Helen McEntee
Meath East · Fine Gael · Ireland
“There are no new missions, so there is only so much we can partake in. In regard to UN requests over the past ten years, in September 2019, we had 14 Defence Forces personnel deployed to a UN mission in Mali as part of a joint operation with the German armed forces.”
“I thank the Deputy for his continued engagement on this matter. It is appreciated and I reaffirm our shared commitment to truth and justice, not least for Private Rooney, but in particular for his family.”
“I thank the Deputy for raising the matter. I know he is committed to this issue; I am too. I have in recent months spent some time travelling to different barracks and Army bases and meeting with personnel. What I see all over the country is their professionalism, dedication and commitment.”
“I disagree that people are being pushed into the courts. The situation is exactly the opposite. I have said in the Chamber many times since I started taking these questions that the State Claims Agency is there and wants to mediate and work directly with people in order that cases do not go directly to the courts.”
“We are all committed to strengthening recruitment to and supporting retention in the Permanent Defence Force. The military authorities have advised that the strength of the Permanent Defence Force stood at 7,823 personnel on 31 May, the most recent date for which we have a figure available.”
“It is the case that no mission is the same, so it is also a matter for the Defence Forces to assess and scope out the mission and then to decide whether it is a mission we can partake in. A question keeps being asked about what it is we would not be able to be a part of if we were to keep the triple lock.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,132 lines we hold for Helen McEntee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 31 of 43.
“Survivors want to know why child sexual abuse was so prevalent in some schools and contexts, why it happened and why it went on for so long. As a society, we need to understand the impact of child sexual abuse in schools, and crucially we need to learn for the future. I know that a common wish for many survivors is that they want to be sure that what they endured can never happen again. The commission will investigate matters of critical importance to survivors, as they so eloquently described to the scoping inquiry.”
“It will examine the causes and responsibilities for those failures, and it will have the power to compel witnesses and documents, which was a key concern for survivors who participated in the scoping inquiry. Schools, persons and entities responsible for and associated with schools, An Garda Síochána, the HSE and its predecessor and successor organisations, and the Department of education, will all fall within the ambit of the commission's terms of reference. While I expect voluntary co-operation from any group or entity that the commission wishes to engage with, and I note that the scoping inquiry reported that it had received positive engagement, I emphasise that such co-operation is required and enforceable.”
“Since the report was published, many others have come forward for the first time, whether to support agencies or to report what happened to them to An Garda Síochána. Through their harrowing accounts of their own experiences, the scoping inquiry participants have paved a path for so many others who may now choose to tell their stories to the commission. This commission will have a remit to examine the handling of sexual abuse in all types of schools. This was a wish expressed by many survivors, and one which I think we can all strongly support. It will investigate concerns of child sexual abuse and failures to treat such concerns in a manner that protected children.”
“The Government takes the appalling crime of child sexual abuse in schools with the utmost seriousness, and it is clear that the potential scale of this issue is quite significant. The establishment of the commission represents Government's commitment to a serious response, in which we seek to understand the past to inform the present, the here and now, and the future. The terms of reference of the commission have been prepared by the interdepartmental group and they closely reflect the recommendations of the scoping inquiry. Crucially, at every step, the work of the interdepartmental group was centrally informed by the views of survivors, expressed so powerfully in the scoping inquiry's extensive survivor engagement consultation process.”
“Participants' accounts of there being no place or sense of safety in their schools represents an egregious breach of trust from those responsible for running those schools. Some participants spoke of loss of community, faith, family and even country, as the aftermath of what they experienced trickled through every facet of their lives. Others spoke of the difficulty in telling anyone what had happened, and indeed a deep sense of shame and guilt. That shame and guilt does not belong to survivors. It belongs to those responsible for child sexual abuse in schools. What is clear from the scoping inquiry is that survivors want accountability. They deserve accountability. The establishment of this commission of investigation is the next step towards delivering that accountability.”
“The findings of the scoping inquiry were nothing short of devastating. These children and young people were sent to school, as thousands of children are every day, to get a better chance in life, improve their outcomes, make friends, socialise and learn. What some were met with within these school gates was beyond comprehension. The scoping inquiry's report sets out not just the devastating accounts of the sexual abuse that participants experienced as children, but the impact on their education, the loss of opportunity in school and the often life-long impact on relationships, employment and their sense of self. As it was said to me, children's childhood was taken away from them.”
“Several of those recommendations relate to the remit and operation of the commission of investigation. The Government has agreed to appoint Mr. Justice Michael MacGrath, an eminent judge of the Court of Appeal, as chair of the commission. Mr. Justice MacGrath brings considerable experience to this role. He was called to the Bar in 1984 and to the Inner Bar in 2000. He was appointed a judge of the High Court in January 2018, where he presided over civil cases. On the criminal side, he presided over trials in the Special Criminal Court and the Central Criminal Court between 2020 and 2024. He was appointed to the Court of Appeal in June 2024. I thank him for agreeing to carry out this important work. He will be assisted in this work by a number of commissioners and a support team.”
“It recommended that the commission should examine the handling of allegations and concerns of child sexual abuse in schools and that its remit should be broadened to include all schools. It recommended that the commission should include a survivor engagement programme and that it should take a survivor-centred and trauma-informed approach. The report of the scoping inquiry was published on 3 September 2024. A high-level interdepartmental group was immediately established to advise the Government on the recommendations of the scoping inquiry and to prepare draft terms of reference for the commission of investigation. The Government immediately accepted the primary recommendations of the scoping inquiry to establish the commission of investigation. It has accepted 13 of the 14 recommendations of the scoping inquiry to date.”
“The scoping inquiry’s survivor engagement process was a distinctive approach, providing each individual participant with the opportunity to tell the scoping inquiry about his or her experience and what he or she wanted to see happen next in a safe environment. As many will recall, the scoping inquiry was told of 2,395 allegations of historical sexual abuse in schools run by religious orders, involving 884 alleged abusers in 308 schools across the country between 1927 and 2013. Devastatingly, a considerable number of those allegations related to special schools. The scoping inquiry made 14 recommendations informed by the views of survivors, including the establishment of a commission of investigation.”
“The scoping inquiry was independently led. I acknowledge the work of Mary O’Toole, who carried out the scoping inquiry, and my predecessor, the Minister, Deputy Norma Foley, for all her work in this area. A trauma-informed survivor engagement process was central to the scoping inquiry. This consulted widely with survivors on what they considered should be included in a Government response to historical sexual abuse in schools run by religious orders. I commend the scoping inquiry team for undertaking this sensitive work with great care and compassion. So many survivors of historical child sexual abuse did not have a voice. Some could not say what had happened and others were not heard or believed.”
“The Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse published its final report in May 2009, revealing the extent of abuse suffered by thousands of children in residential institutions managed by religious congregations. Those shocking revelations of historical abuse in institutional settings forced us to confront a dark chapter of our past. Now, we are faced with revelations of widespread and often brazen historical sexual abuse of children in day and boarding schools. We must once again confront a painful and shameful history as we seek to lance this national wound. As a result of the revelations that followed the Ryan brothers’ courageous disclosure of their own experiences of sexual abuse in schools, the Government established a scoping inquiry into historical sexual abuse in day and boarding schools run by religious orders.”
“I acknowledge the many survivors of historical sexual abuse in schools who told their stories in the years before Mark and David came forward and the hundreds who have come forward since the RTÉ radio documentary, “Blackrock Boys”, was aired in November 2022. I acknowledge Liam and Seán, who are also in the Gallery with David. The Ryan brothers and the many others who came forward to disclose their experiences of historical child sexual abuse in schools have had a central role in the developments that have brought us here today. Of course, this is not the first time the State has had to confront an appalling legacy of child abuse and a need to inquire into past failings.”
“23 of 2004) has been duly laid before Dáil Éireann on 9th July, 2025 in respect of the foregoing matters referred to, together with a statement of reasons for establishing a Commission under that Act; approves the draft Commission of Investigation (Handling of Historical Child Sexual Abuse in Day and Boarding Schools) Order 2025 and the statement of reasons for establishing a Commission of Investigation. I welcome the opportunity to bring this motion to the House. I wish to begin by acknowledging the survivors whose courage and commitment have brought us to this point today. I sincerely thank every single survivor for his or her bravery, whether they were in a position to come forward or not. I particularly thank the late Mark Ryan and his brother, David, whom I welcome to the Gallery today.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann: — having regard to the conclusions and recommendations of the Report of the Scoping Inquiry into Historical Sexual Abuse in Day and Boarding Schools run by Religious Orders, published on 3rd September, 2024; — noting that it is the opinion of the Government that these matters of significant public concern require, in the public interest, examination by the establishment of a Commission of Investigation; — noting that the Minister for Education and Youth has led the Government's consideration of these sensitive matters; — noting the factual information compiled and the specific matters identified for further consideration in the Report of the Inter-Departmental Group on the Recommendations of the Scoping Inquiry into Historical Sexual Abuse in Day and Boarding Schools run by Religious Orders, which has assisted in informing Government considerations on the scope, format, and terms of reference for a Commission of Investigation; and — further noting that a draft Order proposed to be made by the Government under the Commissions of Investigation Act 2004 (No.”
“We can never rectify or change what happened to them but we can acknowledge it and do what we can to support them. We are absolutely committed to doing that.”
“I will engage with colleagues at all stages and will do so in good faith, as I know all colleagues will because we all have the same objective and goal, which is to reflect and acknowledge what happened and to do what we can to put in place supports for survivors and, where possible, for their families. I acknowledge this does not just stop at one individual but impacts on a great many other people's lives. I again acknowledge the many things we have discussed here today. For my part, where I can work with colleagues across Government, I absolutely commit to doing so. I again acknowledge the passing of the Bill and colleagues' contributions here today. I particularly acknowledge all survivors who are here and those who are not here as well.”
“In saying that, I acknowledge that issues have been raised about the supports we are providing here but I hope that what is being provided in this Bill, which can be put in place once it is enacted, will go some way, albeit a very small way, towards acknowledging the trauma I have mentioned here today. There is a lot more we have to do and that I am committed to doing as Minister for Education and Youth. I particularly refer to the commission of investigation into our schools. I have no doubt we will have many more conversations like this in the years and months ahead as a result of that.”
“I will not repeat what I said earlier. I thank colleagues for their engagement. This is something that has obviously been ongoing for some time. I appreciate how challenging and difficult it has been for colleagues and particularly for survivors. I again acknowledge Mary, Mary, Miriam and Sheila, who are here today. After the conversations we have just had, I am not sure there is anything I can say that would accurately reflect the trauma inflicted on so many different people in so many different ways. While we are discussing Caranua, the Ryan report and industrial schools, at every step of the way, we have to acknowledge our past and the wrongs that have been inflicted on so many people so many times. We need to do better.”
“Where possible, at every step of the way, we must ensure individuals who received redress under the scheme have access to their own information as readily and easily as possible.”
“The redress scheme was not a judicial process. It did not involve finding anybody guilty or at fault. The scheme was put together on that basis and we must protect the privacy of everybody involved, not just those who received redress. While I appreciate and acknowledge that the amendment provides only that the applicants to the scheme have access to information, that process could, in turn, identify another individual who has not gone through a legal or judicial process. For that reason, I cannot accept the amendment. I understand the reasoning behind it, which is to make sure individuals can access their information, but what is proposed goes beyond what is allowed for within the redress scheme.”
“The very clear advice I have been given is that this is already provided for under existing data protection and freedom of information rules. These provisions would, in effect, double up on the existing legislation, which applies to the individuals we are discussing. The only reason I am not accepting the amendment is that provision is already there for what it proposes. Individuals' ability to seek information already exists under freedom of information and data protection laws. It is really important that people can access that data. I am not able to accept amendment No. 13 for a different reason, which is that it would undermine the basis under which the redress scheme was brought into play. We discussed this the previous day, particularly in the context of people choosing to access the redress scheme or go the judicial route.”
“That will be at Cabinet shortly, as well as looking at a wider commission. There is still work to do, which I acknowledge, but it is important to say that some institutions were brought in under these schemes and others that we are not speaking of here today. Specifically on the amendments, I fully agree with the intention behind the first amendment. The reason I am not accepting it is that it is already provided for in law. Section 18, in particular, provides for the transfer of a certain set of data from the Residential Institutions Redress Board to the Department, specifically the name, address and the date of birth of each person who received redress from the board back when it was open. The amendment proposes that any individual whose information has been provided would be able to access that.”
“I thank colleagues who have contributed. Referencing another point that they made, separate to amendments Nos. 9 and 13, I fully accept that there are institutions or individuals who are not included in this redress scheme. It is important to note whether it was this particular scheme, the residential institutions redress scheme back in 2002, or even more recently, the mother and baby homes scheme at different stages before it came into law and before any of the supports were provided, different institutions were included along the way and there were increases in the numbers of those who could avail of the supports. I acknowledge that does not include everybody. We obviously have further work to do. It is something that I will be working on through the Department of Education and Youth, particularly looking at our schools.”
“This will help to shape future decisions, positively impact the educational experience of children with special educational needs and their families, and help us to create a more inclusive and supportive education system for all. It is ambitious, but deliverable and absolutely necessary. I again thank all of those who have been involved in this process and look forward to working with them in the future.”
“It will be grounded in these recommendations, which will guide how we move forward, strengthen the legislative and policy foundations of inclusive education and ensure proper implementation across the Government. Ongoing engagement will remain a cornerstone of this next phase. It is important that the plan be published and this body of work happen. The most important thing we can do is make sure that all of the recommendations are acted on and we have a very clear plan in respect of who is responsible for the actions, what timelines we are setting out and how we make sure that we all hold ourselves to account so that these recommendations can be fully realised and achieved as soon as possible.”
“It also points to the need for continued investment in professional learning for the education workforce, something I have mentioned. I wish to stress that we are working on an SNA workforce plan, which we hope to publish this September. These recommendations offer a comprehensive roadmap for change. Many of the policy changes are stepping stones towards possible future legislation and can be progressed more quickly. Some of the recommendations we are already acting and moving on. I am committed to achieving these recommendations, working with the Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan, and my colleagues not just in education, but in the Department of children and disability. Before the end of the year, we will publish an implementation plan.”
“Another key area is the completion of the roadmap towards an inclusive education system, one that is proactive and not reactive and supports strong transitions from early years to post-primary and beyond. Much of this work is already happening in order to make sure that we look ahead, plan for the future and do not just react as perhaps we have done in the past. Other findings related to student support plans, which the review recommends be given a statutory basis to ensure consistency and accountability in meeting individual needs. The report also calls for a review of language used in the area of additional needs, something that we need to be conscious of. Critically, the review reaffirmed the importance of the rights of the child, meaningful parental involvement and closer engagement between Departments and Government agencies.”
“They placed significant value on relationships, the entire school environment and making sure their voices were at the centre of everything we did and were heard in the decisions that affected them. The report identified 51 recommendations. It is divided into 16 key themes where policy and legislative reform is required. Among them is a recommendation to consider bringing all school-aged children under a single Act to ensure a legal rights-based approach to inclusive education. We have the admissions Act, the Education Act and the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs Act. We have to consider how we bring legislation together.”
“Ireland’s ratification of the UNCRPD obliges it to ensure that Irish legislation and policy regarding inclusive education are consistent with its core features. The review and the recommendations outlined are fully aligned with this rights-based approach. The steering group, working group and advisory group met frequently, I think it was bi-weekly, to analyse the evidence and develop the recommendations presented in this report. I will name some of the review’s key findings. The process of reviewing the EPSEN Act has brought to light a number of areas where the participants considered that changes or developments in existing legislation, policy or practice were required. In particular, children and young people highlighted the importance of belonging, being respected and having access to life skills, active and experiential learning.”
“At a very early stage, my Department working with other Departments wanted to ensure every voice was heard, every concern could be raised and that nobody who was involved in the process felt it was constrained. We were not just looking at legislation but also at policy and all aspects of it. An academic review was completed to examine legislation, case law and international best practice. A very significant development captured in the academic review paper is the central position now given to the rights of the child and to the rights of persons with disabilities, as evidenced in legal judgments in Ireland and in international conventions to which Ireland is a signatory, notably the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child and the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, UNCRPD.”
“Participants took part in adult focus-group meetings with four actual meetings in various locations throughout the country and one virtual meeting. We also engaged in focus groups with younger adults too, aged from 18 to 25 years. We placed particular emphasis on ensuring children and young people could participate directly. I want to highlight the creation of an easy-read survey. That allowed children and persons of all abilities to share their views in a way that was accessible and meaningful. This was the first time such a process was used by my Department and was a method to ensure that all voices could be included. We received over 900 responses to the easy-read accessible online survey. No constraints were put on the body of work the review group has done.”
“I want to sincerely thank everyone who took part in this review and shared their own experience. Over 28,000 people took part in the initial public survey, a remarkable response that reflects the depth of public interest and experience. A structured programme of focus groups followed, involving students, parents, educators and professionals. These groups helped explore key themes in more detail and ensured that under-represented voices were heard. Children and young people in particular were always at the centre of this work and we really wanted to hear from them about their experiences. We held focus groups with 80 students, 35 English-speaking face-to-face students and 45 Irish-speaking students, who were under the age of 18.”
“In the 20 years since the Act was passed, Ireland’s legal and educational landscapes have evolved significantly. Major reforms have taken place in curriculum, teaching and assessment, as well as in the broader inclusion and equality agendas. Given these changes, fully commencing the Act as originally written was not a viable option. That is why we are now looking forward and why this review was so necessary. It reflects one of the most comprehensive consultations ever carried out in the area of special education in Ireland and was led by the special education section of the Department of Education and Youth. In conducting the review, we have listened to students, parents, educators, advocacy groups and experts in special education. Their input has been vital and will continue to guide the implementation process.”
“The central purpose of this review was to assess whether there is an adequate legislative basis for the current and future educational provision for children with additional needs. It is about more than just structures but is about protecting the rights of children and families, ensuring high-quality educational experiences and that we are meeting students’ needs. The review seeks to align policy and law with lived experience. We want to make sure every child with additional needs can access the right supports at the right time in the place that is most appropriate for them. While the EPSEN Act was a landmark in its time, establishing the National Council for Special Education and committing to inclusion, as I mentioned, it was never fully commenced.”
“Inclusion, equality of opportunity and the rights of all children and young people to develop their full potential are central to our education policy. The then Minister of State with responsibility for special education and inclusion, Josepha Madigan, announced the review of the EPSEN Act in December 2021 as the original legislative intention of the EPSEN had outpaced its practical implementation. I would like to thank my predecessors in this role, the Minister, Deputy Foley, the Minister of State, Deputy Naughton, and Josepha Madigan, who have continued to bring this important work to this stage and I was privileged with the Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan, to launch the report of the review last week.”
“Early years education has become an integral part of the education continuum, there has been major curriculum reform at primary and postprimary levels while developments in initial teacher education and continuing professional development have promoted active and experiential teaching and learning approaches, collective and collaborative planning and assessment for learning. Importantly, we are going to do more. As of next year, any person who is engaged in teacher training will have to do a mandatory placement in special education which has never happened to date. We are working to make sure the 79,000 teachers currently in schools are supported and upskilled in training around special education.”
“The EPSEN Act made provision for an inclusive educational environment, an equal right to education, and assistance to acquire the skills to participate in society and live independently and above all to ensure that every child is supported to achieve their full potential. The Act also established the National Council for Special Education on a statutory footing. It is an independent but integral part of making sure we can provide those school places and that our children and schools are supported. Since 2004, fundamental changes have occurred in the school curriculum and in teaching, learning and assessment practices, which have considerable bearing on children with additional needs. There have also been considerable changes in how we allocate resources to schools to support children.”
“This review is a critical step in ensuring our education system meets the needs of all children and reflects a renewed commitment to building a rights-based, inclusive system for the future. When the EPSEN Act was first introduced in 2004 it represented a bold and necessary step forward for Ireland. For the first time, we enshrined in law a commitment to provide for the education of children with special educational needs in inclusive settings, wherever possible. While parts of the Act were commenced, some were never fully commenced in law, owing largely to overly-bureaucratic requirements of the original Act.”
“To ensure that children can access the services they require, we are also establishing the education therapy service which will see occupational therapists and speech and language therapists working in our special schools. Over the upcoming school year, we will see up to 90 therapists working in 45 special schools across the country as part of the initial roll-out of this service. The intention is that very quickly that will spread to the remaining special schools, to mainstream schools as well as special classes in them. While the progress I have just outlined has been positive for children and families, I remain acutely aware of the real challenges some families still face, whether in securing a school place or accessing the right supports.”
“I want to ensure that in the coming year these classes are sanctioned sooner and that places are made available to children earlier. We have brought forward the timelines for the sanctioning of classes even earlier. To do this, we are endeavouring to have all special classes sanctioned by 31 December this year for the 2026-2027 school year. The timeline for parents to register with the NCSE has also been brought forward. This will ensure that the NCSE has an earlier picture of demand that exists to allow for new special classes to be sanctioned sooner, allowing more time for these classes to be prepared, children enrolled, giving more certainty to parents and families. That is what this is all about - how we support parents and children and take away so many of the challenges and stresses that they face.”
“For the upcoming school year alone, we will have at least 400 new special education classes across the country as well as five new special schools. We are working to ensure that young people are placed in these schools as soon as possible. These will provide up to 2,700 places for children who need them. An additional 1,200 places will become available due to the movement of students which means for the upcoming year alone we will have over 3,900 available places for children seeking a special class or special school place. As I said, the most important thing is that we are making sure children are allocated those places in the place that is most appropriate to them and that their needs are supported in that school.”
“At the outset I sincerely thank everyone who has been involved in this review. The Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan, and I met most of them last week. The process has been deeply collaborative. I acknowledge the extensive engagement from advocacy organisations, school leaders, staff, parents representative bodies, professionals, Departments and, most importantly, the children and young people, many of whom have engaged in this themselves. The area of special educational needs continues to be a priority for this Government, my Department, the Minister of State, Deputy Moynihan and for me. While there is much work to do we have seen substantial progress in recent years with hundreds of new special education classes provided each year as well as new special schools around the country.”
“I am pleased to be here today to share the report of the review of the Education for Persons with Special Educational Needs, EPSEN, Act 2004 which was published last Wednesday. It is a significant milestone in our shared work to create a more inclusive and equitable education system. The report allows for a moment of reflection - a moment to honour the hopes that inspired this landmark legislation introduced over two decades ago and to take the opportunity not only to see how far we have come but also how far we still need to go and, most importantly, the steps that are required to get there. This is a significant step forward in shaping education policy and law based on the real lived experiences of children and young people with special educational needs and helping them achieve better educational outcomes.”
“It will always be up to the school to decide whether or not it wants to ask parents for voluntary contributions, whether for school tours, technical equipment or otherwise. My objective is to ensure that in respect of the day-to-day costs of books, ICT equipment and other things, schools are supported and provided for through the annual budgets. Of course, this year's budget will be no different.”
“I thank the Deputy. Voluntary contributions are by their nature voluntary. It is up to each individual school to decide what it asks parents for. My objective as Minister is to ensure they have the support, funding and capitation they need for the day-to-day basics. That is why we recently increased the capitation. For next September, the rates for primary and post-primary schoolchildren will increase. Of course, there is a clear commitment in the programme for Government to increase that further. As I mentioned earlier, I want not just to see how we can increase funding for schools but also how we can reduce their overall costs. I do not just want to reduce the cost of electricity, lighting and heating but also the cost of insurance and costs in other areas.”
“I am aware that some schools received an increase in their SNA allocation while for others the allocations remained the same. It is important that it is done through the NCSE and is based on the needs of individual schools. A further increase in SNA allocations is something I will work towards with my colleagues through the budget negotiations.”
“I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. SNAs are an integral part of schools in supporting children and I acknowledge the work they do. By the end of this year, we will have more SNAs than we have ever had before. There will be more than 23,000 SNAs, including the 1,600 additional SNAs provided for in last year's budget. They are allocated through the NCSE and that is based on recommendations by SENOs who look at the needs of the entire school, as opposed to individual children. As the Deputy will be aware, in recent weeks, schools were written to by the NCSE highlighting the allocations they would receive. Schools that are to see a reduction will not see it until next year when we have a redeployment scheme in place to make sure we provide stability and clarity for SNAs and schools.”
“As the Deputy is aware, this Government and my Department are committed to supporting our schools and ensuring that they have adequate funding. Capitation increased only in the last few weeks. This was secured in last year's budget. Any negotiations and agreements on next year's budget will be happening in the coming weeks. I am also interested in not only providing more supports for schools but also making sure we can, where possible, reduce costs. That is why our climate action plan is so important in making sure we retrofit buildings and reduce bills. We should also look at other costs schools are incurring around insurance and in other areas. The Deputy can be assured that we are absolutely committed to supporting schools in as many ways as possible.”
“Any of the other schemes we have administered, be it the mother and baby homes, the Magdalen laundries or the medical card we are proposing here, have been in line with what is being proposed here and I do not propose to move away from that. I acknowledge the Senator's reasons behind this - I really do - but it is important we acknowledge the reasons that specific enhanced card was put in place. That is why I cannot accept this amendment.”
“I thank the Senators. While I appreciate the intention behind the amendment, it is the case and it is for the reasons outlined and for those specific health reasons that the HAA card was provided to those who contracted hepatitis C, to ensure that those who had essentially life-threatening conditions would be supported through that card. I appreciate the card that is being proposed now does not include some of what was in the other. It does not include some of the complementary therapies nor does it include the access to the appointments at perhaps the same rate, but they were specific to the types of consultants and types of expertise that were needed within a particular timeframe and period. It was specific to that group of people.”