the NCSE and my Department to
provide these much-needed classes. Regarding the admission of children into the new special
classes, the NCSE continues to work closely with the school to try to progress the matters. The
Deputies here, as well as Deputy Emer Currie and the Minister, Deputy Chambers, have been
highlighting the issue.
As highlighted by the Deputies, an issue has arisen where students already enrolled in main-
stream classes in the school but who may require a special class place were brought to the atten-
tion of the NCSE after the 1 February timeline.
10 o’clock
I can conrm that the Department and the NCSE are making arrangements to meet the
school and the school patron bodies today on this matter. I will refer to other matters in my
supplementary response.
02/07/2025G00200Deputy Paul Donnelly: The last paragraph is slightly worrying because in the presentation
that was given to us on Monday evening by the principal and the patron of the school, it was
stated that the SENO gave a verbal commitment to the school that the deadline of 19 February
would be waived for pupils in St. Mochta’s as classes were not sanctioned on this date. The
principal met with all parents on 5 March 2025 to advise the parents of the next steps and share
commitments from the SENO to waive the deadline of 19 February. All parents contacted the
SENO and received eligibility letters from the SENO on dates ranging from 14 March to 7 April
2025, and all parents had a legitimate expectation that they would be oered a place. We are
unsure about where the truth lies. There are two dierent versions of what is going on and that
needs to be resolved.
02/07/2025G00300Deputy Ruth Coppinger: I am glad a meeting is taking place today and, hopefully, things
can be resolved. However, I would be extremely concerned if other parents were oered these
places and would then have to be told they do not have alternatives. It is a real problem situa-
tion. The issue is that, according to the school, it did not have sanction for these two classes by
the February deadline and, therefore, it only got the sanction in April and there was an agree-
ment that the February deadline would be waived. That is what we have been told. Hopefully,
this can be addressed at the meeting. I repeat that it is good that 16 classes are sanctioned for
Dublin 15 but while that sounds like a lot, when we take in the population of the area and the
age prole, it is not. We need those classes opened as soon as possible. We still have 12 chil-
dren waiting for Danu places since last year.
Dáil Éireann
296
02/07/2025G00400Deputy Roderic O’Gorman: I noticed that in the Minister of State’s reply, there is a focus
on the 1 February deadline. As colleagues have said, there were no plans to open an ASD class
in St. Mochta’s on 1 February and the only agreement on that opening came in April. In April,
when the school did agree to open these two classes, it received a verbal agreement that the
deadline would be waived for the six children who were in St. Mochta’s. A commitment was
given and that commitment has to be realised and fullled. I am glad a meeting is taking place.
There is now an opportunity to make sure that the six children in St. Mochta’s are able to avail
of an appropriate school place and get the support they deserve within the school.
02/07/2025G00500Deputy Michael Moynihan: There is a meeting taking place today with the school and
school patrons to try to resolve the issue. Without putting words in anybody’s mouth, I know
the school authorities and the Department have been in contact and they will have a meeting
today. Let us see what happens with that. I would be only too delighted to bring back any
information to the Deputies by email or otherwise when we have that information to hand. I
accept the seriousness of the issue the Deputies have raised, and there are a number of other
issues across Dublin 15 regarding school places and school classes.
There is one thing that I would ask the Deputies. The new circular has set 1 October 2025 as
the date for the 2026 school year. I ask the Deputies to get the message out there that we need
the information early in the school year in order to plan properly, so we are not in a situation
next year where we are heading into the school holidays and do not have places. We need the
information earlier. All of the Deputies are working on the ground and know the families. I ask
them to get the message out there that the NCSE has to be notied of the information early so
we can carry out proper planning and ensure that families are not in a stressful position.
To go back to the issue of St. Mochta’s, a meeting is taking place today. I give an undertak-
ing that, subsequent to that meeting, we will keep all the Deputies informed of how things are
progressing.
02/07/2025G00600Nursing Homes: Motion [Private Members]
02/07/2025G00700Deputy Marie Sherlock: I move:
That Dáil Éireann:
notes that:
— investigative journalism by RTÉ has again exposed distressing and unacceptable
practices and conditions in private Irish nursing homes, 20 years on since the Leas Cross
scandal;
— the failure of the State to provide sucient public long term residential care places
has led to the growing privatisation of nursing home care, while the State picks up the ma-
jority of costs through the Fair Deal scheme;
— 30 per cent of nursing homes were privately owned 20 years ago, rising to nearly 80
per cent now, with Emeis Ireland one of the largest operators, with 27 nursing homes;
— research by the Economic and Social Research Institute, since the Covid-19 pan-
demic, outlines the consolidation of the sector into larger operator groups, and the decline
2 July 2025
297
of independently owned, family run nursing homes;
— there are serious shortcomings in the inspection and enforcement regime by the
Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA), with inadequate regulatory oversight,
ambiguity in the application of existing powers, and a lack of appropriate powers beyond
the power to stop admissions or remove a license;
— there are no minimum stang levels required in nursing homes, or binding guidance
provided to operators;
— there is no sectoral pay agreement in place, and the 2023 PwC report entitled “Chal-
lenges for Nursing Homes in the Provision of Older Persons Care - Private and Voluntary
Nursing Home Sector”, documents a sta turnover rate in the private nursing home sector
of up to 38 per cent for nurses, and 54 per cent for healthcare assistants; and
— the Ombudsman’s Wasted Lives: Time for a better future for younger people in Nurs-
ing Homes report, updated in 2024, documents that over 1,200 people under 65 remain in
nursing homes due to a lack of appropriate alternatives;
recalls that:
— the French parent company of Emeis Ireland, formerly known as Orpea, required
a State-led bailout in 2022, after the publication of Gravediggers, a book exposing the
mistreatment of care residents, where the company maximised its prots and dividends to
shareholders, based on a complex strategy of drastic cost cutting and the maximum use of
public funding; and
— the Law Reform Commission published a comprehensive report on A Regulatory
Framework for Adult Safeguarding in April 2024, and the Programme for Government
commits to a new national policy in the health and social sector;
recognises that:
— the nursing home sector has become dominated by big business, and a for-prot
model will not provide the standard of care demanded by families and carers;
— with an increased role for home care support for older persons in future years, the
prole of nursing home patients will become more complex, more dependent, and in need
of greater levels of specialised care in the future;
— increased powers and resourcing for HIQA alone will not resolve concerns about a
prot-led model of care;
— the Covid-19 pandemic exposed the vulnerability of residents in private nursing
homes; and
— the Commission on Care for Older People is examining the provision of health and
social care services and supports for older people; and
calls on the Government to:
— take clear steps to ensure the State takes over the 27 nursing homes controlled by
Emeis Ireland;
Dáil Éireann
298
— prioritise the quality and safety of care of older persons in overhauling how nursing
homes are funded and regulated, and provide HIQA with stronger enforcement powers;
— fundamentally reform the Fair Deal funding model for nursing homes – public, pri-
vate and voluntary, starting with an end to the individualised negotiation process between
the National Treatment Purchase Fund and provider, the introduction of service level agree-
ments, ringfencing of funding for labour costs, and the introduction of specic rules relating
to the control of the nursing home property and operating company;
— legislate to ensure minimum safe stang levels, and implement the outstanding rec-
ommendations in the Covid-19 Nursing Homes Expert Panel report, and the 2022 Report
of the Strategic Workforce Advisory Group on Home Carers and Nursing Home Healthcare
Assistants;
— require nursing home operators, in receipt of public funding, to recognise trade
unions and engage in collective bargaining, to ensure competitive rates of pay, terms and
conditions;
— ensure nursing home operators provide professional development education for sta
within working hours, including mandatory safeguarding, infection prevention and control,
and dignity at work training;
— limit all new nursing homes operations to 84 beds, and set out a schedule for all exist-
ing nursing homes to transition to an agreed appropriate size with HIQA;
— ensure the revised National Development Plan includes a funded programme to de-
velop new public long term residential care, through community nursing homes, to meet the
needs of our aging population;
— implement the Law Reform Commission report, by passing the required legislation
as a priority in the autumn and establishing an independent national agency;
— introduce a new Fair Deal for care by implementing the long delayed statutory Home
Support Service for Older People scheme, to support older people to age positively in their
own home and community;
— adequately resource the home care sector, to deliver more care in the community and
introduce a Fair Deal one-stop-shop, to support families and reduce red tape; and
— nally implement the recommendations of the 2021 Ombudsman’s Wasted Lives:
Time for a better future for younger people in Nursing Homes report, and commit to fully
funding the under 65s programme oce.
We have spent considerable time in recent weeks talking about nursing homes and I want to
move that conversation on today. I do not doubt for a moment the personal commitment of the
Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, to reforming the nursing home sector. However, when I
read the amendment that was put down to the Labour Party motion, a motion that we designed
to improve the nursing home sector, frankly, the amendment is disgraceful. It is completely
devoid of any sense of urgency. It is complicit in endorsing a model of care run by big business
in Ireland that we believe has to change.
Everything about the response to nursing homes in recent weeks since the “RTÉ Investi-
2 July 2025
299
gates” revelations screams of painfully slow caution. The kid gloves have to come o. We owe
it to the older people in this country. I have spoken before about the very dicult decisions that
families make to put a loved one into a nursing home. It is an admission that the needs are too
great and the capacity in the home or the community is too small. As one woman said to me,
for many families, it feels like it is an admission of failure.
Our motion, which I am proud to be proposing on behalf of my colleagues in the Labour
Party, seeks to do a number of things but, principally, to mandate the Government to respond
with a sense of urgency to the frightening issues that we are now seeing in a number of Emeis
nursing homes. I will speak shortly of what was published last night. We want fundamental
reform of the fair deal pricing scheme. To be frank, how that scheme is structured and the loose
controls around it are driving some of the appalling practices that are currently going on in our
nursing homes and in the care of the elderly in this country. Critically, we need legislation to
ensure safe stang levels and protections for sta in nursing homes.
I will ask the Minister of State a question. He has read HIQA’s nal report into the 27 Emeis
nursing homes and, by the way, he knows that the report is incomplete because a number of
reports still have to be progressed. He knows that HIQA had previously found things were ne
when they were not. He has seen the alarming ndings for Blainroe, The Residence Carton,
Brentwood, Kilminchy and Athlunkard. What is he going to do? With all of the information at
his disposal, all of the information about the protected disclosures that have been sitting there
for two years and all of the information that HIQA eectively failed in its duties, is he prepared
to sit around and wait for the nursing homes to transform themselves? The safety and welfare
of residents should not be made to wait.
It is worth recalling that protected disclosures were made two years ago about nursing homes
that were not covered in the “RTÉ Investigates” programme, where residents were made to sit
on commodes unattended for a signicant period of time, where kitchen sta were let go and
home care assistants diverted into the kitchens away from their tasks looking after residents,
and where there was an increase in the number of admissions and no proportional increase in
the number of sta. All of that was eectively ignored, and I do not know what happened with
HIQA, but it was not addressed. There were failings.
If we are to be honest, if we had a doubt about the care of any of our family in a nursing
home, we would not stand around and wait. We would do something immediately. There is a
precedent in that the HSE went in to directly operate and manage 13 nursing homes during the
pandemic. It was possible then and it should be possible now that the Minister would direct the
HSE to go in and directly manage those Emeis nursing homes that have given rise to serious
concerns. If we are serious about aording dignity and respect to older people, and providing
assurances to them and their families, we need to see decisive action from the Government.
The pedestrian pace of the response from the Government speaks to a wider issue of the
gaping holes in how the nursing home sector is regulated and inspected, gaping holes that are
no accident. Our parties dier in that we in the Labour Party believe there must be no role for
big business in the running of nursing homes in this country, no role for prioritising prot over
resident safety and care. Few other sectors have a guaranteed source of income, a regulator that
gives a wide berth and the certainty that demand is going to grow enormously in the coming
decades. This sector gets €67.5 million from the State in the fair deal nursing home scheme and
it is demanding hundreds of millions extra, with very few conditions attached.
Dáil Éireann
300
The reality is that we have little or no oversight because many of those companies are un-
limited companies. It is a sector where almost half of the beds, 48%, are now in the hands of
just 15 operators, seven of which are Irish, four French and the rest German, Spanish, Dutch
and Chinese. They are not here for the good of their health. They are here because they see a
serious investment opportunity. They were the gures in 2023 according to CBRE. The situ-
ation would be even more concentrated now. This is a sector that saw 26 nursing homes close
between 2020 and 2023, the vast majority of them with fewer than 40 beds, while the growth
is now in nursing homes with 100 beds or more. Of the 16 nursing homes under construction
in 2023, nine had 100 beds or more. Three had 146 beds, 150 beds and 151 beds, respectively.
That is not a nursing home; that is a warehouse. All of those have no minimum stang levels.
This is a sector where the business model has profoundly changed over the last number of
years and become increasingly nancialised and where REITs will own the building and leech
sizeable rents from the operating company. Then we wonder why there is no money for inconti-
nence sheets, gloves and the basic resources to provide some degree of dignity to people in their
old age. This is not the type of sector we want to have caring for older people in this country.
The State absolutely has to step in and drive the growth of nursing home places, but we cannot
take our eye o the ball with regard to private operators. We in the Labour Party believe there
has to be a fundamental overhaul of the fair deal pricing scheme. The opaque non-transparent
negotiation between operators has to end. We need service-level agreements specifying the
precise level of care. We need tight restrictions on who owns and controls the operation and
building of nursing homes, and we need legislation on minimum levels of stang care.
In some ways, nursing homes are a misnomer. They are not staed by nurses. The care is
provided by healthcare assistants, yet there are people working in nursing homes who do not
have QQI level 5 qualications. I could rock up to a nursing home in the morning, start work
there and then get my qualications accordingly. That has to change. There are recommenda-
tions from the Leas Cross report going back to 2006 that have yet to be implemented. I believe
this could be a watershed moment with regard to the revelations we have seen relating to Emeis.
This needs to be a watershed moment in how we dramatically and fundamentally overhaul how
nursing homes are run in this country. It is within the Minister of State’s gift. An awful lot is
riding on his eorts. We need, for the dignity and respect of older people in this country, to see
a dramatic change in how they are regulated and inspected.
02/07/2025H00200Deputy Mark Wall: We need a fair deal for care. This means ending the privatisation of
nursing home care and giving older people the choice to age in their own homes and communi-
ties, with a statutory right to home care. This right to home care has long been promised by
successive Governments since 2017, but we have yet to see any real progress on this. Instead,
the only option that older people and their families are faced with is nursing home care. The
average length of stay in a nursing home is around three years. This reects the level of decline
that many older people experience due to privatisation, where shareholders are more concerned
with prots than the care and wellbeing of older people. We have seen a small number of mul-
tinational corporations and foreign investment funds take a stranglehold on the nursing home
sector over the last 20 years. Some 30% of nursing homes were privately owned. That has
risen to nearly 80%.
Emeis Ireland is one of the largest operators in this country, with 25 nursing homes, six
of which are in my own county, Kildare. The “RTÉ Investigates” programme shone a light
on the distressing and unacceptable practices of Emeis Ireland. Our motion seeks to address
the failures of big business to implement eective measures to provide quality care and basic
2 July 2025
301
compassion to older people. As a society, we must accept that the privatisation of care cannot
work. It is already a failed model. We need a radical reform of the nursing home sector, with
minimum stang levels, giving stronger enforcement powers to HIQA, and delivering adult
safeguarding legislation.
This motion is the start of a national movement where we want to end corporate care and
move towards care in the community. We have an ageing population and the demands on
healthcare and services will only increase. We must therefore look at our changing demograph-
ics and expand the continuation of care for older people through developing infrastructure, im-
plementing a statutory home care scheme and increasing sta to support care in the community
and in the home. I note the Minister of State’s bona des from his contributions in this House
and the Seanad and that he is determined to facilitate people to “live in their own homes”.
I have dealt with a number of cases over the last couple of weeks and a huge issue at the
moment is where people are waiting for housing adaptation grants from local authorities, yet
they cannot move into their homes because those housing adaptation grants have not been sanc-
tioned. Surely an intervention from the Minister of State would allow those people to go back
to live in their own homes and allow that bed to be freed up for somebody else. I will allow
my colleagues to come in. I hope the Minister of State will listen to this motion today because
unfortunately what we have seen in the Government’s amendment to the motion is not a Gov-
ernment listening or caring, but a Government promoting privatisation.
02/07/2025H00300Deputy Ged Nash: The failures of care exposed by the media in recent weeks are not just
a failure of one private nursing home operator. This is a failure by our State, a failure of public
policy, a failure of regulation, and an abject failure to uphold the dignity of those who have no
option but to put their care into others’ hands. It would be naive of us to think that we have seen
is anything other than the tip of the iceberg. Just look at Aoife Hegarty’s reports today. The
abuse, the poor care, the corners cut and older men and women lying alone in their own waste
are because the company that operates the nursing homes that they call home will not employ
the sta they need to appropriately run the places that aligns with the uy PR, what we see on
their websites, and what they expect to see.
This is the conclusion of two things. One is the calculated and deliberate crowding in of
private operators over the course of 25 years, propped up by our own money and a regulatory
regime that is hands-o and is not feared by a sector that owns almost 80% of all nursing homes
in the State. Combined, this is a recipe for disaster. The perverse irony is that it is those vulner-
able, ageing citizens, who paid for the tax incentives to develop a slew of private nursing homes
in the 2000s, who are now paying the price themselves in the very homes built on their backs,
paying on the double now with their dignity. We have an industry that constantly has its paw
out for additional resources from the State. At the very least, if the Minister of State is to sign
o on additional fair deal money, the industry should be expected to engage in a joint labour
committee, JLC, employment regulation order arrangement for a fairer deal for their workers.
This is what the State demands, for example, of the childcare sector, using the JLC system to
ensure that State money is properly used to improve the pay and conditions of sta. The same
should apply in the nursing home sector.
If we learned anything from the scandalous deaths at Dealgan House Nursing Home in
Dundalk in 2020, it should be that there should be a national clinical governance programme,
operated by the HSE and applying to all nursing homes. In the other words, in the interests of
all older people and all residents, there should be HSE oversight. That should be standard and
Dáil Éireann
302
applied right across the board, whether the nursing home is public or private.
02/07/2025H00400Deputy George Lawlor: As someone whose family is lucky enough to be in a position to
keep their mother in her home while she requires care, with the help of some wonderful carers
and my sister living with her, the spectre of what we saw on our TV screens a number of weeks
ago was truly appalling. Families across the country looked on in horror as evil appeared on our
screens. I do not need to rehearse all the condemnations that have been rightly chorused, but
seeing the footage was a chilling catalogue of all that is bad about the private sector takeover
of the care of the elderly in this country. We have a situation where the care of the elderly in
some, not all, but a considerable number of units is far from being either caring or considerate.
Yesterday, I listened to an amazing, articulate and well informed woman on my local South
East Radio, Dr. Margaret Kennedy. She is part of a campaign called Equality Not Cruelty. Its
campaign is focused on the urgent reform of HIQA and ensuring that ill-treatment and viola-
tions of dignity, respect and care in residential nursing homes never happens again. This amaz-
ing 72-year-old woman, who lives with a neuromuscular disease, succinctly and articulately
summed it up for so many in her situation. She said her group spoke for disabled people and
older people in its campaign. She said when she saw the images on her television screen, it was
clear that older people were being commodied. She said that older people were being ware-
housed in these places and that money was the root of all the diculties. Who could disagree?
She went on to say that these places are called nursing homes, but nobody should call them
homes of any kind, because that is certainly not what they are. She had listened with interest
recently to a discussion at an Oireachtas committee where someone from HIQA spoke about a
care decit. I agree with her that this is an extraordinary phrase to use when describing criminal
oences whereby people have been assaulted or criminally abused. That is not a care decit; it
is criminal activity. How can there be 198 abuse reports about Beneavin Manor in Dublin and
40 reports regarding The Residence Portlaoise, but it takes the work of an RTÉ investigative
team before we talk about it here in the Oireachtas?
Our motion calls for the nationalisation of the 27 nursing homes controlled by Emeis Ire-
land. That is the least we can do to send a signal to those sailing close to the wind that we are
sick to the teeth of prot driving their motives in looking after some of the most vulnerable
people in our society. Like every public service that is overrun by the greed of boardrooms,
this sector has once again shown that when it comes to the provision of essential services in
the State, greed always trumps the good. The ideology we have seen over the years absolutely
fosters that approach.
02/07/2025J00200Deputy Eoghan Kenny: I second the motion. I thank my Labour Party colleagues, particu-
larly Deputies Wall and Sherlock, for their work on it.
I do not for a minute doubt the Minister of State’s personal view on this issue but what we
saw in the “RTÉ Investigates” programme proved there absolutely are systemic issues within
HIQA. The fact HIQA took more than four months to investigate issues identied by RTÉ is
beyond belief. We are talking about care of our much loved older people, who deserve dignity
and respect as they age.
Following the programme, sta members of private nursing homes in my county of Cork
made contact with my oce to inform me of very serious concerns they have raised with man-
agement and, in some instances, directly with HIQA. Often, those concerns go unnoticed and
receive no response. Accountability is crucial when it comes to care of older people. Families
2 July 2025
303
and sta members across the country have spoken about HIQA’s failure in its statutory remit to
investigate and resolve issues when they arise locally. Ensuring procedures and processes are
in place to protect the vulnerable in society is the job of HIQA but it is not happening.
The motion calls on the Government to provide HIQA with stronger enforcement powers.
Its sta must have the ability to perform unannounced inspections and see for themselves what
the reality is. If we are real with ourselves for a minute, we will acknowledge that HIQA an-
nouncing that an inspection will take place makes no sense. The polish is out, the forms are
signed and appropriate settings are put in place. If inspectors go in unannounced, they will see
for themselves what is actually happening in organisations across the country. It is important
to recognise that there are genuine, caring and hard-working care assistants, nurses and doctors
working in nursing homes. However, that is not the case across the entire sector.
The motion has a specic focus on the fair deal scheme. That scheme is not t for purpose.
We must introduce a statutory home care scheme that allows our old people to live with dignity
and respect in their home and community. The overall focus is on the care being provided to
older people.
In a nursing home in my home town of Mallow, as Deputy Sherlock referred to, the kitchen
sta are being given the option of redeployment or they will be got rid of completely. The job
they have been doing will now be the job of the care assistants. A complete line of work is be-
ing taken out. Care assistants may now have to feed people who cannot get out of bed, a job
which was previously done by the kitchen sta.
This is one of a number of serious systemic issues. As I said, I do not doubt the Minister
of State’s personal opinion on this but he has an opportunity, within his Department, to change
what is ongoing and to address the systemic failures in care for our older people. HIQA’s role
in that care must be made an absolute priority for him, his Department and the Government.
Families across the country are calling on him to do that.
02/07/2025J00300Minister of State at the Department of Health (Deputy Kieran O’Donnell): I move
amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:
“recognises that:
— a national policy on adult safeguarding will be introduced for the health and
social care sector, as set out in the Programme for Government, and this policy will
commit to the development of adult safeguarding legislation for the sector, includ-
ing nursing homes, and will build on the range of existing legislation, policies, and
procedures already in place in the sector for preventing, reporting, and responding
to abuse;
— a framework for safe nurse stang and skill mix will be developed for nursing
homes, and this framework is a systematic, evidence-based approach to determine
the number of nurses and Health Care Assistants required to provide safe and quality
care, based on patient need/dependency; and
— the remaining provision, Section 68 of the Patient Safety (Notiable Incidents
and Open Disclosure) Act 2023, will be commenced, providing additional powers
Dáil Éireann
304
for the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA)/Chief Inspector with re-
gard to serious patient safety incidents in nursing homes, and the Chief Inspector will
have the power to carry out a review of an incident which may have caused an unin-
tended or unanticipated death or serious injury to the patient, and which occurred in
the course of the provision of care to that patient;
notes that:
— a review will be established of the eectiveness of the Chief Inspector’s in-
spection and monitoring processes, and this review will include such elements as
how to further strengthen the monitoring of leadership, culture and governance in
designated centres, how to better capture indicators of sta culture and other areas
of service delivery, which is critical for safe and good quality support for residents;
— a plan for additional public nursing home bed capacity will be published,
and the Department of Health, alongside the Health Service Executive, is currently
developing a new public long-term residential care additional capacity plan, which
will be published in 2025, and the delivery of additional public long-term residential
care capacity is required to deliver on Programme for Government, Sláintecare, and
Project Ireland 2040 commitments;
— new design standards for long-term residential care settings for older people
across all sectors will be created, describing what good building design looks like for
long-term residential care settings for older people, and providing a common bench-
mark against which the standard of these settings can be measured, and the Depart-
ment of Health report entitled ‘Design Guide for Long-Term Residential Care Set-
tings for Older People Public Consultation Report’, was published in January 2025;
— ownership structures will be reviewed to enhance transparency and strengthen
accountability in the long-term residential care sector, and carrying out an evaluation
of the implications of complex corporate ownership structures against current regu-
latory powers will identify opportunities for regulatory reform;
— the Government has reiterated its well-established commitment to the devel-
opment of the statutory home care scheme in the 2025 Programme for Government,
and the rst element in delivering this is the Health (Amendment) (Licensing of Pro-
fessional Home Support Providers) Bill 2024, which will establish a licensing frame-
work for professional home support services and provide for regulation by HIQA;
— the Programme for Government commits to strengthening the nursing home
sector, by increasing funding for the Nursing Homes Support Scheme, also known
as Fair Deal, while investment in Budget 2025 was €67.6 million, and this followed
on from an increase in 2024 of €45 million; and
— the Government established an independent Commission on Care for Older
People, which is charged with examining the provision of health and social care ser-
vices and supports for older people, and with making recommendations to the Gov-
ernment for their strategic development, including long term residential care; and
further notes that from 2021 to 2025, the Government provided funding of €21.4
million, to enable people under the age of 65 to transition to an alternative community-
2 July 2025
305
based placement and provide in situ supports as appropriate.”.
I welcome the opportunity to address the House on matters raised in respect of nursing
homes in the Private Members’ motion tabled by the Labour Party. I do not doubt Members’
sincerity in bringing it forward. We all want to get to a point where we have a better, tter nurs-
ing home service for the elderly.
I again acknowledge the “RTÉ Investigates” programme that was broadcast on 4 June. That
hard-hitting and harrowing programme highlighted a litany of poor care standards in two nurs-
ing homes, namely, the Residence Portlaoise and Beneavin Manor in Glasnevin, and showed
clear neglect and abuse of older people. The welfare of both the residents and their families
was obviously at the forefront of my concerns following the RTÉ programme. I am very con-
scious of the impact the programme will have had on the residents, their families and the sta
in the nursing homes featured in the broadcast. I am also conscious of the impact it will have
had on the nursing home sector more generally, including residents and sta. It is important to
acknowledge, as all speakers have, the committed, compassionate and dedicated providers and
care sta operating in nursing homes across the country.
Like everyone else watching the programme, I was shocked and deeply concerned at the
level of non-compliance with care standards in evidence from the distressing footage that was
aired. I again state categorically that every nursing home resident deserves, and should expect,
the highest standards of care at all times. Poor care, mistreatment, neglect or any other form of
abuse of any person living in a long-term residential care centre is completely unacceptable. I
expect the highest standards of care to be upheld by providers for every resident in every nurs-
ing home across the country. Anything less than that will simply not be tolerated. I welcome
the conrmation that referrals have been made to An Garda Síochána.
I have had signicant engagement with HIQA and with key stakeholders in the nursing
home sector, including the HSE and representative bodies from the sector. I am continuing this
engagement with an immediate focus on delivering the highest quality of care to the residents
of nursing homes in Ireland. Responsibility for the safety and care of residents ultimately rests
with the individual provider of each nursing home and its sta. The governance and manage-
ment of nursing homes is a critical aspect in ensuring the safety and welfare of all residents.
Sta must be equipped with the tools and supports they need to provide those in residential care
with person-centred care.
As the national independent regulator of nursing homes in Ireland, I expect HIQA and its
chief inspector to utilise all powers available to them to ensure rigorous oversight and account-
ability in nursing home care. HIQA’s role is to ensure the systems, structures and processes
put in place by a nursing home work to ensure safe and eective care and support for those
in residential care. Department ocials and I met with HIQA on 4 June to discuss regulatory
activity relating to the nursing homes featured in the “RTÉ Investigates” programme. At the
meeting, HIQA’s chief inspector conrmed its continuous intensive engagements with the two
nursing homes in question.
On 13 June, as requested, HIQA furnished me with an interim report on its engagement with
the two nursing homes featured in the “RTÉ Investigates” programme. That interim report was
published on 17 June. It details HIQA’s inspection of the two nursing homes since the pro-
gramme was broadcast and its ongoing work in this regard. It also provides a brief overview
of the Emeis Ireland group. HIQA has completed a series of unannounced inspections of both
Dáil Éireann
306
nursing homes, in the evening, in the early hours of the morning and during the day, to ascertain
the level of care being provided at all times. Both providers were issued with an ocial warn-
ing of cancellation of registration should they fail to implement signicant improvements in the
care of residents.
On 20 June, as requested, I received a further report from HIQA giving an overview of the
25 nursing homes in the Emeis Ireland group. The report provides a comprehensive overview
of regulatory history, including, but not limited to, regulatory compliance, escalating enforce-
ment actions and any additional conditions of registration. That report was published yesterday.
The Minister, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, and I, together with Department of Health o-
cials, met with HIQA on 17 June and on 30 June to discuss both reports. At those meetings,
HIQA advised it is continuing its intensive engagement with the Emeis Ireland group of nursing
homes. The contents and ndings of both reports are being considered, including the need for
additional regulatory powers in respect of nursing homes, with actions in this regard to be taken
as a matter of priority. I cannot emphasise enough that this is an absolute priority for me and
the Government.
HIQA has acknowledged the importance of examining its processes and methodology. It is
essential that they are continually reviewed to nd ways to improve the inspection and regula-
tion of nursing homes. HIQA is undertaking a review of the eectiveness of the chief inspec-
tor’s inspection and monitoring processes. This review will include such elements as how to
further strengthen the monitoring of leadership, culture, governance and management in nurs-
ing homes, how to better capture indicators of sta culture and other areas of service delivery
that are critical for safe and good quality care for residents.
I have requested that, when compliance issues are identied in a nursing home, HIQA moni-
tor more closely the corrective actions taken by the nursing home towards achieving compliance
and that this information be included in HIQA’s published reports. This makes common sense.
When a report is published at present, it deals with what happened on the day of the inspection.
I want the report not to deal with the day of the inspection but the compliance actions required
to be implemented and whether they were implemented. A report is in real time. When people
read inspection reports on the HIQA website, they will see not only what happened on the day
of the inspection but also what has happened since. When they are looking for a nursing home
for their loved ones, they will know what the situation is now. That is very important. I have
asked HIQA to implement this and it will do so.
It is acknowledged that the nursing home sector has evolved in Ireland over the past 30
years from a predominantly State-led service to a situation today where approximately 80% of
nursing home services are provided by the private sector. I am fully aware of the investment
trends in the Irish long-term residential care market, the growing consolidation of the sector and
the complex investment and ownership structures that now exist. Deputies have referenced that
in almost all of the contributions. It is, therefore, important that all aspects of the nursing home
sector be scrutinised over the coming period to ensure that service delivery and conguration
meet the needs of service users in a sustainable and safe manner.
This scrutiny includes a review of ownership structures to enhance transparency and
strengthen accountability in the long-term residential care sector. Carrying out an evaluation of
the implications of complex corporate ownership structures against current regulatory powers
will identify the required regulatory reforms. As it stands, HIQA can regulate the individual
2 July 2025
307
company that is the service provider but does not have jurisdiction over the parent company or
the umbrella group. I want that changed and we will implement that.
The chief inspector of HIQA will soon have additional powers with regard to serious patient
safety incidents in nursing homes when section 68 of the Patient Safety (Notiable Incidents
and Open Disclosure) Act 2023 is commenced. The chief inspector will have the power to carry
out a review of an incident that may have caused an unintended or unanticipated death or seri-
ous injury to a patient and occurred in the course of the provision of care to that patient.
The Minister, Deputy Carroll MacNeill, and I are fully committed to introducing an adult
safeguarding policy for the health and social care sector, including nursing homes. The policy
will commit to the development of adult safeguarding legislation for the sector, including nurs-
ing homes, and will build on the range of existing legislation, policies and procedures already
in place in the sector for preventing, reporting and responding to abuse. The policy is at an
advanced stage and our intention is to bring it to the Government as a matter of priority. The
Government has included a health (adult safeguarding) Bill in its current legislative programme
to facilitate this, and it is recognised that this will be an important further development in pro-
tecting vulnerable adults from abuse.
I would also like to advise the House of ongoing work by the Department of Health to de-
velop a framework for a safe stang and skill mix for long-term residential care settings for
older people. The framework is a systematic evidence-based approach to determine the number
of nurses and healthcare assistants required to provide safe and quality care based on patient
need. This work is nearing completion, and I expect to receive recommendations for how it can
be implemented shortly. Furthermore, in my discussions with HIQA, I have asked it to ensure
that, where there is a change in the sta prole in a nursing home, there be a requirement to no-
tify HIQA. This is a very important point. It is a practical measure that can be taken by HIQA.
The Government is committed to continued investment in healthcare infrastructure that sup-
ports the highest quality of care for our older population. It is recognised that long-term resi-
dential care will continue to be a crucial part of the overall continuum of care. The programme
for Government commits to building more public nursing home beds and, in this context, the
Department of Health, alongside the HSE, is developing a new public long-term residential care
additional capacity plan, which will be published in 2025. The delivery of additional public
long-term residential care capacity will deliver on programme for Government, Sláintecare and
Project Ireland 2040 commitments. This plan will be informed by the HSE capacity review
report on future capacity for older people, which was published on Monday by the ESRI.
We have spoken about the built environment. It is of paramount importance that the built
environment and location of long-term residential care settings support high-quality care and
positive experiences for our older population. The Government is, therefore, committed to
creating new design standards for long-term residential care settings for older people across all
sectors, providing a common benchmark against which the standard of these settings can be
measured.
Statutory home care is a priority for me. I am working on the legislation for home care pro-
viders, which will be the rst step. I will look to bring it to the Minister, Deputy Carroll Mac-
Neill, and the wider Government as a matter of priority. We are increasing funding for home
care. With regard to the age prole of the population, we have set up the Commission on Care
for Older People and it will shortly publish the rst module of the work it has done.
Dáil Éireann
308
I, as Minister of State with responsibility for older people, the Minister, Deputy Carol Mac-
Neill, and the wider Government are committed to ensuring everything possible is done so that
the distressing scenes we witnessed in the recent “RTÉ Investigates” programme do not happen
again in any nursing home in the country. I want to state clearly that every nursing home resi-
dent deserves and shall expect the highest standard of care. My abiding concern is older people
in nursing homes. Everything is about improving care and safety for them.
02/07/2025K00200Deputy Alan Kelly: What was shown on the “RTÉ Investigates” programme - well done
to those who made it - was disgraceful. We have many ne private nursing homes, but when
we allow the development of a for-prot model for investors - there are large-scale investors in
a large proportion of these nursing homes, as the Minister of State knows - that have borrowed
money at low interest rates and there is no sectoral agreement on workers, we are looking for
trouble.
We have a lax regulatory regime whereby HIQA simply does not have the powers in re-
spect of this sector that it should have, as the Minister of State has acknowledged, to be fair.
The “RTÉ Investigates” programme happened because we let it happen. HIQA was in nursing
homes not long before the programme was made and it took a signicant period of time before
it reassessed one. This is when things fall through the cracks.
We have a real problem in this country when it comes to managing nursing home care and
care for the elderly. We need a complete reboot of the statutory home care scheme to support
people to stay in their homes. There is the scandalous issue of the thousands of under-65s who
are left in nursing home care.
There are practical measures we need to take. In the new national development plan, we
need massive public investment in public nursing homes. We need one in Roscrea. It has been
promised for decades. To be fair to the people of Roscrea, I do not think there is any town in
Ireland that is more deserving of a proper nursing home to replace the Dean Maxwell. We need
them all over the country.
We also need to start giving consideration to our demographics, in particular how many
people will be over the age 65, 70 and 80 in the years to come. We are not prepared for this.
I speak with a lot of knowledge on this. We are not preparing for issues relating to more and
more people living longer and having dementia.
The type of care we provide also needs to change. Many public nursing homes have to take
high-dependency patients purely because private nursing homes cannot, in some cases, take
them or, perhaps in a minority of cases, will not take them, something the Minister of State
knows. I know this because I have tabled parliamentary questions, the replies to which show
that, in many cases, people are left in hospitals for months, if not years.
Collectively, we need large-scale public investment in nursing homes. We need a sectoral
agreement to pay workers properly. We need a regulatory regime that ensures these people are
not let down and nursing homes and the standards they have to maintain do not fall through the
cracks.
02/07/2025K00300Deputy Ciarán Ahern: I commend my colleagues, Deputies Sherlock and Wall, for tabling
the motion. All of us in the House were outraged by the “RTÉ Investigates” programme, which
showed the appalling levels of abuse and malpractice in older people’s care settings. These are
some of the most vulnerable people in our society. They depend on the help of others to meet
2 July 2025
309
their basic needs, as any one of us here might well need some day. To see the conditions these
older people were living in, and the routine violation of their human dignity, was shocking. It
is incredibly upsetting to consider that any of our relatives living in long-term residential care
could face the same indignities and abuse. These abuses are widespread and long term. We
have heard the pleas of care champions and other relentless campaigners who continue to call
for a statutory inquiry into the mistreatment and neglect in our nursing homes, which had par-
ticularly devastating eects during Covid.
The proliferation of private providers is at the heart of this issue. For me, the key takeaway
from the “RTÉ Investigates” programme was that the State’s failure to provide sucient care
for older people through home care and residential care has enabled the ever-increasing privati-
sation of the nursing home sector. We can clearly see that a model of prot maximisation above
all else will never provide adequate and dignied care to those who need it.
In almost all cases, people who require care and personal support, including older people,
would prefer the care to be delivered in the comfort of their own home and community. The
Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing and the ESRI have both reported that institutionalisation is
being imposed on many older people and disabled people who should, and wish to instead, be
enabled to live at home and be included in their community. This is their right under the UN
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
As a State, we have institutionalised people as a default social care response. From the
Magdalen laundries, to psychiatric institutions, to direct provision, to congregated care settings
in nursing homes, again and again these systems, prot making and the lack of State regulation
involved have been shown to cause serious abuse.
Our current home care system is not t for purpose either and this needs to change if we are
to get out of this never-ending cycle of coercive and neglectful institutionalisation. Much of our
home care system is privatised yet we have been speaking about statutory regulation of home
care and a statutory entitlement to home care for decades. These promises were included in the
programmes for Government in 2016 and in 2020. Now, the current programme for Govern-
ment commits to designing a statutory home care scheme. After all this time how are we just
getting to a design stage? We are now in the third successive Fine Gael Government that has
committed to statute-based home care. Is it hoping for third time lucky?
We know the best outcomes for older people in terms of their health and well-being are
when they can remain in their own homes and communities and receive the care they need
there. Home and community-based care, and residential care that is embedded in and open to
community participation, is best for all of us.
02/07/2025L00200Deputy Robert O’Donoghue: I thank my colleagues, Deputies Wall and Sherlock, for ta-
bling this important motion. The care system is increasingly in crisis. From cradle to grave, we
have seen care farmed out to private investors who think of prots and not people. The current
crisis is driven by two factors in particular. These are the natural ageing of the population and
the State’s hands-o approach to providing care. We have seen a shift towards privatisation in
the commodication of care and the outsourcing of our own social responsibility. While the
“RTÉ Investigates” programme was shocking, unfortunately many families who have placed
loved ones in care knew this was inevitable. Many complaints have gone unanswered or un-
investigated. There are serious shortcomings in HIQA’s inspection and enforcement regime.
The high sta turnover rate creates a damaging cycle that compromises the quality of care that
Dáil Éireann
310
people receive and this alone demands urgent attention.
Care for older people must be reframed as an essential part of our social infrastructure, on a
par with education, health and housing. Nursing homes should not be the default solution for
ageing. Instead, they should be reserved for situations where end-of-life or intensive medical
care is genuinely required. They are certainly not for people under the age of 65 due to a lack of
appropriate alternatives. The priority should be on delivering care in the community, allowing
older people to thrive and live with dignity and independence in their own homes for as long
as possible.
Just yesterday, a journalist outside asked how much this was going to cost. That question is
everything that has gone wrong with how we do care. We should be outraged that the rst con-
cern is the price tag and not the person who needs the care in later life. We cannot and should
not put a monetary gure on dignity, well-being or the rights of older citizens. Caring for older
people is not a cost to be calculated; it is a fundamental responsibility of any decent society. We
owe them care not because it is protable but because it is right.
We have seen a shift in the valuation of care economically and socially. Mainstream eco-
nomic thinking often treats care as a cost rather than a vital investment in people and society.
The commodication of care has prioritised cost eciency over individualised high-quality
care. This is also evident in the treatment of our care workers. Care provision is predominantly
delivered by the private sector, even though it is largely funded through the public purse. This
work remains low paid, insecure, under-regulated and undervalued. Many workers lack basic
protections and benets. If private nursing homes are to be funded by the public purse, they
should not block trade unions organising to make sure they have decent and conditions. We
need a new approach that resets care as a public good and not a private commodity. The future
of care lies in public investment, community-based services and the priority of people over
prot. It is time we moved away from a nursing home default model and towards a system that
truly supports older people to live full and dignied lives.
02/07/2025L00300Deputy Natasha Newsome Drennan: I thank the Labour Party for tabling the motion. All
of us here at some stage will have to think about whether our parents will be in need of nursing
home care. It is a very dicult and uncomfortable conversation for any family. It is something
we would all like to think our parents will not need but this simply is not how life goes.
We put immense faith in these nursing home providers that they will show love and com-
passion to the people who raised us as they reach a vulnerable stage of their lives. The “RTÉ
Investigates” report has shattered this faith. It showed that despite more than 200 complaints
being made about one nursing home, no action was taken against it. The HIQA report showed
clearly this nursing home was not only non-compliant but repeatedly non-compliant, with little
evidence it was even trying to improve its standards. There were residents with bedsores and
bruises. Calls for help went unanswered. There were incidents of starvation, deprivation of
liberty, a lack of dignity, a lack of respect and a lack of care. How did the operator get away
with it? There was not a single cent in nancial nes. Where is the accountability?
How did it take an “RTÉ Investigates” report and not the concerns of family members and
loved ones for action to be taken? What kind of message does this send out to families who
have concerns about the care being provided to their loved ones? How upsetting and distress-
ing these past few weeks must have been for the loved ones of residents in that nursing home
is unimaginable.
2 July 2025
311
The consequences of successful Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Governments are being laid bare.
There has been a complete and utter failure by Governments to put in place robust and eec-
tive policies and regulations. There has been a push for a model of privatisation, with fast and
loose regulations, and a failure to provide HIQA with the powers it needs to eectively police
the sector. We have seen scandal after scandal exposing these failures and neglect but what we
have not seen is action from Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael.
There is still no adult safeguarding legislation in place. This legislation must establish an
independent safeguarding authority with real powers and resources to act on individual clini-
cal concerns. There must be mandatory reporting of concerns of abuse and neglect. HSE
safeguarding teams should be brought under the remit of this authority and these teams need
to be signicantly expanded to do their job. Safeguarding teams and social workers must be
given a legal right of entry and be permitted to investigate concerns, unannounced, at any time.
Furthermore, where management and corporation leadership make decisions that lead to poor
quality care and the loss of the health or life of residents in the care of the service for which they
are responsible, there must be accountability.
We need to see a step change in Government policy, one that will invest in building capacity
in public nursing homes and residential homes. Sinn Féin has proposed a home rst approach
to care, backed by a statutory home care scheme that forces the system to redirect resources
to home care. The current laws are clearly not working, and for almost 20 years everyone has
been telling the Government that they are not enough. It is now three weeks since the “RTÉ
Investigates” report. What will it take to nally see some action from the Government?
More than 80% of nursing home beds are provided by the private sector. This is the Govern-
ment’s answer to everything but it is simply not working. What we have seen on RTÉ is just
the tip of the iceberg. I certainly would not like to end up in one of these nursing homes, nor
would I want one of my loved ones to be treated like an animal. If I treated the animals on our
farm badly, with dirty beds, starving them, etc., I would be prosecuted. Why are people treated
with such neglect, calling and pleading to use the bathroom and left to lie in their own urine
as punishment? Is this where our Government is at, letting big business make huge prots by
mistreating our older people?
Speaking as a carer, this is not what we want. I was in the public sector. HIQA had the au-
thority to come into our place. There were two HIQA inspectors for three residents. We cannot
expect two HIQA inspectors to go into a nursing home with 90, 70 or however many patients.
There have to be more.
02/07/2025M00200Deputy Louise O’Reilly: When I think of HIQA, I am often reminded of an article about
the British royal family that stated that they believed that everything outside of Buckingham
Palace smelled like fresh paint. HIQA is probably the same. Announced inspections are not
working and give people far too much time. There have to be unannounced inspections. HIQA
needs to be better resourced. None of us wants our loved ones to be treated in such a manner.
That is a given and we do not need to see it. However, HIQA is sometimes all that stands be-
tween a vulnerable person and mistreatment. The Government - I was about to say “we”, but I
am taking no responsibility for this - should give HIQA the powers it needs.
In 2004, the Rostrevor nursing home was investigated by the health board. On one oc-
casion, bed sores on an elderly incontinent patient were found to have been contaminated by
faecal matter. Before prosecutions even took place, the health board went to the High Court to
Dáil Éireann
312
try to have the home shut down. There was evidence that stang, training and drug adminis-
tration rules had all been breached. One nurse had been rostered for 72 hours in one week. No
re drills were carried out, despite residents smoking in their rooms. The owners at the time,
the Lipsetts, argued that they had resolved the problems. There were no powers to shut the
home down at that stage. The owner was struck o the nursing register because she failed to
act on sexual abuse allegations. That happened between 2004 and 2005. Micheál Martin was
the Minister for Health and Children for part of that time. In 2011, I had occasion to be in that
nursing home when it was eventually shut down. If I live to be 1,000 years old, I will never
forget what I saw and heard from the people working there. The way in which the residents
were treated shocked me to my very core. I did not think it was possible that people could be
treated in that manner. It was very shocking. The workers were treated every bit as badly as
the patients and residents in the nursing home.
Two weeks ago, I sat in my constituency oce for well over an hour with a woman whose
dad had been a resident in the Beneavin Manor nursing home. She detailed to me the litany
of complaints she had made on behalf of her father. She had brought them to the attention of
HIQA, the owner and the upper people in the nursing home. It was during Covid. Her dad was
only allowed to have one visit, but he got that one visit every single day. Hard and all as it was
for her to live it, it was hard to hear about it as well. I thought afterwards about the people who
did not have anybody to speak up for them. She was in every day to see her dad and she could
still see he was being mistreated. What about the people who do not have anyone to speak up
for them? That is why HIQA is supposed to be there. That is why we need the adult safeguard-
ing legislation. We need the Government to stop talking about it because talking about it is
interfering with the Government actually doing something about it. We really need to see that
legislation, not just a “strong commitment”. We need to have a conversation about privatisa-
tion. When prot motive is introduced into the care of vulnerable people, this is the inevitable
consequence. Privatisation is Government policy; it needs to be reversed.
02/07/2025M00300Deputy Johnny Mythen: I thank the Labour Party for bringing this important motion to
the oor. The statistics alone tell the true story of long-term residential care in our country.
More than 80% of nursing homes are now owned by private bodies, with Emeis Ireland being
by far the largest operator, owning more than 27 premises in total. When private companies are
driven solely by prot, whose solidarity and loyalty only lie with their shareholders and their
main goal is to increase dividends, there is a high level of risk that the residents themselves
will become a secondary element in such a nancially motivated model. This explains why the
system is subject to bad conditions, bad-quality service, cutting corners such as sta shortages,
low wages, and unavailable medical devices and supplies, as was exposed by the recent “RTÉ
Investigates” programme on 4 June. What is needed is the State to assist and fund smaller com-
munity nursing homes and to invest in public nursing homes and community beds. Many of
these small homes provide excellent-quality services to their residents. More often than not,
they personally know the residents and their families as well.
Unfortunately, in my hometown of Enniscorthy, the Moyne Nursing Home recently closed,
with the loss of 30 jobs. The management, the Earle family, stated: “For the past nine years we
have put our blood, sweat and tears into making Moyne Nursing Home the home from home
that it is today.” The family stated: “Since we took over the running of the home back in 2013
we have prided ourselves on providing the highest standards of care to our residents”. The fam-
ily also stated that adequate funding was not provided by the Government to ensure adequate
standards set by HIQA were met.
2 July 2025
313
Safeguarding legislation must be introduced and an independent safeguarding authority es-
tablished, as our spokesperson on health, David Cullinane, has advocated for many years now.
The reporting of concerns about abuse and neglect must be made mandatory and whistleblow-
ers must be protected. The Government must act now. More than 820,000 citizens are older
than 65 years of age. With the prediction of a steady and substantial increase in the next two
decades, this must ring alarm bells. A comprehensive social policy to support independent
living must be implemented. A sea change in the State’s current policy of privatising nursing
homes must be radically invoked or we will be facing many more scandals in the near future
like that exposed by RTÉ. The State must bear a duty of care to our ageing population. I ask
the Government to please support this motion.
02/07/2025M00400Deputy Thomas Gould: In recent years, I have had the privilege to work with Pat Coyle
and the Care Champions, a group that came into existence because of what happened to their
loved ones during the Covid pandemic and how badly they were treated. Their stories are heart-
breaking. I have witnessed the guilt and the hurt they feel because of the way their loved ones
were treated. They feel their loved ones were abandoned. Care Champions and Pat Coyle have
tried to engage with the Government in a constructive manner. They are not about pointing
ngers of blame. They want to ensure that what happened to their loved ones will never happen
to anyone again. They want to be positive and constructive, not negative.
The Care Champions just want to work the Government and the Opposition so that people
in nursing homes or hospitals, vulnerable older people and vulnerable sick or disabled people
are not let down the way they were let down. To listen to their stories and hear how they feel
about what happened to their families was just heartbreaking. They have made freedom of
information requests, they have looked for meetings, and they have looked for the Govern-
ment to implement the changes that were supposed to come about after what happened during
the Covid-19 crisis. This has not happened. The Government is now talking about an inquiry.
There will have to be a proper, full, open and honest inquiry, not an inquiry that is going to pay
people, but an inquiry to get to the facts of what happened so that these people can have their
stories and voices heard.
11 o’clock
The “RTÉ Investigates” programme was horrendous. Care Champions told us the organisa-
tion is not surprised but, based on what it has found out in its own investigations, it is surprised
that other people are surprised. The scenes in the programme were absolutely disgusting. Some
200 complaints were made against one nursing home, yet it took RTÉ to highlight the issue, and
fair play to it. RTÉ can be criticised at times, sometimes rightly, but in this case its journalists
did really important work to try to protect vulnerable older people when the State and HIQA
were letting them down. Action needs to be taken.
How many other nursing homes are operating in the same manner? One of the hardest
decisions a person or family can ever make is to put someone into a nursing home. Recently,
a member of my family who is sick had to go into a nursing home while recovering. We could
only visit between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m. That is no good for anyone who is working. I am lucky we
have a good family and people are exible and able to manage things. In the hospital, we were
only allowed visits from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m., so there were no visits during the day. We should
encourage more people to visit vulnerable people, not reduce access to them.
All of this is coming about because of a privatisation agenda that Fine Gael, supported by
Dáil Éireann
314
Fianna Fáil, has driven for decades. We see money and prot being put before people. How
can that be right?
A nursing home owned by the State, Heather House at St. Mary’s health campus in Gur-
ranabraher, had a brand new dementia unit built and it has been lying empty for over a year
because of a lack of resources and sta. At a time when people are crying out for dementia
places in nursing homes the Heather House dementia unit is lying idle. The Minister of State
needs to act on that.
02/07/2025N00200Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú: It is hard to believe we are back here again. It is 20 years
since the Leas Cross case, which led to a commission of investigation and the establishment
of HIQA. Like many of my colleagues, I believe HIQA needs to be given some of the powers
it has requested. As Deputy O’Reilly said, we need some facility for unannounced visits of a
particular type. We cannot be utterly reliant on “Prime Time” to safeguard our older people.
We have huge levels of failings. It is crazy to think that 200 complaints were made about a
particular nursing home and nothing was done about it. Everyone has said we have an issue
with privatisation, accepting that there are good private and public nursing homes. We need to
make sure all of them are good. The Government has walked away from the public system. In
everything this Government touches, there is an overreliance on the private sector. In the nurs-
ing home sector, 81% of homes are private and 19% are public. This is not good enough and it
means the likes of Emeis Ireland are a major part of home care. Without safeguards, there are
huge questions to answer.
Any time I talk about nursing homes I nd it dicult not to deal with Dealgan House and
the 22 families who lost loved ones in the early period of 2020 during Covid. They, like Care
Champions and many other advocates, are not impressed by the Government’s approach to
that. I do not even know what the term is because it is hardly an inquiry. It is a review of the
period of Covid-19. We need some sort of compellability. We have heard the Taoiseach and
many others speak about what they do not want to see in relation to commissions of inquiry or
commissions of investigation. That is ne but it is not ne to be a commentator. The Govern-
ment has the power to decide what type of inquiry can be initiated, with whatever checks and
balances are required. That is what we need.
We really have to get real about delivering a home rst policy to facilitate those in their own
home to be helped by their families. This will require a statutory support scheme that is up to
scratch. We need to see the adult safeguarding legislation delivered. This has been necessary
for a long time and has been spoken about for far too long in this House. We need to make sure
all those necessary pieces are put in place.
When we are talking about residential care-----
02/07/2025N00300An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Mairéad Farrell): Go raibh maith agat, a Theach-
ta.
02/07/2025N00400Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú: -----there is still a particular issue with the capital assistance
scheme. I spoke to the Minister for housing about it. It needs to be delivered. It is creating an
issue because those who should be getting disability housing in St. John of God services and
other services cannot get it because the councils are not able to deliver and the funding is put in
with the tenant in situ scheme and the rest.
02/07/2025N01100An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Mairéad Farrell): Your time is up.
2 July 2025
315
02/07/2025N01200Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú: Apologies.
02/07/2025N01300Deputy Liam Quaide: I commend the Labour Party on its motion. We fully support it. It
has been an honour to meet in recent weeks with Safeguarding Ireland, Care Champions, and
the Irish Association of Social Workers to discuss adult safeguarding and systemic problems
within our nursing home sector and other care facilities. I look forward to engaging with Inclu-
sion Ireland, Sage Advocacy and others to this end in the coming weeks and months.
There is consensus among the advocacy groups that the Law Reform Commission report
into adult safeguarding, published last year, is the roadmap that we need to follow to implement
comprehensive adult safeguarding legislation and to establish a national safeguarding author-
ity. It is worth mentioning that, following the Farrelly commission report, a lot of commentary
reected on the fact that the commission of inquiry was extremely expensive, did not produce
clear recommendations and was very unsatisfactory in many ways. If we had a national safe-
guarding authority, it would greatly reduce, if not entirely eliminate, the need for these com-
missions and tribunals. It would have a safeguarding focus in how it conducts investigations.
Safeguarding Ireland has highlighted that the Bill currently proposed by the Government in
its legislative agenda is too narrow in scope and would be a missed opportunity if pursued. It
is vital, therefore, that we go back to the Law Reform Commission’s report.
The recent “RTÉ Investigates” programme, which brought adult safeguarding back into
sharp focus, documented appalling standards of care at two nursing homes that form part of one
of the largest private for-prot care providers in the State. It was chilling and terribly sad to
witness the casual neglect of and repeated insults to the dignity of those nursing home residents.
Proteering and the care for some of our most vulnerable citizens do not go hand in hand. A
major overhaul of our care system is needed.
The “RTÉ Investigates” programme documented abject failures to respect the basic care
needs and dignity of nursing home residents as an everyday occurrence. These are yet more
examples of how our care system is failing vulnerable adults and is subject to poor oversight,
a lack of mandatory reporting structures and weak enforcement powers. While the content of
the programme was shocking, many people were not surprised by these patterns of mistreat-
ment. These patterns are likely not isolated to this particular nursing home provider. For me,
a stand-out moment of the “RTÉ Investigates” programme was when the more experienced
care assistant advised a colleague that she too had notions of a better system at the outset of her
career. She said:
I know you feel sorry and I feel sorry for everybody here. They do not go out, the ac-
tivities are shit, all this system is shit, you understand, but this is how it is, you know. Ours
is just to do our job and to go home. I wouldn’t put my mother here, even if it was my last
breath.
That exchange captured how basic empathy can gradually break down in a service that is
under so much strain, where there are not enough sta to share the workload and where items
for attending to the basic care needs of residents are not provided. We cannot let a sense of
inevitability set in that this is just how it is now for elder care.
The need for comprehensive adult safeguarding legislation has been repeatedly raised by
the interest groups I mentioned. It has been highlighted in particular following the Leas Cross
scandal 20 years ago, the Áras Attracta scandal in 2014 and the Brandon, Grace and Emily
Dáil Éireann
316
cases, and the Government has failed to act. Unlike with child protection, there is no single,
comprehensive adult safeguarding law in Ireland. Instead, adult safeguarding relies on a patch-
work of legislation, policy documents and fragmented departmental responsibilities. There
does not appear to be an ideological barrier that I can identify to explain why the necessary leg-
islation has not been pursued. The only conclusion I can draw is that successive Governments
have neglected this area because they have not felt sucient political heat on the matter. It is
incumbent on all of us to ensure that it retains the focus it currently has.
02/07/2025O00200Deputy Aidan Farrelly: I thank the Members of the Labour Party for bringing forward
such an important motion. I thank the Minister of State for his opening statement, which
is comprehensive, but it is unfortunate to see the Government amendment and what is con-
tained in it. We have spent a considerable amount of time speaking about this since the TV
programmes aired and the experiences highlighted. Prot can never be the guiding principle
for care. If we use that as a starting point when we discuss reform, we will all start to see we
agree with each other much more than we dier in terms of ideology. Over the past 30 years,
we have allowed the sector to move from being a public good to a prot-making endeavour for
the majority. How this manifests itself is in the experiences highlighted by the “Prime Time
Investigates” programme and many more.
I have spoken to sta in those settings. They have spoken about their hurt as the weeks and
months have gone on. For many, it misrepresented the love, care and compassion they have
for the work they do. They have also highlighted concerns in relation to the response and we
have seen that now in terms of admissions being stopped. It is said there is an element of win-
dow dressing in settings now where we are seeing sta numbers being considerably increased
in the last weeks and months as a response. Why it took such revelations is beyond me. Why
businesses are allowed to operate relatively free of control is a starting point that we should
consider.
Prot cannot be the guiding principle for care. The Minister of State will agree with me on
that. I think we all agree with that. If that is the starting point, then we acknowledge that reform
is needed through HIQA and the HSE. It starts with us considering a move back from the 80%
private dependence to a much more publicly-funded and publicly-regulated sector.
02/07/2025O00300Deputy Sinéad Gibney: Trust in nursing homes has been lost. With everything that has
come to light in recent months, the one overwhelming response, which really concerns me
deeply, is that people are now afraid of nursing homes, or perhaps more afraid, because revela-
tions like these have been coming out for decades. Old age should come with a security and a
certainty that a person’s needs are met, they are safe and they treated with dignity. It is the duty
of policymakers to not only address the issues raised by the recent abuses which have come to
light, but also to rebuild this broken trust. We need a system that is both safe and trusted. With-
out both, we are not delivering that vital security to people and their families.
Unfortunately, as we have heard from many today, this is the natural product of privatisation
of care. When care work is conducted on a for-prot basis, we encourage the work to be done
to as close to the bare minimum of standards as possible. I have worked in both the private and
public sectors - not in the care sector - but it is a simple fact that in a for-prot environment,
the bottom line is it. Everything that is done in such an environment is for prot; it has to be
because that is what the organisation is set up for. The public sector is a very dierent environ-
ment, where there is either a mandate or a job to do that is not driven by money. We have to get
our heads around that when we are thinking about the provision of care in this State.
2 July 2025
317
People who work in nursing homes around the country tell us about the chronic short sta-
ing, the lack of oversight and the lack of resourcing. These conditions are a recipe for disaster
for people living in nursing homes who are then vulnerable to that poor treatment. We did not
need and RTÉ programme to tell us this. Any healthcare assistant around the country could do
exactly that.
As this motion points out, 80% of nursing homes in the State are now in private hands.
Without addressing the failure of the State to provide nursing home care, to provide for safe
stang levels and to take responsibility for the care of older people, we will not see the change
that we need.
I have mentioned one piece of legislation in previous debates and I want to raise it again.
The Inspection of Places of Detention Bill has been delayed multiple times. It provides for
what many people have talked about here today, namely the unannounced visits. The Bill has
the remit and jurisdiction to potentially deal with nursing homes. I encourage the Government
to look at that as something that could bolster the remit of HIQA and give it the powers it needs.
We will be supporting this motion. I commend the work of the Labour Party on bringing it
forward. As with other Deputies, I share a real rejection of what the Government has put for-
ward as a countermotion, because it simply fails to recognise the urgency and the importance
of this issue.
02/07/2025O00400Deputy Charles Ward: I thank the Labour Party for putting forward this very important
motion on nursing homes. I support it and its calls to prioritise equality and safety in the care
of older people. Overhauling nursing homes is what we need to look at. As someone who
has worked on the ground and worked for the company involved in the documentary, I am not
surprised. To say that 80% of nursing homes are now in private hands and are prot driven is
beyond a joke at this stage. I have worked in nursing homes and I can safely say that every
aspect of those homes is prot driven. It goes from the food people are given to the deodorant
and the soap they use. It is a shocking indictment of society that everyone has to go around
their nursing home smelling the same and looking the same. If it comes to it, they have to buy
clothes for people. That is how bad it is. If their clothes are damaged, the nursing home may
not provide them with clothes. The person’s relatives might be in another part of the country.
That company in the documentary would not necessarily be just looking after old people. It
could be a mix of people in the home. It is prot driven. We need to emphasise that we have
lost humanity when prot comes before our elder citizens.
Like my colleagues, I found the “Prime Time Investigates” programme extremely dicult
to watch. In the documentary, we saw older people not being treated like humans. The docu-
mentary demonstrated consistent patterns of neglect and lack of care in nursing homes across
the country. It is deeply concerning. We have been getting phone calls over the past few weeks
about certain issues within private nursing homes all over the State. I was a healthcare worker
prior to being elected. I know exactly what is happening on the ground.
HIQA has an issue here. It is coming in and doing inspections after this is not good enough.
HIQA coming in is like the old analogy of locking the stable door after the horse has bolted. We
nd ourselves in a ridiculous situation. We are revisiting this 30 years after previous investiga-
tions and TV programmes. No lessons have been learned and prot is allowed to be the driver.
The average age of the population is now higher than it has ever been before. The number
Dáil Éireann
318
of people aged over 65 in Donegal has increased by 19% since 2016. We have to start properly
and publicly investigating care of our growing population. It is clear we can no longer rely on
private companies to deliver care. The current service providers are only motivated by prot,
which is evident in the constant cost-cutting measures that are used. We need serious invest-
ment into the creation of public nursing homes with community beds.
I support this motion’s call to ensure the national development plan includes a funded pro-
gramme to develop new, public, long-term residential care, through community nursing homes,
to meet the needs of our ageing population. We need to engage in long-term thinking and
strategic planning. People cannot be expected to rely on their families any more to take care of
them as they get older, given the number of young people who have been locked out of home
ownership and forced to emigrate. We need to ensure that we have enough residential homes
to cater for our ageing population and that these homes are well-staed, comfortable and safe.
I also highlight the fact that residential homes are not covered under the Government’s
defective concrete scheme. We know of a few residential homes in Donegal that are aected
by defective concrete. This must be taken into account. Families with loved ones in a nurs-
ing home have more than enough on their plate and they should not have to worry whether the
building a family member is residing in is safe or structurally sound. However, this is a worry
being forced on many family members in Donegal, on top of the worry about whether their
loved ones are being treated with the decency and respect they deserve. Some of these families
might have been forced to put their loved one into residential care because their home was un-
safe due to defective concrete. I know this for a fact. Mould is always an issue in such a home
and if someone living in it has respiratory problems, there is no choice as they have to be got
out of the house to prolong their life.
The defective concrete crisis has its tentacles in every aspect of daily life in Donegal. What
the Government is not seeing on the ground is that for people impacted by this crisis, it is a
constant presence in every aspect of our life, including in nursing homes and community cen-
tres. It goes right across the spectrum of every aspect of our lives. Crèches and schools are
also aected.
The Government underestimates just how much this crisis is a part of everyday life in Done-
gal. For example, there is an estate in Mountain Top in Donegal where every house in it has
defective concrete. There is a nursing home and an oce block at the entrance into this lovely
estate, which is no longer lovely as it is decaying, and both of them are defective. The families
of the residents in the nursing home are stressed and worried, but there is no scheme in place
for them.
I will return to the subject of nursing homes. I worked in a nursing home up to my election.
The sta in nursing homes are extremely caring people. There were a few bad people. Former
sta members called me to say they feel uneasy at work and that they are being watched. HIQA
can show up at 6 o’clock in the morning. It is meant to do that. However, HIQA is responsible
here too. If a member of sta is taking a resident, who is mobile, to bed, HIQA can watch ev-
ery aspect of that in the hallway but as soon as the sta member takes the resident into his or
her room and closes the door, HIQA is not allowed into the room. A HIQA inspector can only
observe sta and residents in public doorways. He or she cannot go into a room and watch a
member of sta put a resident to bed. That is wrong. We do not know if best practice is being
taught. If a resident is being put in a hoist, if the door to the bedroom is closed then the HIQA
inspector cannot see him or her because they are in the hallway.
2 July 2025
319
I will give another example while I am at it. The residential place where I was working is a
high-security locked unit. It is a circular building with a walkway around it and rooms o the
walkway. People were in sections and sta looked after a section. HIQA decided that was not
right. It said we should open up the whole place and let people wander around. Stang levels
were at a bare minimum. We saw the fall rate and transfers to hospital go through the roof.
The decision was made by a HIQA inspector as to what should happen, so what worked for the
previous 15 or 16 years was discontinued and we went on a dierent route. It is unacceptable
that residents are left in dangerous situations because of sta shortages, which is an everyday
occurrence.
One can see the faults when one has one’s feet on the ground. HIQA must also take respon-
sibility and look at the way things are done. It is ne to have 6 a.m. inspections, but let us put
it where there is best practice. For example, when people can train online as a healthcare as-
sistant at FETAC level 5. They can spend €1,800 on it, walk into a nursing home and get work
experience and also get a job. Whereas, I trained for two years’ part time to up my skills with
Elspeth Vaughan in the ETB, one of the best training courses one could get. We did everything
to a very high standard. When someone with this standard of qualication goes into a private
nursing home, straight away he or she gets calls from the HSE with oers to join it and promises
to give us this or that. I would not be moved. I worked for the minimum wage, but I would not
be moved because I cared for the people. That is what is missing. The fact is that we no longer
care for the people we look after. It is prot driven. We need to get back to a place where the
elderly people are the most important ones.
02/07/2025P00200Deputy Michael Collins: I thank the Labour Party for bringing forward this very impor-
tant motion today. I am sure there is not one person in the Dáil who saw the documentary who
was not disgusted by the way our elderly were being treated. If big businesses are treating our
elderly in such a terrible way, we must ensure we do all we can so that this does not continue.
That said, we cannot tar everybody with the one brush because there are some great nursing
homes. We must make sure the bad are weeded out but the good are secured and looked after.
I meet Tadhg Daly from Nursing Homes Ireland fairly often and we discuss the lack of fund-
ing. I have gone to a lot of nursing homes. They tell me straight that there is a massive lack of
funding.
We all know the great community hospitals that are out there that are funded to within an
inch of their lives. If HIQA walks in the door and improvements have to be made, they are
funded by the State. The situation with nursing homes is that if HIQA walks in the door and
says improvements must be made, the funding must come out of their coers. I am very seri-
ously concerned because while nursing home sta and management are doing everything they
can to make sure everything is right, it is impossible to do that if the budget is tightened beyond
belief. That is the situation here and the Government have let things slip.
I also have very serious concerns about care of the elderly going forward as the elderly
population is rising. I know a lot of the hospitals in my constituency, and I never heard of an
extension being proposed for any one of them. When I ring to inquire about bringing in a pa-
tient I am told, for example, that 15 or 20 people are on the waiting list and the person does not
have a hope of getting in there. They might pass away before they get the chance.
One stunning hospital we have is in Schull. I would be delighted if the Minister were to get
a chance to come and see it because it is a perfect example of what a community hospital should
Dáil Éireann
320
be. In fairness, there are other similar places throughout the country. The hospital has 21 beds.
As far as I know, there were 21 beds there 100 years ago. Something has got to change. Some-
body must have the vision to say the hospital in Schull and in other places need an extension of
25 or 30 beds, so that people will have a home if they need it. That is a very big issue for me.
I also talk about Aperee Living nursing home, which had serious issues some two years
ago. We lost the facility in Belgooley. At that time, I said in the Dáil that the nursing home
in Belgooley should be taken over by the State because there were enough people in need of
a nursing home. One can imagine old people losing their nursing home and having the living
daylights frightened out of them, yet nobody stepped in. The nursing home was let go. It was
the same with Aperee Living in Bantry and the nursing homes in Conna in Fermoy and in the
Mallow area. They all went into liquidation. People are living in fear that they are going to
lose their home, which is basically what can happen. The State must have a mechanism to step
in, as outlined in the motion, and to take over the running of a nursing home if it is badly run
or someone has been found guilty of serious infringements. That is the road we must travel.
It did not happen in Belgooley and the patients were herded out like cattle. They were shoved
everywhere and anywhere. There was no respect shown. They were told a nursing home would
be found and that if they did not take it, they should be taken home. That is not good enough.
We need to wake up and understand how to respect our elderly. If the State had stepped in and
put the money into that nursing home that it needed, and that the owners did not seem to have
or did not want to invest - I did not know what was going on there - it could have taken up to 80
people. It could have taken pressure o nursing homes in west Cork.
Dementia units are also badly needed. We need to invest and ensure there are more carers
and that there is not a means tested for carers. We need to invest in home help. However, the
biggest problem I have with home help, which keeps people at home - we do not need people
going into nursing homes every day of the week - is many of the older home helps are walk-
ing away. They were fantastic and mainly women. The problem is they have to carry around
tablets and computers to do their job. That is not what they should be doing. They should be in
the house looking after the patient. Unfortunately, it has gone to another level which they might
not be capable of reaching but they certainly were the world’s best at looking after the elderly
person in the home. Unfortunately, I am hearing of private companies being brought in because
sta cannot be found as they are walking away. They were willing to stay had they been al-
lowed to work rather than going home to spend an hour tapping on a tablet or on a computer,
sorting things out. Their work was on the ground; delivering for and looking after people. That
is the area the Minister of State needs to return to as well as carers and the means tests. They
are important areas.
The recent increase in the means test for carers is a positive step. It is imperative that the
means test is completely abolished to better support families to care for their elderly parents at
home. Additionally, there is a critical need to expand the availability of home help services.
One of the most pressing issues is the insucient provision of home help for individuals tran-
sitioning from hospital care. This shortage often results in elderly patients being placed in
nursing homes. By signicantly increasing home help services, we can reduce the necessity
for sending our elderly population to nursing homes, thereby allowing them to remain in the
comfort of their own homes.
Last week in the Dáil, we in Independent Ireland brought forward a motion with 23 points
on how to x the housing crisis. While making my contribution on it, I showed those in the
Chamber a picture of Jennifer Marley who is 88 years of age. She was becoming homeless.
2 July 2025
321
She had no home. Her next move, unfortunately, was to a nursing home. She did not need a
nursing home as she lived independently. There is no social housing in west Cork. I have been
on choice-based lettings, CBL, for the past ten weeks and I believe once in ten weeks a couple
of houses came up in west Cork. That is an astonishing situation west Cork nds itself in.
There are no council houses available. A local housing body - the Government needs to invest
money in housing bodies - that had received money from the State and had built a number of
houses, thankfully, stepped in and looked after that lovely lady, and deservedly so. The prob-
lem is I am in the same situation this week. I am holding up another picture of a 77-year-old
man, Gus Dempsey, who asked me to do this. He is homeless as of today. His house burned
down six months ago. A neighbour gave him a house to move into but he is now in a situation
where he has no home tonight. He does not know if he will have to sleep on the street. His
neighbour was brilliant and kind but told him his family was coming home and he had to leave
by a certain date. The man is in a desperate situation. Will he end up in a nursing home? This
is the crisis we have in this country. Our elderly people are being abused one way or another.
We have completely taken our eye o the ball in respect of their future and what will happen
in this country.
If these people become homeless, will they be rammed into a nursing home when they do
not need to be in one? They need a home they can call their own. It is a simple thing. I thank all
the housing bodies. I am involved in two of them and we have approximately 20 to 25 people
housed in 16 houses in Schull and Goleen. They are absolutely thrilled. They have all the ser-
vices they need at their door. The medical centre is right beside them. We opened 12 of these
houses recently. This is a fantastic service and we need to spend more time looking at that.
The future is bleak for a person who is elderly. It is bleak right now but what will it be like
in ten years’ time? There is no planning here and I said that to the Minister of State. I have not
heard of any planning permission from any community hospital or nursing home in the whole
of County Cork for an extension of rooms. We need to look at this issue and not have someone
like Gus Dempsey at 77 years of age worrying whether he is going to sleep in Ballinspittle on
the side of the road, on the street or under a bus shelter. That is a situation we nd ourselves in
between last week and this week with two dierent people aged 88 and 77. We resolved the 88
year old’s situation and my oce is frantically trying to resolve that of the 77-year-old. Any
help the Minister of State can give would be greatly appreciated.
We need to look to the future, which is not happening. The fair deal scheme is an unfair
deal for farmers in regard to nursing homes. The promises made here over a number of years
are being broken. I have two or three pages on the areas of unfairness. If one is leasing land,
one is murdered and caught in a system that is part of the assessment.
I know time is tight. I am very passionate about certain areas here. I do not want to tar
everyone with the same brush. The community hospitals and nursing homes I know of are run-
ning fantastically and are doing great work. It is upsetting for many of them and for their sta
to think the nger is pointing at them when it should not be.
02/07/2025Q00200Deputy Mattie McGrath: This is a timely and sensitive motion. The programme on RTÉ
shocked everybody. Many people knew of the many changes in nursing care and the methods
of care in our nursing homes. I salute the many hundreds of small nursing homes and some
quite big ones in Tipperary, in particular St. Martha’s and Bramleigh Lodge in Cashel and the
many others I could name. They do an excellent job but they are under erce pressure. There
is discrimination against them.
Dáil Éireann
322
The HSE-owned nursing homes have bigger subventions than the small private nursing
homes. We have commodied healthcare and nursing care. I have seen that with my own
two eyes. We were waiting on a 60-bed HSE nursing unit in Cashel at St. Patrick’s Hospital.
Former Deputy, Martin Browne, and I were told at a meeting a year and a half ago that site
was not suitable. I do not know why it took so long to come up with that. We are now looking
for another site for a 60-bed unit. We should look at the pressure that would take o nursing
homes and people who need nursing care. I salute the nurses, attendants and management of
community and small family-run nursing homes and some of the bigger ones as well. I visit
them quite often and the standard of care is very good. Where there is wrongdoing and abuse
taking place not only the management but the persons perpetrating it should be prosecuted. It
is elder abuse of the worst kind.
Tipperary used to have Tipperary District Hospital and St. Brigid’s in Carrick-on-Suir until
two years ago when it was unceremoniously closed. It was taken over during Covid mar dhea
before it was closed down. It had 15 beds and three lovely hospice suites. It was a very func-
tional and practical place and should be reopened. The people of south-east Tipperary, east Wa-
terford and south Kilkenny all used it. It had excellent management and sta. As for St. There-
sa’s in Clogheen, I cannot say enough about it. It was a district hospital and has been expanded
and upgraded. It has two fabulous hospice suites where many people go at the end of life and
have dignity. Families are also looked after there. It is under the care of matron Anne Walsh,
director and manager, and the excellent sta. I have many friends and relations, including my
own mother, who were there. They got the best of care and treatment. That model works rather
than the model of allowing big conglomerates to expand and expand at the expense of others.
A lot of blame rests with HIQA as well. I remember a lovely nursing home in Carrick-on-
Suir when I came in here rst in 2007. It was a at building with no steps. The owner-manager
did her best but HIQA was down on her like a tonne of bricks even though another nursing
home was built in the same town and was never visited. I heard reports again this morning that
HIQA is saying it does not have the power to deal with bigger companies and conglomerates.
It must have the power to do so. It is the same care and people need to be looked after. What
did it do to that woman? It kept criticising this, that and the other and began restricting the
number of beds. It eventually closed six beds. When she needed to get a loan from the bank to
upgrade the nursing home to what HIQA wanted, the books did not add up because of the clo-
sures. HIQA closed the nursing home by stealth. It forced her to close. Lo and behold one day
two inspectors took a tour and had dinner to taste the food and said the food was quite bland. I
do not know what they expected. Was it the Gresham Hotel they were going to or some place?
The food was excellent, but that nursing home is no longer in business. It was unceremoni-
ously closed down by HIQA, which was an utter disgrace. I raised it in this House at the time.
Now HIQA seems not to be able to touch these big sacred cows. We are told it does not have
the power. If it has the power to do it with a small nursing home, why should it not have the
same power for these? We are talking about human beings; individuals who are not able to be
at home, where they would prefer to be, and who need care. We are all facing that.
I remember when my kids were small, buying a sticker for the rear window of my car that
said “Be nice to your children. They pick your nursing home”. That sticker was there for
many people. Unfortunately, there is not much choice nowadays, but speaking for myself, I am
heading to that period of life. It is sad we have commodied this to such an extent. As I said,
we are talking about people, human beings. Our parents, grandparents, friends and neighbours
deserve respect. HIQA is not t for purpose. It should be disbanded, but above all it should be
2 July 2025
323
made to account for why it can close small nursing homes while allowing the conglomerates to
do what they like.
02/07/2025R00200Deputy Danny Healy-Rae: First, I thank the Labour Party for giving us the opportunity to
talk about this important topic.
It is an emotive subject when families have to make the decision to put someone into a nurs-
ing home. I vividly remember when my father was not great and a decision had to be made. I
am glad we were able to keep him in his own home with Kathleen Fitzgerald. I thank all the
people, including Noreen Sullivan, Jackie Ahern and William Leary. I will leave people out
and I am sad about that but I thank all the people who helped him in his nal days. He died in
Tralee hospital and I thank the sta there and the sta in Killarney district hospital for the great
attention and care they gave him every hour and day he was there. They are wonderful people
and we want to thank them. We will never forget them.
He said a nursing home was kind of a departure lounge and that when people go into one,
there is not much hope of coming out again. That was one of the things he felt and said. For
many people, when they are not improving, not getting better but getting worse, families have
to make the decision. Many people keep their loved ones at home and they should get more
help to do so. The Denmark model is that there are hardly any nursing homes in Denmark. We
should strive to better our homecare system and it would save us a lot of money.
At present, I am hurt by what we saw on RTÉ. There are a lot of great nursing homes,
including family-run nursing homes. We have them in Kenmare, Killarney and other places.
We are lucky enough in Kerry that we did not have them, but I worry about the big business
companies that own a number of nursing homes. They have a dierent model. They have to
make the thing pay. They are not like Mother Teresa. I worry about the system where public
nursing homes are getting more funding than private nursing homes. It costs the same to oper-
ate the bed or room. They should get the same funding. There should be no excuse at any time
to mistreat or treat badly elderly people. They are the people who got us to where we are today,
people who strived day in and day out to rear families, keep employees going, provide homes
for their families and so forth. Surely they deserve the Government’s best to ensure they are
properly looked after by carers and home helps.
There is another dimension that is valuable and is not appreciated enough. It is where
people come to sleep with elderly people, not in the beds with them, but in the house to be there
for the whole long night and stay until the morning. They should be rewarded better than they
are. Families have to pay for that themselves. The State should intervene. We are talking about
people who are trying to stay in their homes for as long as possible.
We should strive to develop a system like the model in Denmark, where people are looked
after in their homes. We see too often when people are awarded home help - on leaving the
hospital, they are told they qualify for home help - that then there is no home help available.
The sta are not to be found. That is an awful time for families. The help should be there the
minute they land at home or the following days. They should not have to wait. What happens
in a lot of cases is that these people have to return to hospital. That is another reason our beds
are full in our hospitals. That happens because the home helps are not in place and it is terrible.
One of the reasons I decided to support the Government is that it said it would get rid of the
means test. I am looking forward to that and to helping the carers of Ireland, because they are
Dáil Éireann
324
the massive people who do Trojan work-----
02/07/2025R00300An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Mairéad Farrell): Go raibh maith agat.
02/07/2025R00400Deputy Danny Healy-Rae: -----to keep people-----
02/07/2025R00500An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Mairéad Farrell): Go raibh maith agat, a Theach-
ta. Your time is up.
02/07/2025R00600Deputy Danny Healy-Rae: -----looked after. All right. I am sorry.
02/07/2025R00700Minister for Health (Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill): I thank Deputy Healy-Rae for
his comments on abolishing the means test for carers. We are systematically trying to get to the
point where it has been abolished. I recognise the changes that have been made because what
we want to see, as the Deputy said, is people staying in their own homes for as long as possible
for their dignity, comfort and connection with their families and because that is the model we
want to have. There is a substantial body of work on that, which the Minister of State, Deputy
O’Donnell is leading. I thank him for his work on that.
This is an exceptionally important time to discuss this issue again in the House, recognising
our collective focus on making sure that people can stay at home for as long as possible, that
those who are in nursing homes are safe and have dignity, and that we see a signicant change
to what we saw in recent weeks. I thank the Labour Party for bringing forward this motion to
give us the opportunity to discuss it. To clarify, in opposing the motion, we do not claim there
are no challenges in the sector or anything of the kind, but rather we are taking the opportunity
to set out the pathway for which we should be held to account in the next number of years.
It is fair to recognise that nursing homes in the public, private and voluntary sectors play a
critical role and will retain a critical place in the provision of long-term care and other services.
They will remain a vital part of the continuum of care into the future and we have to make sure
all the other services are in place so that it is an appropriate part and not an over-indexed part of
the continuum of care for older people.
I also need to acknowledge the “RTÉ Investigates” programme that was broadcast on 4
June. I echo the words of the Minister of State with responsibility for older people, Deputy
O’Donnell, by stating in the strongest terms possible that every nursing home resident deserves
and should expect the highest standards of care and dignity at all times. Poor care, mistreat-
ment, neglect or any other form of abuse of any person living in a long-term residential care
centre is completely unacceptable and cannot be tolerated, nor can it be tolerated in any other
setting.
I do not wish to repeat what he said, but I acknowledge that in his opening speech the Minis-
ter of State outlined a range of actions the Government is taking, which we hope will contribute
signicantly to improving the nursing home sector and care of older people. I thank him for his
always forensic approach to the data he has and for his interrogation of what he believes needs
to be done. I have witnessed and, I hope, supported him in that forensic analysis with HIQA
and others about the work done to date and what is yet to be done. A t-for-purpose regulatory
regime for the sector is of paramount importance. As the national independent regulator for
nursing homes, HIQA and the oce of the chief inspector need to use all the powers available
to them and to communicate with us about how we can enhance and develop those powers.
The Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, outlined that he and I have met HIQA a number of
2 July 2025
325
times in recent weeks to try to further those ends. HIQA has acknowledged the importance of
examining its processes and methodology and will undertake a review of the eectiveness of
the chief inspector’s inspection and monitoring processes.
One of the things the Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, and I identied in particular is
the need for more real-time reporting of how that may be done. The update must also be pro-
vided in March, for example, if a report is published in March for an inspection concluded in
October. There should be a follow-up measure to check what may be outstanding at that point.
I would also expect the same in respect of hospital inspections, a number of which I reviewed
this week. Where there are points that need to be followed up, I would prefer to have a real-
time assessment of those. We have very strong condence in HIQA, notwithstanding what has
happened over the last number of weeks, because of its institutional experience and the role it
has played to date. It is always going to be the case in any developed liberal democracy that
we have to assess strongly the institutions we have, even those that have worked very well, and
continue to work to improve them, particularly as the circumstances around them change. That
is especially the case in respect of the ownership of nursing homes and how that has evolved
over the last period.
The Government is fully committed to introducing an adult safeguarding policy for the
health and social care sector, which will provide a framework for strengthening safeguards
across all private, public and voluntary services. The policy is at an advanced stage and our in-
tention is to bring it to the Government as a matter of priority. My hope is that would be before
the August break. To update the House, the Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, and I met
the Law Reform Commission in respect of that yesterday and we looked at some of the detail,
thinking and analysis that went into its report as it considered various models of how to get to
the point of achieving a policy that is going to be eective, independent and capable of being
introduced quickly. We had a good opportunity to tease through some of those issues. I respect
the work of the Law Reform Commission, the very considerable eort it has put into develop-
ing its policy and the draft Bills it has produced. The Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, and
I had a good opportunity yesterday and we will reect on that as I bring the policy direction to
the Government over the next number of weeks.
The policy will set out, at a high level, proposed new legislative provisions for the sector.
It will also set out a wide-ranging programme of non-legislative measures across our sector to
achieve a culture of safeguarding that is fostered and embedded at all levels. More broadly, it
is important to reiterate that investing in services for older people is a Government priority and
has been. There has been an increase of approximately €1 billion in funding for services for
older people since 2020. This year alone has seen an increase of approximately €350 million on
the amount secured under budget 2024, bringing the total gure to almost €3 billion in budget
2025. A gure means nothing without a context but, of course, that is €3 billion out of an over-
all budget of €25 billion. There is signicant investment but that does not mean we do not need
to continue to do better, particularly at a time when there is a growing and ageing population.
Deputies are already familiar with the measures in the nursing home support scheme known as
fair deal. That fair deal scheme will receive Government funding of in excess of €1.2 billion
this year, and the programme for Government commits to strengthening the nursing home sec-
tor by increasing funding for fair deal. It is important that we continue to work on that.
The programme for Government also commits to building more public nursing home beds
and that is an absolute priority for this Government. The 2025 programme for Government is, I
hope, dedicated, among other things, to the vision of creating a caring society, a compassionate
Dáil Éireann
326
State and one that is funded to be able to do those dierent things. We are trying to advance
a range of actions that will genuinely advance the social care model, and support older people
to live a full and independent life in their own homes and communities with appropriate wrap-
around supports.
Another element of that, which is so important, is our increasing use of virtual technology
in the healthcare sector more broadly to enable people to get appropriate care as close to home
as possible, always with a view to keeping people in their own homes and spaces for as long as
possible, recognising all of the dierent challenges that people have. While our commitments
in respect of Meals on Wheels, nursing homes and a range of dierent issues are challenging,
I believe they are achievable but I have to reiterate to the House the scale of the demographic
challenge that is ahead. We are going to have to think about and work together on it in every
possible way.
Our population is growing rapidly and it is ageing. That is an extremely good thing. It is
fantastic that people are living longer lives in Ireland and that our life expectancy is increasing
but it will bring a dierent challenge for all of us here to be able to support and represent people
in an appropriate way. We will have to recognise that people are going to be diagnosed with
more illnesses as they age. Again, this is a good thing, as opposed to the alternative. Never-
theless, the intersection of those illnesses with where they live and how they are supported is
something we are going to have to concentrate our minds on, while making sure we are using
every lever in both the healthcare and social care sectors to support people at home. That is a
good thing for people’s dignity and for the economics of supporting people, which must also
be there. Very happily, these things coincide. I look forward, over the period of this Dáil, to
working with all Deputies to try to achieve those dierent goals.
In conclusion, let me go back to the essence and purpose of this debate, which is prompted
by the desperate and dreadful scenes we witnessed in the recent RTÉ programme, which high-
lighted appalling deciencies in care and with respect to people’s dignity in some long-term
residential care settings in Ireland. Of course, primary responsibility absolutely lies with the
individuals who committed those actions, and the organisations that worked in a way that en-
abled or facilitated them, or did not intervene or address them. It is also the case that we have
to improve HIQA’s processes and standards but we must never lose sight of the fact that every-
body has a choice about how they turn up to work and how they treat people on a day-to-day
basis. Those choices were very wrong in every instance we saw on that RTÉ show. It is simply
unacceptable and I think we are absolutely unanimous in our perspective on that.
The Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, and I have a range of work to do, on which we
will continually update Deputies, and they will hold us to account on that. I thank Deputies for
the opportunity to discuss this today.
02/07/2025S00200Deputy Duncan Smith: Two weeks before the “RTÉ Investigates” programme, a man in
his 80s came to my clinic. He makes a bare minimum of 14 trips a week to the nursing home
in which his wife is living. He visits in the morning to make sure his wife’s day can begin with
care, dignity and love. It is not the nursing home’s job to provide love but it is its job to provide
care and dignity. He goes again at night to make sure her day ends with care and dignity. He
visits a number of additional times during the week when his children cannot make the trip. He
stopped short of saying there was abuse but what there is in that nursing home is neglect. There
is neglect because there are not enough sta, and the sta are not there to provide the work that
is needed to care for his wife. He is in his 80s; his wife is older, she is unwell and she is being
2 July 2025
327
let down by this system.
This system for older people and their care is almost completely broken. There are elements
performing better than others. One element that is performing better and has done for the last
number of years, though not perfectly, are our HSE-run and publicly owned and funded care
homes. We need to be reinvesting in a public model of care. We need to be taking over private
homes such as the 27 Emeis nursing homes that are performing so poorly.
What these private nursing home conglomerates will welcome is our money. They will
welcome the Minister’s money and the State’s money but what they will not welcome is trade
unions. They are not welcome. They will not be allowed into their facilities to organise their
sta to ensure there are safe stang levels, proper pay and proper terms and conditions. I
thought Deputy Charles Ward’s contribution as a former worker in this sector was really inter-
esting. He highlighted the tensions between private and public stang and how the HSE, when
it nds out that a sta member is performing well and has a good reputation in a private nursing
home, will go in and hire them. More often than not, that worker, for understandable reasons
such as pay, pension and standards of care, will move to the HSE. Deputy Ward mentioned
his own case, where he would not be moved because he cared for and was committed to his
residents.
This model is broken. I reject the fact that the Minister felt she needed to put a counter-
motion down in order to set out a charter by which she would measure her own progress. As
Minister, she has many opportunities to do this. She should be supporting our motion and what
Deputies Sherlock and Wall, on behalf of the Labour Party, have put forward here today. We
will continue on this. It may not be on the front pages of the newspapers every day anymore
but it will be front and centre of what the Labour Party will be pursuing in the health and care
agenda for the lifetime of this Dáil and beyond.
02/07/2025S00300Deputy Conor Sheehan: My grandad was actually in one of these aected nursing homes
in 2024.
12 o’clock
The Minister of State, Deputy O’Donnell, would know this nursing home very well. It
backs onto our constituency. My grandad was there for over a week when he was discharged
from hospital. He said the sta were lovely, and they were, but there were not enough of them
evidently. He was often left to go to the toilet on his own. My mum, who is his primary carer,
said that when she collected him from the nursing home, the main thing that she took away from
it was that he was not washed at all while he was there. He had been there for over a week.
The creeping privatisation of elder care, the warehousing of people and the complete dis-
regard for their basic human rights is one of the worst things that we have done in this country.
We have the most private nursing home beds in Europe. In 1990, public nursing homes pro-
vided nearly 50% of all beds. By 2023, that had plummeted to 16%.
My sister is a nurse. While in college, she worked in many private nursing homes as a
healthcare assistant. I remember vividly - it has never left me - her saying to me once that, dur-
ing the pandemic, she would not have been shocked if nearly every single patient in a private
for-prot nursing home in which she worked had died of Covid-19, such was the shortage of
sta and the lack of care. We know the dierence a good, well-run public nursing home makes
to a community. In our own city, we have the recently redeveloped and enlarged 75-bed St.
Dáil Éireann
328
Camillus’s nursing home. This was announced in 2015 by the then Government, representing
€450 million of a capital injection into publicly owned nursing homes. Since 2009, we have
spent €15 billion subsidising private for-prot nursing homes through the fair deal scheme.
Much of that money would have been better spent on investing in building capacity in the pub-
lic system. Public nursing homes have higher stang levels and a lower turnover of sta and
are generally better run.
I feel that HIQA is failing people here. It is nothing really but a report-writing, box-ticking
entity. It is time now for the State to step in and to step up where these private nursing home
providers are failing. We need to pass adult safeguarding legislation as a matter of urgency.
We have the template. The Law Reform Commission has drafted two Bills. We need to do this
before the summer.
02/07/2025T00200An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy Bacik will appreciate that it is time for Leaders’ Questions.
02/07/2025T00300Deputy Ivana Bacik: I thank all those who spoke in support of our Labour motion on nurs-
ing homes and care. I thank in particular my colleagues Deputies Marie Sherlock and Mark
Wall for leading on this motion. We in the Labour Party have put this forward with one key
purpose, namely, to ensure dignity for those of our citizens who are ageing. Everyone in Ire-
land should be supported to age with dignity. We have set out a series of constructive steps to
achieve that dignity that we speak about. In particular, we speak about three things: we want
to see a breaking of the hold of big business on the nursing home sector; we want to empower
HIQA and ensure minimum standards of care are required in the sector; and we want to see the
rapid passage of long-promised adult safeguarding legislation.
Of course, home care should be the gold standard. Everyone wants to be supported in his
or her home. However, nursing homes will always be needed when a higher level of care is
required. Sadly, we know from Aoife Hegarty and her excellent team in RTÉ that abuse and
neglect across nursing homes is all too often the case for our older citizens. This is not limited
to Emeis nursing homes, albeit we saw some egregious examples of abuse and neglect. In our
motion, we call for these nursing homes to be taken over by the State. We stand by that.
According to those who work in private nursing homes, we see denials of dignity every day.
One care worker spoke to me about the cheapest of facilities and materials, the limits on num-
bers of sta and no human touch in the care provided. What is the root cause of this? It is due
to the for-prot motive that unfortunately lies at the base of our nursing home sector.
Our motion seeks to tackle what is a systemic ageism that has allowed this creeping priva-
tisation, this commodication of care. That has resulted in the diminution of standards and in
the sort of neglect that we have seen all too often. We need to ensure that the constructive steps
we have outlined are now taken by the Government with urgency so that we can see a return to
the sort of dignity that our older citizens expect and need. We must ensure older persons have
a voice in the process. That is why we have placed an emphasis on the need for the Govern-
ment to take the steps that Safeguarding Ireland and the Law Reform Commission have set
out so clearly. I welcome the Minister’s indication that the Government will bring forward the
safeguarding legislation before the August break. I very much hope she will. We will certainly
welcome and support that if it is done. This is about ensuring a reset of our care model, ensur-
ing that we move from commodication to compassion and from the disrespect we are currently
seeing across the system to a model where the dignity of our older citizens is paramount and
nobody has to suer the awful indignities that we saw far too many people suering in those
2 July 2025
329
nursing homes that were under the spotlight in the RTÉ programme.
We will work with the Minister on this. We are very disappointed at the amendment. We
believe the Minister could have supported our motion, which is a constructive one. We think
the amendment does nothing to reassure older people and their families that this Government
is going to tackle the scandal in nursing homes with the urgency it requires. The amendment is
derisory and we ask the Minister to withdraw it and enable us to unite across this House in the
support of our older persons and dignity in older age.
Amendment put.
02/07/2025T00500An Ceann Comhairle: In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed
until the weekly division time this evening.
02/07/2025T00600Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders’ Questions
02/07/2025T00700An Ceann Comhairle: I apologise to the leaders for us running late. On that basis, a prec-
edent is not being set by allowing the Labour Party to conclude its motion. However, will try
to be on time for the future.
02/07/2025T00800Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: Before I begin, I want to say how very sorry I am to hear of
the death of Brother Kevin Crowley. I oer condolences to everybody who loved him. Brother
Kevin’s work at the Capuchin Day Centre is the stu of legend. He really was a champion for
the poor and for everyone who fell on hard times, without judgment and without exception. He
lived for others and he absolutely changed lives. We will all feel his loss very greatly. Ireland
has lost a great son. Indeed, his beloved Cork has lost a true legend. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a
anam dílis.
Yesterday, I was contacted by a mother at her wits’ end. She has two daughters in col-
lege. She told me that she and her husband were just about able to cover the costs of that. She
talked about the pressure they were under to pay for the accommodation. She likened it to a
second mortgage, so this mother could not believe her ears when the Minister, Deputy Law-
less, announced that the Government would hike up student fees by €1,000. She asked where
in the name of God did the Government think she and her husband would nd an extra €2,000.
Thousands of students and their parents are in the same position with the worry, stress and un-
certainty of having to come up with that money.
Yesterday, my colleague An Teachta Pearse Doherty twice asked the Minister a very simple
question about what students and their families would be asked to pay. Will it be €2,000 or
€3,000? Twice, the Minister refused to answer. When asked by reporters yesterday whether
a fee hike was coming, Micheál Martin was dismissive. He talked about budgeting processes
instead of being upfront about the bills students and their parents would face in a few weeks.
He was clear on one thing, namely, that there would be no cost-of-living package. Obviously,
the fees are going up.
The Tánaiste, Simon Harris, could not have been more cavalier. He said that if he was the
parent of a child going to college today, he would do what happened last year, the year before
and the year before that. He would pay in instalments and see where the budget brought us to.
How out of touch can you get? We are not talking about a few quid here. We are talking about
Dáil Éireann
330
€1,000 per student. That is a lot of money for families. Parents cannot take a wait-and-see
approach. They and students need to know now what they will be paying. The Government is
making the choice to hike student fees at a time when working people and families are under
pressure with soaring prices, hit left, right and centre with increases in the cost of food, energy
bills, childcare, petrol, diesel and, as the Government well knows, rent. Prices are through the
roof, yet now the Government wants to add a €1,000 hike in college fees into the mix. That is
the ippant and casual attitude of a Government that has no problem reinstating big pay pack-
ages for top-brass executives at bailed-out banks or doling out cushy pay increases for its record
number of Ministers of State, but pleads the poor mouth when it comes to students and their
families. It is a tale as old as time when it comes to Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael.
Caithdh an Rialtas a bheith ionraic le mic léinn agus lena dteaghlaigh. Cad a bheidh mar
tháille coláiste acu i mí Mheán Fómhair? An mbeidh costas €2,000 nó €3,000 air?
The Minister needs to be upfront with students and their families. Dancing on the head of a
pin, dodging and refusing to give a straight answer is, frankly, not acceptable. I will again ask
the straightforward question and I would like an answer, please. When students are paying their
fees for the 2025-26 academic year, will the cost be €2,000 or €3,000?
02/07/2025U00200Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitali-
sation (Deputy Jack Chambers): I thank the Deputy for her question. I rst want to echo what
she said about Brother Crowley. Ireland has lost a wonderful person, someone who brought
incredible care, humility and service to support the most vulnerable in our country. We thank
him for his tireless work. May he rest in peace. I oer condolences to all of his family.
In response to the Deputy’s question, I acknowledge there is still pressure in the daily lives
of many families and costs are still high. What we said at the time of the formation of this
Government was that, as part of the process around budget 2026, changes would be made in a
sustained and permanent way. That covers all policy areas across government. In the context
of further and higher education, the Minister, Deputy James Lawless, has engaged, and will
continue to engage, with students and the stakeholders in that sector. That will form the basis
of the options paper on the cost of education, which will inform his work and the negotiation
as part of budget 2026. That specic detail will inform him about what is possible and how he
wants to prioritise the dierent measures that can be taken on a permanent and sustained basis.
The Deputy referenced the measures that were taken last year or the previous year. Those
measures were taken on a one-o temporary basis as part of a cost-of-living package. We are
approaching budget 2026 by trying to take measures that can be made on a permanent basis.
Work around that is happening across the Government, with dierent Ministers setting out their
priorities in the context of the budget negotiation process. I will be engaging with the Minister,
Deputy Lawless, in that context following the summer economic statement and the publication
of the national development plan.
One element of the cost for students is the student contribution fee, but other elements can
help the aordability for students. Those include the grants from Student Universal Support
Ireland, SUSI, income thresholds and reckonable income when it comes to the wider grant
system we have across the further and higher education sector. The work the Minister is doing
now in developing the options paper on the cost of education and considering what are the best
measures he can take in the context of budget 2026 to support students and households will
form the basis of his discussions on the budget.
2 July 2025
331
We have said that the work over the coming weeks will inform the overall allocation, which
will be made available in the context of current expenditure. However, we have had a series of
interventions over recent years. The average rate of expenditure increase has been 9% in recent
years. We have uncertainty around us and need to be careful about the broader economic and
budgetary context. That is why we are undertaking careful work within the Government to set
out what is possible in terms of the interplay between current and capital expenditure and the
changes we will make from a tax perspective.
As a Government, we are saying that the measures we will take for 2026 and onwards will
be taken in a budgetary context. We are not taking ad hoc decisions in early July when there
is a process to be undertaken. That goes for all my Government colleagues, across the board.
We are cognisant of the pressures that families face, including in respect of third level fees
but also in respect of the cost of education at primary and secondary levels, the continuing cost
of childcare and the cost of a whole range of services. We want to strengthen public services
and make them more aordable. That is the medium-term expenditure framework that we will
set out in the coming weeks. That will form the basis of the broader negotiation.
02/07/2025U00300Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: The Minister said a lot there but did not answer the ques-
tion. He is the Minister for public expenditure and this is a straightforward question. Will the
cost be €2,000 or €3,000? On the basis of what he is saying and according to the logic of his
presentation, I assume the cost will be €3,000. The Minister, Deputy Lawless, has announced
an increase in student fees to €3,000. The Minister, Deputy Chambers, needs to stand up and
conrm that. People are waiting for conrmation. Will it be €3,000? People have to budget
for that. They cannot just produce it out of thin air.
The kind of logic presented by the Minister strikes me as particularly perverse. In order to
bring down the cost of education, the Government is going to hike the cost of student fees. That
makes no sense. What does the Government have against students?
02/07/2025U00400An Ceann Comhairle: Thank you, Deputy.
02/07/2025U00500Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: The Government is going to hike up the cost of their rent-
----
02/07/2025U00600An Ceann Comhairle: Thank you, Deputy McDonald.
02/07/2025U00700Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: -----and is now going to hike up their fees,-----
02/07/2025U00800An Ceann Comhairle: Please, Deputy, time is up.
02/07/2025U00900Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: -----but the Minister does not even have the decency to be
clear about it.
02/07/2025U01000An Ceann Comhairle: The Minister to respond.
02/07/2025U01100Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: I ask the Minister to conrm-----
02/07/2025U01200An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy, please, you are way over time.
02/07/2025U01300Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: -----if students will pay €2,000 or €3,000.
02/07/2025U01400Deputy Jack Chambers: What I have said very clearly is that the outlook will be informed
Dáil Éireann
332
by what we agree as part of budget 2026. This is the hypocrisy of Sinn Féin when it comes to
third level fees. In the North, the then Minister, Caoimhe Archibald, was not at the time ruling
out hikes in student fees.
02/07/2025U01500Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: There are no increases in the North.
02/07/2025U01600Deputy Jack Chambers: She then said that she had to work within the context of the nan-
cial position. It is the same for this Government when it comes to budget 2026.
02/07/2025U01700Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: Will it be €2,000 or €3,000?
02/07/2025U01800Deputy Jack Chambers: When it comes to all policy-----
02/07/2025U01900Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: Jesus, surely the Minister can answer a question as basic
as that.
02/07/2025U02000An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy, please. There is hardly any need.
02/07/2025U02100Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: Mother of God.
02/07/2025U02200Deputy Jack Chambers: All decisions we will make for next year will be made in the
budget.
02/07/2025U02300Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: The Minister does not know the answer.
02/07/2025U02350Deputy Thomas Gould: So, in September.
02/07/2025U02400An Ceann Comhairle: Deputies, allow the response.
02/07/2025U02500Deputy Jack Chambers: They will be done and concluded in the budget process. That is
the same as has happened in previous years. That is the context. That will inform the outlook
for 2026.
02/07/2025U02600Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: That is most unhelpful to families and students.
02/07/2025U02700Deputy Jack Chambers: That is the same for all policy measures.
02/07/2025U02800Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: That is very unhelpful.
02/07/2025U02900Deputy Jack Chambers: It is decided in the budget.
02/07/2025U03000Deputy Thomas Gould: Students are coming back in September, not next year.
02/07/2025U03100Deputy Louise O’Reilly: They get the message.
02/07/2025U03200Deputy Ivana Bacik: I join others in expressing condolences on the death of Brother Kevin
Crowley of the Capuchin Day Centre. I had the pleasure of meeting Brother Kevin, witnessing
the immense work that he and his colleagues were doing and experiencing his great sense of
humour. He will be sadly missed.
When the idea of a housing tsar was announced some months ago, the question on ev-
eryone’s lips was the same: what can a tsar possible do for housing that the Minister cannot
achieve? The bizarre tsar proposal appears to have been quietly shelved. It has joined a pile of
other U-turns on the cutting room oor of Government Buildings and the Custom House. It has
2 July 2025
333
become increasingly clear that the Minister cannot take the necessary action alone and needs
help. Nearly six months since taking oce and in the midst of a severe housing crisis, he has
nothing to show for himself other than two Bills. One is to undo the hames he made of those
deeply misguided plans to end the rent pressure laws. The other, to be taken next week, is a Bill
to amend the huge new planning Act that itself is mostly not yet in force. It is worse than a mere
failure to ensure the necessary radical reset. The Government is allowing existing safeguards
to fail. It may now have extended rent pressure zones, but it has hollowed them out so that the
protections are limited. Rents and evictions will go up.
Speaking of evictions, the Government is starving the tenant in situ scheme so that it has
become ineective. That scheme was the key measure designed to protect renters and keep
families out of homelessness. Last Friday, the homelessness gures told of an appalling new re-
cord. Some 15,747 people were in emergency accommodation, including 4,844 children, each
one a personal tragedy for that child and family. One would think that in the face of this, the
Government would ramp up the tenant in situ scheme, but instead it is depriving it of adequate
funding and the scheme is failing. We hear it is being curtailed or paused in Dublin, Cork city,
Kildare and elsewhere. The Minister has said it will be very dicult to avoid crossing the
shameful threshold of 5,000 children in homelessness. We would think he is a commentator
and not the line Minister overseeing an apparent winding down of the tenant in situ scheme
and harebrained changes to rent pressure zone laws. All of this has consequences. In 2024, the
tenant in situ scheme accounted for two in ve homeless preventions in Cork city alone. This
meant 100 children were kept out of homelessness. What will happen to families like those
now? Increasingly, our TDs and councillors are experiencing hopelessness and despair when
they are seeking to advise families facing evictions because there is nothing we can oer. When
are we going to see a radical reset from the Government? When are we going to see emergency
measures to keep the tenant in situ scheme working and ensure families are kept out of home-
lessness?
02/07/2025V00200Deputies: Hear, hear.
02/07/2025V00300Deputy Jack Chambers: I absolutely reject what Deputy Bacik set out there concerning
the Minister, Deputy Browne. If we look at the series of actions and reforms he has undertaken
in recent weeks, I think a signicant dierence will be made in driving housing supply, private
and public, in our economy. He has reformed and streamlined the approval process for new-
build social housing projects this week, making a real dierence in respect of streamlining the
process to try to drive the approvals for social housing across our economy. He has brought
through signicant reforms and an expansion of the remit of the Land Development Agency,
which is to drive the supply of social and aordable housing right across Ireland. He has es-
tablished An Coimisiún Pleanála, three-year planning permission extensions are being made
in certain cases and he has revised the national planning framework to ensure we have more
zoned land to try to increase the supply of homes across our economy. The heads of the Bill on
reforming short-term lettings has been agreed. This will help to release thousands of units for
long-term use. He has also extended the rst homes scheme to 2027, agreed the new housing
activation oce to try to co-ordinate the supply of homes across local authorities and secured
€750 million in additional funding for more social, aordable and cost-rental homes, alongside
a signicant programme of acquisitions. Therefore, I absolutely reject what the Deputy said
relating to the series of measures that the Minister, Deputy Browne, has taken and that will cu-
mulatively make a dierence in driving the supply of housing across our economy.
In terms of the issue of homelessness, all of us in government are disappointed by the in-
Dáil Éireann
334
crease in the gures we have seen, but we know that the real solution to trying to reduce home-
lessness is to increase the supply of social and aordable homes. It is in this context that there
has been a concentrated eort on preventions and exits. This has been reected in the gures
from quarter 1 of 2025. Nationwide, 642 households, including 850 adults and 369 families,
were prevented from entering emergency accommodation by way of a tenancy being created,
for example, in quarter 1.
Turning to the question regarding the tenant in situ scheme, one of the rst measures we
took as a Government was to provide €325 million in 2025 for local authorities to buy second-
hand properties, with a particular focus on tenant in situ acquisitions. This is an important
part of the overall allocation for 2025. Separately, I am working with the Minister, Deputy
Browne, on the national development plan. Central to that will be a focus on housing supply
in our economy. It will not only be concerned with providing direct subsidies for housing, but
also with how we can invest in our water and wastewater infrastructure, in our grid and in our
transport infrastructure to drive the overall supply of homes.
02/07/2025V00400An Ceann Comhairle: I thank the Minister. He can come back in. I call Deputy Bacik.
02/07/2025V00500Deputy Jack Chambers: If we look at the series of reforms the Minister has taken, it will
make a dierence.
02/07/2025V00600Deputy Ivana Bacik: The Government seem to be content to express disappointment and
say that the measures it is taking will have an eect. The reality for people across the country
facing eviction is that there is no hope and no lifeline. The Minister said that increasing supply
was the key priority. Of course it should be; that is right. Instead of seeing a ramping up of
construction activity, though, we have seen delays and pauses in the building of social homes.
In the last week alone, we have seen further delays announced. We have seen the lleting of
the tenant in situ scheme. Councils, including Cork City Council, are telling us that they are
curtailing the scheme, which was supposed to oer a lifeline for families facing homelessness
to keep them out of homelessness. Far from energy, what we are seeing from the Minister,
Deputy Browne, and the wider Government is inertia,-----
02/07/2025V00700Deputy Conor Sheehan: Lethargy.
02/07/2025V00800Deputy Ivana Bacik: -----a failure to act, a lethargy that leaves people in despair. People
are telling us they have no hope of any prospect of owning-----
02/07/2025V00900An Ceann Comhairle: I thank the Deputy. I call the Minister to respond.
02/07/2025V01000Deputy Ivana Bacik: -----or even of being able to rent their own homes because there is so
little out there. What is the Government oering now to people facing eviction?
02/07/2025V01100An Ceann Comhairle: I thank the Deputy, but she is over time. I call the Minister to re-
spond.
02/07/2025V01200Deputy Jack Chambers: I have referenced a series of actions being taken,-----
02/07/2025V01300Deputy Ivana Bacik: No-----
02/07/2025V01400Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: Raising rents.
02/07/2025V01500Deputy Jack Chambers: -----including the strengthening of the Land Development Agen-
2 July 2025
335
cy, continuing to support the increased supply of social and aordable homes-----
(Interruptions).
02/07/2025V01700Deputy Jack Chambers: -----and the measures the Minister, Deputy Browne, has taken
to cut through some of the bureaucracy that exists around the four-stage approval process and
reform that. He has taken a series of measures that will increase the supply of social and af-
fordable homes.
02/07/2025V01800Deputy Ivana Bacik: When?
02/07/2025V01900Deputy Jack Chambers: Central to the new national development plan will be an increased
allocation that is all focused on housing. Our central and number one focus as a Government is
driving the supply of thousands of new homes right across our country, but this requires reform-
ing how systems operate. The Deputy is just asking for additional allocations, but we need to
change some of the systems that are currently-----
02/07/2025V02000Deputy Ivana Bacik: We talked about them.
02/07/2025V02100Deputy Jack Chambers: Well, credit has not been given to the Minister, Deputy Browne,
for some of the measures he has taken in recent weeks that will make a dierence in the context
of social and aordable homes.
02/07/2025V02200Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: They will make matters worse.
(Interruptions).
02/07/2025V02400An Ceann Comhairle: Please, Deputies.
02/07/2025V02500Deputy Jack Chambers: On the tenant in situ scheme, we have provided an additional
€325 million in 2025 for local authorities to buy second-hand homes.
(Interruptions).
02/07/2025V02700An Ceann Comhairle: Time is up.
02/07/2025V02800Deputy Jack Chambers: This will make a dierence to families facing homelessness.
02/07/2025V02900Deputy Cian O’Callaghan: I extend our sympathies to all the family and colleagues of
Brother Kevin Crowley. He is someone who gave his life to serve others.
The Minister did not tell people during the general election campaign that a vote for Fianna
Fáil and Fine Gael would be a vote to increase college fees. The Minister has been asked twice
about this issue. I will ask him a third time. What fees will students have to pay in September?
Will it be €2,000 or €3,000? It is a simple, straightforward question that the Minister has been
asked twice. I have asked him a third time and I ask him to answer the question and to give a
straight answer.
02/07/2025V03000Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: Hear, hear.
02/07/2025V03100Deputy Cian O’Callaghan: There is now complete disarray and open revolt in the Gov-
ernment over student fees. Last night, the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Healy-Rae, an-
nounced he was not happy about this mess. He said he signed up to a programme for Govern-
ment that clearly promised to reduce fees. He described the threat to increase them by €1,000
Dáil Éireann
336
as a scud missile nobody was expecting. Can the Minister stop the pretence that what is going
on is part of the normal budgetary process? Nobody is buying that spin, not even the Ministers
of State in government. The Government promised to continue reducing student fees, but it is
now threatening to break that promise and increase them by a whopping 50%. This is what is
happening here. I ask the Minister to answer the question on this issue and to clarify this is not
what is happening.
The Minister does not have to lecture us and the public on budgetary planning. There was
enough of that yesterday. What we are talking about here is trust in politics and promises bro-
ken within months of them being made. The Minister has repeatedly cited economic threats as
a reason to ditch commitments to students and their families, but the programme for Govern-
ment was written only a few months ago at the end of January. We are not talking about the dim
and distant past. Is the Minister really telling us that commitments made a mere ve months
ago are now to be on the chopping block?
It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the Government just does not get it. It does not get the
immense pressure on students and families from soaring costs. It does not get the level of rising
panic at the thought of having to nd an extra €1,000, or even more for families with multiple
students in college. The Minister spoke at length about the Government’s budget process, but
what about family budgets? Does he understand household budgets and that they relied on the
Government’s commitment to reduce student fees? Families made plans on that basis, but the
Government is now ripping up that pledge and those household plans. This is at a time when
every penny has to be counted to make ends meet. This is causing great levels of stress and
anxiety. Where are families and students meant to nd that extra €1,000? I am really struggling
to understand what the Government is doing and why this asco is continuing to run and has
not been sorted out. Is it because the Taoiseach is away and nobody else is capable of making
decisions on this issue?
02/07/2025V03200An Ceann Comhairle: I thank the Deputy.
02/07/2025V03300Deputy Cian O’Callaghan: We have heard enough bluster on this issue. The Government
made a commitment in writing, in black and white, to reduce student fees. Will the Government
uphold that commitment?
02/07/2025V03400An Ceann Comhairle: The time is up. I call the Minister to respond.
02/07/2025V03500Deputy Cian O’Callaghan: Will the Minister answer the question concerning what fees
will be in September?
02/07/2025V03600Deputy Jack Chambers: The Deputy cannot just dismiss budgetary planning as if it is not
a proper part of how the Government operates and how politics should operate as part of-----
02/07/2025V03700Deputy Jennifer Whitmore: Is breaking promises how the budgetary process operates?
02/07/2025V03800Deputy Jack Chambers: The Deputy just dismissing this and saying we should have ad
hoc decisions on measures taken every week is not the appropriate way to run the budgetary
process. What I said very clearly yesterday and again today was that we acknowledged the
pressure many families and students faced. That is absolutely understood by everyone in the
Government. What we have said we will do around the budgetary process in the coming period
is examine the cost-of-education paper, on which the Minister is working. This will inform the
ongoing negotiation as part of budget 2026. In that budget, we will take decisions on how we
2 July 2025
337
can support continued aordability of public services. A key part of that is further and higher
education. We are saying that we will do that within the connes of what we set out on budget
day. This is the way annualised budgeting has worked for many years and the Deputy should
not dismiss that.
What we have said very clearly is that we will move away from one-o temporary mea-
sures. What that meant last year was the measures taken relating to third level fees were tem-
porary. We are approaching it this year in the context of seeing how we can provide continued
and permanent changes for next year. The Minister, Deputy Lawless, is looking at that in the
context of SUSI grants, reckonable income and the student contribution fee. That is what we
are saying to people. It is around budget 2026 that we will set out what measures will be taken
for next year. That is how we are engaging in this. It is unfair to just dismiss that by referencing
politics and whatever else the Deputy said. That is unfair on the budgetary process. It is impor-
tant, across every measure in Government, that we set out the overall allocation that will inform
tax and expenditure policy for next year. We will engage in good faith with all our ministerial
colleagues around their priorities. Obviously, aordability in education is one of them, which
is understood fully by everybody in Government. It is through the budgetary decisions we take
that we will set out what the fee threshold will be next year. That was the same in previous
years when we had a cost-of-living package and a permanent package. What we are saying this
year is that we want the measures we take to be taken on a permanent and sustained basis. It is
on that basis that we are engaging in budgetary negotiations.
02/07/2025W00200Deputy Cian O’Callaghan: What will fees be in September? Will they be €2,000 or
€3,000? This is the fourth time the Minister has been asked that question so could he give a
direct answer to that question? What will students and their families be hit with in Septem-
ber? Can the Minister answer that question? In terms of dismissing things, it seems as if this
Government is dismissing what it promised students and their families it would do in the pro-
gramme for Government, namely, to reduce student fees. It seems the Minister is dismissing
the concerns of families in terms of their household budgeting. Anyone reading the programme
for Government in black and white and seeing the commitment to reduce fees would reasonably
have thought that fees would be going down and not up. The Minister is dismissing that and the
concerns of households and families. They need certainty and clarity. The Minister has been
asked four times today to provide certainty and clarity on this and he has failed to do so. I am
giving him a nal opportunity to clarify whether fees will be €2,000 or €3,000 this September.
02/07/2025W00300Deputy Jack Chambers: The programme for Government is centrally important and in-
forms all Ministers in how they negotiate in any budget. What is referenced in the programme
for Government relating to students and third level will inform the Minister’s budgetary negoti-
ation. What happened in previous years when temporary one-o measures were taken was that
they were taken in the aftermath of the start of an academic year. Whatever decisions are made
in the context of the budget around reducing the cost of education will be deducted through an
academic year if a decision is made on that. This is what has happened in previous years when
it came to temporary one-o or cost-of-living packages. What we are saying is that the budget
will inform what measures are taken relating to student contribution fees, SUSI grants and reck-
onable income. Aordability for students is a key priority for the Minister as part of the budget
discussions that will take place.
02/07/2025W00400Deputy Catherine Connolly: Tá an deis á tapú agam anois córas iarnróid éadroma do cha-
thair na Gaillimhe a ardú. Tá an cheist seo thar a bheith tábhachtach. Is í an cheist i ndáiríre ná
an bhfuil an dánacht agus an chrógacht san Aire ceannaireacht a thaispeáint agus glacadh leis an
Dáil Éireann
338
gcoincheap seo chun córas iarnróid éadroma a sholáthar do chathair na Gaillimhe. I am seizing
the opportunity today to raise this matter with the Minister as Minister for Public Expenditure,
Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, although I would have dearly loved to
have raised the issue of Gaza as well.
The decision to roll out a light rail system in Galway requires courage, vision and leader-
ship. Does the Minister have the courage to embrace this project and roll out a light rail system
for Galway as part of the solution to the chronic trac congestion in the city? The provision
of a light rail system perfectly aligns with the national policy objectives in the revised national
planning framework. I refer to objectives 10 and 97 on the requirement for a transport-orien-
tated development approach served by high-capacity public transport in the metropolitan areas
of the ve cities destined to grow, with Galway being one of them. Moreover, section 2.1 of
the revised national planning framework clearly sets out that the four cities, including Galway,
will require the potential of all four cities to be realised at an unprecedented rate to create viable
alternatives to Dublin. We have any number of policies with which the provision of light rail
complies but I will look at climate action and climate change where light rail will actively help
to reduce our emissions.
Regarding the cost of not doing something, the Department of Transport very helpfully
published a report titled “The Economic Cost of Congestion in the Regional Cities 2022-2040”.
It states that, at a minimum, on an annual basis, trac congestion in Galway is costing €35 mil-
lion. This gure will rise to an estimated €107 million and more in 2040. We are not talking
about the cost of nes, lack of productivity, travelling and so on. That report clearly stated that
we need a proactive deployment of sustainable transport for the growing trac congestion in
Galway. I am saying clearly on the record that a signicant amount of work has been done on
this project. A feasibility study has been published stating that it is eminently doable. Regard-
ing light rail on the ground, I collected 24,000 signatures in 2018 begging the Government to
do this.
02/07/2025W00500Deputy Jack Chambers: I am familiar with the serious congestion in Galway city and the
broader Galway region. As the Deputy knows, the National Transport Authority, NTA, has
been developing the Galway metropolitan area transport strategy to inform what is possible for
the future in the context of public transport but also road infrastructure in the Galway region, in
conjunction with Galway City Council and Galway County Council. Part of the development
of this metropolitan area transport strategy necessitated the mode-specic analysis being un-
dertaken for a light rail feasibility study and the strategic roads feasibility study. The light rail
feasibility study was published by the NTA on 30 October 2024. The backdrop is the ongoing
consideration of the ring road, with which the Deputy is familiar.
I know the demand within Galway city for light rail. What we are doing in the NDP is pri-
oritising transport infrastructure more generally. This will involve a serious uplift in investment
in transport infrastructure over the next ve years and the setting out of a longer term position to
provide condence in the development of public transport infrastructure in our cities, between
our towns and within our regions. The metropolitan area transport strategy will help inform
what is possible in the short to medium term. I know it is being progressed by the two relevant
councils. I am open to that engagement as Minister.
Light rail in Dublin and other parts of the country has been of a stop-start nature. It is an
eective way of delivering public transport in urban areas and we need to have a better pipeline
of light rail over the longer term. The NTA and Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, need to
2 July 2025
339
work on that in terms of the respective metropolitan area transport strategies. There is a lot of
interest in the development of the ring road in Galway for its citizens and the people Deputy
Connolly represents. There are also people in Galway who want to see light rail developed as
an option in the urban sphere. Congestion is a serious issue. When I canvassed in Galway on
many occasions last year, public transport and the ring road accounted for probably 50% of the
issues raised on the door by the many people I engaged with. As a Government, with our priori-
tisation of transport infrastructure, we want to make real progress on some of the projects that
can be started quickly but also to set out the longer term position on transport strategy and what
can be delivered for Galway and the broader west of Ireland region over the coming period.
02/07/2025X00200Deputy Catherine Connolly: I welcome that the Government will prioritise transport in the
revised plan. There is no sense of urgency when it comes to Galway city. Its growth has been
hampered. It simply cannot develop. I do not have time to go into the lack of infrastructure
when it comes to basic sewerage facilities. That is for another day and I have raised it before.
I am sticking with just one issue today as one part of a sustainable solution. In 2018, 24,000
people signed a petition appealing to the Government to carry out a feasibility study. That took
until last year. We cannot grow Galway. It is just a pretence and a mockery to say Galway can
grow. It cannot. There is a lack of infrastructure. We then have obligations under our climate
action plans. One of the easiest ways, the straightest way, to comply with those obligations is to
roll out a public transport system with light rail and park-and-ride facilities. Park-and-ride was
provided for in the city development plan in 2004, 21 years ago, and it still has not been rolled
out. What we need from the Government is vision and boldness in the best sense of the word
to give the thumbs up for light rail.
02/07/2025X00300An Ceann Comhairle: Deputy, you are well over time.
02/07/2025X00800Deputy Catherine Connolly: I will nish on this. The Government should put light rail
in the revised national planning framework. There will be a presentation on light rail in the
audiovisual room at 3 p.m. I invite everyone to attend.
02/07/2025X00900Deputy Jack Chambers: I think we all share the objectives of signicantly improving
transport infrastructure for Galway city. The work that has been undertaken around the feasi-
bility study for light rail is important in that context. The National Transport Authority is con-
sidering that with the two relevant councils. There has been signicant investment in Ceannt
Station, as the Deputy knows, to try to improve connectivity for commuters. In Oranmore and
elsewhere, there has been investment and upgrades and signicant work has been undertaken
related to BusConnects in Galway.
I welcome the work that has been undertaken around the feasibility study for light rail in
particular. As I said previously, we need to build more momentum to have more light rail in
some of our urban areas compared with recent years where its development has been of a stop-
start nature. It is an eective way of delivering public transport, as we have seen in Dublin. It
will be considered in the context of the national development plan.
02/07/2025X01000Ceisteanna ó na Comhaltaí Eile - Other Members’ Questions
02/07/2025X01100Deputy Paul McAulie: I express my condolences to the family of Brother Kevin Crowley
and in particular his colleagues who he worked with. As a freeman of Dublin city, he was a
Cork man who made a huge impact on our city. I want to acknowledge that today.
Dáil Éireann
340
I raise bundle 3 and the Minister’s decision not to proceed with the tendering process re-
lated to that bundle. I served on Dublin City Council for ten years and for the best part of those
ten years, we had public sites on which we wanted to build homes. We wanted to do that in a
way that provided mixed communities. In recent years, Housing for All has given Dublin City
Council the ability to build those mixed communities on those public sites through cost-rental,
aordable and social housing. Across my constituency, many sites are proceeding on that basis,
Oscar Traynor Road being the largest. People are delighted to see construction taking place and
homes being built.
It was with some disappointment that we saw the Minister decide not to proceed with bundle
3. While that bundle included nearly 500 homes, 200 of those are in my constituency, at Shan-
gan Road and Collins Avenue. That has an impact on the broader bundles that are outstanding,
bundles 4 to 7, inclusive, because of the 4,500 housing units across the whole country, over
1,000 are in my constituency. I am, therefore, particularly concerned about the future of these
bundles and their delivery.
These bundles do exactly what local authorities should be doing. They involve taking sites
with complex issues, resolving those issues and putting them out to tender for construction.
The Shangan Road site, for example, is a dedicated older persons’ complex. The Collins Av-
enue site is the Port Tunnel site which many people will have driven past. On the Church of the
Annunciation site, an old church was demolished in partnership with the parish and we were
able to identify potential for housing on that site. On Wellmount Road, we had a green space
that was the subject of antisocial behaviour and we were able to put in place a solution. On the
Collins Avenue bring centre, the DCU site, we relocated an old Dublin City Council depot, cre-
ated a new one and created a site in the city. In Balcurris, we brought a number of sites together
as a bundle. These are all measures the local authority has taken, on which solutions have been
brought forward using the tools available in Housing for All.
We are very concerned. While we have to have value for money, we also want to see some
of these sites, which have full planning permission, proceed.
02/07/2025X01200Deputy Jack Chambers: The Department of housing, with the Minister for housing’s ap-
proval, decided not to proceed to award the contract for social housing bundle 3 through a
public-private partnership. The basis for that decision was that the cost per unit was more than
€1 million and almost double the cost of similar units delivered in 2020. Unit costs at that scale
would not be compatible with the overall delivery of what we need in our social housing targets.
The Government and the relevant local authorities remain absolutely committed to delivering
the social housing that the bundle was being designed to provide for. The Department of hous-
ing is now working with its programme leaders, the National Development Finance Agency
and the four local authorities, to urgently advance these projects through an alternative procure-
ment and delivery strategy. The Department is also initiating a review of future social housing
through bundles to consider all options and determine the optimal procurement and delivery
strategy for the Exchequer.
I acknowledge the need in the Deputy’s community and the fact that these projects have re-
ceived planning permission. However, when the cost per unit escalates to €1 million per home
it will have knock-on consequences for other social housing projects down the line, both this
year and in future years, in the context of the overall allocation for social housing. We need
to maximise the delivery of supply in how we manage the social housing allocation in total.
Part of that has been reected in the Government’s response of making increased provision for
2 July 2025
341
social and aordable homes as an in-year budgetary decision this year. We are cognisant of
the local need. That is why there is an urgency in the Department of housing to work with the
delivery partners on how we can identify an alternative procurement and delivery strategy to
deliver much-needed homes in the Deputy’s community.
02/07/2025X01300Deputy Paul McAulie: I thank the Minister. As I say, when people see sites under con-
struction they have some hope and belief that things are changing. When planning went out for
these sites they saw the designs and plans for them. There is an expectation. I welcome that
the Minister is taking this seriously and urgently. I also agree with the Minister. As a member
of the Committee of Public Accounts, I will not stand over the Government spending more than
€1 million per unit. I can understand the diculty. Just because a developer puts in a gure
does not mean the Government has to pay that amount to deliver. I accept that but what we
cannot accept is any signicant delay. I ask the Minister for public expenditure and the Minister
for housing to ensure the Dublin local authorities and the other local authorities impacted are
presented quickly with a solution-----
02/07/2025X01400Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: They have been cancelled.
02/07/2025X01500Deputy Paul McAulie: -----and the sites with full planning permission are given priority
so we can get shovels into the ground and these homes can be built. They are the way forward
for how we provide housing. That is what Housing for All is all about. We have hit a speed
bump. We cannot pay any gure that is presented to us but we also have to act with urgency to
nd an alternative.
02/07/2025X01600Deputy Jack Chambers: I acknowledge the urgent local need to advance these particular
projects and also the fact that they have full planning permission. The Department of housing
is now working with the National Development Finance Agency and all the local authorities to
see how we can advance these projects through an alternative delivery strategy. They are also
reviewing future public-private partnerships bundles so that we can deliver social homes at a
better unit cost and deliver more of them with the overall Exchequer allocation that is made in
the medium term. I will reect on what the Deputy said and pass on his comments to the Min-
ister, Deputy Browne, who is keen to advance these units with the delivery partners and local
authorities.
02/07/2025Y00200Ceisteanna ar Pholasaí nó ar Reachtaíocht - Questions on Policy or Legislation
02/07/2025Y00300An Ceann Comhairle: There are 18 Deputies oering and unless Deputies co-operate with
time, there will be four who will not get in.
02/07/2025Y00400Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: The Minister came to the Chamber this afternoon with big
folders and is surrounded by his colleagues, including the Minister for higher education, Deputy
Lawless, but could not answer a straightforward question. It is not acceptable, smart or clever
to come to the Chamber and refuse to answer a very straightforward question that students and
their families need clarity on. Will their fees be set at €2,000 or €3,000? The Minister, Deputy
Lawless, started this debate. He volunteered the information that fees would increase. I again
ask the Minister to have the decency to be clear with students and their families and state the
position clearly when he takes to his feet. If he cannot, the Minister, Deputy Lawless, should
avail of the opportunity to make it clear whether students and their families will pay €2,000 or
€,3000. It is a very straightforward question. Surely to God one of you can answer it.
Dáil Éireann
342
02/07/2025Y00500Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science (Depu-
ty James Lawless): I thank Deputy McDonald. She has been in the House longer than I have,
but she will understand that the budgetary process takes place in October, not June, July or
August.
02/07/2025Y00600Deputy Louise O’Reilly: It does not take place in a studio in RTÉ.
02/07/2025Y00700An Ceann Comhairle: Have the respect to listen, please.
02/07/2025Y00800Deputy James Lawless: The budgetary process is under way. I am ghting within the re-
sources available for students and their families for the best possible outcome across the board
in all of the measures the Minister, Deputy Chambers, outlined, including SUSI grants, fee
thresholds and the student contribution fee, along with the cost of accommodation-----
02/07/2025Y00900Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: Will the fees be €2,000 or €3,000?
02/07/2025Y01000An Ceann Comhairle: Allow the Minister to answer.
02/07/2025Y01100Deputy James Lawless: No gure has ever been produced ahead of the budget in any area
of Government spending, and that will not change this year no more than any other year. That
has always been the position.
02/07/2025Y01200Deputy Mary Lou McDonald: The Minister has put the heart crossways in families.
02/07/2025Y01300Deputy Ivana Bacik: Ireland has long and historic ties with the US. Some half a million
Irish residents visited last year and more than 30 million Americans claim Irish heritage. How-
ever, increasingly an authoritarian Trump government is causing real concerns, in particular for
those who are undocumented Irish in America. We think about 10,000 such people are there.
This is placing a strain on the relationship.
Last week, I raised the alleged unlawful detention of a Norwegian student by Immigration
and Customs Enforcement, ICE, in this House. I have heard from many Irish families who are
concerned about their children, including students and young adults, travelling to the US and
being detained or picked up. I have heard of worrying experiences since I raised this issue in
the Dáil, including from Irish citizens. There have been allegations from an individual who
said they were detained by ICE for a period of months without charge and with no access to
a lawyer or mobile phone for overstaying their visa by a couple of days. Irish residents need
guidance and reassurance before making plans to visit the US. Families need to know that their
children will be safe over there. Will the Department of Foreign Aairs and Trade review the
safety of the US for Irish citizens? What representations is the Government making to the US
Government on this?
02/07/2025Y01400Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform
(Deputy Jack Chambers): I will allow the Minister for Foreign Aairs and Trade to set out
the specic representations that have been made at ocial or ministerial level. As the Deputy
knows, a new ambassador arrived this week. The Minister met him this week and will be able
to comment on his direct discussions with the US administration. The Ireland-US relationship
is and continues to be important. I acknowledge the plight of residents and Irish citizens who
live in the US and we are continuing diplomatic eorts for the undocumented Irish who live in
the US. That is part of our wider engagement with the US administration. I will ask the Min-
ister for Foreign Aairs and Trade to respond on the specic diplomatic eorts that have been
2 July 2025
343
made regarding what the Deputy referenced today.
02/07/2025Y01500Deputy Pádraig Rice: My question relates to the insourcing and outsourcing of public
healthcare. Yesterday, the Minister for Health published the HSE review of insourcing and
outsourcing, which I welcome. The report conrms that the health service are over-reliant on
these arrangements to reduce waiting lists. Despite the huge sums of public money involved,
proper oversight has been severely lacking, leading to alarming and shocking abuses of the
National Treatment Purchase Fund, NTPF, and clear conicts of interest. While it is welcome
that insourcing arrangements are to be phased out by June 2026, we also need to end the over-
reliance of the health service on outsourcing to private hospitals and other external companies.
This aim is referenced in the review, but there is no timeline or action set out. Obviously,
this cannot be done overnight. If it is to be achieved, we need to accelerate the delivery of
Sláintecare reforms. By 2028, four new elective hospitals were due to be delivered, but no
planning applications have been submitted nor have business cases been approved. In May
2023, the then Minister for Health announced the delivery of six new surgical hubs within 18
months, but only one new hub has been opened 25 months on. Can the Minister commit to
accelerating the elective care reforms and, crucially, funding them so that the dependency on
outsourcing can be reversed?
02/07/2025Y01600Minister for Health (Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill): It was very important to con-
duct the national assessment of insourcing, which I commissioned at the beginning of April
because of my concerns, and to publish it. The Deputy has had an opportunity to consider it
today. We have to use every lever to implement Sláintecare, including rostering for ve over
seven days, the public only consultant contract and making the best case possible for as much
investment in health infrastructure as this Government can do collectively. That includes elec-
tive hospitals and surgical hubs. I understand the surgical hub in Mount Carmel has seen over
1,000 patients; that is my understanding from the CEO of St. James’s. I have asked for detailed
information on what exactly has been happening and when.
02/07/2025Y01700Deputy Paul Murphy: I want to raise the inexplicable decision to cut SNA hours at Fir-
house Educate Together National School. The school is already struggling to cope, with only
eight SNAs catering for more than 90 children with additional needs. One parent wrote to me
to tell me that her son started in the autism unit and with the amazing support of his teachers
and SNAs was able to transition to a mainstream class and is proof of how early intervention
and the correct support can help a child to integrate with his mainstream peers. She said the
school needs an increase in SNA hours to give every child equal access to education as a basic
human right, yet the Department is proposing to cut the SNA hours needed for inclusion and
mainstream classes.
I raised yesterday how the Government is simultaneously trying to push children with mild
general learning disabilities out of special schools and into mainstream education, which cre-
ates a need for more rather than fewer SNAs. This makes no sense. Will the Government con-
sider it and ensure that SNA support is increased rather than decreased?
02/07/2025Y01800Deputy Jack Chambers: As the Deputy can appreciate, I am not familiar with the specic
school he referenced or what has occurred relating to SNAs, apart from stating that the overall
number of SNAs will continue to increase nationally, along with the support we are providing
for special education through the National Council for Special Education, NCSE, around school
buildings, teachers, SNAs and other supports in schools. I will ask the Minister for education
Dáil Éireann
344
to respond to the Deputy on the specic case he referenced. There are review mechanisms,
through engagement with the NCSE and others, on SNA allocations. I will ask that the engage-
ment take place.
02/07/2025Y01900Deputy Paul Nicholas Gogarty: Part of Citywest Hotel is now a holding or detention cen-
tre for those awaiting deportation. Is there a coherent policy? Are those awaiting deportation
at IPAS centres allowed to roam free or are they locked into hotel rooms 24 hours a day? If
detainees are held pre-deportation or pending prison transfer, that means the role of the centre
is not purely accommodation; it is quasi-detention. Is using an hotel as a detention centre legal?
It likely falls outside of the hotel emergency reception exemption and will be considered an
unauthorised development unless retrospective planning permission is granted.
We also know for a fact that there has been no public consultation on safety and security
protocols or an impact assessment on Citywest and, I presume, around the country. What is the
plan for these situations? Obviously, it is inhumane to send families who have been in Ireland
for a very long time back to other countries. This is why we need to dramatically speed up the
process. Equally, there are people who do not have leave to remain who will forcibly resist any
eorts to get them to leave. Should these people be roaming free in local communities?
02/07/2025Y02000Deputy Jack Chambers: As the Deputy knows, the Minister, Deputy O’Callaghan, is com-
mitted to signicantly improving the processing times for international protection applications
and bringing the appeals component back to the Department of justice in order to streamline
the process. Next year, progress on the EU migration pact will make a dierence in terms of
the timeframes around processing. I cannot comment on the specics the Deputy referenced in
terms of Citywest. I will ask the Minister for justice to respond on the specic circumstances
the Deputy referenced. It is obviously a sensitive matter. I will not pre-empt what he says.
02/07/2025Y02100Deputy John Connolly: In the aftermath of Storm Éowyn, the Government committed to
a full review of the response of the State to the impact of the storm. As we recall, across the
west and north west, there were extensive periods of outages of water, electricity, broadband
and communications services.
1 o’clock
It has had a large impact on the minds of people in that part of the country. Even today,
constituents have reported to me an increase in the occurrence of intermittent electrical outages
as a result of Storm Éowyn, which happened on 21 January. I am asking that we consider the
publication of the report prior to the summer recess.
02/07/2025Z00200Deputy Jack Chambers: There has been ongoing work across government relating to the
lessons from Storm Éowyn and the recovery eorts. The Minister, Deputy Calleary, who is
here, has been prioritising the outcome of this in terms of his submission to the national de-
velopment plan and how we build more resilience into our public infrastructure, whether that
is in communications, community infrastructure or energy infrastructure. Every Minister has
been extensively engaged on the specic lessons from the impact of Storm Éowyn. I will ask
some of the Ministers who have been centrally involved to respond to Deputy Connolly on what
actions they have taken. It has been a constant focus of work since the storm occurred in late
January.
02/07/2025Z00300Deputy Catherine Callaghan: I speak today about the cost of third level education in
Ireland. The programme for Government states the Government will reform SUSI to better
2 July 2025
345
meet the needs of students and their families. This is something I welcome and I urge the Gov-
ernment to take action on it from this year onwards. My question today relates to the discon-
tinuation of the reduction in the student contribution fee. Since the Minister, Deputy Lawless,
made the announcement at the weekend, my phone has been hopping with parents and students
throughout my constituency of Carlow-Kilkenny worried and anxious about how they will nd
an additional €1,000 to put towards their student contribution fee in two months’ time. Making
education more accessible to hard-pressed parents is something I campaigned very strongly on
during the general election. I know for a fact it is something that we in Fine Gael negotiated to
be in the programme for Government. Now is not the time to row back on commitments made
during the previous election and by this Government. How can the Minister justify increasing
the student contribution fee for hard-pressed parents?
02/07/2025Z00400Deputy Jack Chambers: I thank Deputy Callaghan and I appreciate the question she has
raised. As she has heard from the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste, this will be considered in the
context of budget 2026. All of us as a collective Government - Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the
Independent Deputies - will work on strengthening the aordability of public services as a
core priority. We want to make permanent changes to some of the costs that exist for students
throughout the country.
02/07/2025Z00500Deputy Matt Carthy: It is like an episode of “Love Island”.
02/07/2025Z00600An Ceann Comhairle: It is not your question, Deputy.
02/07/2025Z00700Deputy Jack Chambers: This work is ongoing. The Minister, Deputy Lawless, will pub-
lish the report on the cost of education and this will inform the budgetary discussion that will
take place.
02/07/2025Z00800Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn: As the Minister knows, the victims of the pyrite scandal
in the east coast of Ireland, comprising 3,000 families, rightly received 100% redress. In the
west of Ireland we did not get this. Worse, nine months ago the Government looked at the Soci-
ety of Chartered Surveyors Ireland rates and increased the cap but this was for people who were
new entrants. Hundreds of families are being denied more than €40,000. They cannot make
the nal payments to their builders. This has been going on for nine months. The Government
said it would sort it out nine months ago. Every week I am told we will have the legislation.
Will the Minister please promise us now, prior to the recess, that the legislation to allow for all
homeowners in the scheme to avail of the increase in the cap, so they have a ghting chance of
at least making up something towards 100% redress, will happen? There are two more weeks
to go. It is absolutely essential that the legislation is introduced.
02/07/2025Z00900Deputy Jack Chambers: I thank Deputy Mac Lochlainn. I know the Minister met various
stakeholders in Donegal in May, including representatives from the action group and many rep-
resentatives on the council. I will ask the Minister, Deputy Browne, to set out the specic time-
line relating to legislation and give Deputy Mac Lochlainn a specic answer to his question.
02/07/2025Z01000Deputy Mattie McGrath: I am glad to see the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, is here.
Cluain Training and Enterprise Centre in Clonmel is a wonderful institution for young and old
but mainly for adults. It has pottery-making facilities, a workshop that repairs tools and many
areas of art and design. It is a fabulous centre for young people and I congratulate the board,
under Seamus Leahy and Gerry Flynn. They are brilliant people. The Minister of State, Deputy
Butler, was good enough to visit recently. We need to have secure and continuing funding for
Dáil Éireann
346
the centre from the mental health and disability budgets. We need a dual or hybrid model to
secure this centre. It has been there for decades. Many of the participants suer from mental
health issues and they get great solace from this great outlet. The Minister of State saw this
when she met people there and engaged, and I thank her for it. We hope to have a dual funding
model that will be secure. The board is doing its best and it needs support.
02/07/2025Z01100Minister of State at the Department of Health (Deputy Mary Butler): I thank Deputy
McGrath for raising this issue and for attending the Cluain adult training centre with me and
Councillor Siobhán Ambrose a few weeks ago. It is an excellent facility which provides a range
of services for those with disabilities, acquired brain injuries and mental health challenges. It
supports people who might fall between the cracks otherwise. I was very impressed by the fact
that the centre identies the needs of trainees and tailors the supports to suit them. I have asked
mental health ocials to engage with the disability ocials who attended on the day to come
up with a comprehensive plan. We will try to work out a service level agreement. I understand
the majority of the funding is being provided through the disability budget but the mental health
budget also must step up and I am committed to doing so. I will keep Deputy McGrath up to
date on developments.
02/07/2025Z01200Deputy Frankie Feighan: I want to bring to the attention of the Minister for Health an is-
sue raised by my colleague, Senator P.J. Murphy; namely, the revelation that sick certicates
are being provided through some online platforms with no consultation between patients and
doctors. From the point of view of medical practitioners, employers and patient safety, there
are serious issues and concerns here. When it comes to someone’s health, it is vital that a con-
sultation between the doctor and the patient takes place. I understand the Minister for Health
was in touch with the Medical Council recently and I welcome this. I hope some action will
be taken. There are many waiting lists for GPs and primary care centres. I understand this is
not the answer. I do understand there are genuinely people who become ill and are not in a t
position to work. On the other hand, this online service is wide open to abuse.
02/07/2025Z01300Minister for Health (Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill): This is an issue for enterprise,
social protection and health. GPs are private practitioners. Many of them have contracts with
the HSE to provide public services. Services provided outside of these are a private matter. The
Medical Council is there to protect the public. Part of this is registering doctors as quickly as
may be, and part of it is making sure that doctors operate to a very high standard. I encourage
the Medical Council to reect on the issue Deputy Feighan has correctly highlighted, recog-
nising the impact it may have on employers, particularly small businesses. I assure him that
everybody in government takes a strong interest in this.
02/07/2025Z01400Deputy Matt Carthy: It is scandalous that there are children with special needs today
whose parents do not know whether they will be able to start school in the new term because
the necessary SNA support is not yet in place. To give one example, there is a rural school in
County Monaghan which has one SNA and one pupil who depends full time on this support.
Another pupil is due to start at the school next month, who will also need a full-time SNA. This
is the position of the school, the position of the preschool which the child is attending at present
and the position of every professional who has worked with the child. The NCSE and the Gov-
ernment have not yet sanctioned the extra SNA at the school. In fact, the advice being given
to the school is that the SNA who is already there should be shared between the two students.
All of the evidence suggests this would be an extremely dangerous situation. It would not be
an exaggeration to state that such an approach would present a signicant risk to both students.
Will the Government engage urgently with the NCSE to ensure this issue and the hundreds of
2 July 2025
347
other cases like it are urgently resolved?
02/07/2025Z01500Deputy Jack Chambers: I thank Deputy Carthy and I appreciate and agree on how essen-
tial an SNA is to any individual with additional needs in the classroom. I am not sure whether
the school Deputy Carthy has referenced has appealed the particular allocation this year to the
NCSE.
02/07/2025Z01600Deputy Matt Carthy: Yes.
02/07/2025Z01700Deputy Jack Chambers: I will ask the Minister, Deputy McEntee, as I did with regard
to Deputy Paul Murphy earlier, to respond on the specic case Deputy Carthy has referenced.
Budget 2025 provided for 1,600 SNAs, the largest number ever allocated, which will bring to
23,000 the number of SNAs in our schools.
02/07/2025Z01800Deputy Matt Carthy: That is no comfort to this family.
02/07/2025Z01900Deputy Jack Chambers: I appreciate that. We are committed to continued investment in
special education in terms of stang and, in many instances, the need for new buildings for
special classrooms. I will ask the Minister, Deputy McEntee, to respond to Deputy Carthy on
the specic case.
02/07/2025Z02000Deputy Carol Nolan: I want to raise the issue of TB. I want to make the point that farmers
are key to our communities. They are also key to our economy. I attended a very successful
tractor run on Sunday. Large numbers were out raising funds for two local schools, Roscomroe
National School and Coolderry National School, as well as a local charity called Living Links.
There is huge concern regarding the TB proposals. We need to bring farmers with us and we
need to protect and support them. I will quote from some of the farming organisations that
have expressed concern. The deputy president of the Irish Creamery Milk Suppliers Associa-
tion, Eamon Carroll, has said he believes that the proposed measures will involve all of the TB
burden being placed on farmers. The IFA’s animal health chair, TJ Maher, has pointed out that
the TB proposals are “crude” and suggested that the nancial burden will be laid at the feet of
farmers. Does the Minister accept the justied criticism? Will he go back to the drawing board
and devise solutions?
02/07/2025AA00200Deputy Jack Chambers: I am acutely aware of the nancial and emotional trauma as-
sociated with a TB breakdown and the associated hardship, as the Deputy said, for many farm
families. TB disease levels in recent years have continued to increase. Over a 12-month period,
a herd incidence of 6.43% has been recorded, with more than 43,000 reactors. That is a seri-
ous deterioration in the situation which we cannot allow to continue. That is why the Minister,
Deputy Heydon, met with all of the key stakeholders in recent weeks and held a further meet-
ing with farming bodies. He wants to advance proposals to try to address this in partnership
with farm families and farm organisations. I can ask him to send the Deputy some of the detail
regarding the additional measures he proposes to take with regard to the bovine TB programme
to try to tackle the current rates of TB, which is a serious issue across the farming community.
02/07/2025AA00300Deputy Liam Quaide: As the Minister knows, many settlements in east Cork were dev-
astated by ooding during Storm Babet in October 2023. I met with the Midleton and East
Cork Flood Protection Group last Friday, alongside my colleague, Councillor Eamonn Horgan.
There is growing concern and frustration within the community about the rate of progress of
ood relief works. We have had major delays with the installation of oodgates on homes and
businesses and there are questions about their quality. The Midleton ood relief scheme is
Dáil Éireann
348
making its way very slowly towards the planning phase. However, smaller scale projects that
would protect villages such as Mogeely, Castlemartyr, Killeagh and Rathcormac appear to be in
limbo. Their residents are increasingly worried for the future. The ood risk that is particular
to Whitegate, Ballinacurra, Ladysbridge and Youghal needs to be addressed. It is vital that the
Minister of State, Deputy Moran, visits all the settlements in east Cork as a matter of urgency
for an in-depth engagement in order that we have a clear roadmap on all aspects of ood relief
for the months ahead. It would also be good to see the Taoiseach there because this is a huge
issue for east Cork.
02/07/2025AA00400Deputy Jack Chambers: I appreciate the urgency of this for residents in Midleton and
throughout east Cork. I was there with Deputies O’Sullivan and O’Connor after the storm
nearly two years ago. A priority for the Government with regard to broader infrastructure more
generally and for ood relief schemes in particular is how we can shorten the project life cycle.
In many instances, ood schemes are taking far too long. The Minister of State, Deputy Moran,
is leading on that work, but is also seeking to prioritise ood relief schemes around the new
national development plan review, which is being undertaken. I will ask him to respond to the
Deputy on the specics relating to the schemes he mentioned. It is an absolute priority. The
Minister of State is trying to advance and commence some of these schemes, which I know are
of pressing need to communities that are worried, particularly as we enter the winter period
when there will be a considerable concern about rainfall.
02/07/2025AA00500Deputy Willie O’Dea: Last year, the Garda Commissioner nally gave his seal of approval
to the provision of a new Garda station in the very heavily populated suburbs of Castletroy, Mo-
naleen and Annacotty in Limerick city. I understand that the Government has set aside capital
funding and approved capital funding for the project. Unfortunately, the task of identifying
a site has been given to the Oce of Public Works - this was more than 12 months ago - and
the OPW, moving at its usual ponderous haste, has not yet identied a site. In the meantime,
the people of that area have been subjected to a tsunami of crime because the area is not being
properly policed. Will the Minister, his Department or another relevant Department intervene
directly with the OPW to bring this matter to a conclusion? The 18,000 people in the area de-
serve no less.
02/07/2025AA00600Deputy Jack Chambers: I regret that crime has had a serious impact on the local com-
munity in the last 12 months. I engage with the OPW regularly and I will ask for an update on
Castletroy Garda station. I will revert to the Deputy on it.
02/07/2025AA00700Deputy James Geoghegan: At last Thursday’s meeting of the Committee of Public Ac-
counts, the Garda Commissioner conrmed that he had reported to the Minister for justice on
the controlled delivery operation that related to the late Evan Fitzgerald. The Commissioner
went on to say that he took note of the comments made in the Seanad by Senator McDowell
with regard to what was or was not said in the currency of a live bail application, and that he
had referred those comments to the ombudsman for consideration. On Sunday’s “This Week”
programme, the ombudsman’s oce conrmed that there is nothing further to be considered by
it. Does the Minister for justice consider the matter concluded regarding what was or was not
said in that District Court bail application? Does he intend to carry out any further inquiries on
the matter?
02/07/2025AA00800Deputy Jack Chambers: First, what happened was a shocking incident for everyone pres-
ent in Carlow. I am limited in what I can say relating to these matters, some of which continue
to go through the legal process. I can ask the Minister for justice to respond to the specic ques-
2 July 2025
349
tion the Deputy raised following the “This Week” programme. He will be in a better position
to give the Deputy any detail or informed information on it.
02/07/2025AA00900Deputy Natasha Newsome Drennan: Throughout Kilkenny, there are major ongoing is-
sues with the school transport scheme. In Gowran, the Department advised last year that anoth-
er school bus be added due to the increase in the population, but still no additional bus service
has been allocated. In my own area of Ballyhale, families like my own have been pushed to
send children to school outside of their parish, despite the school bus collecting their neigh-
bours. There needs to be a parish rule in order that children can attend the primary school in
their local community. Year in, year out we face the same challenges with the school transport
scheme. Something is clearly not working. Will the Minister step in to ensure that bus services
are in place for the coming school term? It is just mayhem at the school gates.
02/07/2025AA01000Deputy Jack Chambers: I appreciate the urgency of forward planning when it comes to
school transport. Extensive work has been undertaken between the Department of education,
Bus Éireann and other delivery partners to support that in communities across Ireland. I do not
know the specics behind what is happening in the Deputy’s own constituency-----
02/07/2025AA01100Deputy Natasha Newsome Drennan: Bus Éireann needs to engage with people.
02/07/2025AA01200Deputy Jack Chambers: -----but I will ask the Minister and Bus Éireann to respond to the
Deputy’s specic needs. There is an ongoing engagement through the summer to ensure they
provide the appropriate school transport services, which are of huge importance to counties
across Ireland.
02/07/2025AA01300Deputy Ken O’Flynn: As the Minister may be aware, some schools throughout the country
have told parents that they have to buy specic tablets up to the value of approximately €600.
Some of these parents have been speaking to me. Those who have three children in secondary
school have had to go to credit unions so that they can pay €1,800 for these specic tablets. The
schools are sending out the information telling parents that the tablets have to be a certain make,
model and particular type of brand. For a lot of people, it is not aordable. This is happening
despite the introduction of the free book scheme, which was intended to reduce the nancial
burden. It seems to be in contradiction of what was described last year when the Government
was coming up with €9 million for pouches to reduce screen time. Will the Minister provide
some clarication on why this is happening? It is not just happening in one school in Cork; it
is happening across the country.
02/07/2025AA01400Deputy Jack Chambers: As the Deputy is aware, the Department of education fully ap-
preciates that costs and funding can pose an issue for schools. It is constantly working to ad-
dress this with enhanced nancial supports which were advanced in budget 2025 for this year.
Schools in any nancial diculty are asked to engage with the nancial support services unit. I
know that a priority for the Minister, Deputy McEntee, is to continue to improve the capitation
grant in schools, for example. That is something that we worked to improve over series of years
and is something that we will engage with over the coming weeks.
02/07/2025AA01500Deputy Eoghan Kenny: I want to raise an important issue with the Minister. Cork City
Council has sent a business case to the Government regarding the establishment of an integrated
services hub. Across our towns and cities we are seeing more and more needs arising for indi-
viduals, particularly adults who are homeless. Across Cork we have charitable organisations
oering beds for people to sleep, groups providing food, and many other amenities as well but
Dáil Éireann
350
what do people do during the day in terms of services? They need to be provided with a service
like this, which would be the rst of its kind in Ireland. It would provide food, shelter, activi-
ties, supports and any additional information people need. In the long run this venue could be
the location for the provision of a supervised drug injection centre for the city. Is the Minister
aware of this business case? What is the Government’s stance on it as an integrated services
hub for Cork? Will a business case be signed o?
02/07/2025BB00200Deputy Jack Chambers: I know we cannot have an over and back on this. I am not sure
whose incentive it is. Is it the Department of housing? I assume it is. To what Government
Department has it been sent?
02/07/2025BB00300Deputy Eoghan Kenny: I am unsure who it has been sent to.
02/07/2025BB00400Deputy Jack Chambers: We will try to nd out who within government has received the
particular business case, or which Government Department, and indeed under what funding
scheme it is proposed to support that particular project of an integrated services hub. We always
welcome any initiative of local authorities, or indeed local communities, to provide rounded
supports and services for vulnerable people in our community. We have countless examples of
it happening in Dublin and it is positive to see such initiatives being proposed in Cork. I will
ask whatever line Department to which it is being submitted to evaluate it and come back to the
Deputy with a position.
02/07/2025BB00500An Ceann Comhairle: I thank the Minister.
Cuireadh an Dáil ar onraí ar 1.21 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 2.20 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 1.21 p.m. and resumed at 2.20 p.m.
02/07/2025HH00100All-Island Strategic Rail Review: Statements
02/07/2025HH00200An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Seán Canney, for
statements on the recommendations of the all-island strategic rail review.
02/07/2025HH00300Minister of State at the Department of Transport (Deputy Seán Canney): I thank the
Leas-Cheann Comhairle and Deputies. I welcome the opportunity to address the House this af-
ternoon to update Members on the all-island strategic rail review. Rail represents a particularly
enduring form of infrastructure. Rail lines built in the 1800s are still carrying passengers today.
The decisions and investments we make for rail in this decade will similarly benet the Irish
people, economy and the environment to the end of this century and beyond. This is why it is
so important to plan our rail network in a holistic and strategic manner looking at the impacts
and benets across all the regions of Ireland. This is the key strength of the all-island strategic
rail review.
Before I discuss the review I would like to provide an update on the progress we are already
making on processing rail projects across the country. The last few years have seen signicant
progress on investment in our national rail network to create a more ecient, safe and better
service for the people of Ireland. Most recently, the opening of the new through platform at
Kent Station represented a landmark day in the delivery of the Cork area commuter rail pro-
gramme. I visited this project a couple of weeks ago. This platform will facilitate commuter
trains to travel through Kent Station from Mallow to Midleton or Cobh without requiring pas-
2 July 2025
351
sengers to change services. This will support a better rail service. This platform is just the rst
element of the programme to go live. Works are well under way on two other work packages,
namely the twin tracking of the Glounthaune to Midleton line and the signicant signalling
upgrade. These elements of the programme are on course to be delivered by the end of next
year and together with the new platform will lay the foundation for further enhancements of
Cork commuter rail services. This will help to deliver a more frequent, ecient and reliable
rail service to the people of Cork. These works all represent phase 1 of the programme, which
received €164 million in funding from the EU recovery and resilience facility, and represents
the largest ever investment in the Cork rail network in the history of the State.
I am happy to say that design has also commenced in relation to phase 2 of the programme,
which can deliver eight new stations and provides for electrication of the Cork rail system.
This will be advanced following the completion of phase 1 works subject to funding and rel-
evant approvals. On 18 June a public consultation on phase 2 of the Cork area programme was
launched, which will give the public a more detailed look at the proposals and an opportunity
to share their views on the plan. The opening of the new platform at Cork’s Kent Station is part
of a series of train station upgrade works that are being progressed across the country. Works
are progressing at Ceannt Station in Galway in addition to planning for a new station at Moy-
ross and the development of a new Plunkett Station in Waterford. Planning permission for the
additional train platform and a passing loop at Oranmore Station was also granted in February
and works on this project should commence early next year. These station upgrades will pro-
vide enhanced passenger experience and improved accessibility. Crucially, they will enable
increased capacity on the networks, helping us to plan for the future. For example, the upgrade
of Ceannt Station in Galway will increase the number of platforms from two to ve, which will
support a growth in frequencies envisioned under the all-island strategic rail review. Another
good example of progress being made is the reinstatement of the Foynes rail line. This project
will bring back rail freight services from Limerick city to Shannon Foynes Port next year, sup-
porting a broader vision for the expansion of rail freight services across the network. Iarnród
Éireann also announced the purchase of 100 new freight wagons in May. These wagons will
replace the end-of-life rolling stock and will enable movement of rail freight at faster speeds
across the rail network. This purchase acts in support of our goals to increase the modal share
of rail freight.
In the Dublin region DART+ is the most signicant expansion of the electried commuter
rail service since the introduction of the original DART line in 1984. The DART+ programme
will bring electried DART commuter trains west as far as Maynooth and the M3 Parkway,
south west to Hazelhatch and Celbridge, and north to Drogheda. It will double the rail city
centre capacity from approximately 26,000 to 52,000 passengers per direction per hour, and it
will triple the electried network from approximately 50 km on the existing DART line today
to 250 km in the future. We have seen positive news emerge from the planning system with the
conditional planning for the DART+ West project, and full planning approval for the DART+
South West project in 2024. In addition, a planning application was launched for DART+
Coastal North last year. It is on the northern rail line from Connolly Station to Drogheda and
the public will get to experience the rst element of the DART+ programme with new battery
electric DART carriages, which are currently undergoing testing and will go into service next
year. These new carriages are signicant not just because they will provide greater capacity and
a better passenger experience but also because they are helping us to meet our decarbonisation
goals. European Union funding has also been provided under the REPowerEU programme for
the installation of battery electric train charging infrastructure at MacBride Station in Drogheda
Dáil Éireann
352
as part of the DART+ programme to support our national and European decarbonisation goals.
There have also been recent improvements in the cross-Border Enterprise rail service be-
tween Dublin and Belfast. The Enterprise rail service is the only cross-Border rail service on
the island of Ireland. It is a well-known symbol of North-South co-operation and provides an
important public transport link operating between Belfast and Dublin. The current Enterprise
rail eet will reach the end of its standard design life later in this decade and an Enterprise eet
replacement programme is now well advanced. Iarnród Éireann and Translink Northern Ire-
land Railways have successfully applied for funding of €165 million for the project under the
PEACEPLUS cross-Border EU programme, which is managed by the Special EU Programmes
Body, a North-South implementation body established under the Good Friday Agreement. The
balance of funding for the project will be provided jointly through the Department of Transport
and the Department for Infrastructure in Northern Ireland on a 50:50 basis. This project will
build on the introduction of an hourly Enterprise train service in October 2024, which is sup-
ported by the Shared Island Fund. The Enterprise eet replacement programme will support a
signicant increase in rail passengers on the Dublin-Belfast corridor compared with today, with
annual passenger numbers on the Enterprise services expected to reach 2.5 million in 2032.
With regard to the all-island rail review, the programme for Government is clear on the need
to continue investment in our national rail network, noting that we will work collaboratively
to act on the recommendations of the all-island strategic rail review to improve connectivity
across the island of Ireland. The review, which was published in July of last year, was led by
my Department and the Department for Infrastructure in Northern Ireland. The groundbreak-
ing report set out a strategic vision for the development of the rail system across the island of
Ireland over the coming decades. By taking a holistic and strategic review of the rail network
across the island of Ireland rather than looking at one region or another, the review not only
encourages balanced regional development but also looks at how individual lines or projects t
into and strengthen the wider network in its entirety. The review considered how the rail net-
work on the island of Ireland can be developed to contribute to decarbonisation, promote con-
nectivity between cities, enhance regional and rural accessibility, and support balanced regional
development with a particular emphasis on the north west of the island, among other goals. The
review examined existing, disused and potential new lines on the network, and also considered
the future role for rail freight. The nal review sets out 32 strategic recommendations to en-
hance and expand the rail system over a period to 2050, aligning with net carbon zero missions
in both jurisdictions. The recommendations set out to transform the quality of the rail system to
the benet of passengers and the wider society on the island through additional capacity on the
rail network, increased service frequencies, and developing new rail lines. These investments
will support higher frequency and more ecient passenger and rail freight services. On this
basis, the report’s recommendations envisage huge benets being created for rail on the island.
Upgrading much of the single-track rail network to double-track, with four-track in some areas,
will provide additional capacity. New 200 km/h intercity trains will provide faster services,
with rail journey times between cities signicantly reduced and, in some cases, halved. There
will be higher frequency train services, at least hourly between cities and at least every two
hours on regional and rural routes. In line with Ireland’s decarbonisation goals, there will be a
carbon net-zero rail system achieved, primarily through the overhead electrication of intercity
routes and new electric trains.
On creating wider connectivity, the rail review recommends that the rail network route
length on the island should increase from approximately 2,300 km to almost 3,000 km, with the
2 July 2025
353
reopening of former and new rail lines, including the previously mentioned western rail cor-
ridor. Wider access will be facilitated by new rail routes in the north midlands and north west,
meaning 700,000 more people would live within 5 km of a train station. High-level economic
analysis conducted as part of the review indicates that the benets of the package of recommen-
dations broadly equal their cost, indicating economic feasibility.
I am delighted to say that included among these 32 recommendations is the reinstatement
of the western rail corridor between Claremorris and Athenry. The reinstatement of this line
has the potential to support both passenger and rail freight services, allowing a direct route for
freight services from Ballina and Westport to ports on the south coast to avoid the more con-
gested lines of the rail network around Dublin. This route would also reconnect Tuam to the
railway and enable direct passenger services between Galway and Mayo, supporting regional
development in the area. This project serves as an example of the types of benet that interven-
tions proposed under the rail review can provide right across our rail network.
My Department is currently working with the European Investment Bank, EIB, and rail
stakeholders north and south of the Border, including the National Transport Authority, NTA,
and Iarnród Éireann, to consider how best to sequence and implement the recommendations of
the rail review with a view to optimising their development for passengers and society. This
work includes the preparation of a project prioritisation strategy. This strategy has been broadly
agreed by the project steering group and will be published later this year. It considers how
best to optimise the sequencing and implementation of the review recommendations, including
both short-term interventions and longer-term projects. The early interventions identied in
the strategy encompass investment across regions of the rail network aimed at adding capac-
ity and resilience through improvements works that can be made relatively easily and quickly
and without the need for planning permission. It should be feasible to deliver them in the short
term, subject to funding.
In relation to major interventions, the strategy identies a series of major projects for com-
pletion or substantial completion over the medium term. These projects will provide for capac-
ity enhancements and electrication of the network to help deliver on the vision set out in the
all-island strategic rail review. For major projects, work is also progressing with the EIB on
conducting a more detailed analysis. This analysis will support the preparation of documents
required as part of the appraisal process as set out under the infrastructure guidelines, which
should help expedite their approval.
Ireland has used funding from the European Union to advance a number of rail projects over
the decades, and as I previously noted, we are currently using funds from the EU to advance
works as part of the Cork area commuter rail programme and install charging infrastructure at
Drogheda to support the roll-out of a battery electric eet, and we have applied for funding to
support the purchase of new rolling stock for the cross-Border Enterprise rail service. Lever-
aging EU grant and other funding opportunities can play an important role in advancing the
interventions set out in the rail review. For this reason, work being supported by the EIB will
also include an examination of potential funding sources available to advance these projects.
My Department is using this strategy as an input into our engagement as part of the review
of the national development plan, NDP, which is currently well under way. As a Department,
we are actively engaged with our colleagues in the Department of public expenditure on review-
ing the current NDP and seeking to deliver improved transport outcomes for citizens across the
country. I hope that this NDP will build on the successes that we have seen since publication
Dáil Éireann
354
of the last NDP.
While there is a renewed focus on improving delivery, it is also important to acknowledge
the delivery that has occurred since publication of the last NDP in 2021. In public transport,
new bus and train eets are already in service, with new DART eet in testing for service entry
next year and an order for a new Enterprise train eet expected to be signed later this year. On
the rail network, charging facilities are being constructed in Drogheda to support those new
battery electric units already mentioned, a new station opened at Pelletstown, another is under
construction at Woodbrook and yet another new station is under construction in Waterford,
forming the centre of a new city quarter on the North Quays.
There is also the largest ever investment in Cork’s rail network under way with the new plat-
form in Kent already opened, signalling upgrades under construction, and double tracking from
Glounthaune to Midleton well under way. In Limerick, Colbert Station has been redeveloped
with a modern, integrated bus, rail and public realm project completed and open for use, and
the disused Foynes line is being brought back into service as a freight line. In Galway, Ceannt
Station is being redeveloped and is expected to be nished later this year, with the Oranmore
station expected to start next year.
With all of this infrastructure being designed with accessibility in mind, signicant progress
has been made in improving accessibility for all. This year, we have increased funding by 67%
from 2024 for the retrotting of legacy infrastructure to make it more accessible, particularly
for disabled people and older people.
I look forward to working closely with the NTA and Iarnród Éireann in the coming weeks,
months and years to make these investment plans a reality. Today, I met representatives of
the north-west city region from Donegal, Derry and Strabane. We discussed the all-island rail
review. It is important to emphasise that this review is an all-island one and we have to work
together to ensure that we deliver it. I had a very positive meeting with the representatives and
their ocials. I look forward to engaging with them on an ongoing basis.
My principle with public transport is that if we provide a good service with frequency, we
will provide an attractive, alternative mode of transport to the car. We have to make sure that,
when we develop lines and add capacity, we also put the carriages in place to meet the demand.
Previously, a Deputy on the other side of the House mentioned the Athenry to Galway line. The
passing loop there will help frequency in the short term. In the longer term, we will be looking
at the double tracking of the line.
02/07/2025JJ00200Deputy Pa Daly: The all-island strategic rail review sets out a vision for the development of
Ireland’s rail system to 2050. It was jointly commissioned by the Department of Transport and
the Department for Infrastructure in the North. The review aptly demonstrates the advantage of
taking an all-island view, which the Minister of State hinted at. Appropriately enough, it has 32
recommendations. These aim to enhance connectivity across the island, with high-speed trains,
an expansion of the rail network, double-track upgrades, new intercity trains and increased
frequency. We have all seen that, when new trains are put on, the frequency of use doubles or
triples. We hope for a tripling of passengers using the rail system.
For decades, successive short-sighted Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Governments have system-
atically dismantled the rail lines and services. Services were run down and then abandoned or
ceased. Rural Ireland, particularly in the west and north west, has suered immensely from
2 July 2025
355
this. For example, the northern and western regions rank in the bottom 20 of the EU’s 234
regions for transport infrastructure. This is incredible in a modern, progressive country. All
this did was strip away some of the essential building blocks of well-connected, ecient and
sustainable transport systems. Short-term economic thinking often took priority over long-term
infrastructure and planning. We must not repeat the same mistakes.
Our network is nearly 200 years old and it is an essential strategic asset that must be planned
beyond short-term economic cycles. The review is an important step in correcting some of the
wrongs of the past and will help us to prepare for a unied Ireland in future. If we get this right,
we can benet all of the people of the island into the next century. We must correct the regional
imbalances created by decades of bad planning.
This review could also help to unlock housing along the lines through transport-oriented de-
velopment. There is also potential for Iarnród Éireann to develop unused sites in town centres
for aordable housing, perhaps for their sta or the general public.
It is important to note that a year has passed since the review was rst published and it is
two years since the draft review was published. It is all well and good to have plans on paper
but we must ensure they are put into action.
It is also worth noting the record of Iarnród Éireann under Jim Meade. It is doing a fantastic
job and delivering projects on time and on budget. It can continue to do this if the Government
gets serious and ensures that the pipeline of projects is sanctioned and resourced eectively.
The Minister of State mentioned the western rail corridor. There is no doubt that should be
progressed all the way to Sligo as soon as possible. If Iarnród Éireann is given the job, it will
do it. We must invest now in Ireland’s future. I implore the Minister of State to ensure there
are proper services on the network.
There is only a trolley service on one or two train routes. One cannot get so much as a bottle
of water, which is unacceptable in this day and age. I urge the Minister of State to do as much
as he can to ensure directly employed sta, ideally, operate such services on all routes.
02/07/2025KK00200Deputy Louis O’Hara: The dierences are striking when we look at a map of Ireland’s cur-
rent rail network compared to the network of 100 years ago. I refer in particular to the absence
of infrastructure from the west, the north west and Border counties. The reality is that we have
gone backwards in recent decades. Plans are one thing but we need implementation to progress
new projects in a timely manner and to address the imbalance in regional infrastructure.
The western rail corridor is critical to the region. It has been talked about and put on the
long nger for years. If the Government is serious about regional development, this project
must be progressed. We must get a move on. The project is shovel-ready and can be delivered
in the lifetime of this Government. We cannot have the same debate in ve years’ time.
The benets of rail are well known in terms of taking cars o the road, reducing congestion,
enhancing freight potential and delivering a sustainable transport link for the people of north
Galway and Mayo into Galway city and ultimately on to Sligo as well. There cannot be any
more delays on this project, which must be commenced as soon as possible.
The double-tracking of the Athenry to Galway line is critical. Athenry is at the crossroads of
the Ennis and future Claremorris sections of the western rail corridor and the Dublin to Galway
line. Double-tracking is needed to ensure we have a proper commuter service between Galway
Dáil Éireann
356
city and county and to cities right across the country.
As the Minister of State outlined, the passing loop at Oranmore and the redevelopment of
Ceannt Station are very welcome, as is the capacity study on the Galway to Dublin line, which
was announced in recent days.
Similar to the western rail corridor, the current issues and the benets of implementing im-
provements are well known. Reports are one thing but delivery is another. That is where the
Government has always been lacking. Commuters are sick and tired of overcrowded services,
delays and restrictions because of the single track and the total absence of infrastructure, as is
the case in north Galway and Mayo.
We need ambition and to future-proof the rail infrastructure and, crucially, get projects de-
livered.
02/07/2025KK00300Deputy Pearse Doherty: Investment in rail infrastructure in the north west is crucial if we
are in any way serious about balanced regional development. Donegal is one of the few coun-
ties on the island of Ireland that does not have a rail network. That is simply unacceptable. The
rail review has proposed linking Derry and Letterkenny, which is crucial for the north-west city
region, as well as connectivity with Belfast and a spur to Dublin.
I would love to see a direct line from the capital city, Dublin, to the fourth largest city on the
island, namely, Derry. It is my ambition to achieve that. It is appalling and shows the eects
of partition that, in this day and age we simply do not have a connection between those two cit-
ies. What we deserve is a fully costed commitment from the Government on a Letterkenny to
Derry line, the other potentials that exist, how we deliver the project, and the timeframe for it.
We must make sure that Donegal is no longer a forgotten county. It is not acceptable anymore,
in particular when we talk about all the challenges, including regional development and climate
change. Donegal has simply been forgotten in regard to rail and that cannot continue any lon-
ger. I seek commitments from the Government to push this forward.
02/07/2025KK00400An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I thank Deputy Doherty. I congratulate him on nishing on
time.
02/07/2025KK00500Deputy Maurice Quinlivan: Fittingly, the all-island strategic rail review contains 32 rec-
ommendations across six headings. I welcome the all-Ireland nature of the document and its
commitment to increasing rail coverage across the island.
I commute to Leinster House most weeks on the Dublin to Limerick train. I acknowledge
the sta who service Colbert Station in Limerick city on this route. They are always friendly,
approachable and very informative. However, there are signicant gaps in railway coverage
and a lack of regional balance on the current lines. The strategic review is timely and necessary,
as far too many lines have been closed by successive Governments in recent decades. I hope
this review and the more localised transport strategies will be the spur that allows lines to be
reopened and rail services across the State to be enhanced.
The report recommends an increase in frequency on regional lines, including Galway to
Limerick, Limerick to Cork and Limerick to Ballybrophy. The Ballybrophy line, which con-
tains the Castleconnell to Limerick route, operates only three times per day and it is important
for this frequency to be increased. It is bonkers that we do not use this line more because it
would bring hundreds of people to the city every day.
2 July 2025
357
The report notes the limited local rail services in Limerick. I welcome that construction is
anticipated to begin next year on a train station in Moyross. This should be the start of a more
complete service within Limerick city. In Limerick, we have existing lines that can be devel-
oped into a comprehensive suburban rail service to serve local journeys. We all want to see
fewer cars being used for short journeys and sustainable intracity transport options could be a
fantastic alternative.
In examining transport options for Limerick, the strategic rail review highlights the case of
the city of Exeter in the UK. The city has a similar population size and geographical layout to
the Limerick-Shannon area. The suburban rail network in Exeter delivers a two-train per hour
service to eight stations within the city and a further 12 that fall outside the boundary of the city.
This could easily be replicated in Limerick.
In the short time remaining, I want to mention the rail spur to Shannon Airport, which is
critical for the future of the economy in the mid-west region.
02/07/2025KK00600Deputy Pat Buckley: Many Corkonians have happy memories of taking the train to Youghal
on a summer day. The train might have 14 carriages but we would be lucky to get a seat on
the train from Midleton. Sadly, the train service between Cork city and Youghal has not been
in operation for almost 30 years, when passenger services were withdrawn. An online petition
has received more than 6,000 signatures, which shows the hunger among the people of Youghal
to have this train service back up and running. Irish Rail owns the land, and a space has been
kept alongside the new greenway that could easily accommodate a new twin-track or light rail
line. Every ve years, there is a review to assess the demand and viability of a potential route
connecting the city to Youghal. Irish Rail has indicated that it is willing to look at reopening the
line, if it receives the funding to do so. Regrettably, the reopening of the line from Midleton to
Youghal is not included in the all island strategic rail review.
I have raised the issue with TII and the NTA approximately three times every year for the
past seven years. I have asked for a park-and-ride facility in Youghal to service the rail station
but, unfortunately, it has not been forthcoming. If the Cork to Youghal rail line is restored, it
would reduce carbon emissions, improve air quality, decrease trac congestion on the N25 and
contribute to a more sustainable environment.
I met Fáilte Ireland this morning. We discussed Youghal and Cobh, but especially Youghal,
where the congestion on the N25 is holding back tourism and the growth of business. The
bridge at Belvelly in Cobh is aecting the Port of Cork and housing. A rail service would de-
liver signicant advantages to commuters, tourists, businesses and the environment. It would
make a valuable addition to Ireland’s rail network. I urge the Government to please support the
reopening of the historic Cork to Youghal line and ensure it is included in any future transport
planning and investment.
02/07/2025KK00700Visit of Peruvian Delegation
02/07/2025KK00800An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Peruvian ambassador and ocials from the embassy are
in attendance in the Distinguished Visitors Gallery. They are very welcome to our proceedings.
I thank them for their visit.
Dáil Éireann
358
02/07/2025KK00900All-Island Strategic Rail Review: Statements (Resumed)
02/07/2025KK01000Deputy Conor D. McGuinness: The all island strategic rail review is a positive step. We
have to acknowledge that, but only if it leads to real delivery across the whole island and not
just around Dublin. As Sinn Féin spokesperson for rural and community development, I have
to say the current approach to transport planning is failing our regions. The national planning
framework in inadequate. It continues to prioritise the capital while neglecting infrastructure
for rural and regional communities. The review cannot become another glossy document that
locks in underinvestment west, south and north of the M50. We need rail to connect communi-
ties not just to Dublin, but across the regions. That means serious investment in regional rail,
frequent and reliable services, and the reopening of disused lines where there is demand. A
functioning, balanced, rail network is essential for rural sustainability, economic development
and regional balance.
The Youghal to Midleton railway is a community-led project that deserves Government
backing. There is a wide campaign in east Cork, but also in west Waterford. Somebody might
ask why a TD from west Waterford is supporting an additional rail line stretching from Midle-
ton to Youghal. It is crucial, not just for east Cork, but for west Waterford and the wider region,
as it will take cars o the road, assist commuters travelling into Cork, including Little Island
and Cork city, for work, and provide options to people for either park-and-ride at Youghal or to
drive on less congested roads. Reopening this line would allow those travelling from Waterford
to Cork to get to work on time with minimal stress. It would take cars o the road. The physical
corridor is intact and runs beside the existing greenway. The community is on board. There is
broad support across business and communities for this. Once again, however, we see no plan,
no funding commitment, no engagement from the Government. That is not good enough. This
is exactly the kind of strategic investment that could deliver real change for regional communi-
ties. I am calling on the Government to support the extension of the Cork-Midleton rail line
into Youghal.
02/07/2025LL00200Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire: I support my colleague. I well understand why Wa-
terford people might want to come to Cork. I do not think we should deprive them of that op-
portunity at all.
Any time there is a debate on rail infrastructure, there is a fair bit of interest right across the
country. That reects a signicant shift in people’s mentality in the last 20 or 30 years. If we
go back 50 or 60 years or even more recently, rail lines were still being closed. There has been
a shift. It reects that people want the opportunity to use rail and if it is there, they will take it.
Anywhere rail lines have been reopened or new rail lines have been initiated, they have been a
success.
I acknowledge the work that has been done in Cork by Iarnród Éireann, led by A.J. Cro-
nin’s team, including Kieran Murphy and Stephen Hackett. A lot of progress has been made
and there is more to come. There will be decisions in the forthcoming period about electric
carriages and where they will go. We want to make sure that they are everywhere. If they are
delivered to Cork on time, it will ensure some of the new routes being talked about become vi-
able at the frequencies that are necessary.
I will briey touch on the issue of a Luas for Cork. It is a vital piece of infrastructure. I
welcome that we are now talking about it in real terms. We need to learn from the mistake in
Dublin, where there were two routes that were not connected. We need to move the Cork plan
2 July 2025
359
from one route to two so that most of the city is served east to west and north to south. There is
a gap for places like Douglas, Rochestown and into Carrigaline. They are big, populous areas
with heavy trac. We should be connecting the north of the city as well. It is an area that is
often neglected in terms of infrastructure. Due to the way the Dublin Luas is set up, we imagine
that such operations have to be run through private contractors. I do not believe so. I do not
see any reason a public body should not be able to run the Cork Luas, and who better to do that
than Iarnród Éireann? Clearly from the public point of view, it is the agency that could do it.
That needs to be considered and is something I would support.
02/07/2025LL00300Deputy Ciarán Ahern: I am delighted to speak on the all-island rail review. We need to
see a major modal shift in how we get ourselves from one place to another on this island so
that we are not so dependent on our cars. Rail will obviously play a huge role in that. We have
a somewhat sorry history in this country when it comes to rail infrastructure. What was once
a fairly comprehensive rail network in the early parts of the 20th century was progressively
ripped up as time went on. There are a number of reasons for this but it was mainly due to the
proliferation of private car use. With that, rail infrastructure made way for road infrastructure,
not least in Dublin city, where our tramlines were ripped up.
I want to get us back to where we were previously in terms of coverage and to restore that
once great rail network. I hope that this strategic review can provide some of the impetus and
a template to do just that. I have concerns, though. They are not necessarily about what is in-
cluded in the review, but what is omitted. I am conscious that this is not a policy document, but
something to inform policymakers. I encourage this and future Governments to implement the
recommendations that have emerged from the review but also to go beyond it and ll in those
gaps that have been missed.
Others have and will raise their own concerns and mention where they think improvements
could be made. I will come back to mine and begin with the positives. There is a lot to be
positive about in this document. As the Labour Party’s spokesperson on climate, energy and
environment, as well as our transport spokesperson, I welcome the fact there is a strong focus
on decarbonisation in the review. The DART remains the only electried heavy rail line in the
country and the last signicant project undertaken here, in terms of electried heavy rail, was
the DART extension to Greystones 25 years ago. We need to do so much better than this. Rail
has a big part to play in helping us reduce our transport emissions and the electrication of our
rail lines will be key to that. I recently met Iarnród Éireann CEO Jim Meade and I know he is
very keen on this element. I left that meeting with Jim Meade thinking he should be running
the country, to be honest. I also welcome the focus on improving frequency and eciency for
service users. That would be key to encouraging people to use our rail systems. That is some-
thing we could really do with in the short term.
Broadly, we need to be more strategic and exible in our timetabling. We could be doing
better around facilitating more frequent services during peak demand times or when big events
are happening. The Minister, Deputy Darragh O’Brien, will be aware of the situation with the
DART services following the recent Charli XCX concert in his constituency.
I appreciate the focus on interconnectivity between our major cities. This is crucial to re-
gional and balanced economic development. However, regarding emissions, I question why
a direct line between Cork city and Limerick city has not been included. I also question why
the western rail corridor has not been extended to Donegal in this review. The north west has
been abandoned in terms of rail infrastructure and the proposals in the review do not rectify that
Dáil Éireann
360
to any great extent. If we do want to achieve balanced regional development, that needs to be
looked at.
Staying with the west, I will raise a matter on behalf of my colleague, Senator Nessa Cos-
grove. The review mentions reinstating the Athenry to Claremorris line but not the Claremorris
to Collooney line. We would like to see that line reinstated.
I have not spoken about MetroLink, as I am sure my colleague, Deputy Duncan Smith, is
going to cover that. However, as a TD for Dublin South-West, I reiterate my call for an inde-
pendent feasibility study for a metro out to there. It was included in the programme for Govern-
ment but is nowhere in the strategic rail review. We would like to see that. There are more than
350,000 people living in Dublin South-West with no access to rail infrastructure unless they
live on the very edge of the constituency. All I am asking for is a fair assessment of the case,
given the issues identied with a previous feasibility study.
02/07/2025LL00400Deputy Duncan Smith: I welcome the time to speak on this topic. The northern commuter
line is one of the most stressed lines in this country. The plan in the all-island strategic review,
which is a long-distance project, aims at four-tracking that line. That is a must for towns like
Donabate, the population of which is going to increase by up to 5,000 people in the next couple
of years, or 25%. It is the rst stop outside the DART line and the last stop on the northern
commuter line coming in. They are unable to get on the train at peak times. Where this Gov-
ernment is building houses, it needs to put infrastructure. There is a plan for a spur from Clon-
grin to the airport. In the context of the MetroLink examinations, it was proven that would
not work unless there was a four-track provision along the northern commuter line all the way
into Connolly Station. We need MetroLink. We expect a decision very shortly. It is the most
vital transport project for Dublin, particularly for the northside of Dublin. I hope we will have
a positive outcome for the planning process soon and we can get building that.
There is an awful lot to welcome in this all-island rail review, but the northern commuter
line needs massive upgrading and investment.
02/07/2025LL00500Deputy Mark Wall: I want to talk about my hometown of Athy. I have been dealing with
Irish Rail over the last period about increasing the frequency of rail services from the commuter
town of Athy into Dublin. I was pleased with a recent response from Irish Rail that told me the
imminent DART+ eet coming on stream would free up additional carriages. We are looking
for an hourly service from Athy and also on the Waterford line. That would denitely benet
the huge increase in the population of Athy but also the commuting towns right down to the city
of Waterford. Unfortunately, Athy has an overreliance on private transport. Having an hourly
service from the town into Dublin would be most welcome.
Irish Rail’s reply stated that it would be based on demand and the NTA’s approval.
3 o’clock
In the past three or four days, I put a petition online and it already has 2,000 signatures,
which I will share with the Minister of State at the end of the day. There is demand for an
hourly service from Athy to Dublin for all those commuting. As part of this review, I hope the
Minister of State will consider that hourly service from Athy and other commuter towns along
the Waterford line to Dublin and providing the additional carriages on the line to accommodate
it. The demand is obvious from the petition I put up online recently. I hope the Government
will give the people the necessary services they deserve.
2 July 2025
361
02/07/2025MM00200Deputy Ged Nash: I will cut to the chase. North Drogheda objectively needs a train sta-
tion. It should already be in place. I was on Louth County Council more than 20 years ago
when we masterplanned the provision of 5,000 new homes. Half of those homes have been or
are in the process of being built. These plans included a site for a train station, but then came
the crash. Up to half of those homes, as I said, have been built or they are in process and we
still do not have a new station.
The prole of the new residents of that area suggests that a high proportion of them are
commuters. Getting from that side of Drogheda, which will be Ireland’s next city, Ireland’s
smallest city, to the train station can be a real challenge in the morning. DART+ will create
capacity issues. As Deputy Smith said, we need four-tracking and suggestions have been made
for a four-tracking initiative parallel to the M1 up to Clongrin. It is an intriguing suggestion
and absolutely makes sense.
Let us get to the point where we can establish the Drogheda east station. That is how it is re-
ferred to in the plan. Let us get it up and running, even with a limited service for now to relieve
congestion and provide those commuting opportunities from north Drogheda for the thousands
of people who live there at the moment. Will the Minister commit to including the provision of
the Drogheda east station in the policy initiative that I understand will be developed later this
year based on the rail review proposals? The review does not mention Dunleer station at all. It
was closed a few decades ago. Will the Minister conrm whether, if there is no mention in the
review of a station reopening, it means the prospect of opening it, that is the station in Dunleer,
is buried or gone once and for all?
02/07/2025MM00300Deputy Conor Sheehan: As a public representative from the west of Ireland, I want to talk
to the Minister of State as another public representative from the west of Ireland about the need
to connect Shannon Airport to the rail network. This can be done within ve years. It needs to
be included in the NDP review. What a testament it would be to the Minister of State and what
a legacy he would leave if he was the person to deliver it and get it over the line. It could even
be named “the Canney train”.
There is existing commuter rail infrastructure in Limerick. The line from Limerick to Ennis
and on to Galway works well. It was said the western rail corridor would be a op. It is not
a op. It works so well that on trains from Athenry to Galway people are like sardines at the
moment. We need to deliver a direct train from Limerick to Cork and get the rest of the com-
muter rail network in Limerick activated again. The plan is there. It needs to be included in the
NDP review. It is the solution to all our trac problems in Limerick because none of this infra-
structure was ever taken away. The rights of way are there. There is no compulsory purchase
order, CPO, involved. It has been transformational to see how quickly Limerick to Foynes has
gone from being a litany of derelict sites to the point that signalling equipment is being put in,
which is happening at the moment. That can be done with the rest of the network. Let us get
the suburban rail network in Limerick, as is being done in Cork at the moment. I imagine there
is some political pressure there because of the Taoiseach being a Cork man. I want to make the
case strongly for rail in the NDP.
02/07/2025MM00400Deputy Malcolm Byrne: I have listened in envy to some of my colleagues talk about the
wonderful rail services they have and how much more they need, because in this rail review the
Rosslare line was an afterthought. Hardly any consideration was given to improving the ser-
vices south of Wicklow town. While I welcome that we are talking about extending the DART
services to Greystones in Wicklow, it is intended in this review to force passengers south of that
Dáil Éireann
362
line - those who get on in Rathdrum, Arklow, Gorey or stations further south - to change trains
in Wicklow or Greystones. That is not going to happen on any other line. On a cold wet morn-
ing, commuters will have to change trains and no consideration has been given to those with
disabilities or mobility diculties.
There is talk of doubling the number of lines from two to four on the northern line. Can
we also consider doubling it on the Rosslare line from one to two? We hear colleagues talking
about the services that are provided. Let me look at the services for commuters in areas around
the country that are equidistant from Dublin. For those coming from Dundalk or Drogheda, as
Deputy Nash does, there are 16 services available every day. From Portlaoise, which is also
the same distance from Dublin as some of the areas I represent, there are 32 services. From
Carlow, there are 11 services. However, if you are travelling from Rathdrum, Arklow or Gorey
to Dublin there is a maximum of six services on any day and we are served by the worst rail
carriages in the country. When I raised this recently with Iarnród Éireann, the promise for im-
proving carriages was, that when it puts all the new carriages on all the other tracks, it will give
whatever is left over to Rosslare.
The problem is we are not seeing improvements to the M11. I raised this when Eamon Ryan
was Minister for Transport. The M11 is the spine that runs through Wicklow and Wexford and
links us with the capital. If we do not see improvements on that route, one would expect us
to be trying to get people onto the trains, but the rail service serving the east coast is not t for
purpose.
Part of the challenge, especially when coming in from Bray, is there are six level crossings
that delay some of the services. Can they be removed? Equally, commitments have often been
made around areas to allow the trains coming from Rosslare to pass the DART on the southside
of Dublin. All we are asking for is that we would go some way towards providing a service for
counties Wicklow and Wexford to match the services in other parts of the country. I will quite
happily call it “the Canney train” if the Minister of State delivers it. We might even go so far
as to call it “the Canney line”.
02/07/2025MM00500An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: No pressure.
02/07/2025MM00600Deputy Keira Keogh: I thank the Minister of State for being here. I will address the all-
Ireland strategic rail review from the perspective of its profound signicance to County Mayo.
I am lucky to have a door-to-door service from Westport to Dublin, but if I want to go to Gal-
way, which is the nearest city, I would have to go to Athlone and then back to Galway and if I
want to go to Sligo, I have to drive or take the bus. It would be fantastic if students in particular
were able to get from Mayo to Galway by train, especially as we are struggling with the housing
crisis. We want a more connected and more equitable Ireland.
Some 32 strategic recommendations came out of the review. One of the lines to be reinstat-
ed has to be the western railway corridor between Claremorris and Athenry. Deputy Sheehan
spoke about the success of the new route in Limerick. Lots of compliments have been thrown
out, but if we got a train all the way to Ireland West Airport, we could call it “the Canney Ex-
press”. We are all bidding for the Minister of State’s attention.
In all seriousness, the Claremorris to Athenry line is a vital piece of railway. It would be
a lifeline for regional development and would restore a vital link between Mayo and Galway,
oering new economic, tourism and commuter opportunities. Reconnecting the rail line from
2 July 2025
363
Claremorris to Athenry would enable students from the west to more easily access third level
education in Galway and Limerick. It would be an equaliser and would also ease pressure on
some of the urban housing hotspots if people could travel from rural areas in the west into cities
such as Galway.
Ballina also plays a regional key role as a freight hub that connects Mayo to industries in
Dublin Port. With strategic investment, that link could be strengthened, making Mayo a logis-
tics leader. As I said, if we get the train to Shannon Airport and the train to Knock Airport, just
imagine the industry we could support. It would also reduce the number of freight trucks on the
roads, lowering our emissions and supporting our climate commitments.
I acknowledge a huge increase in the number of services on the Dublin to Westport route.
There are now ve services from Monday to Thursday and six on Fridays. However, it is rec-
ommended we have a train every two hours. As a new TD, I tried to take the train to Dublin to
reduce my emissions. Three times I took the train to Dublin and three times I had to rent a car
to get back to Mayo in time for meetings. Increased services would help our students, workers
coming from the west to the east and families and tourists alike.
I will nish on this note. We need to bring the trolley back on trains from Dublin to West-
port. It sounds like a nice-to-have but it is a journey of three and a half hours for some people.
Many members of the older population and tourists get on the train without realising there is
no trolley service. There is not a bottle of water available if there is an emergency. There are
no vending machines. I consistently receive emails from my constituents about this. Having
raised the issue with the NTA and recently with Irish Rail, I feel the promise to bring the trolley
back is going backwards, not forwards. Mayo cannot be left behind.
02/07/2025NN00200Deputy Erin McGreehan: I am very pleased to contribute to these important statements
on the all-island rail review recommendations. This is a chance to make a generational change,
transform people’s lives, connect people and communities across the island, strengthen our
economy and, importantly, reduce our carbon emissions.
Fianna Fáil welcomes this work, which was undertaken by the Department of Transport and
the Department for Infrastructure in Northern Ireland. The Belfast-Dublin line highlights the
shared ambition to deliver a decarbonised, modern rail system by 2050. The 32 recommenda-
tions are comprehensive. They envision faster trains, new and reopened lines and, ultimately,
a tripling of rail journeys. It is essential that all of us here, as public representatives, make sure
that no community is left behind.
That brings me to County Louth, which occupies a unique and pivotal position in the con-
versation around rail investment and connectivity on the island. We are the bridge between Bel-
fast and Dublin and the gateway to the north east. The region has been experiencing enormous
demographic change and economic growth and dynamism. Louth is the fastest growing county
in Ireland. Drogheda is now the our largest town, with Dundalk a very close second. We will
soon eclipse some of the regional cities. Mid-Louth communities like Dunleer are expanding
rapidly as well, as is that town’s need for housing. Dunleer is close to both Dublin and Belfast,
and also close to the economic hubs of Dundalk and Drogheda. The Enterprise service has been
increased and is so much of a success that we need more services and more carriages on the line
because there is standing room only in the trains.
We have to be very clear when we are implementing this review. We need to make sure
Dáil Éireann
364
the specic needs of Louth’s communities are at the forefront. The Department of Transport
and Iarnród Éireann need to increase the rolling stock on the Belfast line, strengthen existing
demand for train services and make sure there is capacity to deal with a surge in the number
of people moving to Louth over the next couple of years. It is also time to make sure we have
footprint stations and extra stations in the county. The growth in north Drogheda means there
are thousands of new homes and thousands more people in the area. They need to be able to
access rail easier. There is potential to open the line at Dunleer and open a new train station in
north Drogheda. We need an extra station in Louth given the growth in the population growth
and the importance of the county.
I look forward to working with the Minister of State. I have worked with Irish Rail and
raised concerns with it about resourcing and expanding the rail services from Dundalk to Dub-
lin and Dundalk to Belfast. I wish the Minister of State luck in his new role. He has our support
in the House.
02/07/2025NN00300Deputy Martin Kenny: I congratulate the Minister of State on his appointment. It is good
to have someone from the west in this role. I know he has always had a strong commitment to
the development of the western rail corridor. It always strikes me that the western rail corridor
only extends halfway up the west. We need to bring it the rest of the way. It is clear from the
map produced with the proposals in the rail review that there is a massive gap. From north
Mayo upwards, there is nothing. We need to ensure that changes. A fundamental change that
needs to happen is to open the western rail corridor all the way to Sligo and beyond. It needs
to go right up the west coast to ensure we can develop and open up the whole region to meet
its potential. The places on our island with the most potential are those that have had the least
investment. If they got that investment, they would ourish and rail is key to that happening.
We have a lot of work to do in that respect.
The rail review was an all-island review, which was very welcome. It looked at all parts of
the entire island. It talked about the need for decarbonisation and developing alternative modes
of transport that are less carbon-intensive than those we are currently using. An awful lot of
freight is moved by road on trucks. Much of that could be moved on rail. Our public transport
services need to be enhanced. Most Deputies from the west, including me, drive up and down
to Dublin every day. If I came from Sligo by train, the train home would be long gone by the
time I was nished here. That is the problem. The last train leaves at 7 p.m. That need to
change. I know Mr. Jim Meade and the people in Iarnród Éireann are working towards greater
frequency and better planning in respect of all of that but that will require investment. I hope
the Government will see the dividend that would pay. Investment is not spending money but
investing it for a return that will have a multiplier eect for the regions in which it is invested
and for the economy and ecology of the country. That needs to be made very clear.
In many parts of the country, including Mullingar and Athlone, additional train tracks and
more double-tracking are needed. We need greater frequency of train services, which can only
be done with investment in double-tracking.
With regard to the key airports, one of the strange things about this island is that our air-
ports do not connect to rail. Shannon Airport has been mentioned by some of our colleagues.
Clearly, a rail line to Shannon Airport needs to be a priority but so too does a line to Dublin
Airport. The metro line has been baked in the oven for a long time. An awful lot of money has
been expended so far but nothing has been built. Alternatives need to be looked at. A DART
service to Dublin Airport could be done from the north line. This needs to be done much faster.
2 July 2025
365
That is not to say that the metro should not proceed. It certainly should because our capital city
needs proper transport infrastructure and an underground put in place.
There is a lot of work to be done. The rail review has put a template in place but it does not
go far enough, particularly when we look at the space left vacant in the north west.
02/07/2025NN00400Deputy Jennifer Whitmore: I welcome the all-island strategic rail review. It is a vital
step towards connecting the unconnected throughout the country. Ultimately, however, it is a
missed opportunity because it is not ambitious enough. Even if it were fully implemented, the
review would still leave us behind the Ireland of 1906. It is not often that we look back at the
country 100 years ago and say, “Jesus, if we were only there now with all those railway lines
and rail services.” That fact alone is damning.
Fermanagh has been entirely excluded from the review, Donegal is barely included and
towns with a population of under 10,000 are ignored. This really limits future growth and op-
portunity. It is shocking that there is no mention of coastal erosion in this document. We are de-
veloping a 25-year plan while ignoring the rising sea. Abandoned lines like Claremorris-Sligo
are being left untouched. One of the biggest issues is that the plan has no deadlines, urgency,
ambition or accountability. We need a transport system that meets climate targets and serves
communities, and we needed it yesterday.
This is not just about having rail in place. It is also about the experience of using it. I have
contacted the Minister on this because it is not just about where the train goes but what it is like
to be on that train. That is why I am calling for quiet carriages on all intercounty trains. These
carriages support our neurodiverse passengers and create a calmer space for people with anxi-
ety, PTSD or sensory issues, and they ensure equal access to public transport for all, which is
really important. They also serve commuters, patients, students and remote workers - anyone
who needs a bit of quiet space to rest or work in peace. They make travel time more productive,
reduce stress and support the exible workforce. It is a low-cost, simple measure that could
be put in place, and is already in place on the Cork-Dublin line, on which it works very well.
When I contacted the Minister, and I am not sure if it was the Minister of State or the line Min-
ister who responded, apparently they are not going to be rolled out across all lines. They are
being considered for the Dublin to Belfast route. However, there are no plans to expand quiet
carriages beyond that because of capacity concerns. Instead, passengers with sensory issues are
being oered a pair of sunglasses, headphones and a dget spinner. That is not inclusion; that
is tokenism. Where we could quite simply roll out these sensory carriages, I ask the Minister to
look into it. That is the least commuters deserve.
I will take a moment to talk about my own constituency of Wicklow. It has been raised here
already but the train services in Wicklow are beyond bad. We have seen improvements year
after year on all the other routes but for some reason, despite Wicklow’s increased population
and the fact so many people commute, we still have a single line and only six trains going from
Wicklow town to the city. It is not acceptable. There have been promises of a battery electric
DART to Wicklow town. Previous Ministers said that was going to happen in 2025, but then
it was 2026. It is now targeted for 2029. At the same time, carriages that could have been ap-
plied to that Wicklow line have been set aside and are going to Drogheda. When that system
and those carriages go to Drogheda, it is making an already good line even better. Whereas
Wicklow, which has an incredibly poor line with absolutely insucient rail services, should be
brought up to some level of standard. That should have been the priority and not an already
well-serviced and functioning line. I ask the Minister to look into that because people need to
Dáil Éireann
366
have proper rail services available to them.
02/07/2025OO00200Deputy Jen Cummins: I represent Dublin South-Central which is a densely populated
area. A huge amount of building is going on, particularly in areas like Bluebell, Inchicore, Bal-
lyfermot, Park West and around that area. Our access to rail is actually quite limited. The Luas
goes through it but it is constantly jammed. Bus services are being re-evaluated at the moment
in terms of BusConnect and people are quite unhappy about that.
I love that DART+ is going to come out. Kylemore and Ballyfermot are future-proofed but
when I did the research, I realised that will be in 2050. I will be 75 years old then. That a long
time o. There are many things that need to happen over the next while. It is great that we are
future-proong it, do not get me wrong, but I spent quite a lot of time in Europe where the rail
service is excellent, and in a capital city such as Dublin there is no reason for us not to have that
here, particularly in Dublin South-Central with so many tourist destinations and people coming
to visit. It is really important.
We also have a climate crisis at the moment. We really need to make sure that our rail ser-
vices reach every part of our city thereby removing people from their reliance on the car. For
such a short distance coming into the city, Dublin South-Central really should be very reliant
on rail, bus and other active travel methods. It is great that there are going to be expansions but
I would love the NTA and Irish Rail to make sure Dublin South-Central is not forgotten when
it comes to the rail service.
02/07/2025OO00300Deputy Liam Quaide: There have been some exciting developments in east Cork rail over
the past 16 years. The return of the Midleton to Cork line in 2009 has been hugely progressive
for the region and the number of passengers is increasing year on year. Ten-minute frequencies
from 2026 onwards will be a game changer as will the proposed new stations for Water Rock
and Carrigtwohill west. Cobh, Carrigtwohill, Glounthaune and Midleton are all very well con-
nected with the city by rail. However, Youghal has been totally left out of these advancements
and is suering in several key respects as a result. The quality of life of students and workers
travelling to Cork city on what is a primitive bus service through congested roads is severely
impacted by the lack of a train service. We are not seeing the density of new housing develop-
ment and associated population growth in Youghal, which would occur around a functioning
train station. Our increasing population demands the return of the rail link. Despite the epic
investment into Dunkettle interchange, journey times into Cork from Youghal and Midleton re-
main unpredictable in duration and are prone to signicant delays. Some €215 million later we
are probably seeing reduced trac ow at peak times coming into the Dunkettle interchange.
We have a crisis of trac congestion on our roads in east Cork that is eroding away precious
family time every day for people caught up in it. There is such a sense of futility about this.
Our car dependency means our carbon emissions are increasing, our air pollution is worsening
and it is also leading to more accidents and more fatalities.
Returning the Youghal to Midleton line would be a challenging project in light of the gre-
enway development. However, we have reopened closed lines before and we can do it again.
The Limerick-Foynes line is already being reinstated. Let us bring this ambition to Youghal.
When this service is eventually linked up with light rail in the city it will be transformative for
the region.
02/07/2025OO00400Deputy John Connolly: I welcome the outcome of the rail review study. I particularly
2 July 2025
367
welcome the outcome as it pertains to the recommendations it makes for my own constituency
and for the west in general, especially the doubling of the rail track to Athenry and the proposed
reopening of the western rail corridor. I know the Minister is familiar with this. However,
I go back to the publication of the national planning framework about a month or six weeks
ago. In the national planning framework for each of the regional cities of Cork, Limerick and
Waterford and Galway, a number of key enablers were outlined as to how these cities can be
developed and what infrastructural projects will be required for these cities to develop. For
Limerick, Cork and Waterford, the key enablers all included some reference to rail transport or
rail projects. However, there was no reference in the national planning framework to reopening
the western rail corridor or to doubling the rail track between Galway and Athenry as part of
the key enablers for Galway city. That was regrettable given the strong sense that came from
this review of the all-island strategic rail review to include both projects into the future. Other
Deputies mentioned their own constituencies but when Galway and Cork are compared, Cork
has a double track to Mallow and a double track to Cobh. In Limerick work has started on pro-
gressing the double track between Limerick and Limerick Junction. Yet, I do not see the same
intent arising from this report.
I put down a number of parliamentary questions as to how we are going to move from this
report towards the implementation of both of those objectives in terms of doubling the track to
Athenry and reopening the western rail corridor and I am nding it dicult to see real intent
and to be able to say purposely and specically that this project is going to progress. As I said
at the time of the publication of the national rail review, I hope the national development plan
reviews it in terms of rail infrastructure for Galway and clearly highlights that both the doubling
of the track to Athenry and the western rail corridor are part of the national development plan.
It was mentioned earlier in the Dáil today and it is worth reminding ourselves of the recent
cost of congestion report in Galway city which showed that the cost of congestion in Galway
city is going to double between now and 2030 and is going to reach a level of €107 million.
Clearly, that report is saying we need to do more in terms of infrastructural development to
tackle congestion in Galway city. The two moves included in this report will go some way to-
wards reducing the congestion in Galway city and reducing the cost associated with that.
There are just one or two operational matters regarding rail services in the city I want to
draw people’s attention to as well. There is a very positive project at the moment in terms of
the redevelopment of Ceannt Station. However, Ceannt Station will now have ve platforms,
yet we will only have a single track into the station. It is going to be very dicult to make the
most of the redevelopment of Ceannt Station without doubling the rail track to Athenry. That
should be borne in mind.
I recognise and welcome that there is the project to develop a second platform in Oranmore
and a passing loop. It is a start but I would like to see greater intent as to how we are going to
progress the recommendations in this study as they relate to Galway and rail infrastructure in
Galway.
One other operational matter I will mention is that I understand that Galway County Council
is soon to progress the enhancement of the carpark at the Oranmore railway station which will
make it more amenable for people who want to use the station there to park and ride between
Oranmore and Galway city. I ask Irish Rail to look specically at the car park in Athenry and
to do something similar there. It should be opened up for the public to use. We should reduce
the cost of using it and increase the ow of people using rail services from Athenry in Galway.
Dáil Éireann
368
02/07/2025PP00200Deputy Pádraig O’Sullivan: I am sitting here kind of amused though I probably should not
be. There is obviously a regional disparity in the investment in rail services. I listened to the
contributions of the Social Democrats and there is obviously a Cork bias because the Cork rep-
resentatives, even within my own party, seem reasonably happy with the level of investment we
are receiving. Things in the west are starkly dierent from what is happening in Cork, where it
is predominantly a good news story. We are getting massive investment not just in heavy rail
but also in the light rail system for the future. There is much to be hopeful about. Speaking
strictly geographically and with a geographical bias, it is clear that in Cork anywhere up to 11
new stations are planned. I am being told that at least three, if not four, of those can be delivered
by the end of this decade. That will predominantly benet my constituency. We are looking at
the possibility of an additional station at Tivoli. There will denitely be additional stations at
Dunkettle and Blackpool and there will possibly be another at Blarney. That is without men-
tioning the stations that Deputy Quaide referred to in east Cork. For us, that allows travel every
15 minutes. We also benet from the double-tracking to which Deputy John Connolly alluded.
To be fair, it has been transformative for people on the eastern line, in particular, where I am
living in the Little Island area.
In conjunction with that, we are also looking at the additional park-and-ride facility. At the
new Dunkettle station, in an area called North Esk, there is due to be a park-and-ride facility.
We have spoken about that facility for 20 bloody years at this stage but I am hoping that the
National Transport Authority, NTA, will nally give Irish Rail the funding to deliver it and to al-
leviate some of the trac problems Deputy Quaide spoke about, particularly at the interchange.
A bugbear of mine is that even though we talk about the increased frequency from which
we are all going to benet, lazy people, such as me, still opt for the car. It is partially out of
laziness, and I hold my hands up in that regard, but the timetable can be very rigid. I hope
when we have the full benet of electric lines and double-tracking that we will be able to move
having a train later at night. We are talking about the late-night economy in Cork city centre,
in particular, but to facilitate that, we will have to put on extra buses through BusConnects and
extra trains on the newly developed electric lines. That needs to be scrutinised.
I know that light rail is not exclusively covered under this plan, but we have a problem in
Cork that is similar to the problem in Dublin. There is talk of bringing the metro to Dublin
Airport. People might consider the heavy rail option of connecting Clongrin station to the
airport in Dublin. That could be achieved in a relatively quick time compared to the plan for
the metro. The situation is similar in Cork. We have no plans to connect light or heavy rail to
the airport. It is about providing connectivity and giving people the option. That needs to be
reected in the review.
02/07/2025PP00300Deputy Colm Burke: I thank the Deputy and very much welcome this debate. As my col-
league, Deputy Pádraig O’Sullivan, has set out, a major plan, the Cork metropolitan area plan,
has been set out and was published on 18 June. Public consultation is currently taking place and
it is important that people engage. We are not just planning for the next ve or ten years but for
the next 50 or 60 years. One of the things that will happen in Cork is a growth of population.
The most recent census reported that Cork had a population of 581,000. It is now well over
600,000 and will continue to grow because of the growth of jobs in the area. It is interesting
that Apple is going to increase its workforce by over 1,500 people. The company is now run-
ning a bus service from the train station in Cork because many of its workers live outside Cork
city and use the train service to get to work. Apple runs buses from the train station to those
workers’ place to employment. We must work with businesses to ensure that more people who
2 July 2025
369
are working in the city or in the outskirts of the city can get access not only to the train service
but to the follow-up bus service without having to use motor vehicles.
My colleague has set out the development in Cork, including the Cork to Mallow rail line
and the stations that can be built along the line. That opens up the opportunity for a greater
number of housing developments and a higher level of employment in those areas. It is im-
portant that people are able to travel from Charleville and Mallow into Cork city, but also on
down to Midleton or Cobh, wherever they may be working. We need to fast-track all of these
proposals. The metropolitan plan prepared by Cork City Council, Cork County Council, Irish
Rail, the NTA, Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII, and Project Ireland shows that everyone is
working together to deliver a really good transport infrastructure. That will, as a result, reduce
the number of people who have to travel to and from their places of work, or wherever else they
are travelling, because they have access to public transport and rail transport, in particular.
It is important that the light rail proposed for Cork does not take 15 to 20 years. It is im-
portant that we fast-track that project. The population of Dublin is now well over 1.3 million.
In 1841, Cork had a population of over 854,000. We are currently at 600,000, but that shows
the potential for growing the number of jobs and businesses in Cork. At the same time, we
must ensure that we build adequate housing and allow people to travel from their homes to the
services they require and their places of work. I welcome the debate and the forward planning
that is now in place in the Cork region.
02/07/2025PP00400Deputy Fionntán Ó Súilleabháin: We must do far better for the people of Wicklow and
Wexford. For years, I have raised the issue of the inadequate rail network in these counties, in-
cluding most recently last week at a meeting in Buswells Hotel with representatives of Iarnród
Éireann. My hopes were briey lifted with the all-Ireland strategic rail review when the Wick-
low and Wexford rail line was mentioned. However, unfortunately, this optimism was very
short lived. The report suggests that solutions for this vital region on the east coast and in the
south east would be “costly and ... unlikely to be justiable”. According to the review, the rail
line could not be expected to have more than one or two trains per hour in each direction. How
can we accept such a conclusion when over 4,000 people are crossing the Wexford-Wicklow
border on their commute every morning?
In the region that contains Carlow and Kilkenny, 46% of students and 69% of workers com-
mute to Dublin. These are real people. They are workers, students and families who struggle
through gridlock every morning and evening. They rely on a transportation system that fails to
meet their needs. Only 11% of them are using public transport, including coastal rail and bus
services. A staggering 70% are forced to use their cars. Is this the future we want for our com-
munities and for the island of Ireland?
In 2021, it was reported that we need to reduce car journeys by half a million per day under
the Government’s climate action plan. In 2019, Irish Rail announced 41 new carriages but not
one for the Wexford-Wicklow area. If you live in Gorey, there are only six services per day and
the latest leaving Dublin for Wexford is just after 6.30 p.m. There are trains from Arklow at
6.03 a.m. and 6.57 a.m. They are full by the time they reach Wicklow town. We wonder why
only 11% of people use this service and we have gridlock on the M11 every day. I experienced
it this morning.
If we are serious about reducing car dependency and protecting the environment, we need to
commit to investing in the rail network. Wicklow and Wexford are beautiful counties that hold
Dáil Éireann
370
immense potential. They connect the capital to the gateway to Europe, which is Rosslare Euro-
port. The port is currently expanding due to the evolving trade arrangements between Ireland,
the UK and the EU. The two counties have a population of over 300,000.
We are at a pivotal moment. This is our chance to transform the role of rail along the beauti-
ful east coast of Ireland. Enhanced rail connectivity would not only improve people’s quality
of life because they are not ghting trac gridlock every morning but would also boost tourism
and benet the environment. The time to act on the Wicklow-Wexford rail line is now. Let us
invest in the Dublin to Rosslare rail line and leave a legacy for future generations. I will leave
the Minister of State to ponder those points. I hope he can have an input.
02/07/2025QQ00100Deputy Roderic O’Gorman: A map of Ireland’s railway network in 1906 that is often
shared online provokes passionate debates about the state of our current rail network. We used
to have 5,000 km of railway and more than 1,000 stations connecting all corners of the island.
Today, the network is just a fraction of what it was at its peak. These debates show one thing
very clearly: people want to see increased investment, increased capacity, the reopening of sta-
tions and the return of rail to every corner of our country. For the rst time, we now have an
all-island strategic plan agreed North and South for the development of rail on this island over
the coming decade. It is a realistic and costed plan, and oers a once-in-a-generation opportu-
nity to reshape how we move people and goods around our island.
Bold ideas, though, have to be backed by bold action and guaranteed capital investment.
The public deserve clear answers. When will the Government publish a detailed, phased imple-
mentation plan for the all-island strategic rail review so we can track progress and hold people
to account concerning what they said they will do? What projects are rst in line? When will
construction begin? Given the scale of investment, which is estimated at €35 billion up to 2050,
how much will be committed via the review of the national development plan due to be pub-
lished this month? Delays would not only threaten our climate targets but also the economic
and social gains this plan oers. I therefore urge the Minister of State to commit to publishing
the full implementation plan and to publish it without delay. I also urge him to redouble his ef-
forts to secure the necessary capital funding in the NDP review. Without this money, this vision
of the all-island strategic plan will never be more than a pretty graphic.
02/07/2025QQ00200Deputy Paul Murphy: The year 2024 was the hottest on record. Temperatures were 1.6°
above the historical average. Europe is now in the grip of another heatwave. In France, 300
people have been hospitalised, and two people have already died from the heat. They will not,
unfortunately, be the last to die this summer across Europe. We urgently need to stop pumping
more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Fossil fuels must be completely phased out as fast
as possible. This is what the science demands. We know transport is our second biggest emit-
ting sector, contributing 21.5% of total emissions in 2023. The EPA predicts this will increase
to 21.6% by 2030 with the existing measures. It is doubtful, however, that the target for those
existing measures will even be reached. It is based on getting 560,000 electric vehicles on the
roads by 2030, when there are currently around 73,000 such vehicles. Between 1990 and 2021,
passenger car numbers increased by 178% and transport emissions more than doubled.
To reverse this situation, what is needed is a massive modal shift away from car dependency,
whether fossil-fuelled or electric, to public transport and active travel. In light of this, the target
in the review to increase the tiny 3% share of rail in passenger journeys to a slightly less tiny
6% is unambitious. Yet, this Government is unlikely to come close to this target. This Gov-
ernment is allergic to public investment on the scale needed to provide fast, free and frequent
2 July 2025
371
public transport for all. It continues to force more and more people into long, car-dependent
commutes because this is the only way they can nd semi-aordable housing. It is greenlight-
ing and subsidising new domestic ights to Derry rather than building the railways we need.
The programme for Government promises to act on the recommendations from the all-island
strategic rail review. Which of the recommendations will actually be implemented within the
lifetime of this Government? What share of rail in passenger journeys will result? When will
we see new railway lines like metro south west? At the very least, will we see simple, obvious
things done by 2029, including new train stations on existing lines in Ballyfermot and Cabra
and more trams on the red line?
Another way of encouraging a modal shift to public transport is reducing fares. These were
cut by 20% in 2022 as a temporary cost-of-living measure and then kept, just like student fees.
In light of the Government saying we will not have another cost-of-living package, is it also
saying transport fees are going to increase, just as is threatened in terms of student fees? Can
the Minister of State give a guarantee that public transport fees will not be increased in the
coming budget?
02/07/2025QQ00300Deputy Ruth Coppinger: There are many rail issues in Dublin West. I will briey mention
them and then make some general points. In Ashtown, there is just development after develop-
ment and high-rise apartments ying up regularly. It is happening at such a rate that the rail
service the area does have is jam-packed and dangerous, according to many residents. Either a
stop will have to be put on planning permissions granted, which none of us wants because we
all know there is a housing crisis, or the transport issues will have to be addressed. There are
also many issues further out in the Dublin 15 end of Dublin West. There are no lifts and no dis-
ability access in Castleknock train station. This is not acceptable in this day and age. Regard-
ing seating in the Navan Road Parkway station, it has been pointed out by several workers that
pregnant women have nowhere to sit.
On the Dublin West and Dublin 15 area more generally, we frequently hear TDs from rural
areas talking about people in Dublin having a train or a bus outside their doors. There is no
such thing. Huge chunks of Dublin 15 are badly served by public transport. Most of Dublin
West is reliant on buses. The 39 bus is known as the “con ship into town” because every
time there is a new development, it is just added on to the 39 bus route, rather than a new bus
route being created. It takes one student trying to get to UCD from Ongar three hours to get in
at peak time. You could get to Greece in three hours. Turning to ghost buses, I refer to the 37
bus, the Go-Ahead Ireland buses in Tyrrelstown and disappearing bus stops for people in the
area. Workers who work in St. Vincent’s Hospital and UCD had their journeys signicantly
added to by changes made by Irish Rail last year. It has meant their journey times to work were
severely added to.
We need a Luas. We need a light rail system in Blanchardstown. It is just so obvious. We
have every multinational out there and a massive number of workers. The Broombridge station
is nearby. We need that extended from Broombridge to Blanchardstown. It is quite a green-
eld site at the moment and it could and should have been provided. We have had Taoisigh
and Ministers, but none of them have ever provided Dublin West with the transport system we
need. We now have to say, “Enough”. The misery of people’s lives now trying to get into town
or across the city in built-up urban areas of Dublin is outrageous. This is especially the case at
a time when we want people to use public transport because of climate change and just a better
quality of life. We are actually making it impossible for people. It must be addressed. It is so
obvious we must invest in public transport in large, extremely built-up urban areas. Essential
Dáil Éireann
372
workers cannot get to their place of work and students cannot get to college. The situation is
really eroding people’s quality of life.
02/07/2025QQ00400Deputy James O’Connor: I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Deputy John McGuinness,
for allowing me some of his time. I wish to speak on this issue because Cork East is receiving
the largest single investment in an active rail project anywhere in the country now, with a €1.6
billion investment into the Cork area metropolitan transport strategy. I note Deputy Pádraig
O’Sullivan from Cork North-Central is in the Chair. Both our constituencies are beneciaries
of this investment. The project is advancing at a rapid pace. I was lucky enough to be down
on the site more recently with the appointed contractor and Irish Rail’s project manager, A.J.
Cronin. Phenomenal work is being done and I commend it. It would be remiss of me not to
bring up the restoration of the railway line further east towards Youghal and the restoration
of the train stations at Killeagh and Mogeely. It goes without saying that a state-of-the-art
greenway investment has been put in place costing a very signicant amount of money - shy
of €20 million. It is heavily utilised and has been quite successful but members of the public
constantly raise this with me as a TD representing east Cork. I feel obliged to tell the House
that I have done some research into what the cost of restoring that railway line would be. I am
told by the appointed contractor of the Cork area commuter rail programme rail improvement
scheme, involving double tracking to Midleton, that it would cost around €300 million. It is
important to put on the record of the House that the cost of restoring the line and having a fully
equipped electried rail connection back to Youghal would probably come in at around that
amount, which is a very substantial sum of money for the catchment area of east Cork that I
represent. Ultimately, this should happen but in consideration of the fact that the greenway is
in place, assessing the economic success of that greenway and the impact it has on the tourist
economy in Youghal. I want to add my own two cents to the argument because I am a believer
in investing more in public transport, especially when we are expecting a signicant increase in
the population in east Cork with the development of residential housing at Water-rock, and the
further expansion of housing stock in the Carrigtwohill-Glounthaune area.
02/07/2025RR00200Deputy John McGuinness: Like most Members of the House, I met with Iarnród Éireann
recently when it gave a presentation and made its ocials available to Members to put their
case and highlight the issues in their constituencies. I will get directly to the point. The south
east, particularly Carlow and Kilkenny, has very poor connections. Regardless of whether one
is en route from those locations to Dublin or down to Waterford, not enough times are avail-
able. I can get to the Oireachtas at one time but I cannot get home at the time when we might
conclude. That is very unreasonable in terms of what we are trying to achieve in the economy
and the challenges we face regarding climate action. That people cannot get trains at the ap-
propriate times to suit them is also unfair to those who work in Dublin or along the route of the
train service. If we are going to change as a country, there is an opportunity for us to introduce
a dynamic rail structure to accommodate the communities that are anxious to use the train rather
than the car, and to allow those who do not have a car to commute properly and eciently to a
job, school or college. We have to think of those who are studying or working in Dublin and
need that transport timetable to meet their needs.
I wish to raise another issue relating to infrastructure, namely, the fact that the railway sta-
tions in Kilkenny and Thomastown need investment. The property held by Iarnród Éireann in
Kilkenny city is in a disgraceful condition. People, including tourists, arrive there on the train
and see nothing but a derelict building with an asbestos roof, a building that is falling down and
a very poorly maintained station. I ask the Minister of State to intervene with Iarnród Éireann
2 July 2025
373
and ask it to upgrade the station buildings that are lying derelict. I would like the Minister of
State to ask Iarnród Éireann to bring them up to a standard that will meet that of the neighbour-
ing properties such as MacDonagh Junction or the hotel that will be built there. It is not right
that a company like Iarnród Éireann would not invest in its property and try to keep the image
of the city in which it is located to the standards to which we are accustomed.
I ask the Minister of State to tell Iarnród Éireann to approach the problem at O’Loughlin
Road railway bridge and deal with the wall for which it is responsible. It is creating a problem
for those who are driving or walking the footpaths. It has gone on for decades. Engineers have
visited while the Minister has been down there as well. Iarnród Éireann must take the rst step
to provide the safety that is required. I am asking the Minister of State to intervene and demand
of Iarnród Éireann the action that is required to make that part of O’Loughlin Road railway
bridge safe and to provide us with the times to facilitate those who wish to travel on public
transport to and from Dublin or the locations along the route.
02/07/2025RR00300Middle East: Statements
02/07/2025RR00400Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Aairs and Trade(Deputy Simon Harris): I wel-
come this opportunity to set out the Government position on the situation in the Middle East.
The region is experiencing a period of signicant jeopardy and instability with multiple crises
playing out, many of which are interrelated and all of which threaten further escalation, further
destruction and further devastating loss of civilian lives.
I will turn rst to the appalling and deteriorating situation in Gaza, where we continue to
witness the unending horrors of a brutal onslaught - a clear genocide. More than 56,000 people
are reported killed and over 132,000 injured. Behind these stark numbers are scenes of almost
unimaginable suering, both physical and psychological. In the rst instance, let me recall
Ireland’s position, which has been considered, consistent and compassionate. We have stayed
true to our values of upholding human rights and international law even when it has sometimes
been a lonely place to take leadership positions, which have subsequently belatedly gathered
consensus.
We have strongly condemned and continue to strongly condemn the continuing Israeli activ-
ity in Gaza and we have called it out for the genocidal activity that it is. We strongly urge the
Israeli authorities to call a halt to these military operations. We need an urgent end to hostilities.
I unequivocally condemn the terror attacks by Hamas in Israel on 7 October 2023. I unequivo-
cally condemn the unconscionable taking of hostages by Hamas and have repeatedly called for
their release. I repeat that call here today. Hamas has brought nothing but death and destruc-
tion to Palestinians and Israelis. I urge all involved to support and engage in the eorts that are
under way to reach agreement on a new ceasere and hostage release agreement. Today, I met
with the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Aairs of Qatar, which is one of the key inter-
locutors in terms of trying to bring about a ceasere. I now believe based on that conversation
that there is a real window of opportunity to get a ceasere, to get humanitarian aid owing and
to get the hostages released and people need to seize this opportunity. Let us take this window
of opportunity and let us see an end to the unimaginable suering. I also reiterate that the Israeli
response in Gaza is a despicable and clear breach of international law.
The current volume and pace of aid deliveries into Gaza under Israel’s so-called partial eas-
ing of its blockade remains critically insucient and is an aront to any accepted understanding
Dáil Éireann
374
of the operation of humanitarian aid. It is a drop in the ocean compared to the vast and urgent
needs of Gaza’s entire population for food, water, medicines, shelter and fuel - the very basic
items necessary for daily life and items denied to the civilian population by Israeli restrictions.
The assessment by the IPC global hunger monitor in May found that the entire population of
Gaza was facing high levels of food insecurity with half a million people facing starvation. We
are now in July. Two months have passed without adequate action. The humanitarian situation
remains catastrophic. The Qatari Prime Minister and I were remarking today that no matter
how unimaginably horric the situation appears to be through what we see in the media, it can
only be much worse on the ground, if that is possible to comprehend. We continue to see mass
casualty incidents at distribution centres run by private contractors under the new Israeli-ap-
proved model of aid delivery. This model has rightly been described by the head of UNRWA as
“a death trap”. Food distribution has been chaotic and has resulted in multiple violent incidents
and people have been killed while queuing for food. Over 400 people have been killed and over
3,000 have been injured.
4 o’clock
I join the UN Secretary General’s condemnation of this situation and call for accountability.
Perpetrators must be held accountable. These are people who shoot others dead while they
queue for food for themselves and their starving children. We must be clear. Life-saving aid
must never be weaponised. Humanitarian principles must be followed. Hospitals must never
be militarised or targeted. On 5 June, the World Health Organization warned that the denial of
aid and restricted access had systematically dismantled the health system in Gaza. This, also,
is unacceptable.
At every possible opportunity, Ireland has called on Israel to allow unimpeded access of
humanitarian aid at scale into and throughout Gaza. The announcement last week by Prime
Minister Netanyahu that he had ordered that all humanitarian aid once again be halted from
entering the Gaza Strip was more than deeply concerning. It was disgusting, despicable and
illegal. It was yet another example of the weaponisation of aid.
I again implore Israel to facilitate the UN and humanitarian partners to deliver aid in accor-
dance with international law and humanitarian principles. Time and again, UNRWA and other
UN agencies have demonstrated their capabilities as humanitarian responders. This is the most
sickening thing - we know how to get the aid into Gaza. It could happen today if UN agencies
were allowed to do their job. We recall most recently, during the January to March ceasere,
how they were quickly able to feed and provide aid for more than 2 million people. Ireland has
provided over €88 million in support for the people of Palestine since January 2023, of which
more than €75 million has been provided since October 2023. This includes €58 million for
UNRWA. At the EU level, I continue to advocate for our partners to increase their support to
UNRWA, and I welcome the EU’s payment of €52 million to UNRWA last month.
In June, we saw some progress on issues where Ireland had been at the forefront. I wel-
come that the review of Israel’s compliance with its obligations under Article 2 of the EU-Israel
association agreement has been nalised. Ireland and Spain rst called for this step in February
2024. I have always been clear that any such review can only reach one conclusion, namely,
that Israel is in breach of its obligations under that agreement. This is a signicant nding.
Now that it is there, it cannot be reversed. That nding exists. It is a nding of fact. The High
Representative has said she will communicate this clearly to Israel. I have also been clear with
my EU counterparts that we now need to see options for follow-up actions. A country cannot
2 July 2025
375
breach an association agreement with the EU and it be consequence free. The EU’s credibility
depends on what it does next.
While the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza is rightly at the forefront of our minds, it is
important not to forget or gloss over the extremely worrying developments in the West Bank.
Since January, Israel’s military operations have displaced at least 40,000 people and caused
widespread destruction of civilian infrastructure and homes. Refugee camps in Tulkarm, Nur
Shams and Jenin have been rendered uninhabitable. The scale, speed and severity of displace-
ment is unprecedented. This is in addition to a rising trend of settlement expansion and settler
violence prior to 7 October, conducted within an environment of impunity.
The West Bank Protection Consortium, a coalition of humanitarian organisations and in-
ternational donors, now estimates that 58,000 Palestinians across 195 communities it monitors
are at direct risk of forcible displacement. We are all alarmed by the recent announcement of
the approval of a further 22 new settlements in the West Bank, an action openly described by
the Israeli defence minister as “a strategic move that prevents the establishment of a Palestin-
ian state”. The implications of this are clear for all to see. The UN Special Coordinator for the
Middle East Peace Process has warned that if this trajectory is not reversed, it will make the
two-state solution physically impossible. In her words, the two-state solution is on life sup-
port. We call on Israel to immediately halt these activities, and we continue to press the EU to
urgently take forward further sanctions on violent settlers.
A shared priority with both our European and regional partners at this time is the UN High-
Level International Conference for the Peaceful Settlement of the Question of Palestine and the
Implementation of the Two-State Solution. Regrettably, the conference has been postponed as
a result of developments in the region. It is important that the rescheduled conference go ahead
when conditions allow. I have discussed this with my Saudi and French counterparts, who are
co-chairing this initiative.
Ireland will continue to use every lever at our disposal - political, diplomatic and legal -
in our response to this situation. We are delivering on the commitment in the programme for
Government to progress legislation prohibiting import of goods from the settlements in the
occupied Palestinian territories following the advisory opinion of the International Court of
Justice of 19 July 2024. As members of the House are aware, the Government approved the
general scheme of that Bill last week. I have referred the general scheme to the Joint Commit-
tee on Foreign Aairs and Trade for pre-legislative scrutiny, which has commenced this week.
I note the presence of the Chair of that committee, Deputy Lahart. I look forward to hearing the
deliberations of the committee when it has completed its work. I know it is endeavouring to do
so in a time-ecient manner and I am eager to work with the committee.
I have been honest about this from the start, but we must continue to press for EU action in
parallel with this. It is disappointing, although that is too weak a word, to note that, over a week
since we published our Bill, we are yet to see any other member state do likewise. I reiterate
my call across parties for all of us to use our political contacts in other member states to see if
other countries would consider doing what Ireland is doing. Ireland believes it is possible for
member states to move forward on this as a result of the ICJ advisory opinion. If we want to
maximise the leverage to bring about the conditions for a ceasere, it would be extremely help-
ful if other member states also produced legislation.
Last week, I joined nine other EU foreign ministers in asking the High Representative to
Dáil Éireann
376
call for the EU to undertake a detailed review of its own compliance with the advisory opinion
of the ICJ. I am pleased that this review will now be taken forward and that the High Represen-
tative will seek legal advice. The European Union must make sure it is in compliance with the
International Court of Justice. I will follow this closely and will call for concrete proposals for
action for member states to discuss.
Much attention and activity in recent weeks has been expended on the conict between
Iran and Israel. This was a highly dangerous situation, in which two major powers in the region
directly attacked each other, in which nuclear facilities were directly attacked, as well as cities
and infrastructure, and in which there was a great risk of other states in the region being drawn
in. Our most urgent focus in Ireland and the wider EU was in seeking de-escalation and a step
back from the brink, urging a return to dialogue and diplomacy to solve these issues, and also
in trying to assist our own personnel and citizens caught up in the situation. I want to thank our
diplomats in the region and other EU states that helped us in assisting our citizens at that time.
I discussed the situation with my EU colleagues at an emergency virtual Foreign Aairs
Council on 17 June and attended in person a meeting of the regular Foreign Aairs Council on
23 June. I had bilateral calls with my counterparts in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Qatar and
the UAE. I also spoke with the deputy foreign minister of Iran, where I made the same points.
Our missions in Tel Aviv, Ramallah and Tehran were in close contact with Irish citizens
to oer consular support and assistance in dicult circumstances where airspace was closed.
My Department assisted 24 Irish citizens and dependants to leave Israel and Iran by overland
routes. Our teams in the region stayed in close contact with those who remained in place and
continue to provide support and assistance. In view of the security situation, I took the decision
to temporarily relocate diplomatic personnel from our embassy in Tehran. The embassy to Iran
is now based temporarily in the Department of foreign aairs here in Dublin.
I very much welcomed the ceasere agreed last week. It is fragile but seems to be hold-
ing. We remain clear that only a negotiated diplomatic solution can properly resolve the many
concerns around Iran’s nuclear programme. However, we must also recognise reality. Iran’s
threats against Israel are unacceptable. So is its support for militant armed groups around the
region, such as Hezbollah and the Houthis. Many states in Europe have experienced security
issues with Iran’s activity on their territory and with Iran’s long sustaining of the brutal Assad
regime and its supply of weapons to Russia for use in its illegal war in Ukraine.
A great many states were alarmed at Iran’s apparent eorts to, at the very least, put itself
in a position where it could acquire nuclear weapons. Ireland shares these concerns about Ira-
nian policies more generally and its nuclear programme in particular. Put simply, there are as-
pects of the Iranian nuclear programme that are inexplicable in terms of civilian nuclear power.
However, we believe strongly in negotiation to resolve these issues. This had succeeded in the
2015 JCPOA agreement with Iran, which oered an agreed path to addressing Iran’s nuclear
programme. Regrettably, that agreement was undermined before it was able to achieve its full
objectives.
As we know, there were nuclear talks between Iran and the US, which were still ongoing
when Israel decided to attack Iran. We were not privy to those talks or to the positions either
side was advancing. Perhaps they could have succeeded, perhaps not, but the idea that there
were talks going on that were then disrupted and ultimately ended by Israel’s attack on Iran was
extraordinarily escalatory and unhelpful.
2 July 2025
377
We must recall that the JCPOA was achieved by international sanctions after many years
when progress was not achieved at all. It is my hope that the ceasere now in place will con-
tinue to hold. The eect of military action may have been to set back Iran’s programme. I urge
all involved to now return to diplomacy. There are some indications that the US and Iran may
return to talks.
The EU can make a positive contribution through the work of the High Representative
and France, Germany and the UK. It is important that we keep all channels open to Iran and
encourage a return to diplomacy.
It is important for Iran to maintain co-operation with the IAEA, and I greatly regret its deci-
sion today to move further away from that. The IAEA has an extraordinarily important role to
play.
I said earlier that only a diplomatic solution can properly resolve this issue, and this is
even clearer after military action has taken place. I believe a diplomatic solution is not only
necessary, but is entirely possible. The possibility for a peaceful solution rests largely with the
choices Iran now makes. It must turn away from seeking its own security through the intimida-
tion and destabilisation of their neighbours and the threat of a nuclear weapon. If it does so, I
believe it will nd a ready response regionally and internationally. Above all, we need to see a
reassertion of international law and the peaceful resolution of disputes between states. Attacks
on nuclear facilities are deeply concerning and extraordinarily dangerous and should always be
avoided.
In the time available, I would like to mention two further issues, namely, Lebanon and Syria.
Our connection and commitment to Lebanon remains strong. Lebanon faces many serious
diculties, but it has made much progress in the last year in electing a new president and gov-
ernment. The weakening of Hezbollah may make it possible for Lebanon to gain full control
of its territory, including in the south. This is crucial for the long-term security of Lebanon,
Israel and the region. I urge all involved to work towards this and to refrain from actions that
undermine this, including continuing actions by Hezbollah and Israel. I hope also that it will
become possible for Israel to withdraw its remaining presence from Lebanon and for displaced
communities to return to their homes in security on both sides of the border. UNIFIL has been
central to our commitment to Lebanon, and we strongly believe that the force plays a valuable
role. I was able to see at rst hand the important contribution of the men and women of the
Defence Forces serving in UNIFIL when I visited Lebanon in March. In my meeting with my
Lebanese counterparts, they impressed on me the important role of UNIFIL in supporting the
Lebanese armed forces, but also in implementing the ceasere agreement. Discussions are now
ongoing at the UN about the renewal of the UNIFIL mandate. Ireland will use its voice to sup-
port an outcome that supports the government and people of Lebanon and ensures the safety of
our peacekeepers.
Syria has tentatively emerged from a terrible civil war and brutal regime. Its new govern-
ment faces many questions and challenges, but broadly speaking we can say it is trying to
construct a new Syria, a Syria that must be more open and inclusive, in which the human rights
of all Syrians, regardless of their faith or ethnicity, are upheld and the rights of Syrian women
are protected. The new government is trying to do that in the context where many of the armed
groups that emerged during the war are still in existence, including remnants of the former
regime and violent fanatics. Ireland supported the EU’s speedy removal of most economic
sanctions on Syria and we wish to work positively with the new Syrian authorities to give them
Dáil Éireann
378
every chance to succeed because the people of Syria deserve that chance.
Finally, although recent events have commanded our attention, it is important that this is not
the sum of Ireland’s engagement with the Middle East. Much of it is more positive. Our Gov-
ernment adopted a strategy for Ireland’s engagement across the Middle East and North Africa in
October 2024, focusing our developments on bilateral links, economic relations and people-to-
people contacts. We enjoy good relations with Middle Eastern partners and many Irish people
have gone to live and work there, notably in the Gulf. We operate joint economic committees
with Saudi Arabia and agreed this year to the establishment of that process for the United Arab
Emirates. Large numbers of students from the region study in Ireland, many of them on schol-
arships from their governments. There are regular political visits in both directions.
Earlier today, I met the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Qatar, who yesterday col-
lected on behalf of the Emir the Tipperary Peace Prize, recognising Qatar’s long role as a me-
diator. It was a welcome engagement as Qatar is one of the lead negotiators behind the potential
60-day ceasere between Israel and Hamas. While the situation remains extremely volatile, I
very much hope we have now reached a point where the killing can stop and both sides can
negotiate a meaningful and lasting ceasere.
In my conversation with the Prime Minister of Qatar today, it was clear that there is some
cautious optimism that a ceasere may now be possible and we must seize this window of op-
portunity. We have to do so if there is a window of opportunity for the cessation of violence,
an end to the genocidal activity, the release of hostages and a surge in unimpeded humanitarian
aid. In the hours and days ahead, there will be a renewed eort to bring about that. I thank my
Qatari counterpart for the engagement and update today and wish that process and talks well. I
thank Qatar and others in the region who are playing an important role in that regard.
Today I met the president of the International Criminal Court, ICC. It is an international
court that is under active attack. In this House, we must speak up and speak out for the work
of the ICC. We are continuing to provide nancial assistance, but the world needs international
courts now more than ever. The sanctions the US has put in place against individual judges and
the arrest warrants that Russia has put in place are deeply regrettable and seek to undermine
the work of the ICC. I want to be very clear on the record of the House that the Government of
Ireland and Ireland stands rmly in support of the ICC. I intend to raise this matter with Euro-
pean counterparts in terms of how we can do more to support an international court system that
is clearly being threatened by eorts to undermine its work.
I thank the Members of the House for the continued focus we keep on issues in the Middle
East. I look forward to working with Members to pass our occupied Palestinian territories Bill.
I ask that we continue to work with all our contacts through our political groupings at a Euro-
pean level to seek to maximise the leverage that Europe can bring about in terms of playing a
positive role in ending the violence, killings and genocide in Gaza and that we stand ready as a
country to do all we can to help the people of Palestine create the state they desperately deserve
and have every right to in order to enable Palestine and Israel to live safely and securely side-
by-side.
02/07/2025TT00200Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire: Like most political representatives, one of the rst
things I do when I get up in the morning is to check the news headlines. It is a grim reality that
on any given day for the past year and a half it is almost a certainty that we will wake up to fresh
horrors from Gaza and Palestine. One could nearly set one’s watch by it, it is that deplorably
2 July 2025
379
consistent in terms of the horrors we are seeing. Even today, I read that 40 have been killed
overnight in Gaza.
The relentless nature of the conict is almost without precedence in the past 20 or 30 years.
It is very dicult to think of anything comparable. There has been slaughter upon slaughter. In
the past few days, children have been killed simply for collecting aid for their families. I do not
know how people manage to live their lives against this backdrop, and manage to do the basic
things that any family would need to do on any given day in terms of collecting food, making
sure there is water and looking after somebody who is sick amid the chaos, rubble, carnage,
slaughter and risk of death on a daily basis.
I have put on the record in the past, and will do so again, my revulsion at the events of 7
October and the killing of innocent people. I deplore the taking of hostages and they need to
be released. However, what has happened since then, in terms of proportionality, is that we are
witnessing a genocide. I welcome the fact the Government has begun to use that language. It
is strong language and should not be used lightly, but as it is absolutely valid in this instance. It
is important that the people in Palestine and the Israeli Government hears western governments
using such language. Israel needs to understand that it is completely beyond the Pale. Breaking
international law does not even begin to cover it. It is breaking every kind of moral compass
that one can imagine. That is the situation we are in.
One of the primary issues is the weaponisation and deprivation of aid. There is plenty of
food and medical care surrounding the Gaza Strip at this moment in time, but it is prevented
from entering Gaza by a government that is determined to use food and aid as a weapon of war
against a defenceless civilian population. There is a dierence between what happened under
the aegis of UNRWA and the sort of puppet organisation that is currently providing aid, the
chaos that ensues and the targeting of civilians on the back of that. Historically, by any legal
or international standard aid should be beyond and above the fray, but that does not seem to be
the case this moment in time.
It is vitally important that the Government and other western governments continue to raise
their voices. There are developments at this moment in time. It is important the Government
is vocal on the two-state solution conference that is forthcoming. There is a proposal for a re-
construction conference hosted by Egypt. Reconstruction is a long way from where we are at
the moment. We all hope for a ceasere. I know there is some talk about that at this moment
but, as ever, things develop at the rate of hours and hope on the horizon can, unfortunately, be
quickly extinguished. We hope for a ceasere but it is important that we not simply frame what
is happening in Gaza in the context of a humanitarian situation. We also need a political solu-
tion and it needs to be hinged on the two-state solution, something that is under severe pressure.
I have spoken for longer than intended, but I will take this opportunity to thank our peace-
keepers in Lebanon for their service. They are there under very dicult circumstances.
To comment briey on what is happening in Iran, it is very clear that what is required is dia-
logue, diplomacy and de-escalation. The attacks by Israel on Iran were reckless and dangerous
and risked destabilising the entire region. To be clear, the region and the wider world do not
need more nuclear weapons. Ireland has led the way on this historically, and we do not want
to see Iran possess nuclear weapons. Avoiding this requires a negotiated settlement of the kind
that existed in the past and can exist again. We urge dialogue and de-escalation.
Dáil Éireann
380
We will have discussion on the occupied territories Bill but, in my view, there is no legal
obstacle to the issue of services. There is a noble desire on the part of Irish people to assist and
show solidarity. There are issues regarding solidarity trips to Ireland with visas, such as the
Ireland GAA trip and the Lajee Center cultural association. I will correspond directly with the
Minister to ensure they can be facilitated.
02/07/2025UU00200Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh: One state stands apart as a uniquely dangerous nuclear rogue
state run by a wanted war criminal facing charges of genocide before the International Court of
Justice. It is a state engaged in acts of terror throughout the Middle East, including illegal oc-
cupation, settlements, apartheid, annexation, ethnic cleansing, the use of starvation as a weapon
of war, the use of aid distribution centres as locations for massacres accounting for 80% of the
casualties in the past two months, the bombing of hospitals, refugee camps, residential areas
and schools, the targeting of journalists, acts of aggression in contravention of United Nations
charters, attacks on neighbours, piracy on the high seas and even shooting at Irish soldiers.
In Gaza alone, 60,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel and more than 130,000 have
been wounded in the space of 20 months. Israel is, without question, the principal source of
regional instability in the Middle East, yet European Commission President von der Leyen, in
her phone chat with the war criminal Netanyahu, signalled that the EU agreed that the state that
Israel had just attacked - Iran was the principal source of regional instability. The EU treaties
are clear that utterance by the Commission President on foreign and security policy must be
consistent with positions agreed by the Foreign Aairs Council, which means the Irish Govern-
ment. Shockingly, I have not heard the Minister yet say whether von der Leyen acted outside
of the EU treaties unlawfully, eroding our sovereignty.
Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union commits the EU to contributing to the strict ob-
servation of international law. Central banks are obliged, under Article 127 of the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, to contribute to achieving such objectives. Fianna Fáil,
Fine Gael and our Central Bank say it is against EU rules to have regard to international law and
that it must continue to facilitate Israeli war bonds, which, in fact, the report last week of the
UN special rapporteur, Francesca Albanese, stated had bankrolled the devastation. Her report
outlines in detail how corporations are making a killing from the industry of death and occu-
pation, including tourism services such as booking.com and Airbnb. The occupied territories
Bill must include services. The EU-Israel association agreement must be suspended, as I have
called for in the House for more than a decade, particularly now that Israeli breaches have been
conrmed by the EU’s own review. The genocide planes ying through Shannon Airport and
over our heads, with bombs destined to calculatedly kill innocent Palestinians, must be stopped
and inspected. We must do all we can to stop the slaughter. Saoirse don Phalaistín.
02/07/2025UU00300Deputy Paul Donnelly: Last Sunday in Dublin West, I attended the anniversary of the
genocide of 8,372 men and boys, some as young as 12 years of age, who were murdered by Serb
forces. This year is the 30th anniversary. I will give a brief synopsis. Between April 1992 and
1993, Srebrenica and villages in the area held by Bosnian Muslims were constantly subjected
to Serb military assaults, including artillery attacks, sniper re and occasional bombing from
the air. Each onslaught followed a similar pattern. Serb soldiers and paramilitaries surrounded
a Bosnian Muslim village, called on the population to surrender, and then began indiscriminate
shelling, shooting and killing. They expelled or killed the population, which oered no signi-
cant resistance, and destroyed their homes. Srebrenica was subject to indiscriminate shelling
from all directions daily. In particular, Potočari was a daily target because it was a sensitive
point.
2 July 2025
381
Why do I mention this? It is because the world said “Never again”. So-called upholders
of western democracy, the stalwarts of human rights and international law, said “Never again”.
The hypocrisy of the West is breathtaking and we will have international repercussions for de-
cades to come. Not alone has it allowed this to happen in Gaza, but it has actively participated
in these war crimes. This country also passively participates because we allow the American
military carte blanche to deliver whatever it wants through Shannon. There has been in Gaza
the destruction of homes, hospitals, schools, universities, community facilities, water infra-
structure, electricity, sewage facilities and everything that society needs to function. They have
been systematically destroyed by the Zionist genocidal apartheid regime. Food and water are
now weapons of war. One simple fact is that it could not have done this without Biden and it
could not have continued without Trump, alongside the support of Britain, France, Germany
and other EU countries. All of them have supplied military equipment, intelligence or yovers
from aeroplanes over Gaza.
Iran is the latest country to be attacked by Israel and the United States. It appears that the
rationale was nuclear weapons. Ironically, Israel has somewhere between 40 and 400 nuclear
weapons. Nobody knows but nobody cares. Can we imagine the fake horror, hand-wringing
and pearl clutching if it were the other way around and Iran had pre-emptively attacked the
Zionist regime with missiles because Israel held nuclear missiles? Can we imagine if Iran had
targeted Israeli nuclear scientists and killed their wives, children and families? That is what
Israel did. Imagine the outcry in the West at this horric use of collective punishment for the
families of those Iranian scientists and military leaders. We do not support that regime, and
I certainly do not support the proliferation of nuclear weapons, but the hypocrisy across the
world and, particularly, those who claim to hold western values, is astonishing.
The worrying part is that very few people around the world now will listen to the hollow
claims about western values, democracy, international law and human rights because they are
broken on a daily basis by those same people who proclaim them. The world is a much more
dangerous place due to the genocidal acts of this apartheid regime.
Just like with Bosnia, Israeli war criminals, like war criminals, must be brought to justice to
ensure there is a long and lasting peaceful transition. The western former colonial governments
must end their ongoing military involvements in the Middle East and elsewhere. This is the
only way we will have a peaceful and democratic end to these conicts.
I heard the Minister’s statement on Syria. I saw a video clip the other day. Six months ago,
the new President of Syria had a $10 million price on his head by the American Government.
He is now fêted in the White House. I nd this incredible.
02/07/2025UU00400Deputy Joanna Byrne: This week, we read more reports of starving Palestinians in Gaza
being red upon and murdered by the IDF as they made their way to Israeli and US-run aid
centres for food. It really is the lowest of the low and I cannot think of another conict where
this has happened on a daily basis, with no consequences for the perpetrators or any real pos-
sibility of consequences. Israeli ocials sought to shut down the pre-existing aid system run
by 15 UN agencies and 200 NGOs and partners, and introduced the US and Israeli-backed Gaza
Humanitarian Foundation. There is nothing humanitarian about it. It goes against common
sense, best practice and the lived experience of genuine humanitarian workers and agencies to
set up aid centres away from the population and then to tell civilians to come and get the aid.
The same report quoted unnamed IDF soldiers who said they were ordered to shoot at unarmed
civilians near aid distribution sites to drive them away or disperse them. The Israeli Govern-
Dáil Éireann
382
ment disputes this, but we are in the 21st century and there is ample video evidence and witness
testimony to show it is lying about deliberately murdering innocent, starving and desperate
civilians on a daily basis.
Israel has weaponised aid. Those words should never go together. The Gaza Humanitar-
ian Foundation aid system has been condemned by the UN agencies. UN Secretary General
António Guterres branded it inherently unsafe. Even if I welcome that statement, it is a gross
understatement. Israel has conducted thousands of attacks on ve countries, namely, the oc-
cupied Palestinian territory, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iran, in the last two years. It is militar-
ily occupying the sovereign and internationally recognised territory of Syria and Palestine and
makes regular incursions into Lebanon, which have also endangered Irish peacekeepers there.
The latest aggression was against Iran. In 2013, a news report in the Times of Israel quoted
a study by the Washington-based Institute for Science and International Security that stated
Iran could have a nuclear bomb in a month. We are hearing the same rhetoric 12 years later
from the world’s warmongers as justication for Israel and its chief weapons and nance sup-
plier, the US, attacking its neighbours. Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, nor is it close to
developing one. If it had one, the US and Israel would not have attacked it as it would have
meant mutual destruction. That is a polite way of saying the end of the world. Israel does not
conrm it has nuclear weapons, but anyone with a knowledge of history will remember reading
about the Apollo aair, where the CIA believed that Israel’s rst bombs may have been made
with the highly enriched uranium stolen in the mid-1960s from the US Navy nuclear fuel plant
in Pittsburgh. Great friends they are. Israel has not signed the treaty on the non-proliferation
of nuclear weapons, which is an international treaty. We know Israel does not abide by interna-
tional treaties or laws unless they are of some benet to it.
The International Criminal Court has issued warrants for Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Min-
ister of Israel, and Yoav Gallant, the former Minister of Defense of Israel. The International
Court of Justice has stated Israel should stop settlement activity in the occupied West Bank, East
Jerusalem and Gaza and end its illegal occupation of those areas as soon as possible. Scores
of UN resolutions have condemned the Israel Government’s and the IDF’s actions, yet none of
these are being acted upon. Do we really want a world where international law is meaningless?
We can take a stand in Ireland. We can pass the occupied territories Bill and include goods and
services. We can use our voice in the EU to end the EU-Israel association agreement. We raise
our voices against an apartheid state engaging in genocide and ethnic cleansing. Our history
will judge us all if we continue to remain silent.
02/07/2025VV00200Deputy Conor D. McGuinness: What we are witnessing in Palestine is the systemic de-
struction of a people, their land, homes and children and their very future. Israel has been em-
boldened by decades of impunity. It is armed by the United States, Germany and Britain. This
is not conned to Gaza. In the West Bank, the expulsions, land theft and apartheid continue. In
Gaza, Israel has turned an open-air prison into a graveyard of children and humanity. More than
80,000 people are dead. Starvation is being used as a weapon. Hospitals have been bombed to
dust. Orphaned children are emaciated and amputated. Mothers are giving birth in tents under
re from one of the world’s most sophisticated militaries. A nuclear armed power has been
unleashed on a besieged civilian population.
The IDF is not a defence force. It is a terrorist organisation led by war criminals. This is
an army that has red at Irish peacekeepers and endangered our diplomats. Yet it is funded,
armed and defended by nations we call partners. The Irish people have not been silent. Their
2 July 2025
383
solidarity with Palestine is deep, instinctive and unwavering. Intellectually, we stand for justice
and international law, but instinctively, we know what this is. We recognise it. Israel’s pres-
ence in Palestine is our past - a brutal colonial regime, collective punishment, starvation and
brutality. A people should not need to have lived through colonialism to see that it is wrong. All
they need is a conscience. Yet some of our EU partners - I use that word with the bitter irony
it deserves - provide not just cover but weapons. Germany, a country with which I have deep
personal connection, has a particular responsibility. It is failing catastrophically. A country
does not atone for its crimes by backing those of another. The past cannot be cleansed with
more blood. Guilt cannot be outsourced. Germany must stop. The world is watching. The
hypocrisy and moral cowardice of the German Federal Republic must be called out forcefully.
Ireland must do more. The Dáil must enact the occupied territories Bill in full and include
services, not just goods. The Government drags its feet, asking whether it is legal to include
services. The right question to ask is whether we are in contravention of international law by
not including services. Let us talk about the shameful decision by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael to
block legislation that would have prevented the Central Bank of Ireland from facilitating the
sale of Israeli genocide bonds, nancial instruments issued specically to fund the slaughter.
That was a choice made in this Chamber and it was the wrong one. There is credible evidence
that Irish airspace is being used to transport weapons and military components to Israel. That
cannot continue. The Government must act, investigate and put a stop to it.
Our neighbours in Britain, a totally normal island, are at it again. Artists are hounded for
chanting “Death to the IDF”, while Ministers turn a blind eye to the literal death dealt out by the
IDF every single day. We cannot be neutral in the face of genocide. Ireland stands with Pales-
tine. The Government needs to catch up with the people. History will remember the countries
that failed to take action. The Government must ensure that this State is not among them.
02/07/2025VV00300Deputy Pa Daly: We cannot equivocate on this issue. The volatility in the Middle East
has been caused by Israel’s ongoing decades-long genocidal campaign in Palestine and by its
recent aggression against Iran. Israel is acting with impunity as the world watches on. Nearly
100,000 people are dead, with many more left permanently disabled or as lone survivors. As
Mo Chara said, “The Palestinians have nowhere to go. It’s their ... home and they’re bombing
them from the skies”. Babies and toddlers have had multiple limbs amputated before they have
even learned to walk. Orphaned children are calling out for their parents. Toddlers are on the
brink of death because they have been systematically starved to death by Israel. Journalists
have been burnt alive and medics have been executed in mass graves.
Palestinians are not just being exterminated with US-supplied bombs. The more insidious
killer is now disease and starvation. Israel’s denial of aid since March has put all of Gaza’s 2.1
million people at risk of famine, with more than three quarters of them at catastrophic or emer-
gency levels of food deprivation according to the World Health Organization. The headlines
have reported this as an aid blockade, but this is not an aid blockade. Language in this war has
been colonised and distorted. Organisations that should know better, and whose judgment may
not be as great as we thought it was, such as the BBC, have frequently reported it as a conict.
It is clearly not a two-sided conict; it is a starvation campaign. Gaza has been reduced to
rubble. It is not possible to produce enough food there. A recent analysis found that more than
90% of cattle had died and 70% of land for crops had been destroyed. Following the cut-o of
the electricity supply in March, Israel has also turned electricity into a weapon of war.
To make the situation even worse, Israel is ramping up its genocidal campaign by transform-
Dáil Éireann
384
ing aid distribution sites into killing elds. As my colleagues have already said, Israeli soldiers
have admitted this. According to one report, one IDF soldier admitted that commanders or-
dered troops to shoot at crowds to drive them away or disperse them, even though it was clear
that they posed no threat. When asked about it, they say they have had learnings, but they con-
tinue the killing. At least 583 Palestinians have been killed at the so-called Gaza Humanitarian
Foundation since May. The level of callousness and cruelty on display is unspeakable. An-
other soldier said “Where I was stationed, between one and ve people were killed every day.
They’re treated like a hostile force – no crowd-control measures, no tear gas – just live re ...”.
To use Keir Starmer as an example, he is clearly distracting from cutting fuel allowances for
older people and his “nation of strangers” speech. He continues to spend his time recommend-
ing who should and should not perform at festivals rather than dealing with the ongoing killing
campaign by Israel. While all of this is going on, other countries such as the US and Germany
turn a blind eye. Speaking out about dead Palestinian babies can land a person in prison or on
a deportation list.
I want to raise the case of Jordan Devlin who is an Irish passport holder. He has been held in
Wormwood Scrubs Prison since August of last year. He is one of the Filton 18 activists, along
with others. His father has said that his conscience could not stop him. They are charged with
oences, including violent disorder and trespass that are not terrorist oences and being held on
remand for more than the necessary time because the authorities are using counter-terror legis-
lation to hold them. Jordan’s trial will not be until later this year, in November, but some of his
co-accused are not going to have trial dates until 2026. These are all people with no previous
convictions. Some have oered bail of up to £50,000 and they have been refused. All 18 of
them are being held in custody. I ask the Government to take up the case of Jordan Devlin and
his co-accused with the British Government at their next meeting. Arguing that international
human rights law should be respected can put a person at risk.
Israel is a rogue state. I ask the Government to use its powers to stop Israeli war planes
ying through our airspace and enact the war bonds legislation and occupied territories Bill to
include goods and services.
02/07/2025WW00200Deputy Duncan Smith: Given the slaughter, the genocide and the last 20 months of horror,
to wake up to the news, as we did this morning, that perhaps there will be a 60-day ceasere will
be welcomed by most people. Of course we will welcome it if it happens but for a number of
reasons it is hard to have condence in a ceasere in this conict. One reason is that the person
who announced it this morning, Donald Trump, has a poor record in foreign policy. I will come
back to that a couple of times.
Let us consider the comments and reaction of Israel to this announcement. They are highly
qualied. Is this actually going to happen? If there is to be a ceasere, what will happen in that
space? Will there be a ceasere with negotiations to take place for a longer term ceasere and
proper peacebuilding? Are we going to see moves towards a two-state solution or recognition
of the Palestinian State, as Ireland has done, and for that to become real? That sounds fantasti-
cal in the current context.
What will happen in relation to aid? The naming of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is
almost to troll the people of Gaza and the rest of the world. It is anything but a humanitarian
foundation. It is a new departure in the provision of so-called aid. The weaponisation of aid
to Gaza by Israel and the United States has been one of the foulest elements of this crisis. If
2 July 2025
385
there is to be a ceasere, will we see the re-establishment of the traditional aid organisations?
Will UNRWA be allowed to do its work again? Will the World Food Programme and other UN
agencies and NGOs be able to go in and deliver aid and services as they have done for decades
in Gaza? It would seem not, or at least it is unclear.
What we do know is that since March and the ending of aid into Gaza by Israel, we have
seen a degree of psychopathy that is seldom seen in conicts throughout history. It is the
slaughter and murder of civilians while they are queuing for the meagre amounts of aid, food
and medicines that are being oered. It is absolutely abhorrent. When we felt we could not be
shocked any more, it was, I believe, the slaughter, murder and shooting of people queuing for
aid that was key in turning the international mood music against Israel. It has not done enough.
We have not seen real action from the big powers such as the United States or from the United
Kingdom or Germany, the countries that are arming, and have been arming, the Israel Defense
Forces, IDF, during this war and for decades previously. We have seen some shifts in those
countries and Israel may have felt that. Perhaps this is what caused Israel to become concerned
again about the Iranian nuclear programme as a way of trying to convince its traditional allies
that Israel is somehow on the side of good, democracy and righteousness in the Middle East.
Nothing could be further from the truth. What we know is that 50,000 Palestinians have been
killed by the IDF and thousands more continue to be starved by the Israeli blockade.
We must always be clear that Israel has committed a genocide on the people of Gaza. I wel-
come that the Tánaiste has used that language consistently, including in his statement today, that
Israel has committed a genocide. When we use that language the people and the regime that
commit genocide must face consequences down the line. Cities in Gaza have been attened,
hospitals and schools targeted and destroyed and access to food, water and medical supplies cut
o. It is not just access. The infrastructure to deliver water has been destroyed, as we in the for-
eign aairs committee were briefed on a couple of weeks ago. It will take many years to rebuild
that. Ireland helped with funding and expertise to build that infrastructure in Gaza over the last
number of years. This is another element of Ireland’s commitment to the Palestinian people
and the people of Gaza, of which we are proud, that is being destroyed by the bombs of Israel.
The coverage of Gaza and the war in Gaza has been subject to much criticism. I do not
necessarily agree with all the criticism that has been heaped on various news organisations in
this respect. I have, however, been disquieted by what has happened to the arts community,
including Kneecap and Bob Vylan and what happened at Glastonbury. Moving to try to silence
artists and how they express themselves, whatever our own opinions may be and whether or
not we agree with what they say, is a dangerous space to be in. As Kneecap said, this is not the
issue. They are just giving voice - one voice, their voice - to the suering of the people of Gaza
and if media and journalistic bodies continue down the route of following these artists around
and picking apart every little thing they say or do, it will result in less coverage being applied to
the conict, war and genocide in Gaza. While this is happening, we are not focusing on the 30
people in Gaza that were killed in a café by Israel or the more than 400 people murdered in cold
blood queuing for aid in the last weeks. Our focus needs to be absolutely steadfast. The people
of Gaza and the Palestinians have faced unending devastation from the Israeli Government.
It is another disgrace that Israel and the United States have created their own private body to
control aid distribution in Gaza. I remember studying the proliferation of private security and
military companies. The Iraq war was when we had an explosion in the number of these pri-
vate security companies, which emerged as a big economy in the 1990s. Obviously they have
existed for centuries. The Iraq war was when the proliferation of these companies exploded.
Dáil Éireann
386
What has changed now is that these private security companies have become systemic in the
provision of aid. This is a departure that none of us ever contemplated. None of us who study
private security companies and their role in active warfare and logistical support ever contem-
plated that these companies would, in such a big way, replace the United Nations, the World
Food Programme and other trusted aid agencies and multilateral organisations that provide aid
to people. It will be a hugely concerning and worrying departure if this template is used for
any future conicts. We will have the weaponisation of medicines, basic foodstus and aid.
We in Ireland hold aid very dear. I am proud of the fact that Ireland is one of the few countries
that have not cut aid. Many European countries have cut aid or have put increased restrictions
on aid, or in the case of the United States, have stopped aid. Ireland has increased aid, which
we, the Irish people, are very proud of. The fundamental principle of humanitarian aid is that it
must be neutral, impartial and based solely on need. International humanitarian law mandates
unfettered access to civilians in conict zones. Israel is stopping this unfettered access. Israel
is conducting a siege and a bombing campaign, backed by the United States, which has made
unfettered access impossible. Nowhere is the failure of the IDF-controlled aid system more
stark than in the ongoing killing of civilians. Reading about the slaughter taking place in the
queues for aid is something that I cannot get out of my head. I do not think many of us can. We
have seen this throughout history, where the most vulnerable are lined up in condensed settings,
set upon by psychopaths, and killed in cold blood. Israel must never be allowed to forget this
and the country must be brought to justice for it.
What we have seen in Gaza is not a humanitarian response; it is an illusion of one. We hear
from IDF spokespersons that the IDF does not target civilians, but we know that it does. We
hear that Israel provides aid to the people of Gaza, but we know that it does not. Anyone lis-
tening to “Morning Ireland” this morning would have heard exactly the meagre rations people
have to try to eke out survival in Gaza.
Israel has spread complete chaos in the Middle East in the past 20 months. The renewed
conict with Iran is just the latest example of a state that is completely out of control. To be
clear, there is no good guy or bad guy when it comes to Iran and Israel, but Israel did start by
launching missiles into Iran, even though all intelligence reports indicated that Iran was still
some years away from developing a nuclear weapons programme. We know that Iran has been
less than transparent about its nuclear weapons programme. It is clear to me that Iran is seeking
to develop a nuclear weapon. We know that there was a successful plan, orchestrated by the
former US President, Barack Obama. This was the joint comprehensive plan of action between
Iran, China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European
Union. It was successful between 2015 and 2018 in getting rid of all the medium-enriched
uranium in Iran and reducing the low-enriched uranium to negligible amounts. Then, in 2018,
in what is the greatest foreign policy blunder of the past ten years, President Donald Trump, in
his rst term, abandoned the plan. This allowed Iran to renew its nuclear programme. Iran has
remained inside the nuclear non-proliferation treaty regime, albeit not totally transparently and
not always allowing weapons inspectors in. It has been a contentious relationship over many
years but at least the country is in the regime. Israel is not in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty
regime. The country has had nuclear weapons since the 1960s and is outside any weapons in-
spection programme. It acts as a law unto itself, not just regarding nuclear weapons, but in all
aspects of international policy and relations.
The successful agreement with Iran allowed the IAEA huge amounts of access to ensure
Iran was co-operating. This has now ended and now we hear that Iran will not be co-operating
2 July 2025
387
with the IAEA. This is hugely disappointing and hugely concerning for the long-term stabil-
ity of the Middle East. We also hear from leaked intelligence reports that the damage to Iran’s
nuclear facilities was not as complete as President Trump would like us to believe. The prob-
ability of further conict, instability, missiles and death and destruction in the medium to long
term is quite likely.
We have huge concerns about a ceasere in Gaza, because we have no commitments that
real aid will be delivered by trusted organisations that know how to deliver it. We are not see-
ing any plans for a high-level recommitment to a long-term peace strategy for Palestine and a
road to statehood for the Palestinian people. This is Irish foreign policy and the belief of the
Irish people. I think it is the belief of the large majority of people in Europe, even if many of
our partner governments in the European Union have been too staunchly supportive of Israel.
When it comes to nuclear disarmament, Ireland has proud role in promoting it. Ireland
was the rst signatory to the nuclear non-proliferation treaty and it can continue to play a role
in striving towards a nuclear-weapon free world. The instability in the Middle East has many
causes but the biggest impediment is the State of Israel. It operates outside so many interna-
tional conventions, treaties and norms. It is inicting a continuous genocide on the people of
Gaza. It kills in cold blood Gazans who are queueing for aid. It launches unprovoked attacks
on states such as Iran, and the Iranians are no angels either. I am sure that Iran will continue to
fund and arm its proxies, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Hamas.
While I welcome the opportunity to speak on this topic, it is utterly depressing that we,
here on the western edge of Europe, remain commentators on what is the biggest tragedy on
the globe at the moment, namely, the regional conict in the Middle East. This is being most
acutely felt by the civilians of Gaza, who face death, slaughter and genocide on a daily basis. It
must end. There needs to be a road to a true, viable, Palestinian state and long-term sanctions
need to be imposed on the State of Israel. It cannot be allowed to continue to act outside of
international norms.
02/07/2025XX00200Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Mi-
chael Healy-Rae): Of all the subjects and all the issues that we talk about here, when we see
the horric videos and images of people, and children in particular, starving and the inhumanity
and the senselessness of it all, it really would make one think that man’s inhumanity to man is
beyond belief. We are all rightly outraged by what is going on. That being said, Ireland is a
leader in the world on Palestine. The Taoiseach, the Tánaiste and the Government have been
very strong on this issue. I do not like to see divisiveness in this House when it comes to an
issue as serious as this. Everybody has very good intentions, but sometimes the divisiveness
by the Opposition is unhelpful to what we are all trying to achieve. At the end of the day, we
all want what is best for the people who are oppressed and who are being so hard done by and
whose lives are being torturously aected by the horrible events of the last months and years.
I have listened to the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach speak very strongly on this issue. We are all
trying to achieve the same thing, at the end of the day. We were among the rst in recognising
the Palestinian state. Enacting the occupied territories Bill has been a major concern for the
Government. It has been treated with urgency and importance, but with something as important
as this, it has to be got right. Imposing sanctions on trade and goods from Israel are issues we
are all of the one word on. It is not than any of us are disagreeing with each other fundamentally
on what we want to do. I recognise and appreciate the concerns of each individual and each
party in this House. Historically, we have been a very strong advocate and we have placed a
Dáil Éireann
388
strong emphasis on standing with Palestine, by being the rst EU member to call for Palestin-
ian statehood. Ireland and Spain have both called for a review of the trade relations with Israel.
When we are talking about the politics of this, we cannot ever forget that every minute, ev-
ery hour and every day, torture and other awful things are happening there. We think back on
what happened during the two world wars. We speak historically about those and how horrible
they were and we saw what happened to the Jews in the concentration camps and we watch
lms and read books about it.
5 o’clock
We just have to wake up and think, my goodness, in the modern world today we are living
through and witnessing the same thing happening again. We cannot say it is worse or anything
like that, but it is the same thing aecting innocent lives - people and families, who have done
nothing wrong. How could any child be guilty of doing anything wrong, yet their lives are be-
ing taken? The most basic necessities are being denied to them: clean water, shelter - a place
to call home with heat, comfort and the basic needs for life. All of those bare necessities are
being taken away.
Ireland is doing its part every day but we must question what other larger, stronger super-
powers are doing, or should I say maybe what they are not doing. There should be political
outrage from everybody in today’s world, no matter what side they are on, no matter who they
represent or what their party is - the basic inhumanity of this is so outrageous that we should
all be going out through the eye of a needle and going in the same direction at the same time.
We should all be saying the same thing: this is wrong. We must go down every avenue and do
everything that can be done to stop it, and to provide humanitarian assistance in every way that
we can. The EU, America and other places all have to work together.
We should all support what the Irish Government, the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach have
been doing. While we cannot agree on everything, at the same time we want to travel on the
same road, that is, the road of peace.
When I look at what happened in Ireland, I see the way everybody came together - from
parties, religious people and non-religious people. Everybody played their role, no matter who
they were, be it Sinn Féin, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael or religious people. Everybody worked to-
gether because we wanted to bring peace to the island of Ireland. That was the result. Thank-
fully, every day in the North of Ireland people are going about their work. Families are no lon-
ger losing their loved ones. On this very small island we had a situation where we would wake
up in the morning and hear that a bomb had gone o on whatever side and innocent people were
killed. Now, we must use the bit of inuence we have and the bit of say that we have. We must
stand up and be counted. We must put our shoulder to the wheel on this most serious issue at
a most serious time in everybody’s life. We must think of the innocent people and what we
should do, and can do to support them.
Divisiveness in this House on the issue is wrong. We should all be singing o the same
hymn sheet and say that we want to help in every way we can.
02/07/2025YY00200An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Catherine Connolly): There were two speakers
in that slot. One speaker indicated. With the consent of the House I will let that speaker come
in later. We will preserve the seven and a half minutes that has not been used. Rachaidh mé ar
ais arís go dtí Sinn Féin. Glaoim an Teachta Denise Mitchell.
2 July 2025
389
02/07/2025YY00300Deputy Denise Mitchell: When it comes to the Middle East, we cannot allow a nuclear-
armed rogue state to spread chaos throughout the region. That is why Israel has to be stopped.
Chants from a music festival are not the story, the daily mass murder of civilians by Israel
is the story. Since Tuesday morning, more than 100 Palestinians have been murdered by Is-
raeli attacks on the Gaza Strip. Yesterday, Israel bombed a café that it knew was being used by
journalists – killing 24 people. This morning, Israel continues to lure starving men, women and
children to their so-called aid points, where Israeli troops and mercenaries are gunning them
down.
We saw the Israelis force doctors and patients out of a hospital in north Gaza at gunpoint,
leaving premature babies to die alone in the intensive care ward. They murdered ambulance
sta and medics and buried them in a mass grave. They even went so far as to crush the ambu-
lances and to bury them too, to hide their crime.
This is a genocidal regime that is out of control. Its leader is a fugitive. He is wanted by the
International Criminal Court on war crime charges. Israel holds thousands of hostages. They
are not prisoners because they have never been charged or convicted of any wrongdoing. It is
a regime that has attacked and bombed four neighbouring countries since the start of this year.
The cowardice of many western governments to hold this lunatic state to account is mak-
ing the world a more dangerous place for everybody. Why would anybody bother to adhere to
international law when it is clear that it does not apply to countries that have the superpowers
backing them up?
02/07/2025YY00400Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú: I was lucky enough to be in Roe River Books in Dundalk on
Friday night. If it were not for the subject matter, I would say Fintan Drury provided a great
show. He was there to talk about his new book, Catastrophe - Nakba II. It starts with a quote
from Benjamin Netanyahu on 29 December 2022: “The Jewish people have an exclusive and
unquestionable right to all areas of the land of Israel … Galilee, the Negev, Golan, Judea and
Samaria.”
We should not be surprised by what we have seen. While it depends on what gure we look
at - whether it is 58,400, as it was about a week ago, or if we are now talking about something
far closer to 60,000 - the gure is widely contested, but we know that the death toll is astro-
nomical in the modern age. We all believed that things like this could not happen. Some people
even bought into the idea that Israel sold itself as the friend of the West in the Middle East.
In fairness, the author nished the book with an acknowledgement:
My hope is that Catastrophe – Nakba II will be a credible and readable account of Is-
rael’s determination to wipe Palestine from the map and how it was sponsored in that endea-
vour by powerful nations in the West.
I do not have a lot of time to deal with the next point. Omar Khalil Al-Balawi was a teacher
who was killed in northern Gaza by an Israeli drone on 7 October 2024. He wrote:
After a year of this ongoing crisis, we ask: Who is listening to our plight? Who cares
enough to intervene? Who will stop this war and prevent further loss of life? Who will
hold Israel accountable for these actions? Who will ensure our survival in the midst of this
catastrophe? Despite everything, we remain resolute. As the indigenous people of this land,
Dáil Éireann
390
we will stay. This is our home – Palestine. WE WILL NOT LEAVE!
That is the disaster that they face but it is also the hope. That is why we welcome what this
Government has done in recognising the State of Palestine. We also welcome that we are on the
right side of the argument in regard to the EU-Israel association agreement, but we need to see
movement. The occupied territories Bill must be delivered with services. We must ensure that
we no longer allow the Central Bank to facilitate Israeli war bonds. We must ensure that we are
that voice, that we are part of that voice, and that we provide a voice to others so that the Pal-
estinian people know that people are with them but, beyond that, that Israel is held to account.
02/07/2025YY00500An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Catherine Connolly): Gabhaim buíochas.
02/07/2025YY00600Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú: What we are talking about here is very small, but we need
delivery.
02/07/2025YY00700An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Catherine Connolly): I thank the Deputy.
02/07/2025YY00800Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú: It might need to be small before we see greater because we
have seen failure from Britain, America, Germany and many others.
02/07/2025YY00900Deputy Sinéad Gibney: I welcome the opportunity to speak to the incredibly problematic
situation in the Middle East. Over the past 18 months, violence has erupted across the Middle
East. However, today I wish to speak about the Middle East before October 2023 - the violence
at the hands of Israeli colonists in occupied Palestine; the systematic functioning of Israeli
apartheid; and how Palestinians are constantly facing state-sanctioned violence.
We also need to consider the impact of the carte blanche which has been given to Israel in
its acts of military aggression across the region.
In 1948, Palestine was partitioned by the UN. This plan gave Israelis, who made up less
than 30% of the population, more than half of the land of Palestine. This injustice led to the
rst Arab-Israeli war. During this period mass expulsions of Palestinians were taking place at
the hands of terror organisations such as the Haganah and the Irgun whose members formed
the new IDF. This event is known as the Nakba as hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were
expelled from their land and those who chose to stay were murdered. The Nakba, meaning the
catastrophe, was the destruction of Palestine upon which Israel was founded. More than 500
Palestinian villages were destroyed as people ed to refugee camps - some now famous, such
as Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza, which has since been levelled and its residents killed, missing
or ethnically cleansed.
When we discuss the current ethnic cleansing of Palestine and the genocide in Gaza, we
must remember the precursors to current events. These actions have been done in the name
of an ancestral claim to the land of Palestine as a 2,000-year-old promise. What about the
Palestinians who lived there 70 years ago? We must show that human rights and the enforce-
ment of the rules-based international order are felt by real people and are not simply concepts
for discussion. We must ensure that nations who perpetrate, support or are silent in the face of
genocide face consequences for their complicity.
In Israel as well as occupied Palestine we see time and again the use of an apartheid system
to ensure Israeli domination over Palestinians. In Israel, any Jewish person can immigrate to
Israel and claim citizenship immediately, while Palestinians are refused the right to return to
2 July 2025
391
their family homes. Israeli citizenship law places far more restrictions on Arabs in obtaining
Israeli citizenship. People from the vast majority of the Middle East such as Iraq, Yemen and
the occupied territories are barred from gaining Israeli citizenship.
The education system in Israel is split between Jewish, Jewish secular and Arab schools.
Arab schools are systematically underfunded. Palestinians in Israel cannot leave even if they
do not have citizenship as they can be barred from ever returning. Palestinians in the occupied
territories may not drive or walk on certain roads and they have dierent coloured registration
plates on vehicles. Many Palestinian political parties have been banned as they refuse to recog-
nise Israel as a Jewish state. In 2018, the Knessett passed the Jewish State Act, which allows for
the creation of segregated spaces. This Act results in legal segregation which we all witnessed
in apartheid South Africa. The legal status of Palestinians is determined purely on where they
were born. In Acre in Israel they must be tried in a civilian court. In Ramallah in occupied
Palestine they can be tried in a military court with no legal team to defend them or a translator.
Many human rights and civil liberties advocacy groups describe this as a fundamental aspect
of Israeli apartheid.
The constant and systematic use of violence to maintain Jewish supremacy has created an
environment of militarism which has spilled out across the region. Most recently this has been
targeted at Iran on a spurious justication of a pre-emptive defensive strike. We must be clear
that the Iranian regime is oppressive. However, people cannot be bombed into freedom. Nor
can liberty be enforced through the use of arms.
The dangerous action of Israel and its ally, the United States, to bomb Iran has made the
Cold War of the Middle East searingly hot. The choice to bomb nuclear facilities was a failed
mission, but the ecological and human cost of this operation had it been successful would have
been utterly catastrophic. This jingoistic mindset is a relic of the past and yet we see the Trump
and Netanyahu Administrations use military action to bolster their domestic popularity.
Again, we should remember how the Iranian Ayatollahs gained power. It was after a pup-
pet regime was installed by the US and Britain. This brutal regime was deeply unpopular and
collapsed in the face of such discontent. The puppet regime led by Mohammad Reza Shah was
installed after the democratically-elected leader of Iran, Mohammad Mossadegh, attempted to
form a sovereign-wealth fund by nationalising Iranian oil production. We must call out the hu-
man rights abuses on all sides of the current conict and recognise that only through dialogue
and multilateralism can we secure peace for the people of the region who have suered through
bombardment due to the political choices of their governments.
The European Union’s response to this crisis has been completely lacking. Senior mem-
bers of the European Commission recently declared sympathy with Israel despite the fact it had
chosen to bomb Iran seemingly out of the blue. Ireland has a special status. As a member state
of the European Union which has uniquely experienced a great deal of violence at the hands of
a foreign power in our history, we have a corresponding duty to stand up for people who face
such violence and war. A report published just this week by Francesca Albanese, UN Special
Rapporteur on the situation in Palestine explicitly states:
...where corporate entities continue their activities and relationships with Israel, with its
economy, military and public and private sectors connected to the occupied Palestinian ter-
ritory, they may be found to have knowingly contributed to
Dáil Éireann
392
a. violation of the Palestinian right to self-determination
b. annexation of Palestinian territory, maintenance of an unlawful occupation and there-
fore the crime of aggression and associated human rights violations and
c. crimes of apartheid and genocide.
The Minister of State spoke earlier about divisiveness in this House and that we should all
be singing o the same hymn sheet. The diculty I have with that sentiment is that those in
government have the power to take the actions we need to see. Those options are to pass the
occupied territories Bill in full, stop the facilitation of Israeli genocide bombs, end the endorse-
ment of the IHRA denition of anti-Semitism, sanction Israel and use our diplomatic power as a
member state at the EU level to end the EU-Israel association agreement and to introduce sanc-
tions at the same level as Russia and to push for EU-level recognition of Palestinian statehood.
These are not moral choices anymore; they are also legal necessities. The people of Iran and
Palestine have been targeted with a militarist agenda which has only increased the instability
of the entire Middle East region. We must stand against military unilateralism no matter the
perpetrator and end this onslaught of violence.
02/07/2025ZZ00200Deputy Gary Gannon: Every day without fail when we turn on our televisions or open our
social media accounts, we are met by death on a horric industrial scale, inicted by the IDF
on the people of Gaza, including on children, healthcare workers and UN workers. There is
no line it has not crossed or hospital it has not bombed. The Irish State has been stronger than
most. It has verbalised our horror, tried to enact change at an EU level - only recently but it is
no less welcome - and now moving towards enacting some parts of the occupied territories Bill,
although we will push for this State to go further. Ireland’s contribution has been good but we
can do much better. However, we have not been passive observers. That is absolutely fair and I
want to acknowledge it. However, that does not mean we have done all in our power to prevent
what we and the Government have now referred to as a genocide.
The obligations that come with the recognition of genocide are not just to call it out, but to
do everything within one’s power to prevent it. There are two very signicant ways in which
the Government and Irish State are failing in those most serious of obligations. Shannon Air-
port has become a key node in the transit of US military planes. These carry munitions, person-
nel and equipment, many of which ends up in Israeli hands to be used more broadly in bombing
campaigns across the Middle East. That is not speculation or rhetoric in Parliament; it is docu-
mented by Shannonwatch and it is visible in ight logs and on the tarmac. The Government
said it does not know for sure what is on those planes and cannot prove direct delivery of arms
to Israel but the reality is we refuse to inspect them. We have abdicated any serious oversight
and in doing so allowed our neutrality to be quietly eroded. We have allowed Shannon Airport
to be turned into what is essentially a military backdoor for the United States. In recent months,
people throughout my own party and the Chamber have raised this issue.
My colleague in the Seanad, Senator Patricia Stephenson, has raised issues formally and I
wish to speak to some of those. Senator Stephenson wrote to OLAF, the EU’s anti-fraud body,
to raise concerns that Ireland is potentially facilitating VAT fraud and violating EU customs
rules by not inspecting private aircraft and military-linked ights refuelling at Shannon Airport.
That letter is now on record and OLAF has been notied. Senator Stephenson wrote to the At-
torney General, the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance and at this point we have received
silence. Let me be clear that it is not about the VAT or breaches of customs regulations but it is
2 July 2025
393
about trying to nd an angle by which this State can do the right thing. Yet, we have received
silence. Ireland’s complicity in what is happening in Gaza does not stop at Shannon. We are
facilitating the approval of Israeli state bonds through the Central Bank, which raise money for
the Israeli state. That is the same state that is currently under investigation for genocide by the
International Court of Justice and we have now aligned ourselves to that case. In doing so, we
are providing a nancial pipeline for EU-wide legitimacy.
The question is not just whether we are horried. It is whether we are serious because we
have options. We could suspend military overight and refuelling permissions as Costa Rica
and other states have done. We could inspect aircraft at Shannon. We could block approval of
sovereign bonds of states that are under investigation for the gravest of crimes. The State has
told us it does not have a role so it is incumbent on us now to determine that through the courts
and we are hell-bent on doing so because, when a genocide is happening, we are obligated to do
everything in our power to stop it. Our history demands that of us.
02/07/2025AAA00200Deputy Rory Hearne: I echo my colleagues’ sentiments and statements on this. The peo-
ple of Gaza do not have time left for this Government’s dithering and delaying on the imple-
mentation of the occupied territories Bill. Seventeen thousand children have been murdered in
Gaza by the Israeli genocidal regime. Right now, millions of people in Gaza are being starved
to death. They are being shot and murdered while trying desperately to reach food to feed their
families. Each day that passes while Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael drag their feet on implementing
the occupied territories Bill is another day of lost opportunity for Ireland to be a global leader
for humanity by sanctioning Israel. Each day the Government makes more excuses, waters
down the Bill and fails to implement it in full, including services, is another day lost when Ire-
land could be taking real action.
Real action would be passing the occupied territories Bill in full. This would send a strong
clear message to Israel. It is a message it has not heard, that there are consequences for the war
crimes and the genocidal hell it is unleashing on the people of Gaza. This is the problem. We
fail to see countries having the courage to stand up to Israel and it is a shame and a stain on our
collective humanity that Israel has not been sanctioned by any European country for its mass
murder of women and children in Gaza. What a collective failure of the European project of
peace and solidarity.
Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael committed in their programme for Government 160 days ago to
progress legislation on the occupied Palestinian territories. That is 160 opportunities they have
had to implement the Bill and they have not done so. This is despite the people of Ireland giv-
ing them a clear message in the election and every day outside the Dáil and on our streets that
they want Ireland to stand up for peace and humanity by sanctioning Israel. We cannot wait for
our European partners in this. We must stand up now for the people of Gaza. Ireland must be
courageous and sanction Netanyahu’s murderous, genocidal regime. Ireland must give hope to
the idea of universal human rights, that every person on this planet has an equal right to a digni-
ed life. Palestinians, the people of Gaza have as equal a right to life and dignity as everyone
else on this planet.
What have the people of Ireland made clear? When asked whether Israel’s ongoing military
action in Gaza amounts to genocide, 86% of people polled said “Yes”. When asked whether
the EU should suspend trade with Israel, 76% of Irish people polled said “Yes”. When asked
whether the occupied territories Bill should be passed, 74% of those polled said “Yes”. The
Government’s mandate is there and this is a critical juncture in our international humanity’s
Dáil Éireann
394
history. The Government needs to pass the Bill before the summer recess. The latest United
Nations report names hundreds of corporations, banks, technology rms, universities, pension
funds and charities that are proting from the Israeli occupation and genocide. The report
details how Israel’s economy has transformed from an economy of settler occupation to an
economy of genocide. Ireland can no longer participate, engage with, legitimise or fund this
economy. It is time to pass the occupied territories Bill in full.
02/07/2025AAA00300Deputy Martin Daly: The ongoing conict in Gaza risks igniting a much wider regional
war, an outcome that would be profoundly tragic and destabilising. Gaza remains an open
wound festering and poisoning relations, not just between Israel and Palestine, but also between
Israel and much of the international community.
Ireland has made the situation in the Middle East a central foreign policy priority and we
remain rmly committed to advocating for a sustainable peace through the realisation of a two-
state solution. That a population can be bombed or starved into peace is both morally indefen-
sible and practically impossible. It entrenches a deep collective memory of trauma and perse-
cution among the Palestinian people, which will guarantee that the cycle of violence continues.
We in Ireland understand from our history that violence begets violence. When a population is
brutalised, the next generation inherits a legacy of grievance and deance.
Let me be clear that the attacks on 7 October were abhorrent but the Israeli military response
has been grossly disproportionate and counter-productive. It has not secured the release of
hostages. It has not brought long-term security to Israel. Instead, it has deepened the suering,
radicalised a new generation and pushed peace further out of reach. Israel’s ongoing operations
in Gaza and the West Bank appear to be a systematic rejection of the two-state solution.
In Gaza, relentless bombing, forced displacement and starvation are creating a humanitarian
catastrophe. Conditions are now both physically uninhabitable and psychologically unbear-
able. In the West Bank, government-sanctioned illegal settlement expansion further under-
mines the viability of any future Palestinian state. This cannot be justied on security grounds.
It appears to be ideological. A war is being prosecuted against a largely defenceless population.
More than 60,000 people have been killed, including a shocking proportion of women and chil-
dren. Civilian infrastructure such as schools, hospitals and UN premises have been repeatedly
targeted. A recent Israeli strike on a seafront café which served as one of the only public Wi-Fi
hubs left in Gaza killed 20 people. It was one of the last functional windows for local journal-
ists to report on the crisis. Foreign press access to Gaza remains banned. When witnesses are
silenced, truth is removed.
The ceasere and hostage deal brokered in January oered a fragile, but real, hope to both
Israelis and Palestinians and I am glad to hear the Government is calling on all parties to return
to serious talks to secure a comprehensive agreement. The United States has now reported that
Israel has agreed in principle to a 60-day ceasere. President Trump has urged Hamas to accept
it, but detail remains uncertain and Hamas has yet to respond, although it has indicated willing-
ness to free hostages under the right terms. For its part, Israel has previously insisted that the
war will not end unless Hamas is dismantled. These positions must be reconciled if peace is to
have any chance. I urge Hamas to respond constructively. Lives depend upon it. A ceasere
is not a surrender. It is a lifeline. It is also an obligation under international humanitarian law
when civilians are suering on this scale.
The humanitarian situation in Gaza is beyond desperate. The Red Cross has warned that
2 July 2025
395
Gaza’s remaining public hospitals are either shut or gutted after months of hostilities and sup-
ply shortages. UN and other humanitarian workers must be protected at all times as they carry
out their life-saving work. Civilian infrastructure, including schools, medical facilities and UN
premises, must never be military targets. There must be an immediate large-scale resumption of
humanitarian aid. The trickle of aid currently getting in is a drop in the ocean. People are walk-
ing tens of kilometres in search of food, only to be met with gunre. Israeli soldiers quoted in
a Jewish newspaper, Haaretz, claimed they were ordered to re on aid seekers even when they
posed no threat. The IDF denies this but the allegations are credible and deeply concerning.
The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, which was hastily created to replace the respected
UNRWA, has failed. More than 170 NGOs have called for it to be dismantled. It lacks the
experience, transparency and infrastructure to deliver aid safely. The death toll from Israeli
attacks at Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, GHF, distribution sites now surpasses 500 people.
These were innocent people queueing for food. They died not in battle, but in desperation. I
support international calls to dismantle the GHF and reinstate reliable humanitarian channels
like UNRWA. We must have experienced, eective, secure infrastructure to deliver aid.
I am proud of the stance Ireland has taken. Since January 2023, we have provided core
funding UNRWA. We formally recognised the State of Palestine on 28 May 2024. We have
evacuated sick children and families to Ireland for medical treatment. We have deployed sig-
nicant diplomatic resources to push for peace and the restoration of international law. We will
soon introduce legislation under the occupied territories Bill reecting our obligations under
international law.
This crisis has been further complicated by the escalating tension and war between Israel
and Iran. I fully support the Government’s view, and that of the EU, that Iran must not develop
nuclear weapons but this must be achieved through negotiation and not confrontation. Iran as-
serts the right to peaceful nuclear energy. Israel has a right to security. They are not mutually
exclusive. I deplore the repressive regime in Iran and its abuse of human rights, particularly
against women, but we must not let this distract from the catastrophe in Gaza.
Prime Minister Netanyahu has warned for over 30 years that Iran is on the brink of develop-
ing a nuclear weapon, yet that threat has never materialised. We must be cautious of rhetoric
that fuels endless war. It would be deeply regrettable if the Israeli Prime Minister’s motive in
prolonging hostilities in Gaza and Iran was contrived to avoid legal prosecution in Israel.
I urge the United States to adopt a more assertive role, not just in brokering a ceasere, but
in guaranteeing it. The world cannot continue to look away. The suering of Gaza’s civilians,
the ongoing displacement and the deliberate targeting of essential services all point to a man-
made disaster, a disaster that in the eyes of many, including our Taoiseach’s and mine, meets the
denition of genocide. Ireland’s voice alone will not end this war. We are a small country but
we speak with moral clarity, guided by our history, values and commitment to international law.
I stand by those calling for peace, justice and the protection of innocent lives.
02/07/2025BBB00200Deputy Cormac Devlin: Like many colleagues in the House, I rise today with a heavy
heart. The situation in the Middle East, particularly in Gaza and the West Bank, is an ongoing
humanitarian disaster that demands our attention, our compassion and, critically, our action.
Let me begin by recalling the horric events of 7 October, the appalling attacks and murders
of innocent people. I reiterate what the Taoiseach and Tánaiste have said: all hostages must be
released unconditionally and without delay. Their prolonged captivity serves only to deepen
Dáil Éireann
396
suering and delay peace but we must also recognise what has followed in the months since.
The military response in Gaza has gone far beyond self-defence. What we are witnessing
now, day after day, is the collective punishment of a civilian population. It is a breach of inter-
national humanitarian law and is causing immeasurable suering. Over 500 people have been
killed while trying to access food. Hospitals and UN facilities have been bombed and children
are starving. The Red Cross and Médecins sans Frontières speak of total collapse. The UN
has described the situation as “weaponised hunger”. Pope Leo XIV echoed this, decrying the
“weaponisation of food” in our time, describing it as a moral outrage and a betrayal of basic
human decency.
I welcome the clear stance taken by the Government in calling for full and unimpeded
humanitarian access. The Tánaiste has rightly insisted that the role of UN agencies, including
UNRWA, must be protected and respected. This is not just a humanitarian issue; it is a test of
whether international law means anything.
I am proud that Ireland is one of the few countries to have backed up our words with con-
crete action. Since January 2023, we have provided over €88 million in support to the Pales-
tinian people, including core funding to UNRWA and emergency evacuations of sick children
from Gaza for care in Irish hospitals. This is solidarity in action. I also strongly support the
Government’s decision on the recognition of the Palestinian state in May. Recognition matters.
It rearms our belief that peace must be built on the equal dignity of both peoples. However,
recognition is not enough on its own. It must be part of a broader, co-ordinated eort to revive
and implement the two-state solution, a vision that is being eroded every day by the current
reality on the ground.
Let us be honest: the long-term viability of a two-state solution is hanging by a thread. The
continued expansion of illegal settlements in the West Bank, the deepening occupation and the
violent displacement of communities are not just violations of international law. They are ac-
tions that make a future Palestinian state less and less feasible. The recent announcement by
the Israeli Government of 22 new settlements in the West Bank is particularly alarming, and we
are now seeing the single longest Israeli military operation in the West Bank in two decades.
Combined with record levels of settler violence and movement restrictions, it is hard to avoid
the conclusion that facts are being created on the ground to block any return to meaningful
negotiations.
That is why I support the Government’s decision to advance the Israeli settlements in the
occupied Palestinian territory (prohibition of importation of goods) Bill. This is not about boy-
cotts; it is about the alignment of our trade policy with international law. The ICJ’s advisory
opinion has made it clear: states have a duty not to aid or recognise illegal situations. The Bill
gives that principle legal force. It is modest, practical and principled, and I hope colleagues
from across the House will support it as it proceeds through the pre-legislative scrutiny stage.
We are not acting alone. Many other EU states share Ireland’s view that the EU’s trade
relationship with Israel must be consistent with its own humanitarian rights commitment. I
commend the Tánaiste and his counterparts who wrote to the High Representative calling for a
full review of the EU-Israel association agreement under Article 2. That review is now under
way and I hope it leads to real accountability.
Ireland’s role in the world has always been rooted in our own experience. We know what
2 July 2025
397
conict looks like and we know how dicult peace can be. We also know that it is possible,
if people are willing to engage, to compromise and to put human lives above political gain.
There is no military solution to this conict. Only a negotiated settlement can deliver peace
and security for Israelis and Palestinians alike. That settlement must be based on a two-state
solution, with full respect for international law and the right of both peoples to live in dignity
and security.
Until that happens, as violence continues, suering will deepen and the prospect of peace
will fade further. That is why we in this House and those across the EU and the international
community must keep the pressure on for an immediate ceasere, the release of hostages, full
humanitarian access and a return to diplomacy. The stakes and the continued impact on civil-
ians could not be higher. The time to act is now.
02/07/2025BBB00300Deputy Naoise Ó Cearúil: The situation in the Middle East, specically in Gaza and across
the occupied Palestinian territories, is beyond tragic; it is catastrophic. Ireland must speak with
moral clarity and courage. As I have said before, and as many people in this House have said,
what is happening is clearly genocide.
Ireland has long supported the two-state solution and advocated for peace but peace without
justice is not peace at all. What we are witnessing today is the collapse of humanitarian protec-
tions. Gaza has become a place where children go hungry, hospitals are bombed and families
are being deliberately targeted and murdered. This cannot go unchallenged.
More than 400 people have been killed and over 3,000 injured while trying to access food
at militarised distribution centres. Aid is barely trickling in. The UN has rightly called it a tea-
spoon of aid where a ood is needed. The decision by Israel to take control of humanitarian aid
through private contractors is weaponised hunger. We also cannot ignore the ndings from the
EU review of the EU-Israel association agreement. The conclusion is clear: Israel is in breach
of its human rights obligations under Article 2. We now need to act on that. The occupied
territories Bill is a welcome step forward but if we are to make real progress and meaningful
dierences, the suspension of the EU-Israel trade agreement must be prioritised. That is the
most eective economic lever we have, and Ireland has been and is at the fore of pushing for it
across the European Union.
Beyond the policy level, we are seeing extraordinary solidarity here at home. In Kildare
and across Ireland, families are contacting me daily asking how they can help families in Gaza.
Irish people are in WhatsApp groups with families in Rafah and throughout Gaza and the West
Bank. They are co-ordinating donations and desperately trying to bring Palestinians here to
safety, particularly those with acute medical needs, but the barriers are immense. Applying for
asylum through the normal processes is next to impossible for those in Gaza. Internet access is
patchy or non-existent, documents are destroyed or unobtainable, and travel outside of the Gaza
Strip is almost impossible. Yet, these families continue to try. They do not want to be forgotten.
Ireland must respond with compassion and leadership. Today, I call for the creation of a
special scheme for Palestinians seeking refuge here in Ireland. This should be akin to what we
provided for Ukrainians, namely, a humanitarian route grounded in urgency, dignity and prac-
ticality. We cannot ask people trapped under bombardment to wait months for paperwork that
they cannot even access. This scheme would allow Irish families who are willing to sponsor
and support Palestinians to do so legally and securely.
Dáil Éireann
398
Ireland has a proud record of humanitarian responses, but now is the time for a bolder and
more tailored approach. Gaza is not just facing a humanitarian crisis. It is facing annihilation.
Ceaseres must hold, hostages must be released and aid must ow.
Beyond the emergency, we need to ask ourselves what role can we play in ensuring this
never happens again. It starts with consequences. The EU-Israel trade agreement should be
suspended until full compliance with international humanitarian and human rights law is re-
stored. Words alone are not enough. It is action that gives meaning to our principles. I would
go as far as to say that a mere suspension of the EU-Israel trade agreement is not enough. A
review of any possible reapplication of it should be considered very seriously in light of what
we have seen, not just over past two years, but over the past number of decades.
I commend the work of our diplomats, the Taoiseach, the Tánaiste, the Minister of State,
Thomas Byrne, and our civil servants who continue to work through international channels,
often quietly and diligently, to help families, build pressure and support peace-building eorts,
but we need to go further now. Our voice matters. In terms of how pushing for suspension of
the EU-Israel trade agreement and the recognition of the Palestinian state, Ireland, Spain and a
few others have stood out for a long time. Through those diplomatic relations, we have been
able to bring other countries along with us and let them see our perspective. More countries
in Europe now have their eyes far more open to what is happening. It has taken far too long
but it shows that diplomacy - working with other countries, trying to bring them along and not
just being an outcast standing on our own - works. How we make a real, thorough impact is
by hitting Israel where it hurts, and that is through the EU-Israel trade agreement. That is the
strongest tool we have at this moment.
Let Ireland continue to lead as it has, not only with words, but with our actions, our heart
and our hope. What we did when the war broke out in Ukraine in allowing Ukrainian refugees
to come here with special protections we need to consider for the people of Palestine. Not ev-
erybody from Palestine will want to leave as refugees but for those who do, we should be in a
position to allow them. Trying to get visa documents and trying to get online is quite dicult,
so we should be looking at ways to care for them and help them to come here if they so wish.
02/07/2025CCC00200Deputy Pat Buckley: I came across a quote today that said a sane state did not wage war
against civilians and did not kill babies as a hobby. That is a very strong statement. What has
been happening, particularly in Gaza, over the past number of painful months has been atro-
cious. It makes me nervous that people in the western world - in the whole world - are looking
at what is happening Gaza and war and death have been normalised. This shows that, while not
all of us, a lot of people in this world have lost their souls and humanity.
I cannot imagine what the people who have been bombed every day are going through.
What the people of Palestine are being subjected to is absolutely and utterly horric. Millions
of people face starvation. We have spoke about it. If nothing else, we have to lift the blockade
on the aid and allow in what we would call impartial organisations into Gaza to distribute that
aid.
Let us be honest - Israel has trampled over international law and is getting away with it. I
have to be very careful with my words because, like everyone else, I can get angry. There is no
crime that Israel has not inicted on the Palestinian people, yet the international community has
done nothing. We have named them, namely, the US, France, Germany and our own European
Union. I thought a union was meant to help and look after one another and have strength in
2 July 2025
399
numbers, but I have lost faith in that. How can a lasting peace be built when Benjamin Netan-
yahu is not held to account? The regime acts with impunity and gets away with everything.
That drives me crazy.
I ask the Government to listen to everybody here and play its part in passing the occupied
territories Bill. From a tiny little acorn grows a mighty oak tree. Let us start with every small
thing we can do to get us to the big oak tree and help the Palestinian people who are suering.
Ordinary people in their tens of thousands have come out onto the street throughout the
country to give voice to how angry they are at Israeli war crimes and the inaction of the Irish
Government and others. Please, listen to everyone. Look at the people all over the world who
have come out in support of peace and the Palestinians.
To say it is shocking, but Israel does act with impunity. That is because it has never been
held to account, not for one of its actions in killing thousands upon thousands of civilians -
unarmed mothers, children, fathers, you name it. Professional people who have a right to go
there and report what is happening are just massacred without any consequences. It is genocide
- there is no other word for it - and it is being normalised. We are not doing enough to get this
right. Israel has violated every single part of international law and got away with it. We are
human beings, and if we get away with something the rst time, we will chance it again, regard-
less of what it is. That is what we have seen with Iran.
I wish to mention the band Kneecap and others who have given Palestinians a voice. It is
shocking to see more time being spent trying to silence people who are giving the Palestinians
a voice. If half that eort was spent trying to have peace in Palestine, we may not be in here
talking about it. Please, work together and do whatever is possible to pass the occupied ter-
ritories Bill.
02/07/2025CCC00300Deputy Paul Murphy: It is another week of unspeakable horror in Gaza, with scores of
people killed every single day, many of them - maybe most of them - while queuing for food.
Another week of aid being used as a weapon of war against starving Gazans by the Israeli, US-
backed, so-called Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. Another week of distraction, reframing and
excuses by most of the western establishment who enable, fund and arm this genocide. “Death,
death to the IDF”. That should be a statement of good sense. Dismantle the army that is respon-
sible for this slaughter. Support Palestinian resistance to genocide and occupation. It speaks of
the upside down world in which we live that Bob Vylan chanting this simple slogan was treated
as an outrage. It provoked more investigations into artists speaking up against genocide and
more attempts to conate protests against genocide with antisemitism. In the US and across
Europe, Ireland included, we are seeing the spread of authoritarianism to shut down, oppose
and prevent criticism of and opposition to Israel. There has been a crackdown and criminalis-
ing of peaceful protest. It will only be a few more days before Palestine Action will likely be
ocially proscribed as a terrorist organisation in Britain.
Last week, many of the peaceful activists I was with for the global march to Gaza were in
Brussels to demand that the EU suspend its trade association agreement with Israel. They were
violently suppressed. Irish activists were arrested and carried away for simply singing a Pales-
tinian rendition of “Bella Ciao”.
I will nish with some other words of Bob Vylan that have not received the same coverage.
He said:
Dáil Éireann
400
We, like those in the spotlight before us, are not the story. We are a distraction from the
story ... We are not the rst. We will not be the last. And if you care for the sanctity of hu-
man life and freedom of speech, we urge you to speak up too. Free Palestine.
02/07/2025DDD00200Deputy Catherine Connolly: I have only two minutes so I hope I will pick my words eec-
tively and usefully. Since dawn this morning, 43 Palestinian people have been killed by Israeli
attacks. On Monday, 74 people were killed, 30 of them at a seaside café used by journalists,
activists and local residents. More than 600 starving Palestinians have been killed like moving
targets at a fairground. Some 4,186 were injured while waiting for food at the obscenely titled
Gaza Humanitarian Foundation.
We are oering our few words today. Doctors Without Borders has told us that the aid dis-
tribution sites are “slaughter masquerading as humanitarian aid”. Before 7 October, there were
400 such sites across the Gaza Strip. That is down to four now. Under this abomination, Gaza
has gone from 400 to four, with Philippe Lazzarini the Commissoner-General of UNRWA.
I am looking at the Tánaiste’s 23-page speech. I see the narrative continues from the Gov-
ernment. Despite the good steps that have been taken, the narrative utterly fails to condemn
Israel for the genocidal state it is. We talk as if history started on 7 October; it certainly did
not. We condemn without hesitation what happened but no context or history are given at all.
I read what the Tánaiste said, and if this is what we are talking about, we have no credibility
left at all. He referred to “the conict between Iran and Israel”, as if Iran was not attacked in an
unprovoked fashion by a genocidal Israeli Government. Our Government calls that a mutual
conict whereby the countries attacked each other. That is the type of narrative that makes me
very angry and deals a terrible blow to our credibility as an independent sovereign state and
a Republic with a duty to speak out. We have a duty to call out the abuse of power no matter
where it is. At this stage, it is Israel and absolutely Israel.
02/07/2025DDD00300Deputy Ruth Coppinger: “War is a relic of barbarism only possible because we are gov-
erned by a ruling class with barbaric ideas.” That was said by James Connolly as he looked
at the conagration that was the First World War. How apt it is now. We have been here pre-
viously. People are saying this is something new but, unfortunately, it is a feature of history,
including the world wars, the Holocaust, Srebrenica, the 30th anniversary of which is coming
up shortly, and Rwanda. Colonialism and genocide go back centuries. The indigenous native
Americans had genocide committed against them, as did so many others.
The barbaric ruling class in this case comprises the US, which is funding Israel’s barbarism;
the EU, which is actively sending arms to the Israelis and turning a blind eye; the UK; and the
so-called Gulf and Middle Eastern Muslim states that have been completely complicit in what
is being done to the Palestinian people.
The UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer says Glastonbury is the problem. Apparently, “Death,
death to the IDF” is a shocking thing to say but it is not a shocking thing to say when kids are
being killed for sport. Naturally, you do not want that army to continue. I oer solidarity to
those artists who are using their platforms, potentially suering commercially and facing terror-
ism laws in the UK. They are risking sales. I remember Sinéad O’Connor, who was somebody
else who took a part.
I do not have time to make all the points I want to but I will mention oxycodone. That it now
seems that the Israelis are deliberately putting opioid drugs into our is disgusting.
2 July 2025
401
I also want to put on the record Francesca Albanese’s list of companies that have blood on
their hands by proting from this barbarism. Any TD going to 4 July celebrations has a lot to
answer for in rewarding the US for what it is doing. I do not have time to name all of the rel-
evant companies, but I will mention Palintir, IBM, Google and Facebook, which have tax-free
status in Ireland. Shame on the Irish Government for not taking them to task.
02/07/2025DDD00400Deputy Roderic O’Gorman: Yesterday, I took part in the pre-legislative process for the
Government’s occupied territories Bill, or the OTB-lite. Like others, I focused on the Govern-
ment’s exclusion of services from the current draft. The ocials from the Department of for-
eign aairs were able to give me a clear answer on one point I raised. One of the conclusions in
the ICJ opinion, delivered last year, was that states should “abstain from entering into economic
or trade dealings with Israel concerning the Occupied Palestinian Territory”. I asked the of-
cials if it was their legal opinion that the term “economic or trade dealings” in the ICJ opinion
referred to trade in goods alone or referred to trade in goods and services. They were clear that
the legal advice received by the departmental ocials was to the eect that the ICJ was refer-
ring to trade in goods and services. As such, if Ireland passes a Bill that excludes services, we
will not meet the requirements of the ICJ advisory opinion regarding our engagement with the
Palestinian territories.
I also asked the ocials how we could defend the occupied territories Bill against a pos-
sible challenge under EU law. To do so, we would have to use the public policy justication in
Article 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It has been noted that the
European Court of Justice scrutinises and is very strict about how that particular treaty article is
used. A member state must show that it is advocating a genuine and suciently serious threat
to a fundamental interest of society. I raised my concern that there was a risk that passing a Bill
that only covered trade in goods from the occupied territories and not trade in services, which
was a very obvious gap, undermined Ireland’s argument before the European Court of Justice
that the restriction in the Bill represented a genuine manifestation of Irish public policy. The
ocials were unable to give me a convincing argument on that point. I believe that by propos-
ing a Bill that omits services, the Government is setting it up to fail a legal challenge. This
weakness can be solved by including services in the Government’s Bill.
02/07/2025DDD00500Deputy Brian Stanley: The terrorist state of Israel continues its campaign of horror, geno-
cide, starvation and every war crime imaginable. Civilians queuing for food because they are
desperate and starving are being slaughtered. Refugees in tents are being bombed. Only one
of more than 20 hospitals is now able to operate, and with great diculty. Water supplies are
being cut. Medics and journalists are being murdered. That is not to mention what is going on
in the West Bank with settlers and the Israeli militia.
The State of Israel continues to act with impunity. Many governments around the world,
including EU governments, are assisting and should hang their heads in shame. They are col-
luding with Israel. The British Government is one such government. Meanwhile, Kneecap
becomes the issue for singing and shouting slogans. Nothing is said about the Government of
that state supplying Israel with weapons, etc.
The State of Israel, with the assistance of the US, targets Iran. I do not like the regime in
Iran. Israel targeted it with bombs, supposedly to stop its nuclear programme, despite the fact
that until recently, the US Government’s position was that Iran was not developing nuclear
weapons. A negotiated outcome with Iran should be the priority.
Dáil Éireann
402
What can be done?
6 o’clock
The hostages must be released, but this must include Palestinian hostages, the thousands of
young boys incarcerated in the jails of Israel and being tortured and horribly treated. We in this
State must pass the full occupied territories Bill to include services. We must pass measures
in the Dáil to end the practice of the Central Bank issuing and approving the prospectuses for
Israeli war bonds. The Taoiseach and the Government said they cannot do it. The Governor
of the Central Bank has said it can be done if we put forward the measures here in this House.
Gabriel Makhlouf has said this and contradicted the Government on this point. We should fol-
low through on it. We should continue to work with EU states to try to get the suspension of
the EU-Israel association agreement. I welcome the work done on that by the Government, but
we must continue with it. Regarding the stopping of the slaughter of civilians queuing for food,
this must be brought to the International Court of Justice and added to the case there. We must
continue to use all our diplomatic resources to press for a ceasere and negotiations and to work
towards a two-state solution for Palestine and Israel.
02/07/2025EEE00200Deputy John McGuinness: Over the last few weeks, I have been looking at the emails and
telephone messages I have received from constituents. A lot of the names would be familiar
to me. I have never heard from them previously and never thought they would be as animated
about this issue as to come forward and to put in two pages of an email what they felt about it,
but they did. Over time, those numbers have grown signicantly. It is not that we cannot ignore
them anymore, but that they are telling a truth we do not want to listen to.
Last year, on the nance committee, we dealt with the Central Bank and the bonds. We also
dealt with several other issues concerning Israel. It has taken from before the last general elec-
tion until now for the Government to be brought to the point where it is using words it did not
use before, even though those words are meaningless and not strong enough at all.
One of the things that came across in the course of all the emails I read was the failure of
Europe to deal with this situation and the failure of Ireland - even though we are a small country
in that Union - to convince those in Europe that there is a serious issue here for the country and
Europe to deal with. I condemn the European Union for some of the actions it has taken and
for not taking some of the actions it should have taken. What is required now is a huge eort
on the part of Europe, and on the part of Ireland within Europe, to convince others that action
is being demanded by the people we represent.
Nobody can condone what we see on our televisions and in the print media every day of
the week. It is horrendous to think that in the modern world we can have that type of murder
and mayhem going on, that we are reluctant to call it genocide and that we are reluctant to take
action against another country by highlighting our views simply because we may lose economi-
cally. There are times when one has to put aside any economic advantage or consideration of
any economic disadvantage and do the right thing. At the weekend, I met a lady who was upset
about this whole issue, about the Government and the European Union not doing what is ex-
pected of them and that the genocide and murder continues. I do not know what it takes for this
House to come together with one voice and state exactly where we stand, without any dressing
up or political packaging, just to say it clearly and to encourage others to take the same position
as us.
2 July 2025
403
The occupied territories Bill has gone around and around. I commend Senator Black on
her work in this area. We have left the legislation and long-ngered it for far too long. Ser-
vices need to be included in the Bill. Let it be taken to whatever court anyone might want and
challenged in whatever way it has to be, but we need to make this very denite statement as a
country to ensure our voice and the voices of the people we represent are heard. I read deep
disappointment in the emails and communications to me. People feel they are being overlooked
and not being heard and that we are playing to the gallery in relation to the bigger group within
the European Union. The time has come; people would like to see democracy in action. They
would like to see the European Union listening to them, for once, and they would like to see
the Members of the European Parliament coming together with the countries they represent and
making this statement that is now urgently required.
It is shocking to think the great powers in this world - bigger powers than Ireland certainly
- and the collective power of the European Union have not achieved a free track of supply of
humanitarian aid to where it is most needed. We can argue about who is right and who is wrong
in relation to what is happening, but the bottom line is that it is not the fault of the women, chil-
dren and men we see being murdered on our television screens. Whatever is going on, it should
be put aside. Permission should be given for the humanitarian aid to pass freely to where it is
needed. Because we are not getting that direction from America, the European Union needs to
take that strong hand. While there is still time to do it, I hope that Ireland will correct its pretty
weak position, take a strong leadership role within the European Union and do the right thing
on behalf of the citizens of this country.
02/07/2025EEE00300Deputy Catherine Callaghan: To echo what all the speakers have stated today, the ongo-
ing genocide in the Middle East is abhorrent. Innocent civilians are being starved to death.
Parents have no baby formula for their infants. This is happening in our world today. While I
acknowledge the Government’s work so far, we need to keep the pressure on. I hear from con-
cerned people every day across counties Carlow and Kilkenny who are, quite rightly, horried
by what is happening in Gaza. They are urging us, as a country and a Government, to do more,
to push harder and to pass the occupied territories Bill - now called the Israeli Settlements in the
Occupied Palestinian Territory (Prohibition of Importation of Goods) Bill - and include services
in it, which I am not opposed to. What is paramount is that we ensure this Bill is enforceable
and the most eective legislation it can be. Adherence to any advice from the Attorney General
is of critical importance. We are the only country in Europe to draft legislation of this type, and
I am hopeful, once it is passed into law, that other countries across Europe will be inspired to do
the same. I support the Taoiseach’s call on all parties in this House to work with their equiva-
lent parties across Europe and encourage them to speak with their governments to do as we
have done and enact domestic legislation to place sanctions on Israel in response to the geno-
cidal acts it is committing. We need to keep making our voice heard in Europe so that our Eu-
ropean counterparts can add their voice to ours and ensure we are heard and that we as a group
of European countries together call on Israel to immediately lift its blockade of humanitarian
and commercial supplies for Gaza and allow the resumption of unimpeded humanitarian aid.
I share the UN’s concerns that Israel’s new model for delivering aid into Gaza through private
contractors - the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation - is not operating in accordance with humani-
tarian principles. Hundreds of people have been killed while trying to collect food. UNRWA
has described the model as degrading and humiliating and said it is putting lives in danger. We
need European countries to join us and urge them to act to call out what is happening in Gaza
for what it is - genocide.
Dáil Éireann
404
I cannot speak about the Middle East without talking about the fragile security situation in
southern Lebanon, including ongoing Hezbollah activity and the continuing Israeli strikes and
infringements of Lebanon’s airspace in deance of UN Security Council Resolution 1701. All
sides must meet their commitments under the ceasere agreement. Ongoing Israeli attacks in
Lebanon also undermine the legitimacy of President Aoun and Prime Minister Salam as they
continue to assert the primacy of the Lebanese State. It is important to commend the Leba-
nese Government on its eorts to deploy the Lebanese armed forces into the south and exert a
monopoly of force throughout the country. Israel’s continued occupation of parts of Lebanon
breaches international law. It is important that Ireland encourages the steps being taken by the
Lebanese Government to reform Lebanon’s economy and to continue the reconstruction of
Lebanon. I am glad to see that Ireland and the EU are committed to supporting this work.
I am deeply concerned about the safety of our troops in the region. Speculation about UNI-
FIL’s mandate renewal is not helpful and potentially endangers our troops, particularly in the
context of heightened tension in the region. While it is true that in May, the Irish Government
approved the continued participation of the Irish Defence Forces in UNIFIL for a further period
of 12 months, if UNIFIL’s UN mandate is not renewed when it expires on 31 August, which
is by no means guaranteed as the US has a veto it could use if it so wishes, as Irish law stands,
our Irish troops will have to immediately depart the UNIFIL mission. This is solely due to the
requirement for Ireland to request permission from the US, the UK, France, Russia and China
regarding where our peacekeeping troops are deployed. Meanwhile, the other troops that are
part of the UNIFIL mission can continue. They may decide to continue and remain in a dier-
ent capacity as peacekeepers in Lebanon with the consent of the host nation of Lebanon. Their
presence will continue to provide the much-needed stability that is required in that very fragile
security situation in southern Lebanon.
Bilaterally and at a multilateral level, Ireland has repeatedly called on Israel to comply with
international law, stressing the universal applicability of international law, including interna-
tional humanitarian law. In that way, the deliberate targeting of UNIFIL personnel or installa-
tions is a violation of international humanitarian law.
Ireland, the EU and our international partners have been clear that there can be no forced
displacement of the civilian population in Gaza or occupation of the strip by Israel. We need to
keep pushing. We need to hold rm and work together as a House and in the European Union
to demand a lasting ceasere, the ow of humanitarian aid, the return of hostages and the pass-
ing of the most eective occupied territories Bill and that we work towards a two-state solution.
02/07/2025FFF00200Deputy Natasha Newsome Drennan: So far today, over 40 Palestinians have been slaugh-
tered by Israeli airstrikes. In the past two days, over 250 Palestinians have been killed. A large
number of these people were murdered while seeking aid from aid stations. Even Israeli media
is reporting accounts from soldiers operating near these stations that they are being ordered to
shoot civilians seeking aid. In the West Bank, Israeli forces are evicting Palestinian families
and demolishing their homes to make way for more illegal Israeli settlements. International law
in the Middle East has been ripped to shreds by the Israeli Government.
War crimes are taking place daily, yet this Government and our EU counterparts have failed
to nd any backbone or take a stand against Israel. Worse, Ireland and the EU continue trad-
ing and doing business with Israel. The Government will not even stop arms being transported
via Ireland. We saw decisive action against Russia over its illegal invasion of Ukraine and
war crimes but even now, after all the slaughter of Palestinians, the EU still cannot unite to say
2 July 2025
405
enough is enough.
Tomorrow, the UN will publish a report naming companies that play a vital role in Israel’s
genocide in Gaza and its brutal apartheid system across Israel and the West Bank. Microsoft,
Alphabet and Amazon give Israel, through their database, free reign to maintain surveillance
across the police state. These companies have all eagerly recruited sta from Israeli military
intelligence. Global insurance companies like Allianz and Axa have invested heavily in shares
and bonds linked to Israel’s occupation. These are household names in Ireland. As usual with
large corporations, prot reigns supreme. They show little or no regard for human rights viola-
tions in business partnership.
The public stands with us. The overwhelming majority want the occupied territories Bill
enacted. Even Government Members agree. Find some backbone, do what is right, enact the
Control of Economic Activity (Occupied Territories) Bill and not the Government’s watered-
down version and put an end to arms being transported to Israel via Shannon Airport. People in
Gaza are risking their lives to retrieve food. Israel is weaponising starvation to lure them in to
kill them. Do they just sit in their tents and starve to death or die trying to get food? It is like
putting cheese on a mousetrap. There is only way it is going to end.
This morning, I listened to a paediatrician on the radio. He spoke of women having children
and how the children were born starving. The mothers are lucky to get fed once a day. The
most natural thing for a baby is to get its mother’s milk. The mothers cannot provide milk for
their own children. These children and their parents are dying from starvation. They cannot
even get the basic necessity - baby formula - in to save them. They have enough fuel to cook
once a day if they are lucky enough to get something to eat. Imagine one’s own children beg-
ging for food. Imagine what that is doing to people’s mental health. It is shocking.
Albert Einstein said “The world will not be destroyed by those who do evil, but by those
who watch them without doing anything.” That is what is happening. We are not doing
enough. Children are owed so much more than another day of this war. It is time to act.
02/07/2025GGG00200Deputy Paul Lawless: We have seen horric scenes of the destruction of people in Pales-
tine. It is dicult to pick any single moment but I was struck by a Palestinian paediatrician,
Alaa al-Najjar, who fell to her knees with the pain and devastation of witnessing her own chil-
dren arriving into her emergency department. Her nine children were killed by an Israeli air-
strike. They were between the ages of two and 12. To think of such young children being killed
is heartbreaking and then to think there is such starvation happening in Gaza as thousands of
people are in search of food, yet there is a blockade on humanitarian supplies. Hunger is being
used as a weapon of war. This is genocide.
Yesterday, I listened and watched Department ocials being questioned at the joint commit-
tee on foreign aairs. It was painful. As many members of the Opposition asked important and
poignant questions, I was particularly struck by Senator McDowell’s contribution. He raised
the point that between member states of the European Union, there is a treaty entitlement that
allows member states to prevent the importation of goods on public policy grounds. Has the
Irish Government engaged with the European Union to see if this entitlement is available to a
country outside the EU? It seems implausible to think that this provision is available within
the EU but we cannot enact the same legislation for a country outside the EU, for example,
Morocco or Israel, when we could do it for Spain. It is very frustrating.
Dáil Éireann
406
I have watched conversations and debate here for weeks and this issue has been passed
around like a parcel. All the while I have watched the leaders of Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, the
Taoiseach and Tánaiste, respectively, moralise as if we have achieved something. Talk is cheap,
and all that has happened has been months and years of conversation and moralising. The time
for action is now. What is happening in Gaza is deeply distressing. I would like the Minister
of State to take back to the Cabinet the message that we should be doing much more within the
European Union to put forward the Irish position and that of the people in Gaza. Right now, we
are bystanders on this. We have talked a good game here in this House but that is it. Now is
the time to take the lead in the conversation across the European Union and take a more proac-
tive role. We have a history of persecution by a foreign power in this country and we have a
key competence in peace negotiations. We should be engaging with the European Union, Israel
and, indeed, the Palestinians to work out a solution.
02/07/2025GGG00300Deputy Michael Collins: As so many speakers have said, the war and the scenes taking
place out there are horric. Nothing hits an Irish person more than to see millions of young
people, or any person, facing starvation. It could not hit a deeper note in the mind of any Irish
person because we have had this in our own history. It is something that will never be forgot-
ten in the history of this country and what is happening to the Palestinians now should never be
forgotten either.
I will not be critical of the Government. We have to be very careful. Much of the Opposi-
tion thinks we should shout and roar, expel ambassadors and do all sorts of dramatic things.
While that sells to the public, it could have serious implications in the long term. I have con-
cerns that Europe seems to be hand-tied against speaking out more strongly and advocating for
peace. That is why every politician in this House should advocate for a peaceful solution.
Ireland is a neutral country. I am very much a believer that we should always advocate
for peace. I think the Government has been doing the best it can in a very dicult situation
because if the EU, which is a stronger body, is unable to do something, how is Ireland going to
be a superpower?
I listened to dierent speakers, one of whom mentioned going to meet the US ambassador
on 4 July. I would be delighted to meet anyone if it meant bringing peace to the countries that
are ghting. This country wants to lead on peace abroad. Shouting over fences and screaming
and roaring are not going to deliver. We need to be able to talk to the American ambassador and
others in this country and sit down around the table, regardless of the occasion, when we get the
chance. We will never get peace if we keep roaring. We will only adding to the problem. I will
take every opportunity I get, whether it is this week or next week, to meet anyone, anywhere to
try to speak about peace and push the US Government, which has a strong inuence on Israel,
to advocate for peace through that channel.
One of the rst things I heard was the Social Democrats calling for us to expel the Israeli
ambassador. We have Irish citizens over there. I would have serious concerns for the welfare
of those citizens if we were to go ahead and jump at that. That shows the immaturity that is
out there. Of course, it is a great soundbite, it looks good and people get lots of likes on their
social media for coming out with a statement like that but common sense must come into play
here. We must do everything in our power to advocate for peace. Every hour of the day, we
need to seek to meet the ambassadors. We need to bring them here, talk to them and see if we
can advocate for peace. Rather than engage in dramatics, maybe we need to do the ordinary
everyday things that bring peace to countries and bring people together.
2 July 2025
407
There is some peace in Iran at the moment, which is absolutely needed. I support any peace
eorts going on there. Bombing a country, whichever country it is, is not a way forward for
peace. As a neutral country, we should stand strong and do our best to make sure the powers
that be in Europe are working towards peace and the powers that be in this country, through our
ambassadors, should be pushing very strongly for peace.
I see a lot of protests outside the House on this issue. I believe in democracy and it is im-
portant that people voice their concerns, but the protestors out there should be careful. I have
gone out there a few times. I could have been talking in the Chamber for ten or 15 minutes on
the issue and the next thing is I go outside and get roared at that I do not speak about anything
or any of the issues. That is not the way to bring people with you. You have to respect what
they are saying and understand that they are on the same side, the side of peace. Independent
Ireland is on the side of peace and making sure, rst, that there is no more massacres of inno-
cent people, second, that the starvation of people has to stop immediately and people have to
get food and, third, that immediate aid be provided to the hospitals that are being bombed and
they at least be allowed some safety. There are innocent people who have gone out there to give
their time to help people.
Another Deputy said he was getting a lot of emails. We are all receiving a lot of emails
about this issue, some of which are extremely genuine. I have also received a lot of phone calls
on this issue. I spoke to a gentleman two or three days ago who said he never rang a politician
in his life, but rang all of the politicians in Cork South-West. I spoke to him at length and he
was in bits over what is going on. Much of what people see on social media today probably
upsets people, but they are upsetting scenes. There is no point in anyone being in denial and no
one on our end will ever condone what is going on.
We should be diplomatic in our way forward and seek peace through any channel possible.
We should not condemn anyone who has a dierent way of trying to get peace. Some believe
in shouting and roaring; more believe in sitting down around the table. I am a believer in sitting
around the table and trying to see whether we can bring peace to the country. If that involves
meeting our ambassador from America tomorrow, I would do it. I am not one bit afraid to say
that. I will not stand behind others who think that is the wrong idea. No one will insult any-
body, but we need to talk and open up the channels. That is an opportunity everyone should
take. People should speak peacefully to others because we will never create peace when we are
throwing stones from the other side and looking over the ditch.
02/07/2025HHH00200Deputy Séamus McGrath: I thank the Minister for being here to facilitate the debate on
the Middle East. All of us in the House can agree on how horried we are by what we are seeing
on our televisions day in, day out in terms of the atrocities that are taking place in the Middle
East. The massacre of human life is absolutely atrocious. A number of years ago we would not
have expected to witness this in the year 2025. We had hoped the world had matured to a point
whereby this type of hard military action would not be taking place.
Obviously, the only way forward is discussion, negotiation and reaching a ceasere to allow
room and scope for a proper discussion and a long-term settlement to be put in place. I by no
means underestimate the task involved. The problems in the Middle East, in particular Gaza
and the West Bank, are decades old and there are deep rooted and very entrenched views, but we
have to nd a solution. Ireland can speak loudly on that issue because we had our own issues
on this island. Thankfully, we managed to navigate our way through a peace process which has
endured and lasted. In that sense, it gives us a sense of authority to speak on this issue.
Dáil Éireann
408
As a country, we propose a two-state solution, which is the only way forward as far as I am
concerned. As I said, we have an authority to speak on that. It is only through discussion and
agreement that we will nd an ultimate solution. There has been criticism of Ireland’s position
to the eect that we are not strong enough. A previous speaker mentioned the scores of emails
that we are receiving from constituents. I fully understand that as a TD. The vast majority
come from a good place and are heartfelt and genuine. People, like ourselves, are horried
by what they are seeing day in, day out. They are reaching out to their public representatives,
which is what people do in a democracy. We all fully accept and understand that. Like others,
I have received emails from people who ask how we can let this happen. I ask myself how we
can stop this. That is a question that we, as public representative, need to ask ourselves.
Ireland has a choice to make. Do we remain a strong voice in the large powerful block that
is the European Union and try to bring about progress in that forum or do we stand apart, be-
come an outlier, be more extreme in our views and lose the powerful voice we have within the
European Union? Staying in the European Union and being a strong voice is a choice because
there are voices and views on Europe that are very dierent from ours. Other countries take a
dierent position and have a dierent stance. That is why we as a country need to be strong and
stay within the European Union so that our voice is heard.
Becoming an outlier and being outside the tent as a small country on the periphery of Eu-
rope will not contribute anything to a solution. We can take a stand and make ourselves feel
better about what we have done on various issues, but if we want to make a meaningful dier-
ence, something we have done in Europe, we have to remain within the European family and
try to make progress in that way and through that forum.
Ireland, as a whole, has been very strong in our position on the Middle East. Ireland has
provided over €88 million in support to the people of Palestine since January 2023, which is
a signicant sum of money for a small nation such as ours. More than €75 million has been
provided since October 2023. Ireland has provided €20 million in core support to UNRWA this
year alone, which brings our support to €58 million since 2023. In May 2024, Ireland recog-
nised the State of Palestine, along with Spain, in the European Union, which was a very brave
decision for us to take. We have been strong in our support of the South African case in the
International Court of Justice. In 2024, we facilitated the evacuation of up to 36 children from
Gaza for treatment and care. All of these measures are very important.
The Palestinian authorities praised Ireland for the position we are taking. From some of the
correspondence I have received, one would think we were at the other end. We are not. The
Palestinian authorities have praised us. Israel and its associates have been highly critical of
Ireland in terms of the position we have taken on these issues.
It is about staying the course in terms of our position in Europe, doing everything we pos-
sibly can to bring about a long lasting settlement and working the diplomatic and international
channels. I again repeat that Ireland has a strong position and a lot of authority in respect of a
peace process and trying to bring about an ultimate solution. I urge our political leaders, de-
spite everything I have said, to be as strong as they possibly can when they meet their European
colleagues and counterparts at various meetings and engagements and interactions across Eu-
rope and beyond. I ask that they be as strong as possible in their voice of support for a proper
settlement and bring about what is needed to stop the carnage we are seeing day in, day out and
the unfortunate massacre of men, women and children on a daily basis. It is simply not good
enough in the world we are living in today. Surely working together collectively we can end
2 July 2025
409
this as soon as possible.
02/07/2025HHH00300Deputy Joe Neville: I welcome the O’Regan family from Dublin via Cork and thank them
all for coming to the Gallery. It is good to see them.
We are speaking about the Middle East which is obviously a complex issue, as outlined by
Deputy McGrath. The Government has done a huge amount of work internationally, from a
diplomatic perspective, and has put a huge eort into discussing and raising the issue in a way
that has not happened elsewhere in the western world. We have shown leadership as a Govern-
ment. Indeed, our leaders have shown leadership the rest of Europe. In fairness, a lot of Europe
is now following. Other countries, such as the UK, may be slower, but they are beginning to
view things as we have done.
As Deputy McGrath outlined, the issues have been raised with us. We receive emails and
see social media posts. It is often pitched that we are on the other side of this ght, for want
of a better term. There is a view that we may not stand as aligned as we should, but I would
argue that the people of Palestine know exactly where Ireland stands. The leaders of Palestine
know exactly where we stand. The leaders in the Middle East know exactly where we stand.
We stand against what is happening in Gaza and what is happening to all of the people there,
especially the children, and how they are being killed and their lives destroyed. Not only is
destruction happening now, what is happening will sow the seeds of destruction for future gen-
erations. That is what we in Ireland have highlighted.
Constituents in Kildare North have reached out to me over the past couple of years, espe-
cially since I have been elected to the Dáil. I have received emails from people who are hor-
ried and distressed. Their views mirror my own and those of the people beside me. People
might ask why I would speak as a TD about the Middle East and ask who cares what a TD in
Ireland says about the Middle East. The only reason we discuss it is that we have to discuss it
and highlight what we see on our TV screens and what is going on. If we do not, the world will
be silent about what is going on. Although we are not the strongest militarily or economically,
what we do have is a history of standing proudly neutral and fair behind what is right. We know
that what is happening in Israel and Gaza is not right, and this is what we are calling out.
The Irish Government has always been clear on its support for Gaza. As Deputy Séamus
McGrath outlined, we have committed signicant funding in our own way to the people of
Gaza, as highlighted by the €58 million to UNRWA, among other moneys. We have repeatedly
called for a ceasere with the immediate release of hostages. We recognised the State of Pal-
estine when other countries did not do so. We have shown the way across Europe, along with
Spain and Norway, in this specic regard.
The Government will continue to make the case throughout Europe and at the UN. Let no
one in this House be in any doubt about where the Irish Government stands. The country of
Israel is in no doubt about where this country stands. Sometimes when I am taking part in de-
bates on RTÉ or Newstalk, the Opposition, which is not here at present, would like to label us
as not being as pro-Gaza or Palestine as we should be. This goes against the view of everyone
else. The Opposition is completely wrong in how it is portraying the Government. We want
not only to make the case now but we have made it previously and we will continue to do so.
This debate is about the Middle East and we have seen what has happened in recent weeks
with Iran and Israel. We had issues back and forth between the two countries. I hope that now
Dáil Éireann
410
they have come to a resolution and the guns have been silenced. Ultimately, an escalation of
any conict does no good to anyone. It just sows the seeds of future distrust which will con-
tinue for future generations.
Ireland remains fully committed in all of this. We remain fully committed to promoting
peace throughout the world, and especially in the Middle East where we feel we have a role.
The Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Aairs and Trade, Deputy Harris, has been at the fore-
front of leading this, as has the Taoiseach. The Minister of State, Deputy McConalogue, is
here representing the Government in this debate and all Ministers have been to the forefront in
representing it. Deputy Séamus McGrath and I may be backbench TDs but we also speak for
the Government. The Government speaks with one voice and it is important that the Opposition
and the people of Ireland know with what voice we speak. We speak on behalf of fairness. We
speak on behalf of peace. We speak on behalf of all of the people who are struggling in Gaza
and other areas of the Middle East and throughout the world. We speak for them because we
speak for freedom.
This House came out of war and we have prospered in the freedom we have found since. As
a country we have had our diculties. Many of our families were involved in the War of Inde-
pendence. We do not have to go back too far for all of those stories, or for the battles that raged
around Europe. We have seen peace and now we want the same freedom, peace and future for
the people of Gaza. This is why I am making this statement. I am with the Government and
what it is doing. I call again on Israel to have a ceasere as soon as possible so we can start to
rebuild Gaza with what is required for the future peace and prosperity of the people of the area
so they too can live as we do.
02/07/2025JJJ00200Minister of State at the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport (Deputy
Charlie McConalogue): The images we see from Gaza and the horrifying humanitarian situ-
ation are truly appalling. The trajectory of displacement and disenfranchisement of Palestin-
ians in Gaza and the West Bank is unfathomable. More than 56,000 people have been killed in
Gaza. These are the ones whose deaths have been veried. Many more bodies lie beneath the
rubble. Behind each number is an individual, a loved one, and a person who had ambitions,
dreams, hopes and talents.
I am also acutely aware of the situation in the West Bank. It is clear that Israeli authorities
are taking measures designed to bring about the displacement of Palestinian communities. I am
deeply concerned about the mass demolition of homes, buildings and infrastructure in camps
across the West Bank. It marks the erosion of Palestinian life.
Against this backdrop, Ireland’s position has been clear and considered. We have not been
afraid to use our voices and to take action. Over the past week the Tánaiste spoke with a num-
ber of his counterparts in the Middle East about the escalating hostilities. They all thanked
Ireland for our consistent and principled position. Let me set out this position again. Ireland
strongly condemns the continuing Israeli military operations in Gaza. We urgently need an
end to hostilities and a permanent ceasere. We unequivocally condemn the terror attacks by
Hamas on Israel on 7 October 2023. The taking of hostages is unconscionable and I call for the
immediate release of the remaining hostages. A return to diplomatic talks is imperative.
The entire population of Gaza is facing high levels of food insecurity. One in ve faces fam-
ine. By mid-June, 93% of households also faced water insecurity, exacerbating public health
risks. Israel must immediately lift its blockade and allow the full resumption of unimpeded
2 July 2025
411
humanitarian aid in line with humanitarian principles.
Ireland has used every lever at our disposal to respond to this terrible conict, and we are
continuing to do so. At the Foreign Aairs Council last week, Ireland was not alone in wanting
to keep the focus on Gaza and the West Bank amid the wider regional instabilities. The EU is
united in calling for an immediate ceasere in Gaza, the unconditional release of all hostages
and immediate unimpeded access to, and distribution of, humanitarian aid in Gaza. Ireland has
been at the forefront of member state initiatives to press the EU to take further actions in the
face of such appalling scenes. We have paved the way for many of the policy advances we now
see play out.
At the Foreign Aairs Council in May, it was announced the EU will conduct a review of
the association agreement with Israel. Ireland and Spain rst called for such a review in Febru-
ary of last year. A clear majority of member states agreed on the need to send a strong signal
to Israel to reverse course, halt its military operations and lift the blockade on life-saving aid.
I welcome that the review of Israel’s compliance with its obligation under Article 2 of the EU-
Israel association agreement has now been nalised. It is clear from the review that Israel is in
breach of its human rights obligations. This is a signicant nding and the human rights Vice
President of the Commission has said that she will communicate this clearly to Israel. We are
moving the dial. There must now be concrete options for follow-up action to the review, which
will be discussed at this month Foreign Aairs Council.
Ireland has consistently called for an adequate response at EU level to the July 2024 adviso-
ry opinion of the International Court of Justice, notably as regards trade with Israeli settlements.
Together with eight of our EU counterparts, the Tánaiste wrote to the High Representative for
Foreign Aairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, on 19 June calling for the EU to undertake a
detailed review of its compliance with the advisory opinion. This review will now be taken for-
ward in parallel with the review of the association agreement. It is essential that the EU abides
by its commitments under international law.
Action at EU level is our preferred option. Our voices are always louder together, and the
EU can play an important leadership role and must take action now. Pending an appropriate re-
sponse at EU level, last week the Government approved the general scheme of the Israeli settle-
ments in the occupied Palestinian territory Bill. The scheme delivers on the commitment in the
programme for Government to progress legislation prohibiting the import of goods from the
settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory, following the International Court of Justice’s
advisory opinion. The scheme has been referred to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Foreign
Aairs and Trade for pre-legislative scrutiny and the rst meeting on it was held yesterday. I
thank Senator Frances Black for her continuing work on the issue.
We need a ceasere and a hostage release deal. We need a permanent solution for peace and
security for Israel and Palestine and the wider region. Ireland is also working at UN level on
measures to push the dial forward. On the 12 June the UN General Assembly voted on a draft
resolution that demands an immediate unconditional and permanent ceasere in Gaza. The
vote took place during the tenth emergency special session of the UN General Assembly as part
of the uniting for peace initiative. Ireland was proud to co-sponsor this resolution.
Another shared priority with our European and regional partners at this time is the UN
high-level international conference for a peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine and
the implementation of a two-state solution. Regrettably, the conference has been postponed in
Dáil Éireann
412
response to recent developments in the region. When the rescheduled conference takes place,
it will provide an important opportunity to advance discussions on concrete initiatives toward
implementing this two-state solution.
The importance of recognition of the State of Palestine and support for full UN membership
for the State of Palestine is crucial for achieving a parity of esteem between Israel and Pales-
tine, underpinning political pathways to peace and countering extremist narratives that serve to
undermine these pathways. This is something Ireland knows from our own peace process. Our
experience in Northern Ireland demonstrates that peacebuilding and conict resolution work,
if supported by political commitment at national and international level. We remain convinced
that the implementation of the two-state solution is the only viable path to lasting security and
a sustainable peace for Israelis and Palestinians and the wider region.
Similarly, with regard to Iran, the recent conict has certainly been a shock and a moment of
real danger. Along with others, we used our voice to call for de-escalation, dialogue, diplomacy
and for both sides to step back from the brink. We are relieved that a ceasere is now in place
and that it continues to hold. Although both sides were targeting military objectives, many ci-
vilians were killed or injured in both Israel and Iran. Attacks on nuclear installations raised the
spectre of the release of radiological material, although the IAEA has reported that this was ul-
timately limited to the sites in question. We must also recall the attack on the territory of Qatar
by Iran even though the US military action on Iran did not originate there.
Deputies will also be aware, as we have discussed many times, that there is a number of
other concerns with Iran’s policies which make better relations very dicult. These include in-
ternal repression, support for violent groups around the Middle East, support for radicalisation,
attacks on Iranian exiles in Europe and signicant assistance to Russia for its brutal and unjust
war against Ukraine. There may be an opening now to reach a lasting solution to these issues.
Iran has choices to make. The Iranian Government elected last year has said repeatedly that it
wishes to reach less confrontational relations with its neighbours and the outside world. To do
so, Iran will have to accept that its security lies not in threats and intimidation, but in positive
relations with those around it and in negotiated solution to the concerns of many regarding its
nuclear programme. Iran must embody that understanding in real changes to the course which
has led it to its current isolation. If it does, we will be among the many states ready to engage
positively with it.
Ireland is committed to supporting dialogue to achieve diplomatic solutions for a lasting and
sustainable peace across the Middle East. It is clear that military responses cannot bring lasting
security to any of the conicts that aict the region. What is needed is sustained diplomacy
and negotiation, with the support of the international community. We will continue to use every
option we have at domestic, EU and multilateral level to facilitate such an outcome. We look
forward to continued dialogue with partners in the Middle East as we pursue this objective. I
look forward to the continued co-operation of Members across this House in this pursuit and
thank them for their contributions to this important debate this afternoon.
02/07/2025KKK00200Message from Select Committee
02/07/2025KKK00300An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú): The Select Committee on
Enterprise, Tourism and Employment has completed its consideration of the Employment
(Contractual Retirement Ages) Bill 2025 and has made amendments thereto.
2 July 2025
413
02/07/2025KKK00400Estimates for Public Services 2025: Messages from Select Committees
02/07/2025KKK00500An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú): The Select Committee on
Social Protection, Rural and Community Development has completed its consideration of the
following Revised Estimate for Public Services for the service of the year ending on 31 De-
cember 2025: Vote 42. The Select Committee on Finance, Public Expenditure, Public Service
Reform and Digitalisation, and Taoiseach has completed its consideration of the following Re-
vised Estimate for Public Services for the service of the year ending on 31 December 2025:
Vote 13.
02/07/2025KKK00600Defamation (Amendment) Bill 2024: Report Stage
02/07/2025KKK00700Minister for Justice, Home Aairs and Migration (Deputy Jim O’Callaghan): I move
amendment No. 1:
In page 5, line 17, after “Justice” to insert “, Home Aairs and Migration”.
I welcome the fact that we are doing Report Stage of the Defamation (Amendment) Bill
now. This is a straightforward amendment because all it will do is reect the change in the title
of the Department and my ministerial oce from the Minister for justice, to the Minister for
Justice, Home Aairs and Migration. That came into operation on 5 June 2025. This amend-
ment proposes to reect that change.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025KKK00900Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 2:
In page 5, lines 19 and 20, to delete “of section 34C into the Principal Act” and substi-
tute “into the Principal Act of dierent provisions of Part 4A of that Act eected by section
17”.
This is an amendment to section 1(2) of the Bill, which provides for the commencement of
the Act. Amendment No. 2 simply claries that dierent provisions of Part 4A, which deals
with transposition of the EU anti-SLAPP directive, can be commenced at dierent times.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025KKK01100Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 3:
In page 5, line 22, to delete the comma after “Act” and substitute the following:
“—
“cause of action”, “defamation” and “defamation action” have the same meanings as
they have in the Principal Act;”.
This amendment seeks to include dierent references to “cause of action”, “defamation”
and “defamation action”, which were not in the original Bill. The amendment ensures that
certain terms used in the transitional provisions introduced by amendments Nos. 11 to 17, in-
clusive, amendments Nos. 19 to 22, inclusive, and amendment No. 37, which we will be look-
ing at presently, are understood in line with the denitions in the Defamation Act 2009. It is a
Dáil Éireann
414
technical amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025KKK01300An Cathaoirleach Gníomhach (Deputy Ruairí Ó Murchú): Tá leasú Uimh. 4 in ai-
nmneacha na dTeachtaí Gannon agus Carthy. Amendments Nos. 4 to 9, inclusive, are related.
Amendments Nos. 5 to 9, inclusive, are physical alternatives to amendment No. 4. Amend-
ments Nos. 4 to 9, inclusive, will be discussed together.
02/07/2025KKK01400Deputy Matt Carthy: I move amendment No. 4:
In page 6, to delete lines 18 to 35, and in page 7, to delete lines 1 to 9.
I will also speak to amendment No. 6. Amendment No. 4 is a simple but substantive amend-
ment. We have spoken about this previously. Our principal objection to this legislation is the
abolition of juries in all cases. I believe the Minister would privately accept that this is a bad,
dangerous and nonsensical position to be adopting. I have not met a single person in the legal
world who agrees with this move. This is one of those times when the Government has wanted
to be seen to be acting as opposed to actually doing anything that will have a meaningful impact
in respect of the operation of the media, the costs awarded by courts and the timeframe that
these cases take.
All this will do is remove from High Court defamation cases a fundamental pillar of our
legal system that is older than democracy itself in many states. Any defamation case involving
anybody should have at least the option of being heard by a jury. Matters of defamation are by
their very nature about the value and esteem of one’s name. It is Sinn Féin’s contention that the
ultimate arbiters of that should be a jury of one’s peers. They should be entrusted with weighing
the balance of rights and harms.
7 o’clock
We appreciate the procedural concerns and the risk of disproportionate awards but we do
not feel that, as presented by the Minister and his predecessors, they are sucient justication
for curtailing the right to due process. If anything, any of the logic that was in place or could
have been put in place has since been discounted. We have had the Higgins judgment, which
shows there is now a formula for dealing with substantive awards. All the conventional wisdom
would suggest that we will not see the types of excessive award being granted into the future.
I nd it deeply regrettable. A number of Members from across the Opposition spoke at
length on Committee Stage. We set out very clearly that this was, in essence, the only provi-
sion of the legislation that prevented unanimity on its passing through the House. With a bit of
humility on the part of the Government by accepting that it had got this wrong, we could have
had the Bill passed through the House unanimously. Virtually every other amendment apart
from this one is technical in nature on Report Stage. We would have been here for a short num-
ber of minutes and got the Bill passed, and the Minister could have said that he had addressed
many of the concerns that existed within our defamation laws, particularly the potential use of
SLAPPs, through one of the rst Bills he brought through the House and that he had the full
support of the House in so doing. Instead, the Minister has done something that goes against
everybody who has entered into this debate, apart from a few mega-wealthy media owners who
want to just simply curtail the rights of anybody to vindicate his or her good name at all costs.
The Law Society of Ireland, the Bar Council and the Oireachtas’ own pre-legislative scrutiny,
2 July 2025
415
with its cross-party report, urged the Government not to go down this line. A previous justice
spokesperson by the name of Jim O’Callaghan made a very impassioned case in this House not
to go down this line, yet here we are.
I will make a nal appeal to the Minister, although it appears that it will fall on deaf ears, to
do what he knows is right and not proceed with this provision. The current legislative process
for juries in High Court cases is sucient, but I have gone further and moved half way. In the
expectation that the Minister will whip to reject amendment No. 4, we have tabled amendment
No. 6. The Minister may rule out the deletion of those sections that delete the role of citizens
entirely, but let us take the process of pre-legislative scrutiny and move to an all-Ireland model
on this issue. I know it is an area where the Minister shares my views in many respects. Where
we can have all-Ireland harmonisation, surely that is a good thing. Why not have the same sys-
tem in the North where upon application, it would allow a judge to rule that a jury may or may
not be suitable for a particular case? Our amendment goes a little bit further, in that it would
allow for the provision for the judge to step in on the determination of costs, one of the stated
reasons for the inclusion of this provision in the legislation in the rst place.
The Minister has options. He can roll back on this daft idea of eliminating juries from High
Court defamation cases in its entirety and support amendment No. 4, but if he is not willing to
do that, he can meet us half way by supporting amendment No. 6, which allows for the use of
a jury to be determined by a judge on application. I believe that would be a sensible middle
ground. It is not as far as I would like the Minister to move, but it would be a positive and wel-
come step if he were to accept it.
02/07/2025LLL00200Deputy Mattie McGrath: I believe it is a very retrograde step to remove a jury from this
situation in the High Court. Juries have proven their worth in the justice system over time. The
Minister had a dierent opinion himself when he was on the Opposition benches. I would be
very concerned at what he is doing here.
We all know that defamation is very serious. I was a victim myself of it one time and it is
a frightfully expensive process to engage with. For a person who is defamed by a media outlet
or something like that is frighteningly expensive. My case was short and brought to a cessation
statements that were untrue. I wanted nothing for myself only to clear my good name and have
a donation given to a charitable cause, namely, local district hospice units. I was shocked by the
cost of the case. There was no hearing. It was just a number of emails back and forward, and
maybe one or two phone conversations, but it was a phenomenal bill. When I queried it, I was
told that representation to challenge defamation was frightfully expensive. The legal eagles
make the money. We have juries who will give of their time, so we must support them 100%.
They sit in a voluntary capacity, but it is the legal eagles who get all the money. The cost should
not be so prohibitive for the person who is nakedly and blatantly defamed. People should be
able to have recourse. The best form of recourse to justice is having the case tried in front of
one’s peers in the form of a jury, with a judge presiding. That should be a basic requisite in leg-
islation. I do not know why the Minister has changed his mind since he was the spokesperson
in opposition. It is funny how people change when they move to that side the House. The sys-
tem here is too powerful and maybe it does not allow Ministers to have the views they want to
have. I am aware the Minister is privy to advice from the Attorney General and everything else.
Nonetheless, the removal of a jury at any level is a retrograde step. People have been willing
to serve and have served, except for the Special Criminal Court. In the case of civil litigation,
juries are necessary and should be kept. I appeal to the Minister to accept the later amendment
if he will not accept this one.
Dáil Éireann
416
02/07/2025LLL00300Deputy Gary Gannon: Once again, I will table an amendment today to retain juries. They
are vital in defamation cases in the High Court. I want to be clear about why I think they are
important. There is a lot in this Bill that deserves support, such as the anti-SLAPP measures,
which are welcome and necessary. Protecting people who speak out in the public interest is a
step in the right direction, but a provision in Part 3 is very serious, namely, the decision to scrap
juries in defamation trials entirely. Section 4 removes the right to a jury in every future defama-
tion case brought in the High Court - not in some cases, but in all of them. From the day this
provision kicks in, that right disappears. We should not sugar-coat what that means. It is the
removal of a long-standing public safeguard from the justice system.
A few weeks ago, I met the former High Court judge Bernard Barton. Mr. Justice Barton
had previously come to Leinster House, sat in the audiovisual room, presented to TDs and
Senators and laid out a very clear warning about the dangers of removing juries from cases.
The advocacy to retain juries has come from those without an agenda. They have spent their
entire working lives in the courts and have told us in no uncertain terms that removing juries is
a dangerous mistake. We know that judges tend not to get involved in debates like this, so for
them to step forward, write to us and come in person says something and we would be foolish
not to listen.
We keep hearing the argument that jury trials cause delays or lead to unpredictable results
but that is simply not true anymore. Whatever problems existed were addressed in the Hig-
gins case where the Supreme Court laid out clear guidance on how juries should operate in
defamation trials. The idea that this is still a problem does not reect reality. We are also told
that removing juries will make the system more ecient, but there is no data to back this up.
When juries were removed from personal injury cases in the UK, it did not speed anything up.
In fact, some cases took longer. If delays are the issue, let us talk honestly. Ireland has one of
the lowest number of judges per head of population in Europe. This is the problem, not juries.
Beyond logistics and eciency, this comes down to something deeper, namely, public trust
in the justice system. Juries are one of the last remaining ways ordinary people can actually
take part in legal decisions. They bring their experience, perspective and values into the court-
room. In defamation cases, when someone’s good name and reputation are on the line, this
clearly matters now more than ever. The truth is that the Judiciary still does not reect the full
diversity of Irish society. That is just a fact. Until this changes, juries provide balance. They
make sure that people are not judged solely by a professional class that does not always reect
the country as a whole. Jury trials in defamation cases go all the way back to Magna Carta.
They still exist in the UK, the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. If we get rid of them
here, we will not be catching up. Rather, we will be stepping outside the line of comparable
legal systems.
It is pertinent to point out again that the Minister himself spoke in the past about the aboli-
tion of juries in defamation cases. I agreed with that stance at the time and I still do. Supporting
this amendment, which many of us are supporting, would reect that same principle. The Bill
already brings in some reforms, including the anti-SLAPP protections, clearer defences and a
more structured approach to damages. These are really good changes and will make a dier-
ence, and they should be given the chance to work. However, there is no good reason to push
forward and remove juries on top of that. This is not some tiny, procedural tweak. It is a major
shift in how justice is done, and once juries are gone, they are gone for good. That part of public
involvement in justice will be gone, too. We will have handed over total control of these cases
to a judicial system that, however skilled or fair, does not represent the public in the exact same
2 July 2025
417
way. We will have done it with no real justication and no evidence to support it.
I am asking the Minister and other Members to think hard about this, not just about the
headlines or the briengs but about what kind of justice system we are building. This is not
about speeding things up. Rather, it is about fairness, so I want to support the amendments
that maintain jury trials in defamation cases and all cases. We need to keep juries and keep the
people at the heart of democracy.
There is much in this Bill that is very worthwhile and there is a lot that I would like to sup-
port. However, once we push beyond the line of removing juries from cases, what is next? A
trial by one’s peers is a fundamental part of all democracies. Removing it is a step that goes
beyond the line that most of us are willing to tolerate. I would love to support many aspects of
the Bill, as it has many worthy parts. Oireachtas committees have commissioned reports and
people across the political spectrum have spoken about the ideal of maintaining juries. To re-
move them at this point is unfair. It is unbecoming of a modern democracy. It is not in keeping
with where we have developed from, going on from the Higgins case. This is something the
Minister can do that would make a real dierence. I understand that we have had this debate
previously and I understand the position the Minister took on the programme for Government,
but I also think there is a time for leadership and a scenario like this will demonstrate it.
02/07/2025MMM00200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I thank Deputies Carthy, McGrath and Gannon for their contri-
butions. I will start on where there is agreement in what they have said. It is correct to say that
the contentious part of the legislation before the House is Part 3, which concerns the abolition
of juries. I acknowledge that the colleagues who have spoken are generally supportive of the
legislation, notwithstanding their opposition to Part 3. As the Deputies mentioned, we had a
very thorough discussion on this issue on Committee Stage. I stand over everything I said at
that time.
I will respond to a couple of points that were made by the Deputies. We are discussing
amendments Nos. 5, 7, 8 and 9, which are Government amendments, and amendments Nos.
4 and 6, which are in the names of Deputies Carthy and Gannon. I propose to deal with all of
those issues in my response. I will get the amendments that are not contentious out of the way.
Amendment No. 5, which I will move, amends section 4 to remove the word “the” because
it appears twice. This is simply a technical issue and a typographical error. Amendments Nos.
7 and 9, which I will also move, substitute the word “instituted” with “brought” to provide con-
sistency with the terminology used in the 2009 Act. Amendment No. 8 deletes section 5(1)(c),
which removed the denition of “court” from section 26 of the 2009 Act. That is the section
that deals with fair and reasonable publication on a matter of public interest. As colleagues will
know, amendment No. 15 proposes a change to that. That is why amendment No. 8 is neces-
sary.
I will now turn to the two amendments proposed by Deputies Carthy and Gannon. Amend-
ment No. 4 proposes to remove the section that deals with the abolition of juries. Amendment
No. 6 proposes to substitute a dierent wording so that there would be a sort of a hybrid process
in which a jury could be used to determine certain aspects of a case but a judge would determine
other aspects. I will make two general points in response to the issues raised by Deputies Car-
thy and Gannon in particular. The majority of civil cases before the courts are not determined
by a jury. They are determined by a judge sitting alone. That has been a fairly constant progres-
sion. From the time of the Courts of Justice Act 1924 onwards, we have seen circumstances
Dáil Éireann
418
where all the personal injuries actions up to 1988 used to be heard by juries in the High Court.
These were abolished because it prolonged the hearing of the action and it was too inecient
for the purpose of determining the increasing number of personal injuries actions. The latter
argument does not apply here, but the former does in terms of trying to speed up the process.
Very many defamation cases are heard on a daily basis without a jury. In the Circuit Court,
damages of up to €75,000 can be awarded, which is a considerable sum of money for damage to
reputation. Anyone who takes an action in the Circuit Court does not have a right to a jury. A
defamation case in this court is heard by a judge, sitting alone, and individuals get justice there.
Similarly in the High Court, many defamation cases are heard without a jury. This can happen
if somebody brings forward a claim for defamation and, say, a claim for breach of privacy. The
latter claim cannot be determined by a jury and, consequently, many plaintis opt to have a
High Court judge, sitting on his or her own, determine the action. Any experiences I have had
of judges on their own hearing defamation cases have indicated to me that there is not some
lesser form of justice. There is no lesser vindication of the rights of the individual when a case
is being heard by a judge sitting alone.
I note the points made by Deputy Gannon that sometimes judges come from a certain per-
spective in society and that juries bring a broader assessment. The purpose of juries is to ensure
that they will deal with questions of pure fact in respect of issues that are before the court. This
has happened in respect of defamation actions. However, anyone who has ever attended a defa-
mation action will be aware that there are many occasions when the jury has to rise and leave
the room so that the questions of law can be dealt by the judge, sitting alone. It is fairly clear
that a defamation case heard by a judge sitting alone will be faster than a defamation case heard
by a judge and a jury sitting together. This is a matter of common sense. I am also not fearful
that it will result in miscarriages of justice or individuals being deprived of the opportunity to
vindicate their good name.
I will now deal with amendment No. 6 in more detail. This is being put forward by Deputies
Carthy and Gannon. If amendment No. 6 was accepted, it would divide roles between a judge
and jury in cases that may involve substantial damages. It is noteworthy that the term is not
dened in the proposed amendment. In those cases, juries would have a role in the determina-
tion of questions of fact, but would have no role in respect of the assessment of damages. As I
noted on Committee Stage, it would be inappropriate to divide functions between a jury and a
judge. Deputy Carthy made the point on the previous occasion - I listened carefully to it - that
it happened in criminal proceedings, where a jury determined guilt or innocence and the court
then imposed a sentence. In a criminal prosecution, it is not feasible to suggest that, at the end
of a determination of guilt, the jury would then proceed to set the sentence. The reason we do
not do that is because of the necessity of ensuring consistency in the types of sentence imposed
on individuals convicted of similar oences. Similarly, the objective here is to achieve some
form of consistency in the damages awarded.
02/07/2025NNN00200Deputy Matt Carthy: I do not know if the Minister realises, but he has undershot the entire
premise and logic put forward for this Part. If I am right, he dismissed the costs that might be
incurred but he said there might be an impact on the time. I would argue that the time saved
would be minuscule. The Minister seems to accept that we are now in a situation following the
Higgins case where there is a parameter and that is being adhered to by the courts and by juries.
We had a very high-prole case involving the former president of my party and awards were
given precisely in line with the standards that have now been set.
2 July 2025
419
The Minister has not addressed something that arose in conversations, private and other-
wise, with legal professionals, including judges. Has he considered that what will happen as
a result of this move is an increase in the length of time and the costs because the likelihood
of appeals will be substantially higher? The reason for that is because people are less likely to
appeal a jury verdict because they know that higher courts are very reticent to overturn a jury
decision. Very particular points of law must be made in that respect. They are not as reticent
about overturning a decision of one of their colleagues in the Judiciary. That is a matter of fact.
My estimation is that, far from the stated rationale he presents, this Part will do the exact
opposite because we will see increased pressure on the overall court system.
02/07/2025NNN00300Deputy Gary Gannon: I listened intently to the Minister’s contribution in response to
the points made by the speaker to my left, Deputy Carthy, and the speaker behind me, Deputy
Mattie McGrath, but I did not hear him refer to what happened following the Higgins case. I
have a simple question: why is he proceeding with the abolition when the law on which the
proposal is based has subsequently been swept away by the Supreme Court in the Higgins case
and replaced with guidelines on damages, which we clearly know are working? There have
been genuine improvements. There has also been a Court of Appeal case based on the Supreme
Court judgment in the Higgins case. To be honest, I do not get a sense that the Minister is com-
mitted to this change himself.
The Minister has referred to the fact that juries are often asked to leave the courtroom for
discussion to take place on a point of law. Nobody is seeking to change that. There are often
contested points of law and it is ne for them to be discussed between the legal teams and the
judge. Juries can still leave on those grounds, but where it matters is when it comes to a judg-
ment by a jury of one’s peers. Could the Minister speak to the determination of the Supreme
Court on the Higgins case? How has that not impacted on his own assessment?
02/07/2025NNN00400Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: First, I will deal with Deputy Carthy’s point about time or costs.
The point I make is that if a case takes longer, it will cost more. Individuals will have to pay
more for a case if it goes for six days rather than four days. The two extra days will add extra
cost to it.
Both colleagues referred to the Higgins decision. It was an important Supreme Court deci-
sion that set out the bands that should be awarded for defamation awards. The Higgins decision
will still apply whether there is a jury or not. When it comes to the award of damages, a High
Court judge sitting on his or her own, hearing a defamation action today, must apply the param-
eters of the Higgins judgment. The benet of the Higgins case is not going to be lost, but it is
not the sole reason for the abolition of juries. The main reason advanced is in order to ensure
that the process is expedited, resulting in a reduction in costs.
Deputy Carthy referred to the fact that there would probably be more appeals. He is cor-
rect that a jury determination is generally more sacrosanct and hard to overturn than the nding
of a judge. One of the deciencies that exists in respect of the area of defamation that will be
improved should it be determined by judges is that we do not have any reported rst-instance
decisions on defamation cases in the High Court. We seldom get that because what happens
here, as happened in the case of the former leader of Deputy Carthy’s party, is that we just get
a result from a jury that the plainti succeeds and the damages are a sum of money. Whereas
if we have a decision of a judge, we get an explanation as to why the plainti was defamed, the
defences that were put forward and why they have or have not succeeded, and a justication for
Dáil Éireann
420
the award of damages coming within the Higgins parameters.
02/07/2025NNN00500Deputy Matt Carthy: I feel the Minister is chasing his tail trying to nd reasons to support
this provision when he knows in his own heart, and with his own legal experience, that there is
no credible reason to do it. This was a move on the part of a predecessor of his, predominantly
pressed by large-scale media outlets and owners, to address one particular issue and then a
number of other issues were thrown in, including the abolition of juries. When the abolition
of juries was put forward, it was a surprise to a lot of people, including the Oireachtas commit-
tee that was dealing with it. The entire logic that was presented by the Minister’s predecessor
and the Department was down to the cost of awards. That is the reason that was provided and
that reason has now been put in the dustbin. The Minister has acknowledged that through the
Higgins judgment. When there is a rationale for a law – not that I ever agreed with it, but I ask
the Minister to bear with me - but that rationale clearly stops existing, does he not agree that it
amounts simply to pigheadedness to pursue the law regardless, without any consideration of the
consequences? I do not want to put words in his mouth, but if I am correct, the Minister is on
the record as saying his mind has been changed on this. Previously, we know that he was very
cautious and warned these Houses about abolishing juries in this instance. Now, he is advocat-
ing the exact opposite of that.
How would the Minister feel if, upon further reection in a number of years’ time when he
is out of oce, he realises he made a real mistake and undermined the judicial system? I ask
him to reect on that.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 58; Níl, 84; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Ahern, Ciarán. Aird, William.
Bacik, Ivana. Ardagh, Catherine.
Brady, John. Boland, Grace.
Buckley, Pat. Brabazon, Tom.
Byrne, Joanna. Brennan, Brian.
Carthy, Matt. Brennan, Shay.
Clarke, Sorca. Brophy, Colm.
Connolly, Catherine. Browne, James.
Conway-Walsh, Rose. Burke, Colm.
Coppinger, Ruth. Burke, Peter.
Cronin, Réada. Butler, Mary.
Cullinane, David. Butterly, Paula.
Cummins, Jen. Buttimer, Jerry.
Daly, Pa. Byrne, Malcolm.
Devine, Máire. Byrne, Thomas.
Doherty, Pearse. Cahill, Michael.
Donnelly, Paul. Callaghan, Catherine.
Farrelly, Aidan. Calleary, Dara.
Gannon, Gary. Canney, Seán.
Gibney, Sinéad. Carrigy, Micheál.
2 July 2025
421
Graves, Ann. Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
Hayes, Eoin. Chambers, Jack.
Hearne, Rory. Clendennen, John.
Kelly, Alan. Collins, Niall.
Kenny, Eoghan. Connolly, John.
Kenny, Martin. Cooney, Joe.
Kerrane, Claire. Cummins, John.
Lawless, Paul. Currie, Emer.
Lawlor, George. Daly, Martin.
Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig. Dempsey, Aisling.
McGettigan, Donna. Devlin, Cormac.
McGrath, Mattie. Dillon, Alan.
McGuinness, Conor D. Dolan, Albert.
Mitchell, Denise. Donohoe, Paschal.
Mythen, Johnny. Dooley, Timmy.
Nash, Ged. Feighan, Frankie.
Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Fleming, Seán.
O’Callaghan, Cian. Foley, Norma.
O’Gorman, Roderic. Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
O’Hara, Louis. Geoghegan, James.
O’Reilly, Louise. Grealish, Noel.
O’Rourke, Darren. Harkin, Marian.
Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh. Healy-Rae, Michael.
Ó Murchú, Ruairí. Heydon, Martin.
Ó Snodaigh, Aengus. Keogh, Keira.
Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán. Lahart, John.
Quaide, Liam. Lawless, James.
Quinlivan, Maurice. Lowry, Michael.
Rice, Pádraig. Maxwell, David.
Sheehan, Conor. McAulie, Paul.
Sherlock, Marie. McCarthy, Noel.
Smith, Duncan. McConalogue, Charlie.
Stanley, Brian. McCormack, Tony.
Tóibín, Peadar. McEntee, Helen.
Wall, Mark. McGrath, Séamus.
Ward, Charles. McGreehan, Erin.
Ward, Mark. McGuinness, John.
Whitmore, Jennifer. Moran, Kevin Boxer.
Moynihan, Aindrias.
Moynihan, Michael.
Moynihan, Shane.
Dáil Éireann
422
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Murphy, Michael.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Christopher.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Matt Carthy and Gary Gannon; Níl, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer
Currie.
Amendment declared lost.
02/07/2025PPP00100Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 5:
In page 6, line 21, to delete “the”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025PPP00300Deputy Matt Carthy: I move amendment No. 6:
In page 6, lines 22 to 24, to delete all words from and including “a” in line 22 down to
and including line 24 and substitute the following:
“the court may, on the application of any party to a defamation action in the High
Court, or a question of fact or an issue arising in such an action, order that the action or
any issue of fact in the action shall be tried without a jury if it is of opinion that such
trial—
(a) will require any protracted examination of documents or accounts or any tech-
nical, scientic or local investigation which cannot conveniently be made with a jury,
2 July 2025
423
(b) is for any special reason (to be mentioned in the order) unsuitable to be tried
with a jury.
(2) The court may, on the application of any party to a defamation action in the High
Court, order that in matters which may involve substantial damages—
(a) issues of fact shall be tried with a jury, and
(b) the quantum of any damages which may arise be adjudicated by the presiding
judge.”.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 60; Níl, 84; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Ahern, Ciarán. Aird, William.
Bacik, Ivana. Ardagh, Catherine.
Brady, John. Boland, Grace.
Buckley, Pat. Brabazon, Tom.
Byrne, Joanna. Brennan, Brian.
Carthy, Matt. Brennan, Shay.
Clarke, Sorca. Brophy, Colm.
Connolly, Catherine. Browne, James.
Conway-Walsh, Rose. Burke, Colm.
Coppinger, Ruth. Burke, Peter.
Cronin, Réada. Butler, Mary.
Cullinane, David. Butterly, Paula.
Cummins, Jen. Buttimer, Jerry.
Daly, Pa. Byrne, Malcolm.
Devine, Máire. Byrne, Thomas.
Doherty, Pearse. Cahill, Michael.
Donnelly, Paul. Callaghan, Catherine.
Ellis, Dessie. Calleary, Dara.
Farrelly, Aidan. Canney, Seán.
Gannon, Gary. Carrigy, Micheál.
Gibney, Sinéad. Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
Graves, Ann. Chambers, Jack.
Hayes, Eoin. Clendennen, John.
Hearne, Rory. Collins, Niall.
Kelly, Alan. Connolly, John.
Kenny, Eoghan. Cooney, Joe.
Kenny, Martin. Cummins, John.
Kerrane, Claire. Currie, Emer.
Lawless, Paul. Daly, Martin.
Lawlor, George. Dempsey, Aisling.
Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig. Devlin, Cormac.
Dáil Éireann
424
McGettigan, Donna. Dillon, Alan.
McGrath, Mattie. Dolan, Albert.
McGuinness, Conor D. Donohoe, Paschal.
Mitchell, Denise. Dooley, Timmy.
Mythen, Johnny. Feighan, Frankie.
Nash, Ged. Fleming, Seán.
Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Foley, Norma.
O’Callaghan, Cian. Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
O’Donoghue, Robert. Geoghegan, James.
O’Gorman, Roderic. Grealish, Noel.
O’Hara, Louis. Harkin, Marian.
O’Reilly, Louise. Healy-Rae, Michael.
O’Rourke, Darren. Heydon, Martin.
Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh. Keogh, Keira.
Ó Murchú, Ruairí. Lahart, John.
Ó Snodaigh, Aengus. Lawless, James.
Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán. Lowry, Michael.
Quaide, Liam. Maxwell, David.
Quinlivan, Maurice. McAulie, Paul.
Rice, Pádraig. McCarthy, Noel.
Sheehan, Conor. McConalogue, Charlie.
Sherlock, Marie. McCormack, Tony.
Smith, Duncan. McEntee, Helen.
Stanley, Brian. McGrath, Séamus.
Tóibín, Peadar. McGreehan, Erin.
Wall, Mark. McGuinness, John.
Ward, Charles. Moran, Kevin Boxer.
Ward, Mark. Moynihan, Aindrias.
Whitmore, Jennifer. Moynihan, Michael.
Moynihan, Shane.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Murphy, Michael.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
2 July 2025
425
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Christopher.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Matt Carthy and Gary Gannon; Níl, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer
Currie.
Amendment declared lost.
02/07/2025QQQ00100An Ceann Comhairle: It will be at least 10 p.m. before we reach the voting block. We do
not know how many more votes there will be in between.
02/07/2025QQQ00200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 7:
In page 6, line 25, to delete “instituted” and substitute “brought”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025QQQ00400Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 8:
In page 6, to delete line 32.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025QQQ00600Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 9:
In page 7, line 9, to delete “instituted” and substitute “brought”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025QQQ00800An Ceann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 10 to 14, inclusive, 17 to 22, inclusive, and 37
are related and will be discussed together.
02/07/2025QQQ00900Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 10:
In page 7, line 19, after “corporate” to insert “that is made on or after the date of the com-
ing into operation of section 6 of the Defamation (Amendment) Act 2025”.
This group consists of the transitional provisions included throughout the Bill. Before I ad-
dress those amendments, since we are on section 8, I will refer to the section. It deals with the
provision of a new defence for retailers in circumstances where they are accused of defamation
by persons who allege they were defamed by the retailer because they were stopped to check
whether they had paid for goods or services. This provision, which is contained in section 8,
Dáil Éireann
426
remains completely intact from the time it was introduced by my predecessor, the Minister,
Deputy McEntee, on 2 August last year. The reason I make that point is there has been some
ill-informed and very inaccurate commentary suggesting I have in some respect changed or
amended section 8. That is completely incorrect. It remains exactly the same.
This is a vigorous and very powerful defence I hope retailers will use. The reason the
Oireachtas is unanimously giving them this power is to ensure they are not subjected to un-
necessary defamation actions. However, if they do not avail of the statutory provision we are
giving them, they cannot subsequently complain about the fact that it is insucient. It is a very
sucient and powerful protection and they should avail of it. Any commentary to the contrary,
suggesting I have in some way changed or amended it from the way it was introduced, is simply
false.
Amendment No. 10 provides that the serious harm test introduced for bodies corporate by
section 6 will apply with respect to statements made about bodies corporate from the date of the
commencement of section 6.
Amendments Nos. 11 to 14, inclusive, 17 and 37 concern the new and updated defence pro-
vided for in the current sections 7 to 11, inclusive, and section 20. The amendments provide
that the defences will apply to causes of action which accrue on or after the date those defences
come into operation. For example, the defence of live broadcasting introduced by the current
section 11 will come into operation for broadcasts made after that section commences.
Amendments Nos. 17 to 22, inclusive, relate to procedural changes provided for in the cur-
rent sections 12 to 16, inclusive. The amendments made by these sections come into eect only
in respect of proceedings brought on or after the date those sections come into force. For ex-
ample, section 16 provides for certain requirements regarding the making of correction orders.
Those requirements will apply to defamation actions brought after that section is commenced.
Clearly, this group of amendments comprises transitional provisions. They all provide the
same with regard to providing that the defences only come into operation after the commence-
ment of the legislation.
02/07/2025QQQ01100Deputy Matt Carthy: I will make a couple of points. On the retail defamation, as it is
called, and section 8, as I have indicated before, it is incredibly important that we have this
defence. It is equally important that this defence is not abused. There is clearly a communica-
tion issue. I met a retailer in the House today, a member of a representative organisation, who
expressed real concerns that this section will not actually do what the Oireachtas wants it to do.
Prior to Committee Stage in the Seanad, perhaps the Minister would be willing to engage with
representative organisations to clarify this or to get a sense of whether there is a need for further
clarity within the section.
I did not move any amendments with regard to the so-called corporate provisions and the
test that is to be incorporated. I think this will be the rst section of the legislation that could
very well result in a return of the Dáil to amend this legislation further. As I mentioned on Com-
mittee Stage, there is real potential to have what might be described as corporate entities - they
could be charitable organisations, as I said in the debate, or they could be political parties - that
could suer from malicious articles or publications and while they might not meet that test, the
damage could be very real. I reiterate that I have a concern in that respect. Nevertheless, we
will not oppose any of the amendments in this section.
2 July 2025
427
02/07/2025QQQ01200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I will reply to the point Deputy Carthy made about section 8. It
got some publicity as well around the fact that it was suggested I had deliberately changed the
provisions of section 8 to suit myself, or for some purpose that was not in the public interest.
As Deputy Carthy knows, that is not correct because he was here on 2 August last year when
the Bill was introduced and there has been no change to section 8 since then.
I am happy to sit down with retailers. This is a very powerful defence but like any defence,
it has to be used.
8 o’clock
There is no point in the Oireachtas drafting defences, putting them into legislation and en-
acting them if people for whose benet they have been enacted decide not to use them and take
the easy option out by saying they have been advised that they should just pay over €5,000 to
see o a claim. They should ght claims. Part of the reason claims are encouraged is when a
tendency develops not to contest claims. If people contest claims that are not valid, then the
message will go out to litigants that there is no point in taking those claims because defendants
have the statutory power to stand up to them. People need to avail of the statutory power that,
ultimately, we are going to give them. I am happy to discuss it with any retailers.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025RRR00300Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 11:
In page 8, between lines 4 and 5, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendment eected by paragraph (a) of subsection (1) shall apply only
to causes of action accruing on or after the date of the coming into operation of this
section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025RRR00500Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 12:
In page 8, between lines 31 and 32, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendments eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to causes of ac-
tion accruing on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025RRR00700Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 13:
In page 9, between lines 3 and 4, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendment eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to causes of ac-
tion accruing on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025RRR00900Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 14:
In page 9, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following:
Dáil Éireann
428
“(2) The amendment eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to causes of ac-
tion accruing on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025RRR01100An Ceann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 15 and 16 are related and will be discussed to-
gether.
02/07/2025RRR01200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 15:
In page 9, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following:
“Defence of publication on matter of public interest
11. (1) The Principal Act is amended by the substitution of the following section for
section 26:
“Publication on matter of public interest
26. (1) It shall be a defence (to be known as the ‘defence of publication on a matter of
public interest’) to a defamation action for the defendant to prove that, in all the circum-
stances of the case—
(a) the statement in respect of which the action was brought was on a matter of public
interest,
(b) the defendant reasonably believed that publishing the statement was in the public
interest, and
(c) the statement was published in good faith.
(2) Subject to subsection (3), a court shall, for the purposes of determining whether sub-
section (1)(b) is proved, have regard to whether the belief was arrived at after the making
of such enquiries
and checks as it was reasonable to expect of the defendant.
(3) Where the statement in respect of which the defamation action was brought was an
accurate and impartial account of a dispute to which the plainti in the defamation action
was a party, the court shall, in determining whether it was reasonable for the defendant to
believe that publishing the statement was in the public interest, disregard any omission of
the defendant to take steps to verify the truth of the
imputation conveyed by it.”.
(2) The amendment eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to causes of action accru-
ing on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
As colleagues will be aware from Report Stage amendments, what is being proposed here is
that we will amend section 26 of the Defamation Act by providing for a much simpler and con-
cise defence of publication on a matter of public interest. Colleagues may be aware that since
the 2009 Act was enacted and came into force on 1 January 2010 there was a statutory defence
in line with what was referred to under the common law as a Reynolds-type defence. Section
2 July 2025
429
26 gave eect to that and the whole purpose of that section when it was enacted in 2009 was
to provide a statutory defence for what we can refer to as responsible journalism. That would
operate in circumstances where a journalist or a publisher made a factual error in the publica-
tion that was broadcast or published in a newspaper or online, but the factual error would not
expose them to a claim in defamation because it was a reasonable publication on a matter of
public interest.
Since that legislation has come to be enacted section 26 has been pleaded on many occa-
sions but there are very few judgments or, indeed, decisions of juries where section 26 has been
successfully invoked. Understandably, persons who seek to rely upon this statutory defence
are thereby concerned that there is not a sucient understanding of the section on the part of
judges or juries, or it is not eective enough for the purpose of availing of what was previously
a statutory defence.
What this amendment is seeking to do is to try to simplify it. As I said, section 26 was in-
tended to facilitate public discussion on matters of public interest. This facilitation of public
discussion is in line with Ireland’s obligations under Article 10 of the European Convention on
Human Rights, ECHR, and it plays a vital role in safeguarding democracy. However, feedback
received from stakeholders was that the existing section is overly complex, lacking in clarity
and sets too high a hurdle. Particular concern was expressed in relation to the onerous checklist
in section 26(2) which provides for ten factors which the court may take into account when
determining whether publication of the statement was fair and reasonable.
Section 11, therefore, puts forward a simplied defence which seeks to facilitate public
debate in the public interest while safeguarding the right to a good name. The new defence
requires a defendant to demonstrate rst that the statement was in the public interest, second,
that they reasonably believed publishing the statement was in the public interest and, third, that
the statement was published in good faith. When considering whether a defendant reasonably
believed publication to be in the public interest, the court must take into account whether the
belief was arrived at after the making of such inquiries and checks as it was reasonable to expect
of the defendant.
If the statement in question consists of an accurate and impartial account of a dispute to
which the plainti and the defamation action was a party, the defendant is not required to
demonstrate that they took steps to verify the truth of the imputation conveyed by it in order to
demonstrate reasonable belief that publication of the statement was in the public interest. This
provision recognises that in some instances there is a public interest in the neutral reporting of
allegations in circumstances where it is clear that the publisher is not standing behind those al-
legations. In other words, it may sometimes be in the public interest to know that an allegation
has been made in respect of an individual before that allegation can be investigated.
However, that does not give a freeway to individuals to say they are just publishing an al-
legation that has been made elsewhere. It has to be in the public interest and there has to be a
certain reasonable belief that the publication was in the public interest and there also needs to
be a recognition that there is a responsibility on the publisher to take reasonable steps to inquire
into the veracity of the statement.
Amendment No. 16 adds a new section 26A to the Bill. This provision abolishes any de-
fence which may have existed at common law on the basis of the decision in Reynolds against
Times Newspapers Limited in which the United Kingdom House of Lords in its judicial capac-
Dáil Éireann
430
ity recognised the existence of a defence for responsible public interest journalism. The pur-
pose of section 26A is, therefore, to make it clear that where a claim for defamation arises after
its commencement, any defence on the basis that the publication is in the public interest should
be based on the newly inserted section 26 only. This avoids any confusion or duplication with
pre-existing defences.
The purpose of these amendments is to ensure that there is a more concise, comprehensible
and usable defence of reasonable publication on the matter of public interest. In the second
amendment I just discussed, it seeks to make it known that any other type of Reynolds-type
common law defence has been abolished.
There is some uncertainty at present as to whether or not the Reynolds common law defence
still exists at common law. My own view is that it has been abolished by the enactment of sec-
tion 26 but certainly the courts will take a decision. Mr. Justice Collins in the Court of Appeal
has recognised that there is some uncertainty about that issue. If it is the case that we are going
to enact a statutory defence of fair and reasonable publication, what we do not want to happen
is that there is going to be a parallel and corresponding common law defence emanating back
to the Reynolds decision. The Reynolds decision was a very interesting decision, in that it
recognised for the rst time that you could have a public interest defence in respect of publica-
tion to the world at large. Prior to that it was very much a qualied interest defence that was
based upon duty and interest of individuals. An individual had a duty to confer information and
another individual had an interest in receiving it. They tried to apply that to publications to the
world at large because they recognised the importance of trying to defend responsible journal-
ism that was in the public interest but which may have been inaccurate in one factual respect.
In order to deal with that they had Reynolds in England for many years. We then adopted
Reynolds here even before the enactment of the 2009 legislation, the Blom-Cooper decision
here recognised that Reynolds operated here. However, the net eect for it is that once we
enacted section 26, it is fair to assume everyone thought that the Reynolds defence had ceased
to exist. There is, as I said, uncertainty as about it. This legislation and this latter amendment
will ensure there is no parallel common law defence alongside the new section on reasonable
publication in the matter of public interest.
02/07/2025RRR01400Deputy Matt Carthy: I thank the Minister for his remarks. Most people will welcome
the clarication that these amendments bring. However, we need to be very clear as a House
in terms of setting out precisely the need for this, if you want simplication of the defence of
public interest. My position on this matter is fairly straightforward: media organisations or
anybody who is publishing information pertaining to individuals and entities should not tell
lies about them. They should not publish things that are not true. If they do, then people have
a right to vindicate their good name through the courts, I would argue, adjudicated by a jury
of their peers. I absolutely agree with the provisions in this Bill. If people maliciously use the
court system to intimidate people from speaking truth to power, so-called strategic lawsuits
against public participation, SLAPP, it is absolutely right that they would be held to account.
That is why we will be supporting the provisions in that regard.
I also think we should reect on the reason the public interest defence has not been used
or cited too often. Usually if there is a very strong argument for a public interest defence, the
case would not come to trial in the rst place. As I mentioned previously, I have a concern
around the narrative of this whole issue. The Minister acknowledged on Committee Stage
that Ireland does not have a big issue with SLAPP. We have had an issue in the past in respect
2 July 2025
431
of high awards. The awards were substantially too high. This sense that newspapers or other
media organisations are living in fear because of defamation laws has been exaggerated. I do
not think that the media sector does itself many favours. I cited earlier the recent Adams case
in the High Court. Clearly, what was published and broadcast about Gerry Adams was not true.
Anybody could see it was not true and was highly defamatory, yet it went to the High Court at
obscene cost to the BBC, a public body. Immediately afterwards, the loser in the case, the BBC,
doubled down on what in my view was an unsustainable position. Other media organisations
and representatives talked about a chilling eect. I will put on the record that there should be
a chilling eect on media outlets to stop them publishing things about people that are not true.
If that is the case and it is one of the reasons the public interest defence has not been used regu-
larly, so be it.
Everybody acknowledges that every organisation and person can make mistakes for the
right reasons. That is why this particular section of the Bill is important. There should be no
get-out-of-jail-free card for people who cite the public interest but are really on witch-hunts or
following their own agendas, whether political, personal or nancial. We need to be very clear
in that respect.
It is always a bit archaic to consider that a decision of the British House of Lords became
de facto common law that is applicable in Ireland. As I say, I welcome the clarication of that
issue in this legislation.
Above all, we need to be clear that truth matters, particularly in the modern world. There
is now a broad array of broadcasting vehicles, including anonymous Facebook pages, personal
TikTok accounts and multibillion euro media enterprises. There is an obligation that if you are
publishing something to the world at large, you make due eort to ensure you are publishing the
truth and facts, and are not demeaning somebody’s good name or character.
In all of this debate, we must acknowledge why defamation laws exist in the rst place. It
is a legitimate reason. It provides the balance between free speech and the right of a person to
vindicate his or her good name. There is also the public interest provision that needs to be there
and that is why I will not be opposing these amendments.
02/07/2025SSS00200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I will be brief in response. I note what Deputy Carthy said
about the provenance of the Reynolds defence, which emanated from the British House of
Lords. I am not trying to open up old wounds, but the jury system came from the British system
of justice that operated in Ireland. I will not go back on that.
Deputy Carthy said that people should not tell lies. Everyone agrees with that. However,
most defamation actions do not involve a defendant who has deliberately told lies. Most defa-
mation actions that arise are as a result of an error that has been made. The whole purpose of
the legislation we are introducing here, the new statutory provision, is to recognise that there
are circumstances where, for responsible journalism, broadcasters or newspapers could be do-
ing a story that is very much in the public interest, whether it is about exposing wrongdoing in
nursing homes, crèches or politics, and could have taken responsible steps to ensure the story is
in the public interest and has been investigated. However, there may be a factual error within
the story. The error may be that the story identies me as opposed to, say, the Leas-Cheann
Comhairle. Does that minor error mean they have no protection?
The purpose of what was originally the Reynolds-type defence, what now is in section 26
Dáil Éireann
432
and what is going to be proposed in this new provision, was to recognise that there will be occa-
sions when a responsible journalist may have made a mistake in one or two details but because
the general story was in the public interest and because the journalist had gone out of the way
to verify the truth of what he or she published, and that he or she sought a response from the
individual who subsequently becomes the plainti, all those factors taken into account can, in
certain circumstances, give them a form of defence. However, this defence only kicks in where
there is a mistake. It is not always the case, but sometimes can be, particularly online where
most defamation happens now, that in an orthodox defamation action against a media defendant,
the media has gone of their way deliberately to tell lies. My experience is that does not happen.
Mistakes happen, and in certain instances where there has been public interest journalism and
the media have abided by certain ground rules, they should be able to avail of a defence. It is
up to the court to determine whether they get it, but they should be entitled to avail of it.
02/07/2025SSS00300Deputy Matt Carthy: I do not argue with the Minister about any of that and that is why
we are not opposing this section. I will make one point. The Minister suggested that the me-
dia never go out of their way to lie about someone. Can I suggest that he is saying that with
the luxury of being a Fianna Fáil representative? If he were a representative of my party, he
would not be able to say that. There have been instances where media outlets have published
downright lies about my party. They have done so knowing they were lies. No defamation
case was possible because it was the entity of Sinn Féin, rather than individual members, that
was defamed. So be it. I will defend to the last the right of the media to do their job of holding
power to account. I accept there will always be instances where genuine mistakes are made. I
do not in believe in penalising a media organisation or an individual journalist when mistakes
have been made, provided that they have made every eort to ensure the truth was the basis of
the information that was published.
We are agreeing on the outcome, but perhaps the Minister and I are coming at this with
dierent experiences. As he rightly said, and this is important when we deal with all of this,
the real threat to people’s good character is not coming from a daily broadsheet or the evening
news anymore. It is coming from anonymous actors who have, in many cases, malicious intent.
They are publishing material that can be published much more widely than any traditional me-
dia could, and much faster. It is important when we are discussing these matters to be conscious
of all of that.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025SSS00500Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 16:
In page 9, between lines 18 and 19, to insert the following:
“Abolition of Reynolds defence
12. The Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following section after section
26:
“Abolition of Reynolds defence
26A. (1) Any common law defence known as the Reynolds defence that, immedi-
ately before the commencement of section 12 of the Defamation (Amendment) Act 2025,
could have been pleaded as a defence in a defamation action is abolished.
2 July 2025
433
(2) Subsection (1) shall not apply to causes of action accruing before the date of the
coming into operation of section 12 of the Defamation (Amendment) Act 2025.”.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025SSS00700Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 17:
In page 10, after line 37, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendment eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to causes of action
accruing on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025SSS00900Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 18:
In page 11, between lines 8 and 9, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendments eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to applications un-
der section 28 of the Principal Act made on or after the date of the coming into operation
of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT00200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 19:
In page 11, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendment eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to actions for damages
for defamation brought on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT00400Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 20:
In page 11, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendments eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to defamation actions
brought on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT00600Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 21:
In page 11, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendment eected by subsection (1) shall apply only—
(a) in a case where a defamation action has been brought, where the defamation
action is brought on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section, or
(b) in a case where a defamation action has not been brought, to an applica-
tion under section 33 of the Principal Act made to the High Court on or after the
date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Dáil Éireann
434
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT00800Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 22:
In page 11, after line 32, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendment eected by subsection (1) shall apply only to defamation actions
brought on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT01000An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 23 and 24 are out of order.
Amendments Nos. 23 and 24 not moved.
02/07/2025TTT01400An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendment No. 25 arises out of committee proceedings.
Amendments Nos. 25 to 33, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together. Amendments
Nos. 28 to 33, inclusive, are consequential on No. 25.
02/07/2025TTT01500Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 25:
In page 15, between lines 23 and 24, to insert the following:
“Order for damages in case of section 34F or 34G declaration
34H. (1) Where—
(a) the court makes a declaration under section 34F or 34G that the
defamation proceedings concerned or part thereof amount to abusive
court proceedings against public participation (in this section referred to
as the ‘declaration’), and
(b) the defendant in those proceedings (in this section referred to as
the ‘defendant’) makes an application to the court, whether before or after
the making of the declaration, on notice to the plainti in those proceed-
ings (in this section referred to as the ‘plainti’), for an order for the pay-
ment of damages by the plainti to the defendant under this section, the
court may, in addition to the making of the declaration and in its absolute
discretion, order the plainti to pay damages to the defendant as a result
of injury, loss or damage suered by the defendant consequent upon the
bringing of the proceedings or part thereof the subject of the declaration.
(2) In deciding whether to make an order under subsection (1), and, where
applicable, in determining the amount of any damages to be paid, the court shall
have regard to all of the circumstances of the case and the interests of justice,
and may take into account the following matters as it considers appropriate:
(a) the nature of the public participation concerned;
(b) the purpose or purposes for which the defamation proceedings or
part thereof the subject of the declaration (in this subsection referred to as
the ‘proceedings’) were brought relating to the defendant’s engagement in
public participation;
2 July 2025
435
(c) the conduct of the proceedings;
(d) any other factors leading to the making of the declaration;
(e) whether the declaration has been made under section 34F or 34G;
(f) whether the declaration relates to all or part of the proceedings;
(g) the injury, loss or damage suered by the defendant as a result of
the bringing of the proceedings (including, where appropriate, the threat of
such proceedings) and any mitigating factors.
(3) Where an application for an order for the payment of damages is made under
subsection (1)(b)—
(a) the plainti and the defendant may make submissions to the court and
adduce evidence, and
(b) the court may direct that evidence be given,
in relation to the application.
(4) Where the court makes an order for the payment of damages to a defendant
under this section, the court may, if it considers it appropriate to do so, apply the
provisions of section 34F(2) or 34G(2), as the case may be, to costs incurred
as a result of an application made by the defendant under subsection (1)(b).
(5) The damages recoverable under this section in the Circuit Court shall not
exceed the amount standing prescribed, for the time being by law, as the higher of any
limit of that Court’s jurisdiction in tort.
(6) The Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 shall not apply in relation
to an application under subsection (1)(b).
(7) This section shall not aect the operation of sections 31 and 32.”.
Amendment No. 25 introduces a new section, 34H, into Part 7 of the Bill. Section 34H
empowers a court to award damages to those who have been subject to abuse of court proceed-
ings against public participation. This transposes Article 15 of the anti-SLAPP directive, which
requires member states to make provision for eective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties
or other equally eective appropriate measures, including the payment of compensation for
damages or the publication of the court decision on the party that brought the SLAPP proceed-
ings. Section 34H provides that damages may be awarded only where a court has declared the
proceedings in question to be abuse of court proceedings against public participation under sec-
tion 34F or section 34G of the Act.
In determining the amount of damages to be awarded, the court must have regard to the
circumstances of the case and the factors set out in section 34H(2). These include the injury,
loss or damage suered by the target of the proceedings as a result not only of the bringing of
the proceedings but also, where appropriate, the threat of those proceedings. This recognises
that the purpose of SLAPP proceedings is not to gain access to justice or to genuinely exercise
a right, but rather to intimidate those engaging in public participation, creating a chilling eect
on public debate.
Dáil Éireann
436
The court must also consider the conduct of the parties, the purposes for which the proceed-
ings were brought, the factors leading to the making of the declaration and any mitigating fac-
tors. The court may seek evidence before making a determination as to damages and the parties
may make submissions to the court on the issue. This is a signicant provision that recognises
the impact of SLAPPs, including psychological and nancial impacts. It provides a remedy to
compensate victims of SLAPPs for harm suered and adds signicant weight to the existing
safeguards contained in Part 4A of the Bill. It also strikes an appropriate balance between the
right to public participation and the right of access to the courts. It does this, rst, by provid-
ing that damages are only available where a declaration has been made by the court that the
proceedings are abusive and, second, by directing the court to take into account, among other
things, any mitigating factors and the purpose for which the proceedings were brought, when
considering the amount of damages to be awarded.
Amendment No. 26 replaces the previous section 34H, which provided for the publication
of judgments and orders of the Circuit Court. The purpose of providing for the publication of
judgments and orders in SLAPP cases, as set out in the anti-SLAPP directive, is twofold. On
the one hand, it acts as a deterrent to the bringing of such proceedings while, on the other hand,
it provides a source of learning and awareness in relation to SLAPP cases. With those objec-
tives in mind, this amendment seeks to expand the requirement to publish SLAPP judgments
beyond the Circuit Court to any court that makes a nding that proceedings are abusive pro-
ceedings against public participation in a defamation action.
Additionally, it claries that the requirement is to publish written judgments, and, where
there is no judgment, to publish the relevant court order. This is a very appropriate provision
contained in amendment No. 26 and consideration should be given to using it outside the area
of SLAPPs. It is something I am considering in other areas as well.
Amendment No. 27 provides that the provisions of Part 4A of the Defamation Act 2009
relating to SLAPPs will only apply to defamation proceedings brought on or after the date on
which those provisions come into operation. Amendments Nos. 28 to 33, inclusive, renumber
provisions, which is necessary following the insertion of several new sections by the amend-
ments proposed today. Amendment No. 29 removes reference to the fact that the current provi-
sions of section 34J are without prejudice to the Mediation Act 2017.
02/07/2025TTT01600Deputy Matt Carthy: I support these amendments.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT01800Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 26:
In page 15, to delete lines 24 to 30 and substitute the following:
“Publication of certain judgments and court orders
34I. Where a court nds in the course of defamation proceedings that the pro-
ceedings are abusive court proceedings against public participation, the court shall
direct that any written judgment of the court or, in the absence of a writ-
ten judgment of the court, any order of the court, related to that nding, shall be pub-
lished on the website of the Courts Service where practicable and as
soon as so practicable.”.”.
2 July 2025
437
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT02000Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 27:
In page 15, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:
“Transitional provisions relating to provisions of Part 4A of Principal Act
18. Where a provision of Part 4A of the Principal Act comes into operation on a par-
ticular date, it shall do so only in relation to defamation proceedings (within the meaning
of that Part) brought after
that date.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT02200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 28:
In page 16, line 4, to delete “34I.” and substitute “34J.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT02400Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 29:
In page 16, line 15, to delete “34J. (1) Without prejudice to the Mediation Act 2017, a”
and substitute “34K. (1) A”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT02600Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 30:
In page 17, line 6, to delete “34K.” and substitute “34L.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT02800Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 31:
In page 17, line 27, to delete “34L.” and substitute “34M.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT03000Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 32:
In page 18, line 13, to delete “34M.” and substitute “34N.”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT03200Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 33:
In page 18, line 14, to delete “34L(1)(a)” and substitute “34M(1)(a)”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025TTT03400An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 34 to 36, inclusive, are related and will
be discussed together.
Dáil Éireann
438
02/07/2025TTT03500Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 34:
In page 19, line 33, to delete “intermediate” and substitute “intermediary”.
These amendments make changes to the denitions contained in the proposed section 45
of the Defamation Act 2009 introduced by section 19 of the Bill. Section 45 provides the Cir-
cuit Court with jurisdiction to make identication orders. This allows a person who has been
subject to defamatory comments by anonymous posters online to seek information identifying
those posters. Amendment No. 34 corrects a mistaken reference to an “intermediate” rather
than an “intermediary” service provider. Amendment No. 35 adds wording to the existing de-
nition of “information society service” to clarify that although such services only include those
provided for remuneration, this remuneration may be received by the service provider either
directly from the user of the service or indirectly through advertising or other means. Amend-
ment No. 36 adds a further denition of “recipient of the service”, a term used in the existing
denition of “intermediary service provider”. The denitions of “information society service”
and “intermediary service provider” align with those contained in EU law instruments, most
notably the Digital Services Act.
When looking at the amendments we have just discussed, particularly those dealing with
section 45, these really take into account the fact that we are going to see an opportunity here for
people being defamed online to bring applications before the Circuit Court to secure identica-
tion orders. We have been talking here about defamation in the context of defamation taking
place in what is the traditional format, where the media - a newspaper or broadcaster - publishes
something false about an individual. Fortunately, that happens very infrequently. The vast ma-
jority of defamation that takes place now is online, where anonymous people publish to a large
number of individuals defamatory material about an identiable person. In most instances, it is
extremely hard for the person defamed to get any remedy because it is not possible to identify
who the publisher is and it is dicult in the context of trying to hold social media companies
liable for it. The real benet of this legislation is that we now have a statutory mechanism pro-
vided in the legislation in section 45 for the purpose of enabling somebody to go to the Circuit
Court and to apply for an identication order that will compel a social media company to tell
them the identity of the account holder who has published the defamatory material.
Deputy Carthy spoke earlier about members of his party being defamed. No political party
in this House - and it certainly does apply to Fianna Fáil - has not been defamed. I think it is
fair to say, however, that politicians should have a thick skin when it comes to publications put
out there in the traditional media. We should perhaps also have a thick skin when it comes to
false and defamatory comments made about us online, although that is a matter for each indi-
vidual politician. I refer to a situation, however, where egregious defamatory statements are
made about individuals, falsely accusing them of the most heinous and serious oences. That
does merit a statutory response. The constitutional right to one’s good name means something.
Sometimes I am concerned that the debate on defamation focuses very much on the right to
freedom of expression and the organised campaign that can be put forward by the media, as
it is entitled to do. However, as legislators, we must take into the account the individual - the
citizen - who does not have an organised group campaigning to ensure his or her right to his or
her good name is protected and defended. That is why it is so important that provisions like
this are included and that is why it is so important that the Defamation Act respects the balance
between conicting rights: the right of an individual to his or her good name, and the right of
an individual or corporate entity to freedom of expression. Our job in the Oireachtas is to try to
balance those rights. I suspect that the most egregious development in the world of defamation
2 July 2025
439
in the past 100 years is the development of social media and the ease with which individuals can
make false defamatory statements about persons who might not even be well known - private
individuals who have no recourse. I hope this statutory provision will give them some recourse.
02/07/2025UUU00200Deputy Matt Carthy: I also hope these provisions address the issues the Minister outlined.
I do not dispute anything he said, including the argument that politicians should have thick
skins. I endeavour to live up to those standards daily. I am a passionate advocate of freedom
of speech. I believe it is essential in a functioning democracy that people can feel to say things
- even nasty things or critical things - about politicians or others in power, particularly those in
power.
There is a distinction between free speech and anonymous speech whereby somebody can
hide behind a computer and not have the guts to reveal himself or herself when he or she
publishes what can be abhorrent material about a person or entity with no consequences. In
that vein, I mean it when I say that I hope that the provisions outlined by the Minister do their
stated job. It is a high bar for a lot of people who might nd themselves in that position. As
the Minister said, there has been an evolution of defamatory comment. Due to the multitudes
of mediums by which people can publish assertions, it is probably people who do not have ac-
cess to a solicitor or recourse to or understanding of the law who are likely to become victims
in all of this. I hope that we will reach a point where not only will this mechanism work but
the fact that the mechanism is there will give social media companies the freedom to divulge
the information early on when it is requested by people seeking to nd out who is behind these
anonymous accounts that in many cases are causing signicant societal destruction in terms of
the malicious agendas they pursue. This is notwithstanding everything I have said about the
right to free speech. I believe in it passionately but if somebody wants freedom of speech, he or
she should also avail of the freedom to reveal himself or herself and have the guts to stand over
what it is he or she wants to say.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025UUU00400Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 35:
In page 20, line 7, after “remuneration,” to insert “whether such remuneration is pro-
vided directly by a recipient of services or indirectly through advertising or other means,”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025UUU00600Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 36:
In page 20, between lines 32 and 33, to insert the following:
“ ‘recipient of the service’, in relation to an intermediary service, means any natural
or legal person who uses an intermediary service, in particular for the purposes of seek-
ing information or making it accessible;”.
Amendment agreed to.
02/07/2025UUU00800Deputy Jim O’Callaghan: I move amendment No. 37:
In page 21, after line 19, to insert the following:
“(2) The amendments eected by subsection (1)* shall apply only to causes of action
Dáil Éireann
440
accruing on or after the date of the coming into operation of this section.”.
Amendment agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
Question put: “That the Bill do now pass.”
The Dáil divided: Tá, 83; Níl, 61; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Aird, William. Ahern, Ciarán.
Ardagh, Catherine. Bacik, Ivana.
Boland, Grace. Brady, John.
Brabazon, Tom. Buckley, Pat.
Brennan, Brian. Carthy, Matt.
Brennan, Shay. Clarke, Sorca.
Brophy, Colm. Connolly, Catherine.
Browne, James. Conway-Walsh, Rose.
Burke, Colm. Coppinger, Ruth.
Burke, Peter. Cronin, Réada.
Butler, Mary. Cullinane, David.
Butterly, Paula. Cummins, Jen.
Buttimer, Jerry. Daly, Pa.
Byrne, Malcolm. Devine, Máire.
Byrne, Thomas. Doherty, Pearse.
Cahill, Michael. Donnelly, Paul.
Callaghan, Catherine. Ellis, Dessie.
Calleary, Dara. Farrelly, Aidan.
Canney, Seán. Gannon, Gary.
Carrigy, Micheál. Gibney, Sinéad.
Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer. Graves, Ann.
Chambers, Jack. Hayes, Eoin.
Clendennen, John. Hearne, Rory.
Collins, Niall. Kelly, Alan.
Connolly, John. Kenny, Eoghan.
Cooney, Joe. Kenny, Martin.
Cummins, John. Kerrane, Claire.
Currie, Emer. Lawless, Paul.
Daly, Martin. Lawlor, George.
Dempsey, Aisling. Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
Devlin, Cormac. McGettigan, Donna.
Dillon, Alan. McGrath, Mattie.
Dolan, Albert. McGuinness, Conor D.
Donohoe, Paschal. Mitchell, Denise.
Dooley, Timmy. Murphy, Paul.
2 July 2025
441
Feighan, Frankie. Mythen, Johnny.
Fleming, Seán. Nash, Ged.
Foley, Norma. Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Gallagher, Pat the Cope. Nolan, Carol.
Geoghegan, James. O’Callaghan, Cian.
Grealish, Noel. O’Donoghue, Robert.
Harkin, Marian. O’Gorman, Roderic.
Healy-Rae, Michael. O’Hara, Louis.
Heydon, Martin. O’Reilly, Louise.
Keogh, Keira. O’Rourke, Darren.
Lahart, John. Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
Lawless, James. Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
Lowry, Michael. Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
Maxwell, David. Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
McAulie, Paul. Quaide, Liam.
McCarthy, Noel. Quinlivan, Maurice.
McConalogue, Charlie. Rice, Pádraig.
McCormack, Tony. Sheehan, Conor.
McEntee, Helen. Sherlock, Marie.
McGrath, Séamus. Smith, Duncan.
McGreehan, Erin. Stanley, Brian.
Moran, Kevin Boxer. Tóibín, Peadar.
Moynihan, Aindrias. Wall, Mark.
Moynihan, Michael. Ward, Charles.
Moynihan, Shane. Ward, Mark.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Whitmore, Jennifer.
Murphy, Michael.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Dáil Éireann
442
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer Currie; Níl, Deputies Matt Carthy and Gary
Gannon.
Question declared carried.
02/07/2025WWW00100Social Welfare (Bereaved Partner’s Pension and Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2025:
Report and Final Stages
02/07/2025WWW00200An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 1, 2 and 21 to 23, inclusive, are related
and may be discussed together.
02/07/2025WWW00300Deputy Ruth Coppinger: I move amendment No. 1:
In page 5, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:
“(3) Before this Act comes into operation the Minister shall publish a report which
outlines the following:
(a) the degree of nancial dependence that families with divorced or separated
parents have on those parents;
(b) an overview of the legal issues with not providing the same level of access to
social protection payments for some children’s families based on the marital status
of their separated or divorced parents.”.
I am speaking on amendment No. 1. This is a very important amendment, in particular
given that our key amendments have been ruled out of order. That is bizarre because we should
have a right to debate the changes being made to the Bill by the Government. We should have
the right to vote on them, but the Government is using the so-called additional costs reason
which, in this case, is inappropriate because the Minister, it could well be argued, is removing
a cost. We have no control over this.
The lack of attention this Bill has received is very unfortunate. It is very unfortunate that de-
spite all of the political correspondents hanging around the Dáil, none saw t to write an article
on the Bill. The changes the Minister proposes to make on the back of the O’Meara judgment
are completely against what the Supreme Court ruled. The Supreme Court wanted to equalise
the situation, whereby cohabiting people would have the same entitlements as married, sepa-
rated and divorced people if their partner died. Instead, the Minister will apply the legislation
to cohabiting people while excluding separated and divorced people.
My amendment calls for an assessment to be carried out in advance of the nancial hardship
2 July 2025
443
that will occur for so many families arising from this change. The Free Legal Advice Centres,
FLAC, One Parent and Treoir, key organisations that deal with lone parents, women and all
sorts of one-parent families, have all opposed these changes. The Minister is setting his face
against them.
I will provide a couple of examples. This is an attack on a universal payment. On Com-
mittee Stage, I asked what alternative the Minister was providing for separated or divorced
partners who had maintenance arrangements in place with a deceased partner and may have
been co-parenting and sharing parental costs with their partner, such as getting help to pay their
mortgage or rent or to fund their children’s education, if they had children. What the Minister
said in respect of one parent families was completely disingenuous because he knew the change
would not apply to most people. Payments are means tested. If people work, etc., they do not
receive the payments. Families will be plunged into poverty as a result of this. People who
have maintenance agreements and support will lose all of that, along with emotional support.
The Minister is ne with that. It is quite shocking.
This is a breach of faith. The statements made by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, the two main
parties in respect of the divorce referendum, included a promise that people would not suer
if they were divorced or separated. However, the Minister is now introducing discrimination
against people who are separated or divorced.
The worst aspect of the Bill relates to children. The Minister is creating a new discrimina-
tion against children. I hope the Ombudsman for Children takes this up. I know for a fact there
will be legal cases taken in the future on this.
I want to highlight another issue, namely, funeral costs. When my partner died last Septem-
ber, I, along with my daughter, organised the funeral. I shared parental responsibilities with
my late partner. I paid for the funeral because he did not have any other family. If this were
to happen next year, I would pay for somebody’s funeral, lose maintenance and be in a really
dicult situation, regardless of being a TD. This happened before I was elected. I am talk-
ing about people in ordinary jobs who are trying to keep their families going. The Minister is
okay with this. There is a grant of up to €8,000 for funeral costs, which will be gone for many
people. Treoir and other organisations, such as FLAC, which took the case that brought about
the change, have asked the Minister not to do this. Its representatives have met the Minister and
spoken at briengs. Unfortunately, the Minister has not changed his mind.
The Minister is trying to make out the O’Meara judgment said we had to do this. The
O’Meara judgment did not say he had to do this. It made it very clear that all children and
partners should be treated equally. We have a bizarre situation now. I know somebody who
will benet from this and I am delighted. I have been brieng them about this Bill for months
because they are a single cohabiting person with no children. Somebody who is cohabiting and
does not have any children will get this, but somebody who has three, four or ve children with
their partner and was in receipt of nancial support will get nothing. How does the Minister
justify this? It is seriously beyond belief the way he is doing this so blithely. It is wrong that
the Minister is pushing ahead with this despite all of the cases being made.
The Minister hates putting ideas into people’s minds but he has now opened the way for
private pension companies to discriminate against separated people. I know this for a fact
because, from experience and from having spoken to solicitors, separated people are treated
exactly the same way as married people in terms of getting death in service benets and other
Dáil Éireann
444
pensions their partner may have had. The Minister is now opening it up to prot-hungry insur-
ance and life assurance companies to change that situation. They will decide that they can do
so because the Government has done so. It is absolutely disgraceful.
I ask that the proposed change not be brought in until the Minister has reported on the nan-
cial implications of doing so. The legal implications are huge. I have cited pension companies
and cases that denitely will be taken to the High Court, Supreme Court or whatever on behalf
of separated and divorced people. They should not have to do that because we are telling the
Minister now that there is a problem and he is just not listening. He is trying to make this cost
neutral and does not seem to recognise the impact it will have, primarily on women, by the way,
because it is women who are lower paid in general and have living arrangements involving
children. It is a real attack on women as well, and that has been said by all of the organisations.
02/07/2025WWW00400Deputy Louise O’Reilly: I am on the record as having welcomed this legislation. I under-
stand its intention and to respond to the judgment was very necessary. It is important, however,
when we have the opportunity, that we make the legislation as good and decent as it can be and
ensure that it reects the judgment.
9 o’clock
We must remember the Chief Justice placed an emphasis on the rights of all children and
the obligations of their parents, irrespective of the status of their parents. We are not talking
about large numbers. There are no oodgates, as FLAC has pointed out. As Deputy Coppinger
said, and rightly so, FLAC took the case. It has been immersed in this. FLAC, One Family
and Treoir all ask the same thing, which is, if possible at this late stage, will the Minister try to
include all children.
Most of our amendments have been ruled out of order. This is very regrettable. The Bill
has come before us in order to rectify legislation that treated the children of cohabiting parents
less favourably than the children of married parents. That was declared unconstitutional, and
rightly so, but it is hard to see any justication for the introduction of legislation that treats the
children of separated or divorced parents less favourably than children whose parents are mar-
ried, in a civil partnership or cohabiting.
The amendment being proposed is very sensible. It is simply about the compilation of data
and the examination of the potential nancial implications. I genuinely do not believe it is the
Minister’s intention to exclude these people but it is hard to come to any other conclusion. We
are standing here telling the Minister there are people and children, not in large numbers, who
will potentially be discriminated against. The Minister is creating another class of child, which
ies in the face of the judgment. I encourage the Minister to support the amendment and do this
work before the Bill is enacted. The intention here is to right a wrong but the Minister will not
right that wrong by creating another category, layer and group of children who are excluded.
I know, not from my own personal experience – touch wood – but from experience in my
very close family, how important this money is to people at a time in their lives when there are
expenses such as funerals and kids to be cared for. It is very tough time and the money is very
much needed. It is also a recognition of the children, and this is worth saying. This represents
a levelling down. The Bill creates a category of children and a category of family who will be
excluded and treated less favourably. Before the Minister presses ahead with this, it is right to
support the amendment and take this opportunity to review the nancial implications and the
2 July 2025
445
potential for hardship for a very small number of people. I want to really stress there are no
oodgates about to be opened. We are talking about small numbers but, nonetheless, for every
single one of them this is a very important amendment.
02/07/2025XXX00200Deputy Claire Kerrane: I want to be associated with the case made on amendment No.
1 and I wish to speak in support of amendment No. 2, which is grouped with amendment No.
1. Amendment No. 2 proposes a report that includes the examination of estimated savings by
excluding those who lost a partner before that date in January 2024. For a number of years in
the House I have raised the need to extend the widows pension to unmarried couples where a
partner is lost, particularly where there are children. Accessing supports based on marriage is a
very outdated, old and ancient rule in social welfare. Of course, when it comes to the means test
and everything else, it does not matter whether people are cohabiting. Marriage is irrelevant
and everyone’s means is taken into account. It is one rule for one thing and another rule in other
cases when money is paid out.
I have been raising this issue for a number of years because of a constituent close to my
hometown who lost her ancé in December 2021. They had three very young children and he
died suddenly. They were due to get married but, unfortunately, because of Covid the wedding
had to be cancelled. It was postponed and then he died suddenly. If he had died in December
2024 she would have been entitled to the widow’s pension but based on the date she will not be
entitled to it. I had promised her, as I sought this change, that I hoped it would be for everyone
who has lost a partner, regardless of the date. There are not that many people in this category.
I feel obliged, now that legislation is going through, to make the case on her behalf. She is not
the only one but I feel obliged to do it this evening. It is something that has been asked of the
Minister, and he has said it cannot be done, but I would like him to take the opportunity this
evening to advise us on what he has done on the extension of this and why it is not possible.
We will have people who will access the widow’s pension because their partner died after
a certain date, and we will have widows in the exact same position but based on the date they
will not be able to access it. This is deeply unfair. We should never base laws on a certain date
or time. It should be for everyone, and it should be equal no matter what date someone lost the
person they love, in many cases the father or mother of their children.
02/07/2025XXX00300Deputy Mark Wall: I welcome the fact we are on Report Stage of the Bill. I put on record
my thanks to John O’Meara, and I recognise his late partner Michelle, and I also thank my
colleague, Deputy Kelly, who has put tremendous work into this, as the Minister has acknowl-
edged.
The Minister might clarify the point Deputy Kerrane raised in her contribution. My under-
standing is that anyone would be entitled to the pension after January 2024 and, therefore, in the
case Deputy Kerrane mentioned, the person would be entitled to it after January 2024. I ask the
Minister to clarify this. This is the understanding that I have taken to many people. It is a big
issue and if this is not the case we will need to revisit the Bill very quickly.
I support amendment No. 1, as I did on Committee Stage. Since we started this discussion,
and Deputy Kelly brought it to the Labour Party, a number of separated or divorced persons
have come to us. They have relied on the income, particularly for the children of the relation-
ship. As I said the other day, the emphasis of the Bill, through the Supreme Court, is on the
children. I ask the Minister, as the other speakers have done, to reconsider this part of the Bill
and put something into it that will acknowledge the fact that many people in such a relationship
Dáil Éireann
446
will be out of pocket.
As has been said, the number of people who have contacted us is not large. There are no
large numbers in this but it is signicant that these people will nd themselves considerably out
of pocket in some cases. In one case I am aware of, when the children were going to college
there was a substantial cost. I ask the Minister to reconsider this. Treoir, FLAC and One Fam-
ily have highlighted this to us. It is important that we acknowledge this, as has been outlined
by the two previous speakers on amendment No. 1.
On amendment No. 2, we want to see how eective the Bill is, which is why we have pro-
posed a report three months after the passing of the Act. It is to ensure we are taking care of
the greatest number of people possible. This is what Johnny O’Meara wanted to do. It is what
FLAC and Treoir wanted to do when they got behind the Bill, and what Deputy Kelly wanted
when he got behind the Bill. We do not want to leave anyone behind. This is why we have
asked for a report to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas after three months.
There is an issue with amendment No. 1, which was outlined on Committee Stage. It is
something on which we need to hear from the Minister again. The number of people involved
is not large but there are people involved. I put the emphasis on the children. With regard to
amendment No. 2, which we have tabled, we need to know the Bill is t for purpose and that all
the great work done by John O’Meara and his family, and by Deputy Kelly in assisting them,
was worthwhile in the end, and that the Bill will cover the greatest number of people.
02/07/2025XXX00400Deputy Liam Quaide: I support my colleagues Deputies Coppinger, O’Reilly and Wall in
respect of amendment No. 1. I appeal to the Minister, in the spirit of meaningful collaboration
on the Bill, to take on their very reasonable arguments, which have been very well articulated.
If clear unfairness is identied in a Bill, it is very important that it is acknowledged and that
there is not a default Government position of pushing it through without having a very reasoned
response. I appeal to the Minister in that regard.
02/07/2025YYY00200Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Aairs (Deputy Thomas Byrne): A
number of my constituents will benet from this Bill. I pay tribute to John O’Meara for going
to the Supreme Court and acknowledge the circumstances in which he went to it. I know the
Minister, Deputy Calleary, will take on board what the Members have said today. I sympathise
with Deputy Coppinger as well. It is awful. I acknowledge the ocials in the Department un-
der the Minister who brought this Bill forward. We would have liked to have had it quicker, but
bringing forward a Bill this quickly after a major constitutional case is tremendous work. This
Bill will be of signicant benet overall to many families throughout the country.
02/07/2025YYY00300Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Dara Calleary): I thank the Deputies for their
remarks. I will speak to the amendments rst and then speak to some of the queries that were
raised, which were dealt with on Committee Stage. Amendments Nos. 1 and 2, and 21 to 23,
inclusive, are grouped together.
As I said during the Committee Stage debate, it is not appropriate to include commitments
to producing reports in primary legislation, particularly legislation that is as complex as the
Social Welfare Consolidation Act. That is my view in respect of all of the proposed reports and
reviews within this grouping. The social welfare system provides for annual reviews through
the Social Welfare Acts and through the monitoring of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on So-
cial Protection, Rural and Community Development. I made commitments that I would engage
2 July 2025
447
extensively with that committee on this Bill.
With respect to specic issues regarding reports being sought through the amendments, as
is clear from the Bill and as we all want to do, the intention is for this legislation to become
operable on enactment. This is important for those who will become eligible for the pension for
the rst time. It would be impossible to produce the report sought by Deputies Coppinger and
Murphy through amendment No. 1 before the Act comes into operation, unless the suggestion
is that the payment to surviving qualied cohabitants is delayed until such a time as the report,
which is unlikely to be feasible, is produced. I do not think that is the Deputy’s intention. Some
of the information sought in the report and in the reviews sought in amendment No. 23, does not
come with the information currently available to my Department and is unlikely to be publicly
available at all. My Department does not hold information on the degree of nancial depen-
dants that families with divorced or separated parents have nor could it determine the nancial
arrangements that exist between divorced or separated parents or the impact in the case of a
death. It would be wrong for me to commit to something in legislation that cannot be produced.
Deputy Wall seeks a report through amendment No. 2. I will provide clarication to Deputy
Kerrane on this case. Deputy Wall’s amendment tries to quantify the nancial cost of provid-
ing payments to those who suered a bereavement before 22 January 2024. In recognition of
established legal principles, it is proposed that the payment of the bereaved partner’s contribu-
tory pension will commence only from the date of judgment in the case of a death that occurred
prior to that date. To clarify, in the case Deputy Kerrane mentioned, the person will be entitled
to the payment, but the payment will be from 22 January 2024, when the legal entitlement was
actually made in the Supreme Court judgment. They will be entitled. If the application is suc-
cessful, the payment will be from 22 January 2024, when the existing law was found inconsis-
tent with the Constitution.
To go back to Deputy Wall’s amendment, while a report may, subject to the information
provided by the claimants, give a clearer indication of the quantum in respect of pre-2024
payments, it will not change the legal position on the eective date of the payment. Legisla-
tion is typically only applied prospectively, hence any retrospective conferring of entitlement
requires a strong legal justication to avoid creating unwanted precedent which could aect
other schemes. To pick another date prior to this could be considered arbitrary and potentially
expose the State to further claims.
The more general reviews sought by Deputies Coppinger and Murphy in amendments Nos.
20 and 21 were debated on Committee Stage. It may be appropriate to build reviews into some
legislation, but I do not agree that such reviews are appropriate in this legislation. As I said, so-
cial welfare legislation is focused and is subject to ongoing review annually through the Social
Welfare Acts, the social welfare joint committee and the day-to-day operation and experience.
I assure the House that I am asking my ocials to review the impact of the changes, including
those who qualify and any issues that may arise. I do not propose to provide for this in primary
legislation, but I gave a commitment to the committee and I am giving one to the House this
evening that we will monitor the impact of this legislation and the changes. If changes and is-
sues arise, I will deal with them in the appropriate way.
The Supreme Court judgment did not make a general nding that the payment of a widow-
er’s or widow’s pension was in respect of children. Mr. Justice O’Donnell did, however, note:
Furthermore, WCP is increased when there are dependent children, and quite substan-
Dáil Éireann
448
tially. This is not in any sense to suggest that, as a matter of law, WCP is a payment to or for
the children. It is an established principle in the eld of social welfare more generally that
the payment is made to the beneciary ... and may be used by them for any purpose.
The Supreme Court did not make ndings on the denition or the protection of dierent
types of families. We are addressing one very serious anomaly through this legislation. To con-
tinue with other anomalies and not address them, particularly when they have been highlighted,
would be wrong as well. As I said, other supports are available in this situation that have been
referred to this evening.
02/07/2025YYY00400Deputy Ruth Coppinger: I am sorry; what are they?
02/07/2025YYY00500An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: We will come to that. I call Deputy O’Reilly.
02/07/2025YYY00600Deputy Louise O’Reilly: The Minister referred to universal payments, which are available
to everybody. I am not sure they cover what we are looking for. He said he will review the
impact of the changes. He has given that commitment in this House. Will he also commit to
publishing that review? From my perspective, I will submit a case. There are cases that exist.
We will submit cases that will be excluded from this and excluded unfairly. It is our intention
to forward those cases to the Minister for examination.
I spoke to one woman who was six months pregnant when she was bereaved. I am glad that
the Minister has an answer for me on that because she is concerned that she might potentially
be excluded in some way, shape or form. We have highlighted to the Minister what we believe
- I am willing to give him the benet of the doubt - to be the unintended consequences of this
for children. The judgment related to children and the judge did refer specically to children.
My concern is that a category of child will be created that will be excluded. That is not a good
thing. I will certainly forward cases to him for examination in which I believe people will be
treated unfairly as a result of this. I would appreciate his answer in relation to the woman who
was bereaved when she was six months pregnant.
02/07/2025YYY00700Deputy Ruth Coppinger: Amendment No. 1 is dierent from the others in that it is asking
for due diligence to be done before a Bill is brought in. It should be the norm. The Minister
is acting as if it is unusual to ask for a report on the impact of a Bill. He should have done that
previously. TDs from Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and other TDs will troop into the House tonight
without having a clue what they are voting on. We had a brieng yesterday and most of them
acted very shocked. They will line up and presumably go with the party Whip, but people down
the line will go to claim this and then ask them why they voted for it. I would not be too quick
to do so if I were them.
The other issue is marriage. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are the two parties in particular that
wax lyrical about marriage, how important it is and what a central place it has in the Constitu-
tion. In fact, they are actually taking away one of the many reasons people get married, namely,
that the other person will be looked after if anything happens, legally, nancially and so on. If
they separate, they usually make a separation agreement. The Government is throwing that out
the window.
I want to mention the O’Meara judgment. I will not say “lying”, but the Government is ab-
solutely fooling people because in the O’Meara judgment the Chief Justice placed an emphasis
on “the rights of all children, and obligations of their parents, irrespective of the status of their
parents.” The Chief Justice made it very clear. He highlighted the importance of this pension in
2 July 2025
449
addressing the nancial impact the death of a parent may have on families. He was absolutely
adamant that there should be equal treatment of all the people aected. The Government has
decided to make this cost neutral, but that is basically to include a group and take out another
group. We are going to see litigation in the future. It is very hard to see why people would not
litigate, especially people who have children and then see other people who are cohabiting and
do not have children, something I would fully agree with. It is completely unbalanced. It is
very disappointing that the Minister has not listened to the professional organisations or to the
Opposition.
02/07/2025ZZZ00200Deputy Claire Kerrane: I just want to clarify what I said. If my constituent’s partner had
died in December 2024, she would have got that payment from then on. Because he died in
December 2021, she will of course be able to apply for the payment and I welcome that but
she will not get it because it was in 2021 and, therefore, it is not backdated. My point is that
the date should not matter, but it is going to matter. I do welcome the dierence this payment
will make to her and to others, although I want to reiterate what my colleagues have said about
amendment No. 1. It is very important. The judge was very clear with regard to children, and
that is what this is supposed to be about.
02/07/2025ZZZ00300Deputy Dara Calleary: This is an area the Leas-Cheann Comhairle has also expressed an
interest in. On Deputy O’Reilly’s comment about the lady whose partner passed away while she
was expecting, we have based the qualications on the 2010 civil partnership Act and the issue
from the Department of Justice. I am writing to the Minister, Deputy O’Callaghan, to highlight
this case and also on the points reected in Deputy Wall’s amendment, which was ruled out of
order, in relation to civil partnerships outside the jurisdiction. I have just highlighted those two
issues to the Minister and asked him to consider them in the context of any review of the 2010
Act he may be planning. Both cases that were highlighted are stand-out cases that grabbed me.
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle was also in touch with me about a similar case.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 60; Níl, 85; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Ahern, Ciarán. Aird, William.
Bacik, Ivana. Ardagh, Catherine.
Brady, John. Boland, Grace.
Buckley, Pat. Brabazon, Tom.
Byrne, Joanna. Brennan, Brian.
Carthy, Matt. Brennan, Shay.
Clarke, Sorca. Brophy, Colm.
Conway-Walsh, Rose. Browne, James.
Coppinger, Ruth. Burke, Colm.
Cronin, Réada. Burke, Peter.
Cullinane, David. Butler, Mary.
Cummins, Jen. Butterly, Paula.
Daly, Pa. Buttimer, Jerry.
Devine, Máire. Byrne, Malcolm.
Doherty, Pearse. Byrne, Thomas.
Dáil Éireann
450
Donnelly, Paul. Cahill, Michael.
Ellis, Dessie. Callaghan, Catherine.
Farrelly, Aidan. Calleary, Dara.
Gannon, Gary. Canney, Seán.
Gibney, Sinéad. Carrigy, Micheál.
Graves, Ann. Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
Hayes, Eoin. Chambers, Jack.
Hearne, Rory. Clendennen, John.
Kelly, Alan. Collins, Michael.
Kenny, Eoghan. Collins, Niall.
Kenny, Martin. Connolly, John.
Kerrane, Claire. Cooney, Joe.
Lawless, Paul. Cummins, John.
Lawlor, George. Currie, Emer.
Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig. Daly, Martin.
McGettigan, Donna. Dempsey, Aisling.
McGuinness, Conor D. Devlin, Cormac.
Mitchell, Denise. Dillon, Alan.
Murphy, Paul. Dolan, Albert.
Mythen, Johnny. Donohoe, Paschal.
Nash, Ged. Dooley, Timmy.
Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Feighan, Frankie.
Nolan, Carol. Fleming, Seán.
O’Callaghan, Cian. Foley, Norma.
O’Donoghue, Robert. Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
O’Gorman, Roderic. Geoghegan, James.
O’Hara, Louis. Grealish, Noel.
O’Reilly, Louise. Harkin, Marian.
O’Rourke, Darren. Healy-Rae, Michael.
Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh. Heydon, Martin.
Ó Murchú, Ruairí. Keogh, Keira.
Ó Snodaigh, Aengus. Lahart, John.
Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán. Lawless, James.
Quaide, Liam. Lowry, Michael.
Quinlivan, Maurice. Maxwell, David.
Rice, Pádraig. McAulie, Paul.
Sheehan, Conor. McCarthy, Noel.
Sherlock, Marie. McCormack, Tony.
Smith, Duncan. McEntee, Helen.
Stanley, Brian. McGrath, Mattie.
Tóibín, Peadar. McGrath, Séamus.
Wall, Mark. McGreehan, Erin.
2 July 2025
451
Ward, Charles. Moran, Kevin Boxer.
Ward, Mark. Moynihan, Aindrias.
Whitmore, Jennifer. Moynihan, Michael.
Moynihan, Shane.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Murphy, Michael.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Flynn, Ken.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Ruth Coppinger and Louise O’Reilly; Níl, Deputies Mary Butler and
Emer Currie.
Amendment declared lost.
02/07/2025AAAA00100Deputy Mark Wall: I move amendment No. 2:
In page 5, between lines 21 and 22, to insert the following:
“Report
3. The Minister shall, not later than 3 months after the passing of this Act, make a report
in writing to each House of the Oireachtas on the estimated number of persons aected and
the estimated savings to the Exchequer achieved by the provisions of sections 4 and 8 to the
eect that an entitlement to a pension under this Act can arise no earlier than 22
January 2024.”.
Dáil Éireann
452
Amendment put and declared lost.
02/07/2025AAAA00300An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 3 to 6, inclusive, have been ruled out of
order.
Amendments Nos. 3 to 6, inclusive, not moved.
02/07/2025AAAA00500An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 7, 8 and 14 are related and may be dis-
cussed together.
02/07/2025AAAA00600Deputy Louise O’Reilly: I move amendment No. 7:
In page 8, to delete lines 4 to 8.
To be fair, this denition is really only relevant as a test of whether the couple was living
together in an intimate relationship. It is related and consequential to the other amendments,
and those ones which were, unfortunately, ruled out of order. I look forward to hearing the Min-
ister’s rationale on this. Given that it is related to the other amendments, I am happy to discuss
it and hear from the Minister.
02/07/2025BBBB00200Deputy Mark Wall: Like Deputy O’Reilly, I am prepared to listen to what the Minister
might say in reply.
02/07/2025BBBB00300Deputy Dara Calleary: I thank Deputies O’Reilly and Wall. I do not propose to accept
amendments Nos. 7, 8 and 14. To accept them would remove the ability of any future Minister
for Social Protection to make regulations to clarify the circumstances where a couple may be
living apart for more than two years due to medical circumstances. This denition is linked to
the regulation-making power inserted into section 123A of the Act, for the Minister to consider
time spent living apart due to medical reasons as not bringing the relationship to an end. The
normal provisions in the Bill are designed to apply where a couple are eectively separated
but have not formalised the breakdown of the relationship after two years by either divorce or
judicial separation or dissolution in the case of a civil partnership. This reects current legal
practice in family law and in other cases where relationships have broken down. This is a
belt-and-braces provision to ensure there is no doubt in a case where a couple are living apart
because one of them is in a medical institution, for instance, a nursing home. The relationship
still exists and, consequently, there should be no loss of eligibility for a couple in this scenario.
The removal of this denition would impact on the operation of the ability to prescribe such
circumstances.
There were discussions before the joint committee recently to the eect that the underlying
provisions would give rise to an interrogation into the nature of a married relationship at the
time of death. Once again, I assure the House that this is not the case. These provisions are de-
signed to apply where a couple are eectively separated but have not formalised the breakdown
of the relationship after two years by either divorce, judicial separation or the dissolution of a
civil partnership.
My Department will not be seeking proof that a married couple were in an intimate and
committed relationship at the time of death. Applicants will be asked whether they were still
living with their spouse at the date of death, and nothing further, unless there is evidence to the
contrary. This means that a couple who are no longer living together in an intimate and com-
mitted relationship would not be entitled to the payment. The provisions in the Bill set down
2 July 2025
453
how these matters are dened, based on existing family law legislation for where a marriage has
broken down, which includes the fact that a couple can live in the same dwelling but no longer
be in an intimate and committed relationship.
02/07/2025BBBB00400Deputy Louise O’Reilly: Could I get clarity on what the Minister said? He said that it will
be accepted that a couple are living together, which is welcome, but then he said “unless there
is evidence to the contrary”. That then brings in the test. I am happy to be corrected if I mis-
heard him. It is ne and appropriate if the Department is going to accept their word but what
the Minister just said is slightly dierent to what was said in the committee, namely, “unless
there is evidence to the contrary”. Could he explain to us what that would mean and how that
evidence would present itself or how it would then be tested?
02/07/2025BBBB00500Deputy Dara Calleary: If one part of the couple said something dierent to what had been
signed up to, for whatever reason, there would have to be further investigations. I assure the
Deputy that I would not want any intrusion into a relationship and the Department does not
intend to intrude. If evidence was presented by a member of the couple that contradicted what
the other member of the couple had said, that would have to be checked.
02/07/2025BBBB00600Deputy Louise O’Reilly: But what would happen if it was presented by a neighbour? Does
the Minister see where I am going with this?
02/07/2025BBBB00700Deputy Dara Calleary: Yes.
02/07/2025BBBB00800Deputy Louise O’Reilly: I fully respect the intention here but again, I am concerned about
the words the Minister used, that is, “evidence to the contrary”. I accept what the Minister said
in the case of a couple but I am asking about a situation where a neighbour is involved. Does
the Minister see where I am going with this?
02/07/2025BBBB00900Deputy Dara Calleary: Yes.
02/07/2025BBBB01000Deputy Louise O’Reilly: I understand the Minister does not think that is going to happen
but it is our job to make sure that it does not happen. It is a case of wanting to be sure to be
sure – belt and braces - as the Minister said himself.
02/07/2025BBBB01100Deputy Dara Calleary: I am pretty sure. It is a standard provision in such legislation. I as-
sure the Deputy that the Department is not going to stick its nose in where that is not necessary.
02/07/2025BBBB01200Deputy Ruth Coppinger: This shows part of the problem with the changes the Minister is
making to the Bill. When he says that the Department is not going to carry out investigations
or be intrusive, I do not mean any oence but the Department does carry out investigations into
other aspects of social welfare.
We debated a lot of the issues in the groupings of amendments. I am a bit perplexed as
to why the parties of marriage are not in here jumping up and down, parties like Aontú and
Independent Ireland. They have not opened their mouth in this entire debate, which is a bit
surprising because this is undermining marriage, if one likes, as per the point about the previ-
ous amendment. This was said by FLAC for example. Assurances were given to people before
the divorce referendum that there would not be any impoverishment of women. Do Members
remember the big threat that was made? I remember the divorce referendum. It was said that
women would be turfed out of their houses. We have an example of that now. Somebody who
may have been abandoned, for example, a victim of domestic violence, who was separated –
Dáil Éireann
454
perhaps not even by their own choice - but who had children with an individual will be in a
much worse situation as a result of this change. The likes of Aontú and the Christian gang are
not even in here making a peep about it. I just thought that was interesting.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment No. 8 not moved.
02/07/2025BBBB01500An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 9 to 13, inclusive, have been ruled out
of order.
Amendments Nos. 9 to 13, inclusive, not moved.
02/07/2025BBBB01650Deputy Louise O’Reilly: I move amendment No. 14:
In page 11, to delete lines 39 to 42, and in page 12, to delete lines 1 and 2.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
02/07/2025BBBB01800An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 15 to 17, inclusive, have been ruled out
of order.
Amendments Nos. 15 to 17, inclusive, not moved.
02/07/2025BBBB02000An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Amendments Nos. 18 to 20, inclusive, are related and may
be discussed together. Amendments Nos. 19 and 20 are physical alternatives to amendment No.
18. Amendments Nos. 18 to 20, inclusive, may be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
02/07/2025BBBB02100Deputy Mark Wall: I move amendment No. 18:
In page 13, to delete lines 3 to 41, and in page 14, to delete lines 1 to 5.
Again, like with amendment No. 7, I would like to get the Minister’s comment on the
amendment.
02/07/2025BBBB02200Deputy Dara Calleary: I thank Deputy Wall for the amendment. Amendments Nos. 18 to
20, inclusive, are grouped together. I do not propose to accept these amendments, which are
possibly irrelevant owing to other related amendments being ruled out of order.
I wrote to Deputies Wall, Quaide, Coppinger and O’Reilly on this issue after Committee
Stage. There are provisions in the Bill removing the eligibility of divorcees to the bereaved
partner’s contributory pension. The legislation adopts the policy whereby, insofar as possible,
an individual has an entitlement to a bereaved partner’s contributory pension on the basis of
one person only. As I stated, this is being done in an attempt to treat each cohort equally, as
far as is possible. That means eligibility for the bereaved partner’s contributory pension would
end upon divorce, similar to the loss of eligibility due to remarriage or on becoming a qualied
cohabitant again. The Bill contains a saver clause within the legislation for anyone aected by
the rule changes who is already in receipt of the payment. The eect of this amendment will
be to remove the saver provided for divorcees already in receipt of pension before enactment,
which would be unfair to those currently in receipt of the payment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Amendments Nos. 19 and 20 not moved.
2 July 2025
455
02/07/2025CCCC00300Deputy Ruth Coppinger: I move amendment No. 21:
In page 23, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:
“Review of provisions of Act
20. The Minister shall, not later than 12 months after the commencement of this Act,
carry out a review of the operation of this Act, and in particular the impact of the deni-
tions of “civil partner”, “widow” and “widower” in this Act.”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
02/07/2025CCCC00500Deputy Ruth Coppinger: I move amendment No. 22:
In page 23, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:
“Review of provisions of Act
20. The Minister shall, not later than 12 months after the commencement of this Act,
carry out a review of the operation of this Act.”.
Amendment put and declared lost.
02/07/2025CCCC00700An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: As the time permitted for this debate has expired, I am re-
quired to put the following question in accordance with an order of the Dáil of this day: “That
the Fourth Stage is hereby completed and the Bill is hereby passed.” Is that agreed? Agreed.
02/07/2025CCCC00800Minister for Social Protection (Deputy Dara Calleary): It is important to acknowledge
this Bill came about as a result of Mr. Johnny O’Meara and his family in memory of his partner
and their mum, Michelle Batey. I thank Mr. O’Meara and Deputy Alan Kelly who stood and
worked with him along with other organisations throughout this process. I thank all Deputies
for their contributions to this debate and look forward to bringing the Bill to the Seanad.
10 o’clock
02/07/2025DDDD00100Criminal Justice (Terrorist Oences) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Second Stage (Resumed)
02/07/2025DDDD00200An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I must now deal with a postponed division relating to Sec-
ond Stage of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Oences) (Amendment) Bill 2025, taken on Thurs-
day, 26 June 2025. On the question, “That the Bill be now read a Second Time”, a division was
claimed and in accordance with Standing Order 85(2), that division must be taken now.
Question put: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.”
The Dáil divided: Tá, 86; Níl, 62; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Aird, William. Ahern, Ciarán.
Ardagh, Catherine. Bacik, Ivana.
Boland, Grace. Brady, John.
Brabazon, Tom. Buckley, Pat.
Dáil Éireann
456
Brennan, Brian. Byrne, Joanna.
Brennan, Shay. Carthy, Matt.
Brophy, Colm. Clarke, Sorca.
Browne, James. Collins, Michael.
Burke, Colm. Connolly, Catherine.
Burke, Peter. Conway-Walsh, Rose.
Butler, Mary. Coppinger, Ruth.
Butterly, Paula. Cronin, Réada.
Buttimer, Jerry. Cullinane, David.
Byrne, Malcolm. Cummins, Jen.
Byrne, Thomas. Daly, Pa.
Cahill, Michael. Devine, Máire.
Callaghan, Catherine. Doherty, Pearse.
Calleary, Dara. Donnelly, Paul.
Canney, Seán. Ellis, Dessie.
Carrigy, Micheál. Farrelly, Aidan.
Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer. Gannon, Gary.
Chambers, Jack. Gibney, Sinéad.
Clendennen, John. Graves, Ann.
Collins, Niall. Hayes, Eoin.
Connolly, John. Hearne, Rory.
Cooney, Joe. Kelly, Alan.
Cummins, John. Kenny, Eoghan.
Currie, Emer. Kenny, Martin.
Daly, Martin. Kerrane, Claire.
Dempsey, Aisling. Lawless, Paul.
Devlin, Cormac. Lawlor, George.
Dillon, Alan. Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
Dolan, Albert. McGettigan, Donna.
Donohoe, Paschal. McGuinness, Conor D.
Dooley, Timmy. Mitchell, Denise.
Feighan, Frankie. Murphy, Paul.
Fleming, Seán. Mythen, Johnny.
Foley, Norma. Nash, Ged.
Gallagher, Pat the Cope. Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Geoghegan, James. O’Callaghan, Cian.
Grealish, Noel. O’Donoghue, Robert.
Harkin, Marian. O’Flynn, Ken.
Healy-Rae, Michael. O’Gorman, Roderic.
Heneghan, Barry. O’Hara, Louis.
Heydon, Martin. O’Reilly, Louise.
Keogh, Keira. O’Rourke, Darren.
2 July 2025
457
Lahart, John. Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
Lawless, James. Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
Lowry, Michael. Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
Maxwell, David. Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
McAulie, Paul. Quaide, Liam.
McCarthy, Noel. Quinlivan, Maurice.
McConalogue, Charlie. Rice, Pádraig.
McCormack, Tony. Sheehan, Conor.
McEntee, Helen. Sherlock, Marie.
McGrath, Mattie. Smith, Duncan.
McGrath, Séamus. Stanley, Brian.
McGreehan, Erin. Tóibín, Peadar.
Moran, Kevin Boxer. Wall, Mark.
Moynihan, Aindrias. Ward, Charles.
Moynihan, Michael. Ward, Mark.
Moynihan, Shane. Whitmore, Jennifer.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Murphy, Michael.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
Nolan, Carol.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer Currie; Níl, Deputies Pádraig Mac Lochlainn
and Denise Mitchell.
Dáil Éireann
458
Question declared carried.
02/07/2025DDDD00400Criminal Justice (Terrorist Oences) (Amendment) Bill 2025: Referral to Select Com-
mittee
02/07/2025DDDD00500Minister for Justice, Home Aairs and Migration (Deputy Jim O’Callaghan): I move:
That the Bill be referred to the Select Committee on Justice, Home Aairs and Mi-
gration pursuant to Standing Orders 103(2)(b) and 188(1).
Question put and agreed to.
02/07/2025DDDD00700 Transparency and Social Value in Public Procurement Bill 2024: Second Stage (Re-
sumed) [Private Members]
The following motion was moved by Deputy Mairéad Farrell on 26 June 2025: “That the
Bill be now read a Second Time.”
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after “That” and substitute the following:
“Dail Eireann resolves that the Transparency and Social Value in Public Pro-
curement (Bill 2024) be read a second time this day 24 months, to allow for con-
sideration of the complex legal issues in the Bill and how they interact with the
Companies Act 2014 and the EU’s eForms (electronic procurement notices) Im-
plementing Regulation; and also to allow for the European Commission to have
completed its revision of the Public Procurement Directives, which the Commis-
sion have timetabled to commence in early 2026; and for such considerations to
be taken into account in further scrutiny of the Bill”.”
(Minister of State at
the Department of Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and
Reform, Deputy Emer Higgins)
02/07/2025DDDD01000An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I must now deal with a postponed division relating to Sec-
ond Stage of the Transparency and Social Value in Public Procurement Bill 2024, which took
place on Thursday, 26 June 2025. On the question, “That the amendment to the motion be
made”, a division was claimed, and in accordance with Standing Order 85(2), that division must
be taken now.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 84; Níl, 64; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Aird, William. Ahern, Ciarán.
Ardagh, Catherine. Bacik, Ivana.
Boland, Grace. Brady, John.
2 July 2025
459
Brabazon, Tom. Buckley, Pat.
Brennan, Brian. Byrne, Joanna.
Brennan, Shay. Carthy, Matt.
Brophy, Colm. Clarke, Sorca.
Browne, James. Collins, Michael.
Burke, Colm. Connolly, Catherine.
Burke, Peter. Conway-Walsh, Rose.
Butler, Mary. Coppinger, Ruth.
Butterly, Paula. Cronin, Réada.
Buttimer, Jerry. Cullinane, David.
Byrne, Malcolm. Cummins, Jen.
Byrne, Thomas. Daly, Pa.
Cahill, Michael. Devine, Máire.
Callaghan, Catherine. Doherty, Pearse.
Calleary, Dara. Donnelly, Paul.
Canney, Seán. Ellis, Dessie.
Carrigy, Micheál. Farrelly, Aidan.
Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer. Gannon, Gary.
Chambers, Jack. Gibney, Sinéad.
Clendennen, John. Graves, Ann.
Collins, Niall. Hayes, Eoin.
Connolly, John. Hearne, Rory.
Cooney, Joe. Kelly, Alan.
Cummins, John. Kenny, Eoghan.
Currie, Emer. Kenny, Martin.
Daly, Martin. Kerrane, Claire.
Dempsey, Aisling. Lawless, Paul.
Devlin, Cormac. Lawlor, George.
Dillon, Alan. Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
Dolan, Albert. McGettigan, Donna.
Donohoe, Paschal. McGrath, Mattie.
Dooley, Timmy. McGuinness, Conor D.
Feighan, Frankie. Mitchell, Denise.
Fleming, Seán. Murphy, Paul.
Foley, Norma. Mythen, Johnny.
Gallagher, Pat the Cope. Nash, Ged.
Geoghegan, James. Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Grealish, Noel. Nolan, Carol.
Harkin, Marian. O’Callaghan, Cian.
Healy-Rae, Michael. O’Donoghue, Robert.
Heneghan, Barry. O’Flynn, Ken.
Heydon, Martin. O’Gorman, Roderic.
Dáil Éireann
460
Keogh, Keira. O’Hara, Louis.
Lahart, John. O’Reilly, Louise.
Lawless, James. O’Rourke, Darren.
Lowry, Michael. Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
Maxwell, David. Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
McAulie, Paul. Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
McCarthy, Noel. Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
McConalogue, Charlie. Quaide, Liam.
McCormack, Tony. Quinlivan, Maurice.
McEntee, Helen. Rice, Pádraig.
McGrath, Séamus. Sheehan, Conor.
McGreehan, Erin. Sherlock, Marie.
McGuinness, John. Smith, Duncan.
Moran, Kevin Boxer. Stanley, Brian.
Moynihan, Aindrias. Tóibín, Peadar.
Moynihan, Michael. Wall, Mark.
Moynihan, Shane. Ward, Charles.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Ward, Mark.
Murphy, Michael. Whitmore, Jennifer.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer Currie; Níl, Deputies Pádraig Mac Lochlainn
and Denise Mitchell.
2 July 2025
461
Amendment declared carried.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
02/07/2025DDDD01300GPO and Moore Street Regeneration as a 1916 Cultural Quarter: Motion (Resumed)
[Private Members]
The following motion was moved by Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh on Tuesday, 1 July 2025:
That Dáil Éireann:
notes:
— the sacrice of the men and women of 1916, who fought and died in the Gen-
eral Post Oce (GPO), Moore Street, across Dublin and elsewhere in Ireland, so
Ireland may be free;
— the status of the GPO as a national monument, the headquarters of the 1916
Easter Rising, and the place where the Irish Republic was proclaimed on Easter
Monday, 24th April, 1916, and defended in arms in the following days;
— the central role of the GPO in delivering postal services to the people of Dub-
lin for over two hundred years, since it opened in 1818, as an early home from 1928
of 2RN, which pioneered broadcast media in Ireland and evolved into RTÉ, and as
the historic heart of a communications network connecting communities across the
nation; and
— the consistent, widespread and negligent destruction of Ireland’s republican
revolutionary history presided over by successive Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Govern-
ments;
expresses:
— dismay at the failure to deliver the promised 1916 Commemorative Centre at
14-17 Moore Street, nine years after it was meant to open for the centenary of the
Easter Rising; and
— alarm at the plans announced by An Taoiseach Micheál Martin this past week,
to turn part of the GPO into retail and oce components;
agrees that any plan involving the GPO must include the entire 1916 battleeld
site, of which it forms a part, and that therefore, Ministerial consent must not be
given to the current plan by the private developer Hammerson, which would demol-
ish much of the Moore Street 1916 battleeld site around the National Monument
14-17 Moore Street, and the promised 1916 Commemorative Centre at 14-17 Moore
Street must proceed without further delay; and
calls on the Government to ensure that:
— the GPO remains in full public ownership and control, and that no part of it be
made available for private commercial prot;
Dáil Éireann
462
— the GPO continues as a public oce of An Post, a function it has fullled
since its construction, and its reconstruction following the 1916 Rising, and which it
still fulls successfully today, enhancing O’Connell Street and the North Inner City;
— Moore Street in its entirety, including the terrace at 10-25 Moore Street, should
be conserved, and sensitively developed as a cultural historic quarter, cherishing its
1916 Rising heritage and its street-trading tradition, in line with the vision of the
Moore Street Preservation Trust;
— no more of Ireland’s republican heritage is allowed be subject to wanton de-
struction for private prot, and that the full heritage and cultural potential is hon-
oured and realised; and
— the Ceathrú Chultúir 1916 Bill 2021, is enacted without delay.
The following amendment No. 1 was moved by the Minister of State at the Department of
Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Christopher O’Sullivan:
To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:
“notes:
— the ongoing commitment of this Government to honouring the men and wom-
en of 1916;
— the hugely successful and inclusive Decade of Centenaries programme, and
the Government’s investment in key capital projects in that regard, including the
seminal 1916 Museum and Exhibition at the General Post Oce (GPO), and the
purchase by the State of the National Monument at 14-17 Moore Street; and
— its armation of the status of the GPO as the headquarters of the 1916 Easter
Rising, and the site at which the Proclamation of the Republic was read on Easter
Monday, 24th April, 1916;
acknowledges the central role the GPO has played since 1818 in delivering postal
services, and its historical signicance as an early home for the predecessor of RTÉ,
2RN;
recognises the enduring role of the GPO as a hub of communication, connecting
communities across the country;
further notes:
— that the Government has approved the overall approach as outlined by the
Interdepartmental Group on the recommendations of the proposed Roadmap for De-
livery: Dublin City Taskforce Report;
— the accelerated delivery of several landmark capital projects in Dublin’s core
area, forming part of a broader strategy to drive urban regeneration and sustainable
development as a result of the work of the Interdepartmental Working Group and the
Dublin City Taskforce;
— that this commitment will be reected in the review of the National Develop-
2 July 2025
463
ment Plan (NDP) and aims to help build delivery momentum across priority projects;
— that the NDP 2021-2030, published in 2021, included the GPO redevelopment
and clearly sets out the intentions relating to the GPO that the building will remain
in public ownership, and the rich cultural heritage of the building will be preserved
through continued operation of the historic post oce and the museum on the ground
oor, and, sympathetic to development elsewhere on O’Connell Street, the upper
oors will be refurbished to provide oce accommodation for civil servants; and
— that a detailed proposal for the future use of the GPO will be developed by the
Oce of Public Works (OPW), and submitted for approval by the Government in
due course, and it is acknowledged that there will be a need to consult on design, and
that the consultation would be wide ranging given the emblematic importance of the
GPO, not only to Dubliners but also to the public all over Ireland;
endorses the intention to reect the national historical and cultural signicance of
the GPO in any development plans, creating a dynamic and respectful reuse of a key
historical civic landmark; and
furthermore, notes:
— the acquisition by the State of the National Monument at 14-17 Moore Street;
— the signicant stabilisation and weathering works undertaken by the Govern-
ment to preserve and save the buildings from further deterioration, and, in particular,
the preservation works relating to the historic tunnels;
— the extensive engagement with relevant stakeholders, including political par-
ties, through, inter alia, the work of the Moore Street Advisory Group and other fora;
and
— the more recent progress made by the OPW on the restoration and conserva-
tion of the National Monument at 14-17 Moore Street.”.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1 to amendment No. 1:
To insert the following after “restoration and conservation of the National Monu-
ment at 14-17 Moore Street”:
“; and
commits to:
— respecting the heritage and legacy of the leaders of 1916;
— ending the destruction of key National Monuments such as the O’Rahilly
Home and Moore Street;
— implementing the Moore Street Preservation Trust plan for Moore Street;
— developing the GPO as a national cultural museum of the national struggle for
independence; and
— purposing part of the GPO to pursue implementation of the Proclamation of
Dáil Éireann
464
the Irish Republic across the 32 counties of Ireland.”.
(Deputy
Peadar Tóibín)
02/07/2025DDDD01700An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I must now deal with a postponed division relating to the
motion regarding GPO and Moore Street Regeneration as a 1916 Cultural Quarter. On Tuesday,
1 July 2025, on the question, “That the amendment to the amendment to the motion be agreed
to”, a division was claimed and in accordance with Standing Order 85(2), that division must be
taken now.
Amendment to amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 63; Níl, 84; Staon, 1.
Tá Níl Staon
Ahern, Ciarán. Aird, William. O’Gorman, Roderic.
Bacik, Ivana. Ardagh, Catherine.
Brady, John. Boland, Grace.
Buckley, Pat. Brabazon, Tom.
Byrne, Joanna. Brennan, Brian.
Carthy, Matt. Brennan, Shay.
Clarke, Sorca. Brophy, Colm.
Collins, Michael. Browne, James.
Connolly, Catherine. Burke, Colm.
Conway-Walsh, Rose. Burke, Peter.
Coppinger, Ruth. Butler, Mary.
Cronin, Réada. Butterly, Paula.
Cullinane, David. Buttimer, Jerry.
Cummins, Jen. Byrne, Malcolm.
Daly, Pa. Byrne, Thomas.
Devine, Máire. Cahill, Michael.
Doherty, Pearse. Callaghan, Catherine.
Donnelly, Paul. Calleary, Dara.
Ellis, Dessie. Canney, Seán.
Farrelly, Aidan. Carrigy, Micheál.
Gannon, Gary. Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer.
Gibney, Sinéad. Chambers, Jack.
Graves, Ann. Clendennen, John.
Hayes, Eoin. Collins, Niall.
Hearne, Rory. Connolly, John.
Kelly, Alan. Cooney, Joe.
Kenny, Eoghan. Cummins, John.
Kenny, Martin. Currie, Emer.
Kerrane, Claire. Daly, Martin.
Lawless, Paul. Dempsey, Aisling.
2 July 2025
465
Lawlor, George. Devlin, Cormac.
Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig. Dillon, Alan.
McGettigan, Donna. Dolan, Albert.
McGrath, Mattie. Donohoe, Paschal.
McGuinness, Conor D. Dooley, Timmy.
Mitchell, Denise. Feighan, Frankie.
Murphy, Paul. Fleming, Seán.
Mythen, Johnny. Foley, Norma.
Nash, Ged. Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Geoghegan, James.
Nolan, Carol. Grealish, Noel.
O’Callaghan, Cian. Harkin, Marian.
O’Donoghue, Robert. Healy-Rae, Michael.
O’Flynn, Ken. Heneghan, Barry.
O’Hara, Louis. Heydon, Martin.
O’Reilly, Louise. Keogh, Keira.
O’Rourke, Darren. Lahart, John.
Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh. Lawless, James.
Ó Murchú, Ruairí. Lowry, Michael.
Ó Snodaigh, Aengus. Maxwell, David.
Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán. McAulie, Paul.
Quaide, Liam. McCarthy, Noel.
Quinlivan, Maurice. McConalogue, Charlie.
Rice, Pádraig. McCormack, Tony.
Sheehan, Conor. McEntee, Helen.
Sherlock, Marie. McGrath, Séamus.
Smith, Duncan. McGreehan, Erin.
Stanley, Brian. Moran, Kevin Boxer.
Tóibín, Peadar. Moynihan, Aindrias.
Wall, Mark. Moynihan, Michael.
Ward, Charles. Moynihan, Shane.
Ward, Mark. Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Whitmore, Jennifer. Murphy, Michael.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
Dáil Éireann
466
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Peadar Tóibín and Paul Lawless; Níl, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer
Currie.
Amendment to amendment declared lost.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 84; Níl, 64; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Aird, William. Ahern, Ciarán.
Ardagh, Catherine. Bacik, Ivana.
Boland, Grace. Brady, John.
Brabazon, Tom. Buckley, Pat.
Brennan, Brian. Byrne, Joanna.
Brennan, Shay. Carthy, Matt.
Brophy, Colm. Clarke, Sorca.
Browne, James. Collins, Michael.
Burke, Colm. Connolly, Catherine.
Burke, Peter. Conway-Walsh, Rose.
Butler, Mary. Coppinger, Ruth.
Butterly, Paula. Cronin, Réada.
Buttimer, Jerry. Cullinane, David.
Byrne, Malcolm. Cummins, Jen.
Byrne, Thomas. Daly, Pa.
Cahill, Michael. Devine, Máire.
Callaghan, Catherine. Doherty, Pearse.
Calleary, Dara. Donnelly, Paul.
Canney, Seán. Ellis, Dessie.
Carrigy, Micheál. Farrelly, Aidan.
Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer. Gannon, Gary.
Chambers, Jack. Gibney, Sinéad.
2 July 2025
467
Clendennen, John. Graves, Ann.
Collins, Niall. Hayes, Eoin.
Connolly, John. Hearne, Rory.
Cooney, Joe. Kelly, Alan.
Cummins, John. Kenny, Eoghan.
Currie, Emer. Kenny, Martin.
Daly, Martin. Kerrane, Claire.
Dempsey, Aisling. Lawless, Paul.
Devlin, Cormac. Lawlor, George.
Dillon, Alan. Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
Dolan, Albert. McGettigan, Donna.
Donohoe, Paschal. McGrath, Mattie.
Dooley, Timmy. McGuinness, Conor D.
Feighan, Frankie. Mitchell, Denise.
Fleming, Seán. Murphy, Paul.
Foley, Norma. Mythen, Johnny.
Gallagher, Pat the Cope. Nash, Ged.
Geoghegan, James. Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Grealish, Noel. Nolan, Carol.
Harkin, Marian. O’Callaghan, Cian.
Healy-Rae, Michael. O’Donoghue, Robert.
Heneghan, Barry. O’Flynn, Ken.
Heydon, Martin. O’Gorman, Roderic.
Keogh, Keira. O’Hara, Louis.
Lahart, John. O’Reilly, Louise.
Lawless, James. O’Rourke, Darren.
Lowry, Michael. Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
Maxwell, David. Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
McAulie, Paul. Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
McCarthy, Noel. Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
McConalogue, Charlie. Quaide, Liam.
McCormack, Tony. Quinlivan, Maurice.
McEntee, Helen. Rice, Pádraig.
McGrath, Séamus. Sheehan, Conor.
McGreehan, Erin. Sherlock, Marie.
McGuinness, John. Smith, Duncan.
Moran, Kevin Boxer. Stanley, Brian.
Moynihan, Aindrias. Tóibín, Peadar.
Moynihan, Michael. Wall, Mark.
Moynihan, Shane. Ward, Charles.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Ward, Mark.
Dáil Éireann
468
Murphy, Michael. Whitmore, Jennifer.
Naughton, Hildegarde.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer Currie; Níl, Deputies Pádraig Mac Lochlainn
and Denise Mitchell.
Amendment declared carried.
Question put: “That the motion, as amended, be agreed to.”
The Dáil divided: Tá, 84; Níl, 64; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Aird, William. Ahern, Ciarán.
Ardagh, Catherine. Bacik, Ivana.
Boland, Grace. Brady, John.
Brabazon, Tom. Buckley, Pat.
Brennan, Brian. Byrne, Joanna.
Brennan, Shay. Carthy, Matt.
Brophy, Colm. Clarke, Sorca.
Browne, James. Collins, Michael.
Burke, Colm. Connolly, Catherine.
Burke, Peter. Conway-Walsh, Rose.
Butler, Mary. Coppinger, Ruth.
Butterly, Paula. Cronin, Réada.
Buttimer, Jerry. Cullinane, David.
Byrne, Malcolm. Cummins, Jen.
2 July 2025
469
Byrne, Thomas. Daly, Pa.
Cahill, Michael. Devine, Máire.
Callaghan, Catherine. Doherty, Pearse.
Calleary, Dara. Donnelly, Paul.
Canney, Seán. Ellis, Dessie.
Carrigy, Micheál. Farrelly, Aidan.
Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer. Gannon, Gary.
Chambers, Jack. Gibney, Sinéad.
Clendennen, John. Graves, Ann.
Collins, Niall. Hayes, Eoin.
Connolly, John. Hearne, Rory.
Cooney, Joe. Kelly, Alan.
Cummins, John. Kenny, Eoghan.
Currie, Emer. Kenny, Martin.
Daly, Martin. Kerrane, Claire.
Dempsey, Aisling. Lawless, Paul.
Devlin, Cormac. Lawlor, George.
Dillon, Alan. Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
Dolan, Albert. McGettigan, Donna.
Donohoe, Paschal. McGrath, Mattie.
Dooley, Timmy. McGuinness, Conor D.
Feighan, Frankie. Mitchell, Denise.
Fleming, Seán. Murphy, Paul.
Foley, Norma. Mythen, Johnny.
Gallagher, Pat the Cope. Nash, Ged.
Geoghegan, James. Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Grealish, Noel. Nolan, Carol.
Harkin, Marian. O’Callaghan, Cian.
Healy-Rae, Michael. O’Donoghue, Robert.
Heneghan, Barry. O’Flynn, Ken.
Heydon, Martin. O’Gorman, Roderic.
Keogh, Keira. O’Hara, Louis.
Lahart, John. O’Reilly, Louise.
Lawless, James. O’Rourke, Darren.
Lowry, Michael. Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
Maxwell, David. Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
McAulie, Paul. Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
McCarthy, Noel. Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
McConalogue, Charlie. Quaide, Liam.
McCormack, Tony. Quinlivan, Maurice.
McEntee, Helen. Rice, Pádraig.
McGrath, Séamus. Sheehan, Conor.
Dáil Éireann
470
McGreehan, Erin. Sherlock, Marie.
Moran, Kevin Boxer. Smith, Duncan.
Moynihan, Aindrias. Stanley, Brian.
Moynihan, Michael. Tóibín, Peadar.
Moynihan, Shane. Wall, Mark.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Ward, Charles.
Murphy, Michael. Ward, Mark.
Naughton, Hildegarde. Whitmore, Jennifer.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer Currie; Níl, Deputies Pádraig Mac Lochlainn
and Denise Mitchell.
Question declared carried.
02/07/2025DDDD02100Nursing Homes: Motion (Resumed) [Private Members]
The following motion was moved by Deputy Marie Sherlock on Wednesday, 2 July 2025:
That Dáil Éireann:
notes that:
— investigative journalism by RTÉ has again exposed distressing and unaccept-
able practices and conditions in private Irish nursing homes, 20 years on since the
Leas Cross scandal;
2 July 2025
471
— the failure of the State to provide sucient public long term residential care
places has led to the growing privatisation of nursing home care, while the State
picks up the majority of costs through the Fair Deal scheme;
— 30 per cent of nursing homes were privately owned 20 years ago, rising to
nearly 80 per cent now, with Emeis Ireland one of the largest operators, with 27
nursing homes;
— research by the Economic and Social Research Institute, since the Covid-19
pandemic, outlines the consolidation of the sector into larger operator groups, and
the decline of independently owned, family run nursing homes;
— there are serious shortcomings in the inspection and enforcement regime by
the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA), with inadequate regulatory
oversight, ambiguity in the application of existing powers, and a lack of appropriate
powers beyond the power to stop admissions or remove a license;
— there are no minimum stang levels required in nursing homes, or binding
guidance provided to operators;
— there is no sectoral pay agreement in place, and the 2023 PwC report entitled
“Challenges for Nursing Homes in the Provision of Older Persons Care - Private
and Voluntary Nursing Home Sector”, documents a sta turnover rate in the private
nursing home sector of up to 38 per cent for nurses, and 54 per cent for healthcare
assistants; and
— the Ombudsman’s Wasted Lives: Time for a better future for younger people
in Nursing Homes report, updated in 2024, documents that over 1,200 people under
65 remain in nursing homes due to a lack of appropriate alternatives;
recalls that:
— the French parent company of Emeis Ireland, formerly known as Orpea, re-
quired a State-led bailout in 2022, after the publication of Gravediggers, a book ex-
posing the mistreatment of care residents, where the company maximised its prots
and dividends to shareholders, based on a complex strategy of drastic cost cutting
and the maximum use of public funding; and
— the Law Reform Commission published a comprehensive report on A Regula-
tory Framework for Adult Safeguarding in April 2024, and the Programme for Gov-
ernment commits to a new national policy in the health and social sector;
recognises that:
— the nursing home sector has become dominated by big business, and a for-
prot model will not provide the standard of care demanded by families and carers;
— with an increased role for home care support for older persons in future years,
the prole of nursing home patients will become more complex, more dependent,
and in need of greater levels of specialised care in the future;
— increased powers and resourcing for HIQA alone will not resolve concerns
Dáil Éireann
472
about a prot-led model of care;
— the Covid-19 pandemic exposed the vulnerability of residents in private nurs-
ing homes; and
— the Commission on Care for Older People is examining the provision of health
and social care services and supports for older people; and
calls on the Government to:
— take clear steps to ensure the State takes over the 27 nursing homes controlled
by Emeis Ireland;
— prioritise the quality and safety of care of older persons in overhauling how
nursing homes are funded and regulated, and provide HIQA with stronger enforce-
ment powers;
— fundamentally reform the Fair Deal funding model for nursing homes – pub-
lic, private and voluntary, starting with an end to the individualised negotiation pro-
cess between the National Treatment Purchase Fund and provider, the introduction
of service level agreements, ringfencing of funding for labour costs, and the intro-
duction of specic rules relating to the control of the nursing home property and
operating company;
— legislate to ensure minimum safe stang levels, and implement the outstand-
ing recommendations in the Covid-19 Nursing Homes Expert Panel report, and the
2022 Report of the Strategic Workforce Advisory Group on Home Carers and Nurs-
ing Home Healthcare Assistants;
— require nursing home operators, in receipt of public funding, to recognise
trade unions and engage in collective bargaining, to ensure competitive rates of pay,
terms and conditions;
— ensure nursing home operators provide professional development education
for sta within working hours, including mandatory safeguarding, infection preven-
tion and control, and dignity at work training;
— limit all new nursing homes operations to 84 beds, and set out a schedule for
all existing nursing homes to transition to an agreed appropriate size with HIQA;
— ensure the revised National Development Plan includes a funded programme
to develop new public long term residential care, through community nursing homes,
to meet the needs of our aging population;
— implement the Law Reform Commission report, by passing the required leg-
islation as a priority in the autumn and establishing an independent national agency;
— introduce a new Fair Deal for care by implementing the long delayed statu-
tory Home Support Service for Older People scheme, to support older people to age
positively in their own home and community;
— adequately resource the home care sector, to deliver more care in the com-
munity and introduce a Fair Deal one-stop-shop, to support families and reduce red
2 July 2025
473
tape; and
— nally implement the recommendations of the 2021 Ombudsman’s Wasted
Lives: Time for a better future for younger people in Nursing Homes report, and
commit to fully funding the under 65s programme oce.
Debate resumed on amendment No. 1:
To delete all words after “Dáil Éireann” and substitute the following:
“recognises that:
— a national policy on adult safeguarding will be introduced for the health
and social care sector, as set out in the Programme for Government, and this
policy will commit to the development of adult safeguarding legislation for the
sector, including nursing homes, and will build on the range of existing legisla-
tion, policies, and procedures already in place in the sector for preventing, report-
ing, and responding to abuse;
— a framework for safe nurse stang and skill mix will be developed for
nursing homes, and this framework is a systematic, evidence-based approach to
determine the number of nurses and Health Care Assistants required to provide
safe and quality care, based on patient need/dependency; and
— the remaining provision, Section 68 of the Patient Safety (Notiable Inci-
dents and Open Disclosure) Act 2023, will be commenced, providing additional
powers for the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA)/Chief Inspec-
tor with regard to serious patient safety incidents in nursing homes, and the Chief
Inspector will have the power to carry out a review of an incident which may
have caused an unintended or unanticipated death or serious injury to the patient,
and which occurred in the course of the provision of care to that patient;
notes that:
— a review will be established of the eectiveness of the Chief Inspector’s
inspection and monitoring processes, and this review will include such elements
as how to further strengthen the monitoring of leadership, culture and governance
in designated centres, how to better capture indicators of sta culture and other
areas of service delivery, which is critical for safe and good quality support for
residents;
— a plan for additional public nursing home bed capacity will be published,
and the Department of Health, alongside the Health Service Executive, is cur-
rently developing a new public long-term residential care additional capacity
plan, which will be published in 2025, and the delivery of additional public long-
term residential care capacity is required to deliver on Programme for Govern-
ment, Sláintecare, and Project Ireland 2040 commitments;
— new design standards for long-term residential care settings for older peo-
ple across all sectors will be created, describing what good building design looks
like for long-term residential care settings for older people, and providing a com-
mon benchmark against which the standard of these settings can be measured,
Dáil Éireann
474
and the Department of Health report entitled ‘Design Guide for Long-Term Resi-
dential Care Settings for Older People Public Consultation Report’, was pub-
lished in January 2025;
— ownership structures will be reviewed to enhance transparency and
strengthen accountability in the long-term residential care sector, and carrying
out an evaluation of the implications of complex corporate ownership structures
against current regulatory powers will identify opportunities for regulatory re-
form;
— the Government has reiterated its well-established commitment to the de-
velopment of the statutory home care scheme in the 2025 Programme for Gov-
ernment, and the rst element in delivering this is the Health (Amendment) (Li-
censing of Professional Home Support Providers) Bill 2024, which will establish
a licensing framework for professional home support services and provide for
regulation by HIQA;
— the Programme for Government commits to strengthening the nursing
home sector, by increasing funding for the Nursing Homes Support Scheme, also
known as Fair Deal, while investment in Budget 2025 was €67.6 million, and this
followed on from an increase in 2024 of €45 million; and
— the Government established an independent Commission on Care for Old-
er People, which is charged with examining the provision of health and social
care services and supports for older people, and with making recommendations
to the Government for their strategic development, including long term residen-
tial care; and
further notes that from 2021 to 2025, the Government provided funding of €21.4
million, to enable people under the age of 65 to transition to an alternative commu-
nity-based placement and provide in situ supports as appropriate.”.
(Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Kieran O’Donnell)
02/07/2025DDDD02400An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: I must now deal with a postponed division relating to the
motion regarding nursing homes. On Wednesday, 2 July 2025, on the question, “That the
amendment to the motion be agreed to”, a division was claimed and in accordance with Stand-
ing Order 85(2), that division must be taken now.
Amendment put:
The Dáil divided: Tá, 84; Níl, 64; Staon, 0.
Tá Níl Staon
Aird, William. Ahern, Ciarán.
Ardagh, Catherine. Bacik, Ivana.
Boland, Grace. Brady, John.
Brabazon, Tom. Buckley, Pat.
Brennan, Brian. Byrne, Joanna.
Brennan, Shay. Carthy, Matt.
2 July 2025
475
Brophy, Colm. Clarke, Sorca.
Browne, James. Collins, Michael.
Burke, Colm. Connolly, Catherine.
Burke, Peter. Conway-Walsh, Rose.
Butler, Mary. Coppinger, Ruth.
Butterly, Paula. Cronin, Réada.
Buttimer, Jerry. Cullinane, David.
Byrne, Malcolm. Cummins, Jen.
Byrne, Thomas. Daly, Pa.
Cahill, Michael. Devine, Máire.
Callaghan, Catherine. Doherty, Pearse.
Calleary, Dara. Donnelly, Paul.
Canney, Seán. Ellis, Dessie.
Carrigy, Micheál. Farrelly, Aidan.
Carroll MacNeill, Jennifer. Gannon, Gary.
Chambers, Jack. Gibney, Sinéad.
Clendennen, John. Graves, Ann.
Collins, Niall. Hayes, Eoin.
Connolly, John. Hearne, Rory.
Cooney, Joe. Kelly, Alan.
Cummins, John. Kenny, Eoghan.
Currie, Emer. Kenny, Martin.
Daly, Martin. Kerrane, Claire.
Dempsey, Aisling. Lawless, Paul.
Devlin, Cormac. Lawlor, George.
Dillon, Alan. Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
Dolan, Albert. McGettigan, Donna.
Donohoe, Paschal. McGrath, Mattie.
Dooley, Timmy. McGuinness, Conor D.
Feighan, Frankie. Mitchell, Denise.
Fleming, Seán. Murphy, Paul.
Foley, Norma. Mythen, Johnny.
Gallagher, Pat the Cope. Nash, Ged.
Geoghegan, James. Newsome Drennan, Nata-
sha.
Grealish, Noel. Nolan, Carol.
Harkin, Marian. O’Callaghan, Cian.
Healy-Rae, Michael. O’Donoghue, Robert.
Heneghan, Barry. O’Flynn, Ken.
Heydon, Martin. O’Gorman, Roderic.
Keogh, Keira. O’Hara, Louis.
Lahart, John. O’Reilly, Louise.
Lawless, James. O’Rourke, Darren.
Dáil Éireann
476
Lowry, Michael. Ó Laoghaire, Donnchadh.
Maxwell, David. Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
McAulie, Paul. Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.
McCarthy, Noel. Ó Súilleabháin, Fionntán.
McConalogue, Charlie. Quaide, Liam.
McCormack, Tony. Quinlivan, Maurice.
McEntee, Helen. Rice, Pádraig.
McGrath, Séamus. Sheehan, Conor.
McGreehan, Erin. Sherlock, Marie.
Moran, Kevin Boxer. Smith, Duncan.
Moynihan, Aindrias. Stanley, Brian.
Moynihan, Michael. Tóibín, Peadar.
Moynihan, Shane. Wall, Mark.
Murnane O’Connor, Jen-
nifer.
Ward, Charles.
Murphy, Michael. Ward, Mark.
Naughton, Hildegarde. Whitmore, Jennifer.
Neville, Joe.
O’Brien, Darragh.
O’Callaghan, Jim.
O’Connell, Maeve.
O’Connor, James.
O’Dea, Willie.
O’Donnell, Kieran.
O’Donovan, Patrick.
O’Meara, Ryan.
O’Shea, John Paul.
O’Sullivan, Pádraig.
Ó Cearúil, Naoise.
Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.
Ó Muirí, Naoise.
Roche, Peter.
Scanlon, Eamon.
Smith, Brendan.
Smyth, Niamh.
Timmins, Edward.
Toole, Gillian.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Mary Butler and Emer Currie; Níl, Deputies Duncan Smith and Ivana
Bacik.
Amendment declared carried.
Motion, as amended, put and declared carried.
2 July 2025
477
Cuireadh an Dáil ar athló ar 10.43 p.m. go dtí 8.47 a.m., Déardaoin, an 3 Iúil 2025.
The Dáil adjourned at 10.43 p.m. until 8.47 a.m. on Thursday, 3 July 2025.
