dail2018-05-17a.xml

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<!DOCTYPE publicwhip
[
<!ENTITY aacute "&#225;" >
<!ENTITY eacute "&#233;" >
<!ENTITY iacute "&#237;" >
<!ENTITY oacute "&#243;" >
<!ENTITY uacute "&#250;" >
<!ENTITY yacute "&#253;" >
<!ENTITY yen    "&#165;" >

<!ENTITY Aacute "&#193;" >
<!ENTITY Acirc  "&#194;" > 
<!ENTITY Eacute "&#201;" >
<!ENTITY Ecirc  "&#202;" > 
<!ENTITY Iacute "&#205;" >
<!ENTITY Oacute "&#211;" >
<!ENTITY Uacute "&#218;" >
<!ENTITY Zcaron  "&#381;" > 
<!ENTITY zcaron  "&#382;" > 
<!ENTITY hellip  "..." >
<!ENTITY bullet  "&#8226;" >
<!ENTITY Dagger  "&#8224;" >
<!ENTITY eth  "&#240;">

<!ENTITY ndash   "&#8211;">
<!ENTITY mdash   "&#8212;">
<!ENTITY iexcl   "&#161;">
<!ENTITY divide  "&#247;">
<!ENTITY euro    "&#8364;">
<!ENTITY trade   "&#8482;">
<!ENTITY bull    "&#8226;">
<!ENTITY lsquo   "&#8216;">
<!ENTITY rsquo   "&#8217;">
<!ENTITY sbquo   "&#8218;">
<!ENTITY ldquo   "&#8220;">
<!ENTITY rdquo   "&#8221;">
<!ENTITY bdquo   "&#8222;">
<!ENTITY dagger  "&#8224;">

<!ENTITY Scaron "&#352;" >
<!ENTITY scaron "&#353;" >
<!ENTITY Ouml   "&#214;" >
<!ENTITY szlig  "&#223;" >
<!ENTITY agrave "&#224;" >
<!ENTITY acirc  "&#226;" >
<!ENTITY atilde "&#227;" >
<!ENTITY auml   "&#228;" >
<!ENTITY ccedil "&#231;" >
<!ENTITY Ccedil "&#199;" >
<!ENTITY egrave "&#232;" >
<!ENTITY ograve "&#243;" >
<!ENTITY Ograve "&#210;" >
<!ENTITY Egrave "&#200;" >
<!ENTITY ecirc  "&#234;" >
<!ENTITY euml   "&#235;" >
<!ENTITY icirc  "&#238;" >
<!ENTITY igrave "&#204;" >
<!ENTITY ugrave "&#249;" >
<!ENTITY iuml	"&#239;" >
<!ENTITY ntilde "&#241;" >
<!ENTITY nbsp   "&#160;" >
<!ENTITY ocirc  "&#244;" >
<!ENTITY ouml   "&#246;" >
<!ENTITY oslash "&#248;" >
<!ENTITY otilde "&#245;" >
<!ENTITY uuml   "&#252;" >
<!ENTITY ucirc  "&#251;" >
<!ENTITY thorn  "&#254;" >
<!ENTITY Icirc  "&#206;" >
<!ENTITY Uuml   "&#252;" >
<!ENTITY pound  "&#163;" >
<!ENTITY sect   "&#167;" >
<!ENTITY copy   "&#169;" >
<!ENTITY reg    "&#174;" >
<!ENTITY deg    "&#176;" >
<!ENTITY plusmn "&#177;" >
<!ENTITY sup2   "&#178;" >
<!ENTITY sup3   "&#179;" >
<!ENTITY micro  "&#181;" >
<!ENTITY para   "&#182;" >
<!ENTITY middot "&#183;" >
<!ENTITY ordm   "&#186;" >
<!ENTITY frac14 "&#188;" >
<!ENTITY frac12 "&#189;" >
<!ENTITY frac34 "&#190;" >
<!ENTITY oelig "&#339;" >
<!ENTITY aelig  "&#230;" >
<!ENTITY Aring  "&#197;" >
<!ENTITY aring  "&#229;" >
<!ENTITY Oslash "&#216;" >
<!ENTITY oslash "&#248;" >
]>


<publicwhip scrapeversion="a" latest="yes">
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.1" nospeaker="true" time="10:30:00" url="">Prelude</minor-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.2" nospeaker="true" time="10:30:00" ><p>Chuaigh an Leas-Cheann Comhairle i gceannas ar 10.30 a.m.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.3" nospeaker="true" time="10:30:00" ><p>Prayer and Reflection.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.4" nospeaker="true" time="10:30:00" ><p>Paidir agus Machnamh.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.6" nospeaker="true" time="10:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700003#A00200">Ceisteanna - Questions - Priority Questions</major-heading>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.7" nospeaker="true" time="10:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700003#A00300">Public Service Pay Commission</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.8.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700003#A00400"><p><i>1.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the status of the negotiations with regard to pay equalisation; the timeline for negotiations to conclude; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[21727/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.9.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700003#A00500"><p>As the Minister knows, in our confidence and supply arrangement we insisted on a public pay commission to respond with recommendations following analysis of costs associated with pay equalisation, especially for new entrants since 2011.  We recognise that the Government has finally committed to a pathway to deal with this process.  It is a matter for the Minister to consider also the recommendations of the commission on issues and difficulties with recruitment and retention of staff, particularly in the health service, health consultants and the Air Corps.  When does the Minister expect the commission to conclude its work?  When will he be able to make recommendations to the Cabinet on foot of that, notwithstanding the issues relating to prudence over the associated economic cost?  Now that the cost has been established, will the process be put in place?</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.10" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700003#A00600"><p>I thank the Deputy for the question.  I look forward to working with him during what I am sure will be a very exciting period in the run-up to many things in the coming months.</p>  <p>  The Public Service Stability Agreement 2018-2020, provided that an examination of remaining salary scale issues in respect of those recruited after January 2011 at entry grades would be undertaken within 12 months of the commencement of the agreement.  Additionally, as the Deputy is aware, the Government accepted an amendment to section 11 of the Public Service Pay and Pensions Act 2017, that within three months of the passing of the Act, I would prepare and lay before the Oireachtas a report on the cost of and a plan to deal with pay equalisation for new entrants to the public service.  This was a significant body of work delivered through the Irish Government Economic Evaluation Service, which collected, collated and examined the data, and provided detailed point-in-time costs associated with the measure.</p>  <p>  I submitted a report to the Oireachtas on 16 March.  It showed that there has been strong recruitment since 2011 to the 237 recruitment grades across the public service, with more than 60,500 new entrants hired, representing 19% of the public service.  This includes more than 16,000 teachers, nearly 5,000 special needs assistants and almost 10,000 nurses.</p>  <p>  Graduates entering the public service today do so on a competitive salary.  For example, a teacher recruited in 2018 will start on just under &euro;36,000.  This will rise under the current public service stability agreement to nearly &euro;38,000 by 2020.  Across the labour market as a whole, the average starting salary for graduates is &euro;28,554, with 40% earning less than &euro;25,000.</p>  <p>  Discussions on this issue with public service trade unions and representative associations commenced in October, with a further meeting on 27 April.  Further engagement is being arranged for early June as the parties continue to work through the various aspects of this issue.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.11" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700003#A00700"><p>I thank the Minister for his good wishes.  I apologise for my voice this morning.  Before the T&aacute;naiste, Deputy Coveney, or anybody else starts tweeting, I wish to point out I have a sore throat.  I ask the Minister to bear with me.</p>  <p>  I thank the Minister for his answer.  Notwithstanding the catastrophic scandal involving the HSE, CervicalCheck and the Department of Health, it was refreshing to hear some of the victims of that scandal speak highly about the nursing and other front-line staff in their dealings with them in very trying circumstances in recent times.</p>  <p>  I raised this issue with the Minister last week during Questions on Promised Legislation.  We are into the first year of the pay deal to which the Minister referred.  There is an understanding on the part of the INMO, for example, that the recommendations of the pay commission on difficulties with recruitment and retention in its field would be adopted by Government and would kick in during the second year of the three-year deal.  I am led to believe that has been clarified in correspondence from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform.  Will the Minister confirm that is the case?  Will he confirm that nurses, midwives, hospital consultants and personnel in the Air Corps, as part of the recommendations of the pay commission in response to the challenge that has been placed upon them, will be making recommendations to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and that Government will have a responsibility under the pay agreement signed and agreed last year for implementation in year two of the three-year deal?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.12" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700003#A00800"><p>The Public Service Stability Agreement 2018-2020 provides for &euro;887 million in additional pay restoration and increases.  The agreement makes clear that the responsibilities that are upon me are to set up the public service pay commission, which was set up before the agreement - I did that - and to support the pay commission in submitting a report to Government during the second quarter.  I understand it will report towards the end of June and then into early July.  The subsequent Government response will be the subject of negotiation between the Government and representative bodies.</p>  <p>  If the Deputy asks me to commit that a particular issue be dealt with in advance of engagement on the matter, all of the other bodies with concerns or needs over the pay agreement will ask why I am not prioritising them.  I am happy to commit to the terms of the public service stability agreement negotiation being implemented by me.</p><p>Work is under way on pay equality, an issue on which I have answered the Deputy.  We are dealing with the demands for so-called pay equality by those in the representative bodies, while parallel work is under way by the Public Service Pay Commission on recruitment within the health service.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.14" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00200"><p>I acknowledge the ongoing negotiations on the inequality issue and the Government's commitment to resolving it.  I accept that there is a pathway for it to be carried through.  However, the pay commission was charged with an initial and primary responsibility which was related to recruitment and retention issues and the associated difficulties in the health service.  There is an acknowledgement on the part of the Government that this is its job of work.  There was a further acknowledgment in the Minister's reply that he would look at the recommendations that emanated from it and enter into discussions on them in good faith thereafter.  That is merely what we are seeking at this juncture.  We acknowledge, of course, the constraints and the fiscal rules which have to be adhered to.  As we said during the negotiations which led to the confidence and supply arrangement, however, it is imperative that the commission be provided with the terms of reference to which we have alluded, namely, that there are issues surrounding recruitment and retention.  The Government must acknowledge the need for a pathway to deal with these issues, notwithstanding the difficulties which may emerge by virtue of the difference of opinion on the agreement in place, as I have outlined, for the INMO.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.15" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00300"><p>I will not comment on any potential agreement or disagreement.  We have an agreement that is laid out in text and the Government and I are honouring everything laid out in it.  Work is under way on the issue of new entrant pay and I have updated the House on some key points in that regard.  The Public Service Pay Commission is engaged on the issue in the context of recruitment and retention within the health service.  I will deal with all of the issues that emerge from both processes when they are complete.  However, I emphasise to the House that we cannot say, on the one hand, that we need to ensure the public finances are managed in a stable way and that we must not repeat the mistakes of the past, while telling ourselves, on the other, that we can meet every individual demand.  We will not be able to meet the needs of every group with which we are engaging.  We have a public service pay agreement for three years and it is in year one.  We are committed to engaging with everyone in good faith, but if we are saying we need to keep the public finances stable and ensure we can afford to meet the commitments we have made, we have to understand there are responsibilities which come with that.  I am committed to discharging those responsibilities, as I am sure the Deputy is too.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.16" nospeaker="true" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00400">Budget Measures</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.17.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1280" speakername="Jonathan O'Brien" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00500"><p><i>2.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way in which he is building capacity within the Civil Service and the public service and ensuring access to adequate information in pursuit of developing policy proofing within the budgetary process as a means of advancing equality as outlined in the public service report 2017.  <b>[21726/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.18.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" speakername="Maurice Quinlivan" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00600"><p>How is the Minister building capacity within the Civil Service and the public service to ensure there is access to adequate information to pursue equality proofing in future budgets as outlined by the Government in the public service report for 2017?</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.19" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00700"><p>The ongoing work on equality budgeting in Ireland follows the commitment in A Programme for a Partnership Government to "develop the process of budget and policy proofing as a means of advancing equality, reducing poverty and strengthening economic and social rights".  Following this programme for Government commitment and in order to facilitate a more comprehensive assessment of the impact of budget measures on household living standards, my Department has undertaken initial work in the area of social impact assessment.  The social impact assessment framework is defined as an evidence-based methodology which attempts to assess the impact of policy on households' financial positions.  The objective of the framework is to broaden the scope of current practice to take account not only of tax and social welfare measures but also of how changes in public expenditure policy can impact on household outcomes and living standards.  By doing so it may in the future be possible to compare the distributional impact of changes to various types of public service spending and the implications for household outcomes.</p>  <p>  Following the announcement on budget day in October 2017, alongside the publication of the paper Equality Budgeting: Proposed Next Steps in Ireland, a pilot programme of equality budgeting for the 2018 budgetary cycle is under way, anchored in the existing performance budgeting framework.  For this first cycle of equality budgeting, a number of policy areas have been selected, including making childcare more affordable to reduce barriers to women's participation in the labour market and increasing female participation in apprenticeships.  Associated objectives and indicators were published in the Revised Estimates Volume last December and progress towards achieving these targets has been reported in the public service performance report for 2017 which we published just last month.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.20" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" speakername="Maurice Quinlivan" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00800"><p>I thank the Minister for his response and remind him that the Government's economic and evaluation service recognised in the 2017 report that the budget was something more than a neutral process of resource allocation, that rather it was a value-laden process which embodied and potentially informed and influenced long-standing societal change in how resources were deployed.  Those in our society with disabilities have for far too long fallen behind in the budgetary process and must now be placed at the centre of any future budget.  In its discussion on disability proofing of budgets, the Irish Wheelchair Association has asked that 10% of all new builds be wheelchair accessible, not just visitable.  What mechanisms is the Government putting in place to ensure future budgets will safeguard equal access to housing for those with disabilities?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.21" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B00900"><p>Responsibility for matters related to how we support citizens with a disability lies with the Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Finian McGrath, who regularly challenges all Departments, including my own, to look at how we can meet their needs.  As to how we are seeking to advance the broad equality budgeting agenda, my Department is engaging with the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission and the National Women's Council of Ireland, both of which have broadly supported the initiative we have under way.  I am attempting to establish an equality budgeting steering group which will consist of stakeholders and policy experts to look at how we can advance the initiative.  What is crucial for me is identifying particular policy areas which are appropriate to deepen equality budgeting and track them in the way we have tracked many other indicators for many years.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.22" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" speakername="Maurice Quinlivan" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B01000"><p>I am aware of the Minister of State's responsibility, but that was not the issue I was raising.  Technical guidance document M - on access and use - of the building regulations 2010 stipulates that all new builds must guarantee circulation within dwellings for disabled persons.  Will the Government ensure compliance with the regulations within the private housing market and, if not, why not?  What provisions can it put in place to ensure compliance to safeguard access to housing for disabled persons?  The regulations do not apply to buildings constructed prior to 1992 and that has clear implications for those with disabilities and their access to housing.  When the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government was contacted to provide information on the proportion of buildings built prior to 1992 within the housing market and compliance with the regulations, none could be provided for us.  Given the importance of these data in any disability proofing of future budgets, how can the Government ensure adequate fact-finding mechanisms are in place to ensure equality proofing will be a process which will deliver rather than deceive?  Will the Minister provide the resources in order that we can actually disability-proof budgets?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.23" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B01100"><p>I am committed to increasing resources to deal with such issues.  I have engaged with the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, on this area in two successive budgets.  The issues of detail the Deputy raises are, however, matters for the Minister of Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy Eoghan Murphy.  I will contact him to see if I can get answers to the issues raised by the Deputy.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.24" nospeaker="true" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B01200">National Development Plan</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.25.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B01300"><p><i>3.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council was consulted on the growth projections and the money committed in relation to the national development plan; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[21728/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.26.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700004#B01400"><p>We welcome the investment committed to in the national development plan.</p><p>The sum of &euro;91 billion in Exchequer expenditure up to 2027 is most welcome.  However, it is a ten-year programme based on projections such as, for example, a 4% annual growth rate from 2022 to 2027.  The Government seeks the advice of the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council annually on projections for budgetary measures made by the Department of Finance.  Was similar advice sought from the same body on these projections and investment over a ten-year period?</p></reply>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.28.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00200"><p>The figure the Deputy mentioned is not correct.  For the latter half of the plan, the assumption underpinning the national development plan is 2% growth per year.  We deliberately reduced our growth forecast for the second half of the ten-year plan in recognition of the fact that it was more difficult to forecast that far ahead into the future in view of the many risks, of which the Deputy is aware.</p><p>Regarding engagement with the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, the council assesses macroeconomic and budgetary forecasts published by the Department of Finance twice a year - in the stability programme update and the budget.  While the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform was not required to consult the IFAC on the national development plan, the council stated in its fiscal assessment report of November 2017:</p><blockquote>Public investment levels are expected to ramp up quite rapidly again, rising to levels that are among the highest in the EU under current plans ... Across all measures, this would be higher than present levels for countries such as France, the Netherlands, Germany and the UK as well as for the EU and euro area aggregates.  Importantly, this is possible while still complying with the fiscal rules in later years.</blockquote><p>It went on to state:</p><blockquote>A commitment to stick to a specified level of public investment as a share of GNI* would be a sensible basis for fiscal policy over the medium term.  If adhered to, this approach could help to prevent forced cuts to public investment in downturns and excessive expansions in investment during booms.</blockquote><p>We consult the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council when we are required to do so and it has offered a broad understanding of what we are seeking to do with the increase in investment levels in the economy.  It is good to hear this being welcomed by the Deputy.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.29" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00300"><p>To clarify, there is a 2% growth rate, as the Minister says, and a 2% inflation rate.  That amounts to a total of 4%.  The Minister is saying the council was not specifically asked or consulted prior to publication of the national development plan.  What provision was made for potential Brexit implications?  Do the projections take cognisance of the reports on Brexit of the Economic and Social Research Institute and the Department of Finance or even the Copenhagen report on Brexit?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.30" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00400"><p>The Deputy referred to a growth rate of 4%.  When we are considering growth rates in the economy so far into the future, we strip out the impact of inflation.  The trend growth rate we have used for the second half of the plan is 2%.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.31" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00500"><p>It is 2% plus 2%.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.32" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00600"><p>The Deputy further asked whether we had been cognisant of the Copenhagen papers and how we had taken account of Brexit.  I will make two points in that regard.  The best response we can put in place to the period of uncertainty the economy could enter if the Brexit process becomes even more difficult is to increase capital investment across the period.  That is what we are doing.  We are seeking to increase capital investment next year by one quarter above the current position at the precise point the United Kingdom will be leaving the European Union.  That is the appropriate response to something that will pose challenges for the economy.  On the question of its affordability, the plan was affordable on the basis of growth figures for next year that have since been increased again on the assumption that it is possible for the United Kingdom and the European Union to reach a transitional agreement.  The plan is affordable and is the type of response we should have when an open economy is entering a period of uncertainty.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.33" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00700"><p>The Minister's reference to Brexit and its potential implications for the economy and our ability to meet the demands of the plan is based on an assumption that there will be a transitional agreement that will not have a detrimental effect on the provisions he has made for capital expenditure under the plan.  He says increasing capital expenditure by 25% will be sufficient to meet the demands of the plan over ten years.  That is fine.  I would have no problem with that if it were the case that the various bodies that produced these reports and the severe sectoral implications outlined in the Copehagen report, for example, could be referred to in the plan to ensure there is a safety net in place to guarantee the commitments made by the Government with regard to capital expenditure.  That expenditure is badly needed and I accept the Minister's commitment to it in the face of Brexit, but there must be more openness and greater transparency on such reports which are very informative and, in some cases, alarming.  There must be reference points associated with the national development plan to ensure the commitment to it, notwithstanding the effects a hard Brexit would have on the economy.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.34" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00800"><p>That is all contained in the Project Ireland 2040 strategy and the associated documents that were published.  They lay out how we believe the plan is affordable.  With regard to having a safety net, the best response in entering a period in which the economy could face further uncertainty is to make use of the levers we can fully influence.  Increasing investment in higher and further education and public transport and increasing housing supply are things we have to do, but they are even more necessary if an open economy is facing a period of heightened uncertainty.  All of the related economic assumptions were laid out when we published Project Ireland 2040.  The implementation board that will oversee the plan has now met and engaged on how we will be able to prioritise projects and make them happen.  Furthermore, we will soon have a meeting of a construction sector working group to examine how we can make use of all of the resources available in the economy to deliver projects in a phased and affordable manner.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.35" nospeaker="true" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C00900">Public Sector Reform Implementation</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.36.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C01000"><p><i>4.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the areas of reform his Department is prioritising; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[21978/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.37.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C01100"><p>This is to ask the Minister the position on his Department prioritising cost saving initiatives in the interests of better financial prudence and scarce resources being spent wisely.</p></reply>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.38.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="10:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700005#C01200"><p>In December 2017 last I launched Our Public Service 2020, the new framework for development and innovation in the public service.  The new reform framework focuses on supporting sustainable, continuous progress across the public service.  Our Public Service 2020 has three priority pillars: delivering for the public, innovating for our future and developing people and organisations.  There are<b></b>18 actions which include new initiatives and actions focused on building on reforms already in place.  We are also moving the focus of reform to achieving outcomes that will have a positive impact on the public.  With this goal in mind, my Department has established a reform evaluation unit to focus on monitoring and evaluating the outcomes of reform, as well as creating greater links between expenditure and reform.</p><p>A strengthened model of governance is being put in place to oversee implementation of the actions in Our Public Service 2020 with the establishment of a new public service leadership board.  The board includes Secretary General-CEO level participation drawn from the Civil Service and a broad range of public service organisations.</p><p>In the Civil Service the next phase of implementation of renewal will aim to deepen and embed renewal and also consolidate and implement current programmes.  Other priority actions for 2018 include work to strengthen policy making; improve the delivery of shared whole-of-government projects; and support the development of a national data infrastructure.</p><p>The Government continues to pursue a legislative agenda in this area.  The Minister of State, Deputy Patrick O'Donovan, is working on the Public Sector Standards Bill and the Data Sharing and Governance Bill.</p><p><i>11 o&amp;rsquo;clock</i></p> <p>My Department is also leading on Ireland's open data initiative, which is a key part of the public service reform agenda.  We want to be a leader in open data and create an environment in which the economic, social and democratic benefits of open data are recognised and realised.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.40" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00200"><p>The public service performance report for 2017 states the aim is to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of public expenditure by linking the funding of public sector organisations to the results they deliver.  That is vital.  It is a very useful exercise and one we all support in terms of promoting positive reform.  In the section of the report dealing with local authority funding for housing from the Department, it is stated that &euro;387.7 million was provided.  In addition, &euro;98.3 million was provided through the local property tax.  It is stated self-funding was used by local authorities to support the delivery of housing problems.  What has been delivered despite all the expenditure?  I suggest there was very little.</p>  <p>  As noted, the purpose of the public service performance exercise was to determine how we can improve the effectiveness of the delivery of services.  As far as I can see, no progress has been made in this area.  While the reviews and practices continue aplenty, there is nothing happening on the ground.  That is the problem.  It is blatantly obvious in housing in that we are not getting housing delivered in Tipperary or anywhere else.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.41" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00300"><p>The Deputy is wrong on that.  We are increasing resources for local authorities to ensure public housing commitments can be delivered upon.  We expect local authorities to deliver on housing targets with the resources that have been made available to them.</p>  <p>  The Deputy referred to Tipperary, which he knows far better than I do.  If I look to progress made in Dublin, I note that only yesterday we were able to confirm that the first phase of the long-promised project at O'Devaney Gardens, a huge public housing project, will be under way very soon.  I have seen many such examples throughout the country.  It is an essential element of how we have to respond to all the considerable housing challenges we face.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.42" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00400"><p>I did not say the Government was not giving enough money.  It is giving plenty of money and there have been plenty of reviews, but nothing is being delivered.  While the reviews and practices continue aplenty in the Department, nothing seems to change.  There are poor outcomes.  That is what I said.  I did not say the Government was not giving the money.  The houses are not being built.  The authorities are saying they are not getting the money.  The Minister met our county manager, Mr. Joe McGrath, recently and I hope he asked about this.  Eleven houses were built in Tipperary in five and a half years.  It beggars belief so far into the housing crisis.  We were able to build hundreds of houses back in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.  What has gone wrong?  There have been reviews and reports, reports and reviews, consultants and tenders moving the whole thing around.  At least Minister of State, Deputy Kevin Boxer Moran, goes out on the ground and demands to see what has been done.  He questions the Office of Public Works, OPW, on value for money.  It is all money and nothing being delivered.  There has been review after review.  The Government keeps throwing the same thing at the problem and does not seem to learn.  No wonder we have crises in health and every other area.  The Government is inept at running Departments.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.43" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00500"><p>We have had a very significant development that Deputy Mattie McGrath has confirmed and acknowledged, namely, that we have increased resources for housing.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.44" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00600"><p>I did not say the Government had not.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.45" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00700"><p>It is great to see that acknowledgement here today.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.46" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00800"><p>What good is money if one cannot build anything?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.47" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D00900"><p>When I was in Tipperary, I met the local authority representatives that afternoon.  It was at the end of a very positive day.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.48" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01000"><p>Positive?  In the Minister's mind.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.49" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01100"><p>I could see many different businesses and people who were involved in-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.50" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01200"><p>Campaigning.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.51" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1289" speakername="Pat Gallagher" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01300"><p>Please, let us be orderly.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.52" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01400"><p>-----the community and economy in Tipperary.  They were pointing to the progress that is being made.  When I met the chief executive of the local authority, he pointed to the fact that not enough housing had been delivered, as the Deputy rightly said.  He also took me through the plans funded by the Government to increase local housing supply, however.  We want to and will ensure local authorities are accountable for delivering more homes with the higher level of resources that the Deputy has acknowledged here today.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.53" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01500"><p>No homes to be found.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.54" nospeaker="true" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01600">Climate Change Adaptation Plans</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.55.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" speakername="Eamon Ryan" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01700"><p><i>5.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the role of his Department in drafting the European climate and energy plan for Ireland by the end of 2018.  <b>[21979/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.56.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" speakername="Eamon Ryan" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01800"><p>In the late 1950s, this country completely transformed from a closed economic system to an open, international one.  Mr. Lemass was in power at the time.  Mr. Whitaker, the Secretary General of the Department for which the Minister is now responsible, led that.  We are now in a similar moment in history in that we need to change our entire economic model from an unsustainable one to a sustainable one.  The climate and energy plan we have to present to the European Union under the Paris climate agreement is surely the chance to do what Mr. Whitaker did in the report he wrote in the 1950s.  This is the opportunity to think that big and differently and change everything.  What are the plans of the Government?  What is the role of the Minister's Department in this new climate and energy plan that we have to present to the European Union by the end of the year?</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.57" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D01900"><p>My Department's role is broadly to deliver well-managed and well-targeted public spending.  When it comes to climate change, this means ensuring we respond in the best way to climate transition in our country.</p>  <p>  EU countries have agreed on a 2030 framework for climate and energy, including new EU-wide targets and policy objectives for the period 2021 to 2030.  These targets will be underpinned by a new regulation on the governance of the energy union.  This regulation will provide for the creation of integrated national energy and climate plans by each member state.  The regulation is the subject of an ongoing trilogue process between the Commission, Council and Parliament which is expected to conclude later this year.  Until this point, the targets, policy objectives and timelines are subject to revision.</p>  <p>  The development of Ireland's national energy and climate plan is, in the first instance, a responsibility of the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment.  My Department is working closely with the Department of that Minister, Deputy Naughten, through the structures that have been established to co-ordinate Government activity on climate change.  There is a high-level steering committee on climate action, chaired by the Minister, Deputy Naughten, and a technical research and modelling group that provides expert advice and support.  My Department is represented on both.</p>  <p>  Preparation of the plan is at an early stage but its development will be facilitated by the work under way to complete the national mitigation plan and the recently published national development plan.  The latter, in particular, represents a step change in Government commitment to climate change, with &euro;21.8 billion in funding directed to addressing the transition to a low-carbon society.  This capital investment will lead to a significant reduction in our greenhouse gas emissions over the period to 2030.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.58" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" speakername="Eamon Ryan" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D02000"><p>The current plans will not do it.  They are not ambitious enough and we have not grasped the opportunity that exists.  The plans do not reflect the ability and willingness of the Irish to make the leap to a cleaner, sustainable economy.  At a meeting of the Committee on Transport, Tourism and Sport yesterday, Transport Infrastructure Ireland made a presentation.  It is still doing the exact same thing it was doing, namely, trying to tackle Dublin's congestion problems by building a wider ring of motorways around the city.</p>  <p>  In the area of forestry, we should be thinking really big.  We should be thinking about a massive, native rainforest that would be a store for carbon and part of the Wild Atlantic Way.  It would create 30,000 jobs.  The Minister should be thinking about an area of 20,000 ha.</p>  <p>  On our sea area, we should be going back to Europe saying we will listen to E. O. Wilson, the great biologist, and set aside half our waters for conservation, protection and research on what is happening in the North Atlantic as everything changes.  That would be accepted in Europe as reflecting the scale of ambition, leadership and vision required.</p>  <p>  It is time to shift our thinking to see this as a bold project where we can lead rather than one in which we are trying to resist change, which is what I sense happening.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.59" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700006#D02100"><p>I see this as a major opportunity.  I want the Irish people and Government to play a role in responding.  The Deputy can always point, very legitimately, to areas in which we could make improvements and operate differently, but alongside that, let us recognise what is contained in Ireland 2040, the national development plan.  There is a commitment to retrofitting 45,000 homes each year and delivering energy upgrades to all public buildings and a minimum of one third of commercial buildings.  At least half a million electric vehicles are to be introduced by 2030.  The plan also refers to transitioning to a low-emission urban public bus fleet, with no diesel buses being purchased from 1 July.  From 2030 onwards, fossil fuel cars will not be allowed to be sold in Ireland.</p><p>From 2045 no national car test, NCT, certificates will be issued for these cars.  I am in the final stages of agreeing with the Minister for Communications, Climate Action and Environment, Deputy Naughten, a new climate action fund to be established that will have an allocation of &euro;500,000.  Maybe the particular matters referred to by the Deputy could be funded through this plan.  That is in addition to the very comprehensive public transport plan contained in Project Ireland 2040.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.61" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" speakername="Eamon Ryan" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00200"><p>If we are to get real, we will heed the comments from the National Transport Authority in yesterday's committee.  Its representatives conceded we do not have the resources for that bus network and most of our best engineers are stuck doing outer urban and inter-urban motorways, adding to the congestion problem rather than addressing this major problem that we have to introduce cycling facilities and buses in our cities.  Nothing is happening in that regard and the budget fell 40% in the past year.  That is the reality.  Similarly, if we are serious about electric vehicles, let us start on our car park outside and put in 20 or 50 charging points.  Let us do the same in every supermarket and public car park to show we are for real.</p>  <p>  We have all these plans but the reality is our emissions are rising in every sector at speed.  The Taoiseach recognised that we are climate laggards but it is not the people who are climate laggards; it is our administrative system.  We need to change the political and administrative system here to live up to the promise that exists for the Irish people in this transition.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.62" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00300"><p>The National Transport Authority indicated to me that with the further development of the bus network, for example, there is funding available.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.63" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" speakername="Eamon Ryan" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00400"><p>It does not have the staff for it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.64" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00500"><p>I am not aware of what it said about cycling infrastructure but I take the Deputy's comments in good faith.  I want to see our cycling infrastructure improve beyond where it is.  I look at plans under way for the new greenway linking the north inner city, for example, to Castleknock and beyond as an example of the kind of investment now happening that the Green Party has sought for so long.  If there is an issue with staffing and engineers in particular not being available to do the work, as the Deputy mentioned, I will engage with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport on that.  I have made the capital funding available to try to make these projects a reality.  I know we will not be able to respond to climate change obligations if we continue to organise transport like we do in Ireland currently.  I am working very hard to provide the additional funding to ensure that agenda can be delivered.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.65" nospeaker="true" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00600">Other Questions</major-heading>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.66" nospeaker="true" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00700">Public Private Partnerships</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.67.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00800"><p><i>6.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the estimates of public private partnership, PPP, expenditure in the context of the multi-annual capital allocations in respect of the period 2018 to 2021; the major PPP projects in the water supply sector; the costs of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[21624/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.68.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E00900"><p>As the Minister knows, there has been much criticism and two major debates about public private partnerships, PPPs, in this House.  Our parliamentary budget office has carried out an overview of PPPs in Ireland, asking that we address the pretty opaque nature and the lack of transparency in the whole area of PPPs.  There is a difficulty in measuring true value for money down to the 2040s or 2060s.  The overview made some specific proposals on water contracts and the multi-annual budget.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.69" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E01000"><p>This week we have taken steps looking at how we can increase the information available relating to PPPs.  My Department has published two separate sets of financial data.  This can be accessed on the <i>www.ppp.gov.ie</i>website.  The first set of data provides an update on the existing financial commitments table.  This table contains detailed information on all PPP projects for which contracts have been signed and which are either operational or in construction.  Information is broken out by individual project on the type of PPP model being used, the operational date of the project, the capital contractual value of the project, the total unitary payments made to the end of 2017, the projected future unitary payments for each project, other PPP-related costs, the total cost of each project and the year of final payment of the project.  All told, it is a considerable amount of information.</p><p>The Deputy should note that the published data is intended to provide indicative information on PPP projects based on information provided to my Department by the relevant responsible Departments or agencies.  The central PPP policy unit in my Department endeavours to ensure that the information is as accurate as possible but any queries on the details of specific projects should be confirmed directly with the State authorities responsible for those projects.</p><p>The estimated expenditure on PPP unitary payments will amount to approximately &euro;1.2 billion up to 2021.  This represents 4% of the total.  With regard to water, Irish Water has statutory responsibility for all aspects of water services planning, delivery and operation at national, regional and local levels.  This includes taking on responsibility for the water-related PPPs from the local authorities.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.70" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E01100"><p>I welcome the Minister's point on greater transparency or information but he was to publish a major review of PPPs going over the past couple of decades and into the future.  I do not know if his Department has done that yet.  He mentioned a central expenditure evaluation unit and that clearly has a key role along with the National Development Finance Agency in evaluating PPPs.  There still seems to be an opaque nature when we look at the multi-annual capital framework and the spending of each Department.  We still need clarification on how PPPs are performing, particularly with respect to water supply and drainage.  This relates to the way money is drawn down and the way projects move forward.  We have the major River Shannon water supply project, the Ringsend project and so on.  There is much work to be done in treatment, and the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, has done much work in the area.  There are also flood relief schemes and so on.  It seems hard to disaggregate the PPP structure despite major criticism.  We had the Comptroller and Auditor General report of 2011, when the Government took power, which is very critical.  The Economic and Social Research Institute has been equally critical over the years.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.71" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E01200"><p>The Deputy mentioned the challenges of disaggregating the data and that is why we have now provided the information project by project and Department by Department.  In the past too much information was not made available relating to PPPs under the auspices of the claim of commercial sensitivity.  We can get a better balance and there is much information we can share that does not undermine the ability of the State to get good value while respecting the contractual obligations that we have to people involved with delivering projects.  I have believed this since I was a member of the Committee of Public Accounts, and it is one of the reasons we published the data.  As a Member of the House, the Deputy is entitled to know as much as we can make available to him on certain projects.</p>  <p>  I have the report on PPPs and I anticipate publishing it soon.  With respect to water, Irish Water has now been brought fully on to the balance sheet of the Exchequer so virtually all the capital projects it is involved with are no longer classed as PPPs.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.72" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700007#E01300"><p>I welcome the news that we will get more full information.  The point made about commercial sensitivity and so on reminds me of the spurious reasons that were given.  We are spending the people's money and it is a mortgage for the people.  I note some projects going to the 2060s.</p>  <p>  There is the 10% figure in the investment policy framework and the rule relating to the capital budgets of each Department.  It is important this is kept.  We need to carry out major capital investment projects in water, housing, education and health across the country.  In many Departments the Government is constrained because of an ever growing unitary payment bill relating to existing PPPs.  There has been much criticism both here and in the UK, as the leader of the Opposition in the UK has said there will be no more public finance initiatives there because of the performance of Carillion and various others.  Is it time, given that we can expect a reasonable surplus over this calendar year, to go back to funding the major kinds of works being carried out by the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, and other Ministers ourselves?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.73" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00100"><p>The majority of works which the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, is delivering are fully funded by the Exchequer because it is appropriate in those cases.  Many of those projects are of a scale where a PPP model is not appropriate and they can only be funded by the Exchequer.</p>  <p>  On whether we are squeezing out other capital commitments because of the value of unitary payments to which we are committed, it is fair to say that the value of unitary commitments which are coming up is significant.  It is now an average of &euro;410 million per annum between 2024 and 2035.  However, at this point it is not squeezing out other capital investment because it forms part of the Ireland 2040 plan.  We are increasing capital investment by a quarter next year alone, and my attitude towards future projects is clear, namely, that we should decide PPPs on a case-by-case basis.</p>  <p>  We should bear in mind that, regarding the unitary payments that I touched on, in many cases they pay for the maintenance of projects that are built.  We should decide if PPPs are appropriate on the basis of the project rather than any broader policy.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.74" nospeaker="true" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00200">Decentralisation Programme</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.75.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" speakername="Brian Stanley" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00300"><p><i>7.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if the decentralisation of other Departments, sections or Government agencies to counties Laois and Offaly has been considered. <b>[21626/18]</b></p></ques>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.76.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" speakername="Brian Stanley" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00400"><p><i>34.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform his plans to relocate new Departments or Government agencies, or both, to counties Laois and Offaly in view of the infrastructural strain on the capital city and the lack of employment opportunities in the counties. <b>[21627/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.77.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" speakername="Brian Stanley" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00500"><p>My question relates to any plans the Government may have to decentralise agencies or any other sections of or entire Departments to Laois or Offaly.  The two counties are centrally located and are haemorrhaging jobs.  Huge numbers are commuting to Dublin from both counties daily.  In Laois alone, 11,500 of a very modest workforce commute from the county, which is ideally located.  I am keen to hear if the Minister has any plans.</p></reply>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.78.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00600"><p>I propose to take Questions Nos. 7 and 34 together.</p>  <p>  As the Deputy will be aware, the decentralisation programme announced in December 2003 involved the potential relocation of more than 10,000 civil and public service jobs to 53 locations in 25 counties.  It was a Government decision in 2011 that the programme be cancelled in light of the budgetary and staffing outlook at that time.  Up to that date, about a third of the target numbers, more than 3,400 posts, were decentralised.  The proportion of civil servants working outside Dublin is now just over 50%.  There are no plans at the present time to introduce a further programme of decentralisation.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.79" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" speakername="Brian Stanley" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00700"><p>I thank the Minister for his reply, which is disappointing.  The 2003 plans were somewhat chaotic and in the style of something written on the back of a cigarette boxto put it mildly.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.80" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00800"><p>The Deputy would be glad of it now.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.81" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" speakername="Brian Stanley" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F00900"><p>Nevertheless, Laois and Offaly have benefited from them.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.82" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01000"><p>That is right, they have.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.83" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" speakername="Brian Stanley" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01100"><p>The plans were chaotic during their first years.  For example, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine was in seven different locations in Portlaoise, although it is now in fewer places.  There is no doubt that there was chaos for some years and that it was not planned properly.  I do not want, however, the Government to use that as an excuse not to decentralise other parts of the public service.  In Offaly, there is part of the Department of Education and Skills and the Department of Finance.  Laois has the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, the Office of the Data Protection Commissioner and the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment.  IDA Ireland jobs have been slow to come to Laois and Offaly.  Only four jobs were created by IDA Ireland in Laois last year, but there is an opportunity in this area.  We are told that IDA Ireland cannot get companies to move beyond the M50 and that it is difficult to get them into the midlands.  Dublin cannot cope with the rapid growth it is undergoing.  This is an opportunity to examine this issue and look to sections of other Departments that could be decentralised.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.84" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01200"><p>Last week, we saw IDA Ireland's success in delivering major job announcements in areas and cities outside Dublin.  There was an announcement regarding Longford and regarding Cavan prior to that.  IDA Ireland is very much committed to trying to increase employment and attract foreign direct investment to areas throughout the country, particularly in such areas as financial services and the kinds of jobs announced in Longford and Cavan.</p>  <p>  My focus on decentralisation is on growing employment in offices which are decentralised.  Any further decisions to be made will be in the context of Ireland 2040, where we integrate decisions into a proper planning framework for the country.  At this time, I have no plans to decentralise any further offices from Dublin.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.85" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" speakername="Brian Stanley" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01300"><p>We must hope that the new national plan to which the Minister referred is better implemented than its predecessor.  The capital is under huge pressure in areas such as water, housing and transport.  Housing is beyond the reach of most low and middle-income civil servants.  There are opportunities to relocate.  Even if the Minister will not relocate additional Departments, there are further opportunities within the Departments which have been decentralised and which have been welcomed and embraced by people in the midlands, especially in Laois and Offaly.</p>  <p>  For example, someone ought to look at the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government.  While it may not relate strictly to decentralisation, every little thing in planning must be rubber-stamped in the Custom House, even for applications regarding the porches of houses or the kinds of covers that may be put over the tops of house windows.  Some of that work needs to be decentralised to local government.  That is one area in which we could move civil servants out of central government and back into city halls.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.86" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01400"><p>We have made a lot of progress in allowing local authorities to take a lead in providing shared services to the entire country.  The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donovan has pointed to the progress which has been made in the local authorities in Limerick which play a role in the rental accommodation scheme, RAS.  Shared services functions for the country are now run from particular local authorities.  Approximately half of all of our civil servants are based in regional locations.  While we have made progress in moving existing employment outside Dublin, my focus is on increasing employment in offices which have located in all counties.  The wage agreement which is in place over the next three years creates the ability to hire more civil and public servants in offices that we have established.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.87" nospeaker="true" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01500">Statutory Retirement Age</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.88.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01600"><p><i>8.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform when legislation to increase the compulsory retirement age for public servants will be published; the timeframe for the legislation to pass in D&aacute;il &Eacute;ireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[21668/18]</b></p></ques>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.89.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1257" speakername="Fiona O'Loughlin" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01700"><p><i>19.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the timeframe for the publication of the legislation to abolish the mandatory retirement age for public sector workers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[16483/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.90.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01800"><p>The current system compulsory retirement age remains at 65 years while pensions can only be claimed at 66 years, and that age is to be increased in future.  We cannot allow the current practice of applying for jobseeker's payments to continue to fill the gap.  When will legislation come before the House to increase the compulsory retirement age to 70 years, as the Minister announced last December?  It is imperative that that happens as soon as is practicable so that a further tranche of people will not be affected come September.</p></reply>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.91.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F01900"><p>I propose to take Questions Nos. 8 and 19 together.</p>  <p>  As the Deputies are aware, on 5 December 2017, the Government agreed that the compulsory retirement age of most public servants recruited before 1 April 2004 should be increased to age 70.  Primary legislation is required for this change to be implemented. The Office of the Attorney General has been requested to prioritise the drafting of the necessary legislation so that the new compulsory retirement age will become effective as soon as possible.</p>  <p>  It is not possible to determine the length of time it will take for a Bill to be drafted and pass through both Houses of the Oireachtas given the need for meticulous drafting, ongoing detailed policy considerations, and the scheduling requirements of the Houses of the Oireachtas.  The drafting process is under way and the Bill is on the list of priority legislation for publication in the current session.  Indeed, I understand that the drafting of the legislation is significantly advanced.  I aim to be in a position to be able to publish the legislation next month.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.92" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" speakername="Barry Cowen" time="11:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700008#F02000"><p>While I do not doubt the effort that has been made to bring forward the legislation, it is disappointing to hear that we have no commitment from the Minister that it will be passed prior to the summer recess in order that it might benefit another tranche of people in September.</p><p>In that light, will the Minister agree to waive the requirement for pre-legislative scrutiny by the relevant committee?  Such an approach might fast-track the legislation.  There was an expectation, based on the Minister's announcement, which we welcomed in December, that this would be forthcoming and that the legislation would be brought before the House and passed before the summer.  I implore the Minister, in the absence of a commitment, to agree to waive the requirement for pre-legislation scrutiny which would otherwise be necessary.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.94" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00200"><p>We will publish the legislation next month, but I cannot give a commitment as to when it will be passed.  No Minister is in a position to give such a commitment as it is a matter for the House as to when legislation is passed.  I will consider the Deputy's proposal that the requirement for pre-legislative scrutiny be waived.  I accept his good intentions in trying to have this matter resolved and I am aware that there is some concern about the implementation of interim measures.  However, this is complex legislation that will have a material effect on the lives and circumstances of many people who decide to continue to work.  I want the legislation to pass and believe that if we publish it next month and the House gives it fair wind and considers it quickly, we will be able to pass it promptly.  I will consider what the Deputy has said about the requirement for pre-legislative scrutiny when the Bill has been fully drafted and will be happy to consult the Deputy and the rest of the House at the time.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.95" nospeaker="true" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00300">Budget Targets</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.96.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00400"><p><i>9.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he will report on his Department's interaction with the main spending Departments; the Departments that are close to profile in 2018; the Departments that are below or above their budget 2018 expenditure profiles; and if he will make a statement on the matter.  <b>[21623/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.97.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00500"><p>Given the issues with the weather this year, the cervical cancer screening scandal, the forthcoming visit of the Pope and ongoing problems in the Departments of Health and Justice and Equality, among others, are Departments constantly in contact with the Minister to seek more money?  I notice that in their Votes Departments have less of a buffer this year than in previous years.  Are they close to profile in spending?  When we received the stability programme update, I believe expenditure on housing was below profile.  The members of the Committee on Budgetary Oversight believe more spending and more resources are required in the area of health.  Is this something that concerns the Minister?  Will we have Supplementary Estimates for the Department of Health, the Department of Justice and Equality and the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection?</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.98" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00600"><p>Managing the delivery of public services within budgetary allocations is the responsibility of every Department and Minister.  My Department is in regular contact with all Departments and offices to ensure expenditure is being managed within the overall budgetary parameters. The draw-down of funds from the Exchequer is reported every month in the Fiscal Monitor published by the Department of Finance. </p><p>As set out in the most recent publication, total gross voted expenditure at end of April was &euro;19.216 billion.  This was &euro;74 million, or 0.4%, below profile.  Gross voted current expenditure, at &euro;18 billion, was 1.1% ahead of profile.  Timing issues related to child benefit and Garda pension payments, profiled for payment at the start of May but brought forward to April, accounted for a significant portion of the variance.  As outlined in the April report, it arose as the Trans-European Automated Real-time Gross settlement Express Transfer, TARGET, system was closed on 1 May due to it being a European public holiday.  The timing issues will reverse in May.  Health expenditure, at &euro;5.15 billion, was 1.4% above profile.  Gross voted capital expenditure, at &euro;1.1 billion, was 19% below profile but up &euro;190 million, or 20%, versus April 2017.  The key driver was that capital expenditure in the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government was running at &euro;158 million behind profile.  This was largely due to a delay in drawing down payments for Irish Water.  It is anticipated that the draw-downs will be completed in the coming months, bringing expenditure back into line with profile</p><p><i>Additional information not given on the floor of the House.</i></p><p>As the Deputy will be aware, sound public finances are necessary to underpin sustainable economic growth.  This requires that overall expenditure be managed effectively.  To support this goal, my Department has been engaging with a range of Departments on year two of the spending review process, with a view to reinforcing a systematic analysis of existing spending programmes, focusing on an assessment of efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.99" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00700"><p>I thank the Minister.  I asked him yesterday about the summer economic statement, but we did not have time to discuss it.  Will we have the statement at the end of June in order that the committees of the House will be able to have a proper chance to have an input into the budget?</p>  <p>  The Minister mentioned expenditure on housing as being below profile and that the delay in the draw-down for Irish Water was one of the reasons for it.  That is a matter of grave concern.  The Committee on Budgetary Oversight had a lengthy discussion on the health budget, which seemed to be at least &euro;800 million short of the resources required, based on an analysis by civic society groups such as Social Justice Ireland.  We are all aware of the enormous pressures within the health service.  The Secretary General of the Department of Health told me at one of the meetings that health spending would always be rationed.  That was his approach, which is interesting, given the deficiencies in the Department of Health.  I could also mention other Departments.  Will there be any Supplementary Estimate to cover the cost of implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities, to achieve what we have committed to achieving?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.100" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00800"><p>I am confident that within the resources available to the different Departments the commitments we have made in the ratification of the UN convention can be met for this year.  It is a key priority for the Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Finian McGrath, and I will certainly work with him to make available what is needed for implementation of the convention next year.</p>  <p>  When the Secretary General referred to rationing, the point he was making - correctly - was that every single Department had a budget for the year.  On the calls for further resources for the health service, we have to recognise that the total allocation for the Department of Health this year is &euro;14.9 billion, an increase of 3.6% from last year.  It was a very significant increase on what was already a very large budget.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.101" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G00900"><p>I welcome the Minister's comments on the UN convention, but will there be additional funding this year to begin the implementation of ideas that civic society and disability groups have put to committees of the House?  The problem in the health service is that acute waiting lists are growing.  Yesterday the leader of the Labour Party spoke  about the waiting lists for cataract operations.  There is a litany of such problems.  I am sure the Minister sees constituents about the matter of early intervention and assessments, as I do.  There may well be a huge gap in that area also.  Is the reality that we will have to have Supplementary Estimates in the areas of health, disability services, justice and social protection, among others?  Does the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform have any process under way wherein it is looking at the formulation of budgets, starting in 2019, to ensure all line Ministers will have enough resources to do the jobs we want them to do?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.102" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700009#G01000"><p>Every single line Minister and Department will always want more resources.  The Deputy asked me whether I was contacted about the allocation of additional resources.  I am - all of the time.  Every Minister wants to do his or her best for citizens to whom they have a responsibility.  It is my job to try to meet those needs out of the resources available to us.  I will work with the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, to meet needs in the disability sector.  It is an issue on which I have worked with him in the past when he looked for my support in making funds available to promote assisted decision-making.  I made funding available in budget 2018 and have tried to meet the requests he has made to support requirements in the disability sector.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.103" nospeaker="true" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00025">Forensic Science Ireland Laboratory</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.104.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00050"><p><i>10.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform when it is expected work will commence on the construction of the Forensic Science Ireland headquarters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[16489/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.105.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00075"><p>The Minister will be aware of the Forensic Science laboratory in the Phoenix Park, which is in his constituency.  He will also be aware that this is the laboratory that carries out very important work on behalf of the State to analyse and process forensically evidence to be used in criminal prosecutions.  The Government gave a commitment in October 2016 that a new forensic science laboratory would be built and that construction would commence in 2017.  That did not happen.  When will work on the construction of the new forensic science laboratory start?</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.106" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1363" speakername="Kevin  Moran" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00100"><p>The enabling works contract for the Forensic Science Ireland laboratory reached substantial completion on 4 May 2018.  The works included site services, site preparation, security, flood control and building foundations.  The main contract will follow.</p>  <p>  Due to recent changes in international forensic laboratory standards, it was necessary to add further information to the main contract tender documents.</p>  <p>  Forensic Science Ireland and the Office of Public Works, OPW, are currently examining the issues involved, which relate primarily to laboratory interior finishes and mechanical and electrical specification requirements.  That examination has been completed and the OPW is now reviewing and amending the tender documents.  The OPW intends to re-issue a complete set of documents to the contractors by the end of quarter 2, 2018.  Following tender submissions it is expected that the main contract construction will commence in quarter 4, 2018.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.107" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00200"><p>I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Moran.  I do not know whether he has had an opportunity to visit the Forensic Science Laboratory.  If not, I recommend he does so.  I had the benefit of visiting it in 2016.  The laboratory plays a vital role in analysing and processing all the evidence that is to be used in criminal prosecutions.  Unfortunately, however, the facilities are completely inappropriate.  The laboratory is based in an old office block at the back of Garda Headquarters.  The staff have to work in extremely cramped conditions and it is a completely inappropriate place for evidence to be forensically examined.  It is not just me who is stating that.  Dr. Sheila Willis, the director of Forensic Science Ireland, stated that the current facility is unsuitable for modern science practices and that it is vital that the construction of a new laboratory starts as soon as possible.  I am conscious of what the Minister of State has said, but it raises more concerns.  From what he said, it appears that the main contract has not yet been signed and that we are in the process of reviewing tender documents.  The question I asked was specific.  When will construction work commence?  I would appreciate an answer to that question.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.108" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1363" speakername="Kevin  Moran" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00300"><p>As I said, we are hoping that construction will start later in 2018 but I advise the Deputy that the tender document is complex.  The revised tender documentation pack is composed of 1,000 drawings including 30 supporting report documents.  Our Department will be working closely with all the people involved to ensure that we deliver on this project in the later part of 2018.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.109" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00400"><p>I am aware that it is a complex construction process.  We have all been aware of that.  I am also aware that recent changes in international forensic laboratory standards have meant it was necessary to add further information to the main contract.  Nonetheless, I regret to say there has been considerable delay in the commencement of this process.  A legitimate explanation does not appear to have been provided as to the reason that is so.  If we are taking criminal justice seriously in this country it is essential that we have up-to-date, advanced, modern capabilities to examine evidence.  Every criminal prosecution that relies on forensic evidence must have that evidence analysed in a laboratory.  We know the laboratory is due to be located in Backweston, in Celbridge.  That was announced a number of years ago but I am disappointed that we do not have a definite indication as to when it will start and when the main works will commence.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.110" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1363" speakername="Kevin  Moran" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00500"><p>I can assure the Deputy that I am giving the matter my full attention in terms of my Department.  It has been delayed, but I can assure him that we will proceed and make sure that we deliver on time.  I will keep the Deputy updated in that regard.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.111" nospeaker="true" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00550">Public Procurement Contracts</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.112.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" speakername="Richard Boyd Barrett" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00600"><p><i>11.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform if he is considering measures to deal with companies that are found to have been negligent, fraudulent or substandard in the work on public contracts; and if he will preclude the companies from bidding for public contracts in the future. <b>[21724/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.113.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" speakername="Richard Boyd Barrett" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00700"><p>I am asking whether the Minister of State will consider bringing in more serious penalties and excluding contractors who do work paid for out of the public purse through public procurement or contracts where those companies are found to have been substandard, negligent in their work or engaged in fraudulent behaviour.  I am thinking of issues like schools that were built in a substandard fashion without proper fire safety measures, bogus self-employment on public contracts and, we may discover, the outsourcing of cervical smears.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.114" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00800"><p>Thank you, Deputy.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.115" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" speakername="Richard Boyd Barrett" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H00900"><p>I ask whether companies found to be guilty of those sort of failings should be excluded from further public contracts.</p></speech>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.116.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1267" speakername="Patrick O'Donovan" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H01000"><p>I thank Deputy Boyd Barrett.  Public procurement is governed by EU legislation and national rules and guidelines.  The aim of these rules is to promote an open, competitive and non-discriminatory public procurement regime which delivers best value for money.</p>  <p>  When carrying out procurement procedures, contracting authorities have discretion to exclude tenderers from competing in a public procurement competition for reasons set out in Regulation 57 of SI 284 of 2016 &ndash; European Union (Award of Public Authority Contracts) Regulations 2016.  This includes poor past performance where the tenderer has shown significant or persistent deficiencies in a prior public contract which led to termination, damages or other comparable sanctions.</p>  <p>  The public procurement system operates at its optimum where the evidence presented to demonstrate compliance is independently verified.  Otherwise, the contracting authority must rely on its own expertise and, in some cases, investigative powers to establish a tenderer&rsquo;s bona fides.  This can lead to inconsistencies in the administration of tender competitions.</p>  <p>  The tax clearance system operated by the Revenue Commissioners is an example of the type of independently verified compliance mechanism that has operated successfully in ensuring that those who do not meet their tax obligations are excluded from the award of public contracts.  Determining compliance with certain other legal requirements may require the input of the relevant enforcement body such as the Health and Safety Authority, the Workplace Relations Commission and Building Control, to name but three.</p>  <p>  When making a submission a tenderer must consider whether any of the exclusion grounds listed in the procurement documents apply to them.  Should any of the grounds apply, they must advise the contracting authority accordingly.  Before a tenderer is excluded regarding certain breaches, they may make a case and provide supporting evidence as to why it should not be excluded.  The contracting authority must arrive at a decision based on evidence rather than hearsay or dissatisfaction and should take the principle of proportionality into account in its deliberations.</p>  <p>  The monitoring of public works contracts is also important to ensure that contractors continue to meet their legal and contractual obligations during the performance of the contract.  A consistent contract management regime is critical and clearly defined milestones should be set down for evaluation purposes.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.117" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" speakername="Richard Boyd Barrett" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H01100"><p>That looks good on paper, but is it happening?  For example, I remind the Minister of State about Western Building Systems and the company that built 31 schools.  A report into fire safety issues resulting from substandard building in an audit of five schools initially, which we were supposed to have had by now, revealed they were found to be fire safety defective.  A report was to be prepared on all the other schools built by Western Building Systems, but I do not believe it has been produced, even though it was promised we would have it by now.  I do not know if this has come into the public domain yet but Western Building Systems built a college of further education in Whitehall as long as ten years ago that is lying empty as we speak while homeless families are being accommodated in police stations.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.118" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H01200"><p>Thank you, Deputy.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.119" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" speakername="Richard Boyd Barrett" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H01300"><p>It is extraordinary that such companies are still being awarded public contracts.  All firms that were found to have been involved in bogus self-employment arrangements, such as the JJ Rhatigan dispute----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.120" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H01400"><p>I will come back to the Deputy.  I call Deputy Burton.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.121" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" speakername="Joan Burton" time="11:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700010#H01500"><p>Has the Minister had an opportunity to read the UK Parliament report on Carillion, which is a major provider of educational construction and building services to the Irish State?  Is he aware that the Loreto school in Wexford is fully completed?  The teachers have moved in their equipment and materials but they have been forced to leave again because the Minister of State's Department does not seem to have any mechanism for allowing the schools to enter the premises, for which the State is paying, but where the company, which is the contractor, has collapsed.  We are given to understand that the four schools and one education centre involved in that contract in Wicklow, Carlow, Wexford and Meath will face delays of at least another year.</p><p>This is when the State has been paying top dollar.  I would like the Minister of State to comment on that.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.123" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1344" speakername="Eamon Scanlon" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00200"><p>This is an issue I have raised with the Minister of State already.  It is outrageous to think that a company that was involved in windmill construction - I am sure there was a Government subsidy there somewhere along the line -  is back in business.  I know of four small companies affected and the amount involved ranges from &euro;60,000 to &euro;37,000.  These are small operators and the loss of this amount of money will put them out of business.  I am sure this company has got much Government financing.  It is paying about 3% of the euro.  I think &euro;20 million is owed nationally and we now discover it is back in business.  It is outrageous that these people can put a company into liquidation, grab as many payments as possible from State subsidies and put small companies out of business.  This is not just one company but this is happening on a regular basis.  It is wrong and there should be a law to stop it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.124" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1267" speakername="Patrick O'Donovan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00300"><p>I do not think it is appropriate for me to comment on an individual case but I have engaged with Deputy Scanlon on particular issues before, as has the Office of Government Procurement.  To make a general point on school buildings and similar matters, the Minister, Deputy Donohoe, and the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton, have answered questions here before on a recent collapse.  The National Development Finance Agency, NDFA, and the Department of Education and Skills are working on this.  It affects my constituency as well.  They are trying to work through this with agencies like education and training bodies across the country.  It is not something that can be unravelled easily.</p>  <p>  To get back to Deputy Boyd Barrett's point, I already referenced the EU rules that are there.  There are mandatory exclusion rules and I can provide a copy of them to the Deputy.  There are also discretionary rules where previous performance can be used.  As I said earlier, it has to be proven.  That has to be worked out by the contracting authority.  In this case, the contracting authority who be whoever commissioned the development of the school.  The Office of Government Procurement does not run and operate individual contracts, as Deputy Boyd Barrett will appreciate.  We set out the policies in which each of the contracting authorities have to operate within and their Accounting Officers are then held accountable to the Oireachtas via the Comptroller and Auditor General.  There are procedures within the statutory instruments that are in place for those exclusions and if people believe that unsatisfactory work has been done, then the contracting authority can move to have those people excluded from future rounds.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.125" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" speakername="Richard Boyd Barrett" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00400"><p>I do not think this is happening and that there is proper enforcement of this.  The Office of Government Procurement and the Minister of State should be putting pressure on the relevant Departments to ensure this happens.  I mention Western Building Systems, which built a school in Whitehall that I understand has been sitting empty for perhaps a decade because it is structurally unsound.  We then discovered that five of the schools it built were fire defective.  We are then told there will be a report into the other 30 schools it built.  That report was promised in September to be out in six months but it is not out.  All of this suggests to me that there is not a seriousness about getting to the bottom of why companies in receipt of public money are doing substandard work.  We are not bothered to look into it and we are not excluding them from further public contracts.</p>  <p>  I mentioned bogus self employment.  We hear the advertisements at the moment, and it is good the Government is raising the issue, but there have been widespread examples of contractors doing work for the State where they were found to have been, as in the case of Rhatigans, engaged in bogus self employment.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.126" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1267" speakername="Patrick O'Donovan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00500"><p>To repeat, there is a bonding system in place with all of these contracts that are undertaken on behalf of the State, where a percentage of the bond is retained by the contracting authority.  In the case Deputy Boyd Barrett referred to, and without getting into the detail, it may well be an education and training body or the Department of Education and Skills.  There is a procedure available but as well as that, we have to go through a process.  That process can often involve court action being taken against the contracting authority and-or the State.  It is not something we can enter into lightly.  We have to have proof and we have to follow a process, and I think the Deputy would appreciate and respect that.  There are safeguards already in place.  Maybe there is a problem of awareness around the processes and safeguards that are there and if so, we can do more about making sure people are aware of them.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.127" nospeaker="true" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00550">National Development Plan</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.128.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1280" speakername="Jonathan O'Brien" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00600"><p><i>12.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the way in which capital projects will be prioritised under the National Development Plan 2018-2027. <b>[21512/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.129.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" speakername="Maurice Quinlivan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00700"><p>I ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform how capital projects will be prioritised under the national development plan.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.130" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00800"><p>The capital allocations made in budget 2018 and the national development plan were informed by the extensive evidence base collated and published on the Department's website in 2017 as part of the mid-year capital review.  The evidence base included a macroeconomic analysis, an assessment of progress to date on the 2015 plan, departmental submissions, a public consultation process, an infrastructure capacity and demand analysis and an analysis of the resourcing available for increased investment.  In addition to this, a review of public private partnerships, PPPs, was undertaken by the public investment management assessment unit of the International Monetary Fund.</p>  <p>  It should be noted, that while I am responsible for setting the overall allocations across Government Departments and for monitoring monthly expenditure, decisions on which capital projects are prioritised within these allocations are matters for Ministers and have to be taken in the context of the national development plan.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.131" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" speakername="Maurice Quinlivan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J00900"><p>The national development plans were introduced in 1989 on the recommendation of the EU to ensure an evidence based approach for prioritising projects to guarantee the taxpayers value for money.  With the publication of the National Development Plan 2006, this evidence-based approach was diminished.  The NDP which the Minister's Government has published displays the same deficiencies.  The Irish Planning Institute stated that Project 2040 choices send mixed messages about evidence-based planning with its president stating that good planning is evidence based.  Does the Minister believe the Government's planning is sufficiently evidence based and is it good enough that a plan committing &euro;116 billion lacks sufficient planning?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.132" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01000"><p>Yes I do, having published the evidence on it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.133" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" speakername="Maurice Quinlivan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01100"><p>In chapter 6.2 of the National Development Plan 2018-2027 it is stated that the work of the Irish Government Economic and Evaluation Service network in building analytical capacity across the Civil Service through specialist recruitment and learning and development will also play an important role in enhancing the evidence base for decision making.  In year one of the NDP, what work has the Irish Government and Economic and Evaluation Service, IGEES, completed to this end?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.134" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01200"><p>The work on the evaluation of projects and making choices within the national development plan will be more of a responsibility of the implementation board that has been set up for Ireland 2040.  It has already met once and any decisions that are made - for example, on the allocation of funds from the four funds that have been set up to drive new work and new activity to make Ireland 2040 happen - have to be shared with the implementation board.  The work of IGEES will be more focused on implementing the next round of our comprehensive spending review.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.135" nospeaker="true" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01250">Public Sector Reform Review</minor-heading>
    <ques id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.136.q" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" speakername="Bernard Durkan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01300"><p><i>13.</i> To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the degree to which reforms throughout the public sector remain in place to ensure accountability, collective responsibility and good value for money; and if he will make a statement on the matter. <b>[21675/18]</b></p></ques>
    <reply id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.137.r" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" speakername="Bernard Durkan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01400"><p>This question seeks to ascertain the extent to which reform remains a central part of Government policy, with a view to achieving the points set out in the question.</p></reply>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.138" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01500"><p>It is an essential element of what we are looking to do.  Last December I published the public service plan of 2020 that laid out what we are looking to do in how we deliver services.  Only last month I published a performance report that laid out what every Government Department is meant to do and the progress that has been made to date in delivering against those targets.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.139" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" speakername="Bernard Durkan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01600"><p>From what he has observed so far, can I ask the Minister about the success of the plan so far and the degree to which he expects to achieve continued results of a beneficial nature?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.140" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01700"><p>I expect that we will continue to see improved results.  The Government and I are particularly focused on making progress with the challenges we have in the housing and health sectors at the moment.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.141" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" speakername="Bernard Durkan" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01800"><p>Having regard to the degree to which reform stood the country in good stead during the downturn of the economy, what is the degree to which it can now be ascertained that the continued reforms can be of assistance in different economic climate as they unfold?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.142" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" speakername="Paschal Donohoe" time="11:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700011#J01900"><p>It continues to be vital in terms of making sure we get good value on how the country's money is spent.  It is fair to say we have to construct the need for reform and the argument for it in a different way.</p><p><i>12 o&amp;rsquo;clock</i></p> <p>During the crisis, much of the reform was focused on how we could find savings, efficiencies and manage tough decisions that had to be made.  The focus of it now is not on cutbacks but on trying to make better use of the nearly &euro;60 billion spent every year.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.144" nospeaker="true" time="12:00:00" ><p>Written Answers are published on the Oireachtas website.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.145" nospeaker="true" time="12:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700012#K00300">Leaders' Questions</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.146" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1335" speakername="Dara Calleary" time="12:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700012#K00400"><p>For several years Fianna F&aacute;il and Deputy Michael McGrath, in particular, have been highlighting the burden of ever soaring insurance costs.  Deputy Michael McGrath has raised the issue in the House, as well as with the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, and the European Commission.  All Deputies are aware of the burden of soaring insurance costs on businesses and people generally.  Many have seen insurance costs rise by between 40% and 60% over the past several years.  There is considerable evidence in recent months of business closures as a consequence of excessive insurance rises.  For young drivers in particular, there are many examples of people being unable to afford the premiums charged, thereby discommoding their daily lives.  Despite the pressure, there has been very little Government action to deal with this issue.  While the Government says it is committed and published bucketloads of reports, it has failed to stop insurance price hikes for businesses and for consumers around the country.</p>  <p>  It is not just Fianna F&aacute;il saying this.  The National Competitiveness Council figures show that Irish insurance price inflation is significantly above that of the eurozone average, thereby adding to the competitiveness burden faced by businesses and the burden in people's daily lives.  The key factor in this burden is the lack of competition in the Irish market.  This morning, we learned from David Murphy of RT&Eacute; that the European Commission has acted and launched a preliminary investigation as to whether or not foreign companies are being barred from entering the Irish market.  David Murphy's report quotes the experience of Zenith Insurance which pulled out of the Irish market in 2016.  In a statement it cited "the lack of engagement with us by Irish industry bodies, which we believe creates a market disadvantage for us and our partners."  Less competition means higher prices for Irish insurance consumers.  Higher insurance premiums cost jobs and hurt people across the country.</p>  <p>  Will the T&aacute;naiste confirm that this preliminary investigation is under way and how far it has progressed?  Does the T&aacute;naiste agree that insurance costs are too high in Ireland?  What is the Government actually doing to encourage more companies to enter the Irish market?</p>  <p>  The insurance industry body in Ireland, Insurance Ireland, promotes access to a service called Integrated Information Data Service, IIDS, a shared members' database that, by arrangement with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, allows its users to confirm the accuracy of penalty point information.  Will the T&aacute;naiste confirm all insurance companies and all prospective insurance companies have access to that information, regardless of whether they are members of Insurance Ireland not?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.147" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700012#K00500"><p>The European Commission has been undertaking an investigation since last year.  Members will recall that on 4 July 2017, it carried out an unannounced inspection at the premises of companies active in the motor insurance industry in the State.  The basis for this inspection was a concern by the Commission that the companies involved may have engaged in anti-competitive practices in breach of EU anti-trust rules which prohibit cartels, restrictive business practices and-or abuse of a dominant market position.  The House will understand neither I nor the Minister for Finance are in a position to make any comment on an ongoing investigation by the European Commission.  Any investigation undertaken by the Commission is done independently and I have no insight into the development of any such exercise.</p>  <p>  Separately, the CCPC has been undertaking an investigation into potential price signalling in the private motor insurance sector.  The CPCC is the statutory independent body responsible for the enforcement of domestic and EU competition law in the State.  Again, it is not appropriate for me to comment on an independent live investigation.  Having said that, the State has taken action where it can to date.  The cost of insurance working group's reports on the cost of motor insurance, employer liability and public liability insurance have made several recommendations which are relevant to the issue of supporting a level playing field to ensure a competitive marketplace, which is what we all want.  We are committed to implementing the recommendations of both of those reports.  Much of that has taken place and has had an impact on the motor insurance market in particular.</p>  <p>  There is still more work to be done, however.  The Government is absolutely committed to ensuring an insurance market attractive to new entrants, based on a level playing field, and having a competitive environment in order consumers and businesses benefit.  We will take appropriate action to ensure that is the case.  It is not appropriate for me today to comment on independent investigations, which are ongoing.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.148" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1335" speakername="Dara Calleary" time="12:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700012#K00600"><p>I appreciate that the T&aacute;naiste cannot comment because these are independent investigations.  That is precisely one of the issues, namely, they are independent of the Government.  It took two outside agencies to intervene to do something.  The Government has talked and published reports while businesses and consumers face significantly excessive increases in their insurance costs.  The figures show that, compared to our EU competitors, our insurance costs are considerably above the EU average.  Once again, it is another burden on the cost of doing business in Ireland.</p>  <p>  High insurance costs are hurting jobs, businesses and families.  We need action.  Will the T&aacute;naiste confirm when the action points in the report on the cost of employer liability and public liability insurance will be completed?  When will the Government implement all the recommendations in the report on the cost of motor insurance?  Will the Government actually do something to address the burden being faced by insurance holders rather than just talking about it?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.149" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700012#K00700"><p>The role of the CCPC, independent of the Government, is working.  That is why it has a live investigation under way.  That is the way it should be.  If there are concerns about appropriate levels of competition, an independent investigation must happen, separate from the political system or the Government, in a robust manner, which is what is happening now.</p>  <p>  The recommendations of the cost of insurance working group include enhancing the powers of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board to include regular reviews of the book of quantum and greater detail, establishing the Personal Injuries Commission, which is reviewing personal injuries claims internationally with a view to benchmarking these, improving the personal injuries litigation framework, including through the existing provisions regarding notification of claims, and provisions to penalise fraudulent activity.  There are significant recommendations on the back of good work which has been done by the Government.  We are acting in implementing those recommendations which is what exactly we should be doing.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.150" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1288" speakername="Pearse Doherty" time="12:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700012#K00800"><p>Yesterday on Leaders' Questions, I put it to the Minister for Education and Skills that central to building confidence in our health system must be the need for information, clarity and accountability.  The Government has repeatedly pledged in the wake of the CervicalCheck scandal that this would be forthcoming.  The Taoiseach said there would be a package of supports available to the women affected and to their families.  He also said last week that pending court cases would be dealt with through mediation.</p>  <p>  However, we understand that more cases are to be lodged this week.  During yesterday's sitting of the Committee of Public Accounts, the solicitor for Vicky Phelan, Cian O&rsquo;Carroll, spoke of two women who do not have time on their hands and have difficulty accessing their own medical records.</p><p>In an incident last Friday he described how, when the legal representatives made arrangements to collect documents that they were assured would be available at the CervicalCheck headquarters in Limerick, they were told on arrival that the documentation would not be made available and they were escorted off the premises.  This was done in the presence of the programme manager for CervicalCheck, Mr. John Gleeson.  That is hardly in keeping with the approach outlined by Government, is it?  Stephen Teap told the Committee of Public Accounts that no support services were provided to him or his children at this point.  Again, this is out of step with what has been promised by Government.</p> <p> It would seem that what has come from Government is more about being seen to take action and get control of the situation rather than delivering substantive action.  What the Government needs to do is take control of this issue.  Those in government are not commentators.  They are in charge and they need to act like it.  The cervical cancer audit, which has been available since 2014, still has not been published despite assurances given last week that it would.  Information in respect of the US laboratory detection rates that was promised to the Joint Committee on Health two weeks ago still has not been published.  Why the delay?  Why the wait?  Is Government not lifting the telephone and demanding that these records be put into the public domain?  Will the Government do that?  Will the Government ensure that it is published today?  This is not a new request.  This documentation has been promised.</p> <p> I want to return to the issue I raised yesterday because it was not answered by the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton.  It relates to when the then Minister for Health, and now Taoiseach, promised to introduce mandatory disclosure, but he decided not to proceed on the advice of the chief medical officer, Dr. Tony Holohan.  It was the wrong advice and the wrong decision.  The chief medical officer was informed of the CervicalCheck scandal around the same time as this advice was given to the Taoiseach.  A reasonable question is whether that advice and the information provided at the time to the then Minister for Health was informed as a result of the CervicalCheck scandal or indeed any other scandal.  Will the Government publish that advice today?  Will the Government publish the advice that the then Minister for Health got at the time as well as the advice the Government got to ensure that, late last year, it withdrew from the legislation that was going through these Houses the provisions for mandatory disclosure?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.152" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700013#L00200"><p>There are many questions being asked and many questions being answered today in multiple forums, as has been the case in recent weeks, including at Leaders' Questions, the Committee of Public Accounts and the Joint Committee on Health.  We also have a statutory inquiry-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.153" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" speakername="Joan Burton" time="12:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700013#L00300"><p>It is not statutory.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.154" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700013#L00400"><p>My apologies.  We have a scoping inquiry under way that will report initially in the first week of June and it will be finalised by the end of June.  It will be followed by a statutory inquiry.</p>  <p>  There is no question that any information or files are going to be hidden from anyone.  As Vicky Phelan said yesterday, what is needed is full accountability and that is what is going to be delivered.  What we are doing as a Government is trying to ensure that the information we put into the public domain now is fully accurate and complete.  That is why we want to ensure Dr. Scally can get on with the work he needs to do while respecting the fact that the committees have important work to do as well.  The work they have done in recent weeks has been most valuable.</p>  <p>  Deputy Doherty referred to supports for victims of this scandal.  I have met Stephen Teap and spoken to him on several occasions.  It was Stephen Teap's contribution and what he was looking for in terms of support that influenced the way in which the package was shaped and how we would tailor support for individuals and their families with medical cards, out-of-pocket expenses and others supports and counselling that may be needed.  It is by listening to people like Vicky Phelan, Stephen Teap and Emma Mhic Mhath&uacute;na that the Government has tried to respond as comprehensively as it can to provide tailor-made individual packages for families and individuals who need them from the HSE.  Not only that, we are appointing people within the HSE who appoint people to talk to families and individuals to ensure we get the supportive packages right.  That is a significant and important delivery for the Government to follow through on for victims and their families.</p>  <p>  Deputy Doherty referred to accountability.  We are already seeing, and we will continue to see, an insistence that no one is excluded from full scrutiny regardless of what offices people hold or who they are.  The way in which we can do that most comprehensively is to let Dr. Scally get on with the work that he needs to do and the follow-on inquiry that will come afterwards.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.155" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1288" speakername="Pearse Doherty" time="12:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700013#L00500"><p>The package of supports announced last week has not filtered through to the victims.  Stephen Teap was before the committee.  No support has been provided to him since then.  We had the announcement.  We had the press release but the follow-up has been wanting, to say the least, and that is not acceptable.  This needs to be about the victims - the women and their families.  Assurances from the T&aacute;naiste that the Government is appointing people within the HSE to liaise with them one week on are simply not good enough.</p>  <p>  I have asked the T&aacute;naiste about information that does not represent a new request but that has already been promised.  Are we going to see the cervical cancer audit of 2014 published?  Are we going to see the documentation relating to the detection rates of the US laboratories published, as promised to the Joint Committee on Health two weeks ago?  Will the Government publish the advice provided to the Taoiseach in respect of his U-turn on mandatory non-disclosure in 2016 as well as the advice provided in 2017 that encouraged the Government to withdraw the provision from the legislation that was passing through the House?</p>  <p>  This is my final point.  After eight days of searching for documentation, two individuals who do not have time on their hands were given assurances that the documentation would be in Limerick.  Then, they were told that the documentation would not be provided to them and they were escorted off the facility.  This is not the compassionate approach those of us in the House want to see in dealing with victims of this scandal.  The T&aacute;naiste should not tolerate it.  The Government needs to take a hold and get a grip on this situation.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.156" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700013#L00600"><p>The Government is getting a grip of this situation.  We are prioritising victims first.  That is why we will seek for packages to be put in place for people in a very supportive environment and in a proactive way coming from the HSE as opposed to expecting victims or families to have to seek those packages.</p>  <p>  For what it is worth, both Stephen Teap and Vicky Phelan spent time last night with the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, after their powerful testimony at the committee hearing.  The Minister sought to ensure from our perspective that we fully understand what is needed by victims and their families in order that we can follow through in a comprehensive way.  No victims should be treated in a way that adds any further to the trauma they have witnessed and the challenges that they continue to have to face, especially in the cases of the women who have cancer.  I can assure Deputy Doherty of that.</p>  <p>  If any commitments were made to make files or documentation available to committees, then that information will be forthcoming.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.157" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1367" speakername="Br&iacute;d Smith" time="12:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700013#L00700"><p>I appeal to the T&aacute;naiste, in the last week of this most historic campaign on the referendum to repeal the eighth amendment, to join me in putting some things to bed with the public, who are continually indicating that there is a degree or level of confusion about what this is about.  Will the T&aacute;naiste join me in saying to the population that women's lives matter indeed and that this referendum is not about a licence to kill, as has been indicated by posters, women being murderers, or the wholescale slaughter of babies with disability?</p><p>It is about an emotive, sensitive and deeply personal issue related to women's health.  In that context, women need to be given the right to make decisions about their lives.  The results of a poll published today in <i>The Irish Times </i>were very interesting.  They showed that when asked whether they would like the eighth amendment to be repealed, 44% of respondents answered &quot;Yes&quot;.  However, when asked whether they believed the law in Ireland needed to be changed to recognise a woman's right to choose to have an abortion, 62% of respondents answered &quot;Yes&quot;.  The confusion has been caused by imagery that is deliberately misleading and false and messaging that is untruthful and makes a mockery of women's lives and the deeply divisive and difficult choices they must often make. <br/><br/>We want to move away from the legacy of the Magdalen laundries, mother and baby homes in Tuam and elsewhere, the shaming and stigmatising of women and the wholesale export and outsourcing of women's healthcare to Britain and elsewhere when they face a crisis pregnancy.  We need to endorse the view expressed by Irish people in large numbers that this is about a woman's right to decide.  We must provide this clarity in a highly divisive debate in which the issue has been framed in terms of murder and manslaughter and the killing of babies, which is not the case.Later today I will be joined in Buswells Hotel by women who will give testimony about having an abortion for many and various reasons.  They include not having a home - as a former Minister with responsibility for housing, the T&aacute;naiste will be well aware of the number of women and children who are homeless; in an abusive relationship, as we know from the statistics for domestic violence and sexual abuse; do not having a decent job; and face the possibility of losing a job.  There are as many reasons as there are women. <br/><br/>I ask the T&aacute;naiste to join me in condemning any attempt to portray women as murderers or paint the referendum as being about a licence to kill people with disabilities or babies.  I ask him to join me in clarifying the position for the public.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.159" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700014#M00200"><p>I thank Deputy Br&iacute;d Smith for giving me an opportunity to speak about this issue.  As the Taoiseach stated earlier in the week, with some notable exceptions, the referendum campaign has, by and large, been respectful.  Given that this is such a divisive and difficult issue for many, people have engaged in considered discussion of it in their homes.  I have spoken to many people in their homes about the issue and they want facts.  We should try to look at the facts, rather than the posters.  We must recognise that in any campaign as emotive and divisive as this one, one gets people who are desperate to win an argument and who may present the facts in a very emotive manner.  I respect both sides in the referendum campaign.</p>  <p>  I passionately believe and hope the people will vote "Yes" next week because doing so would be a reflection of reality.  Abortion is a reality in Ireland and the truth is that the law that applies to abortion for Irish women is British abortion law.  Every year thousands of women are given a piece of paper with an address indicating where they should go, as long as it not here, thanks very much.  I am not willing to stand over that any more, which is the reason I am advocating a "Yes" vote. </p>  <p>  I could make many emotive arguments around rape, incest and fatal foetal abnormalities.  I have met many women who had to face these challenges and they chose to speak to me because of this debate.  Over time, my perspective on this issue changed on the basis of facts, as opposed to posters, conversations and listening to horror stories that we continue to allow as an unintended consequence of a change made to the Constitution in the 1980s.  I do not believe people expected what subsequently transpired.  The truth is that abortion is a reality in Ireland and women are making choices without support from the health system and doctors that is appropriate at a time of real vulnerability.  If the people give the Oireachtas permission, we must change the current position. </p>  <p>  I reassure the many people who are still undecided, those who recognise a change is needed but are a little concerned that it may go too far, that if they vote "Yes", there are many Members of the Oireachtas who will ensure the change we will make in legislation, if given the opportunity to do so, will respect and protect women in a much more comprehensive way than we have been able to do to date.  In doing so, we will also recognise the responsibility of the State towards providing protections for the unborn.  What the Government is proposing to do, with the support of many other Members, will strike the right balance if we are given the opportunity to do so through a "Yes" vote.  We will not be able to do anything if the people vote "No" because it will mean a freezing of time.  We will be stuck with all of the dilemmas we face today and turn a blind eye to many of them if we do not choose to change.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.160" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1367" speakername="Br&iacute;d Smith" time="12:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700014#M00300"><p>I fully agree with everything the T&aacute;naiste said.  While I also recognise that a divisive debate is taking place, I want the T&aacute;naiste to join me in stating the use of misleading information and ugly imagery and the claim that what is proposed is a licence to kill are confusing people.  If they are asked whether they want to give women the right to decide for themselves, 62% answer "Yes".  This is important because whatever the T&aacute;naiste or I think, the question people are being asked is whether they believe women should decide on this societal issue.  In the event that the referendum is won and people vote "Yes", we will have to deal with ancillary issues such as making contraception free and having non-ethos, objective and factually based sex education in schools.  These are issues that matter for women and if the referendum does not pass, we will continue to condemn women to leave the country and younger women will be condemned to take a pill alone at home and endure a great deal of pain without the medical supervision of their doctors.  There is a chill factor attached to the eighth amendment because it criminalises women and their doctors.  The T&aacute;naiste should not believe for one moment that this chill factor does not hang over the entire population, including partners and families.  While I appreciate his remarks, we must clarify that the referendum is not about a licence to kill.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.161" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700014#M00400"><p>As I stated previously, there are sincerely held views on both sides of the argument, including in this House, and we need to respect them on such an emotive and personal issue.  For that reason, from my experience, the focus of the "Yes" campaign has been on trying to provide people with facts, ensuring doctors are listened to and addressing the challenge the country faces in this matter.  Nobody is pro-abortion.  What we are trying to do is reduce the number of crisis pregnancies and, insofar as possible, the need for conversations on the termination of pregnancy.  A number of initiatives were launched yesterday to reinforce this message, including on education and making contraception free and easy to access.  The country is also having a conversation on how Ireland should deal with circumstances in which a decision is made to terminate a pregnancy.  For example, what protocols and processes will be in place and how can we wrap the health system around such decisions in a way that is supportive and offers alternatives and facts?  We will insist on time being taken for full consideration of all of the issues surrounding a decision of the magnitude of terminating a pregnancy.  As I stated, if the country gives the Houses an opportunity to legislate on these issues, we can put in place a much more compassionate and appropriate legal structure than the one in place because of the restrictions in the Constitution.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.162" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" speakername="Michael Collins" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00100"><p>In the programme for Government negotiations over two years ago, much of the discussion centred around rural Ireland and the losses of services that left a trail of devastation in rural towns and villages throughout Ireland, in particular, in west Cork.  Immediately after votes here in the D&aacute;il today, I will return to Ballydehob in west Cork for a public meeting to save the local post office, run efficiently by Ms Bridie Roycroft.  This woman is one of many postmasters and mistresses who received letters recently telling them of losses in their future income and offering them a chance to engage in a get-out redundancy.  Bridie has come out to the public fighting and is a model for other postmasters and mistresses throughout this country as she has decided to ask her community does it want a post office.  From what I have heard, she has got, and will tonight get, overwhelming support in Ballydehob as people plead with Bridie to keep the service open to the community.  Ever since she started the public battle, many have cancelled getting payments through direct debit and are now going back to Ballydehob post office for their payments as they knew it was a case of use it or lose it.</p>  <p>  Tonight's public meeting will again demonstrate to all how this village needs its post office, and the meeting will be replicated throughout the country in the coming weeks.  What do I say to the people of Ballydehob and beyond tonight who will attend?  Do I tell them the truth, that Fine Gael Governments, both this and the previous one, have failed as of yet to put new life into the post offices?  Over two years ago, the Government promised rural proofing and there was no delivery, as there is now a 15 km limit placed between post offices in rural communities.  Two years ago, they promised to look into community banking for post offices - no delivery.  Two years ago, they promised to look into the facilitation of motor tax payments through post offices - no delivery.  Two years ago, in the programme for Government, they promised that post offices would be a one-stop shop for Government services - no delivery.  Many more promises were made but as of yet there has been no delivery on the ground.  While Government TDs may lament throughout the country about post office closures in their communities, it is all crocodile tears as they have failed to date to sit down as a Government collectively and honestly looking at saving rural post offices.</p>  <p>  Redundancy packages are not a way of solving problems.  Communities must come out and save their own post offices but if the Government - this being almost the same Government since 2011 - fails to energise post offices by channelling new services through the door, it has failed these post offices and rural Ireland.</p>  <p>  Ballydehob, like other rural towns, cannot afford to lose its post office.  The Mizen peninsula, where Ballydehob sits, has seen two banks it had closed by the previous Government, leaving no day-to-day bank service within 40 km for many.  They have seen Garda stations closed by the previous Government.  Local pubs, shops and businesses have closed in the past few years.  Cuts to schools' capitation grants have seen our schools struggle for funds.  The closed school bus rule has generated more difficulties for parents in rural communities.  The Government cut home help service hours for our elderly and yesterday's report on our cataract service proves the Government let elderly people going blind wait five years for cataract operations in west Cork.  This is appalling, as the focus by Government was on how could it force cuts on rural Ireland rather than on how it could work with rural Ireland to rebuild and thrive.  What can I say to the people of Ballydehob tonight or to other communities in west Cork who have been let down by successive Governments and who are sick of empty promises to save their post offices?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.163" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00200"><p>Let me answer the questions in relation to post offices and other services, but can I just say that the contribution the Deputy has just made would suggest that rural Ireland is dying on its feet?  I know west Cork-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.164" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" speakername="Michael Collins" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00300"><p>It is.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.165" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00400"><p>No, I know west Cork well.  I know Ballydehob well.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.166" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00500"><p>Do something about it then.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.167" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00600"><p>I also know that there are parts of west Cork that are thriving.  This is a great place to live.  There are challenges in relation to post offices and we have worked with An Post.  An Post, in particular, has worked with postmasters to come up with an agreed approach to ensure that we have a post office infrastructure that can survive into the future recognising the modern realities that they face.</p>  <p>  Nobody is being forced to close.  These are voluntary decisions for postmasters to make.  What Bridie, I understand, is doing in Ballydehob is challenging people locally to use it or lose it.  I congratulate her on it.  If one wants to hang on to this post office then let us use it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.168" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00700"><p>Why does the Government not use it?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.169" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00800"><p>People have also challenged the Government and we are responding to that.  We are seeing parcel services being expanded through the post office network.  We are seeing new Government services.  There is a digital assist pilot programme being rolled out.  An Post has promised new financial services through its post office network before the end of the year.  Instead of throwing our hands in the air and saying nothing can be done-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.170" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N00900"><p>The Government is sitting on its hands.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.171" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01000"><p>-----An Post, working with postmasters and getting agreement and endorsement from them in a ballot, as well as working with the Minister, Deputy Naughten, in particular, who has really taken this issue hugely seriously as a priority in government, is ensuring that we have a future for a post office network that can help a thriving rural economy to grow and develop in the future.</p>  <p>  Of course, there is service provision on which we need to focus.  I have a whole list of west Cork hospitals in which we are currently investing, from Skibbereen to Bandon, Clonakilty, Dunmanway, Kinsale and Castletownbere.  On the other issues the Deputy raised here, such as cataracts, there is ongoing work but we are putting increasing resources into these areas to resolve them.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.172" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01100"><p>Blind people.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.173" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01200"><p>Let us not paint rural Ireland as part of this country that is dying on its feet-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.174" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01300"><p>The Government is killing it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.175" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01400"><p>-----because it is simply not true.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.176" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" speakername="Michael Collins" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01500"><p>The T&aacute;naiste does not seem to grasp the seriousness of the situation for people in rural Ireland.  He should not stand up here and talk about what the Government is doing for people with cataract operations.  For God's sake, let him stop.  It is scandalous beyond belief to see the report yesterday of someone five years waiting.  The Government let him go blind rather than doing something.</p>  <p>  Ballydehob has one of the greatest community spirits in Ireland, safeguarded by one of the finest community garda&iacute; in the country.  There is a huge community spirit.  Ballydehob is, as I have always called, the festival capital of Ireland.  Almost every weekend, there is a festival.  They do work, they work hard but they need their post office, and so do the people of Schull and Goleen, and through west Cork.  Look at Ballineen post office, with the worry of closure hanging over the community for months as the Government stands idly by and lets it happen.</p>  <p>  I call on the T&aacute;naiste today to stand up before the people of this country and say that enough is enough and the Government will co-operate with the Minister, Deputy Naughten, to speed up saving the post office network.  The Government must get the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, to sit down immediately to work with Deputy Naughten to have motor tax paid through the post offices.  This will help rural communities.  The Government must start putting rural community banking into post offices, cut out the 15 km rule between post offices and apply that in the cities where there is a proper transport service for people who can travel.  They must ensure that the post office will be a one-stop shop for all Government services.  This will let the people of Ballydehob and beyond see the Government TDs are not crying crocodile tears for the post office service.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.177" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01600"><p>In relation to Government interest and vibrancy in west Cork, we saw 200 jobs created in Skibbereen across three companies last week and the Minister of State at the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Pat Breen, was there for that.  That reinforces what I am saying, that west Cork is a vibrant community.  West Cork has challenges that we need to address through policy and An Post is one of the challenges that we are addressing, but that has happened in a way that has the support of postmasters.  Nothing is being enforced on anybody.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.178" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" speakername="Michael Collins" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01700"><p>It is all done by stealth.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.179" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01800"><p>If one looks at the new digital assist pilot scheme, two out of the 20 pilots are in west Cork.  I take to a certain extent Deputy Michael Collins's point that there are challenges that we need to face to ensure that living in rural Ireland is a vibrant proposition for people and we need to ensure that basic services and infrastructure are there to allow for that, but that is exactly what the Minister, Deputy Naughten, in particular, has taken on board in terms of looking at the new services that we can deliver through the post office network, and those conversations are already taking place in government.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.180" nospeaker="true" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N01900">Questions on Promised Legislation</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.181" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N02000"><p>We have only 15 minutes today, one minute for one question.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.182" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1335" speakername="Dara Calleary" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N02100"><p>This morning the NESC published a report calling on the Government to build homes on publicly owned lands.  It is extraordinary that a body of its significance still feels it has to remind the Government to take this.  The report states, "Publicly owned sites now have a central role in addressing the housing crisis and starting the transition to a new system of active land management and urban development."  It is extraordinary that there is not a programme in place to build actively on State owned lands already.  We are five years into a housing crisis.  What is the T&aacute;naiste's response to the NESC report and can he confirm what State owned sites, in particular in Dublin, are ready to go to construction?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.183" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700015#N02200"><p>I might, if there is a detailed follow-up, ask the Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, Deputy Damien English, to contribute.</p><p>We discussed the report in Cabinet this week.  Effectively, the report endorses what the Government has been doing, particularly with regard to Ireland 2040 and medium-term planning to make sure we see the next phases of residential development in Ireland happening on the basis of proper and good planning as opposed to being driven by individual developers on the basis of what sites they can access and so on.  We have undertaken an audit of all available public land for housing throughout the country.  Every local authority has been asked to report comprehensively on it.  I remember it clearly during my time in the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government.  We are now putting pressure on to make sure we maximise the potential of those, whether it is social housing, social housing and private combined, a public private partnership or affordable housing schemes.  That is exactly what is happening now.  What the Government is doing, I am glad to say, has been endorsed by and large by the NESC report that was published this week.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.185" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1288" speakername="Pearse Doherty" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00200"><p>This morning there were reports of families sleeping in Garda stations.  I understand in April and May there was a dramatic increase in the number of families unable to secure emergency accommodation.  These families are then referred to Garda stations for child protection reasons.  We can all agree it is a completely unacceptable situation.  It is another example of the failure of the Minister with responsibility for housing to get to grips with the problem.  Will the Minister of State tell us how many referrals to Garda stations happened in the months of March, April and May of this year?  Will he tell us what the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government is doing to get to grips with the issue?  Will he assure us the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government, the Department of Children and Youth Affairs and the Department of Justice and Equality will come up with a co-ordinated approach to deal with this problem?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.186" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1264" speakername="Damien English" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00300"><p>I do not have the figures for the numbers that presented to Garda stations but I can certainly try to get them for the Deputy.  There is no reason for people to spend a night in Garda accommodation.  There is no reason for it whatsoever.  There are a lot of service providers and &euro;120 million was spent this year directly on homelessness services.  People are placed in emergency accommodation.  Sometimes people present as homeless late at night and the services are not there and they end up in Garda stations.  There is no need for it.  In the stories that were reported in the media at the weekend, people said they knew they were going to be homeless.  They would not need to go to a Garda station.  The services are there.  A lot of people are moving through emergency accommodation and placed in homes.  Last year, the number was 4,700.  There has been a lot of movement.  The numbers are still far too high.  We all accept that.  It is untrue to say that the numbers presenting have been increasing in Dublin.  They have been decreasing.  Overall the figures nationally are still far too high.  We are dealing with that but it is not true to say there has been an increase in presentations in March and April.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.187" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1288" speakername="Pearse Doherty" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00400"><p>If the Minister of State sends those figures, it would be very helpful.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.188" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1264" speakername="Damien English" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00500"><p>I certainly will.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.189" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1353" speakername="Brendan Howlin" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00600"><p>A Belfast High Court ruled on Monday that civil servants cannot make major decisions normally taken in Northern Ireland by Ministers.  A judicial review there ruled that civil servants had no power, in this case to approve a planning application, but the expectation is that it is likely to have consequences for other significant administrative decisions.  It is clear the Westminster Government is consumed by Brexit.  There seems to be little progress in restoring an Executive in Northern Ireland.  Is there any initiative under way by Government to facilitate the restoration of power-sharing and an Executive in Northern Ireland or are we going to face a situation where there is simply no effective authority to implement normal administrative procedures in the North of the island?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.190" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00700"><p>I share the Deputy's frustration and concern but my job is to get things moving, which is what I am trying to do.  In the past week, there have been some positive developments in Northern Ireland with regard to the launch of a public consultation process around legacy which is something we have been waiting for quite some time.  It is hugely important to many families in Northern Ireland.</p><p>What we got from a court decision this week is a reminder that the <i>status quo </i>is not okay in Northern Ireland in terms of normal basic decisions that impact on people's lives and livelihoods.  In this case it was a decision that said a civil servant was not empowered to make the decision he or she did on a planning application for an incinerator.  There are a lot of other decisions stacking up now.  There are hundreds which need political input.  They need a Minister in a devolved government to make a decision.  Those decisions are not being made.</p><p>I am speaking to the Secretary of State of Northern Ireland to ensure she can take a practical approach to making important decisions.  We want to do it in an appropriate structure.  Ultimately, we continue to talk to parties to try to find a way forward to return Northern Ireland to the devolved governance it should have.  In the absence of that, we are drifting in a way that is very concerning for many decisions that need to be taken in Northern Ireland.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.191" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" speakername="Mattie McGrath" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00800"><p>My question is about the programme for Government and support for education in national schools.  St. Mary's CBS primary school in Carrick-on-Suir is an excellent school with excellent staff and principal, Denis Cotter.  In February of last year, the school got DEIS 1 status and was delighted.  Last September, after enrolments, the school was one short.  It had 132 students but it needed 133 to retain its staff.  Its DEIS status allowed it to have classes with fewer than 25 students, which was wonderful for the school.  Lo and behold in September, a few months after it lost its staff, the direct provision centre, which had been closed, reopened and the school now has six pupils enrolled from that centre.  They are very welcome.  The school educates them and does a very good job, but now the school is way over the threshold and is losing a staff member.  Will the Minister for Education and Skills intervene?  As a result of the intricacies of the categories and numbers, it is a numbers game and if a school does not fit into a category, it is in trouble.  It is reprehensible.  The school needs to retain its staff to deal with the extra pupils it got in addition to those it already had.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.192" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1293" speakername="Richard Bruton" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O00900"><p>The system caters for 3,200 schools and it is based on a schedule of allocation.  There is an appeal process which is independently run.  With such a scheme there is no ministerial discretion to deviate from it.  It is provided and administered equitably across every school that applies.  There is an appeal mechanism.  I will check the position of the school the Deputy referred to but that is the situation.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.193" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1269" speakername="Caoimhgh&iacute;n &Oacute; Caol&aacute;in" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O01000"><p>Forty-four years ago today, the most terrible atrocity in terms of lives lost during the years of conflict that then raged was visited upon the citizenry of the city of Dublin and my home town of Monaghan.  The Taoiseach is meeting British Prime Minister Theresa May today on the sidelines of the EU summit in Bulgaria.  Will the T&aacute;naiste advise if the Taoiseach will reflect on the fact the D&aacute;il has on two occasions unanimously agreed to request the release by the British Government and its agencies of all relevant documentation regarding those attacks and that to date there has been only refusal and denial?  Will the T&aacute;naiste contact the Taoiseach and urge him to raise the repeated requests of this Parliament at today's meeting with the British Prime Minister?  Will the T&aacute;naiste and Taoiseach undertake to press this matter at every opportunity, mindful of the passage of so many years and the need for full disclosure in order that truth and justice can be achieved in memory of the victims, the surviving injured and the families directly affected?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.194" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O01100"><p>I am very conscious that as we moved through Leaders' Questions today, the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, and many families of the Dublin-Monaghan bombing victims were commemorating 44 years since it happened.  I have met the families and they are decent people looking for the truth.  We want to help them get it.  I have raised the issue with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in recent weeks and my office raises the issue regularly with both the British Government and the Northern Ireland Office.  We will continue to do it and I will continue to talk to the Taoiseach about it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.195" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" speakername="Joan Burton" time="12:40:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700016#O01200"><p>In recent days, the Environmental Protection Agency issued a damning report on water quality in respect of five beaches in north and south Dublin which failed to meet minimum EU water quality standards.  The agency says five more beaches, all in north County Dublin, are at risk.</p><p>In a region with hundreds of thousands of families and children, we are coming into summer and famous beaches such as the north beach in Rush, Merrion Strand and Sandymount Strand and others are at risk of becoming permanently closed if they continue to fail to meet EU water quality requirements.  What does the Government propose to do about this?  It is a disaster for the city but it is a particular disaster for the hundreds of thousands of children in the Dublin area who rely on beaches for recreational use, for sport and other activity in the summer but will now be barred from those beaches.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.197" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00200"><p>It is not all bad news, by a long shot.  The EPA report on bathing water in Ireland in 2017-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.198" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" speakername="Joan Burton" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00300"><p>There are ten beaches in Dublin.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.199" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00400"><p>It is not just about Dublin.  This is a national-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.200" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" speakername="Joan Burton" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00500"><p>My question was about Dublin, which is where the biggest population lives.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.201" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00600"><p>The overall quality of Ireland's bathing water remains good and 132 out of 142 beaches meet strict EU standards.  Seven bathing waters are at poor status, which compares well with other northern European states.  Having said that, it is still not good enough and we need to continue to improve.  We need a plan for each of the areas where the water quality is not as good as it needs to be and we need the necessary investment to bring that about.  We also need to understand in detail the reasons for the issues at present.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.202" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1342" speakername="Eugene Murphy" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00700"><p>On people with disabilities, the programme for Government states, "We will examine transport service provision for young people with disabilities to ensure that the service is fit for purpose, consistent with their needs."  A report commissioned in 2002 stated that a key responsibility for Government was to ensure that people with disability can move around freely to the best of their ability.  A major component of this is the adequate provision of an integrated accessible public transport system.  To my horror, I find out that a number of Bus &Eacute;ireann routes are not wheelchair accessible.  I watched a tourist recently trying to struggle onto a bus and, while I give full marks to the Bus &Eacute;ireann staff who were excellent, it was appalling to see.  A number of routes around the country are not accessible for people with disabilities.  I implore the T&aacute;naiste, as deputy head of Government, to take this matter in hand and ensure that Bus &Eacute;ireann gets the budget to deal with this without delay.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.203" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00800"><p>I will raise this issue with the Minister concerned and make sure he comes back to the Deputy.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.204" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" speakername="Michael Collins" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P00900"><p>The programme for Government states, "We will set out capitation rates to schools on a rolling 3-year basis, allowing for forward planning."  The reality is that capitation grants were cut from &euro;200 per child to &euro;170 by the former Government, a cut of 15%.  As a result, most primary schools are relying on fundraising by parents to make up the shortfall in funding.  I know this at first hand as I am on a board of management and I know the difficulties we have in trying to make up the shortfall by fundraising.  This is putting huge pressure on parents and schools.  When will this Government restore the capitation grant and properly fund our primary schools?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.205" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1293" speakername="Richard Bruton" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P01000"><p>It is in both the programme for Government and the confidence and supply agreement that we will address capitation over the lifetime of the Government.  In the first two budgets we gave priority to areas such as special education, the provision of SNAs, the reduction of the pupil-teacher ratio and support for disadvantaged schools and we have to make decisions within the available resources to prioritise the areas where we feel the greatest pressure is.  I fully recognise that capitation is posing a problem for schools and we will be examining it in the context of the forthcoming budget.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.206" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1321" speakername="John Brassil" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P01100"><p>In regard to the housing crisis, the programme for Government states, "To deter &ldquo;land hoarding&rdquo; by developers, we will monitor and benchmark the use by local authorities of the new &ldquo;Vacant Site Levy&rdquo; legislated for by the last Government, to take effect from 2018.".  In an earlier response, the T&aacute;naiste said the Government had undertaken a comprehensive audit of all State-owned land but how much of the land subject to the vacant site levy is owned by the State?  How much will it cost the Office of Public Works, local authorities and NAMA to pay what is, in effect, their own levy?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.207" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P01200"><p>I do not have that information but I will see if it is available.  If it is, we can try to send it on to the Deputy.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.208" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" speakername="Bernard Durkan" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P01300"><p>A criminal law (sexual offences) Bill is promised and it proposes to provide for presumptive minimum sentences for repeat sexual offenders and to amend an anomaly with respect to penalties for incest.  I ask the T&aacute;naiste if and when this legislation will be brought before the House, given its importance.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.209" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="12:50:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700017#P01400"><p>It is on the priority list and the drafters are working on it.  The Deputy can expect progress on it this year.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.210" nospeaker="true" time="13:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700018#Q00100">Affordable Housing: Motion (Resumed) [Private Members]</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.211" nospeaker="true" time="13:00:00" ><p>The following motion was moved by Deputy Darragh O'Brien on Wednesday, 16 May 2018.</p><p></p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.212" nospeaker="true" time="13:00:00" ><p>Debate resumed on amendment No. 2:</p><p>- (Minister for Housing, Planning and Local Government).</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.213" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="13:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700018#Q00400"><p>I must now deal with a postponed division on amendment No. 2 to the motion on affordable housing.  On Wednesday, 16 May, on the question, &quot;That the amendment be made,&quot; a division was claimed.  In accordance with Standing Order 70(2), that division must be taken now.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.214/1" nospeaker="true" time="13:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700018#Q00500"><p>Amendment put:</p><p>The Dáil divided: Tá, 38; Níl, 73; Staon, 0.</p><br/><p>Tellers: Tá, Deputies Joe McHugh and Tony McLoughlin; Níl, Deputies Michael Moynihan and John Lahart.</p></speech>
        <division id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.214/2" nospeaker="true" divdate="2018-05-17" time="13:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700018#Q00500">
            <divisioncount ayes="38" noes="73" abstain="0" />
                <mplist vote="aye">
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1246" vote="aye">Maria Bailey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1272" vote="aye">Pat Breen</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1310" vote="aye">Colm Brophy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1293" vote="aye">Richard Bruton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" vote="aye">Catherine Byrne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1260" vote="aye">Se&aacute;n Canney</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1339" vote="aye">Marcella Corcoran Kennedy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" vote="aye">Simon Coveney</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1364" vote="aye">Michael D'Arcy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1261" vote="aye">Jim Daly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1352" vote="aye">John Deasy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" vote="aye">Paschal Donohoe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" vote="aye">Bernard Durkan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1264" vote="aye">Damien English</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1214" vote="aye">Frances Fitzgerald</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1331" vote="aye">Peter Fitzpatrick</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" vote="aye">Charles Flanagan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1318" vote="aye">Brendan Griffin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1365" vote="aye">Paul Kehoe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1314" vote="aye">Se&aacute;n Kyne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1240" vote="aye">Michael Lowry</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1243" vote="aye">Josepha Madigan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1290" vote="aye">Joe McHugh</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1343" vote="aye">Tony McLoughlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1247" vote="aye">Mary Mitchell O'Connor</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1363" vote="aye">Kevin  Moran</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1282" vote="aye">Dara Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1295" vote="aye">Eoghan Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1234" vote="aye">Denis Naughten</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1315" vote="aye">Hildegarde Naughton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1328" vote="aye">Tom Neville</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1267" vote="aye">Patrick O'Donovan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1329" vote="aye">Fergus O'Dowd</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1334" vote="aye">Michael Ring</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1304" vote="aye">Noel Rock</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" vote="aye">Shane Ross</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1277" vote="aye">David Stanton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1358" vote="aye">Katherine Zappone</mpname>
                </mplist>
                <mplist vote="no">
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1330" vote="no">Gerry Adams</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1432" vote="no">Mick Barry</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" vote="no">Richard Boyd Barrett</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1321" vote="no">John Brassil</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1332" vote="no">Declan Breathnach</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" vote="no">Tommy Broughan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1354" vote="no">James Browne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1279" vote="no">Pat Buckley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" vote="no">Joan Burton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1220" vote="no">Mary Butler</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1225" vote="no">Thomas Byrne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1350" vote="no">Jackie Cahill</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1335" vote="no">Dara Calleary</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1357" vote="no">Pat Casey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1218" vote="no">Shane Cassells</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1255" vote="no">Jack Chambers</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" vote="no">Michael Collins</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1221" vote="no">Niall Collins</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" vote="no">Barry Cowen</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1309" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Crowe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1288" vote="no">Pearse Doherty</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1436" vote="no">Stephen Donnelly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1274" vote="no">Timmy Dooley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1303" vote="no">Dessie Ellis</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1317" vote="no">Martin Ferris</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1266" vote="no">Kathleen Funchion</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1289" vote="no">Pat Gallagher</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1360" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Haughey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1348" vote="no">S&eacute;amus Healy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1353" vote="no">Brendan Howlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1229" vote="no">Billy Kelleher</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1299" vote="no">Gino Kenny</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1345" vote="no">Martin Kenny</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1311" vote="no">John Lahart</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1323" vote="no">James Lawless</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1242" vote="no">Catherine Martin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1244" vote="no">Charlie McConalogue</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" vote="no">Mattie McGrath</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1223" vote="no">Michael McGrath</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1362" vote="no">Denise Mitchell</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1284" vote="no">Aindrias Moynihan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1283" vote="no">Michael Moynihan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1333" vote="no">Imelda Munster</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1262" vote="no">Margaret Murphy O'Mahony</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1342" vote="no">Eugene Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1433" vote="no">Paul Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1340" vote="no">Carol Nolan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1228" vote="no">Darragh O'Brien</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" vote="no">Jim O'Callaghan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1278" vote="no">Kevin O'Keeffe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1257" vote="no">Fiona O'Loughlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1302" vote="no">Louise O'Reilly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1324" vote="no">Frank O'Rourke</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1325" vote="no">Jan O'Sullivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1291" vote="no">Maureen O'Sullivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1215" vote="no">Eoin &Oacute; Broin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1269" vote="no">Caoimhgh&iacute;n &Oacute; Caol&aacute;in</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1312" vote="no">&Eacute;amon &Oacute; Cu&iacute;v</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" vote="no">Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1305" vote="no">Aengus &Oacute; Snodaigh</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1366" vote="no">Thomas Pringle</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" vote="no">Maurice Quinlivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1231" vote="no">Anne Rabbitte</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1301" vote="no">Brendan  Ryan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" vote="no">Eamon Ryan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1344" vote="no">Eamon Scanlon</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1276" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Sherlock</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1222" vote="no">R&oacute;is&iacute;n Shortall</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1367" vote="no">Br&iacute;d Smith</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1271" vote="no">Niamh Smyth</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" vote="no">Brian Stanley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1235" vote="no">Peadar T&oacute;ib&iacute;n</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1250" vote="no">Robert Troy</mpname>
                </mplist>
                <mplist vote="abstain">
                </mplist>
        </division>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.214/3" nospeaker="true" time="13:00:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700018#Q00500"><p>Amendment declared lost.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.215" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1215" speakername="Eoin &Oacute; Broin" time="13:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700019#R00050"><p>I move amendment No. 1:</p><blockquote>To delete all words after &ldquo;calls on the Government to:&rdquo; and substitute the following:<br /><br />&ldquo;&mdash; at least, double the capital investment in the public housing provision for Budget 2019, to dramatically increase the delivery of social and affordable homes on public land and in mixed-income and mixed-tenure estates;<br /><br />&mdash; amend Part V of the Planning and Development Act 2000, to deliver 20 per cent social and affordable housing in private developments, and 30 per cent social and affordable housing in strategic development zones;<br /><br />&mdash; immediately introduce an affordable rental and purchase housing scheme to be rolled out by local authorities for households on incomes between &euro;35,000 and &euro;75,000 in this budgetary year;<br /><br />&mdash; ensure that local authorities have adequate staff to deliver an ambitious programme of public housing and reduce the approval and procurement timeframe from 18 months to 6 months to ensure speedy delivery of new homes;<br /><br />&mdash; fast-track the legislation for the establishment of Home Building Finance Ireland and target the fund at small and medium builders developing affordable housing;<br /><br />&mdash; take a more proactive approach to the use of finance from credit unions, to assist the delivery of social and affordable homes;<br /><br />&mdash; develop a coherent plan in partnership with the approved housing body sector to reverse the Eurostat decision to reclassify Approved Housing Bodies as part of the government sector; and<br /><br />&mdash; ensure that no Local Infrastructure Housing Activation Fund funding is released to any project that does not deliver genuinely affordable homes at prices between &euro;170,000 and &euro;280,000, depending on the region.&rdquo;</blockquote></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.216/1" nospeaker="true" time="13:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700019#R00100"><p>Amendment put:</p><p>The Dáil divided: Tá, 36; Níl, 75; Staon, 0.</p><br/><p>Tellers: Tá, Deputies Aengus Ó Snodaigh and Denise Mitchell; Níl, Deputies Michael Moynihan and John Lahart.</p></speech>
        <division id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.216/2" nospeaker="true" divdate="2018-05-17" time="13:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700019#R00100">
            <divisioncount ayes="36" noes="75" abstain="0" />
                <mplist vote="aye">
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1432" vote="aye">Mick Barry</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" vote="aye">Richard Boyd Barrett</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" vote="aye">Tommy Broughan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1279" vote="aye">Pat Buckley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" vote="aye">Joan Burton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1309" vote="aye">Se&aacute;n Crowe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1288" vote="aye">Pearse Doherty</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1303" vote="aye">Dessie Ellis</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1317" vote="aye">Martin Ferris</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1266" vote="aye">Kathleen Funchion</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1348" vote="aye">S&eacute;amus Healy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1353" vote="aye">Brendan Howlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1299" vote="aye">Gino Kenny</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1345" vote="aye">Martin Kenny</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1242" vote="aye">Catherine Martin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1362" vote="aye">Denise Mitchell</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1333" vote="aye">Imelda Munster</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1433" vote="aye">Paul Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1340" vote="aye">Carol Nolan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1302" vote="aye">Louise O'Reilly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1325" vote="aye">Jan O'Sullivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1291" vote="aye">Maureen O'Sullivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1215" vote="aye">Eoin &Oacute; Broin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1269" vote="aye">Caoimhgh&iacute;n &Oacute; Caol&aacute;in</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" vote="aye">Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1305" vote="aye">Aengus &Oacute; Snodaigh</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1370" vote="aye">Willie Penrose</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1366" vote="aye">Thomas Pringle</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" vote="aye">Maurice Quinlivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1301" vote="aye">Brendan  Ryan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" vote="aye">Eamon Ryan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1276" vote="aye">Se&aacute;n Sherlock</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1222" vote="aye">R&oacute;is&iacute;n Shortall</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1367" vote="aye">Br&iacute;d Smith</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" vote="aye">Brian Stanley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1235" vote="aye">Peadar T&oacute;ib&iacute;n</mpname>
                </mplist>
                <mplist vote="no">
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1246" vote="no">Maria Bailey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1321" vote="no">John Brassil</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1332" vote="no">Declan Breathnach</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1272" vote="no">Pat Breen</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1310" vote="no">Colm Brophy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1354" vote="no">James Browne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1293" vote="no">Richard Bruton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1220" vote="no">Mary Butler</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" vote="no">Catherine Byrne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1225" vote="no">Thomas Byrne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1350" vote="no">Jackie Cahill</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1335" vote="no">Dara Calleary</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1260" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Canney</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1357" vote="no">Pat Casey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1218" vote="no">Shane Cassells</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1255" vote="no">Jack Chambers</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" vote="no">Michael Collins</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1221" vote="no">Niall Collins</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1339" vote="no">Marcella Corcoran Kennedy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" vote="no">Simon Coveney</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" vote="no">Barry Cowen</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1364" vote="no">Michael D'Arcy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1261" vote="no">Jim Daly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1352" vote="no">John Deasy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1436" vote="no">Stephen Donnelly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" vote="no">Paschal Donohoe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1274" vote="no">Timmy Dooley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" vote="no">Bernard Durkan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1264" vote="no">Damien English</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1214" vote="no">Frances Fitzgerald</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1331" vote="no">Peter Fitzpatrick</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" vote="no">Charles Flanagan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1289" vote="no">Pat Gallagher</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1318" vote="no">Brendan Griffin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1360" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Haughey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1365" vote="no">Paul Kehoe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1229" vote="no">Billy Kelleher</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1314" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Kyne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1311" vote="no">John Lahart</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1323" vote="no">James Lawless</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1240" vote="no">Michael Lowry</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1243" vote="no">Josepha Madigan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1244" vote="no">Charlie McConalogue</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" vote="no">Mattie McGrath</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1223" vote="no">Michael McGrath</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1290" vote="no">Joe McHugh</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1343" vote="no">Tony McLoughlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1247" vote="no">Mary Mitchell O'Connor</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1363" vote="no">Kevin  Moran</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1284" vote="no">Aindrias Moynihan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1283" vote="no">Michael Moynihan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1262" vote="no">Margaret Murphy O'Mahony</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1282" vote="no">Dara Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1295" vote="no">Eoghan Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1342" vote="no">Eugene Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1234" vote="no">Denis Naughten</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1315" vote="no">Hildegarde Naughton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1328" vote="no">Tom Neville</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1228" vote="no">Darragh O'Brien</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" vote="no">Jim O'Callaghan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1267" vote="no">Patrick O'Donovan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1329" vote="no">Fergus O'Dowd</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1278" vote="no">Kevin O'Keeffe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1257" vote="no">Fiona O'Loughlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1324" vote="no">Frank O'Rourke</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1312" vote="no">&Eacute;amon &Oacute; Cu&iacute;v</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1231" vote="no">Anne Rabbitte</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1334" vote="no">Michael Ring</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1304" vote="no">Noel Rock</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" vote="no">Shane Ross</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1344" vote="no">Eamon Scanlon</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1271" vote="no">Niamh Smyth</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1277" vote="no">David Stanton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1250" vote="no">Robert Troy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1358" vote="no">Katherine Zappone</mpname>
                </mplist>
                <mplist vote="abstain">
                </mplist>
        </division>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.216/3" nospeaker="true" time="13:10:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700019#R00100"><p>Amendment declared lost.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.217/1" nospeaker="true" time="13:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700020#S00100"><p>Question put: "That the motion be agreed to."</p><p>The Dáil divided: Tá, 39; Níl, 79; Staon, 0.</p><br/><p>Tellers: Tá, Deputies Michael Moynihan and John Lahart; Níl, Deputies Joe McHugh and Tony McLoughlin.</p></speech>
        <division id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.217/2" nospeaker="true" divdate="2018-05-17" time="13:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700020#S00100">
            <divisioncount ayes="39" noes="79" abstain="0" />
                <mplist vote="aye">
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1321" vote="aye">John Brassil</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1332" vote="aye">Declan Breathnach</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1354" vote="aye">James Browne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1220" vote="aye">Mary Butler</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1225" vote="aye">Thomas Byrne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1350" vote="aye">Jackie Cahill</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1335" vote="aye">Dara Calleary</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1357" vote="aye">Pat Casey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1218" vote="aye">Shane Cassells</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1255" vote="aye">Jack Chambers</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1263" vote="aye">Michael Collins</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1221" vote="aye">Niall Collins</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1217" vote="aye">Barry Cowen</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1298" vote="aye">John Curran</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1436" vote="aye">Stephen Donnelly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1274" vote="aye">Timmy Dooley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1289" vote="aye">Pat Gallagher</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1360" vote="aye">Se&aacute;n Haughey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1229" vote="aye">Billy Kelleher</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1311" vote="aye">John Lahart</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1323" vote="aye">James Lawless</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1244" vote="aye">Charlie McConalogue</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1347" vote="aye">Mattie McGrath</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1223" vote="aye">Michael McGrath</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1284" vote="aye">Aindrias Moynihan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1283" vote="aye">Michael Moynihan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1262" vote="aye">Margaret Murphy O'Mahony</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1342" vote="aye">Eugene Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1228" vote="aye">Darragh O'Brien</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" vote="aye">Jim O'Callaghan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1227" vote="aye">Willie O'Dea</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1278" vote="aye">Kevin O'Keeffe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1257" vote="aye">Fiona O'Loughlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1324" vote="aye">Frank O'Rourke</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1312" vote="aye">&Eacute;amon &Oacute; Cu&iacute;v</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1231" vote="aye">Anne Rabbitte</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1344" vote="aye">Eamon Scanlon</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1271" vote="aye">Niamh Smyth</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1250" vote="aye">Robert Troy</mpname>
                </mplist>
                <mplist vote="no">
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1330" vote="no">Gerry Adams</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1246" vote="no">Maria Bailey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1432" vote="no">Mick Barry</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1238" vote="no">Richard Boyd Barrett</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1252" vote="no">John Brady</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1272" vote="no">Pat Breen</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1310" vote="no">Colm Brophy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" vote="no">Tommy Broughan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1293" vote="no">Richard Bruton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1279" vote="no">Pat Buckley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1253" vote="no">Joan Burton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" vote="no">Catherine Byrne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1260" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Canney</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1273" vote="no">Joe Carey</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1339" vote="no">Marcella Corcoran Kennedy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" vote="no">Simon Coveney</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1309" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Crowe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1364" vote="no">Michael D'Arcy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1261" vote="no">Jim Daly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1352" vote="no">John Deasy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1268" vote="no">Pat Deering</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1288" vote="no">Pearse Doherty</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1338" vote="no">Regina Doherty</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1292" vote="no">Paschal Donohoe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1322" vote="no">Bernard Durkan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1303" vote="no">Dessie Ellis</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1264" vote="no">Damien English</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1317" vote="no">Martin Ferris</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1214" vote="no">Frances Fitzgerald</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1331" vote="no">Peter Fitzpatrick</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" vote="no">Charles Flanagan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1266" vote="no">Kathleen Funchion</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1318" vote="no">Brendan Griffin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1348" vote="no">S&eacute;amus Healy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1353" vote="no">Brendan Howlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1365" vote="no">Paul Kehoe</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1299" vote="no">Gino Kenny</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1345" vote="no">Martin Kenny</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1314" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Kyne</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1240" vote="no">Michael Lowry</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1243" vote="no">Josepha Madigan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1242" vote="no">Catherine Martin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1290" vote="no">Joe McHugh</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1343" vote="no">Tony McLoughlin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1247" vote="no">Mary Mitchell O'Connor</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1362" vote="no">Denise Mitchell</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1363" vote="no">Kevin  Moran</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1333" vote="no">Imelda Munster</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1282" vote="no">Dara Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1295" vote="no">Eoghan Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1433" vote="no">Paul Murphy</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1234" vote="no">Denis Naughten</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1315" vote="no">Hildegarde Naughton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1328" vote="no">Tom Neville</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1340" vote="no">Carol Nolan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1267" vote="no">Patrick O'Donovan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1329" vote="no">Fergus O'Dowd</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1302" vote="no">Louise O'Reilly</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1325" vote="no">Jan O'Sullivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1291" vote="no">Maureen O'Sullivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1215" vote="no">Eoin &Oacute; Broin</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1269" vote="no">Caoimhgh&iacute;n &Oacute; Caol&aacute;in</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" vote="no">Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1305" vote="no">Aengus &Oacute; Snodaigh</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1370" vote="no">Willie Penrose</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1366" vote="no">Thomas Pringle</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1327" vote="no">Maurice Quinlivan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1334" vote="no">Michael Ring</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1304" vote="no">Noel Rock</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" vote="no">Shane Ross</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1301" vote="no">Brendan  Ryan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1294" vote="no">Eamon Ryan</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1276" vote="no">Se&aacute;n Sherlock</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1222" vote="no">R&oacute;is&iacute;n Shortall</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1367" vote="no">Br&iacute;d Smith</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1232" vote="no">Brian Stanley</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1277" vote="no">David Stanton</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1235" vote="no">Peadar T&oacute;ib&iacute;n</mpname>
                    <mpname id="com.kildarestreet/member/1358" vote="no">Katherine Zappone</mpname>
                </mplist>
                <mplist vote="abstain">
                </mplist>
        </division>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.217/3" nospeaker="true" time="13:20:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700020#S00100"><p>Question declared lost.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.218" nospeaker="true" time="13:20:00" ><p>Explanations under Standing Order 138(2A) as received from Members</p><p></p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.219" nospeaker="true" time="13:20:00" ><p>Sitting suspended at 1.25 p.m. and resumed at 2.05 p.m.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.220" nospeaker="true" time="13:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700021#W00100">Palestine: Statements (Resumed)</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.221" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1350" speakername="Jackie Cahill" time="13:30:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700021#W00200"><p>The conflict between Palestine and Israel is a tragedy.  I used to have a lot of sympathy for Israel, the people of which suffered terrible oppression during the Second World War.  I have wondered how a previous generation could have stood idly by and let it happen.  It was very difficult for the Israeli people to establish the state of Israel and their battle for nationhood was strung with grief, but the Israeli people who were once oppressed have become the oppressors.  When the conflict between Israel and Palestine was explained to me in detail and I began to read about events and how the people of Palestine were being treated, it became clear that we had to reach a resolution of the conflict and the Palestinian refugee crisis.  I do not want to be told in one or two decades' time that we stood idly by and watched as a people were banished off the face of the earth.</p>  <p>  In recent years there has been a focus on the war in Syria and the resultant refugee crisis.  However, the Palestinian refugee crisis is one of the longest lasting episodes of forced migration in modern history.  Millions of Palestinians have been exiled from homes and lands that their families inhabited for generations.  They are stateless.  Many still suffer the penury and insecurity that are the legacy of their dispossession.  Human rights violations, including house demolitions, land confiscations, forced displacement, restriction of movement and violence against civilians, occur on a regular basis.  According to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East, UNRWA, almost one third of registered Palestinian refugees, comprising more than 1.5 million individuals, live in 58 recognised Palestinian refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Gaza Strip and on the West Bank, including east Jerusalem.  The remaining two thirds live in or close to cities and towns in host countries, on the West Bank and in the Gaza Strip, often in the environs of official camps.  The Gaza Strip is home to approximately 1.9 million people, 1.3 million of whom are refugees.  Over 500,000 people live in the eight recognised Palestinian refugee camps in Gaza, which have population densities which are among the highest in the world.  Approximately 70% of Gaza's 1.9 million people rely on humanitarian assistance.</p>  <p>  The land, air and sea blockade imposed by Israel following the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2017 which is exacerbated by Egypt keeping its border with Gaza largely sealed continues to have a devastating effect as access to markets and people's movements to or from the Gaza Strip remain severely restricted.  A report published in September 2015 by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development on assistance to the Palestinian people warned that the Gaza Strip could become uninhabitable by 2020 if the economic trends in being at the time persisted.</p><p>According to Human Rights Watch, Israel's restriction on the delivery of construction materials to Gaza and lack of funding have impeded reconstruction of the 17,800 housing units severely damaged or destroyed during Israel's 2014 military operation in Gaza.  Approximately 29,000 who lost their homes remain displaced.  Conditions in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank are far below an acceptable standard of living.  Decades of conflict and denial of human rights take their toll, as people struggle to make ends meet.  However, while it is abundantly clear that more needs to be done to help the Palestinians and improve basic living conditions what is also required is the complete halt to rocket attacks and random knife attacks by Hamas and other Islamic military groups and the cessation of all military strikes by Israel.  That is a necessary precondition to functioning negotiations and trying to establish a peace process.  The refugees and the Palestinian people need us to stand up for them at this time.  We need a two-state solution in that part of the world and it needs to happen now.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.223" nospeaker="true" time="13:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700022#X00200">Topical Issue Matters</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.224" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1289" speakername="Pat Gallagher" time="13:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700022#X00300"><p>I wish to advise the House of the following matters in respect of which notice has been given under Standing Order 29A and the name of the Member in each case: (1) Deputy James Browne - to discuss the issue of unqualified specialists in consultant roles in mental health services; (2) Deputy Tom Neville - to discuss upgrading village sewerage schemes in rural Ireland; (3) Deputy Thomas P. Broughan - the need to ensure that all garda&iacute; receive full CBD2 training for emergency responses; (4) Deputy John Brassil - to discuss the decision to refuse an SNA post to Scoil Naomh Eoin B&aacute;iste, Lios P&oacute;il, Contae Chiarra&iacute;; (5) Deputy Pat Buckley - to discuss rising unaffordable rents outside the rent pressure zone areas; (6) Deputy Joan Collins - the lack of services for children in St. John of God school at Islandbridge; (7) Deputy Clare Daly - to discuss reopening the Irish embassy in Iran; (8) Deputy Robert Troy - the need for a family resource centre in Longford town; and (9) Deputy Louise O'Reilly - to discuss the accommodation at St. Michael's special school in Skerries.</p>  <p>  The matters raised by Deputies Tom Neville, Joan Collins and James Browne have been selected for discussion.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.225" nospeaker="true" time="13:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700022#X00400">Palestine: Statements (Resumed)</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.226" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1330" speakername="Gerry Adams" time="13:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700022#X00500"><p>The refusal of the Cabinet to do no more than issue a call for an independent investigation into the dreadful events in Palestine is in reality a call to do nothing.  We are all aware of the dreadful mass killings of Palestinian protestors and the Government has rightly repudiated the Israeli Government actions.</p>  <p>  The Taoiseach claims that to expel the Israeli ambassador is against the principle and imperative of dialogue but that is not true.  Recently, the Government expelled a Russian diplomat, not for any alleged wrongdoing in this State but in solidarity with the British Government.  The Taoiseach and the Minister should stop finding excuses for not taking positive action that gives meaningful expression to the rejection by the Irish people of the treatment of the people of Palestine.  There is no excuse for the Government not formally recognising the state of Palestine as agreed by the D&aacute;il and the Seanad.  If the Irish do not stand by the Palestinians, who will?  Who will stand by those people if we do not?  If we, as a former colony, still occupied in part by a government we do not want, and with our history of freedom struggle and freedom fighters and our peace process, do not uphold the rights of the Palestinians then who will?  Their land is being slowly stolen from them.  Hundreds of thousands of Israeli settlers live on Palestinian land in violation of UN resolutions.  Their water rights are taken.  They live in poverty and disadvantage with no rights of movement.  The Government&rsquo;s stance is a cop-out.  Sinn F&eacute;in is asking the Government to demand that the international community upholds international law.</p>  <p>  I visited the Middle East region five times in recent years.  I have spoken to Israeli leaders and citizens and Palestinian leaders and citizens.  I have been in the Gaza Strip, Gaza city and the West Bank.  I have been in the refugee camps and spoken to children released after years in prison.  I have spoken to their parents.  I walked along the separation wall that cuts Palestinian families off from their lands.  Palestinian academics and others have organised a recent series of protests to mark 70 years of Nakba.  They took as their example the non-violent campaigns of Martin Luther King and Gandhi.  The protests in Gaza were the Palestinian equivalent of the march to Selma, a peaceful mass protest at injustice ignored for 70 years.</p>  <p>  The Government&rsquo;s options are clear.  It can talk a lot but do nothing.  It can expel the Israeli ambassador.  It can stop ignoring the democratic will of the D&aacute;il and recognise the state of Palestine, as it recognised the state of Israel, and stand up for peace in the Middle East by standing by the Palestinians.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.227" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1317" speakername="Martin Ferris" time="13:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700022#X00600"><p>People right across the world were shocked by what they witnessed on their television screens this week.  A total of 58 people were killed in one day and 2,800 were wounded, including 228 children and a man in a wheelchair, on the pretext that they were trying to invade Israel.  Most of the killings were done by Israeli snipers who were located 300 m from the border.</p>  <p>  I was part of a parliamentary delegation that visited Jordan about four years ago.  We visited the camps that had developed following the Syrian conflict.  The first camp which we went to is just outside Amman and it is there since 1948.  Three generations of Palestinians have been born into it.  We then went to the 1967 camp which is half way between Amman and the Syrian border.  That was one of the most depressing places I have ever seen.  People live in makeshift houses with no sanitation or running water, and they have been there since 1967.  The other camp for Palestinian refugees who were run out of Syria was located on the Syrian border.  There were tens of thousands of them.  The world looks on and allows that to happen.  Nothing has been done to alleviate the pain of generations of Palestinian people.</p>  <p>  Another sad fact is that a third generation of Palestinian people who have been born in Jordan are stateless.  They are not accepted as Jordanian citizens and one of the consequences of that is that they are not facilitated with third level education.</p>  <p>  Approximately five or six years ago prior to the election in Israel Mr. Netanyahu decided to bomb Palestine.  A total of 2,200 people were killed in Gaza by indiscriminate bombing from the air and attacks on the ground by Israeli forces.  Again, the powerful nations in the world did absolutely nothing to help the Palestinian people.</p>  <p>  Gaza is denied necessary hospital facilities coming from Egypt.  Saudi Arabia is in cahoots with the Israeli Government and what it is doing at the moment.  The powerful in the world order are doing absolutely nothing to try to alleviate the suffering and pain.</p>  <p>  The Government has let down the Palestinian people consistently over the years.  It let them down because it had the opportunity to recognise the state of Palestine that would give recognition and a state to people who are deserving of it.  I urge the Minister of State, Deputy D&rsquo;Arcy, to use his power within the Government to ensure recognition of the Palestinian state is forthcoming and also to convey to the Israeli ambassador that he is not wanted in this country.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.228" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1299" speakername="Gino Kenny" time="13:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700022#X00700"><p>I do not know if the Minister of State saw the grotesque pictures last Tuesday from Jerusalem of the American Embassy, the Israeli authorities and an entire parcel of rogues &ndash; Zionists, right wing Christians and all sorts &ndash; celebrating the move of the embassy to Jerusalem.  It was grotesquely triumphalist on a day that 60 people were murdered in Gaza.  Those 60 people were unarmed and included eight children.  One child was only eight months old.  It was ultimately depressing to see 60 people murdered.  That quantifies the level of desperation experienced by ordinary Palestinian people at their situation.  Occupation affects the mind and body and makes one desperate but the will of the Palestinian people will not be mown down by Israeli bullets.</p>  <p>  I know the T&aacute;naiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade met the Israeli ambassador a few days ago.  He said he was shocked and dismayed.</p><p>These are weasel words.  This Government does not have the bottle to say what is required to the Israeli ambassador.  People want to know what it will take for the Israeli ambassador to be told to pack his bags.  Will it take 100, 1,000 or 10,000 Palestinian deaths?  Where will the line in the sand be drawn?  Israel is not a normal state.  It is an apartheid and racist state.  It was built on blood and it also survives on blood.</p> <p> The Irish Government can do something about this situation.  Sometimes these debates can be quite abstract in terms of what we can do but there are a number of practical steps that the Government can take.  Since 2012, the Irish Government has bought &euro;5.6 million worth of Israeli armaments, including &euro;1.2 million worth of Israeli drones.  Most people would be shocked to hear that the Irish Government is buying arms from Israel while the Israeli army is killing thousands of Palestinians.  That is one practical measure the Government can take.  It can stop purchasing military hardware for the Irish Army from Israel.  The other thing the Government can do is support the Control of Economic Activities (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 proposed by Senator Frances Black.  It is a very sound Bill which would end Irish trade with and support for illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.  The Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade has said that he will look at that Bill again in June but I urge the Government to support it.  These are two practical actions the Government can take although I am not sure it will do so.  We will have to wait and see.</p> <p> In 1987, this country was the first in the world to ban all goods from apartheid South Africa.  It can be done if the will is there.  People are horrified to see what has happened and what will continue to happen.  As a country we have shown amazing support for and solidarity with the Palestinians and the least we can do now is to tell the Israeli ambassador to get the hell out of here because he is not welcome.  If the Government does not do that and if it keeps buying arms from Israel, then it is complicit in this murder and mayhem.  Our support is always with the Palestinian people and never with the Zionists because they are murdering bastards.  That is what they are - murdering bastards.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.230" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1306" speakername="Joan Collins" time="13:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700023#Y00200"><p>I repeat the condemnation of Israel's brutal and murderous policy against unarmed protesters in Gaza.  It is an outrage that should be met not just with outrage but with action.  The moving of the US embassy to Jerusalem is a green light for the Israeli state's policy of Zionist expansion and colonisation.  Israel claims that it is defending its borders from terrorism but these borders were established by military occupation in 1967 and are not agreed borders.</p><p>I support the concept of an Israeli state, given the history of discrimination, pogroms and the horrors of the Holocaust for the Jewish people.  This must be a state with agreed borders, however, and not those determined by military might.  It must be a state that treats all of its citizens, Jews and non-Jews, equally.  It must recognise the rights of Palestinians driven from their homes and lands in the Nakba of 1947-1948.  It must also offer the right to return or full compensation, end the siege of Gaza and enter into meaningful talks.</p><p>The <i>status quo</i>cannot be accepted but that is what is happening.  The problem is not just with the US and President Trump.  The EU wrings its hands but is Israel's main trading partner.  One third of all Israeli exports go to the EU.  A boycott of settlement goods is not sufficient because it will affect only 2% of Israeli exports.  We need boycotts, divestments and sanctions on all Israeli goods and services.  The arms trade must be ended.  Since 2005, we have bought &euro;16.6 million worth of ammunition, drones and other military equipment from Israel.  This is dwarfed by EU states which bought &euro;9.5 billion of Israeli arms and so-called battle tested military equipment between 2005 and 2009.  This equipment was developed and then tested on Palestinians.  That is what the term &quot;battle tested&quot; means.</p><p>Ireland must lead the way, not just with words but with actions.  We should recall our ambassador to Israel and expel the Israeli ambassador.  We must support the passage of the Control of Economic Activities (Occupied Territories) Bill 2018 which was put forward by Senator Frances Black.  We must immediately end all military co-operation and trade in arms, military components and so on, commence a programme of boycott, divestment and sanctions to force Israel to abide by UN resolutions, formally recognise the state of Palestine, and enter into real and meaningful talks for a two-state peace process.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.231" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1361" speakername="Tommy Broughan" time="13:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700023#Y00300"><p>President Trump tweeted on Monday last that it was a "great day for Israel".  The Israeli Prime Minister, Mr. Netanyahu, declared several times that "we will remember this day".  Indeed we will, but not for the crass and inappropriate moving of the American embassy to Jerusalem.  As Israeli and American dignitaries openly celebrated the transfer of the US embassy as a "step towards peace", dozens of Palestinians were being gunned down by Israeli snipers just 40 km away.  Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital on 6 December 2017 and the moving of the US embassy have reignited tensions within Palestine and Israel.  The Israeli occupation of the West Bank and east Jerusalem since 1967 has never been recognised by the international community.  The consensus has always been that the city's status must be negotiated between Palestinians and Israelis.</p>  <p>  Monday's death toll brings the number of Palestinians killed in Gaza to well over 100 in seven weeks of protests against the continued decimation of their country.  One of the key points that may arise from the events of this week, as others have said, is that the US action may indeed mark a watershed in Palestinian-Israeli history.  It may mark the end of the proposal for a two-state solution.  A two-state solution is clearly not viable and will not provide a solution to the intense suffering of the people of Palestine.  Effectively, there is a single territory which encompasses about 13 million people, including both Jewish and Arab Israeli citizens and around 6.5 million Palestinians, in the occupied territories and Gaza.  This is an area that is roughly the size of Leinster and half of Munster, at 11,000 to 12,000 square miles.  Everyone who wants a peaceful, secure and happy future for all of those 13 million people must call for full civil and political rights for the citizens of all of those countries.  The ambition of this House should be to do everything possible to bring about full civil and political rights for all of the people who live in Palestine and Israel.  That is the only way forward.  As others have said, any kind of apartheid type solution is an anathema that cannot and will not stand the test of time.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.232" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1250" speakername="Robert Troy" time="13:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700023#Y00400"><p>I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate.  It is only right and proper that this Parliament expresses its total and utter condemnation of one of the most violent periods in the ongoing conflict in the Middle East which has resulted in the death of 58 Palestinians and the injuring of thousands more.  The severely disproportionate response of Israel to a legitimate protest is quite simply appalling.</p>  <p>  In 2016 I took the opportunity to visit some of the affected areas, including Hebron, Jerusalem and along the Jordan Valley.  While there I witnessed at first hand the total disparity between the quality of life of Palestinians and Israelis.  I saw farm land with walls built right through it.  On one side was rich, arable, good quality agricultural land while on the other side was barrenness.  The vast majority of land, at approximately 93%, was under Israeli control.  One of the biggest issues in the region is the lack of water.  Palestinians, on average, only have access to between 20 and 30 litres of water per day which is 70 litres less than what is recommended by the World Health Organization.  I also saw forced relocation and the appalling treatment of Palestinians in prison.</p>  <p>  People ask why the Palestinians are protesting.  They are protesting because of illegal borders and infringements on their property and human rights. </p><p>One of the most basic human rights is the right to water.  In recent years tens of thousands of people took to the streets of this country to protest about water charges.  We should not question why people are protesting when they are not even getting access to quality water.  By any measure, the Israeli response was totally and utterly indefensible.  It was a blatant massacre of defenceless civilians.  Questions should be asked of a country that acts in this manner, flouts international law and continues to ignore UN resolutions.  The Fianna F&aacute;il Party has always respected and celebrated the establishment and progress of the state of Israel.  We have never questioned the right of the Israeli people to exercise their right to self-determination and self-defence.  However, this should not be done at the expense of the Palestinians.  As a party, we will continue to speak up on behalf of the Palestinian people.  We will use our voice on the international stage to advance a resolution.  As previous speakers said, it is quite hard at this stage of the game to see how a two-state solution can be achieved.</p> <p> This week marks the 70th anniversary of the birth of the state of Israel which is referred to by Palestinians as "Nakba", which means "catastrophe".  For them, the anniversary marks a time when hundreds of thousands of Palestinians left or were forced to flee their homes.  On Monday, 14 May, the United States followed through on the decision it made in December 2017 to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.  Fianna F&aacute;il does not support this hugely controversial decision.  How can the United States continue to see itself as an honest broker in this conflict which has been ongoing for decades?  While recent years have seen a focus on the Syrian war and refugee crisis, the Palestinian refugee crisis is one of the longest lasting cases of forced migration in modern history.  The recent massacre highlights more than ever the need for an urgent international intervention.  We can no longer sit by and hope the conflict will be resolved.  We need a greater international intervention.  It is apparent on a daily basis that Palestinians are suffering significant infringements of their human rights.  Following the escalation of violence and tension in recent months, the United Nations, the European Union and other international bodies must accelerate their efforts to find an equitable solution.  We need to know what came from the meeting that took place after the T&aacute;naiste summoned the Israeli ambassador to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.  The Government needs to live up to its "commitment to recognise the State of Palestine", as set out in the programme for Government.  That needs to happen now to show the people of Palestine who are living in unbearable conditions in their homeland that people in the international community are supportive of them.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.234" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1348" speakername="S&eacute;amus Healy" time="13:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700024#Z00200"><p>I condemn in the strongest possible terms the latest massacre of unarmed Palestinians by Israeli occupation forces.  Last Monday, 14 May, was the single deadliest day for Palestinians in the occupied territories in over four years.  The Great March of Return protests took place on the 70th anniversary of the Nakba, the expulsion - perhaps it might be better explained as ethnic cleansing - of over 750,000 Palestinians, or two thirds of the indigenous Arab population, from their homes by Israeli forces between 1947 and 1949.  On Monday 60 unarmed Palestinians were shot dead and over 2,000 wounded.  In the previous six weeks another 45 unarmed Palestinians were shot dead by Israeli state forces.  The slaughter of unarmed Palestinian protesters carried out by Israel on Monday as part of its response to the Great March of Return in the past six weeks was cold blooded murder.  As we all know, it was the very same as the shoot to kill policy implemented by British state forces in the Six Counties in previous years.  The conduct of the Israeli state forces can rightly be compared to the outrageous and despicable campaign of murder and mayhem visited on this country by the infamous Black and Tans.</p>  <p>  In the face of seven decades of consistent failure by the international community to enforce the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, Palestinian civil society has taken it upon itself to assert its UN-mandated right of return.  Unarmed protesters who are seeking to do this are being met with Israeli sniper bullets.  Nothing has been done to punish Israel for the slaughter of over 100 unarmed Palestinians in the past two months.  Instead, the United States has moved its embassy to Jerusalem and blocked UN Security Council resolutions condemning the killings, while the European Union has continued to reward Israel with increased co-operation.  The entire situation is utterly shameful and sickening.  The massacre of unarmed protesters while the world, including the European Union and the Government, stands idly by is utterly shameful.  The protestors are simply demanding their rights under international law.  They include the right to return, as set down in UN Resolution 194; the right not to be the subject of the collective punishment of an entire population, as is happening with the 11-year siege of Gaza; and the right not to have their lands illegally annexed for Israeli settlement expansions.</p>  <p>  While it is all very fine for the Government to call in the Israeli ambassador, talk is cheap and action is needed.  We need to expel the Israeli ambassador and his staff.  We need to recall the Irish ambassador from Tel Aviv, just as South Africa has recalled its ambassador.  Ireland must end the bilateral arms trade with Israel.  It should call for an international military embargo on the state of Israel on the basis that it is murdering vast numbers of Palestinians in cold blood.  Ireland must call for the suspension of the EU-Israel association agreement on the basis that Israel is in clear breach of the human rights clause in the agreement.  Furthermore, the 11-year siege of Gaza must be lifted.  We must commence an extensive boycott of Israeli goods and services.  In 2014 both Houses of the Oireachtas unanimously called for the formal recognition of the state of Palestine.  The Government must formally recognise it immediately.  I commend all of the organisations, including the Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign, that are supporting the Palestinian people.  I commend all of the people from Ireland who have visited the Palestinian territories in support of the cause.  My own daughter has just returned from such a visit.  She and her companions were blackguarded at the airport.  They were held and interrogated for six hours.  Some in the group were refused entry.  It is time the international community, including the Government, stood up to Israel and supported the rights of the Palestinian people.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.235" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1342" speakername="Eugene Murphy" time="13:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700024#Z00300"><p>We have witnessed one of the most violent periods in the Middle East conflict.  The violence has resulted in the deaths of dozens of Palestinians and left thousands of others injured.  Frankly, it is appalling.  The number of deaths shows that there is a need for an urgent international intervention.  As other Deputies said, this week marks the 70th anniversary of the birth of the state of Israel which is referred to by Palestinians as the "Nakba", which means "catastrophe".  The decision of the United States to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem was ill judged.  All of these factors have resulted in a significant increase in the level of deadly violence and tension in the region.</p><p>The decision of the US to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem has resulted in a significant increase in deadly violence and tension in the region.  We have the US President and the Israeli Prime Minister telling us it is a great day for them and for the world - extraordinary statements from people who clearly have blood on their hands.  The United States, once the great brokers of peace in this conflict, have now only exacerbated it.  Now the difficulty is that they cannot be negotiators of peace.</p> <p> The disproportionate use of force by Israeli forces is only serving to compound the situation.  Fianna F&aacute;il fully supports the calls for an independent investigation into those incidents.  At this juncture, peace seems to be an aspiration that is unlikely to be fulfilled.  The situation is becoming increasingly untenable.  It is therefore imperative that the Irish Government, the EU and the international community redouble their efforts to restart this peace process.  Fianna F&aacute;il has always respected and celebrated the establishment and progress of the state of Israel.  We have never questioned the right of the Israeli people to exercise their right to self-determination and self-defence.  However, coupled with this our party has long advocated and supported a two-state solution in the Middle East, although I acknowledge that it may be difficult to achieve given the crossroads we are at.  When in government, Fianna F&aacute;il led Ireland to be the first EU member state to declare that the solution to the conflict in the Middle East had to be based on a fully sovereign state of Palestine, independent and coexisting with Israel.  My party is deeply frustrated about the lack of progress in advancing peace talks, the continued expansion of Israeli settlements on Palestinian lands, which are illegal under international law, and the deterioration of the humanitarian and economic situation in Gaza and the West Bank.  This simply cannot be allowed to continue.</p> <p> Ireland has a long interest in the challenges in the Middle East and we have always acted out of the experience of our own troubled history and out of our overriding respect for and belief in human rights for all people across the world.  Successive Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Trade have consistently spoken in favour of a peaceful, equitable and lasting settlement in the Middle East.  We have to be deeply concerned about the plight of men, women and children.  Children have been brutally killed.  It is in everybody's interests to try to bring this terrible conflict to an end.</p> <p> While recent years have seen a focus on the Syrian war and refugee crisis, the Palestinian refugee crisis is one of the biggest lasting cases of forced migration in modern history.  Today there are millions of Palestinians living in exile from homes and lands their families had inhabited for generations.  They are without a state.  Many still suffer the legacy of their dispossession, destitution and insecurity.  Human rights violations including house demolitions, land confiscation, forced displacement, restrictions of movement and violence against civilians occur on a regular basis.  Approximately 70% of Gaza's 1.9 million people rely on humanitarian assistance.  The blockade on land, air and sea imposed by Israel following the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, which is exacerbated by Egypt keeping its own border with Gaza largely sealed, continues to have a devastating effect as access to markets and people's movement to and from the Gaza Strip remain severely restricted.  This is a deep crisis and I urge the Government to do everything it can to try to stop this terrible violence, which is causing outrage and devastation to the Palestinian people.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.237" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="14:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700025#AA00200"><p>I want to reflect on an interview I watched on &quot;Prime Time&quot; during the week, when David McCullagh interview the former Israeli MP, Dr. Einat Wilf, about the use of force by the Israeli defence forces.  It was an extraordinary engagement.  She was asked if she felt their response was proportionate, to which she replied: &quot;I assume you would have been more pleased if more Jews had been killed in the process.&quot;  Rightly, David McCullagh took exception to this.  He further pressed Dr. Wilf as to whether the IDF was justified in slaughtering the Palestinians, to which she responded:</p><blockquote>The Israeli public and the defence forces defending it will not allow people to breach its borders.  These are not unarmed protesters.  There is no question of proportion in defending our borders.</blockquote><p>She also spoke about the internationally agreed 1967 borders and Israel's retreat to them, which it has not done to date.  In concluding, she disputed facts as to whether what the media have seen in the form of dead children were even real and called half of those who were massacred terrorists.  I could hardly believe what I was hearing or the narrative that was being spouted.  Unfortunately, it has been quite typical of the views of the Israeli establishment and Government for some time now.  They are putting forward arguments that are scarcely credible to any of the world although perhaps they are credible to a proportion of their own audience.  They have become apologists for the complete disregard for the human lives of Palestinians and view them as a problem rather than a people.</p><p>Internationally, their track record has been one of disregarding international norms.  In the 1980s alone, 82 amendments were passed in the UN relating to Israel, the majority of which have been ignored.  In the last decade, the situation has become demonstrably worse.  Last December, the UN General Assembly passed a resolution declaring the status of Israel's capital null and void, supporting an international consensus.  That consensus has clearly been breached by the United States in a move that is problematic and provocative.  The US ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, announced that the US would move its embassy to Jerusalem.  She claimed that no vote in the UN would make any difference and stated that the US was by far the greatest contributor to the UN, warning that the US might cut funding to the UN.  This is an unfortunate reflection of the distance the United States has travelled; it is now very clearly a partisan actor in this conflict.  Monday's move was rightly globally condemned.  It displays a complete disregard of international law.  We see this contempt reflected in Monday's statement, when the US and Israel claimed it to be a historic day while merely 70 km away the IDF was busy massacring Palestinian people, using live rounds with a policy of shoot to kill.</p><p>I also want to raise the issue of recognition.  This is entirely within the gift of the Government.  It could be delivered tomorrow if the Government wished.  It is in the programme for Government.  The Irish Government and Parliament are committed to it.  I believe the vast majority of the Irish public favours it.  Page 144 of the programme for Government states that we will continue to play a role in advancing a stronger role for the EU in the Middle East peace process, having regard to the stalled nature of the process at present, and that we will honour our commitment to recognise the state of Palestine as part of a lasting settlement of the conflict.  Certainly in the last few days, the Government has put a great deal of emphasis on those last nine words.  Most people would read them as putting such a commitment in context.  They would read them as suggesting that Ireland favours a two-state solution and a recognition would be viewed in that context, without prejudice to a peace process and with a desire for such a process.</p><p>Since 2014 and the votes in both Houses, Government statements have been cautious and delaying, yet ultimately accepting the desirability of recognition in principle.  I am concerned, however, that some of the statements made more recently indicate that the Government may be moving further away from recognition of Palestine, which would be quite shameful.  On Tuesday, the Taoiseach said the programme for Government commits the Government to recognising Palestine as part of a two-state peace solution and that, while we stand over that Government commitment, we do not yet have a peaceful solution.  That is an absurd position.  What does it mean?  What will the Government require?  It is clear that the peace process is moribund.  The programme for Government commitment recognises that.  What does the Government require before it will move?  It can hardly require a fully fledged peace process in which the Israeli Government clearly has no interest. </p><p>Ultimately, making the recognition of Palestine conditional on a fully functioning peace process is in the interests of one side alone, namely, the State of Israel.  I hope that is not the case and that recognition will happen.  I hope the T&aacute;naiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade will bring Irish pressure to bear as much as possible to end the blockade and the slaughter, as well as the casual disregard for the lives of Palestinians.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.239" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1321" speakername="John Brassil" time="14:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700026#BB00200"><p>I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue.  I sometimes wonder do debates such as this mean anything to anybody.  One hopes that somebody somewhere is listening.</p>  <p>  This week 58 demonstrators were killed in Gaza doing nothing other than demonstrating, while 2,800 were injured, of which 228 were children.  The response of us as a nation and the Government is to condemn it.  A few weeks ago, a former Russian spy and his daughter were suspected of being poisoned by agents of the Russian Government.  Following on from the response from the US and many other European countries, we expelled a Russian diplomat from its embassy in Dublin.  I do not understand how one can compare the proportionality of our response to the suspected involvement of a government in the poisoning of a former spy to the shooting dead of 58 demonstrators in Gaza.  Ireland is a small nation but, sometimes, a small nation can take a big stand.</p>  <p>  The people in Gaza were demonstrating because there are over 2 million people living on a tiny strip of land without proper water supplies, sanitation, electricity and hope.  No wonder they are demonstrating.  What other option have they?  Without the prospect of a future, subversive groups within the Gaza Strip will come to the fore.  That will just lead to a further cycle of violence and despair.</p>  <p>  As a country, we need to reflect and ask what would be the response of the Government if 58 innocent Israelis were shot dead this week or 2,800 innocent Israeli demonstrators were injured, including women and children.  It would be completely different.  We are guilty of inaction.  We support the two-state solution.  We claim to support and recognise the state of Palestine.  I certainly do.  Yet, we stand idly by when atrocities, such as what happened this week, occur.  By standing idly by, we are as a nation, a Government and a Parliament guilty by association.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.240" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1305" speakername="Aengus &Oacute; Snodaigh" time="14:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700026#BB00300"><p>I, like other speakers, was horrified at the latest attack by Israel on protesters last weekend, as well as other attacks in recent weeks, which have left over 100 dead and many thousands wounded.  I was not surprised at all, however.  I have seen how the Israeli State treats and views the Palestinians.  I have seen how, over the years, it has sought to colonise, conquer and extinguish the Palestinian people.  I visited refugee camps in Palestine and saw the official and unofficial settler policy.  I saw how people were moved out of their own homes and how villages were made uninhabitable to ensure the Palestinians were unable to harvest their own land and forced to leave due to starvation.  I saw the settler roads on which no Palestinian was allowed drive.  I saw ghost towns struggling to survive.  I saw Israeli troops menacing Palestinians and others who took the Palestinian side.  I saw the huge concrete walls, 40 ft in height, built around Palestinian towns to ensure those who service the land in them could not get to it.  I saw the buffer zone and the confiscation of water tables which meant that the survival of towns in Palestine was near impossible.  I saw the queues of farmers trying to get their crops to market being forced to sit out in the sun for hours while their crops rotted away.  Once rotten and no use to the market, the farmers were then let through the checkpoints.</p>  <p>  I spoke to Palestinian fishermen in the territory of Gaza who come under regular gun attack when they try to fish, even within the boundaries set by Israel.  I spoke with those who lost limbs because of the attacks by Israeli gunboats which regularly interfere with their attempts to land fish in Gaza.  I saw the destruction brought on Gaza by attacks, even before Operation Cast Lead, in what is the equivalent of an open mass prison.  I saw the failed water, roads, hospitals and educational infrastructure.  I am proud of my meagre attempts to break the siege of Gaza.  I am proud I was among those who were on the last boat to dock and last to leave Gaza Port in November 2008.</p>  <p>  The T&aacute;naiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade challenged us that our call for the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador was no more than an empty gesture and would serve no purpose.  It is not an empty gesture.  It is the same call of the Palestinians.  It would not be empty if it were followed by a series of other measures which the State can take.  Other Members spoke about the recognition of the Palestinian state.  All the Taoiseach has to say in this Chamber are five words.  Can one imagine the lift that would give to the Palestinian people if Ireland, a country which was colonised and brutalised over centuries, was willing to stand up for their rights?  It could be followed up by a demand by Ireland that the EU review its preferential treatment agreement with Israel and that trade cannot happen while Israel abuses the human rights of the Palestinian people.  It could be followed up by boycotting the purchase of Israeli weapons and the end of dual-use goods sales between Ireland and Israel.  It could be followed up by the immediate end to settler goods being brought into and sold in Ireland.  It could involve the disinvestment of any Irish companies from any Israeli companies or properties.  There could be no State contracts for companies which invest in or trade with Israel.  As others have said, we should consider ending our participation in the Eurovision and the European football championship while Israel is still involved. These events legitimise the attacks perpetuated by Israel last week and before.</p>  <p>  Will the T&aacute;naiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade not look at empty gestures but a whole series of gestures which will send out the message that we are willing to stand up for the rights of small nations and those under attack by other nations, as well as the dehumanising of the Palestinian people and the ending of their human rights by the Israelis?  I urge the T&aacute;naiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade to look at the example we gave when we were to the fore in ending the apartheid regime in South Africa.</p><p><i>3 o&amp;rsquo;clock</i></p> <p>As a small nation we can set the lead.  We should not wait until some other country in the EU takes a stance.  We should be out front setting the standard for others to follow rather than crawlers coming behind all the others.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.242" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1291" speakername="Maureen O'Sullivan" time="14:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700027#CC00200"><p>I have had the opportunity to visit both Palestine and Israel on several occasions, most recently during last September.  I am a member of the Joint Committee on the Implementation of the Good Friday Agreement.  The committee has met many delegations from Israel and Palestine, including those from civil society, academics, religious leaders and political leaders.  The one thing that came across on every occasion was the overwhelming desire of Palestinians and Israelis to be able to live in peace as well as the need for compromise.</p><p>When we look back to the past and the Oslo Accords, we can see the potential for peace, but those initiatives came to nothing except assassinations and intifada.  The Geneva accord and the initiatives in 2003 and 2009 illustrate the comprehensive solution that could have been brought into being.  There was mutual recognition of both nations, the right to an independent state on both sides, and an almost complete Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders.  There was recognition of a Jewish Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and an Arab Jerusalem as the capital for Palestine.  There was significant support.  In Palestine, support was 49%, and in Israel, support was 52% for that agreement.  There was considerable opposition too.  Despite this, there are non-governmental organisations on the Israeli and Palestinian sides which continue to work in an atmosphere with the belief that they can bring about some kind of compromise.  I wish to acknowledge the work of the NGOs, especially in Israel and Palestine, working on human rights and justice.  I was at the launch of a book on their work recently entitled <i>Defending Hope</i>.  Those involved speak about the great difficulties under which they are working together to try to find a just peace.</p><p>We know that the roots of this come from imperialism, first the Ottoman empire and then the British empire, which gave away the homes of the Palestinians.  We know the emotional, religious and cultural attachment of the Jewish people as well.  The question is whether conflict was inevitable.  Once 1948 came and 750,000 Palestinians were driven from their homes and villages, there was always going to be conflict.  We saw the movement of Palestinians.  It did not stop then and it is not going to stop today.  Having been there, I know there is no doubt about the devastating and disastrous consequences of continued settlement building.  It makes life virtually impossible for Palestinians and it is certainly erodes their dignity as people.</p><p>Let us consider the wall.  The Palestinians start queuing from the middle of the night, from 3 a.m. and 4 a.m.  They are herded like cattle.  They cross over into Israel to work in and contribute to the Israeli economy.  Then they start the journey back in the evening.  Journeys that used to take ten or 15 minutes now take over an hour.  Things like that make life so very difficult.  Palestinians remember how they used to be able to visit their relatives and friends in Jerusalem, Haifa and Tel Aviv.  Israelis talk about how they used to bring their families into Gaza to the beaches and the markets there.</p><p>What always strikes me is the great resilience of the Palestinian people in cities like Ramallah and Nablus.  They go to school and college.  They are getting on with life and with their businesses in the midst of all of it.</p><p>I have serious criticisms of both governments because both governments have let down all their people.  I have criticisms of the UN.  We see the whole dysfunction of the UN Security Council and the use of the veto by America.  Representations should be made to the Americans on this.  We do not have an ambassador here but there is certainly one in the UK.</p><p>Israel has a right to protect its borders but the force we have seen is totally and utterly over the top.  The role of the EU has been as ineffective as the role of the UN.  The support for a two-state solution is like a facade.  At the same time, it is like the EU is appeasing its conscience by giving funding to Palestine.  It buys from and sells arms to the Israeli arms industry, which is bombing the buildings that EU funding is constructing.  Israel must be made accountable for its violations of international law and human rights.  Palestine also needs elections.  A serious error was made when Israel did not recognise the results of the last election.  Hamas representatives were elected but that was a democratic process and it needed a peaceful transition to power.  So much of what we are seeing today could have been avoided.</p><p>There is also a need for honesty with the whole business of the two-state solution.  How can it be viable?  It is like suggesting putting two counties from Leinster with two counties from Munster, one from Connacht and one from Ulster and calling it a state.  There has to be honesty.  Perhaps the honesty can come about from discussing a one-state solution whereby the Palestine people would have exactly the same rights as those in Israel, including the same rights to services, infrastructure, education and healthcare.</p><p>A Palestinian academic made a point.  He said the West Bank is an open prison but that Gaza is like a high-security prison.  We know the statistics and the number of people who are living there.  Some 1.7 million or 1.8 million people are living an area the size of County Dublin.  The fishing industry is a source of food and the source of livelihood for these people but it is constantly being pushed back in again.</p><p>Two other groups always get lost in this kind of discussion.  The first is the Bedouin and their right to the kind of life they live.  The second group is made up of the residents in the Golan Heights.  They are frequently forgotten about in all of this.</p><p>We have to start somewhere.  What is happening now has pushed everything back.  We know there are families and communities in Gaza who are grieving horribly.  I came across a line from a Michael Longley poem I used to discuss in school called <i>Ceasefire</i>:</p><blockquote>I get down on my knees and do what must be done<br /><br />And kiss Achilles' hand, the killer of my son.</blockquote><p>Something has to be done now.  It is time to get back to the table to talk, listen, compromise and reach a consensus.  We have the example of the Good Friday Agreement.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.243" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1269" speakername="Caoimhgh&iacute;n &Oacute; Caol&aacute;in" time="14:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700027#CC00300"><p>I stand in this House today to record once again my solidarity with the long-suffering people of Gaza and Palestine.  Let me state in the most unequivocal manner that what we witnessed on our television screens from the Gaza Strip last Monday was state-sponsored murder involving the massacre of 60 Palestinian adults and children.  It was a crime against humanity.  The almost simultaneous images coming out of Jerusalem last Monday juxtaposed to those coming from the Israeli-imposed border with the Gaza Strip can only be described as gut-wrenching.</p>  <p>  It has to be put on record that the current United States President has grossly enflamed this decades-long interface.  The decision to relocate the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem is a grave mistake.  It has been condemned, rightly, by countries throughout Europe and the world.  President Trump has embarked on yet another ill-considered solo run that has directly contributed to the death and slaughter of innocent Palestinian citizens.  By carrying out this act, President Trump has provided the rogue state of Israel with a licence to kill.  He has the blood of innocent Palestinian children, women and men on his hands.  Faith and trust in peace-making efforts have now been set back, it is to be hoped not irreparably.  Confidence has been utterly shattered.  The present US regime has now passed the point of no return and will never again be viewed as capable of performing as an honest broker in this conflict.  It has to its shame taken one side over another.  In this instance, that is a fundamental error.</p>  <p>  The behaviour of the state of Israel with the deployment of snipers along the Israeli-imposed Gaza Strip limits must be condemned at the highest levels of all decent thinking nations and international bodies.  The use of live fire against unarmed civilians needs to be called for what it is: indiscriminate murder.  I reiterate, the Israeli state is conducting a campaign of murder against the Palestinian people.</p>  <p>  The Irish Government needs to take a strong line on this, far stronger than heretofore.  The contemptible comments by an Israeli spokesperson calling for Ireland to move its embassy to Jerusalem as well showed the Israeli regime up for what it is: an uncompassionate and murderous state that has no respect for, and places no worth on, Palestinian lives.  The Irish Government should expel the Israeli ambassador with no ifs, no buts and no maybes.  The excuse of keeping lines of communication open does not hold water.  Israel has no intention of negotiating a lasting peace.  It has been brazenly emboldened by the United States and will do whatever it likes at this time.</p><p>Palestinian lives simply do not come into consideration.</p> <p> As with apartheid South Africa, Israel needs to be isolated by the world community and forced into treating the Palestinian people with respect and on an equal basis because it is crystal clear it will not do so voluntarily.</p> <p> I send my sincere condolences to the families of the 60 people slaughtered on Monday.  I demand a cessation of the use of so-called live bullet rounds by Israel in such circumstances in the future.  I reaffirm that Sinn F&eacute;in stands four-square behind the long-suffering people of Palestine in their struggle for basic human rights, including the right to live and prosper in peace on their own lands.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.245" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1364" speakername="Michael D'Arcy" time="14:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700028#DD00200"><p>On behalf of the Government, I thank Deputies for their contributions to statements on the tragic and appalling events in Gaza in recent days and weeks.  They have passionately articulated the shock and concern of the people at these events.  The Government fully shares these sentiments.  The T&aacute;naiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, Deputy Coveney, listened carefully to the views expressed and ideas proposed.  They will be taken into account fully in his work and that of his Department on the issue.</p>  <p>  The Government has made it clear that the events we have seen in Gaza, specifically the massive use of live ammunition without a clear, real and immediate threat to life, are unacceptable, must cease and be investigated.  The T&aacute;naiste set out clearly the restrictions in international law on the use of deadly force and that they have not been followed.  I will repeat only his summary of these aspects of the issue.  Like all states, Israel is entitled to defend itself and its borders, but it is not entitled to do what it has been doing this week and in recent weeks in Gaza.  These points have been made clearly and strongly in successive public statements made on behalf of the Government in the D&aacute;il and directly by the T&aacute;naiste when he summoned the Israeli ambassador on Tuesday.  </p>  <p>  Many Deputies, perhaps reflecting the anger and frustration we have all heard from constituents, called for the expulsion of Israel's ambassador or the recall of the Irish ambassador from Israel to signal our anger at these events.  The T&aacute;naiste explained carefully in his remarks on Tuesday the reason this would not be a fruitful or appropriate response.  Ireland's foreign policy has always been built on dialogue and engagement, however slow and frustrating they may be.  Expelling the Israeli ambassador would command the headlines for a few days and we would feel good about ourselves, but it would permanently marginalise Ireland's voice on these issues in places that matter.  We are seeking to persuade people in Europe, Israel and elsewhere of our point of view.  I am not sure if Ireland has ever expelled an ambassador on the basis of differences with his or her government.  That is not the correct approach to take. </p>  <p>  The question of recognition by Ireland of a state of Palestine has also been raised.  The position on this matter remains unchanged.  The Government is committed to recognition of Palestine as part of an overall peace settlement, as has been the policy of successive Governments.  The T&aacute;naiste has stated on a number of occasions in the D&aacute;il his view that the moment for recognition of Palestine by Ireland has not yet arrived.  Recognition must be a symbolic act and could, in the right circumstances, also be an important one.  However, as a symbol, the impact and timing of recognition are everything as it will not change anything on the ground.  This is an issue for the Government of Ireland. </p>  <p>  The T&aacute;naiste has consistently stressed on behalf of the Government Ireland's support for calls for an independent and transparent investigation of recent events in Gaza and the circumstances of such large-scale use of deadly force.  Ireland this week co-sponsored a request for a special session of the United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva to consider these events.  It is expected that such a meeting may be held on Friday.  At this session Ireland will support any appropriately worded motion to establish such an inquiry. </p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.246" nospeaker="true" time="14:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700028#DD00300">Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Order for Report Stage</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.247" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="14:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700028#DD00400"><p>I move: &quot;That Report Stage be taken now.&quot;</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.248" nospeaker="true" time="14:35:00" ><p>Question put and agreed to.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.249" nospeaker="true" time="14:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700028#DD00600">Judicial Appointments Commission Bill 2017: Report Stage</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.250" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1289" speakername="Pat Gallagher" time="14:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700028#DD00700"><p>Amendments Nos. 1, 2, 66 to 72, inclusive, 74, 79, 80, 96, 98, 101, 103 and 104 are related and may be discussed together.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.251" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="14:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700028#DD00800"><p>I move amendment No. 1:</p><blockquote>In page 7, line 7, to delete &ldquo;through committees of&rdquo; and substitute &ldquo;by&rdquo;.</blockquote><p>I do not intend to spend much time on this group of amendments as all of the Government amendments address some unfinished drafting business from Committee Stage.  They all relate to the removal from the Bill of references to the relevant committee structure.  </p><p>On amendments Nos. 1 and 2, the proposed changes to the Long Title relate purely to changes made on Committee Stage insofar as the relevant committee structure was concerned.  They delete elements of the Long Title that concern this structure, the purpose being that the Long Title will be fully consistent with its provisions.  Amendments Nos. 66 to 72, inclusive, 74, 79, 80, 96, 98, 101, 103 and 104 all achieve the same purpose of deleting what might be described as superfluous references to the relevant committees across ten sections of the Bill.  There is, therefore, some tidying up to be done and amendment No. 66 does this in respect of section 26(1) by deleting a leftover reference to a relevant committee.  Amendment No. 67 addresses a punctuation issue.</p><p>Amendment No. 68 deletes a drafting construction referring to a relevant committee inserted for the purposes of section 9, which is also superfluous.  Amendment No. 69 removes a hang-over reference to &quot;relevant committee&quot; in section 27.  Section 27(3), as passed by the select committee, provided for an interpretation in terms of the relevant committees of certain references.  With the removal of the relevant committee structure, such interpretation has no meaning and amendment No. 70 simply deletes subsection (3), as is necessary.</p><p>Amendments Nos. 71 and 72 are further drafting amendments, in this case taken together, to make sense of section 28(1) in order that it is clear that the records to be kept include records relating to the recommendations of the commission as those of a relevant committee will not exist under the Bill.</p><p>Amendment No. 74 is a drafting amendment relating to the removal from the Bill of the word &quot;committee&quot; and inserts the term &quot;Commission&quot; in its stead.  Again, the amendment is essential to achieve consistency across the drafting. </p><p>Amendments Nos. 79 and 80 are also drafting amendments.  Amendments Nos. 96, 98 and 101 are further drafting amendments that propose deletions from the Bill.  Amendment No. 103 removes the reference to &quot;relevant committee&quot; from section 55, while amendment No. 104 makes a similar correction in respect of section 58.</p><p>Having regard to the meat and veg of the Bill, so to speak, to which we will come later this afternoon, I put it to Members opposite that at this stage we are merely acknowledging issues that were considered and passed on Committee Stage.  My contention is that these are merely drafting amendments to ensure consistency and that we have a workable legislation.<br/><br/>I welcome the Minister, Deputy Ross.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.253" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00200"><p>Does the Minister, Deputy Ross, intend to speak on these amendments?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.254" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00300"><p>No.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.255" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00400"><p>Why?  Of course, I was not aware of the transport implications of the Bill.</p>  <p>  I welcome the Report Stage of the Bill.  I acknowledge the presence of the Minister for Justice and Equality, Deputy Flanagan.  We should also acknowledge the fact that the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, is here.  One way of looking at that may be that it is a reflection of the fact the Bill is, as I have said, a vanity project of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport.  Another way of looking at it could be that he does not trust the Minister for Justice and Equality and has to be here watching carefully to ensure that he does exactly as the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport says.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.256" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00500"><p>The introduction of contentious issues such as that are surely out of order.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.257" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00600"><p>They may be out of order but I guarantee they are 100% correct.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.258" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00700"><p>This is a team.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.259" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1289" speakername="Pat Gallagher" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00800"><p>It is not for me to interfere but I would suggest to all, including Ministers, not to invite interruptions.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.260" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" speakername="Shane Ross" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE00900"><p>Deputy O'Callaghan has no one with him.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.261" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE01000"><p>Out of order but correct.</p>  <p>  The first group of amendments we are looking at relates to the amendments that were made on Committee Stage as a result of amendments I put down and which were passed by the committee.  The purpose of those amendments was to remove from the commission the overly complex structure of committees that had been put into it by the Minister.</p>  <p>  In considering all amendments to the legislation, in particular this group of amendments, we should take into account what is the purpose of this legislation.  One cannot consider the amendments without considering the purpose of the legislation.  The purpose of the legislation is to establish a commission, an advisory body that will provide advice to the Government on individuals who should be appointed or nominated as judges.  It is important to note it is not a regulatory body.  It is an advisory body.  As it is an advisory body, it requires expertise.  The reason it requires expertise is because in Ireland, as in virtually every country in the world, one can only be appointed as a judge if one is a lawyer.  The Minister, Deputy Ross, may object to that.  Maybe his next proposal is to insist that judges cannot be lawyers and we should only have other individuals appointed as judges.  However, at present, the law is that one can only be made a judge in Ireland if one is either a practising barrister or a practising solicitor.  Therefore, the whole purpose of the legislation is to try to ensure that there is a group of expert individuals who can give advice to the Government as to who is a suitable person for nomination for appointment to the office of judge.  As a result of that, it requires expertise.</p>  <p>  Notwithstanding that, when one looks at the commission that is being proposed by the Government, for some reason the objective of the Government is to ensure that the advisory body contains a majority of persons who do not have expertise.  On numerous occasions, I have asked the Ministers, Deputies Flanagan and Ross, and other Deputies, can they identify what is the public benefit or purpose in having an advisory body which has a majority of persons who do not have expertise in the area of who are suitable persons to be appointed to judicial office.  If this were a regulatory body I would understand perfectly why it would be appropriate and necessary to have a majority of persons who did not come from what the Ministers, Deputies Flanagan and Ross, refer to as the legal side of the house but this is not a regulatory authority.  The reason one has a lay majority in a regulatory authority is because one wants to instill public confidence that the regulatory authority will not be making decisions based on the fact that they are members of the same group.  Here it is completely different.  It is an advisory body.  One wants persons who have expertise to advise the Government in respect of who are the best persons to be appointed to the position of judge in Ireland.</p>  <p>  The Minister, Deputy Ross, had a good point - regrettably, he is like a broken clock in being right only once or twice a day.  His good point related to the mischief.  I agreed with him on this.  The problem the legislation needed to resolve was that in the past individuals had been appointed to judicial office because they had a political association.  Deputy Ross overstates that problem but he is right in stating that occurred.  I stated that occurred.  The reason I brought forward legislation, and I thought the reason the Minister, Deputy Ross brought forward legislation, was for the purpose of dealing with that mischief.</p>  <p>  Where that mischief occurs is in the Cabinet.  It is the problem with the political decision-making in Cabinet.  The problem, that was identified and is correct, is that too broad a number of individuals were being recommended by the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board to the Government.  The solution to that problem is not to attack the advisory board.  The solution is to cut down on the numbers of persons who can be recommended to Cabinet.  Instead, however, the Minister, Deputy Ross, has gone off on a completely irrelevant and unexplained tangent.  Instead of concentrating on the mischief, which is politicians appointing persons because of their political connection, the Minister, Deputy Ross, has got another target in his sight, namely, to attack the Judiciary.  Nowhere has the Minister, Deputy Ross, ever explained what is the purpose behind that particular targeting.  What is clear is that the legislation and the amendments, which are being put forward in many cases by the Government, will not deal with the problem.</p>  <p>  In fact, they will set up an advisory body, a commission, that has as its sole objective that there must be a majority of lay persons on it.  This is disrespectful to the Judiciary which is not uncommon from this Government.  I do not recall a Government that has ever been so disrespectful to the Judiciary.  The purpose of their contentions is to suggest that judges and lawyers are all the same and in it together when, in fact, a judge is a former lawyer.  Judges are independent of the legal profession.  It is disrespectful to the Judiciary and wrong to suggest that judges and lawyers are the same cabal.  It is completely incorrect.</p>  <p>  The Minister for Justice and Equality is correct in stating that the amendments in this grouping are technical amendments which all arise from the deletion of the committee structure on the Committee Stage of the Bill.  I will be supporting the amendments.  They are mainly drafting amendments.  They make sense.</p>  <p>  It was beneficial to the Government that the committee made changes on Committee Stage.  In fact, the amendments that were made on Committee Stage improved the Bill and the Ministers should recognise that.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.262" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="14:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700029#EE01100"><p>Ar an gc&eacute;ad dul s&iacute;os, ba mhaith liom labhairt i gcoitinne faoin gcur chuige a bheidh ag Sinn F&eacute;in maidir leis an mBille seo.  In general, as I outlined previously, my party's position on the final vote remains in open consideration but as regards each set of amendments and each individual amendment, we will evaluate them on the basis of their merits.</p>  <p>  We will be supporting this first group of amendments, which are largely technical.  It mainly relates to providing, in a drafting sense, for a tidying up after decisions taken at committee to move from a position of separate committees being responsible for the appointment of judges to different courts to a position where the commission in general would be responsible for the appointment to those courts.  The Minister was, with that approach of the different committees, trying to facilitate the participation of the President of the District Court and the President of the Circuit Court.  Broadly speaking, I believe we were moving towards a consensus to resolving that issue on Committee Stage.  The comments of the Attorney General may have thrown a spanner into the consensus that was emerging.</p><p>I nonetheless believe there was a general agreement about how it might be resolved.  Perhaps the commission could be expanded such as is anticipated here or it could be done on the basis of <i>ex officio</i>members.  That would facilitate the bringing on of the presence of those two courts.  It makes sense to bring those two on.  I am anxious to preserve the lay majority.  It was the right decision to move to a more comprehensive single body and that the commission would be responsible for appointments.  A number of amendments that were discussed on Committee Stage came from a submission from Dr. Patrick O'Brien from Oxford who made a number of points, some of which were taken on board.  He made the point that the judicial appointments commission committee structure described in what was then section 11 and section 13 appears to be over-engineered having regard to the comparatively small number of appointments that are to be made to the Irish courts each year.  He said it might be more economical and might lead to more consistency if the practice of constituting a slightly different committee for each appointment were replaced with a provision permitting the president of each court or their nominee to take part in the deliberations of the judicial appointments commission when they are considering candidates for that court.  It is not quite what is anticipated by the Minister but nonetheless the same principle applies that the presidents of those courts should be in a position to participate.  If all appointments come through the commission, there will be more consistency and there would be an understanding by the commission of the different needs and requirements in each of the appointments as well as the common attributes that would exist.  In regard to those particular amendments, we will support them.<br/><br/>I will respond to what Deputy O'Callaghan said about the lay majority.  It is something we firmly believe in.  It is not a particularly radical proposal to have lay participation and a lay majority.  While the Judiciary has served us substantially very well in the State there is an issue with regard to the transparency of the appointment of judges.  Fianna F&aacute;il has its own reasons for adopting the position it has adopted.  There is history in that regard.  It seems very clear to me that the Judiciary does not represent society as a whole.  We will move further on into amendments which reflect upon how the lay appointments will be appointed and how we can ensure we have lay members on many public boards and that they are not necessarily reflective of society as a whole.  We will move on to how we can improve it and how we can change the backgrounds of those lay members to ensure they are reflective of society as a whole.  Our Judiciary does not reflect Irish society.  The objective of several of the amendments that I and others have tabled is to ensure the judicial appointments commission tries to ensure we move to a position where the Judiciary is more reflective of society as whole.  With regard to the lay majority, I do not believe it is entirely possible to achieve that objective and to move to that position if we have a judicial majority reproducing the same dynamic and being reflective of the reality that exists.  That is the reason for the ideal that there would be people from organisations dealing with victims, people in rape crisis situations, young offenders, immigrant communities and a wide variety of experiences.  It is important that it is part of the commission and that it makes up a majority of the commission.  There should be significant representation there from the Judiciary, including all of the heads of the courts, namely, the Presidents of District Court and the Circuit Court.  That is the dynamic that will best result in a process that is independent and transparent, which is what we all aspire to.  It will ensure we have a Judiciary that reflects Irish society and that consequently the decisions it makes take account of the differing experiences of Irish citizens.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.264" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1355" speakername="Mick Wallace" time="14:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700030#FF00200"><p>I apologise that I will not be able to stay for reasons beyond my control.  I will be here 100% of the time next week.  I did not think this business would happen this evening.</p>  <p>  We spent five sessions over many hours deliberating in committee.  The Minister, Deputy Ross, might not think we were genuine but there was no bias against one side or the other.  I agree 100% that reform of how we appoint judges is really important.  It is crucial we do that.  I am 100% in favour of reform of the way we appoint judges.  I am sure the Minister read the Official Report of the proceedings of the committee.  Before the Minister, Deputy Ross, went into government he said political paws had to be taken off how we appoint judges.  What was presented to us in committee was not doing that.  We were doing anything but taking the political paws off it and, in some way, even increasing them.  I disagreed with that and I have said so.  The way we have done it in the past is not good.  I agree that it does not reflect society as much as it should.  We all accept that one needs a certain amount of ability to do the job.  We all know a such-and-such a judge was appointed by Fine Gael, Fianna F&aacute;il or the Labour Party and that should not be the case.  We are all conscious of the fact that it is what transpired.  We are in favour of changing it.  I am not hung up on a lay majority either.  Who are the lay people that will be in the majority?  We argued a lot about that at the committee.  If they are from the political stable or the Civil Service, then I would be just as comfortable with the legal crowd picking them.  Our amendment No. 7 was ruled out of order because it was deemed it would result in a cost on the Exchequer but it is not true.  I put two judges on to sit in the District Court and the Circuit Court and we all agree the District Court judge and the Circuit Court judge should be on it.  They are getting paid by the State already.  They will not get a salary from the commission.  I took off a lay person who would get a salary.  The result of my measure would be to save the State money.  The Government had 13 members but I put forward 14 members.  I had two extra judges who would not get a salary from the commission and I took off a lay person who would have been getting a salary.  How can the Government or the powers that be deem that to be the case?  I am not saying it is the Minister's fault.  I do not know where the decision comes from.  I do not understand this process.  </p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.265" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="14:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700030#FF00300"><p>It is not the Government.  The Government has nothing to do with it.  </p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.266" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1355" speakername="Mick Wallace" time="14:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700030#FF00400"><p>I am only in here seven years, which is probably seven years too long.  I still do not understand how the system works.  It is not true to say my amendment would result in a cost to the Exchequer.  I strongly disagree with that.  I have appealed to the Ceann Comhairle and he said if my amendment does not come up until next week he will look at it again and that is fair enough.</p>  <p>  I am inclined to support Deputy O'Callaghan's amendment No. 11.  That amendment would not incur a cost to the Exchequer.  My amendment provides for seven judicial members and seven lay members and the 14 would pick their own chairman.  The committee was determined to come up with something that was better than what we had.  We wanted to take the political paws out of the equation a bit more.  </p>  <p>  The Judiciary, in its preliminary submission to the Department on the legislation, said that radical improvement is required with regard to judicial appointments and not a tinkering around the edges of the current process.  They acknowledge that we need to do things better.</p><p>I cannot help feeling that the fact that the amendments tabled by me and Deputy Clare Daly were thrown out means that we are being thrown back into having to bring the Attorney General back into the equation.  That is where Fianna F&aacute;il is going to be driven.  Sinn F&eacute;in will not support it as there will be no lay majority, but perhaps it is a done deal.  I do not know what goes on behind the scenes between Fianna F&aacute;il and Fine Gael.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.268" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00200"><p>That is very unfair.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.269" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1355" speakername="Mick Wallace" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00300"><p>I said I did not know.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.270" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00400"><p>Is the Deputy suggesting there is a conspiracy?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.271" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1355" speakername="Mick Wallace" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00500"><p>The Ceann Comhairle will back me up and confirm that I made no allegation.  I said I did not know; there was a lack of knowledge on my part.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.272" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00600"><p>There would not be any conspiracy around here.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.273" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1355" speakername="Mick Wallace" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00700"><p>That is a fair point.  At the committee we all agreed that there was no logic to the Attorney General being involved in both processes.  The Attorney General has more control and authority in the second process.  As a member of the Cabinet at the time when the three names are presented for one to be selected, he or she has huge influence.  That is fair, but where is the logic in him or her being involved in both decisions?  It does not stack up.  Because of the tinkering with the amendments, we are being driven back to having to get the Attorney General back on both sides again.  Give us a break.  We are trying to do it right and want to reform how we appoint judges in Ireland.  If one looks at all of the current judges, one can see how many came from private schools and all of the political connections to one party or another.  It is a joke.  People want to see things being done differently.  We agree 100%, but we need a little common sense.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.274" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1259" speakername="Clare Daly" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00800"><p>I agree that there is something utterly demoralising about having to be here today and the manner in which this incredibly important issue is being dealt with by the Government.  The judicial appointments process is in need of radical reform.  We, as legislators, have a job to do which we take very seriously.  Bringing forward legislation requires a hell of a lot of work in our offices at all stages.  It should be done in the interests of the common good, not political expediency.  I take no pleasure in saying the manner in which the Bill is being handled and the presence of the Minister for Transport Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, show that this is a politically expedient measure, which is not a good way to produce legislation.</p>  <p>  There is irony in the fact that the Government has probably created records in the history of the State in the political appointment of judges.  About a year ago we were reminded that appointments would only take place over the dead body of the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, but here he is, despite the fact that so many have been made in the meantime.  Clearly, there is not enough work to be done in the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, even though there is a lot to be done in respect of Dublin Airport in my constituency.  I wish somebody was doing it.</p>  <p>  We have put in a huge amount of work into the Bill and agree that there is a need for radical reform.  However, a couple of things really get my back up.  First, the intervention of the Attorney General after Committee Stage was a disgrace and I have no problem in saying so.  The committee had put in hours of work.  I had the misfortune to sit in at a different committee this morning and, given the way that committee conducted its business, the Government should be incredibly grateful for the hard work and diligence of Opposition members of the justice committee which are without parallel in this D&aacute;il.  The Attorney General said we had made a dog's dinner of the Bill, but if he had listened to a fraction of the arguments that had been made in the committee's deliberations, he would have known precisely that the Bill had been a mess from the start.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.275" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG00900"><p>Hear, hear.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.276" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1259" speakername="Clare Daly" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG01000"><p>In our engagement we all tried to put together better legislation.  We all agreed in our own way that we wanted the Presidents of the Circuit Court and the District Court to be involved and on Committee Stage grappled with the different ways of doing this.  The amendments in this group are a tidying-up exercise to deal with leftover references to the relevant committees - the Government's original way of getting the two boys in without making the committee too unwieldy.  However, in the spirit of the deliberations, we put back in the Presidents of the Circuit Court and the District Court, while also respecting the wishes of the committee to keep the Attorney General out because it would have given him two bites at the cherry and meant too much political influence.</p>  <p>  The Government has tabled an amendment to increase the size of the committee to 17 to bring back the Attorney General, with the two Presidents.  On the other hand, our amendments have been ruled out of order.  If our amendments which seek to have a 14-person committee, including the Presidents of the Circuit Court and the District Court, were to be passed, we would save the Exchequer money, in comparison to the Government's option of having a 17-person committee, as the Minister is proposing today.  I do not accept that our amendments should have been ruled out and agree with the points made by Deputy Wallace.  Whether there is a lay majority is not the most decisive issue for us.  The debate was always about removing political interference from the process.  I also believe the manner in which we are handling this issue is an insult to the Judiciary and that it will go down very poorly in the history books.</p>  <p>  The incredibly speedy manner in which the legislation has come back from the committee for Report Stage is a little odd, given the complexity of the issues raised as a result of the changes made in full engagement by the committee.  As every vacancy in the next ten years has probably been filled, there is no urgency.  The Department of Justice and Equality was charged with the responsibility of dealing with many other urgent items of legislation.  The Coroners (Amendment) Bill was a priority for the Department, the Minister and his predecessor, Deputy Fitzgerald, who met us and senior officials this time last year to discuss advancing it through all Stages before the summer in order to provide for mandatory inquests in cases of maternal death.  The Minister and the Taoiseach assured me that the Department would bring forward the legislation in February and March, but it is now May and it is not even listed.  We are again heading towards summer without it, which is why a lot of people have come to the conclusion that we talk a lot here but do not deliver.  We have a responsibility to call Departments to account, but in doing this in the interests of political expediency we are not treating the legislation with the seriousness it merits.  It is indecent, very wrong and regrettable.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.277" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" speakername="Shane Ross" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG01100"><p>I congratulate Deputies Clare Daly and Wallace and acknowledge the great work they did at the committee.  They knuckled down and produced amendments.  They are genuinely interested in reform of the Judiciary.  That is what Committee Stage is for and it did take a long time to complete.  I have no quarrel with this because of the thorough and forensic way in which they addressed the Bill.  I might not agree with all of their amendments, but I accept, as I am sure they do, that it will be the D&aacute;il which will give its verdict on what has come back from the committee when the amendments are voted on.  If Deputy Clare Daly believes there has been a reluctance to accept her good work, she should not do so.  She did tremendous work, as did Deputy Wallace and all other members of the committee.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.278" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="15:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700031#GG01200"><p>I thank the Minister.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.279" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" speakername="Shane Ross" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00100"><p>It is extremely important that it be acknowledged.  It is also important that Deputy O'Callaghan realise Ministers are not totally and utterly confined to their portfolios.  I was elected on a platform, as was the Deputy and he is entitled and duty bound to speak about the issues about which he was elected to speak.  The fact that he has landed the justice and equality portfolio does not exclude him from speaking about other issues.  I hope he does not regard it as a compulsory muzzle on what he has to say because he says it with great eloquence.  However, he speaks with equal eloquence when he speaks in the Four Courts.  In what we are discussing he is representing not only the people of his constituency but also the voice of the Law Library.  That should be acknowledged by us every time he speaks about this issue, but he does have a vested interest in promoting the interests of the Law Library.  I acknowledge, of course, that he is capable of separating that vested interest when he comes into this House, but it should be pointed out that his opposition to the Bill is probably related to his experiences in the Law Library which are very valuable.  However, they bring him from a certain perspective in addressing this issue.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.280" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1311" speakername="John Lahart" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00200"><p>The Minister forgot to mention his journalistic background.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.281" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" speakername="Shane Ross" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00300"><p>It is important that I comment on the lay majority and what Deputy O'Callaghan had to say about not attacking the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, JAAB.  We are all united on one issue, namely, that the prime objective of the Bill is to remove the rotten practice of politicians appointing friends, cronies and political loyalists to the Bench.  The Deputy is correct in stating the Bill he produced also included this objective.  One of the problems with the JAAB was that there were three lay people on it, which was often cited as justification for its independence and impartiality, but the three lay people were always nominated by the Government or the Minister of the day.  I do not propose to name anybody.  If memory serves me correctly - I think it does - of the three appointees to the last board under Fianna F&aacute;il, one was a former candidate for Fianna F&aacute;il in the European Parliament elections, while another was a gentleman who had been director of elections for Fianna F&aacute;il in D&uacute;n Laoghaire-Rathdown.  That puts into perspective the respect with which Fianna F&aacute;il treated the particular body.  This practise had to end.  The Bill may be imperfect, but it will end that practise.  </p>  <p>  We can go on debating until the cows come home who is going to be on the commission of selection, but following enactment of the Bill what we will have which Deputy O'Callaghan from the Law Library cannot stomach is a lay majority.  Having a lay majority is imperative because we do not want to see political patronage and insiders replaced solely by judges and legal insiders.  It is all very well to say we need to end political patronage and be united in that regard, but to say we have to have a judicial majority - we know that the judges do not want lay people to be on the board-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.282" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00400"><p>That is not true.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.283" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" speakername="Shane Ross" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00500"><p>The Deputy may want to have them on the board.  He may be the spokesman for the judges and no doubt we will hear from him again on this issue.  To replace the lay members with a group of insiders would be wrong.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.284" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1311" speakername="John Lahart" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00600"><p>This is the wrong road to take.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.285" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1213" speakername="Shane Ross" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00700"><p>We would be leading ourselves into a difficult situation where we would replace one group with another.  I would prefer to have a smaller commission than what is being proposed, but that is not going to happen.  The great virtue of the Bill is that there will be a huge independent input into the choice of judges.  Let no one say there will be no judicial influence because the representative of every court will be on it.  They will have massive influence, more than I would like, but I acknowledge the importance of having them there to have a major input because they have expertise in the area.  They should not, however, have the final decision because that will lay open the charge that we are just replacing one group with another.  When the Bill is passed, political interference will be no more.  That will be a great and radical achievement.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.286" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1311" speakername="John Lahart" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00800"><p>Does the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, support his colleague's comments?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.287" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700032#HH00900"><p>I will speak to the amendments.  I have tabled 69 amendments to the Bill, the vast majority of which seek to return the Bill to its original state, as initiated, because of difficulties we encountered when reflecting on the amendments made on Committee Stage.  Some of the amendments made were inconsistent with Government policy, while others were unworkable from a practical point of view, which I believe is accepted.  Some were unacceptable from a legal perspective and also a constitutional standpoint.  I have proposed a number of key ministerial amendments, some of which we are debating, on which I hope to receive the support of the majority in the House, acknowledging that due to the configuration of the Parliament the Government is in a minority.  I appeal to Members to ensure that, ultimately, we will have legislation that is consistent with the Constitution, legally robust and responds to the need for reform of the appointments system in accordance with a number of items of legislation, not all of which came from this side of the House, introduced in the past few years in response to the need to modernise a vital component of the democratic system.</p>  <p>  It is important that we reverse the decision to remove the two court Presidents from the new process.  I think there is agreement across the House that there is a role for the President of the Circuit Court and the President of the District Court, with the Presidents of the other courts, in the process.  The removal of the Attorney General was a mistake.  It is important that in the next few days in debate we acknowledge the role and functions of the Attorney General and provide a role for him or her in the process.  Other aspects that were clearly unconstitutional are also being addressed, for example, the imposition of an explanation requirement on the Government subsequent to making some appointments.  I look forward to the amendments being considered carefully.  </p>  <p>  I acknowledge the work done by the committee.  It did a lot of work, as acknowledged by the Government, including the Minister, Deputy Ross.  It is important that we do not lose sight of this.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.288" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ00100"><p><i>4 o&amp;rsquo;clock</i></p>  <p>Although the Minister, Deputy Ross, has been a Member of the Houses of the Oireachtas for 37 years, his comments displayed an extraordinary lack of political maturity.  I fully recognise that a Minister is entitled to speak on other topics, in a way that I as a spokesperson for justice and equality am also entitled to speak on other areas.  I was pointing out, however, that it is extraordinary that a Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport is prepared to sit through all of the Report Stage amendments.  I have no objection to the Minister, Deputy Ross, speaking on Second Stage when he did, or coming in at the end to give his speech when the Bill is passed or defeated.  To have him sitting here for all of the Bill amendments while we have a crisis in our transport system is simply alarming.  It underlines once again what this Bill is.  It is a vanity project for the Minister, Deputy Ross.</p>  <p>  The Minister also criticised me.  He gave me the credit of stating that I am a representative of Dublin Bay South, which is my constituency.  He said that I stand here and speak as part of a vested interest on behalf of the Law Library.  I will not apologise to a former stockbroker for the fact that I am a barrister.  I am very proud to be a barrister.  When I come to the House, I speak on behalf of Fianna F&aacute;il and on behalf of my constituents in Dublin Bay South.  I do not speak on behalf of anybody else.  The Minister, Deputy Ross, and I have no objection when it comes to the involvement the Law Library should have in the judicial appointments commission.  The Minister's proposed legislation says that there should be one person nominated to the commission by the Bar Council.  I agree with that.  The Minister is also trying to put a second barrister onto the commission by including the Attorney General.  The Minister wants two barristers on the commission and I only wanted one.  The Minister needs to get his statistics correct.</p>  <p>  As well as launching an extraordinary attack on the Judiciary by stating that their appointments are rotten, he then went on to make an even more extraordinary attack on the lay members of the current Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, JAAB.  Now the villains are the politicians who appoint judges, the judges on JAAB who advise on the recommendation of judges, and the lay people who are JAAB.  We must realise that there is only one solution to this problem.  Let the Minister, Deputy Ross, pick every judge in the country.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.289" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1259" speakername="Clare Daly" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ00200"><p>This is incredible stuff.  The whole thing is unbelievable.  The Minister, Deputy Flanagan, has acknowledged that because what we did on Committee Stage was inconsistent with Government policy, the Government is trying to bring us back to where we were before Committee Stage.  Has the Minister, Deputy Ross, not realised, two years on, that he is in a minority and that he has to suck it up and take on board the points of view of other people in the House?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.290" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ00300"><p>Which we have done.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.291" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1259" speakername="Clare Daly" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ00400"><p>We put in hours in trying to improve the Minister's Bill.  He has now come up with hare-brained arguments around unconstitutionality that were never made on Committee Stage.  The Minister has said that he is reinstating the President of the Circuit Court and the President of the District Court, but he is wrong about that because it was everyone of us who argued for the presidents of the Circuit Court and the District Court to be members of this commission.  In the original Bill the Government left them out and now we have this convoluted committee to try to get them in through the back door.  That was the Government's mess, which it is now trying to reinstate.  Members in this House tried to do this on Committee Stage in a better way, so the Minister's assertion and the argument about unconstitutionality are absolute nonsense.</p>  <p>  The Minister, Deputy Ross, has said there would be a lay majority on the commission.  He said that whatever happens from now on, it would be a lay majority, independent of political interference.  This is nonsense.  In fact, the Government's amendments to reinstate the Attorney General to the commission enshrine political interference and bring it back to the commission and to the final selection stage, because the final stage of judicial appointments will continue to rest with the Government.  The idea that this proposed legislation will break the link between political appointments and that it will herald in a new dawn is utter nonsense.  A lay person can be just as much a political appointee as a judge or can have political views.  We are trying to reform the whole system and the manner in which this has been handled, and some of the commentary so far, has been disgraceful and an abuse of an important function.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.292" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ00500"><p>We are speaking to a group of amendments.  As far as they go, the amendments are relatively sound and reflect they fact that on Committee Stage there was a general consensus on the direction in which the Bill would move.  It is my analysis, while one would never think it, that Fianna F&aacute;il has essentially conceded the principle of much of this argument.  The comments of the Attorney General about the Bill, however, were ill-informed and very inappropriate because of the context in which they were made and the manner and type of language used.  His comments were ill-informed because they separated out the text of the Bill, as it existed at that time, without considering the discussion that had happened on the Bill and what the discussion clearly pointed to, namely, consensus in favour of a lay majority, consensus about finding a way to return the President of the Circuit Court and the President of the District Court on to the commission, and consensus on the need to ensure the lay nominations for the commission and those who come from the public appointments system are more radically reflective of Irish society and bring in a greater breadth of experience.  With regard to criteria that must be reached by the lay majority nominations, there is no question of these lay members being mugs.  There is a very lengthy list of criteria and expertise expected.  The lay members of the commission would be eminently qualified and capable.</p>  <p>  I do not believe that this is radical legislation.  We are all agreed on the need for independent and transparent judicial appointments.  This is not a particularly radical proposal.  If we want to be radical in dealing with this, then we also need to consider other reforms of the Judiciary, including sentencing guidelines.  I have made this point a number of times and the Ministers will be aware of this.  I firmly believe that both pieces of legislation need to be considered as a package to reform the Judiciary properly.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.293" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ00600"><p>I merely say to the Members opposite that I appeal for calm.  It is important that we have a constructive debate on the merits of the amendments.  I acknowledge the good work by all members of the committee on many aspects of the Bill.  I believe that everyone is agreed that on Committee Stage we were left with a document that was far from perfect.  The purpose of the various Stages of debate is to improve on issues, if we can.  I hope that over the next few weeks we can reintroduce the spirit of constructive engagement that we had on Committee Stage for a number of weeks, oftentimes outside of the spotlight of the media, and that we can work in the way we need to ensure we can have improved legislation.  Although it might seem strange, given the last hour's debate, it is my firm belief that there is not much between us.  We can go through the more than 100 amendments to see how best we can reform the system in the way that life in 2018 deserves, and that we can modernise the manner in which judges are appointed.  Ultimately, under the Constitution, this will be a matter for the Government.  We are not changing the Constitution and we are not advocating a change to the Constitution.  We are ensuring that we modernise our legislation in a way that brings about a greater level of transparency to the system.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.294" nospeaker="true" time="15:25:00" ><p>Amendment agreed to.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.295" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ00800"><p>I move amendment No. 2:</p><blockquote>In page 7, lines 9 to 12, to delete all words from and including &ldquo;and&rdquo; where it secondly occurs in line 9 down to and including &ldquo;relates&rdquo; in line 12.</blockquote></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.296" nospeaker="true" time="15:25:00" ><p>Amendment agreed to.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.297" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="15:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700033#JJ01000"><p>Amendments Nos. 3 to 5, inclusive, 100 and 102 are related and may be discussed together.  Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 are physical alternatives to amendment No. 3.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.298" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="15:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700034#KK00100"><p>I move amendment No. 3:</p><blockquote>In page 9, to delete lines 30 to 34, and in page 10, to delete lines 1 to 6 and substitute the following:<b>&ldquo;7. </b>(1) No person shall be recommended, under this Act, for appointment to judicial office unless they are of sufficient merit to discharge with distinction the responsibilities of the office to which they are appointed (the &ldquo;Merit Principle&rdquo;).<br /><br />(2) Subject always to the Merit Principle described in <i>subsection (1)</i>, recommendations of persons for appointment to judicial office under this Act shall have regard to the &ldquo;Diversity Principle&rdquo;--<blockquote>(a) the objective that membership of the judiciary should comprise equal numbers of men and women, and<br /><br />(b) the objective that the membership of the judiciary should reflect the diversity within the population as a whole.</blockquote>(3) Subject always to the Merit Principle described in <i>subsection (1)</i>, a list of persons recommended for appointment to judicial office under this Act shall include at least one person whose appointment would further the objectives of the Diversity Principle described in <i>subsection (2)</i>.&rdquo;.</blockquote><p>I apologise.  I had misread the grouping.  As I reflected in my contribution on the previous grouping, it is vital that the Judiciary reflects greater diversity because that would benefit those who appear before it, be they complainants or accused.  The amendment would not change the fact that everyone appointed to the Judiciary should be adequately skilled, qualified and experienced, which is important.  Rather, it would adjust the Bill slightly so that the commission would have regard to the diversity principle as outlined.  On Committee Stage, the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, spoke in opposition to this idea on the basis that it would be too restrictive.  As I pointed out then, there exists the objective of the Judiciary reflecting the diversity of the population as a whole.  This amendment would make that a firmer principle, subject to the merit principle.</p><p>I was not properly prepared, as I misread the grouping, so I might contribute again in a moment.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.299" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="15:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700034#KK00200"><p>That is fine.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.300" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1259" speakername="Clare Daly" time="15:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700034#KK00300"><p>Of this grouping, Sinn F&eacute;in's amendment No. 3 is probably the most interesting.  The rest are concerned with tidying up, providing rules around the Irish language and so on.  I support amendment No. 3, which is similar to the proposal that Sinn F&eacute;in tabled on Committee Stage of a merit or diversity principle.  Under the amendment, when the commission is proposing a list of people for appointment, at least one of them should be someone who furthers at least one of the objectives of the diversity principle, mainly, that the membership of the Judiciary should be gender equal and reflect the diversity of the population as a whole.  This is a good idea.  I foresee practical difficulties with an absolute obligation that at least one of the names should further the objectives of the diversity principle, but we need to discuss this proposal further.</p>  <p>  A Law Library submission on the gender pay gap in the barrister profession in 2017 pointed out that only 38% of the total Law Library membership was female.  Worse still, the attrition rate among female barristers was much higher than it was among men, with only 16% of the inner Bar - senior counsel - being women.  While it is not a requirement to hold a senior counsel position to become a judge, let us face the fact that, with such an attrition rate, it is likely that a good deal fewer than the 38% of barristers who are female will succeed in getting the full ten years of practice that are necessary to be appointed to the District Court or Circuit Court or the 12 years that are necessary to be appointed to a superior court.  We need to factor these issues into our discussion.  Granted, solicitors can also seek appointment as judges, but their success rates to date have been much slimmer.  Only eight solicitors have been appointed to the superior courts since 2002, with none appointed to the Supreme Court.  Of the eight, none is female.  This problem needs to be addressed.  I appreciate the Sinn F&eacute;in amendment's intention of trying to do so.  If we do not include such measures, the problem will not be addressed.</p>  <p>  If the amendment were to pass, would it lead to more women becoming barristers and more solicitors putting themselves forward for judicial appointment?  One would hope so, but I imagine that it would be difficult in the first few years.  That said, we should not resist the idea, particularly if it is put up to the Law Library to encourage more women to become barristers and more solicitors, including female solicitors, to apply for the role of judges.  This positive principle sets the bar for the Law Library in encouraging diversity.  Diversity is necessary and important if we are to have fair and impartial judgments and if judges are to reflect life's diversity when people appear before them.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.301" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="15:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700034#KK00400"><p>We all agree on how important it is that the objective behind this legislation should be to try to ensure that the best people are nominated for appointment as judges.  Consider the legislation that I introduced and the Bill that is before the House.  Section 7 of the latter refers to the fact that people should be selected based on merit.  Regarding Sinn F&eacute;in's amendment, I have no objection to inserting a specific principle called the &quot;Merit Principle&quot;.</p><p>I also agree that we should make efforts to ensure that there is greater diversity on the Bench.  As Deputy Clare Daly stated, however, that requires more diversity in the legal profession.  One can only become a judge if one is a lawyer.  That makes sense.  It is required to have expertise to be a judge.  Sometimes people believe it is just about making a decision based on a judge's preference for these facts over those facts, but lawyers are appointed to be judges because judges need to have expertise in the law.  They must understand the Constitution, statute law and the rules of evidence.  In this anti-expertise world, it is sometimes presented as though anyone could do the job.  In many respects, being appointed as a judge is like being appointed as a consultant oncologist, in that one would need to be a doctor and have expertise first.  We must recognise that the merit principle is necessary.</p><p>I have a slight concern about the diversity principle.  I agree with Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire on the importance of ensuring diversity, but the diversity principle in Sinn F&eacute;in's amendment is unambiguous and has two requirements:</p><blockquote>(a) the objective that membership of the judiciary should comprise equal numbers of men and women, and<br /><br />(b) the objective that the membership of the judiciary should reflect the diversity within the population as a whole.</blockquote><p>There are two parts to this principle, not one.  Subsection (3), however, places an unambiguous requirement that at least one of the three people who are going to be recommended by the commission must be a person whose appointment would further the objectives of the diversity principle.  In my reading, the principle would not necessarily be complied with if the commission simply recommended a woman, as a woman only complies with half of the diversity principle.  I would be interested in the Minister's comments on this point.  We should note that section 7 of the Bill contains a set of requirements:</p><blockquote>(a) the objective that the membership of the judiciary should comprise equal numbers of men and women, and<br /><br />(b) the objective that the membership of the judiciary should, to the extent feasible and practicable, reflect the diversity within the population as a whole.</blockquote><p>The Ministers may not be aware - I hope that the Minister, Deputy Ross, does not object to the fact that I have some knowledge in this area - that trying to attract top lawyers, highly qualified lawyers and lawyers who would make good judges into applying for the Judiciary is difficult at the moment.  If we are to ensure that the high standard of the Judiciary continues, we must make it more attractive if we are to get better people to apply.</p><p>The other amendments in this grouping relate to a matter on which my amendment was accepted on Committee Stage.  I thank the Minister, Deputy Flanagan, for his generous comments about the contributions of all members of the committee.  My amendment was on the necessity of ensuring proficiency in the Irish language among the Judiciary.</p><p>I tabled it not because I love the Irish language, which I do, but rather because it is important to recognise that people in this country have a constitutional right to have their case heard through Irish if that is feasible.  It will not be possible in all circumstances.  There have been attempts to have criminal trials heard in Irish, some of which attempts have failed.  We must recognise that people should have an entitlement to have their cases heard through Irish if that is feasible and we should try to facilitate people in that regard.  That right would be watered down by amendment No. 5 tabled by the Minister.  One must also consider amendment No. 102 in that regard because it proposes that in order to ensure proficiency in the Irish language among the Judiciary that "The Commission shall consult with the Courts Service for the purpose of keeping under review the needs of the users of the courts with respect to proceedings being conducted in the Irish language".</p> <p> It is important to recognise that not everyone who applies to be a judge must be proficient in the Irish language and very few applicants will be.  There must be, however, a sufficient number of judges on the High Court, appeal courts and, in particular, the Circuit and District Courts who are able to hear cases through Irish.  I note the Minister's amendment but I would like to know the purpose behind it and whether in some respect it waters down the clear wish of members on Committee Stage in accepting the amendment now contained in section 7(2)(c).  It is important that we recognise that entitlement of people to have their case heard through Irish and we should try to facilitate that.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.303" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="15:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700035#LL00200"><p>Unfortunately, I did not expect this amendment to be dealt with at this point.  Deputy O'Callaghan has mischaracterised the amendment, which contains several qualifications.  Section 7(2)(a) addresses the objective that the membership of the Judiciary should comprise equal numbers of men and women and 7(2)(b) provides that the membership of the Judiciary should reflect the diversity within the population as a whole.</p>  <p>  As regards expertise, it is probably true that there is greater hostility and there are issues in terms of the attitudes people have towards expertise in society as a whole, but that is not necessarily a feature of this debate.  No Member is suggesting that any of the lay members of the commission would not be experts and the amendment does not suggest that any appointee to the Judiciary would be anything less than expert.  Anyone to be considered for appointment under the diversity principle would also have to satisfy the merit principle.  All persons considered for appointment would have to reach a certain minimum standard.</p>  <p>  I disagree with Deputy O'Callaghan that one would have to satisfy both subsection (2)(a) and (2)(b) because the wording of the amendment is that "under this Act shall include at least one person whose appointment would further the objectives of the Diversity Principle".  That is not the same as having to satisfy both those subsections.  The amendment provides that the appointment of at least one of the candidates would be in furtherance of the objectives of the diversity principle, that is, either (2)(a) or (2)(b), which is quite a low threshold.  For example, if the majority of the Judiciary were male, as is the case, at least one of the candidates would have to be female.  That would very clearly be in furtherance of the diversity principle.  Numerous other examples could be given.  It is not an unreasonable expectation and would be very easily satisfied.  There is no obligation to appoint a candidate who satisfies the provisions.  Rather, the requirement would be that the appointment of at least one of the eminently qualified people would in furtherance of the objective of diversity but the decision on appointment would be for the commission.  It is not a particularly radical provision but it is important.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.304" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700035#LL00300"><p>Amendment No. 3 proposes to insert a new section in place of section 7.  The amendment is identical to an amendment discussed at some length on Committee Stage and ultimately withdrawn by Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire to facilitate other amendments to section 7.  I acknowledge that the Deputy flagged that he would resubmit the amendment on Report Stage but in so doing he has failed to take into account a change made to section 7 on Committee Stage by an amendment that introduced the objective of Irish language proficiency.  I indicated on Committee Stage that I was not amenable to accepting the amendment and I reiterate that now.</p>  <p>  Subsection (1) of the proposed replacement section 7 states that "No person shall be recommended, under this Act, for appointment to judicial office unless they are of sufficient merit to discharge with distinction the responsibilities of the office to which they are appointed (the &ldquo;Merit Principle&rdquo;)."  Subsection (2) of the proposed new section has the effect of benchmarking the merit-based recommendation against the objectives of having an equality of men and women in the membership of the Judiciary and diversity among that membership.  The objectives are denoted by reference to a diversity principle.  Subsection (3) stipulates that "a list of persons recommended for appointment to judicial office under this Act shall include at least one person whose appointment would further the objectives of the Diversity Principle".  I am not at all sure that the Bill should require the commission to select in such a specific manner.</p>  <p>  I acknowledge the points made by Deputy O'Callaghan on the issue.  He made a lot of sense on the merit principle.  Deputies are aware that there are several elements to how the Bill addresses the issue of population diversity and gender equality.  Under section 7, subject to decisions being based on merit, the concerns in regard to gender balance and diversity in the membership of the Judiciary are very clearly brought to the fore by way of a requirement that regard must be had to them for the function of selecting and recommending persons for appointment.  Gender equality and diversity feature elsewhere in the Bill, such as sections 12(5) and 50(5).  Section 12(7) provides that one area where knowledge and experience is to be to the fore in the selection of lay members is with respect to "human rights, equality or issues concerning diversity amongst members of society".  Under the review process provided for in section 53 the procedures committee must monitor and review the implementation of the Act including, in particular, the diversity among candidates for appointment.  It must report its findings to the commission which, in turn will report to the Minister with recommendations.  I am satisfied that the Bill addresses this issue adequately as well as that which Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire intends to achieve through the amendment, and I am not inclined to support it.</p>  <p>  I wish to discuss amendment No. 4 and other amendments in this grouping which are in my name.  Amendment No. 4 is a drafting amendment.  As regards amendment No. 5, section 7 was amended on Committee Stage such that, in addition to the objectives that membership of the Judiciary should comprise equal numbers of men and women and reflect the diversity of the population as a whole, a third objective now provides that there shall be proficiency in the Irish language among judges, subject to the fundamental requirement that merit be the basis for any decision to recommend a person for appointment to office.  Under section 7, regard shall be had to those three objectives.</p>  <p>  Section 50, which was section 55 of the Bill as published, was also amended on Committee Stage.  It regards the procedures committee and its role and function.  There ought to be more consistency in section 50(5)(f) with the language of the objective of gender equality in 50(5)(c) and that on the objective of population diversity in 50(5)(d).  For that reason, I have tabled amendments Nos. 5 and 100 and related them to a new subsection, the subject of amendment No. 102, which I am sure Deputy Clare Daly will welcome.  Similarly, amendment No. 100 provides that, in the context of the statement to be prepared by the procedures committee, section 50(5)(f) will prescribe that a matter to which the committee shall have regard will be the written statement to be provided under section 50(7).</p><p>Deputy O'Callaghan referred to the subject matter of amendment No. 102, namely, a new provision requiring the commission to consult with the Courts Service to enable the commission to keep under review the needs of court users with respect to Irish language proceedings.  This new subsection will require the commission to provide a written statement to the procedures committee from time to time, addressing those needs.</p> <p> My colleague, the Minister, Deputy Ross, has expressed certain views on the nature of judicial appointments.  He is entitled to his views but I do not share them.  I disagree with his view that our Judiciary is comprised of friends of Government, past and present.  I believe that is unfair and untrue.  As Minister for Justice and Equality I wish to state on the record that we have been very well served by our Judiciary, who serve our people on a daily basis without fear or favour.  The Judiciary has been independent in that service since the foundation of the State.  Our judges are highly regarded both at home within this jurisdiction and abroad.</p> <p> The reforms in this Bill that the Government is bringing forward should not in any way be construed as casting any negative aspersions or otherwise on the quality of the Judiciary.  These reforms modernise aspects of the judicial appointments system.  I believe it is important that we keep our laws updated.  I do not agree that the Judiciary has been in any way compromised down the years and I reject that notion if it was construed by what has been said earlier this afternoon in the course of this debate.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.306" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1259" speakername="Clare Daly" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00200"><p>It is hard to follow that one.  I will go back to the issue at stake.  The Minister is correct that there are aspirations regarding the encouragement of gender equality and diversity throughout the Bill.  The difference between an aspiration and what Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire is trying to do is that the amendment provides a lot more meat.  I put it to the Minister that amendment No. 3 is very carefully crafted to do exactly that because it is subject always to the merit principle but it means that we are not just paying lip service to gender and diversity, we are putting it up to the commission to encourage more people to be nominated as judges by requiring at least one person in such a category to be appointed.  I agree with that.  To me that is the judicial equivalent of gender quotas for political parties.  At the time when that idea was put forward I thought it was nonsense and I was of the view that it would just pay lip service to the issue and that we would get inadequate people, but the reality has proven that to be an incredibly positive measure which has meant more women have come through into the Parliament and that in and of itself has had a knock-on effect on the type of Parliament we have.  It might not be perfect but it is more diverse than it used to be, so we are getting there.  This measure is the judicial equivalent of that and we need to put it up to the commission that it has to deliver recommendations that encourage women and reflect diversity in society.  That is an issue women need to look at because the real problem here is that there are very few people from working class communities of Dublin or the pauperised rural communities who end up as members of the Judiciary.  Generally speaking, they come from the barrister profession and it is very difficult to become a barrister if one does not have parents to support one in all those years when one does not get paid.  We must tackle those issues.  We must define diversity.  It is not just a case of being gay or black.  It is primarily a class issue and that needs to be reflected.  Amendment No. 3 is a very good step in that direction and it is carefully crafted.  The Minister should accept it because it is important for all the other aspects also.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.307" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00300"><p>I welcome the comments of the Minister for Justice and Equality.  It is about time that somebody in government has stood up to the cowardly and ill-informed assault that the Minister, Deputy Ross, has waged against the Judiciary for the past two years.  It is regrettable that no one else in government has seen fit to do likewise.</p>  <p>  In respect of Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire's amendment, there is something I did not notice when I was speaking about it earlier and I am afraid it has affected my view in respect of it.  I do not know if he intended this, but the effect is to remove section 7 in its entirety.  Perhaps he is aware of this but if section 7 is removed that would have the effect of removing section 7(2)(c) which contains the objective I know he agrees with, namely, that there should be proficiency in the Irish language among the Judiciary.  That would affect my view in respect of the amendment.  It is important that there would be proficiency in the Irish language for the reasons I outlined earlier.</p>  <p>  I note the interesting comments Deputy Daly made in respect of diversity.  "Diversity" is a word that is sometimes overused.  It sounds great in legislation but it is not meaningful.  In order to get greater diversity in the Judiciary we need to get greater diversity in the legal profession.  My experience is that it is changing.  It is very hard to make it as a barrister in Ireland now, but it is not the case that it the same type of people who are becoming barristers or solicitors.  A much broader range of people is coming into the legal profession.  It is a much tougher career than is presented by people who view it as being an easy career.  It is very hard to make a living as a young barrister or solicitor.  We must encourage people and ensure they are given a chance early on.  The merit principle in the profession is really important so that people get a chance on merit to make a living and that will improve diversity in the Judiciary.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.308" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1255" speakername="Jack Chambers" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00400"><p>Like my colleague, Deputy O'Callaghan, I welcome the comments and clarification from the Minister.  There is clearly a separation of opinion at Cabinet.  It is bizarre seeing two Ministers reflecting opposite views.  Does the Minister for Justice and Equality feel pressurised by the presence of the initiator of this Bill?  His every move is being watched.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.309" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00500"><p>Not at all.  It is a Government team.  I said that from the outset.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.310" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1255" speakername="Jack Chambers" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00600"><p>It is a bizarre and divided team.  Deputy O'Callaghan makes a very valid point.  The amendment proposed by Sinn F&eacute;in has the effect of deleting the objective that there should be proficiency in the Irish language among the Judiciary.  We know what Sinn F&eacute;in is trying to do in the North and the importance of the Irish language.  Sinn F&eacute;in has tabled very few amendments.  I understand the party is supporting the Bill, as it has said that previously.  Perhaps Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire could set out what is the crux of his party's support for the Bill.  Is it this amendment or is it another amendment?  I am a bit confused by the lack of amendments Sinn F&eacute;in has tabled in terms of what is the crux of its support for the Bill.  More than 100 amendments are being tabled and we need to know how they will be supported.  What is the central tenet of Sinn F&eacute;in's support if this does not have the Government's support as set out by the Minister?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.311" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00700"><p>I will observe future Bills for Fianna F&aacute;il amendments as a measure of the party's level of interest.  I do not know whether that is a very good criterion to use.  With only two minutes speaking time I am not sure I will have time to respond to that point but I might get to it.</p><p>I am conflicted over the amendment.  I accept the point made by Deputy O'Callaghan.  It is an oversight that the point is not included.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.312" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00800"><p>That is fair enough.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.313" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="15:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700036#MM00900"><p>It was a change of lines.  I would like to see both measures included.  There is still the Seanad in terms of effecting change.  That said, the Government has to a large extent accepted paragraph (c).  I will consider the issue further.  I would like to see the Irish language proficiency retained but I also think the reference to diversity is important.  I wish to emphasise that this is not a huge ask.  Deputy Daly's analogy was very good.  Such an approach is very sensible because just as quotas did not put women in the D&aacute;il or Seanad, they put them on the ballot paper and gave the public the final say in that regard.</p><p>In the same manner, this is not going to do anything other than put people who further, rather than comprehensively satisfy, the objective of the diversity principle on the short list.  That makes sense and is reasonable.  The opportunity will then exist to evaluate all the people who will have satisfied the merit principle.  I will consider further whether to press this amendment.  It is my strongly held view that the Minister should take this point on board but I am also anxious to ensure that there is proficiency in the Irish language among the Judiciary.</p> <p> As to supporting the Bill, I have made it clear on the public record that Sinn F&eacute;in views this Bill and the Judicial Council Bill as a package.  We want to see progress in the reform of the Judiciary generally and we want to see the introduction of sentencing guidelines.  Our position on the final vote is still being considered and depends on a number of factors.  It is important to reform the independent appointment of the Judiciary process.  Fianna F&aacute;il may have its own reasons for opposing changes in the judicial appointments system.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.315" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN00200"><p>How stands amendment No. 3?  Is it being withdrawn or pressed?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.316" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN00300"><p>I cannot support it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.317" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN00400"><p>In that context my amendment is likely to be defeated so I will table a slightly adjusted version for the Seanad debate.  In the interim, I would like the Minister to consider the matter because I think there is a consensus as to the principle contained in the amendment, whatever about the actual vehicle.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.318" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN00500"><p>We cannot get into that discussion now.  The amendment is either being withdrawn or pressed.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.319" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1287" speakername="Donnchadh &Oacute; Laoghaire" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN00600"><p>I will withdraw it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.320" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN00700"><p>I am conscious of what Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire has said about the context of the withdrawal and we will have a further opportunity to discuss this.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.321" nospeaker="true" time="16:05:00" ><p>Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.322" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN00900"><p>I move amendment No. 4:</p><blockquote>In page 10, line 2, to delete &ldquo;and&rdquo; where it secondly occurs.</blockquote></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.323" nospeaker="true" time="16:05:00" ><p>Amendment agreed to.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.324" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN01100"><p>I move amendment No. 5:</p><blockquote>In page 10, to delete lines 5 and 6 and substitute the following:&ldquo;(c) the objective that, consistent with the written statement most recently provided under <i>section 50(7) </i>to the Procedures Committee concerning the needs of the users of the courts in that regard, the membership of the judiciary should include persons with a proficiency in the Irish language.&rdquo;.</blockquote></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.325" nospeaker="true" time="16:05:00" ><p>Amendment agreed to.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.326" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN01300"><p>Amendments No. 6, 8, 10, 12 to 23, inclusive, 45 to 57, inclusive, and 59 to 64, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.  Amendments Nos. 8, 10 and 12 to 16, inclusive, are alternatives to amendment No. 6.  Amendments Nos. 15 and 16 are alternatives to amendment No. 14.  Amendments Nos 21 to 23, inclusive, are alternatives to amendment No. 20.  Amendments Nos. 47 and 48 are alternatives to amendment No. 46.  Amendment No. 50 is an alternative to amendment No. 49.  Amendment No. 63 is an alternative to amendment No. 62.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.327" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1296" speakername="Jim O'Callaghan" time="16:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700037#NN01400"><p>I move amendment No. 6:</p><blockquote>In page 10, to delete lines 20 to 28 and substitute the following:<b>&ldquo;10. </b>(1) The Commission shall consist of 11 members being&mdash;<blockquote>(a) the Chief Justice,<br /><br />(b) the President of the Court of Appeal,<br /><br />(c) the President of the High Court,<br /><br />(d) the President of the Circuit Court,<br /><br />(e) the President of the District Court,<br /><br />(f) a lay person nominated by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission,<br /><br />(g) a lay person nominated by the Free Legal Advice Centres Limited,<br /><br />(h) a lay person nominated by the Citizens Information Board,<br /><br />(i) a lay person nominated by an t&Uacute;dar&aacute;s um Ard-Oideachas,<br /><br />(j) a practising barrister nominated under <i>section 13</i>, and<br /><br />(k) a practising solicitor nominated under <i>section 13</i>.</blockquote>(2) The Commission shall elect its own chairperson.&rdquo;.</blockquote><p>This is a very large grouping but I will try to simplify it for the thousands of people watching at home.  All these amendments are concerned with how the commission is constituted, the number of people on it and how they should be appointed.  Following the Committee Stage debate we have a Bill under which, at present, the commission has 13 members.  Under the Minister's Report Stage proposals, the commission will increase to 17 members.  Just looking at this on pure economic grounds, we are establishing a quango of 17 people that the Government has told us will cost &euro;1 million per year.  That information was contained in the explanatory memorandum that was attached to the legislation on Second Stage.  The commission is replacing the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, JAAB, which has nine members and which costs less than &euro;10,000 per year.  On first principles alone, an extraordinary quango is being established here.  We know from the legislation that not only is the commission going to deal with recommending people to Government, there will also be an office of judicial appointments, a director general and no doubt there will be glossy annual reports, the commission will have a PR company advising it and so on.  This is the sort of thing that an enthusiastic journalist would have criticised years ago and is a further example of this Government creating an unnecessary and very costly quango.</p><p>My amendment proposes to simplify the commission.  The Government is proposing to put 17 people on the commission but my amendment provides for 11 members.  I ask colleagues to approach this with an open mind.  Under the proposal I have put forward in amendment No. 6 there would be five members of the Judiciary on the commission of 11.  There is agreement among all of us that the presidents of each of the courts should be on this commission.  They are in similar positions to the headmasters or principals of schools in that they know what is required in their courts.  What they want most of all is not to have their friends appointed but to ensure that any appointees to their courts are people who can work hard, who know the law and who will be an addition to the courts over which they preside.  It is essential, for that reason, that we have the five presidents of each of the five courts on the commission.</p><p>It is also important to have lay people on this body.  Lay people will bring a different perspective.  They obviously do not bring with them the expertise that judges have but they bring a different perspective on how individuals should be selected following the application process which is set out in the legislation.  The Government has proposed that the lay people it wants on the commission should be appointed by public advertisement and a competition run by the Public Appointments Service, PAS.  That is a very complicated process, particularly given that there will be nine lay people on the commission under the Government's proposals.  We will have to go around the country, advertise and look for nine lay people who cannot be lawyers under any circumstances because lawyers might bring some knowledge or expertise to the process.  A much better way of finding suitable lay people is to have them nominated by organisations and entities that are well respected.  My amendment proposes that a lay person be nominated by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, the Free Legal Advice Centres Limited, the Citizens Information Board and by an t&Uacute;dar&aacute;s um Ard-Oideachas.  That would provide a very good contribution to the commission.  We would have four strong lay people nominated by each of those respected entities, based on what they think would be appropriate for the commission.  I do not think there is disagreement in the House on the need to have a representative of both of the legal professions on the commission.  As I have said repeatedly, one can only be a judge if one is a practising lawyer.  Therefore, it is necessary that someone from the Law Society of Ireland who knows solicitors and someone from the Bar Council who knows barristers can bring their knowledge of the people who are applying.  I heard the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, being interviewed by Mr. David McCullagh on &quot;Prime Time&quot; a number of months ago.  Mr. McCullagh made the point to the Minister that the advantage of having people on the commission who have knowledge of and who know the applicants is that they will &quot;keep the eejits out&quot;.  There are many people who can apply and whose applications will look great on paper.  Some will have impressive a curriculum vitae and will do a great interview but the commission needs to have knowledge of the applicants' experience as barristers or solicitors over a period of 15 to 20 years.  One will know a lot more about a person and whether he or she will make a good judge from knowing how he or she has been, as a practising barrister or solicitor for 20 years, than from looking at a three or four page application.  It is important, in that context, that the commission has that expertise.  The Minister will note that in the commission I propose I have not included the Attorney General.  That is consistent with the proposal that I put forward in the legislation that Fianna F&aacute;il sponsored a year and a half ago.  I must also speak on the other amendments in this grouping but before doing so, I must point out that amendment No. 6 proposes that the commission itself should be able to elect its own chairperson.  </p><p>I note that Deputy Wallace's amendment No. 7 has been ruled out of order.  Parts of that amendment appealed to me but it is now gone.  I also note that Deputy Clare Daly's amendment No. 11 has also been ruled out of order.  That amendment proposed that the Presidents of the Circuit Court and District Court be put back onto the commission.  I would have supported that because it is just not tenable to have a commission without them.  The Minister already knows my views on having the Attorney General on the commission and also at Cabinet afterwards, making the political decision.</p><p>Deputy &Oacute; Laoghaire and others have to decide how they will vote, but I want to make it clear that if my amendment No. 6 is rejected, I will probably accept the Government's amendment No. 10 as the only way I can get the presidents of the Circuit Court and the District Court back onto this commission.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.329" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1233" speakername="Charles Flanagan" time="16:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700038#OO00200"><p>I have listened carefully to what Deputy O'Callaghan has had to say on this issue.  He has proposed amendment No. 6, which provides for an 11-member commission.  The Judicial Appointments Advisory Board currently has the same number of members.  A positive element of the Deputy's amendment is that it secures the membership on the commission of all the court presidents, including the Chief Justice.  That is a key objective of the amendment I am proposing in this regard.  I agree with the committee's proposal, as replicated in my amendment, that it would be appropriate to nominate a member of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission.  We will not be changing that proposal.</p>  <p>  There are a number of problems with Deputy O'Callaghan's amendment.  First, the amendment does not allow for a lay majority.  The composition of the commission he is proposing barely represents any reform of the current position.  Deputies will be aware that a key priority in the programme for Government is the establishment of a judicial appointments commission with "a lay majority" and "an independent chairperson".  The Bill, as passed by the committee, provides for a lay chair and a lay majority.  I do not see any rational basis for revisiting, much less reversing, that position.</p>  <p>  I am still convinced that the use of the Public Appointments Service, operating on the basis of a set of competencies provided for in the Bill, is the best method of obtaining the knowledge and experience that may well be represented in some of these bodies.  I say that in response to Deputy O'Callaghan's suggestion that it could be difficult to get lay people with sufficient expertise and experience.  I think we will look to the Public Appointments Service in this regard.</p>  <p>  Deputy O'Callaghan's amendment poses a number of policy difficulties.  It does not provide for a lay chair and does not guarantee that there will ever be a lay chair.  It does not provide for a lay majority.  It provides for a membership of five judges, four lay members and two legal members.  It does not provide for a role for the Public Appointments Service.  I cannot support it for those reasons.</p>  <p>  I would like to speak on the amendments in this group in my name, which are Nos. 8, 10, 12 and 14.  Deputies will be aware that the relevant committee structure provided in the Bill, as published, was removed by a vote of the select committee.  This means that the selection and recommendation function falls back on the commission.  It also means there is no role in the Bill for the presidents of the District Court or the Circuit Court.  I believe we need to be as representative as we can.  I think I have done that with regard to amendment No. 10.</p>  <p>  Since this Bill was first published and debated, the provision that has attracted the most attention has undeniably been section 10.  I believe amendment No. 10, which includes a reference to "the Attorney General", is important in that context.  I acknowledge that the will of the select committee was to remove the Attorney General from the membership of the commission.  The committee voted in favour of including the Chief Justice and the chief commissioner of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission.  I accept the inclusion of the chief commissioner of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, but I believe there is strong merit in revisiting the membership of the Attorney General.</p>  <p>  The Government's view on this matter, which was reaffirmed recently in the context of this debate, is that the Attorney General should be included in the new commission, subject to the inclusion of the presidents of the District Court and the Circuit Court and the retention of the chief commissioner of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission as a lay person.  This would bring the total membership of the commission to 16 and would not bring about a lay majority.  I am proposing in amendment No. 14, having regard to the programme for Government, to add one further lay person to the commission, thereby providing for a commission of 17 members with a lay majority.</p>  <p>  We have a short amount of time available to us this afternoon.  We will come back to this legislation next week.  As Deputies are aware, the Attorney General has an important function in representing the State in legal proceedings.  The Attorney General represents the public in all legal proceedings from the perspective of the enforcement of the law and the assertion or protection of public rights.  The day-to-day interaction between the law and the courts, and at the highest level of legal proceedings before the courts, gives the Attorney General a unique perspective on the work of legal practitioners and on the deliberations of the courts themselves.</p>  <p>  I have not heard a convincing argument for losing the Attorney General's potentially significant input into the deliberation stage of the selection process.  During that stage, very many names may come before the commission, whereas a limited number of names come before the Cabinet at present.  I do not believe there can be a convincing argument for the removal of the Attorney General from the commission.  I see no justification whatsoever for turning on its head the very positive history of the Attorney General's involvement in the advisory board process, the benefits of which the courts and the system have enjoyed for over 20 years.</p>  <p>  I assume Deputy Clare Daly will move amendment No. 13, which is linked to amendment No. 16.  Perhaps we will have an opportunity to deal with those amendments when these proceedings resume after they have been adjourned today.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.330" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1255" speakername="Jack Chambers" time="16:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700038#OO00300"><p>It is important to note that the amendment in the name of my colleague, Deputy O'Callaghan, proposes a commission of 11 members with an appropriate mix of lay people and a spread of key people across the Judiciary, including the president of the District Court, the president of the Circuit Court, the president of the High Court, the president of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Justice.  I think it is right that he is proposing that lay members of the commission should be nominated by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, the Free Legal Advice Centres, the Citizens Information Board and an t&Uacute;dar&aacute;s um Ard-Oideachas.  He is proposing that a barrister and a solicitor should be nominated to the commission under section 16 of the Bill.  He is also proposing that the commission should be able to appoint its own chairperson.  As none of these people would have a single majority, there will be a genuine mix or spread of people across the commission.  It would be a misinterpretation to say that there will be a majority of any type.</p>  <p>  The Minister for Justice and Equality is proposing that there will be up to 17 people on this board, which would be an overwhelming number, especially given that the judicial appointments commission will appoint very few judges in any given year.  I note that the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport has been sitting on his shoulder since the beginning of these proceedings.  I assume he will do likewise next week and in the weeks beyond.  As someone who read the newspaper columns that the Minister, Deputy Ross, used to write over many years, I am surprised by this proposal.  He was the biggest critic of quangos and of excessive costs and layers within the public service.  The pressure brought to bear by this proposal would impose a hundredfold increase in cost.  I suggest this would probably be the biggest increase in costs associated with a single quango during the term in office of this Government and its predecessor.  Under this proposal, we will have a director of the office being appointed.  The establishment of a judicial appointments commission office is being proposed.  There will be a spread around the director in terms of the secretariat.  I am surprised that the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, who has a number of quangos in his own area, is proposing one of the biggest expansions in bureaucracy we have seen.  The Judicial Appointments Advisory Board, as it currently stands, is efficient.  We all accept that reforms are needed.</p><p><i>5 o&amp;rsquo;clock</i></p> <p>To propose such a multiplication of cost just to integrate his own reform proposals is really surprising.  Can the Minister explain the necessity for that cost increase?  Why do we need to bring the budget, as Deputy O'Callaghan said, from &euro;10,000 or &euro;20,000 on an annual basis from the Department of Justice and Equality to one of &euro;1 million?  As per the previous proposal, if the Minister had his way with the various procedural committees and everything else, this would have cost even more.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.332" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="16:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700039#PP00200"><p>I am sorry to interrupt the Deputy.  As it is 5 p.m., by order of the House we must adjourn the debate.  When we resume, he will be in possession with in excess of three minutes remaining.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.333" nospeaker="true" time="16:25:00" ><p>Debate adjourned.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.334" nospeaker="true" time="16:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700039#PP00400">Topical Issue Debate</major-heading>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.335" nospeaker="true" time="16:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700039#PP00500">Water and Sewerage Schemes</minor-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.336" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1328" speakername="Tom Neville" time="16:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700039#PP00600"><p>My background is as a local councillor.  I was first elected in 2004, having been co-opted in 2003.  In my native county of Limerick, with the economy of that time, a number of sewerage schemes were bundled together, un-bundled and then re-bundled again.  There was a lot of to-ing and fro-ing between the Department and the council in respect of developing wastewater and sewage systems in our towns and villages.  Much of this was driven by the drive for development at the time but there was also a need to upgrade these schemes.  Now we are moving into an economic climate of seeking more housing and development.  I welcome the initiatives that have been started by the Government.  I welcome that the number of commencement notices and planning permissions in the private sector have increased.  We need to do more because the demand for housing is extremely high at the moment.  Coupled with this, we need to be looking at towns and villages in rural Ireland.</p>  <p>  I refer particularly to strategic towns and villages within rural Ireland and in County Limerick that are on infrastructural routes.  One town on which I have been working and that has been mentioned quite a bit is Askeaton, County Limerick, and another is Hospital, County Limerick.  These towns are at capacity and cannot expand further without upgrade of the sewerage schemes.  Putting the onus back on the private developers could put them off taking the risk to further develop housing.  It is a chicken-and-egg situation.  The Askeaton sewerage scheme was built some time in the 1940s and was to cater for 550 people.  The 2011 census showed a population of about 1,150 there, which is double what it was.  That has put huge strain on the existing sewerage system.</p>  <p>  The local councillors have been writing to me about the problems that are arising in that town through Limerick City and County Council, which was my municipal area as a councillor.  This issue has come with me since my time on the council.  This also comes from constituents at particular times of the year, particularly after a heavy deluge of rainfall.  Whether it is global warming or something else, we have seen more moisture and precipitation than usual over the last years, particularly during the fodder crisis this year.  That is putting extra pressure on the sewerage scheme.</p>  <p>  The Askeaton local area plan produced by Limerick City and County Council in 2015 states that the existing wastewater plant is overloaded and has been for some time.  The system is currently failing to meet obligations under the EU directives such as, for example, the urban wastewater directive.  Background levels of phosphorus in the Deel continue to exceed the limits of the surface water regulations.  Preliminary studies for the council have identified the need for a new treatment plant and upgrade of the sewer network.  Plans for the construction of a new wastewater treatment plant were included in Irish Water's capital investment programme for 2014 to 2016.  Askeaton's competitiveness as a place to invest, locate business and sustain a good quality of life for a growing population is dependent on high-quality infrastructure including wastewater disposal.  The council states that it will work with Irish Water to improve the primary discharge into the River Deel.  It stated that all future development would require separate foul and surface connections to the appropriate collection network in compliance with the Department.</p>  <p>  I ask the Minister of State to prioritise Askeaton in respect of wastewater treatment work.  I have some other clarification issues to raise, particularly around the prioritisation of this work now that we have moved on to Irish Water. </p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.337" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1264" speakername="Damien English" time="16:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700039#PP00700"><p>I thank the Deputy for raising the issue of the upgrading of rural town and village schemes to further housing development.  The Deputy highlighted the importance of doing this, particularly in Askeaton in his own native county of Limerick.  This is something on which we must focus on if we are going to achieve our housing targets and get construction going again in the parts of the country where it is needed.  Under Project Ireland 2040 and looking ahead, we have to invest money in water and wastewater infrastructure if we are to achieve our regional targets and get the regional balance we want in housing development, as well as jobs and so on.  It is important that Limerick would be a major part of that space as well.</p>  <p>  Since 1 January 2014, Irish Water has statutory responsibility for all aspects of water services planning, delivery and operation at national, regional and local level.  Irish Water as a single national utility is taking a strategic nationwide approach to asset planning and investment and meeting customer requirements.  Investment in water services is a key factor in enabling proper planning and sustainable development in physical and economic terms and in national, regional and local contexts.  Towns like Askeaton are a major part of that.  Irish Water is proposing to invest in a range of programmes that will support growth at national, regional and local levels.  Irish Water will also play a key role in implementing Project Ireland 2040, which incorporates the national planning framework and the national development plan.</p>  <p>  Irish Water's water services strategic plan, WSSP, sets out the strategic objectives for its delivery of water services over 25 years up to 2040 to ensure the provision of clean safe drinking water, the effective management of wastewater, environmental protection and support for social and economic development.  The Irish Water business plan, "Transforming Water Services In Ireland to 2021", sets out its short to medium-term planning in implementing the first phase of the water services strategic plan.  While the Irish Water business plan sets out the planned level of operational and capital expenditure over this period, the actual allowed operational expenditure and capital investment is decided on by the economic regulator, the Commission for Regulation of Utilities, CRU.  To this end, Irish Water submits a water charges plan based on the WSSP and a business plan for given regulatory periods to the CRU.  Irish Water also developed an investment plan based on a five-year investment planning horizon from 2017 to 2021, which aligns to the WSSP and the seven-year business plan 2014-2021.</p>  <p>  Irish Water must optimise investment decisions to ensure that it utilises scarce capital by making investments that deliver the best possible service improvements while maximising value for money and should undertake this in conjunction with the local authority in each area.  In the case of Limerick, the link-up with Irish Water would be very important for key sites and areas of towns and villages that have to be developed.  A substantial proportion of investment by the State through Irish Water over the next ten years will be focused on programmes to improve compliance with relevant public health and environmental standards.  This will involve implementation of the measures contained within the river basin management plan for Ireland 2018 to 2021 and the achievement of the outcomes identified.  Through Irish Water&rsquo;s capital investment plan, it is implementing the capital investment programme, which prioritises investment decisions to ensure it utilises available funding most effectively by making investments that deliver the biggest benefit while maximising value for money.</p>  <p>  One of Irish Water&rsquo;s key goals is that the same standard of service for water and wastewater will apply no matter where someone lives in the country.  Achieving this objective will take time in accordance with the varying condition of the assets.  Certainly, in the case of Askeaton, where a system was put in place for 550 people and where there is now double the population, it is certainly an area that needs to be addressed.  I will raise the specifics of the two towns the Deputy has mentioned directly with Irish Water to get a more detailed response for him.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.338" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1328" speakername="Tom Neville" time="16:25:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700039#PP00800"><p>I thank the Minister of State and wish to share some more information with him.  Irish Water stated to me in June 2017 that it completed a concept design study recommending a preferred solution for Askeaton sewerage scheme.  The project had just received approval to proceed to the next stage, detailed design and planning, which was to be undertaken over the following 12 to 18 months.  Could the Minister of State get some timelines from Irish Water in that regard?  Is it going to make a decision within the 18 months?  Is the design and planning phase going to be completed within 18 months?  The language is quite ambiguous.  Do we have to wait until the design phase is over before we can hunt for budget for this project?</p><p>We have been told it is not part of the 2017-2021 priority list which I believe it should be, given the criteria outlined by what I have read from the local area plan from Limerick County Council before Irish Water took over in 2014.  Askeaton will be a spur off the main Limerick to Foynes motorway which will be built and which will include the Adare bypass.  This is a strategic town which sits along the Shannon estuary and where several multinational industries are located.  Several days ago, the expansion of Foynes Port was announced.  It is an EU tier one port which can take the larger container ships being built and can compete with many ports across the world.  The motorway is being developed there and Askeaton sits just off that.  One is looking at developing these towns which will facilitate the major natural resources of Foynes Port.  There is synergy developing in Askeaton.  We need to get the town&rsquo;s water and sewerage schemes along with this. </p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.340" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1264" speakername="Damien English" time="16:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700040#QQ00200"><p>I thank Deputy Neville for the information he has provided on the importance of Askeaton and other areas in County Limerick.  It is important when Irish Water is rolling out its investments, it does so in collaboration with local Oireachtas Members and councillors.  It has to take cognisance of the national planning framework, the national development plan, the forthcoming regional and spatial economic strategies, as well as the ongoing reviews of the county and local area development plans.  When we are trying to roll out long-term plans for housing, we try to match the services needed, such as health and education services, in a planned way.</p>  <p>  There is much ambition for Limerick county and city to develop and take its fair share as a region.  We want to rebalance development from the east coast.  It is important Irish Water bears that in mind when deciding its investment strategies.  The updated Limerick county and city plan will fit into that, along with the regional strategy.  It is important local Oireachtas Members are consulted.  I will ask the Irish Water team to deal with the Deputy specifically on this case.  Neither I nor the Minister, Deputy Eoghan Murphy, actually picked the different places for investment.  However, it is important Irish Water does that in collaboration with Deputies who know what is going on in the areas and matches up the plans.  We meet people every day who want to provide public or private housing.  We need to make sure the infrastructure is in place to make that happen.  If we do not, we cannot reach our targets in Rebuilding Ireland or Ireland 2040.  The Deputy made submissions to Ireland 2040.  There is much ambition for both Limerick city and county in those plans.  We can only achieve those plans if we provide water and wastewater infrastructure, along with other required services.  I will make sure the Irish Water team gets in contact with the Deputy on timelines and future plans on this issue.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.341" nospeaker="true" time="16:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700040#QQ00250">Services for People with Disabilities</minor-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.342" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1306" speakername="Joan Collins" time="16:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700040#QQ00300"><p>I am disappointed the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, is not here to take this Topical Issue matter.  However, the St. John of God special school in Islandbridge, providing services for children with profound disabilities, is in the constituency of the Minister of State, Deputy Catherine Byrne.  I know she will be interested in what has come out about it over the past few days.</p>  <p>  On Monday, Emma O'Kelly gave a report on &ldquo;Morning Ireland&rdquo; about three parents and their children who attend the school.  One mother, Christine, has an eight year-old son who attends the school and who is both deaf and autistic.  She is a lone parent who lives in Dolphin House.  Her son is non-verbal, wears nappies and has received no services or therapies in the past two years.  He needs supports for washing, dressing, toilet training, etc.</p>  <p>  Sarah and Fabrice&rsquo;s son, Joseph, 17 years of age, has been four years in the school.  He has received no services.  He needs speech and language therapy, as well as occupational therapy.  He was receiving them from the HSE but is not now.  Once one goes into a service like St. John of God, the HSE expects the service to provide them.  Sarah described the situation like a ping-pong ball.  One service blames the other and no one seems be able to get to the nub of the problem, namely, that there are no services.  They are currently paying &euro;2,500 per year for speech and language therapy.  Fabrice said he can afford to pay but the lack of service discriminates against those like Christine who cannot afford it.  Why are their children&rsquo;s needs being outsourced to a private charity?</p>  <p>  Catherine Lyons, secretary of the parents' committee, said no therapeutic services are provided.  This year&rsquo;s school leavers have never received therapy.  She says they are in limbo and are the lost children.  That is a terrible description for a parent to have to use about her child.</p>  <p>  When Emma O'Kelly asked St. John of God services how many speech and language therapists were available at the school, she was told none in the past two years.  She said she has seen in writing that it has been for the past three years while parents say it has been for the past four years.  On occupational therapists, St. John of God said it took a consultation approach to 11 of the 92 children.  That is not a service.  That is just paying lip-service to it.</p>  <p>  The parents' committee did a comparison of services provided between the school in Islandbridge and St. Augustine&rsquo;s school in Blackrock.  It got this information from genuine sources.  St. Augustine&rsquo;s has two speech and language therapists working exclusively in the school while Islandbridge has two speech and language therapists shared with 500 people in the south-west Dublin area.  St. Augustine&rsquo;s has two social workers working exclusively in the school while Islandbridge has an emergency social work clinic for two hours a week.  Blackrock has two psychologists working exclusively in the school while Islandbridge has one psychologist shared with St. John of God Menni services.  St. Augustine&rsquo;s has one school nurse while no such service is available in Islandbridge.  St. Augustine&rsquo;s has 26 vocational instructors funded by the HSE through St. John of God community services.  Pupils are supported for three years after leaving school in Blackrock.  In Islandbridge, no such service is provided.  Six modern houses providing residential services, Monday to Friday, funded by the HSE through St. John of God community services, are provided in Blackrock while no such service in Islandbridge.  An after school independent living programme from 3 p.m. to 9 p.m., Monday to Friday, is provided in Blackrock while in Islandbridge, there is no such service.  An extended school day for pupils in their final two years in Blackrock is provided while in Islandbridge, no such service is provided.  That tells a stark story.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.343" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" speakername="Catherine Byrne" time="16:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700040#QQ00400"><p>I thank Deputy Joan Collins for raising this issue.  Unfortunately, the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, cannot attend.</p>  <p>  St. John of God community services provides for a range of HSE-funded supports in the area of disability and mental health.  It is committed to the provision and development of services and supports of the highest standards to children and adults with intellectual disability.  There are two whole-time equivalent speech and language therapy posts currently funded by the HSE in St. John of God, Islandbridge.  At present, one of these posts is vacant due to sick leave.  However, I understand St. John of God community services has commenced a recruitment process to fill this vacant post.</p>  <p>  As part of the wider St. John of God community Menni services, some occupational therapy services are also provided to the users of Islandbridge.  The Department of Education and Skills also provides significant levels of educational staffing to the school to support the educational needs of the pupils attending the school.  This includes provision for a school principal, 16 teachers and 30 special needs assistants to support the care needs of the pupils attending the school.</p>  <p>  A programme for reconfiguration of children&rsquo;s disability services is under way in Dublin west and the south city as part of the Government&rsquo;s progressing disability services for children and young people programme.  The national programme is changing the way services are provided across the country to make access to services equitable and consistent for all.  It also recognises that children with complex needs may present with needs across several areas and that services provided in isolation within one environment of a child&rsquo;s life is not appropriate.</p><p>Therefore, support and intervention is provided in a variety of environments, including home, school, clinic and community settings.  When the services are reconfigured all resources currently available in the area, voluntary and statutory, will be centralised and reconfigured into children's network disability teams.  Children currently attending the St. John of God School, lslandbridge will be among the cohort of children affected by the reconfiguration of new teams in the community as part of the process.  In the interim, children can be referred to the current school-age team in the community.  The proposed reconfiguration of services is scheduled to take place in the fourth quarter of 2018.  I will come back to Deputy Collins on some of the issues she has raised.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.345" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1306" speakername="Joan Collins" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00200"><p>I raised this issue with the Taoiseach last year during Leaders' Questions.  It was thrown aside.  I was told that what I had said was not the case and that it was not happening in St. John of God.  I was told the children were getting the services.  I followed up with parliamentary questions.</p>  <p>  Emma O'Kelly did a detailed report into this.  It has been shown that St. John of God, Islandbridge is the poor relation when it comes to services.  The organisation does not have vocational structures.  It has only one psychologist, who is shared with St. John of God Menni Services.  It has an emergency social work clinic for two hours each week, while two speech and language therapists are shared with 500 people in the Dublin South-West area.  This has to change.</p>  <p>  On Tuesday, the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs, the Minister for Education and Skills and the Minister for Health launched a pilot scheme funded by the National Council for Special Education to bring services into mainstream schools.  This school in Islandbridge is specifically supposed to provide these services for children but they are not getting the service.  This is mad.  The main message the Ministers tried to get across was that early intervention makes all the difference, yet these children have had no services for four years.  Parents are going to private speech and therapy services for their children at a cost of &euro;2,500 per year.</p>  <p>  A scandal arose in St. John of God Services only two years ago when pensions and so on were being paid to the people on the board according to their rights.  What about the rights of the children?  These children need services now.  That launch was in the HSE community healthcare organisation 7 area, which includes Islandbridge.  The parents are demanding that the National Council for Special Education or the HSE intervene and provide the services that St John of God, Islandbridge is not providing.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.346" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" speakername="Catherine Byrne" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00300"><p>I thank the Deputy.  I saw the report by Ms O'Kelly on the television.  I was shocked by some of the statistics raised, including those raised by Deputy Collins, as well as by the information she has given me.  Unfortunately, I cannot answer any of the accusations Deputy Collins has made on paper.  If Deputy Collins gives me the information I will certainly bring it to the attention of the Minister of State with responsibility for this area, Deputy McGrath.</p>  <p>  At present, the Government and the HSE are committed to supporting children with special needs.  We have recognised that first-class early intervention is very important for all children with disabilities.  It is paramount.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.347" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1306" speakername="Joan Collins" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00400"><p>The problem is that they are not getting it.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.348" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" speakername="Catherine Byrne" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00500"><p>I hear Deputy Collins loud and clear.  We need to improve and organise more effectively the process under way at present nationwide.  The key object is to bring about access to disability services consistently and to ensure services are delivered with a clear pathway for children with disabilities and their families.</p>  <p>  I do not have the information available to Deputy Collins.  I know St. John of God Services well, as does Deputy Collins, because the organisation is in our constituency.  I admire the work done down through the years in St. John of God Services by all the people working there, including special needs assistants and those serving the community.  I know many families whose children benefit from St. John of God Services.</p>  <p>  I will certain bring the concerns of Deputy Collins and, to be honest, my concerns to the attention of the Minister of State with responsibility for this area, Deputy McGrath.  If Deputy Collins gives me the information she has, I will certainly bring it to the attention of the Minister for State.</p>  <p>  I am unsure whether St. John of God Services is the poor relation, as suggested by Deputy Collins.  However, if that is the case then something needs to be done rapidly to address the matter and I will support Deputy Collins in that regard.  Until I have the full information before me, I cannot go back to the Minister of State.  I will get the information from Deputy Collins and get the Minister of State, Deputy McGrath, to reply to her.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.349" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1306" speakername="Joan Collins" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00600"><p>Parents have full respect for the teachers and the SNAs working there.  The people there are great.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.350" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" speakername="Catherine Byrne" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00700"><p>I know they are.  I know most of the parents.</p></speech>
    <minor-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.351" nospeaker="true" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00800">Mental Health Services Staff</minor-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.352" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1354" speakername="James Browne" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR00900"><p>I welcome the opportunity to raise the issue of unqualified non-specialist doctors working as consultants in our mental health services.  The President of the High Court, Mr. Justice Peter Kelly, has been extremely critical of this practice.  He has described as scandalous the HSE practice of permitting non-specialist doctors to be appointed as consultants in hospitals and mental health services.  He said that the HSE appears to be a law unto itself in this regard.  These comments came from the President of the High Court.  He also highlighted the disparity and distribution of sub-standard consultants, which is considerably higher in one CHO area and in regional hospitals.  All 20 acute hospitals are affected.  Mr. Justice Kelly was so perturbed that he directed that his judgment be sent to the Attorney General, the Minister for Health, the Secretary General of the Department of Health, the HSE chief executive, HIQA and the State Claims Agency.  He made these worrisome criticisms in a decision to cancel the registration of an individual consultant who had made a series of medical errors.</p>  <p>  The Medical Council, HIQA and the Irish Hospital Consultants Association are all reported as having expressed serious concerns about this practice.  The College of Psychiatrists of Ireland recently stated that it holds that a doctor should not be a consultant if the doctor is not a specialist in the appropriate area of medical practice, yet unqualified doctors are being appointed as psychiatric consultants.  These doctors have not undergone higher training, only basic training.  They are not subject to the usual rules and oversight to which a qualified psychiatrist consultant is subject.  They are not trained in leadership or management, but they are being paid the consultant rate.  Indeed, if they are working for an agency, they may even be paid more.  One week such a doctor may be a junior trainee and the next week he or she may be running the place.  One week the senior registrar may be holding the hand of such a trainee and the next week the trainee may be giving senior registrar orders.</p>  <p>  Let us consider for a moment what this means for patients.  It means that someone who is not qualified is making orders to the effect that a person should be deprived of liberty or detained under the Mental Health Act against his or her will.  Surely, this is a clear breach of human rights.  It means that doctors are prescribing mediations and courses of treatment without the appropriate training, continuous upskilling or oversight.  It means patient safety is being seriously compromised.</p>  <p>  One of the regular excuses is that there is a shortage of consultants, but only some weeks ago the College of Psychiatrists of Ireland stated that it had enough quality candidates to increase the number of training places by at least 10%.  Inexplicably, the HSE only approved a 5% increase in training places.  Nothing adds up in this regard.  It is clear that the practice of permitting non-specialist doctors to be appointed as consultants places the lives, health and welfare of patients at risk.  This is a real patient safety issue.  It is another example of the dysfunctionality at the heart of the HSE and it demands to be addressed immediately.</p>  <p>  Will the scandalous practice of permitting non-specialist doctors from being appointed as consultants stop?  Are people who have been the subject of medical errors by non-qualified consultants notified of these errors?  Will the Minister undertake to increase the number of training places for those who actually want to be properly trained and who wish to properly qualify as psychiatric consultants?</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.353" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" speakername="Catherine Byrne" time="16:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700041#RR01000"><p>I thank Deputy Browne for raising this important matter.  Unfortunately, the Minister of State with responsibility for this area, Deputy Daly, is not here but has asked me to address the matter on his behalf.</p>  <p>  Mental health policy, including policies and services for the prevention of suicide, remains a priority for Government.  This is reflected by the additional funding of &euro;35 million provided in the last budget, bringing total HSE funding for mental health to in excess of &euro;910 million this year.  A Programme for a Partnership Government gives a clear commitment to increase mental health funding annually, as resources allow, to expand and modernise all aspects of services.  The HSE currently employs 324 whole-time-equivalent consultant psychiatrists to support community and specialist mental health services throughout the country.</p><p>There are 26 non-specialist consultant psychiatrists working in the Health Service Executive.  The majority of these appointments are temporary, pending posts being filled permanently with a specialist consultant psychiatrist.  These consultants carry out their work in the context of relevant HSE consultant contracts.</p> <p> The HSE has advised that since 2008, it has worked to recruit only consultant psychiatrists in the public health system with appropriate specialist training and competence to enable individual consultants to attain and maintain specialist registration with the Irish Medical Council.  The stated aim of the executive is to employ consultant psychiatrists with the highest possible level of training and expertise.</p> <p> In March 2008, the HSE amended the qualifications specified for consultant posts in the public health service to require registration in the relevant specialist division of the register of medical practitioners at the Medical Council.  The rationale for the change was to ensure that consultants employed in the public health system have the appropriate training, skills, competences and qualifications to deliver care as assessed by the Medical Council.</p> <p> Internationally, there is a shortage of medical doctors, including appropriately trained consultant psychiatrists.  Many countries in Europe and across the world are significantly challenged to recruit adequate levels of appropriately trained doctors.</p> <p> In recent years, the HSE has developed new services, as outlined in the national mental health policy, A Vision for Change.  This requires increased numbers of specialist trained consultants.  In the context of staff recruitment and retention challenges set against the expansion of consultant posts throughout the country, individual consultant posts are sometimes filled temporarily with consultants who may not be entered into the specialist registration of the Irish Medical Council.  This occurs in circumstances where, following exhaustive searches, no specialist consultant has been available.  It is done to ensure ongoing delivery and continuity of essential mental health services.</p> <p> The majority of consultant psychiatrist recruitment challenges are experienced outside the large urban centres.  A particular and acknowledged recruitment problem relates to staffing for the child and adolescent mental health service, CAMHS, which the HSE is addressing on a priority basis.  It should be noted that strategic priorities for mental health in the agreed HSE service plan 2018 include delivering a timely, "clinically effective and standardised safe service" together with developing highly trained staff within a modern infrastructure.  The HSE mental health service is working closely with the HSE national doctors training and planning office and College of Psychiatrists of Ireland to increase the number of specialist training posts for psychiatrists.  The intention is to create a larger potential pool of specialist consultants who can be trained in Ireland.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.355" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1354" speakername="James Browne" time="16:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700042#SS00200"><p>While I appreciate that the Minister of State, Deputy Jim Daly, could not attend this discussion, the appointment of non-qualified medical personnel as consultants is a matter for the Minister for Health, Deputy Simon Harris, notwithstanding that the focus of the discussion is on psychiatric consultants.  The dangerous practice I have highlighted has been described as scandalous by the President of the High Court who has written to as many of the relevant stakeholders as possible about the matter.  Patients are not being informed that some of the consultants attending to them are unqualified.  Some non-qualified consultants are being struck off the medical register because of medical errors.  Are patients being notified of these medical errors, as is their entitlement?</p>  <p>  There is a perverse incentive built into the current system.  A trainee psychiatrist faces two choices.  First, he or she can choose to spend three or four years doing higher training on a lower salary and trying to make his or her way through the proper channels.  He or she also has the option to skip this step, however, and go straight into a senior position with a higher salary and the status that comes with a consultant role.  If he or she can hold this position for three years, the post will almost certainly be made permanent, which means a specialist role in psychiatry will be permanently filled by someone who is not qualified.  In such circumstances, it is the patients who lose out.</p>  <p>  This is a serious matter.  The words of the President of the High Court did not receive the attention they deserve because other very serious matters have arisen in health in recent weeks.  People are becoming more aware that they are being treated by unqualified consultants.  This matter will not go away as and must be addressed as a matter of urgency.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.356" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1307" speakername="Catherine Byrne" time="16:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700042#SS00300"><p>I do not have anything to add to Deputy Browne's contribution.  I took a note of his concern that some of the consultants <i>in situ</i>are not suitably qualified and I will convey his concern to the Minister of State, Deputy Daly, and the senior Minister.  I will also inform them of the concerns the Deputy raised regarding matters that have arisen in recent weeks in the area of smear testing.  I hope the Minister or Minister of State will respond to the Deputy on the issue.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.357" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1342" speakername="Eugene Murphy" time="16:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700042#SS00400"><p>I thank the Deputies and Ministers who contributed.  We will suspend for a few moments to allow the T&aacute;naiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade time to arrive for the Second Stage debate on the European Communities (Brexit) Bill 2017.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.358" nospeaker="true" time="16:55:00" ><p>Sitting suspended at 5.37 p.m. and resumed at 5.42 p.m.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.359" nospeaker="true" time="17:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700043#TT00100">European Communities (Brexit) Bill 2017: Second Stage [Private Members]</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.360" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1330" speakername="Gerry Adams" time="17:05:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700043#TT00200"><p>I move that: &quot;The Bill be now read a Second Time.&quot;</p><p>I wish to share time with Deputy Cullinane.</p><p>This Bill was originally introduced in February 2017.  Its objective was to ensure that the Government would keep the Oireachtas regularly informed of all developments during the Brexit negotiations.  That it has taken so long for this Bill to get this far is evidence of the constipated state of the legislative process in this D&aacute;il.</p><p>Brexit is widely accepted as the most important and dangerous challenge facing the people of this island in decades.  It poses a significant economic threat to the two economies on the island.  It also threatens the Good Friday Agreement and the ability of citizens in the North to access the full range of rights available to them as EU citizens.  Consequently, it is an imperative that the fullest information is available to the Oireachtas and to the public.</p><p>While I accept that the Brexit process has moved on since the Bill was first introduced, Sinn F&eacute;in believes that there is an onus on the Government to ensure that the maximum information is available.  This can best be accomplished by a statutory requirement that there are regular and consistent debates in the D&aacute;il on Brexit.</p><p>I acknowledge the Minister's efforts to keep the Oireachtas briefed on Brexit.  This Bill will enhance this crucial process.  Therefore, I regret the Minister's decision to oppose this Bill and I ask him even at this stage to reconsider his decision and to allow this to go to Committee Stage.</p><p>The politics around Brexit are constantly shifting.  All of this underlines the need for constant alertness and continuous debate, discussion and accountability.  The past ten days illustrate this point perfectly.</p><p>On Tuesday, 8 May, the British Foreign Secretary, Mr. Boris Johnson MP, dismissed as crazy the preferred proposal of the British Prime Minister, Mrs. Theresa May, on a customs plan in which Britain would effectively collect tariffs on behalf of the EU.  The Brexiteers, which include the DUP, favour what they call &quot;maximum facilitation&quot; which would use technology to facilitate cross-Border trade.  Speaking at the weekend, the Minister, Deputy Coveney, correctly rejected this proposal.</p><p>On Monday of this week, a leading Brexiteer, Mr. Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, stated that the British Prime Minister &quot;ought not to take Brussels too seriously about the Irish question&quot;.  On Tuesday, the British Prime Minister announced that she plans to publish a White Paper before next month's EU summit.  The Scottish Parliament this week voted against backing the Tory's European Union (Withdrawal) Bill.</p><p>The Minister will be aware that the London Government has consistently ignored the concerns of the various assemblies and has deliberately kept them out of the Brexit negotiations and has also ignored the vote, as has the DUP, of the people of the North on this issue.  All of these significant developments, even in the past ten days, underline the need for this Bill and for frequent and regular updates from Government and for debates in the D&aacute;il.</p><p>Yesterday, it was reported that the British Government is now considering a third option for addressing the customs dilemma.  This suggests the possibility of the British state, as well as the North, remaining aligned with the EU customs union.  This is not new.  My colleague, an Teachta David Cullinane, identified this as a possibility after the December agreement was published.</p><p>However, none of this can be divorced from the mounting problems Mrs. May is facing in the British Parliament, particularly in the House of Lords where she has lost over a dozen votes, the civil war inside the Conservative Party and within her Cabinet.</p><p>Despite all of this, the Minister was quoted on Tuesday as stating that he is confident that the British Prime Minister will deliver on her commitment to avoid border controls by June.  Today, following his meeting with Mrs. May, the Taoiseach is saying that the British will now table a new proposal on a future customs relationship within the next two weeks and that this is new thinking.</p><p>We were told that in December only to have the British Prime Minister repudiate the EU legal text in February.  Remember &quot;No UK prime Minister would ever agree to it.&quot;  Sin an m&eacute;id a d&uacute;irt s&iacute;.  Why should this time be any different?  This is the same British Prime Minister who last week claimed that only British soldiers are being investigated in relation to legacy matters.  As the Minister will be aware, this is a patent untruth.  Her claim was deeply hurtful to all of those families who lost loved ones as a result of the actions of British state forces.</p><p>This is the same British Government that refuses to provide information on the role of its agents in the Dublin-Monaghan bombings which took place on this date 44 years ago and this is the same British Prime Minister who has done a deal with the DUP which is taking precedence over her obligations in respect of the Good Friday Agreement.</p><p>The EU legal text accepts that the alignment option contained in the December agreement means that the North shall be &quot;considered part of the customs territory of the EU&quot;.  It confirms that the North would remain within the customs union and acknowledges the need for many of the elements that go to make up the Single Market.  It explicitly states that there should be &quot;no diminution of rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity as set out&quot; in the Good Friday Agreement.</p><p>The EU legal text also requires the British Government to &quot;facilitate&quot; the work of the North's human rights commission, the equality commission and the joint committee of representatives of the human rights commissions, North and South, and it definitively demands that the Good Friday Agreement and its subsequent implementation agreements &quot;should be protected in all its parts&quot;.</p><p>In his response to the joint agreement in December, the Taoiseach stated:</p><blockquote>To the nationalist people in Northern Ireland, I want to assure you that we have protected your interests throughout these negotiations.<br /><br />Your birth right as Irish citizens, and therefore as EU citizens, will be protected.  There will be no hard border on our island.  You will never again be left behind by an Irish Government.<br /><br />These rights will, of course, be available to everyone in Northern Ireland who chooses to exercise his or her right to be an Irish citizen, regardless of their political persuasion or religious beliefs.</blockquote><p>The Irish Government, therefore, carries an onerous responsibility to protect the rights of all citizens on this island, both in relation to Brexit and the future of the Good Friday Agreement.  If an agreement is reached in the upcoming negotiations between the EU and the British Government, it cannot fall short of the position that the legal text has established.</p><p>Sinn F&eacute;in's proposal for the North to be designated special status within the EU is now accepted, even in a <i>de facto</i>way, by the EU.  The onus is, as the Minister has stated, on the British Government to come forward with workable alternative solutions that meet the objectives set out in the legal text and which protect the Good Friday Agreement.</p><p>I repeat my proposition at the outset of my remarks and ask the Minister to reconsider his opposition to this Bill and to allow it to move to the Committee Stage where it can be amended, if need be.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.361" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1258" speakername="David Cullinane" time="17:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700044#UU00100"><p>The Bill seeks to amend the European Communities Act 1972 and requires the Government to update the Oireachtas formally on Brexit developments and negotiations and on preserving the rights of Irish citizens in the North.  As Teachta Adams said, we acknowledge the Government has in recent times agreed and followed through on its commitment to update the House on a regular basis.  The difficulty is the updates are at the whim of the Government.  They are not on a formal or statutory basis.  There is no agreed formalised arrangement.  To put the updates and all the associated reports that the Government gives the D&aacute;il on a statutory formalised basis would be a good move and something the Government should support.</p>  <p>  We must consider it in light of the potential period of transition we are facing into, notwithstanding what might come from the current phase of negotiations in terms of the trade talks between the European Union and Britain.  We are, without doubt, facing into at least a two-year transition period.  Given that, the importance of Brexit and the impact it will have on Ireland, notwithstanding whatever agreements are eventually put in place, it is timely that measures such as those proposed in the Bill are agreed and accepted.  That is why I support the call by Teachta Adams that the Government does not just ignore the Bill, vote it down or oppose it but accepts it to go into Committee Stage where we can tease out the proposals that are being made.</p>  <p>  We are two years on from the European Union referendum and it is a year to go to Brexit.  When the Taoiseach informed the public he had a discussion with the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, on the current negotiations and that she talked about new thinking, it was being talked up as a major development.  We were brought back to last December when the Taoiseach came back and talked up the political agreement saying it was a cast iron, bullet-proof agreement.  This was the back-stop arrangement.  We were told it was a certainty and it would be the bare minimum that would be put in place.  It was very quickly followed by contradictions, backsliding and disagreements between the British Government, the European Union and the Irish Government on the interpretation of the agreement.  A legal text was put on the table and dismissed out of hand by a British Prime Minister.  After months of that cast-iron guarantee being put on the table we are still without any clear proposals.  Now we have a new proposal and new ideas which we still have not seen and of which we do not know the detail.  Are we now facing more months of uncertainty and more months of negotiations?  Is it the case the British Government is stringing everybody along, including the European Union and the Irish Government, with all of these promises because it is obviously trying to keep every side of the Tory party happy which is an impossible task given the very opposite positions that are held?</p>  <p>  I accept the proposition the Minister put forward, which Teachta Adams referred to, that the backstop arrangement may not have to be put in place if we can get a better outcome.  If that better outcome is essentially Britain staying in the customs union and the Single Market then that resolves an awful lot of these issues for the State.  There are still polar opposite positions being taken by the two wings of the Tory Cabinet with the British Prime Minister saying Britain and the North will come out of the customs union and Single Market.  It is still the stated position of the British Government that the North will come out of the legal and political architecture of the European Union and it will put some protections in place.  If that happens there will be a step backwards in terms of the Border, the Good Friday Agreement and the rights of citizens in the North, including their political, human and civil rights.  We talked about this last week as well when we had updates on the European Council meeting.  The issue of the rights of people who live in the North was also raised during priority questions.  The Minister said in December there was a commitment in principle from all involved that these rights, which Irish citizens who are also European citizens who live in the North have, should be protected and respected but there is no agreement on the detail because it is unprecedented to have hundreds of thousands of people who are European citizens not living in European Union territory.  Saying we have agreement in principle and we are still negotiating and trying to make progress is not really any comfort to the people in the North who are worried about educational opportunities outside of the North in the South and the European Union and things such as access to European Union insurance funds if they go abroad on holidays and all the other human and civil rights that are protected by the European Court of Justice and the European Court of Human Rights.  It is still the position of the British Government that the North will not be under the purview of those courts which is in contravention of the Good Friday Agreement.  There is agreement on none of these issues.  I hope these new ideas and the new thinking the Taoiseach was talking about today resolves all of these issues.  I am sure the Minister will appreciate that we want to see the detail.  What we do not want is more fudge and more talk of new ideas while we are still none the wiser about what exactly will happen.  Workers' rights need to be protected.  It is an area we see as a threat.  I sit on the Brexit stakeholder forum.  I welcome it as another structure that was put in place by the Government.  I have found it very useful because of all the groups that sit on it.  Fishing is a big issue and a big concern.  Fishermen have real concerns about how Brexit will impact on them.  They do not have any certainties.</p>  <p>  I will finish on where we in Sinn F&eacute;in started.  I welcome that eventually the Irish Government moved closer to the Sinn F&eacute;in position from where it was under Deputy Enda Kenny and where it started which was a very different place.  We said there had to be a form of special status for the North and special arrangements and that we had to look at new opportunities and new ways in which we could protect the Good Friday Agreement and make sure there is no hardening of the Border which is entirely different from having no hard border.  The acid test for any Irish Government in terms of these negotiations and for the European Union and the British Government is that the people of the North voted to stay in the European Union.  With regard to all the issues I mentioned, including workers' rights, access to healthcare, access to education, human rights, civil rights, political rights, the Border and the Good Friday Agreement, there can be no rowing back on any of the rights and entitlements for people who live in the North as a result of a vote of people in England or Wales.  It simply cannot happen.  We cannot have these hard Brexiteers dictate to the people of Ireland and end up putting in place political solutions that in reality will be a row back on any of those rights and entitlements.  That will not be accepted.  It will not be tolerated.</p>  <p>  We will continue to wish the Government well but we are running out of patience as a result of not getting the detail.  I hope that by June and the June summit, the clarity the Minister talked about, which we need, will actually come and we will see the colour of everybody's money including the Irish Government and the British Government.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.362" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="17:15:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700044#UU00200"><p>I welcome the opportunity to set out the Government&rsquo;s views on the Bill.  First, I assure the Deputy of the Government&rsquo;s support for what I interpret as the underlying spirit of this Bill, which is the need for frequent and fruitful engagement between the Government and the Oireachtas on all issues relating to Brexit.  The Government recognises this in principle and, more importantly, in practice.  Since the announcement of the referendum result in June 2016, the Government has kept both Houses of the Oireachtas fully informed on its approach to the Brexit negotiations.  On 27 June 2016 three days after the referendum, the then Taoiseach Enda Kenny addressed the House, setting out the Government&rsquo;s immediate reaction to the outcome in advance of travelling to Brussels to meet his EU counterparts.  That day, in addition to apprising the House of the contingency planning already implemented by the Government and the steps envisaged in the following months, the Taoiseach emphasised that a cross-party approach would be valuable in the time ahead.  He also spoke about being encouraged by the willingness of Members to use their influence through party affiliations in Europe to ensure Ireland&rsquo;s position was well understood.  I believe that has happened.</p>  <p>  I acknowledge, some 18 months down the road, that this overriding unity of purpose continues to hold firm.  While it would neither be natural nor healthy for us to agree on every detail every day - and we do not - it is true to say all Members of the House have played an important role in fostering the strong solidarity that we enjoy from our EU counterparts with respect to the unique implications that Brexit has for Ireland.</p><p><i>6 o&amp;rsquo;clock</i></p> <p>This has not only included the direct engagement of the Members of this House with their counterparts throughout the EU and the UK, but also the valuable initiatives taken last year by the Oireachtas in inviting both Michel Barnier and Guy Verhofstadt in May and September, respectively.  These contacts have served to reinforce the understanding at EU level of Ireland&rsquo;s priorities, complementing the work being carried out by the Government through its intensive programme of bilateral engagement with the EU institutions and the EU 27.</p> <p> From a parliamentary perspective, the value of this work has been clearly reflected in successive resolutions on Brexit adopted by the European Parliament which have expressed strong support for Ireland&rsquo;s strategic goals, including with regard to protecting the gains of the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement in all its parts.  In this respect, it is also important to acknowledge the important contributions made by our MEPs.</p> <p> Within the context of my own role with special responsibility for the Government&rsquo;s approach to Brexit, I am fully committed to maintaining and building further on this constructive approach.  This not only includes my formal interaction with this House and with the Seanad but also my frequent informal engagement with my Opposition counterparts.  In particular, I welcome the participation of Opposition spokespersons, including Deputy Cullinane of Sinn F&eacute;in and Deputy Lisa Chambers, at the Brexit stakeholder forum which has met on eight occasions since I convened it last September.  This forum brings together key stakeholders with a view to providing regular updates on the progression of the negotiations as well as providing a platform for the interaction of academic, sectoral and EU expertise with a view to informing further the Government&rsquo;s comprehensive response to Brexit.  I was particularly pleased to host a special meeting of the forum to coincide with the recent visit of Michel Barnier to Ireland, providing a welcome opportunity for Members to engage directly with the EU&rsquo;s lead negotiator.</p> <p> As concerns Ireland&rsquo;s overall strategic approach to the negotiations, the Government has also set out its position to this House frequently and clearly.  In April 2017, shortly after the UK formally triggered the withdrawal process, the then Taoiseach addressed this House, outlining the steps already taken by the Government to ensure that Ireland&rsquo;s concerns would be reflected in the EU position.  In particular, he welcomed that the draft EU guidelines, which were subsequently adopted by the European Council, included a very strong acknowledgement of Ireland&rsquo;s unique circumstances, the need to protect the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement, and our intention to maintain bilateral arrangements with the UK, like the common travel area.</p> <p> The negotiations have continued to proceed under the strategic guidance of the European Council.  In this respect, in the period since this Bill was first proposed in February 2017, the Taoiseach has addressed the D&aacute;il in advance of, and after, the European Council meetings of March, April, June, October and December 2017 as well as March 2018, in which developments in the Brexit negotiations were addressed and reported as appropriate.  Since this Bill was proposed in February 2017, both I and my colleague the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, as well as our respective predecessors, have participated in 17 debates dedicated specifically to Brexit across both Houses of the Oireachtas and its committees.  For my part, this most recently included my address to the Seanad on 1 May, during which I provided the House with an update on both the progress in negotiations and the Government&rsquo;s domestic preparations for Brexit.  I also note and welcome that D&aacute;il statements on Brexit have been scheduled for 24 May, next week.  Of course, such formal debates and statements take place over and above the intensive and dynamic engagement that is facilitated daily through Leaders' Questions and through parliamentary questions.</p> <p> A key pillar of the Government&rsquo;s response to Brexit has been to underline our firm commitment to EU membership and to work together with our EU 27 partners to build a positive future for the European Union. In this regard, I emphasise the importance of situating our approach to Brexit, as well as our domestic response, within the context of our wider EU engagement.  I welcome that the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, had the opportunity last week, on the occasion of Europe Day, to address both this House and the Seanad on Ireland&rsquo;s wider EU priorities, as well as on the national citizens&rsquo; dialogue on the future of Europe, which has enabled the Government to engage with people of all ages and from all sectors to hear their views about the Union and its future direction.</p> <p> I know that all of my colleagues across Government regularly engage with the Oireachtas on the EU related files that fall under their responsibility.  For my part, I look forward to the opportunity to meet the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Defence later this month.  Of course, the fundamental purpose of all our collective efforts is to follow through on the mandate granted to us by the people of Ireland.  With respect to EU issues, I believe that the results of the poll published last week to coincide with Europe Day were very heartening, reflecting a very high and growing level of support for Ireland&rsquo;s membership of the EU.  Overall levels of support for Ireland&rsquo;s EU membership are at 92%.  What is also notable, however, is the exceptionally low percentage of "don&rsquo;t know" responses to key statements such as "Ireland should remain a part of the EU", where only 1% responded "don't know".  In the question, "Given that the UK has voted to leave, should Ireland also leave the EU?", only 2% responded that they did not know.  This is an issue on which people have clear views.</p> <p> This obviously reflects the high profile of EU issues in Ireland, including with respect to Brexit.  I also mention the very successful citizens' dialogue on the future of Europe, led again by the Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, which culminated in a well-attended event last week which coincided with Europe Day.  It also speaks to the unprecedented level of scrutiny being afforded to these issues by the Oireachtas.</p> <p> I have demonstrated that the Government&rsquo;s engagement with the Oireachtas on Brexit and on wider EU issues is already extensive and dynamic.  This raises a number of points of principle about the Bill proposed by the Deputy.  First, it is clear that the Standing Orders of the D&aacute;il more than adequately provide for frequent updates from the Government on Brexit, or indeed any other topic.  Furthermore, it would be an unwanted precedent to amend legislation to take account of a topical issue that is temporary in nature.  For example, the consequence of this in the context of Brexit would be that a further legislative Act would be required as soon as the negotiations are completed.  I put it to the House that the valuable time that this legislation would take, to achieve objectives which are being met, might be more usefully dedicated to the negotiations at hand.  This is also the case for Brexit officials in my Department and the Department of the Taoiseach who are working very long hours in pursuit of our national objectives in the negotiations.  Given the cross-cutting nature of the challenges posed by Brexit, it is important to ensure that our engagement on Brexit does not become isolated from the overarching approach to Oireachtas scrutiny of EU issues that is set out in the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002.</p> <p> To these points of principle, I also add some more technical concerns.  As the negotiations are now well under way, section 5(2) as proposed by the Deputy has been overtaken by events and is effectively redundant.  Furthermore, as the negotiations are proceeding on the basis of a mandate from the European Council, updates by the Taoiseach to the D&aacute;il on the Government&rsquo;s approach to the negotiations are provided for under the Standing Orders of this House.</p> <p> This Bill also proposes that Government report quarterly to each House of the Oireachtas on developments in the negotiations.  I point out to the Deputy that this is in no way excluded by the relevant provisions of the European Union (Scrutiny) Act 2002.  Section 2(5) states, "Every Minister of the Government shall make a report to each House of the Oireachtas not less than twice yearly in relation to measures, proposed measures and other developments in relation to the European Communities and the European Union in relation to which he or she performs functions."</p> <p> I have confined my comments thus far to the Bill proposed by the Deputy.  Bearing in mind the issue that it addresses, however, it would be remiss of me to pass up this opportunity to comment more generally on the state of play of negotiations which are now at a critical juncture.  As I informed this House on Tuesday during parliamentary questions, it is the objective of the negotiators that the full legal text of the withdrawal agreement, as well as a detailed political declaration on the framework for the future relationship, would be concluded by the October meeting of the European Council.  To meet this objective, it is clear that we need to see significantly more progress on the outstanding withdrawal issues, including on the draft protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland, ahead of the June European Council meeting.</p> <p> This was the focus of my meeting with Michel Barnier, the EU&rsquo;s chief negotiator on Brexit, last Monday when we took stock of the negotiations on the draft protocol.  Mr Barnier has clearly said that without an agreed backstop, there can be no withdrawal agreement at all.  The EU has also made it clear that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed and that negotiations can only progress as long as all commitments undertaken so far are respected in full.</p><p>This point was emphasised by Mr. Barnier and I during the meeting of the General Affairs Council later that day.  While we have been clear at every stage that the backstop is only that, a fallback or insurance mechanism, and that it is our preference to resolve issues related to the border through a comprehensive future relationship between the EU and the UK, it is crucial that we have certainty in all scenarios on the commitments already made on Ireland and Northern Ireland.  In this regard, Ireland enjoys the support and solidarity of all of our EU partners.  It is, therefore, more important than ever that the UK engage in a more detailed and realistic way on the draft protocol, including the backstop, to which it has committed, in advance of the June European Council meeting.</p> <p> I am happy to return at a later point to any issues of substance raised by Deputies during the course of this debate.  In regard to the Bill, I reiterate the Government&rsquo;s firm commitment to frequent and meaningful engagement with the Oireachtas on any issues of concern in regard to Brexit.  The Government is, however, of the view that such engagement is already adequately provided for in the Standing Orders and in Statute, thus rendering this Bill unnecessary.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.365" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1336" speakername="Lisa Chambers" time="17:35:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700046#WW00200"><p>I welcome the opportunity for a discussion on Brexit.  While the Bill is specific, it provides us with an opportunity to discuss the wider implications of Brexit and how matters are progressing.  Fianna F&aacute;il is not supporting this Sinn F&eacute;in Bill that would compel the Government to report to the Oireachtas on negotiations regarding the UK's intention to withdraw from the European Union.  While we believe that both Houses of the Oireachtas should be kept up to speed on the status of the Brexit negotiations, we regard this Bill in the context of the ongoing negotiations as inappropriate and untimely.  Ultimately, it could endanger our position in terms of negotiating.  We are also cognisant that there is already an opportunity to discuss Brexit and European related matters in the D&aacute;il by way of pre and post European Council statements.</p>  <p>  The irony of Sinn F&eacute;in bringing forward this Bill is not lost on us.  This is the same party that campaigned against joining the EU and against every referendum held within the State.  It is the same party who during the 2016 general election signed up to the right to change manifesto which called for Ireland to hold a referendum on its membership of the European Union should the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, TTIP, be signed without it first going before the Irish people and, moreover and most important, this is the same party that collapsed the Executive in Northern Ireland and left the region most affected by Brexit without a voice in the negotiations.  Through its actions and policy of absenteeism, Sinn F&eacute;in has played its part in creating a toxic environment in Northern Ireland that has not only undermined the Good Friday Agreement and the peace process but has also left the people of Northern Ireland, the majority of whom voted in the Brexit referendum to remain, without a voice at this most critical time.</p>  <p>  Coupled with this, Sinn F&eacute;in has continually called for a Border poll, which has only served to reverse the progress made in Northern Ireland and sow seeds of division and mistrust, which has prevented the parties from working together to restore the Executive and to achieve the best Brexit deal possible.  Therefore, it is ironic that Sinn F&eacute;in wants the Government to report to the Oireachtas on Brexit negotiations in the Republic while simultaneously it fails to take any responsibility for Brexit in Northern Ireland.  In our view, they have very little credibility when it comes to Brexit.  </p>  <p>  This Bill seeks to amend section 5 of the European Communities Act 1972 which states that the Government shall make a report twice yearly to each House on the Oireachtas on development in the European Communities.  The Sinn F&eacute;in Bill, at section 5(1), states that in each year the Government shall make a report, such that it proposes a reduction from two to one the number of reports to this House.  Subsection (2) further states that notwithstanding the generality of the foregoing the Taoiseach shall report to the D&aacute;il the Government's approach to the negotiations surrounding the United Kingdom's intention to leave the European Union in advance of the commencement of such negotiations.  This Bill is out of date and irrelevant.  It makes no sense because negotiations have already commenced.  Subsection (3), with which Fianna F&aacute;il does not have a difficulty, states that the Government shall make a report to each House of the Oireachtas on developments in negotiations.  As I said, pre and post Council statements allow us to do this.  </p>  <p>  I fail to see the purpose of this Bill given it is almost one year out of date in that negotiations have commenced.  As I said, it seeks to reduce the number of reports that are made to this House, which is regressive step.  The Bill was first introduced in February 2017.  As I said, it is out of date and I am not sure why we are discussing it but I do welcome the opportunity to have a wider discussion on Brexit and its implications.  Sinn F&eacute;in's hypocrisy on this matter cannot be overlooked.  The Executive in Northern Ireland remains in a state of limbo.  The people of Northern Ireland need their voice.  While the Irish Government and Fianna F&aacute;il have been very strong in providing that voice, the people of Northern Ireland feel let down by the parties in the North in terms of their failure to come together and restore the institutions and actively participate in the Brexit negotiations rather than grandstanding and virtue signalling in the Republic.  Given Sinn F&eacute;in collapsed the Executive and it continues its policy of absenteeism, the people of Northern Ireland are left without representation at one of the most critical times in their history.  It baffles me that we are now almost 16 months without an Executive.  Brexit is raging and this Bill, which is a year a half out of date, seeks to update the D&aacute;il on what is happening in Brexit yet we have no institutions in the North.  This needs to be called out for what it is.</p>  <p>  The ultimate aim of Fianna F&aacute;il is to secure the best Brexit deal possible for the entire Island of Ireland, including a trading relationship that is as close as feasibly possible to what we have at present, to ensure that progress is made in Northern Ireland and that Anglo-Irish relations are not regressed as a result of Brexit.  We recognise this is a tense time but it is important that those relations are maintained and that foundations are put in place to continue maintenance of those relations post-Brexit.  Fianna F&aacute;il is a constitutional republican party that wants to see a united Ireland but we will not exploit Brexit as a means of achieving this goal.  Sinn F&eacute;in's call for a Border poll has not in any way helped the Brexit negotiations.  It has only served to harden the position of the DUP and create levels of distrust and discord in Northern Ireland that we have not seen since prior to the Good Friday Agreement.  Sinn F&eacute;in has, in our view, certainly not covered itself in glory when it comes to putting Ireland&rsquo;s interests to the fore in the Brexit negotiations. </p>  <p>  Fianna F&aacute;il has been generally supportive of the Government&rsquo;s Brexit negotiation.  Despite suggestions from the Government party that it has not been supportive, it is our view that we have been supportive but this support is conditional on the Government doing a good job.  At an International level, we have raised serious concerns about the Government&rsquo;s domestic preparedness for Brexit, which I will speaker a further later.  I would like to raise some of the ongoing issues in terms of the negotiations.  I know that the Taoiseach met Prime Minister, Theresa May, today and that discussions took place in recent days on a third option in terms of what has been termed "maximum facilitation plus delay".  While Fianna Fail welcomes Theresa May proposing that the entire United Kingdom remain within the Customs Union, we are concerned that this is being couched in language of it being a temporary solution such that we are kicking the can down the road with a view to at some point in the future having some type of border facilitated by technology that does not yet exist.  If we allow this to progress to the point where we are talking about maintaining the UK in the Customs Union or some type of customs arrangement for a period of, say, six or seven years and so on what will happen when we reach the end of that process?  It should be borne in mind that at that time Michel Barnier, Guy Verhofstadt and we may not be around.  We do not know who will be on the Irish Government, European or UK teams.  We are playing a serious game of Russian roulette with the future of this country if we are willing to rely on what might happen years down the road, something over which we have no control.  For this reason, the backstop is important.  I acknowledge that progress was made last December, although I believe it was over-sold and that the language used at that time over-egged it.  Very strong language was used, including cast-iron, bulletproof and so on, because that was not the case.  When the wording was put before the British Parliament and Theresa May and she outright rejected it, this showed that the British Government, the Irish Government and the EU negotiating team had different interpretations of what that backstop and protocol 49 meant.  We cannot afford to facilitate the UK, Theresa May and the Tory Party to the detriment of our own party.</p><p>It is very important that this is nailed down in June and that we have absolute clarity in October because we are edging towards a situation where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, as the T&aacute;naiste has said.  If we do not have a withdrawal treaty we do not have a transition period and if we do not have a transition period we have a cliff edge exit next March.  I know that the T&aacute;naiste knows this.  I issue one warning on this.  If the European research group that is headed by Jacob Rees-Mogg and his 60 Brexiteers comes on board to support the idea put forward by Theresa May, then alarm bells should ring across this island.  Only a couple of days ago the same MP said that they are fully committed to a hard Brexit, that they want no ties or links to the European Union, that they want the ability to trade freely with other nations and that they do not support maintaining the UK as part of the customs union.  If there is a change of heart and they are suddenly, somehow, on board with the proposals then we need to be very cautious in working with that.  I appreciate the difficulties with the negotiation but I fear that if we allow this can to be kicked down the road the negotiations may tick on for months and years to come.  We cannot predict what might happen in six or seven years' time.  This is so important for the future of the island of Ireland, and especially for the citizens in the North of Ireland with regard to their rights to access the European Courts of Justice and for the free movement of people, services, goods and trade, including trade North and South.  We really need to see this negotiation locked down and absolutely clear.  While I cautiously welcome Theresa May's remarks today we certainly need to see text on a page.  In very basic terms, we need to see in writing exactly what is being proposed before we can support the so-called "third option". </p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.367" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="17:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700047#XX00200"><p>I shall respond to what has been said and I will also speak about the current state of play in the negotiations.</p>  <p>  We all have an obligation to be cautious.  What we are seeing is a permanent new reality in the relationships between Ireland and the UK and between the UK and the EU.  Given the interwoven nature of the relationship between Ireland and Britain, from an economic perspective in particular but also in many other aspects, the idea that any significant change in that relationship is not going to require a fundamental level of planning and contingency work is hopefully resulting in the kind of unity and purpose between parties, in the context of what we need to do to protect our State.  This is what we are doing, while also trying to maintain the closest possible relationship with our closest neighbour.</p>  <p>  There has been much in the media recently about disagreements and conversations within the British political system around looking at options such as maximum facilitation versus customs partnership.  Today and yesterday we have heard about the so-called "third option" whereby there is recognition that it would take a number of years to prepare and design any new way of dealing comprehensively with the Border that would not result in any physical infrastructure, and therefore we should maybe look at maintaining a shared customs territory with the UK on a temporary basis.</p>  <p>  Currently, Britain is negotiating with itself.  It is an internal discussion within the British political system and the British Cabinet.  We must respect their right to do that so they can finalise their approach to these negotiations, but it is not unreasonable for us to remind everybody that time is running out.  The real negotiation is between the British Government and the Barnier task force on behalf of the 27 EU countries.  At a time when we are planning to have a withdrawal treaty text agreed by the end of October that is operable and accepted by both sides, and the EU guidelines call for a review of progress by the end of June, everybody on the EU side now accepts that there needs to be significant progress and a lot more clarity around how we will resolve some of the core issues, especially the Irish Border issues.  It is not unreasonable for us to state quite clearly that the clock is ticking, as Michel Barnier has said, and that there is an obligation on all sides to try to move this forward.  Brexit is not just about Britain, and this is a key message, it is about Ireland and other European Union countries too.  The relationships we have and the respect we have for each other as countries hopefully will result in a sensible outcome that will protect the interests of multiple countries, as opposed to focusing solely on Britain's future and British political debate.  If that is the sole focus then the EU would be forced to look at the sole interest of the EU and binary positions will be taken.  It would then be a very difficult negotiation that would not be good for anybody but especially not for Ireland.  This is because Ireland is more exposed, by far, to a bad outcome to these negotiations than any other EU country.</p>  <p>  I now turn to the negotiations.  I reaffirm for the House and for anybody who is listening that the understanding and support we are getting from the EU task force is comprehensive.  I met with Michel Barnier on Monday and he is absolutely committed to understanding fully the detail of the Irish concerns and to try to protect the Irish interest.  Mr. Barnier regards the Irish interests as EU interests.  Over some months we have managed to build significant solidarity with the EU task force and among the other 26 member states involved in the negotiations on the EU side.</p>  <p>  We have also reached out to the UK side.  I have been in London a lot and the Taoiseach met the Prime Minister again today.  We are actively talking, but not negotiating, with the British Government.  The negotiation is a formal negotiation that must happen with the EU task force.  What we are not flexible on is the outcome, which was committed to in December and again in March.  For some weeks we have been calling for some new thinking from the UK side that could help to break the deadlock to allow the process to move forward in a way that is consistent with commitments that have already been given in black and white, in writing, by the British Prime Minister to the EU and to EU institutions on Irish issues in December and in March.</p>  <p>  Our position will remain consistent, transparent and open.  We have nothing to hide.  Ireland's concerns are genuine and we hope we can find a way to move the negotiations forward in June, to build confidence that we can finalise the wording by October, and move on to the future relationship discussions that will also take some time and which will need to be comprehensive from an Irish perspective.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.368" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1330" speakername="Gerry Adams" time="17:45:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700047#XX00300"><p>I was quite surprised at the tone of Deputy Lisa Chambers' remarks earlier.  I can only presume the Deputy is trying to stake her claim to the strategy of Deputy Miche&aacute;l Martin, which is to attack Sinn F&eacute;in at every single opportunity.  Deputy Chambers started her contribution by saying she was not sure why we are here discussing this Bill.  I know why I am here.  I respect the Minister and I have a lot of admiration for the work he does but I am here to keep the Government to account.  That is part of my responsibility.  If the Teachta D&aacute;la from Mayo is not sure then she should refrain from so much negativity.  It is also no surprise that Fianna F&aacute;il supports the Government on this Bill because the Government, of course, is Fianna F&aacute;il's partner on so many other issues.</p><p>The Deputy launched into a tirade about the collapse of the Assembly even though her own leader called for its suspension, which Sinn F&eacute;in resisted in dire and difficult circumstances.  It was only when Martin McGuinness, God rest him, could go no further that he resigned his post.  The Deputy should also know that we - I was a part of it just before our recent Ard-Fheis - negotiated a draft agreement with the DUP.</p> <p> Fianna F&aacute;il played a positive role in the negotiations on the Good Friday Agreement.  Even if it has a new generation, Fianna F&aacute;il should therefore be for the full implementation of the agreement, including the referendum on unity, which is a crucial part of it and without which republicans in Sinn F&eacute;in would not have signed up to the agreement.  Are Deputies referring to Sinn F&eacute;in's "hypocrisy" because we want accountability?  That tells its own story.</p> <p> I agree with the T&aacute;naiste on much of what he has said about the need for unity of purpose in the D&aacute;il and with our EU partners and on his acknowledgement of the work that has been done.  I am not sure that I can say it definitively, but I am probably the only Deputy present who campaigned in the North against Brexit.  I do not know whether any Fianna F&aacute;il, Fine Gael or Labour Deputy was up there.  I was there.  We won, in that the people of the North voted to remain.  That vote needs to be upheld and to form part of what we are considering.</p> <p> The T&aacute;naiste will bear witness to the fact that Sinn F&eacute;in has been active through our MPs, MLAs and, significantly and with great success, our MEPs.  I do not believe that Fianna F&aacute;il has an MEP at this time.  Regardless, our team has done the work and we represent people from across the entire island of Ireland.</p> <p> Let us discuss part of the difficulty.  The T&aacute;naiste rightly stated that there was a need for caution.  We know that one cannot trust the Brits.  That is the reality, speaking in a west Belfast way.  I do not mean the British people, the decent people whom I know there with all of the connectedness.  I have great friends there.  When I talk about the Brits, I mean the British Government.  One cannot trust them.  One certainly cannot trust the Tories.</p> <p> On Tuesday, the T&aacute;naiste stated that he was confident that the British Prime Minister would deliver on her commitment to avoid border controls.  I asked whether that would be by June, but he fudged the answer because he did not know any more than I did whether the Brits would come up with something by then and probably presumed they would not, that they would try to play it right down to the wire and then cobble something together.  I remember a former Taoiseach, Albert Reynolds, God rest him, telling us a story.  He had agreed the Downing Street Declaration with the British Prime Minister John Major.  He was getting make-up put on when John Major nipped in behind him and asked him whether he would change a little bit of it.  This was after the thing had been done and dusted.  We know how this works.  We have had plenty of experience.</p> <p> Contrast with the T&aacute;naiste's statement that he is confident that the British Prime Minister will deliver on her commitment to avoid border controls with his statement during this debate: "It is, therefore, more important than ever that the UK engage in a more detailed and realistic way on the draft protocol, including the backstop... in advance of the June European Council meeting."  One can only interpret that in west Belfast terms by saying that the UK has not engaged in a detailed and realistic way on the draft protocol, including the backstop, up to this point.  Contrast that with what the Taoiseach is saying, namely, that the British will table a new proposal on a future customs relationship within the next two weeks and that this is new thinking.</p> <p> These are all reasons to be cautious.  Of course, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed; it is game on, we are all wearing the green geansa&iacute; and we support the Government in what it is doing.  As our people used to tell me all the time, "You are doing very well, so far".  We have to keep our eyes on the prize and watch everything that is happening.</p> <p> I conceded at the outset that this Bill had been tabled at the beginning of last year.  It was not my responsibility that this took so long.  The Bill was relevant then when we did not have the current approach, which I have commended the Taoiseach and the T&aacute;naiste on, of reporting to the D&aacute;il regularly and using various structures that have been set up to inform and reach out to parties.  To be frank, the previous Taoiseach did not have a clue about how matters stood and the Fianna F&aacute;il leader was not much better at the time.  At least we have a more joined-up and informed approach.  That is right but it is not statutory, and this Bill, which was published quite a long time ago, was trying to correct that situation.</p> <p> The Government and Fianna F&aacute;il will oppose the Bill, so it will fall.  There we go - accountability.  Would the sensible thing to do not be to send the Bill to a committee so that the bits that had been overtaken by time could be rooted out and we could ensure that these issues were dealt with on a statutory basis?  There has been so much talk in recent times about accountability and so many protestations by politicians that they will sort all of this out.  Here we are on an issue not as personal or emotive as some of the issues the House has dealt with in recent times, but one that could have calamitous consequences for all of the people of this island.</p> <p> Since Fianna F&aacute;il, Fine Gael and Labour are not organised in the North, let me tell them that the position of the nationalist people of the North has changed hugely in the past two or three years.  The new generation of well educated, informed, connected and successful young people will not put up with what others may have been forced to put up with in the past.  It is spelled out in the backstop agreement - I do not have it before me - that our rights will be upheld.  The Taoiseach remarked: "Your birthright as Irish citizens and, therefore, as Europeans has been protected."  He also referred to the need for the British Government to facilitate the work of the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland and the joint committee of representatives of the human rights commissions, North and South.  I have not received a report on this and it has not been addressed.  Similarly, there would be "no diminution of human rights, safeguards and equality of opportunity set out in" the Good Friday Agreement.  Again, I have not received a report on this.  That is not the Minister's fault because, obviously, the Brits have not negotiated, to my knowledge anyway, on those-----</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.370" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="17:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700048#YY00200"><p>There has been some progress on those issues, actually.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.371" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1330" speakername="Gerry Adams" time="17:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700048#YY00300"><p>Then tell us.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.372" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1286" speakername="Simon Coveney" time="17:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700048#YY00400"><p>It is a negotiation.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.373" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1330" speakername="Gerry Adams" time="17:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700048#YY00500"><p>I understand that, but we all have to be accountable to the House because we are sent here by the people to represent them.</p><p>I rest my case.  I am pleased that the Minister is present and that he gave us an update on the current state of play insofar as he could.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.374" nospeaker="true" time="17:55:00" ><p>Question put and declared lost.</p></speech>
    <major-heading id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.375" nospeaker="true" time="17:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700048#YY00700">Message from Select Committee</major-heading>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.376" speakerid="com.kildarestreet/member/1371" speakername="Se&aacute;n &Oacute; Feargha&iacute;l" time="17:55:00" url="http://debatesarchive.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail2018051700048#YY00800"><p>The Select Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection has completed its consideration of the Employment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2017 and has made amendments thereto.</p></speech>
    <speech id="com.kildarestreet/dail/2018-05-17a.377" nospeaker="true" time="17:55:00" ><p>The D&aacute;il adjourned at at 6.40 p.m. until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 22 May 2018.</p></speech>
</publicwhip>