Eoin Hayes
Dublin Bay South · Social Democrats · Ireland
“As this is my final time speaking, I thank the Ceann Comhairle and all of the staff in the Oireachtas, including the ushers in particular who take such good care of us and everybody who makes this place work so well, for all that they have done. I hope that they get a good and well-deserved break.”
“It seems only proper that this new united social protection system would do the following from a principled way: establish a shared prosperity and proper social protection supports to underpin a properly functioning economy and society; ensure that no individual is worse off in a united Ireland than they were under partition; and ensure t…”
“In a united Ireland, the Six Counties' economic future should be a prosperous one, and in that it has to be properly supported and transformed.”
“There are challenges in these principles, challenges of politics and reconciliation most of all, but there are practical considerations as well.”
“While the project of integrating these systems will be significant, it is imperative that we take the opportunities to create a better life for all, North and South, where people do not just survive but are given the means to thrive and contribute, and where a system of public services supports that.”
“In that vision, we will have to give people in the Twenty-six Counties and in the six the confidence that a united Ireland will work for all against poverty, unemployment and deprivation, and that we will challenge these scourges that are felt regardless of community or background, for poverty has no religion, unemployment no flag and exc…”
The complete record
Every one of 346 lines we hold for Eoin Hayes, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 7.
“I cannot tell the Minister how many times I have marched in the streets protesting about housing. I have done it against what feels like every single one of the Minister's predecessors. A huge reason I have been so frustrated with Government parties and why I joined the Social Democrats was the utter failure in housing for my generation over multiple governments. Today, years after I first started political activism in protesting on housing, I find myself in this Chamber as a private sector rental tenant with the unique opportunity to tell the Minister exactly what is wrong with housing in Ireland and how his proposed legislation runs the severe risk of making it worse. First, some facts and figures. About 30% of the population in this country rent. In my own constituency, where we are standing right now, about 50% of people rent.”
“Most recently, the flooding this week in Dartry, Milltown and Ballsbridge from the bursting of the banks of the Dodder even after most of a flood-alleviation scheme has been implemented gives me great cause for concern over our capacity to plan and act for our climate century. At the core of this dysfunction seems poor political stewardship, poor political will, and a lack of decisive action and good public administration from the very top, from this Government and every government preceding it. While I cautiously welcome the Government taking infrastructure development seriously and bringing this plan forward, I fear it may be the same old rigmarole - reports, committees, speeches like this one, commitments and ideas without the proper governmental leadership that developing our country demands. I hope the Government does better.”
“Despite the DART, there are real infrastructure deficits in my constituency that have gone on for far too long. A Luas extension has been postponed in Poolbeg, in an area already choked by traffic every day while construction at the Irish Glass Bottle site for a population of a small town goes ahead nearby. There is regular dumping of sewage into Dublin Bay at Sandymount, making the water unswimmable and creating a direct threat to public health every summer. In Harold's Cross, Terenure, Rathgar and Rathmines there are no Luas lines or rail lines even though, as my constituents often remind me, there were trams there 100 years ago. The latest incarnation of the national development plan mentioned developing rail in this area exactly zero times.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak about infrastructure in the House and that the Government has made time for this debate. This was a huge issue during the general election. It came up at door after door in my constituency. I will start with a history lesson. Between 1831 and 1834, within three years of the idea being mooted, the world’s first commuter train line was built between Westland Row and Dún Laoghaire. Running through my constituency, it cost between €6 million and €7 million per kilometre in today’s terms. At the time, it was considered grossly expensive. Today, it is known as the DART. By comparison, the MetroLink is expected to cost between €300 million and €400 million per kilometre, making it nearly 50 times more expensive, and take much longer to complete.”
“Did people really vote for a Fianna Fáil that leaves disabled people in poverty and cuts their incomes? Is that really the character of our country? Somehow, knowing many voters, I think not. I think I know the great character of the great people of this country and think they would be ashamed of how the Government will vote tonight. The Government should be ashamed too.”
“I ask it to consider its great privilege in holding the purse strings of this country and passing the laws that direct where they are loosened, and, perhaps, to consider that this great privilege carries a responsibility to those who are vulnerable outside this Chamber and that there is no better example of these people than those with disabilities. Is the Government so distrustful of the Opposition that even when it tables constructive motions – motions aligned with the programme for Government, motions that are fiscally sound and motions targeted at the most vulnerable – it will not relent? Has Irish politics come to leaving disabled people impoverished, because it was not the Government’s idea? What does the Dáil do with that reality? What does the electorate do with that reality?”
“I am referring to those in arrears on their electricity bills, those who scour supermarket shelves for the best deals on food, those who in record numbers have sought help from the Society of St.Vincent de Paul to meet their basic needs, and others. I am so conscious that there are too many in this country who do without and who are not given the immense privilege that I and everyone else in this House have been granted. That is frightening but it is not alarmist, dangerous or misleading, unless the Minister wants to accuse the Society of St. Vincent de Paul of being misleading. I am referring to the reality on the ground. It is the reality this Government has designed. I find it hard to wrap my head around the fact that the Government’s answer to this motion is "No".”
“Government is not easy in any country and I do not doubt the sincerity or good intentions of anyone in this House who comes in every day to work on behalf of his or her constituents, but surely it does not sit well with anyone here, in government or opposition, that those outside this House in poverty and deprivation are reliant on the very privileged few who sit here dry and warm. There is an enormous privilege associated with debating motions like this one and voting on the laws that govern our country. There is also an enormous responsibility. Hundreds of thousands of people are struggling with the choice between heat and food, and between their children’s needs and their own.”
“It raises the question as to when the Government will respond to the urgent needs of disabled people. How many briefings for TDs must be held? How many committee rooms must be filled with ordinary people forced to ask for help? How many motions, votes or speeches are needed? What will it take to break through the callousness of a Government that would leave disabled people cold, hungry and impoverished? What should I tell them about their Government? What defence is there for neglect?”
“I thank all the Deputies who spoke in support of this motion and also those who did not speak but who I know support it. Regardless, I am very disappointed by the Government’s response. I know I am not alone and that I speak for tens of thousands of disabled people when I say it is a great shame that the Government has not sought to support them adequately this winter. The Minister spoke of a supplementary welfare scheme totalling 3,000 recipients in 2025. This motion affects ten times that number, namely 310,000, so the Government should do better. This is my first Private Members’ motion in this House, having watched many others. I was not hopeful that the Government would relent on an Opposition motion. I was disappointed by its response but not surprised.”
“I ask him to at least give them his honesty if he cannot give them his support, and I ask him to look them in the eye as he does so. Some of them are here in the Gallery and they are watching. To those of you at home watching, perhaps with one rung of the heater on instead of two, I want you to know that the Social Democrats knows you are there. We see you, we hear you and we share your anger. We are fighting for you, even if this Government is not. I commend the motion to the House.”
“We have even written the motion for him and designed the scheme. All he has to do is say yes. Should he say no, however, I have a request. It is not good enough to just read from the sheet prepared by his officials or collaborate with the Government Whip on voting down or amending the motion. No, he must go further. I ask him not to visit upon the disabled people of this country a further indignity of not being honest with them as he does so. I ask him to at least have the courage to tell them that he will reduce their income and will not restore it this year. I ask him to at least tell them that he has no intention of honouring the commitment in the programme for Government on a cost-of-disability payment until he is at least 40% of the way through his term.”
“What he did not say is that the net change for people on disabilities payments was negative. Not only did he not keep up with the generalised rate of inflation or with energy costs, housing costs or food costs; he also failed to keep disabled people's incomes level with even the nominal levels that they were at last year. He actually reduced them. I know the Minister is a good man. He is doing his best. Quite frankly, however, a reduction in incomes for people with disabilities, especially during a cost-of-living crisis, is absolutely appalling and shocking. When I asked the Minister for a report on the cost-of-disability payment in committee, he responded by saying he did not like reports and would prefer to act. Well, here is the Minister's opportunity. He can act, and Fianna Fáil can act with him.”
“Last month many disabled people gathered in the cold and rain outside the gates of Leinster House to describe the brutality of this winter. I and many others in this House heard their stories: the woman who searches in her wheelchair from shop to shop to find the best deals for food; the man with the cane who sits in front of his electric heater and is now turning on only one heating rung instead of two; the mother with Parkinson's who had to take her child out of crèche because she had to choose between that and feeding her family; the young man choosing between heat and charging his electric wheelchair. The list goes on and on. During budget week, the Minister for Social Protection told this House that he had introduced payments that would keep up with inflation.”
“They are the cohort in Ireland with among the highest poverty rates and deprivation rates. The experiences of people with disabilities in services - transport, housing, access to care, financial support, accessibility, educational supports - illustrate the astonishing range with which the State manages to fail disabled people. Ireland's employability gap for people with disabilities, according to a 2022 OECD report, is the highest in the developed world, meaning that if you are disabled in Ireland, you are less likely than your peers to be employed than in any other developed country. What a damning indictment of successive Governments' policy. To add insult to injury, this Government chose in its most recent budget to strip people with disabilities of €1,400 in annual payments, according to the Disability Federation of Ireland.”
“I rise to introduce this motion, on behalf of my party, to introduce an emergency winter payment for people with disabilities, who are so badly in need of the support of this House. I thank the disability organisations - the Irish Wheelchair Association, the Disability Federation of Ireland and Access for All - and others for their leadership in this campaign and the opportunity to support them. I also thank my parliamentary party colleagues for their support and Deputy Liam Quaide, to my left, for his counsel and leadership and his work on disability policy. We bring this motion to describe the callousness of the Government and present it with an opportunity to correct its neglect. People with disabilities in Ireland face a cruel system and a crueller Government.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann: notes that: — disabled people in Ireland are among the most socially excluded and disadvantaged in the State, with some of the highest poverty, deprivation, and unemployment rates in Ireland; — one in five disabled people live in consistent poverty, nearly four times the national average, while nearly 40 per cent live in enforced deprivation; — in the context of escalating costs in energy, food and housing, disabled people are particularly vulnerable to cost pressures, especially as they are more likely to spend more of their time at home; — the State-commissioned Indecon Cost of Disability in Ireland - Research Report, published in 2021, estimated the extra cost of living with a disability to be in the range of €8,700 - €12,300 (€10,490 - €14,830 adjusted for inflation); — Budget 2026 reduced income for disabled people by an estimated €1,400 per year, according to the Disability Federation of Ireland; and — the Disability Federation of Ireland has called Budget 2026 a "devastating setback for disabled people… which leaves disabled people poorer, unsupported, and excluded"; further notes that: — the need for a cost of disability payment has been identified as far back as 2004, something which was reaffirmed by the Indecon report; — a 2022 Economic and Social Research Institute report entitled "Headline Poverty Target Reduction in Ireland and the Role of Work and Social Welfare" found working-age adults with disabilities experience "distinctively high rates of income poverty, deprivation and consistent poverty"; — the 2025 Programme for Government committed to the introduction of "a permanent annual Cost of Disability support payment with a view to incrementally increasing this payment"; — the Government has failed to deliver any such permanent payment, and instead delivered a Budget which cut the incomes of disabled people and left them worse off; and — as a result of the Government cutting their incomes, disabled people have been forced to make unconscionable decisions about how to live on more limited means, forgoing necessary levels of home heating, nutrition, and greatly reducing their mobility and independence; recognises that: — the Government repeatedly claims that it wants to target resources at those who need it most and an emergency winter payment for disabled people would do just that, meaning it is in line with purported Government budgetary policy; — disabled people need emergency financial support as they are experiencing an extremely challenging winter period, due to cost pressures associated both with their disabilities and seasonal costs, including energy, housing, and food costs; — an immediate emergency winter payment would serve as a vital support, which would protect against the increased risk to disabled people of falling into poverty and deprivation; and — an emergency €400 winter payment is affordable and fiscally sustainable, given the cost of the measure, €124 million, amounts to a small portion of the budget surplus last year, which was even larger than the Government forecasted; and calls on the Government to: — immediately (within a month of this motion being agreed) introduce an emergency winter payment of €400 to all qualified recipients of; — Disabilities Allowance; — Invalidity Pension; — Blind Pension; — Incapacity Supplement; — Disablement Pension; and — Domiciliary Care Allowance; and — immediately progress the introduction of a permanent cost of disability support payment, as promised in the Programme for Government, as a matter of urgency.”
“What is the Government’s policy on how long public agencies under its remit should take to bring vacant buildings like this one back into use?”
“A public building has been vacant in my constituency for several years. I would like to know what the Government is doing to rehabilitate vacancy across public agencies, with value for money at the core of that. In October 2025, I asked Transport Infrastructure Ireland about a 125 sq. m vacant kiosk at the Ranelagh Luas stop in Dublin 6, to which it replied the long-term use was still being considered and it had no timeline for that use. It confirmed to me last week that it was requesting €500,000 from the National Transport Authority to bring it back into use just two years after it was last operational, but the final use was yet to be confirmed. As one commentor on a Reddit thread remarked, it is mad that a little place like that in one of the richest suburbs in the country is vacant.”
“These costs are affecting everyone but this is the most vulnerable population in the State. They were vulnerable before the cost-of-living crisis. They will be vulnerable after the cost-of-living crisis. Importantly, I reject this question of it being a one-off payment. If the Minister intends to introduce a cost-of-disability payment, a payment in lieu of it through the Supplementary Estimates process would absolutely be within his gift and within the gift of Fianna Fáil.”
“I have been speaking to a lot of disabled people over the past few weeks about their experiences and on this question of a cost-of-disability payment, permanent or otherwise. Some of the stories they told me were that they were using only one heating bar on their electric heater rather two because they could not afford the cost of electricity, that they were going in for central dialysis in a hospital because they could not afford the energy costs of doing it at home thus increases the risk of hospitalisation and that they could not charge their electronic wheelchair. A wheelchair user was going to several shops to try to figure out where she could get the best deal for food. There is real anger and frustration at this drop of €1,400 that has been stripped from people with disabilities.”
“In particular, I am just conscious that the regulations that came in at the end of the year, just about a week before the launch of auto-enrolment, changed how employers dealt with the auto-enrolment question and how they were giving pension provision to employees. I would just like to hear from the Minister regarding the different small businesses or the spectrum of different employers that exists by number of employees.”
“To come back on those figures briefly, the Minister referred to just under 100,000 employers having signed up to the scheme and over 700,000 participants. This gives me a sense that the average number of employees per business that has signed up is about seven. I would like to get a sense of whether the Minister has an understanding of the spectrum of sizes of employers and the number of employees per employer that have signed up to the scheme. Is it disproportionately small businesses, for example, or retail and hospitality businesses? What has been the feedback from employers?”
“I would like to echo Deputy Murphy's call to reduce the time requirement for the wage subsidy scheme. The OECD published a report not too long ago saying that 10% of the working-age population had a disability and 25% of people with disabilities in 2019 were unemployed. It is the largest employability gap in the developed world and is higher than the United States or the United Kingdom. Dr. Mel Cousins from Trinity College said that income from employment would be the best way of tackling poverty for people with disabilities but, importantly, making sure that people do not lose employment would be the best way of tackling poverty for people with disabilities. One thing that is not mentioned too often in the wage subsidy scheme is that the number of employers that are availing of it has actually dropped over the last number of years.”
“Will the Government introduce an emergency €400 winter payment for disabled people and commit to introducing a permanent cost-of-disability payment in the new year?”
“Yesterday, the Taoiseach did not answer my party leader, Holly Cairns, on whether an emergency winter payment for people with disabilities would be provided. Instead, he said the Government wanted to embed permanent changes to payments, but it has not done that either. The Government has instead slashed the income of some of the most vulnerable people in this country by €1,400 before those permanent supports were ready. It has also plunged more disabled people into poverty to face a grim Christmas. They are already the cohort with among the highest deprivation and poverty rates in the country and among the lowest employment rates in the developed world. It is not too late to admit this was wrong and to do something about it, so I will ask again.”
“Local gentry are cosplaying as British aristocrats in an imported tradition that no Celt, Gael or Brit now engages in. The attempts to justify it as a form of pest control are ludicrous. Imagine the ridicule if Michael O'Leary and Dermot Desmond were to don loincloths and spears and go hunting for deer in the Phoenix Park and then justify it as pest control. It is so outrageous that it would be laughable if it were not the argument of the three big parties today. It is just wrong. It is wrong, wrong, wrong. The Social Democrats know what is wrong and what is right. The barbaric torture of animals is wrong. Upholding cruel colonial practices is wrong. Blood sports for the pleasure of the wealthy are wrong. Fox hunting is wrong and the parties and Deputies who vote against this Bill are wrong, too.”
“It is profoundly wrong to chase a defenceless animal to exhaustion and have it ripped apart by dogs and call that a sport. It is a barbaric and cruel practice that has no place in a modern society. It is a throwback to empire. It is a loathsome practice. Those are not my words. They are the words of backbenchers from Sinn Féin, Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil. Those words ring true and matter. They should be reflected in votes. Tonight, in an act of indifference or cruelty, it appears those backbenchers will come into this Chamber and cast their votes against restricting fox hunting and for barbarism. It is truly galling to see three parties founded against colonialism supporting a colonial practice such as this. Fox hunting is not just inhumane savagery. It is also one of the last cultural vestiges of that colonialism.”
“Let us be the best version of ourselves, the one that values and cares for dogs and other animals, one that prevents cruelty and does not tolerate it, one that corrects injustices and does not turn a blind eye, one that ensures that we live up the better angels of our nature, our humanity and the concert in which we live with all living beings. Let us make sure we make Ireland a great place for dogs.”
“This Bill is crucial in addressing human behaviour, ensuring we are good stewards of the animal kingdom and especially for those we call our best friends. At its core is also the question of how a society should behave. How we treat animals is how we will eventually treat our planet, our fellow human beings and, indeed, ourselves. It is the great false narrative that somehow animals are precluded from the rules that govern societies. That is not the case. There is a natural cycle of things, yes, and of how animals are predators and prey, eat and are eaten, are part of our domestication and are undomesticated. That natural cycle can be twisted to the cruel and inhumane. That is a reflection of us, of our humanity and our role in a planet we share with the animal kingdom and, ultimately, of who we become.”
“At the heart of this Bill is not a question about how dogs should be treated but, rather, how we, humans, must act with care not cruelty, with connection not exploitation, in harmony with animals rather than only seeking to profit off them. It should be known in this House that the psychology of those who harm animals and exploit them is often a precursor to more violent and exploitative actions against other humans. It has been very well documented across the psychiatric profession and in research that if one is cruel to small animals in particular, it is a leading indicator of cruelty, antisocial behaviour and disorders. In particular, cruelty towards dogs can often be a precursor to sociopathy.”
“It is often said that a dog is man's best friend. In Ireland, we are no different. Who of us do not remember the old stories of Cú Chulainn, who was named after the hound, or Fionn mac Cumhaill and Bran? There are nine Irish breeds of dog, the most famous being the wolfhound. We have a proud and long history in our mythology and society of a wonderful relationship with dogs. Unfortunately, we also have a history of cruelty to animals in this country. Less than six months goes by in any year, and we hear of some conviction, investigation or a tragic case of animal cruelty being uncovered. These disproportionately involve dogs. Dog farms are not the only area of animal cruelty. We see it in fox hunting, the treatment of greyhounds by unscrupulous people, dog fighting and the inhumane treatment of farm animals.”
“Is that the official policy of the Government? The numbers have doubled in a decade and the Government still wants them to move in with their parents. Youth unemployment among the highest it has ever been, if you strip out Covid and the recession. What is the official policy of the Government for housing for young people?”
“I was genuinely shocked and appalled by the video that was circulated by the Department of housing yesterday. It was drafted by a charity, as we know, but it was released on the Department of housing's official communication channels. It actually beggars belief that some bright spark in the Department of housing came up with releasing that video. Is it now official Department policy that young people should move in with their parents to have housing?”
“I thank the Minister. I genuinely welcome the clarity he will bring on the fees in the Cabinet memo next week. I also welcome the work he will be doing in regulating the allocation of funds for employees towards the right products. I would support him in bringing those regulations expeditiously, as reported in the media. I just do not agree that investment managers can be charged with the responsibilities here. This is employees' money. It is a State-mandated fund. The board has a responsibility here. I really do think that the Act is not sufficiently clear or explicit in that. I am quite disappointed that the Minister does not agree.”
“More typically, when we think about the investment management role of any organisation that is charged with managing funds on behalf of individuals, it is absolutely imperative that fiduciary responsibility is not implied or intended but is made explicit and is charged specifically to those who have the oversight and the role of ensuring that their funds are being managed appropriately. Saying that the investment managers - private pension funds - are going to do it is ridiculous. You need to have proper oversight and you need to ensure that the board is actually charged explicitly with that role. I am quite disappointed that the Minister does not agree.”
“I am disappointed at that response. I understand the logic the Minister has put forward and I accept that the Department is doing all that it can. However, I have very real concerns that the Department and the Minister are not sufficiently prepared for this launch date. As much as they have done a promotional campaign, there are equally some unscrupulous actors equally promoting themselves to divert employers from investing in this My Future Fund on behalf of employees to other funds. The Minister seems to have done absolutely nothing about it.”
“All of these issues lack sufficient clarity. They have been raised with the Minister and were flagged with the Business Committee last month for further discussion in this House. We still do not have clarity on any of them. It appears to me right now that the Minister is not prepared for the launch date on 1 January. This amendment goes some way towards ensuring the board is not as unprepared as he seems to be. I commend it to the House.”
“This gets to a broader point about the preparedness of the Government and of the structures put in place for the launch in just a few short weeks. I would argue we need clarity here about fiduciary responsibility but also more broadly about the board's other responsibilities. We still have not heard about the administration or management fees that we asked about in the Chamber last month. Will this be a board responsibility too, and when will we hear about it? Will it be the board's responsibility to ensure the integrity of the scheme if employers divert employees to less beneficial schemes for them? Will it be the responsibility of the board to provide financial literacy training to participants? Will it be the board's responsibility to craft annuity schemes for participants to purchase with their lump sums?”
“Given that the current structures are being progressed, and the Minister's insistence on the funds remaining those of individual participants, I am arguing we need an extra measure so that the board members understand the very weighty responsibilities contained in the nature of the work they are carrying out, which involves being entrusted with the financial health of millions of people's final years, and that their fiduciary duties are to those people as individuals and not to an aggregated, risk-assessed group, financial strategy or the financial health of a body corporate or State body. That is a first, as I said. As such, it is appropriate that such responsibilities be properly accounted for in the primary legislation.”
“On Committee Stage, the Minister was keen to stress that it is the individual participant's money. There is a need here for an added layer of fiduciary responsibility on board members which reflects that fact. I spoke, on Committee Stage, about the potential to structure this scheme around alternative, non-individuated pension vehicles.”
“That is why my amendment focuses on how the responsibilities of the board to participants in the scheme are elucidated in the Act, and establishing a clear and uncontestable fiduciary responsibility on the board members to act at all times in the interests of participants. Of course, it can be argued that the code of practice for the membership of State boards contains sufficient guidance on the responsibilities for board members, which I assume all members will be subject to. Clarity on that would be very welcome. The code, however, is not referenced in the Bill, which maintains only that fiduciary obligations exist between board members and State bodies. It does not refer to board members having direct responsibility for the management of funds that belong to individuals. This is a first.”
“While I wanted the representative aspect of such an appointment to be stronger and more direct in terms of appointing an additional person enrolled in the scheme, if the board is to be composed as is, it crucial that we set out very clearly what the responsibility of those members will be to the participants. As the Minister said in this House on 13 November, the funds entrusted to the My Future Fund will be those of the participants, namely the employees as opposed to the employers or the State. As the Minister stated on that date, "It is not the State's money but each individual's money". I think it prudent that responsibility for managing the money of the participants be made explicitly clear in legislation.”
“I do not doubt the credentials of anyone who has been appointed or, indeed, their ability to fulfil the functions as set out in the primary legislation for auto-enrolment. My contention on Committee Stage was that we ought to have a more direct relationship between the kind of representation at board level, the participants who have a financial interest in the performance of the My Future Fund and auto-enrolment scheme and the people who sit on the board. I accept that there is an individual on the board who will have knowledge of the interests of workers.”
“I move amendment No. 1: In page 11, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following: “(a) in section 10(2), by the insertion of the following paragraph after paragraph (b): “(c) act with fiduciary responsibility to the participants in the scheme in the discharge of its functions.”,”. This amendment follows on from our discussion on Committee Stage regarding board composition and the responsibilities and profiles of members who are still on the board of the national auto-enrolment scheme authority. The Minister said on Committee Stage that members who have recently been appointed to the board are very capable individuals and will serve with distinction. I agree wholeheartedly with that.”
“This means they will need to shut off their energy supply for a month next year or make ends meet and cut their budgets somewhere else. If they dip into the social welfare payments that were announced in the budget, it will mean they will spend nearly 50% of these budget increases on energy over the next year. This is despite the supposed increase in fuel allowance, which it turns out does not make a dent in these massive increased bills. They will still be €250 worse off. What is the Government's recommendation to this quarter of all households, to the grandmother, the disabled person or the carer in Kanturk? Should they shut off the heating for two months or spend less on Christmas presents this year? Should they go cold or should they go hungry? Should they believe the Government's spin or should they check their bank accounts?”
“Yet, at the same time, the energy companies have put up their prices to €1,877 per year on average, according to the figures released from the Minister of State's Department that were covered in the Irish Independent . I want to know where this leaves a typical pensioner, a typical person on disability allowance and a typical carer, who are all reliant on this fuel allowance increase. To be clear, more than 400,000 households are in receipt of the fuel allowance. This is approximately 25% of all households in this country. This is not a niche issue. It turns out that despite all the hot air from the Government and the weak efforts on fuel allowance, each of these people will be €250 worse off in the next 12 months than they were in the past 12 months.”
“I really like numbers. I look at numbers all the time. There are approximately 750,000 people who are about to go on auto-enrolment in January, approximately 1.5 million recipients of social protection payments and zero offshore wind farms in this country that are operational. A magic number I just discovered is minus €250. The reason I really like numbers is that they often bring clarity. Politics is too often the opposite of mathematics. It is often too much about obscurity and opaqueness; telling people we are doing one thing and then the Government doing the other. Therefore, I thought I would run some numbers and seek some clarity. In the most recent budget, there were no energy credits like there were last year but there were increases to the fuel allowance, which I welcome.”
“Will the Government commit to the establishment of citizens' assemblies, work towards cross-Border fora on health, economics and education and set out a positive vision?”
“The renewed calls for a border poll on reunification in recent months point to a definite direction of travel on the issue of a united Ireland and on that question moving from the realm of the idealistic to the practical. My party and I would welcome the opportunity to advocate for reunification and believe that a united Ireland achieved by truly informed communities North and South in a process defined by consent and deliberative consensus has the real potential to benefit the people of the entire island. However, I am concerned that as the chances of a border poll in the next ten or 15 years continue to rise to that of political inevitability, we are running out of time to ensure it takes place in such an environment.”