Aidan Farrelly
Kildare North · Social Democrats · Ireland
“I thank the Minister. If she will indulge me, it is very rare I get the opportunity to speak about my life experience prior to being in here but I have been a youth worker for about 16 years or the guts of three Dáil terms. The day before the general election I submitted my PhD thesis, which was on professional youth work.”
“In the past year, the number of children admitted to Temple Street with brain injuries from accidents on e-scooters has increased by 50%. I think we have agreement across the House that this is an ever-worsening public health crisis at this point. It is clear that the ban on under-16s using e-scooters has been a monumental failure.”
“It is acceptable that data will be shared with the task force in September but I ask that it be shared more widely once the terms of reference have been agreed. It would be really useful for the academic sector and for those who are in the market of training and professionally qualifying youth workers in the field.”
“Crucially, gardaí must be given the resources and the appropriate training to be able to pursue and enforce what is current legislation. The fourth piece, the bike-to-work scheme, has been an incredible success.”
“Actually, youth work is an occupation and profession that is one of the best jobs to have but we need to make sure the landscape is there for budding youth workers to go through appropriate professional qualification programmes and that the job will fulfil them not just from a rewarding job perspective but also from a financial perspectiv…”
“When the Minister says that advisory group is going to meet in September, who makes up the membership of that? The information the Minister's Department has collected is golden with regard to the sector. Will the Minister publish the findings of that survey? It would be really useful information.”
The complete record
Every one of 482 lines we hold for Aidan Farrelly, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 10.
“Last week, I appealed to the Tánaiste to intervene on behalf of the 400 children and teachers in St. Patrick's national school in Celbridge. What we know today is that the school is closed. The Department of education knew about the problems in the school as far back as last summer. The Tánaiste has been at pains to tell us this morning that he has capital. The community of Celbridge needs capital. It needs investment and a plan in the short, medium and long terms for those children and parents who are at home. What is the plan for those children and their education going forward?”
“The Select Committee on Enterprise, Tourism and Employment has completed its consideration of the following Revised Estimates for public services for the year ending on 31 December 2026: Vote 32 - Enterprise, Tourism and Employment.”
“The costs saved by a post office closure or move will be a bill picked up by the State elsewhere. Loneliness has become a disease on this island, and while this is not the official responsibility of our local post office, each loss or relocation contributions. A new CEO will take the helm at An Post this year. I wish them well, but they will not save our main street. That is not their job. They will not resolve loneliness. That is not their job. It is everybody's job here.”
“I fully agreed with the CEO of An Post this week, who was quoted in The University Times as stating that An Post and our postal workers are "essential infrastructure in the country", which is why announcements of closures or relocations are always met with anger, frustration and deep sadness. Leixlip post office relocated in 2024 from its main-street location to a site on the outskirts of the town. Undoubtedly, this business decision was not taken lightly, but it was another example of the invasive erosion of our main-street culture. As each shop closes, one more reason to go into town goes with it. While unit after unit lies empty and desolate, the rent, the rates and the insurance bills stave off interest before a viewing is even scheduled, so we find ourselves with ever less reason to go to our main street.”
“Postal workers, as the Minister of State will be aware, remain a traditional pillar of our communities. Like other such pillars, including nurses, social workers and youth workers, they are often taken for granted. We never truly understand the hidden magic behind their occupation, the relationships they build, the local knowledge they develop and the many tasks outside their job description they will do just to go that extra step, yet post offices continue to face existential questions. Why are post offices closing or relocating? Is it because the cost of running a business has become excruciatingly high? Is it because the model is outdated? Is it because the State is not utilising these community hubs to their full potential?”
“If the Minister of State can give us a guarantee that what the architect had to say in his assessment of the site will be remedied, then we have a plan we can work towards. Otherwise we might have missed an opportunity here.”
“I was somewhat concerned about the fact that the officials of the Department of Education and Youth who appeared before the committee yesterday stated that they are conducting a peer review in respect of the architect's report. In some ways, this casts a shadow what the architect has said. Ultimately, what we need to know, in very clear terms, is whether the plan that was presented to the school on Tuesday will remedy what the architect outlined in terms of the immediate concerns relating to the health and safety of children and staff at the site. If the Minister of State can tell me that, then we as a collective group can go back with that. From this reply, I am not convinced.”
“We need something in the short term which will ensure that the health and safety of the staff and children is of paramount importance. We all look forward to the Minister of State's reply. He should know that he has collective support from all TDs in the constituency in the context of progressing this over the next couple of weeks. The latter is the timeline within which we need to see action.”
“The entire school community, including the principal, the teachers, the SNAs and the secretaries, should not be expected to work in those conditions. I join Deputies Neville, Cronin, Ó Cearúil and Lawless in commending the entire school community regarding what they have had to endure. I cannot overstate how concerned the parents are right now. We have reached the point where they are organising a meeting next week to try to progress this. They do not know what the next steps need to be, which is why they need the State to step in on an emergency basis. None of us really believes that works will suffice at this point. The Minister of State knows that for an 18-year-old modular unit with a design lifetime of five years, it is not a great solution to upgrade what is there now.”
“I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to speak on this matter. The Minister of State is faced with a rare situation whereby all the TDs in the constituency are working together on it. We raised it earlier with the Secretary General of the Department of education at the Committee of Public Accounts. We know that Simon Harris and the Minister are aware of what is happening. Deputy Neville outlined the matter in a very comprehensive manner. We need to see action on the architect's report. The evidence is no longer anecdotal. There is a real and significant health and safety concern for the children. There are issues with fire safety, the floor plate, wall retention, mould and damp, etc. Nobody should be expected to learn in such an environment.”
“I believe the Tánaiste has already spoken about St. Patrick's National School with Deputy Ó Cearúil. I want to build on that. I have just spoken with the Secretary General at the Committee of Public Accounts. Everyone is aware of this now, especially with the damning findings of the architecture report. We need to bring everyone together on it at this stage. We could have modular units in the short term. The Tánaiste has to see it to believe it right now. Is there anything we can do to expedite this?”
“In ten years', 20 years', 30 years' or 40 years' time, the State will once again apologise to the children in respect of whom it is legislating tonight for holding them against their will. I have serious, significant concerns about the determination of this; the decision-making. Who has the capacity? Who has the competency? On what grounds will these decisions be made? For how long? Where? The Government has told us in the legislation where this will not happen but it has not told us where it will happen. It will not tell us who will do this and on what grounds but it says it will ultimately always be in their "best interests". It is never in the best interest of a child to detain them, never mind the fact that it is proposed to detain them simply for existing.”
“Many of the points have been already made in support of Deputy Gannon's amendment. I truthfully cannot believe we are here legislating for the detention of innocent children. It is shocking that they can have committed no crime and done nothing wrong, yet we are legislating for their detention apparently if it "is in the minor’s best interests", despite the fact that we have heard from every corner of the expertise on this that it is never in the child's best interests. I am fascinated to hear what the Minister of State will say as to the justification for this. How can this be explained on the day when the Taoiseach, sitting where the Minister of State is right now, made an unequivocal apology to those who have suffered?”
“The time spent on this amendment has been disproportionate at this stage, with the greatest of respect to everybody here. We have gone through it all. I ask Members making a point for the second time to please think it through and let us talk about something that is really meaningful.”
“My thoughts on this amendment specifically are on the record from last week and, unlike others, I will not repeat them here tonight just because I have another opportunity to take the microphone. Tonight this Government is about to make history by legislating for the ability to detain innocent children for doing nothing wrong. As it stands, at the pace we are going at this evening, irrespective of why we are here in the first place, we will not have an opportunity to debate the amendments put down to remove that provision because of the disproportionate amount of time we have spent on this amendment. I ask colleagues to think about the number of really worthwhile amendments that need a thorough conversation this evening.”
“There are people in Kildare right now who are queuing up overnight to buy homes for €500,000 on the assumption that alongside the homes that they buy, the services they need to raise their families will be there. They are not there.”
“In ways, some of the aspects of the motion simply ask the Government to fulfil commitments it set out in Sláintecare nearly ten years ago. What we are doing is trying to match ambition to need. We are not seeing that from the Government's perspective. We need a comprehensive workforce plan when it comes to GP services. We need reform. It is not a siloed approach that is necessary. We need to see the Department of housing come in here. We need to see the involvement of the Department of Social Protection. We need to see an evidence-based approach whereby when housing developments are being planned, it is not simply a childcare facility that is stipulated. What else does a community need?”
“If Kildare is a snapshot of what is happening around the country, there are upwards of 3,200 people per GP. That is simply unsustainable. There has been a population surge in Kildare over the past 30 years. It has increased from 120,000 or 130,000 to 250,000. The one thing we can all be absolutely sure of is that while the population has increased, the incredibly important services, such as GP access, have not risen in a similar fashion. What we do not see from this response or in the Government's ambition is any sort of urgency. We are not addressing the root cause of issues. The Taoiseach, Tánaiste and everyone else have criticised us for not coming forward with evidence-based proposals, constructive dialogue and plans. Here we have concrete proposals.”
“I thank the Minister of State for his response. Like my colleagues, I commend the work of Deputy Rice in the lead-up to this motion and in presenting a motion which, as Deputy O'Callaghan said, is not opposed. We still have as many questions as we have answers about the implementation of the motion. The irony, as we all truly know, is that you have to plan two or three weeks in advance if you need a GP appointment. That is the case throughout this country. You have to let your GP know or build into the timetable for your family at home that you might need an antibiotic, a consultancy, some advice or professional experience well in advance of actually having any symptoms. If you leave it until you are symptomatic, you will quite often not get an efficient appointment. That is no reflection, as we know, on the wonderful work of our GPs.”
“Before it even gets under way in real detail, I look forward to the recommendations that will come from this project in terms of future learnings for institutions of the State to make sure we have accurate information but also appropriate services to follow up. I look forward to further updates on this from the Minister and her Department as this project progresses.”
“I thank the Minister for that update. I hear sincerity in her response and I give her my assurance that, from a Social Democrats perspective, whatever we can do to support the Government in trying to seek that legislative change in this instance, I think it would be really important. If we are going to do it, why not do it right in this instance in respect of 12-year-olds and 13-years-olds who experienced lockdown going through a very troubling transition between primary school and secondary school? It was a really troubled time. We need to hear from them in this process. Whatever we can do to support that, we will. I reiterate my thanks and commendation to those involved in this project because it is a significant undertaking. We have heard about the IT specialties that are required, the access to information and challenges.”
“The Minister will not hear criticism from me in terms of the timeframe. If this takes months, it takes months and should be allowed to happen. I ask the Minister to talk to us a little more about that piece. If I was 12 in 2020 and my case was closed, I am outside the scope of this project. Is there a way in which we can amend legislation to ensure we can broaden the scope of this project for anyone over the age of 12?”
“I thank the Minister because she has pre-empted the piece I was going to try to discuss with her. To be honest, I have come around to the idea of this project. At the start I was quite cautious because my understanding and the meaning I would infer from "well-being" would suggest that you are getting a thorough understanding of how a child or a young person is, as opposed to what I called at the time a proof-of-existence check - ultimately, that we are just making sure that the child is still alive and still existing within the State. We had an opportunity to meet Ms Ward and her team this week, and it was really informative. I can understand now very clearly the methodology and Tusla's aspirations in this process. I still have some outstanding concerns about the resources it might have to complete these checks.”
“Will the Minister provide the House with an update on the Tusla well-being checks, which she instigated within her Department on foot of a number of very tragic cases last year, for all children and young people who had their cases closed by Tusla during the Covid years?”
“We need standards, we need quality but we need the State to comply with its own laws when it comes to planning permission in the first instance to ensure that where services are established, they can provide the basic amenities to those who will be living in them.”
“The piece that I thought was a little ironic in this is that so many of us have spoken tonight about local issues that pertain to this amendment, about how communities have struggled because of a lack of investment over generations, but I wonder which of the communities we have spoken about tonight would pass through the stages of this assessment and be deemed okay to host a direct provision centre or an IPAS accommodation centre. When the mode of delivery is wrong, everything else that comes from that will always be wrong. We need State-run services. That is fundamentally a really important part of this.”
“With the greatest respect to my colleagues in Sinn Féin, I completely understand where this amendment comes from but when the State cannot even comply with its own planning legislation as enacted right now, I fear that an amendment like this would gather dust with haste because we have seen the State sign so many contracts with private providers in buildings that are not fit for purpose for anybody to live in, that do not have any sort of services - no running water, no heat, no electricity - and where we appeal that contracts are not signed for those services for those sites, people are ignored. So much of the issue has been covered.”
“That needs to be said tonight because, ultimately, the narrative and the discourse about what is before us tonight and what has happened over the last couple of years is the manifestation of an absence of political leadership, if I am honest, in all sections of this House. We have seen too many examples of where immigration and diversity is what makes us thrive as a country, but what we have allowed is a small cohort of people to blame the process and the mode of delivery as the rationale for racism.”
“I have tried to listen attentively to this. This has been a really interesting conversation over the last hour or so. I have mixed emotions on it, I have mixed views on it and I do not really know where I stand on it yet. Ultimately, proposed centres were never set on fire because of a lack of GP services, a lack of school places in a community or because the traffic congestion was too bad, and this amendment is almost a damning indictment of how Government has got it so wrong in the past. I am from a constituency where we have seen significant housing growth in the last 30 years. Our population in Kildare has doubled from 120,000 in the 1990s to 250,000 right now and I have yet to see a mobilised effort, a demonstration or a protest at any of the hundreds of housing developments that are proposed.”
“We cannot ever stand over a statement that a child's best interest is part of this legislation if we intend to provide for their detention when they have done nothing wrong.”
“10 and 20, and many others, that ensure that what actually comes out of this, among many other things, is an opportunity for the State to very clearly say it will ensure that the experience of a child or young person experiencing the international protection system is just and is fair, and that there is a quality associated with this. We have seen way too many contracts being signed by this State over the last number of years that did not define a minimum set of standards with regard to accommodation, play, education, independence, meal preparation or anything like that. On many occasions, we have seen operators riding roughshod over what they believe to be optional extras with regard to quality of life. That is why I am here today. I am trying to represent the children and young people who have experienced that system.”
“I accept the Minister's sincerity in this regard. I can see in him that he believes that children's rights are not being impinged as part of this legislation. The lived experience I have had, which is a very limited one in comparison to the children and young people who have experienced direct provision or the international protection system, is at complete contrast and odds to that. I appeal to the Minister again. Amendment No. 14 is out of order based on the cost; that is fine. There are really meaningful pieces in amendments Nos.”
“-----of what amendment No. 20 was. It is the same amendment essentially without the detail. The Minister can see that. Long before I ever considered or entertained a career in politics or had an opportunity to do so, I was a youth worker in Kildare. I worked with children and young people who were living in direct provision centres. I would love to be here appealing for legislation to enshrine meaningful opportunities for young people and children to engage in education, to engage in play and to engage in appropriate health outcomes. It is really hypocritical of the Minister to say that the best interests of the child are already enshrined in this legislation when we are collectively engaging in a process of legislating for the detention of children. It is still there; we have just voted it through. It is still part of it.”
“I thank the Minister for coming in. With regard to amendment No. 10 and equally the one in my name, amendment No. 20, I want to highlight a couple of aspects of amendment No. 14 that went into detail on this matter. It has since been ruled out of order. It is essentially just an extension-----”
“This legislation, as Deputy Kelly said, could be seen from a child's point of view as an opportunity to underpin what is not an optional extra. A child's access to basic human rights and services is not an optional extra. This legislation is not underpinned by a child's best interests, not just with regard to the detention - we have covered that, and I am sure we will cover it again - but also the way in which they interact with the services of this State as they experience the international protection system. My amendment No. 14 was ruled out of order because of the money message. I am a new TD; I am learning. I will have it written in a different way for future pieces of legislation. However, I say that to show the Minister there is a series of ways in which he and his officials could draft what this will look like as a definition.”
“With regard to amendment No. 20, I am fully supportive of amendment No. 10. We will take another run at it in a definition in terms of Article 14.1 of the Eurodac regulation. My concern equally with this legislation, and it speaks again to the somewhat rushed nature of it, is that it could even be at odds with domestic legislation with regard to Children First and young children and young people's rights and welfare and protections in the State because it does not underpin this legislation. It does not go far enough at all to very clearly highlight the importance of what we must remember are a very vulnerable cohort of people in this society. They are people who have experienced trauma and a whole diversity of issues, and what they need are services.”
“I wish to pick up on what the Minister said that judges or Tusla will quite often make that determination. I struggle to think of an example where they would make such a determination in a child's best interests - to detain them simply for existing. There are no behavioural issues, crimes being committed or laws being broken. There is no rationale for that decision. It is quite disingenuous to say Tusla or a judge would have the competency to determine that it is in a child’s best interest to be detained for no reason other than for existing. The Minister can withdraw that if he likes. It is not a comparison and it does not make sense to include it.”
“Will a lack of availability in the State of appropriate care ever be a rationale for detaining children? If we cannot or are not in a position to provide appropriate places for children or young people, based on it being in their best interests could there be a rationale to detain them? We spent the guts of what felt like 14 hours discussing a definition of "absconding". Children and young people will not even have the opportunity to abscond because, in some cases, they will be detained for doing nothing wrong. How will it be deemed to be in their best interest to be detained for nothing at all?”
“I thank the Minister for his response. Today we are misjudging in an overwhelming fashion the vulnerability associated with children and young people who are experiencing this process. In doing so, I have lost count of the number of bodies with acronyms that have come out and said that it is never in a child's best interests to be detained. Notwithstanding the fact that the Minister has included point 3 in the Bill, against every research piece and piece of evidence that says it is never in the child's best interest to be detained, who is experienced or qualified enough to go against that and decide it is deemed to be in a child's best interests to be detained? We have amendments that ask for this to be removed wholesale. We should not be legislating for the detention of children. I will take the opportunity to say that now.”
“Notwithstanding the merits of this amendment, we should be clear first that we should not be legislating for the detention of children who have done nothing wrong. That should never be a part of legislation and certainly not legislation that has been described in this House today as rushed in nature. It has not been thought through. There will be amendments forthcoming on other Stages. We have not thought this Bill through and with that in mind, legislating for the detention of children who have done nothing wrong simply does not seem right. If the Minister is to pursue that then we need to ensure we obtain what Deputy Kelly is providing for about what a clear definition of "last resort" is and by extension who gets to determine when that has been reached.”
“On a point of clarification, the final few words of this definition are "for reasons which are not beyond the applicant's control". Could the Minister outline what those reasons might be, who will determine what those reasons are and if there is a threshold given that is part of the definition?”
“On Monday, nurses began a work-to-rule in Naas General Hospital over what they say are unacceptable and unsafe staffing deficits. These include a failure to comply with the agreed safe staffing frameworks, a failure to increase staffing to meet a 25% increase in attendance at accident and emergency and maternity leave posts not being filled. Will the Taoiseach and the Minister for Health reach out to the HSE to get it to come to the table meaningfully to bring this to a resolution?”
“My concern is that his colleagues in government, namely those in Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil, do not share his commitment when it comes to flooding and, ultimately, climate change. I agree with Emeritus Professor John Sweeney that it is time to do what this law demands in the context of climate change.”
“It took numerous attempts from officials in this House and from our office just to get a response and what we learned was nothing new. We have been trying to establish this for ten years trying to establish this and we still do not have publicly available forecasting data. In Kildare last week we were told to brace ourselves because areas of Newbridge and Clane could be flooded due to necessary alleviation procedures at the Pollaphuca dam. The ESB was able to brief public representatives and communities but there is a bigger problem here. We need to see investment in the dam in terms of its capacity. Questions still arise as to where the liability would fall if semi-State agencies knowingly flooded communities in this State. I commend the Minister of State on his dedication in respect of this issue.”
“The ways by which successive Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil governments have handled flooding over the past ten years is an example of gross incompetence. In March 2025, I put a parliamentary question to the Minister for housing - it is a shame he has left the Chamber; he has abandoned ship on this issue - asking about the national flood forecasting and warning service. I asked, in particular, why this information was not being released publicly. The service was set up in 2016. Ten years later, we still have no public information about forecasting and warnings. I was told stage 1 was being managed by the OPW and that the data was not mature enough to provide warnings for locations to the public. We asked for an update just last week. The reply from the Department of housing was there was 48 hours left.”
“It is all back to our moral compass and mine reminds me very steadfastly that legislating for the detention of children and young people who have done nothing wrong is just downright wrong. To do so in this Bill with so much ambiguity is reprehensible.”
“This is one of the many concerns held by the Children's Rights Alliance. What legal advice and representation will be provided to children and young people seeking international protection? The EU pact sets out the minimum standards for states to have in place but stops short of precluding states from going beyond that, including legal aid. The Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission has said this Bill goes further than what is required in the pact in restricting the rights of applicants but not as far as the pact allows in protecting their rights. I began by highlighting that our words, values, emotions and bias all influence what we say here today.”
“Who decides whether the threshold has reached last resort territory? There is no clarity here and, despite the risk of imposing lifelong harm on children by detaining them, the Bill leaves a breadth of scope that is concerning. Where will children be detained? The Bill might tell us where children will not be detained - in locations such as prisons, detention schools or Garda stations - but it does not tell us where they will be detained. Why not? The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has said that detaining a child is never in their best interests. This Bill allows so much scope for this to occur without knowing who the decision maker is, the destination for such detention, the level of care provided and by whom, and for how long. Who else would be subjected to this? Legal counselling is not defined in this Bill.”
“The Bill has not put any children's rights safeguarding measures in place whatsoever. It does not speak about children first or rights. It speaks of detention in the same breath as talking about the best interests of the child. The Bill legislates for the detention of children. Section 24 specifically relates to the detention of children in the screening procedure. Section 24(10) states that if a parent of a child is not co-operating, the parent will be detained and Tusla will be notified. For what purpose will Tusla be notified? This is not clearly established in the Bill and, from a child protection perspective, merits immediate attention and amendment. Section 24(12) allows for the detention of an unaccompanied minor "in exceptional circumstances and as a measure of last resort". What are these exceptional circumstances?”
“I am thankful for the opportunity to speak on the Bill before us today. As I start, I acknowledge that we all speak on important issues like this from a place of bias. Personal experience, our values and our world views all incorporate much of what we say on these issues. I spent a great deal of time as a youth worker working in direct provision settings with children and young people. While I speak about this issue, I am speaking about it with those children and young people in mind, people whom I came to know and care so much about. The first question I will put to the Minister is: why does the principle of the best interest of the child not underpin this Bill? In fact, all the provisions for the best interests of the child in the EU pact have not been transposed into this Bill. Why not?”