Barry Ward
Dún Laoghaire · Fine Gael · Ireland
“I acknowledge all of the factors the Minister of State set out. I welcome them all and it is really important that we spread that message. The second part of the Minister of State's response is really important and that is the EU jobs part. I would not necessarily limit it just to the European Union.”
“Let us not abdicate responsibility for politically unpopular decisions, which are still the right decisions, made at European level with the involvement of Irish people.”
“There is little doubt about the positivity we associate with membership of the European Union. Some 82% of Irish people favour membership of the European Union, the highest rate of approval of any European state.”
“It is really important, not from the point of view of influence but from the point of view of presence, that there are Irish people around the table when decisions are being made so that the Irish perspective is understood and heard.”
“To look at it from a purely economic standpoint, the value of being part of the Single Market is enormous. In 1973, we imported €340 million more in goods than we exported. In recent times, we have had an export surplus. We have exported more than €53 billion more than we have imported.”
“As we hold the Presidency of the Council of the EU and are at the heart of Europe, leading the agenda and setting the tone in respect of our priorities during the Presidency, what is the Government doing to communicate to Irish people just how lucky we are to be part of the European Union?”
The complete record
Every one of 997 lines we hold for Barry Ward, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 20.
“Let us say we will provide dedicated educational opportunity for those people on site if they have no English or, where they go into the local school, let us provide that school with the additional resources that are needed. It is not okay to abandon this. It is not okay to leave an information vacuum. It is not okay to not be honest with the communities we represent. Let us trust them to acknowledge the duty we have as a wealthy First World country. Let us trust them, with the generosity we know they have, with the real information about what is happening and the consequent resource applications that are required.”
“The other issue people raise is education. When children are coming into IPAS centres, where are they going to continue their education? We cannot abandon them. They must continue to have education, if only to equip them for the temporary situation they might be in. That duty falls on local schools. Teachers tell me, "I am already up to my gills dealing with the 20 or 30 students I have in my class. I cannot take in six students who might not have English. I cannot deal with the extra resource implications of that." I understand what those teachers are saying and I understand what the parents of the children in those classes are saying. Let us provide a practical solution for those legitimate concerns about the accommodation of international protection applicants.”
“The other concerns mentioned to me relate to healthcare. It is a case of, "We cannot get a date with our GP. We cannot get into a GP's surgery in the local area so when these extra 50 or 100 people come into our community, where are they going to get healthcare?" That is a legitimate concern. The Minister and I have an IPAS centre between our constituencies or in his constituency and at the edge of mine. The number of people who will fit into that will need healthcare. One of the things I have said repeatedly to the Department is that we need to provide on-site healthcare for those people. We cannot expect local GP services to absorb them. They do not do so in any event because they do not have the capacity. Let us deal with legitimate concerns like that and actually address them with practical solutions.”
“We need to be honest about what the actual effect of a community like that coming into our constituency is. The complaints that are often made to me are that people are in fear. They fear that if a community of single men is moved into an area, they would not be able to let their daughters out. I do not think those people are racist, but I do think they are ill-informed. Every statistic will show that the vast majority of people charged with sexual crimes in this country are Irish - even in terms of the proportion of the population that are Irish. The incidence of crimes involving international protection applicants is minimal compared with those involving Irish people. Let us be clear about that. It is the gap of information that allows it to be filled by people with nefarious intent with lies just like that.”
“They hear rumours that an IPAS centre is going in here, there are X number of people coming in here and they are coming from a totally different background - they might be from a different religion or whatever it is. This breeds mistrust - mistrust between them and the Government but also mistrust between them and the innocent people who are fleeing persecution who come to live in their communities. Let us be honest with the Irish people and talk to them about what is actually happening. Every Member of this House will have had a situation in their constituency where a rumour goes around, be it founded or unfounded, that some centre is going in here. In that context, we as representatives need to be honest with people in our communities and constituencies.”
“They cannot know if the Department purchased a hotel in an area where that is the only place where tourists can stay. They cannot know the effect that will have on the local community. There has been far too much centralised paternalism in Dublin in terms of being honest with communities, asking them and talking to them about what is proposed. Fundamentally, Irish people are genuine, generous and welcoming people. That is our history and there is ample evidence to support the fact that Irish people are happy to open their doors to communities who come here with genuine issues in their home countries, to accommodate and look after them and let them form part of our communities for however long it is they must be here. What has happened, however, is that those communities have been left in the dark.”
“That is what the international protection accommodation service is for. That is probably the system that has created most controversy with people. I say this with respect to all those working in this area. It is a programme that has been mismanaged. It has been particularly mismanaged from a public information perspective. We have been far too afraid to be honest with communities around this country and to be up front with them in saying, "Here is what we are planning to do. Tell us what you think. Tell us what you think the downsides are. Tell us what you think the pitfalls are. Tell us why you think it's a good idea or a bad idea or whatever it is." The reality is that those sitting in a Department in Dublin cannot know every corner of the country and every community.”
“It is not fair for people to come here from a war-torn country or a place where they were being persecuted only to be told they must wait years for a decision about whether they can stay, leaving them in a limbo where, for a long time, they could not work, though now they can after six months. It leaves them in a situation where their future is totally uncertain. That is not fair. That is why we need to accelerate the processing of international protection applications and give people clarity on the decisions regarding whether or not they can stay here for the duration of that persecution or the instability in their home country. While they are waiting for that process, we have obligations not to ignore or abandon them but instead to ensure they have safe places to live.”
“I am sure the Minister will acknowledge that he benefits from the foresight of his predecessor as Minister, Deputy McEntee, who massively increased the number of staff available in the international protection office such that those applications that were taking years to process a few short years ago are now being reduced to terms of months. This is exactly as it should be. That is fair not just to the people who live in this country and are entitled to have certainty for those coming in seeking international protection but, perhaps more importantly, to those seeking international protection.”
“They come here and there are criteria they must meet to be allowed to stay here. If they stay here, it is technically, certainly initially, on a temporary basis until such time as they are in a position to return to their countries. Equally, we all recognise that for somebody who comes here, receives international protection, lives and works in this country or who might be born in this country if their parents were in that situation and has gone through school in this country, it does not always make sense for them to return to the country from which their family came. What is most important is that we use that international rules-based system to process those applicants and, most importantly, do so in a swift way. This has not been the case for a long number of years.”
“They were brought into those communities as guests and given the protection of those communities. It is a consequence of our success as a country that the duty now falls to us to give that temporary, and maybe sometimes longer term or even permanent, protection to people who are in exactly the same place our forefathers were at the time of the Famine and persecution in this country when they went abroad. The role now falls to us to look after those people who come here. The difference now is that we benefit from a very substantial and complex, but also comprehensive, international rules-based system for how we deal with people who come here. That is the international protection system that manages those people who come here seeking what we used to call asylum and is now known as international protection.”
“As part of that migration system, they come here seeking international protection. They are the people who most people see as immigrants, when in fact the category is much wider than that. They are people who come here seeking the protection of Ireland. The irony is that we as Irish people have benefited from similar protection across the world for centuries. Everybody in this Chamber will have family members who live in other countries, be it the United States, or the far side of the world in places such as New Zealand and Australia, European countries and across the world. They live there because they went there seeking a better life or, in some instances, they went there seeking protection because situations in this country were unpalatable, for a variety of reasons, over the past 150 to 200 years.”
“Many of them are from outside the European Union but wherever they come from, when they come here to work in our bars, restaurants and, particularly, hospitals, in home healthcare services, in assistance services at all kinds of different levels and in our schools, we are so lucky to have those people. That is the immigration system. Parallel with that is the migration system. This includes people who probably have not come here by choice necessarily. They have come here because of some upheaval in their own countries or some situation that makes it dangerous, unpalatable or even impossible for them to live where they have come from. They very often come from war-torn areas, or from communities where there is massive discrimination against them because of their ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation or gender.”
“I will start by distinguishing something that is not distinguished enough in public discourse, namely, the difference between immigration and migration. Very often, when I deal with people on these issues, they do not necessarily make that distinction. Immigration, or people who come here to work, live and contribute to our society at lots of different levels, includes people we absolutely need. They keep our hospitals running and our hotels, restaurants and communities busy. At a time when we have full employment in this country, thank God, we are very lucky to have communities that are willing to come and work here as part of an immigration process complete with visas, permissions, etc. Some of them are European Union citizens.”
“I, the Tánaiste and the Fine Gael Party campaigned in relation to the cost of childcare at the election last year. I was pleased that we made sure it was central to the programme for Government that we would reduce the cost for parents to €200. We know that has not happened yet, but I understand that work is taking place in that regard. We also know that some childcare providers are leaving the sector in anticipation and because it has not happened yet. Can the Tánaiste provide us with an update on how progress is going on that? Is there a timeline for when it will be delivered?”
“The other concerns people talk about are environmental impacts, particularly on the sea bed, with regard to plankton farms and sites for the growing of important micro-organisms within the sea. My understanding is the experience from Scotland and the North Sea is that these wind farms create small biospheres where, in fact, the biodiversity increases. Can we help communicate to people that while there may be downsides, the upsides grossly outweigh them in all of these projects?”
“The Minister of State put his finger on it with regard to public consultation. Some of these projects can be very controversial and it is really important to bring people with them and show them the benefit of the project not only to us all but also to local communities. In the context of the two projects I mentioned to the Minister of State, I know from speaking to people in Dún Laoghaire that there are two major concerns. One is the loss of visual amenity. As you look out across places like Dalkey Island that have remained unchanged nearly since Viking times, there is a loss of visual amenity. I acknowledge that but in weighing the two up, the balance of correctness, if I could put it that way, lies in building the wind farms.”
“That is all welcome news. In my constituency, there are a number of plans relating to offshore wind. We do not really have the land space to be developing much in the way of onshore wind in Dún Laoghaire but there are two particular projects in the Dublin Array and the Codling Wind Park that will deliver a lot, not just in clean energy but also for the facilities onshore and the use of Dún Laoghaire Harbour to help deliver that. In the context of a windy island like Ireland, the importance of building our capacity, particularly in offshore wind, cannot be understated. We have a real opportunity here. Notwithstanding what the Minister of State has said, how can we speed up the process to ensure that even where things are controversial, we deliver offshore wind in a way that will benefit everybody in this country and on this island?”
“A lot of wind programmes are currently in planning. Will the Minister of State indicate what the capacity would be if all of those planning permissions were to come good and deliver those wind projects? What would be the capacity at that stage?”
“Let us put in place the measures they need to do what they want to do in order that they contribute the same as everybody else. Then we will have a more inclusive society, but also one that is better for it because all of them will be added in to the mix, delivering what we all want to deliver to make this a better place.”
“There must be an incentive there to ensure this, because employers do sometimes need to make allowances for people with disabilities. Most employers will do it if they can. What we want to do is make sure that it is not difficult for them to do that and that they have the capacity to do it. That is a key part of levelling the playing pitch too, because we know that people with disabilities are much more likely to suffer from unemployment. A total of 75% of them suffer from unemployment. That is fixable for many of those people. They want to work but, because of whatever challenge they face, they cannot do so and they cannot find an employer who either wants to or can make the changes that are needed. Let us level the playing field.”
“They talked in Iarnród Éireann about how they are bringing in these fabulous new trains that are going to be level with the platform and will allow, for example, mobility impaired people to get on and off unassisted. That is wonderful and I welcome it, but it is still two years away. If we really want to level the playing field and if we really want to say to people with any type of disability that we are there to support them and to give them the same opportunities that anyone else has, we must be serious about it. We cannot say, "Yes, we are working on it and it is coming in two years' time." Now is the time to do it. We also need to work in terms of the supports we provide to people through social protection to ensure they have the same opportunities. This includes employers.”
“If they then get a job and start working, however, and make too much money, they will lose out on that grant because it is means-tested. They still face the same difficulties, however. They still have the same problems getting to work and with employers who cannot or will not facilitate them. This must change. Transport has to change. If I am a wheelchair user, I should not have to call Dún Laoghaire Dart station in advance to let them know I will be getting off the first carriage so someone can come out with a ramp and put it down so I can get off. I stood in Woodbrook Dart station as we opened it, but that new fully accessible station still needs ramps to get people on and off the train.”
“I worked with them when I was on the county council trying to ensure we had not just proper and accessible bathrooms in public spaces, but facilities for people who need much more than just an accessible bathroom, where hoists and other facilities are required. I welcome that the group has achieved charitable status. I acknowledge the work of people like Ann Healy, Aaron Daly, Aisling McNiffe, Annette Monaghan and the tireless work they have done, along with my colleague, Councillor Vicki Casserly, in this space. This endeavour, though, must expand to more than just that. Let us look at employment. We provide grants to people who require assistance, for example. We help them with a payment to allow them to do what they need to do.”
“I remember speaking many years ago to a resource teacher in Loughlinstown in my constituency. He was saying that if you ask a child in the classroom to throw a balled-up piece of paper into the bin, they can all do it to the same extent, except it is much easier for the kids sitting at the front of the class than it is for the kids sitting at the back of the class. What this is about is levelling the playing field. This applies to disability as much as it does to educational opportunity. We must, therefore, be looking at levelling the playing field for people, irrespective of what challenges they face, so they can achieve as much as they possibly can. I pay tribute to those who have been involved in organisations like Changing Places Ireland.”
“The community safety fund is exactly the kind of fund that should be contributing to that because it will stem future crime.”
“That being the case, this is an entirely sensible measure that allows the short-circuiting of a process that has taken far too long up to now. The notion that the State has to maintain assets for seven years before they can be disposed of is blocking the benefit of the proceeds of crime for the Exchequer. When they are taken away from the criminals involved, they should be able to be redistributed. I will finish on the community safety fund, a hugely important initiative. It is a young fund, relative to this legislation. I am not sure it is directly the Minister's responsibility but can we please focus it on education and literacy initiatives in disadvantaged areas. There is a programme in place in Loughlinstown in north County Wicklow, which is really good but is crying out for funding.”
“If you expect somebody to go into the District Court or any other court to lift a freezing order, if they do not know the basis for the order having been made, it is very difficult for them to properly litigate that in the way we would expect them to be able to in the normal way. I also acknowledge that the Bill will shorten the period of time available to the State to dispose of those assets once they have been seized, from seven years to two years. While I welcome that, I again sound a note of caution insofar as my understanding - I have not been able to get that out of the Bill - is that this will not frustrate any appeal process and the assets will not be disposed of before the expiration of any appeal process.”
“Sometimes, if it is an administrative process, whereby an account or asset is frozen, the freezing order can be renewed over and over again, albeit with judicial oversight, but without proper litigation or a real opportunity for the person who is in charge of, responsible for or owns that asset to come before a court and explain why it should not be frozen. In the circumstances where an asset is frozen on an administrative basis, there should be an opportunity for a person to come to court. More important, there should be an opportunity for that person to know the basis on which the freezing order has been made. Having dealt with people in this situation, my understanding is this is not always available to them. There is an inequality of arms in that regard.”
“I note it essentially streamlines the process in many respects, particularly the seizure of assets and the opportunity for the freezing of accounts to frustrate the possibility that somebody might be able to evacuate funds or get them away from the claws of the Criminal Assets Bureau or the authorities in this jurisdiction. That is a reasonable measure. However, I sound a small note of caution in relation to how long those freezing orders can continue for without coming before a court or being properly litigated, if I can put it that way.”
“To take away assets and the proceeds of crime is the best way of having an impact on their activities and reducing the profitability and impetus that drives that criminal activity. The development of this law is hugely important. It is a law that must evolve with the process because, as the Minister knows, the same criminal gangs that are profiting from crime in this jurisdiction are constantly changing their methodologies and modus of operation to be ahead of the law and An Garda Síochána. An Garda Síochána does a very effective job keeping up with these gangs but this Legislature must do that as well. I welcome this evolution in the law.”
“As previous speakers said, Ireland has a history in this area of which it can very proud. In the aftermath of the assassination and murder of Veronica Guerin, action was taken by the Government at that time. It was led by Nora Owen, the then Minister for Justice, and it put in place a very radical regime for dealing with assets that are the proceeds of crime. As the Minister knows, jurisdictions and colleagues throughout Europe are bending over backwards to follow Ireland in this regard and take the lessons we have learned in how we have dealt with this. As other contributors said, the best way to hit criminal gangs, organised criminal groups and those profiting from crime is in their pockets.”
“As somebody who has sometimes had to go through a series of pieces of legislation, it can be very difficult to see exactly what the up-to-date position is in relation to the law. We can solve that problem as a Legislature by consolidating legislation rather than passing a number of amending Acts. This is not a bad example in terms of the proceeds of crime Act but there are other examples in legislation. I have in mind the Road Traffic Acts, for example, where it is very difficult to understand what the latest iteration of legislation coming from these Houses actually says. I encourage consolidation. That said, this is not a bad example. There is a principal Act and other legislation referred to but it is relatively clear for anybody who knows the situation what this Bill is doing. I also welcome what the Bill is doing.”
“As the Bill also amends other legislative instruments, reference will have to be made to them as well. Time and again, I make the point that when we are introducing legislation that amends an existing Act, it is more appropriate to repeal in the original Act the section that is being amended and restate it in the new Bill so it is clear what is actually being done. Any ordinary citizen coming to read this Bill would then not need to open copies of a series of pieces of other legislation to compare, contrast and see what changes have been made and the import of those changes. We should be passing legislation that is easily accessible for every citizen, and every lawyer.”
“I share the Cathaoirleach Gníomhach's sentiments and welcome the Norwegian ambassador. I welcome this legislation, which was brought to Cabinet by the then Minister, Deputy Helen McEntee, in January last year and has progressed since then. It is a very welcome development of the law in relation to the seizure of criminal assets. I will start by making a point on the drafting of the Bill and the way it is presented, which the Minister, and certainly his officials, have heard me make before. In any amending legislation, there are a series of amendments which are very difficult to understand without reference to the principal Act. In this case, the principal Act is the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996. In order to read this Bill and see what it means, you have to have a copy of the Act open in front of you.”
“The patrol of our coasts and coastal waters is a mammoth task for the Defence Forces, customs, An Garda Síochána, the RNLI and the Coast Guard. I want to put on record my admiration for those involved in the seizing of the MV Matthew and the drugs haul that came with it. The work done by the Defence Forces, the RNLI and An Garda Síochána has borne great fruits for this country in stopping the drug shipment. The patrolling of this enormous exclusive economic area is a very difficult task. Is there a role for more economical means, such as the use of long-range sophisticated scout drones to patrol these waters? This would also save money and carbon emissions. It is an opportunity for us to patrol these waters more effectively and do so in a more economical way.”
“They may be fee-paying or private schools but they still have limited resources. If this scheme is to work well, it should be rolled out to all schools.”
“I am very grateful to hear the Minister is open to the expansion of this scheme. I appreciate what she has said. I believe the take-up would be strong among all schools if the eligibility criteria were extended. I understand entirely that no resource is infinite and the Government has to spend money where it is needed most. I welcome the Minister's commitment to engaging with the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, on possibly expanding the scheme before its conclusion. There is a danger we perceive private schools as being schools with lots of money. The Minister will know there are many private schools, particularly those that address a minority need, whether a religious or other need, that charge fees but are not wealthy schools. The patrons, parents and families of those schools are not necessarily wealthy.”
“While I accept that, at the same time, if we are committed to this scheme as one that will reduce carbon emissions and our dependence on fossil fuels and allow us to get more renewable energy and, therefore, benefit the whole country, should it not be rolled out automatically to all those schools, rather than deciding that if one school takes in fees, it is ineligible or to parse the scheme in those terms? If the scheme works - and it clearly does - and it reduces emissions and our dependence on fossil fuels, then surely what is good for the goose is good for the gander and it will be good for all schools.”
“I thank the Minister and am delighted to hear her answer. I welcome this scheme; it is a great one. Even the rate of take-up the Minister outlined is impressive and is key to meeting our climate targets. It allows schools, as much as the rest of society, to address their emissions and reduce their carbon footprint. The Minister said fee-paying schools and private schools - and we must remember that not all private schools are fee-paying - may have access to fees that non-fee paying or non-private schools do not have.”
“As a small country in Europe, we benefit enormously from the data and the co-operation that are shared between us and other member states, often countries that have much bigger apparatuses and much greater access to resources. When, as a small country, we form part of those networks, we always benefit. Therefore, I have no real concerns about this proposal. It makes perfect sense and I am very happy to welcome it.”
“We know in real terms that this will help prevent and detect crime and help the agencies that deal with human trafficking, drug trafficking and all the other crimes we know take place across transport networks. It will help to detect these crimes and solve them when the time comes to bring about prosecutions in respect of them. It is a perfectly sensible measure that I welcome. As I say, I am almost a small bit surprised it has not happened already. Most importantly, however, these countries are allies of ours with which we deal all the time and it is right and proper that we should have enough trust in them to share this information. There is almost no instance I can think of when Ireland, as a member of the European Union, has not benefited from data-sharing arrangements with other countries in the European Union.”
“It is not just names and dates of birth. It is also passport numbers, nationality and other information that airlines have about people. While the airlines are bound by the general data protection regulation and other instruments, the notion that they would not share that information and those data with other allied countries is, to my mind, nonsense. I absolutely welcome this proposal. It makes perfect sense. Again, these are two countries with which we co-operate on lots of different levels and I welcome the fact that we will now be sharing this information with them or, rather, we will be allowing the air carriers to share that information with them.”
“I have been following this proposal from the European Commission since June. Honestly, when I first read of it I was surprised it was not in place already. Iceland and Norway are two functional members of the wider European community that are associated with Schengen. We deal with them regularly and we can have great faith in their systems, rule of law, respect for rules around data protection and those kinds of things. We are dealing with two countries and the notion that there are passenger flights or other transport from Ireland to Iceland or Norway and that we are prohibiting those jurisdictions from collecting passenger data seemed to be very strange. We all know how much information we share with air carriers. They are obliged to collect that information because of other instruments that have been put in place.”
“As good as we are here and inasmuch as we have made progress, there is so much more to do to recognise the equality of those families and to ensure they can enjoy life just as much as those families who are “normal”, as the law says.”
“That creates all kinds of problems for the children in relation to the other parent in terms of inheritance. Beyond that, for things like sending notes into school, approving medical appointments or vaccines and all the normal things that parents do with their children, many parents in the LGBTQ+ families in our society, who are the same as the rest of us and have the same love for their children and express the same responsibility, are prohibited, through a lack of action in this Chamber and by the Government, from being fully participative parents because we have not moved in the way we should have moved. We have not moved with the times.”
“Again, however, let us not clap ourselves on the back too much because in this jurisdiction there is still not equality, particularly for families that fall outside the norm, as it is seen by the law here. The majority of children within families from the LGBTQ+ community, that part of our society, are prevented from having a legal relationship with one parent. I have raised this issue in the Chamber before. We made progress in May 2020 when the Children and Family Relationships Act was brought into law. It is a step in the right direction, but only a small number of children benefited from that. There are still many families that exist outside the parameters of that legislation, and only one parent is deemed to be the birth or biological parent.”
“It is about recognising that people are people and should have equal opportunity to enjoy their lives as they see fit. Even in this country, however, we know that Pride was affected by decisions made in Washington DC of all places. There was a chilling effect at a corporate level for sponsorship of Pride parades. Dungarvan Pride, as the Minister of State will know, was cancelled as a result of that kind of thing. We know that many people pulled out of it because companies were afraid there would be repercussions from the Administration in Washington. How shameful is that, both for people who were afraid of doing something that is positive in every respect and for the Government in the United States that seems to have forced them to do it?”
“When I talk about Pride, I also congratulate those people in Ireland who have consistently worked in this area. I have worked with many of them, but the reality is that there has been a chilling effect for those people involved in Pride. It has not necessarily come from within this country, but look at what happened in Hungary, within the European Union, and the decisions made by Victor Orbán's Government to suppress people involved in the Pride movement. I am delighted to see that people proceeded with that Pride march and that it was the best attended and the most supported one ever in Hungary, as I understand it. The power of people that comes behind that is hugely important because that is what this is all about. It is about people.”
“Some people decided after the fact that, actually, we have gone too far and should start to undo things, or we have gone far enough and should not do any more. Both views are wrong, from my perspective. I think, for example, of the hate speech legislation that we tried to introduce in the last session. It was shot down by people who opposed it for entirely spurious reasons, in my view. In fact, in this Chamber, I think last week, I had a disagreement with a Member about an aspect of that and the misrepresentation of the notion that within hate speech we are saying that everybody deserves certainly the right to free speech but also to express the responsibility that comes with free speech, that you do not use it to put upon other people or to do down other people or incite hatred against them.”