Colm Brophy
Dublin South-West · Fine Gael · Ireland
“The Minister has outlined very clearly our intention in relation to this matter. We have always been very clear that the ARP would be a temporary provision. It was introduced in 2022 as a response to a crisis, always with the view that it would be phased out. That remains the case.”
“It is important to look at the ARP in the context of what is happening here. We are reducing the payment back to the original rate in order to fulfil the original intention. We thank the people for the generosity they showed in opening their homes to Ukrainians who came to live with us here in Ireland.”
“It is important, as the Minister has mentioned, to recognise and thank all of the people who participated in the scheme, and to recognise the work of the Irish Red Cross and the many people who have made the scheme a success. We recognise that there are difficulties with schemes, and that is why this one has been under constant review.”
“What we want to work towards is a solution which recognises that contribution and which examines how, in the longer term, we can work with the Ukrainian people in our country and with the Government of Ukraine in order to ensure that a pathway exists for them to either continue to live here or, if they so choose, to return home.”
“lreland ratified the convention on International Women's Day, 8 March 2019. Zero Tolerance: Third National Strategy on Domestic, Sexual and Gender-Based Violence 2022-2026 is structured around the four pillars of the convention, namely, prevention, protection, prosecution and policy co-ordination.”
“Some of the treaty provisions relate to the justice sphere and, therefore, Title V of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. In light of Ireland’s position under Protocol 21, the court determined that two decisions were necessary, one to cover areas coming within scope of Protocol 21 where an opt-in is required and another t…”
The complete record
Every one of 783 lines we hold for Colm Brophy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 16.
“The matters to be included in the screening form under section 31 are intended to align with the screening form provided in article 17 of the screening regulation. While it is not my intention to deviate significantly from the contents of the form as provided for in that article, the Deputy will note that there is a regulation-making power that enables the Minister to prescribe additional categories of information. I will keep the categories of information under review in light of the operational experience. The purpose of amendment No. 83 appears to be to provide that an additional applicant can be considered in the accelerated examination procedure if the preliminary health assessment and preliminary vulnerability assessment are not carried out.”
“29 is to remove the possibility that a person arrested under section 24(2) could be detained in a screening centre. For operational purposes it may be necessary for such a person to be detained in the screening centre while their identity is being verified. I remind Deputies the allowing of such detention is intended to be short term in nature until the applicant's identity is verified and in any event may not exceed two days. For that reason, I do not propose to accept amendment No. 29. I do not propose to accept amendment No. 79 because the entries into the screening form are standard across all member states. This is so relevant authorities can share the information regarding persons who have made previous international protection applications in the European Union before arriving in the State.”
“This provision only applies to international protection applicants and not to persons registered under the Immigration Act. Therefore, I do not intend to accept this amendment. Amendment No. 27 seeks to remove the possibility that person given a direction under section 22(5) may be arrested and detained. I point out that these cases involve persons who may constitute a threat to public order, national security or both. It is important we have the possibility to identify such persons from the outset. It may be necessary to be able to arrest and detain such persons as a last resort for the purposes of verifying their identity. This is part of a coherent and well-functioning international protection system and, as such, I am unable to accept amendment No. 27. It appears that the purpose of amendment No.”
“There will be a process. We have a refugee process as well and we have people who come here to work. All of them remain. It is very wrong to portray what is being done here in a particular way when what is actually being done is a process of reform. Amendment No. 21 proposes to delete section 22(5). That subsection provides that a member of An Garda Síochána, an immigration officer or an officer of the Minister may direct an applicant who holds a valid registration certificate under section 9(4)(a) of the Immigration Act 2004, or a minor exempt from registering under that section, to travel to a screening centre where it is in the interests of the public policy or national security. This is a necessary provision for ensuring that all international protection applicants undergo screening in those circumstances.”
“I propose to take amendments Nos. 21, 27, 29, 79 and 83 together and I will reply to each one. I just want to say, though, before I begin that reply to each individual one, that I am a true believer in democracy. It is very important that we respect democracy and democratic outcomes. We have a Government, and this Government is committed to reform. That is what this legislation is about. I believe it is important to acknowledge that we are trying to reform a system that needs reform. At the end of that process there will still be international protection. There will still be a process that allows for people to come to our country.”
“I will rely on a rate card that is delivering millions in savings to us in this area. It is delivering value for money, which we wanted to see, and I believe it is working for us. I will stand over the fact that there is transparency in the payments that are being made. We will not agree, I am sure, but that is the case.”
“The purpose of having a rate card and delivering those savings, which are in the millions of euro, while having a transparent process under which payments of over €20,000 are recorded is to have a system where people can see what has been paid and we have an ability to negotiate and deliver the best value for money for the taxpayer. When every contract comes up, and there are 147 of them so far since the summer of last year, it goes through a process that appraises it and looks to deliver the best value for money and, obviously, all the quality assurance standards we want. That is the best way of doing it. I do not agree with the Deputy's analysis of how it should be done, so I cannot accept the amendment.”
“We are obviously not accepting this amendment. I do not know if Sinn Féin fell asleep in 2024 but its members have gone assiduously out of their way - I know they would not do so deliberately - not to mention the new rate card introduced in May 2025 or acknowledge that this rate card is delivering €83 million in savings to the State. It has been applied across 147 centres and the process of putting in place these contracts has been overhauled. The State's objective is always to ensure we have a robust system that delivers value for money when we are signing these new contracts, ensures centres are inspected and properly regulated, and has transparency built in with payments over €20,000 fully recorded. The value of a rate card system is that it allows the best deal to be struck.”
“We are legislating to put in place what the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and I believe is a complete overhaul of our system and what we need going forward. As other contributors have said, this is not just for the now, but for the future. That is very important. On a number of occasions, I have addressed comments on the fact that we have a strong ongoing relationship with the UK at a political and official level, and at a relationship level between An Garda Síochána and the policing authorities in the UK. All of that relates to ensuring the proper and effective running of the common travel area.”
“A huge amount of work has gone into this Bill for the purpose of examining the range of issues Deputies are mentioning to ensure from the Government's point of view we are bringing forward the strongest set of legislative proposals we can, taking account of the advice we have received. The Bill is designed to succeed in trying to address all the issues Members across the House want to see us address in terms of international protection, how we regulate it and how manage it. I am very confident this Bill can do that for us.”
“As I have mentioned in relation to this - and I appreciate the Deputy has too - this will be examined in terms of the UK prior to commencement and it can be done by ministerial action. It is our intention to look at this after the enactment of the Bill.”
“I hear clearly what the Deputy is saying. However, I will reiterate what I said in my initial reply to him. Areas like this are looked at very carefully. Advice is sought from the Attorney General. There is clear advice on what we are doing. Therefore, I am not in a position at this point to accept the Deputy’s amendment.”
“The measures under the pact do not require the independence of officers who will be performing the functions of the Minister. It is for this reason I do not propose to accept the amendment. By the way, the arrangements have been subject to very careful consideration by the Office of the Attorney General to ensure we are satisfied that this process is in place and correct.”
“Under section 74 of the International Protection Act 2015, the International Protection Office is independent in the performance of its function. Officers, in considering international protection applications at first instance, make recommendations to the Minister on the applications, but they do not make decisions. This provision was necessary at the time when the Act was drafted to allow the International Protection Appeals Tribunal to set aside a first instance recommendation and issue a fresh recommendation to the Minister. The ministerial decision unit in the IPO would then issue the final decision. Under the timelines of the pact and Bill, this system of recommendations is no longer feasible. The Minister is the determining authority who will be responsible for issuing first-instance decisions.”
“My understanding is that, as part of this, there will be the deeming of countries to be safe third countries. The procedure in the new Bill is intended to be more efficient, with specific timeframes set out for the different parts of the process. The question of the UK being a safe third country will be looked at after the Bill has gone through.”
“I move amendment No. 12: In page 23, lines 33 and 34, to delete " 174(1) or 174(5) " and substitute " 174(1) , 174(5) , 176 or 193 ". I propose to take Amendments Nos. 12, 137, 138, 140, 144, 155, 159, 167, 194, 197, 221 to 224, inclusive, 245 to 247, inclusive, 255, 263, 266, 267 and 269 together. They are technical and drafting amendments providing clarity and correcting errors in the text.”
“It is important to note the overall numbers coming in year on year are going down. That is very important and it is the result of a range of measures - some I will accept before the Deputy says it are international and some are directly as a result of the actions taken by myself, the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan and this Government in terms of dealing with the inward flow of migration into the country. That is a very important thing to recognise when we are having this discussion. It is obviously important for us to recognise also that that deep co-operation between the United Kingdom and Ireland at all levels contributes to managing the common travel area. This legislation will enable us to continue to manage effectively what we need to do on the international protection side.”
“What we are doing with the International Protection Bill is putting in place structures that will serve us in the best interests of the overall management of how we handle this as an issue for our country, decided by us in this Parliament.”
“It is important to recognise there is ongoing co-operation in terms of the management of the common travel area. It is extensive co-operation, as I said in my initial reply. That is at official, political and operational level between An Garda Síochána and the police services of the United Kingdom. All of that is effectively ongoing and continues to be strengthened and deepened in terms of how we actually deal with managing that common travel area. We want to have a common travel area. Every Government of every persuasion has wanted to have a common travel area with the United Kingdom. It is important it is managed effectively.”
“This includes joint operational co-operation, as well as information sharing between the Garda, the UK Border Force, the UK policing service and the Police Service of Northern Ireland. This strong and practical engagement and co-operation serves the mutual interests of Ireland and the United Kingdom and that will continue. The protection of an open Border on the island of Ireland was and remains a key priority to the communities on both sides of the Border. I do not believe it would be necessary or, indeed, appropriate to place requirements for consideration of the impacts of the common travel area on a statutory footing.”
“Ireland and the United Kingdom share a very long history and a common interest in effective co-operation on the common travel area. Maintaining the integrity of the common travel area and preventing its abuse in the context of immigration is an issue on which I, the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, and our officials have had many engagements with our UK counterparts. My Department is taking all necessary steps to manage the international protection process efficiently and effectively, while ensuring the integrity of those processes is maintained at all times. There is extensive engagement and co-operation at all levels between my Department and the United Kingdom Home Office.”
“This amendment also attempts to reframe the aspects of the separation of powers already defined in the Constitution. With respect to the House, it is well established that the executive authority of the State to determine policy in respect of migration is vested under the Constitution in the Executive branch. The Oireachtas is entitled to exercise its constitutional function to legislate. However, to allocate policy function solely to the Oireachtas might, for example, limit the Minister's authority to determine the policy relating to the granting of visas or other immigration permissions in the State. For the above reasons, I cannot accept amendments Nos. 2 and 3. I also do not propose to accept amendment No. 4.”
“Ireland participated in the first phase of the common European asylum system, opting into several EU measures in the first years of this century, some of which were the forerunners of the measures in the migration and asylum pact which are being given further effect by this Bill. Article 29.4.7° of the Constitution provides that the State may exercise the options or discretions under Protocol 21, but any such exercise should be subject to the prior approval of both Houses of the Oireachtas. The decision to opt in and be bound by the migration and asylum pact measures was approved by this House and the Seanad - the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, has said this to Deputy Carthy many times - on the basis of the proposal of the Government pursuant to Protocol 21 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.”
“Certain things can be done on a common European basis, and should be. As I said on Second Stage, and as the Minister has said, migration and asylum have given rise to challenges not only for Ireland but across the European Union. They are shared challenges which are increasingly difficult for any one country to deal with acting alone in a global and independent world. We have seen very close to home how difficult it can be when a country decides to think it can deal with this on its own. That is why the shared solution is the best way forward. Ireland's participation in international agreements and EU measures in the area of international production is not new. Ireland ratified the 1951 convention relating to the status of refugees in 1956 and acceded to the 1967 protocol in 1968. The Dublin Convention was agreed in 1990.”
“The Bill does not and could not in any meaningfully way do what Article 5 of the Constitution states, which is that "Ireland is a sovereign, independent, democratic state". Article 6 is clear as to where the sovereignty power of the State resides, namely, with the people. At the same time, the Constitution also provides for Ireland to be a member state of the European Union and to participate in addressing shared challenges with co-ordinated solutions. That is the important thing. What Europe is all about, in case the Sinn Féin Deputies have missed it, is shared challenges. This co-operation with our fellow member states was clearly approved by the people when they voted in referendums for the inclusion of references to the various European treaties in Article 29 of the Constitution.”
“I do not propose to accept amendments Nos. 2 and 3. I will go into that in detail but it is important to make a point at the very start. If a party is anti-EU, and Sinn Féin is, in my opinion, with platitudes to the left and the right of what it may or may not want to say about it, its members would be far more honest to come in here and say that. On every occasion when I listen to its members speak - they come in and their line writers have given them whatever cliché to say for the day - it is always anti-EU. That is really the importance of what the last contributor said about that sovereignty argument and how not working with our EU partners can really damage us in this area. That needed to be said.”
“We believe a two-year period in allowing for family reunification and someone being able to clearly show they can support and sustain people coming into the country to join them is not only fair to the person wishing to do so but to the Irish communities and the people who are living here. I thank all of the Deputies for their contributions. It has been very informative to listen to so many views in relation to this. I look forward to continuing to work with the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, on it.”
“We are saying that if a person comes here and is granted the right to remain, not only does he or she have the right to look for family unification after a period of time, but must have the ability to sustain people coming into the country because we have to be reasonable in terms of what this country can actually do. We need to make sure there is a balance between people being able to reunify with their family and the costs involved in that to the State. It is not something we can ignore or pretend to wish away. It is a real choice and cost. We are determined to strike what we believe is the correct balance around fairness in that.”
“The majority of Irish people want to see the type of system we are talking about, namely a firm, fair and effective rules-based system that enables people to come in and that grants them the right to remain in this country and contribute to it if they can make their case in that regard. If that does not happen, they will have to go. I do not think there is anything hard, wrong or in any way inappropriate about having that type of policy. That is what the Bill is about at heart. I echo what my colleague the Minister said. There are choices that have to be made and there are choices people will say are too harsh. I do not believe that. I believe it is a balance of fairness. What we are saying on family unification is really important.”
“We recognise that we had a crisis whereby the numbers went so exponentially high that the State had to respond fast. The purpose of the response by the State was for humanitarian reasons, namely that we wanted to be able to offer people accommodation and shelter when they arrived so that we could process their claims. We now want to address the key issues around how we can do that in a much more effective way. We will not let ideology impact on us. I am going to respect what I believe are the genuinely held views of Irish people, regardless of whether they have the luxury of sitting in this seat or on a bar stool, when it comes to migration.”
“If we pass the Bill, we will put in place something that most people in this House want, namely a system that will reduce the waiting time to 12 weeks. As a result, there will be a system that will be much fairer for applicants and for people already living in communities in Ireland because it will be less onerous due to the fact that people will be processed more quickly. It will answer the questions raised by the Deputy across the way about why and how we will get out of the situation which none of us want of having hotels around the country being used for IPAS. The Minister and I are quite clear. We want to move to a much more effective State-owned system which we believe is the best way to go. We are in government and do not have the luxury of standing up to complain.”
“I thank all Deputies for their contributions. I sit and listen and sometimes wonder if there is type of parallel world here. The purpose of the Bill brought forward by the Minister and me is to reform the IPAS system in order that we will have a firm, fair and effective system. I listened to Deputies one minute welcome that and the, particularly in the case of Sinn Féin, which is a bit ludicrous, stated for purely anti-EU ideological reasons that they could not agree to it. I remind Sinn Féin that we are part of the European Union. We are an integral part of it. We have the ability, as a sovereign state, to do what we need to do and we have the ability, working in conjunction with the European partners, to be able to develop and implement far more effective systems. That is the important part.”
“This includes co-ordination with the Department of Education and Youth, ongoing work to provide prevention, consent and healthy relationships education through our schools and other youth settings and the implementation of the framework for ending sexual violence and harassment in higher education. I reiterate that I am committed to keeping all legislation under review, as is the Minister. Technology is evolving rapidly, and criminal law must keep up. I have made it clear in the many contributions that I have made on this topic that one of the problems that we face in democracies is trying to keep pace with the speed at which things change. The ability of companies to instigate and commercialise products is effectively faster than most democracies can respond to them through legislation. What we are doing here this evening is important.”
“I reiterate that the harmful digital practices being debated disproportionately target women and children. So many of the contributors tonight made that point and it should be made by everybody who speaks on this matter. In such circumstances, the zero-tolerance strategy on domestic, sexual and gender-based violence is extremely relevant. Cuan is engaging with partners and stakeholders on research relating to the harmful effects of violent pornography and its links to violence against women and children in order to develop an evidence-based pornography literacy strategy spanning public awareness and education.”
“The EU AI Act complements the protections provided for in the Digital Services Act, by introducing stronger governance for AI that is developed or deployed within the European Union. These provisions will introduce transparency requirements such that AI-generated images must be clearly labelled, as has been mentioned, as being made by AI. The Government is in the process of implementing domestic legislation to give full effect to the EU AI Act in Ireland. The main supervision and enforcement provisions will come into effect in August, as the Minister mentioned. These provide a formal regulatory mechanism for relevant surveillance authorities to engage with individual companies specifically on the development, provision and deployment of AI systems.”
“As the Minister, and indeed the previous Deputy, indicated, a momentum is being developed to prohibit at European level the types of AI systems that enable the generation of child sexual abuse material and non-consensual intimate content of people. It is important that we drive this at EU level because we need to drive it at that scale. A significant body of existing legislation provides the foundation of Ireland's online safety framework, including the regulation of social media. Coimisiún na Meán, as Ireland's online safety media regulator, is at the heart of that framework. Under the framework, it is for the regulated platforms to demonstrate they have the correct safety measures in place to prevent illegal or harmful content being shown.”
“I thank Deputies Devine and Carthy for raising this issue. I also extend my appreciation to all the other speakers who contributed to the debate this evening. It was interesting to listen to so many points on which there was broad agreement in this House. It is not that usual to hear that. As mentioned, online safety is a priority for the Government and the Minister, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, and I have it at the heart of what we believe is important in what we are doing. It will also be a priority during our EU Presidency. The European Commission has a key role to play in this area. It is important to ensure we work together with other member states.”
“I will convey directly to the Minister and the Minister of State - I know the Senator will because she engaged with the Minister on this - that invitation to go and see at first hand. As the Senator said, she is a Minister who likes to engage on this. The HSE is reviewing the site. That is subject to that study being completed. The study will include considerations for the equine therapy centre, as the Senator mentioned. That is a very important thing that they do. I will convey the Senator's remarks to the Minister. I thank her.”
“The works are also addressing essential structural issues, for example, works on the roof, and upgrades to mechanical and electrical installations.”
“These are: national counselling services, mental health services, quality and risk, paediatric outpatients, HR and administration support. In addition, a building at Toghermore campus has been temporarily licensed by the HSE to the Office of Public Works for the use of the Office of the Director of Authorised Intervention, Tuam. The Office of the Director of Authorised Intervention, Tuam, is a time-bound agency under the auspices of the Department overseeing the excavation, recovery, analysis, identification and dignified reburial of remains located at the former mother and baby institution in Tuam. The OPW is currently undertaking refurbishment works to fit out the building on the HSE Toghermore campus to meet the requirements of the Office of the Director of Authorised Intervention.”
“The HSE has additionally advised the Minister of State that it aims to have a specialist appointed in February 2026 to commence the study and will encompass the entire campus, including the building. Development of infrastructural proposals, which the Senator talked about so elegantly, cannot be progressed until this review has concluded. The HSE is engaging with Galway County Council. A meeting was held between Ms Ann Cosgrove, the integrated healthcare area manager, and Mr. Liam Hanrahan, CEO of Galway County Council, on 4 June 2025. I am informed that a follow-up meeting was held between the HSE and the county council and that another meeting is planned by the parties in the coming days before the end of this month. At present, the HSE continues to utilise facilities on the grounds of Toghermore House for a number of services.”
“I thank Senator Rabbitte on behalf of myself and the Minister of State, Deputy Higgins, for raising this issue. I know it is an issue the Senator is committed to and she has made a clear and strong advocacy there. The Minister of State is fully committed to providing the necessary supports for people with disabilities throughout the country, including those in Galway. She wishes to advise the Deputy that the Toghermore House site in Tuam, which is owned and operated by the HSE, is under review. The Senator was asking for an update, so I hope this covers it for her. In 2024, a HSE feasibility study was conducted and, following on from this work, a more in-depth health planning study was devised to provide greater detail.”
“The Senator made the point very elegantly about the benefits it would bring to a community. I reaffirm on behalf of the Minister of State, Deputy Higgins, her absolute commitment in terms of providing supports in this area. An announcement is coming soon in relation to the new centres, which was part of the independent process of evaluation of all applicants. I wish all of the people the best of luck in that announcement process.”
“It is important to note that many of the Tusla-funded family support counselling services providers are family resource centres. The centres offer valuable counselling and therapeutic services at no to low cost in their communities. Many family resource centres also benefit from additional funding that has been secured by the Department over the last few years, which was formally allocated as part of the dormant funds. This funding is for counselling, psychotherapy and therapeutic services for children and young people. It helps to address unmet need and reduce waiting lists for community-based counselling services. A comprehensive national application and assessment process was undertaken to determine the new family resource centre programme members.”
“The expansion follows the increase in the membership of the programme in 2025 by five members, where funding was secured as part of budget 2025 measures. This was the first such expansion since 2018. A further equalisation scheme for the family resource centre programme was initiated by the Department in 2024. The scheme ensured that all family resource centre programme members received minimum core funding of at least €160,000 from 2025 onwards. In addition to budget 2026 measures providing for ten additional members, the measures have also enabled an increase in the minimum core funding for all programme members to €180,000 from 2026 onwards. The ten new members of the family resource centre programme will also receive this core funding component.”
“I thank the Senator for raising this important issue and giving me an opportunity to respond on behalf of the Minister. The forthcoming expansion of the family resource centre programme is the latest in a number of very positive developments for the programme over the past few years. There is a programme for a Government commitment to work to increase funding and expand the capacity and network of family resource centres. Budget 2026 honours the commitment, with funding secured for a further ten family resource centres. This will bring the family resource centre programme membership up to 136. While I cannot comment on any specific organisation, I understand that these ten additional family resource centres are due to be announced in the very near future.”
“I acknowledge what I know is the Senator's tremendous contribution to Limerick and to the redevelopment project within it. It is a city we both know. Her work as a public representative in the area is vitally important and is fully acknowledged. It is also important to acknowledge, as she mentioned, the funding that has gone in from the Office of Public Works for the regeneration work that is taking place right across the board within Limerick. Obviously, there are additional areas I am sure the Senator will explore on behalf of her constituents to try to seek additional funding in this regard. I will convey the strength of her feeling and remarks to the Minister in relation to this.”
“However, there is obviously still a significant shortfall of funding to ensure completion of the project. The current libraries capital programme for 2023 to 2027 is investing €22.6 million in 11 state-of-the-art infrastructure projects and a further €2.6 million in 12 next-generation mobile library vehicles. The programme is fully committed and there is no scope to provide any additional further capital commitment in respect of the project.”
“I am advised the project was included in the multi-sectoral submission from Limerick City and County Council to the national development plan review process in May 2025, where the council sought funding of €50 million for the library element of the Opera Square development, which the Senator mentioned in her contribution. However, I note that there is no specific reference to the project in the national development plan review published by Government in July 2025. The Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage has confirmed that urban regeneration and development funding of €41.9 million has been allocated to the overall Opera Square site development project, with €5.9 million being allocated to project 4, which includes the library.”
“That application was unsuccessful as the maximum grant available at that time was €3 million per library project approved. The application sought funding support from the Exchequer of €37 million, with the council proposing to provide matching funds of €12.4 million. The Senator will appreciate that Limerick City and County Council is fully cognisant of the €2 million funding allocation for Limerick city library under the library capital programme throughout all project stages, and it would not be possible to provide any further funding capital in respect of this project due to the limited funds in the library project.”