Jim O'Callaghan
Dublin Bay South · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“This relates to section 69 of the Bill as passed by Dáil Éireann, which amends Schedule 5 to the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 to add the Courts Service to the Schedule.”
“The first four amendments in this group are minor drafting corrections. They corrected the wording in four places so that the Bill reads consistently. It is changing the word "references" to "a reference". They make no change to the substance or effect of the Bill.”
“The ARP scheme was introduced in July 2022 to recognise the generosity of members of the public who opened their houses, whether in their entirety or through the provision of a room, at their own expense to provide shelter to people displaced by the Ukraine war. The Department of Social Protection administers the scheme on my behalf.”
“I have no doubt it will be challenged, and I have to be able to convince a court, if it is being challenged, that this legislation weighs up conflicting interests and recognises there is a mechanism for somebody who has reformed himself to get off the register.”
“The scheme has been a lifeline for people from Ukraine displaced by the conflict, given high rental market rates and scarcity of rental accommodation.”
“I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle in the first instance for presiding over these Stages of the legislation. I am very pleased that this legislation has been enacted. I want to thank a few people very briefly. I thank Deputy McAuliffe for introducing me to Jason Poole. I thank Senator O'Loughlin for her work on this issue in the Seanad.”
The complete record
Every one of 4,181 lines we hold for Jim O'Callaghan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 28 of 84.
“This consultation yielded about 150 submissions from individuals, LGBT and other non-governmental organisations, trade unions and political parties and representatives. These submissions were of great value to the working group in its deliberations and helped to inform its final recommendations. The working group's final report, published in summer 2023, contained 95 recommendations on how to establish, operate and promulgate such a scheme, and on key matters such as the range of offences that should be included, the proposed eligibility criteria for a disregard, the legal effects of a disregard, and procedures for applications, record retrieval, decisions and reviews.”
“This further illustrates how deeply inequitable these laws were, but it also has the unfortunate legacy that an across-the-board expungement of convictions under these laws is clearly not viable. Any given case must therefore be assessed on its own merits by reference to whatever records are available. It was in this context that in 2021 the working group was established to examine and make recommendations on an application-based scheme for the disregard of eligible convictions. The working group met on 11 occasions with follow-up research, legal analysis and stakeholder outreach occurring between each meeting. In late 2022, my Department held a full public consultation on key issues relating to the development of a scheme to disregard relevant convictions.”
“A legislative scheme to enable the disregard of these convictions is long overdue and, as I have said, the Government is committed to its introduction. Unfortunately, this cannot be achieved by way of a simple blanket disregard of all such convictions. That is because the applicable common law and statutory offences did not distinguish in any way between consensual and non-consensual activity, nor between adults and minors. In the eyes of the law, two adult men engaging in sexual activity in the context of a loving relationship were not only committing a crime, but committing precisely the same offence as that of a predatory male who committed the same act with a boy.”
“However, while over 30 years have passed since the applicable offences were abolished, their malign effects continue for all those who were unjustly rendered criminals in the eyes of the State. To this day, consenting adults who were convicted under these laws still bear the unmerited stain of criminal record. It is true that history cannot be rewritten and we cannot change the fact that although convictions occurred, nor undo the hardship, humiliation and lasting pain they caused. What we as legislators can do, however, is find a means by which a conviction of this kind can, in effect, be nullified, such that the person who incurred it is, to all intents and purposes, treated in law as if it never happened.”
“However, while the intention of the Bill has obvious merit, there are legal, policy and operational issues with this Bill as drafted, which I will outline shortly. As I said, I am working on the scheme to be introduced on Committee Stage. It is also important as Minister for justice that I again acknowledge that the laws which criminalised consensual sexual activity between adult males in Ireland, as in innumerable other jurisdictions, are now widely recognised as a historical injustice, motivated by ignorant and prejudicial societal attitudes. Those laws were introduced under British rule but persisted for some 70 years after the establishment of the Irish State, before finally being repealed in 1993.”
“It assigns to the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, the responsibility for reviewing applications and for issuing disregards. In the scheme for which I have approval from Government to introduce, it is not IHREC doing it. It will be another person appointed by me who will be solely focused on the disregard scheme. The objective of Deputy Ó Snodaigh's Bill corresponds with Government policy and specifically the programme for Government commitment to implement legislation to disregard specific historical offences related to the criminalisation of homosexuality. As such, this Bill is consistent with the Government's policy and that is why I will not be opposing it.”
“The scheme being drafted in the Department at present is more robust. Once that is ready to be introduced on Committee Stage in the Dáil we can move promptly after that to get it enacted and to get the scheme up and running. I did indicate to Deputy Ó Snodaigh yesterday that I hoped Committee Stage would take place next month. I am putting pressure on my officials to do so and the fact that I have now said it in the Dáil will put even further pressure on them. This is something I will seek to actively work upon. We are here to discuss Deputy Ó Snodaigh's Bill. It sets out an application-based statutory process for the disregard of historic convictions relating to consensual sexual activity between men.”
“The Government will not oppose this legislation. There are some issues with it that I will discuss presently. As to where we are, I got approval from the Government a number of months ago - I think two or so months ago - to introduce Committee Stage amendments to the miscellaneous provisions Bill, which has already gone through Second Stage here, that would establish a disregard scheme. It was very good news that approval from the Government had been put in place and that a general scheme for the Committee Stage amendment had been drafted. The drafting is ongoing in the Attorney General's office and the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. I am not opposing this legislation. In fairness to Deputy Ó Snodaigh, I know that neither he nor I cares which legislative instrument gives effect to the disregard scheme, provided it works.”
“I was thinking at the time whether some simple type of scheme could be introduced, in a similar way to a scheme that had been introduced in the UK in respect of the Post Office dispute and scandal that arose over there. There were issues in respect of how that type of scheme could not operate, but one of the benefits of my raising it was that I was able to instruct officials that I wanted to get the legislation enacted as promptly as possible. The effect of that was that I instructed that I wanted it to go as a Committee Stage amendment into the miscellaneous provisions Bill. A lot of work had been done on the Bill already, but my saying I wanted to have it in on Committee Stage in the miscellaneous provisions Bill expedited it, and I acknowledge Deputy Ó Snodaigh's role in contributing to that expediting of the Bill.”
“I was aware at the time that there were plans within the Department to bring in legislation, but, as a result of Deputy Ó Snodaigh raising it, it catalysed that further engagement. After our engagement on the floor of the Dáil, I wanted to see what could be done to speed up the process. I am very conscious that the men who are alive who are affected by this - the numbers may be small, but the point is still very significant - will be of a considerable age, and I think a legislative measure should be introduced as quickly as possible to ensure that a disregard scheme can apply for them. After our engagement in the Dáil, I went back to the Department.”
“Ar dtús, ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis an Teachta Ó Snodaigh as an mBille seo. Is Bille fíorthábhachtach é. An bhliain seo caite, bhí díospóireacht idir an Teachta Ó Snodaigh agus mé féin sa Dáil ar an gceist seo. Tar éis sin, chuaigh mé ar ais chuig an Roinn agus dúirt mé leis na hoifigigh gur mhaith liom Bille nua a fheiceáil go tapa. I thank Deputy Ó Snodaigh and the other Deputies who have co-signed this Bill for their consistent work on this issue. Last year, Deputy Ó Snodaigh raised this in, I think, an oral parliamentary question to me and I said I would go back to the Department and try to see whether I could expedite the process of introducing legislation.”
“If youths are hanging around, which sometimes happens more in the summer months, we need to ensure that we have the services available as well so that they can do things like play football or get involved in sport and be diverted away from the criminal behaviour. However, if they are involved in criminal behaviour, the law should come down on them relatively hard because if it does not, we are doing them a disservice.”
“Deputy Ward will know that generally criminal behaviour is committed predominantly by boys and men between the ages of 14 and 30. Once they reach the latter age, they cop on and they stop engaging in criminal behaviour. The Deputy is absolutely right that we are doing a disservice to people between the ages 14 and 18 if we do not try to stop or divert them. If they are committing criminal behaviour on the last day of their 17th year, once they turn 18 they are inevitably going to end up in the adult system and will probably be incarcerated. I should have mentioned that I recall being with Deputy Ward out in Dún Laoghaire. I was impressed by what is going on out there but policing of youths is complicated. I want to try to ensure that there are greater resources for gardaí but also for young people.”
“Obviously, the youth diversion programme does not mean that children cannot be arrested, convicted of offences or apprehended by gardaí. If gardaí come across youths who are involved in criminal behaviour or breaches of public order, they can apply the law in respect of them and it may be necessary at times for them to be arrested. The Deputy is right to say that this does result in further bureaucracy within a Garda station because arresting a child is treated differently to arresting an adult. That said, it still can be done and I want to assure the general public that gardaí can arrest juveniles who are involved in the commission of criminal behaviour. However, that does not mean that subsequently, after their arrest and once they go through that process, they cannot then be put on the pathway of the youth diversion programme.”
“I appreciate that this might not be of much comfort to the victim suffering from the criminality or antisocial behaviour of a person under 18 years of age but there does need to be a Garda response. If the individual child does not want to go along with the youth diversion programme, then the force of the criminal justice system must operate in the way that it should in respect of children. If we want to put in a different statutory regime that does mean amending the Children Act and having a broader conversation about whether we wish to change the way we deal with children or whether want to redefine the age beneath 16. These are very complicated issues that we need to carefully consider.”
“Young people deemed suitable by the director of the Garda youth diversion programme may be referred to the local youth diversion projects where, in collaboration with a Garda juvenile liaison officer, these projects provide supports to children to address their behaviour and engage positively with their communities. People sometimes that youth diversion programmes are not effective or successful, but there is success in respect of them. If we look at the statistics in terms of the number of people being referred to youth diversion programmes, we can see that notwithstanding the year-on-year population growth, the number of children coming to the attention of the diversion programme has generally decreased.”
“Each such case is assessed and the director of the Garda diversion programme, the Garda superintendent, decides if the case is suitable for inclusion in the programme. I recently had the pleasure of being out in Dún Laoghaire Garda station with Deputy Ward's colleague Deputy Devlin. I met officials and the superintendent there and was extremely impressed by their commitment to policing the area. Obviously, the challenges they face when it comes to dealing with juvenile offenders is consistent with the problems that exist around the country.”
“I am pleased to say that when it comes to Oberstown, we have been able, through consultation with the Minister for children, Deputy Foley, to increase the number of spaces available for boys in Oberstown. That was done as a result of consultation I had with the Minister, Deputy Foley. An essential pillar of the child-focused approach is the Garda youth diversion programme, and that is effective. It provides a statutory basis for the Garda youth diversion programme. The intention of this programme is to divert children aged 12 to 17 years who have been engaged in such behaviour away from the criminal justice system and towards more positive, pro-social behaviour and life choices. Children who commit criminal offences are considered for admission to the diversion programme.”
“When it is the case that criminality is being carried out or antisocial behaviour engaged in by a person under 18 years of age, as Deputy Ward will be aware from experience, we have a different statutory procedure in terms of dealing with people who are defined as children under the Children Act. Since the enactment of the Children Act a quarter of a century ago, Ireland's approach has been to divert children from the criminal justice system, with detention being, as it says in the Act, an option of "last resort". That does not mean, however, that detention is not sometimes necessary. Regrettably, sometimes the detention of children is necessary.”
“I thank Deputy Ward for raising this very important issue. Obviously there is a complexity to how society should respond to criminality by people under 18 years of age but my starting point is looking at the impact it has upon victims. From the victim's point of view, as Deputy Ward has described, it is cold comfort that the person who is perpetrating the criminal act or the antisocial behaviour is, in fact, under 18 years of age. The impact of the offence or the antisocial behaviour on the individual is as significant as it would be if it was being carried out by an adult as opposed to by a child. That is why I start, as I am sure Deputy Ward does, by looking at the impact on the victim.”
“We have many Garda stations but it is not the stations that give people a sense of safety. Rather, it is the fact that there are gardaí on the streets or in the vicinity of the station. I will seek to prioritise the continued presence of gardaí in the community. People want them visible. I hear what the Deputy is saying about Rush Garda station. I will consider the matter and discuss it within my Department.”
“We would all prefer it if the Commissioner put a significant number of recruits into our own constituencies, but he has to adopt a fair basis for all communities. He also has to take into account where the needs are. It is a complicated issue to determine where gardaí should be placed. As the Deputy will probably agree, there is no point in putting gardaí where they are not needed and where there are not high crime levels. Communities have to have a garda presence but there are areas where you need to focus gardaí, and that will be based on the Commissioner’s assessment as to where the needs are greatest. The Deputy has very eloquently advocated a permanent Garda station in Rush, in her area. What is more important to me is actually seeing gardaí out in the community.”
“Ciara's petition is probably trying to do what many other communities seek to do as well. In effect, she and the Deputy are looking for a formal assessment of the policing needs of the Rush area. I want the Deputy to know, however, that when the Commissioner sits down to decide where the new gardaí coming out of Templemore should go, he does it on the basis of a particular plan. In the past year, it has been for the purpose of achieving high-visibility policing, predominantly in the cities of Dublin, Cork and Limerick. However, he is now having new probationer gardaí put into suburban areas and rural areas as well. I suppose he has to decide on the basis of the needs of the country as a whole.”
“Overall, since the reopening of the Garda College in 2015, 496 probationers have been assigned to Dublin metropolitan region north, which is almost 9% of all probationers attested since 2015. Just under 800 trainees entered the Garda College in 2025, which is the highest number since 2018. Recruitment is extremely important to ensure we get more gardaí into Deputy O'Reilly's constituency, Dublin Fingal West, and indeed throughout the country. We are seeing success in this regard at present. Deputy O'Reilly also raised the issue of Rush Garda station and how she would like to see it reopened. I cannot give her an update in respect of that at present. I am here to talk about the numbers but I will certainly engage with her in respect of those issues.”
“That is as a result of a policy of the Government that is being implemented by the Commissioner. It is extremely important that communities have visible policing. The presence of gardaí is very much dependent on there being a pipeline of reserves and recruits and resources available to the Commissioner. Last year, 619 gardaí attested from the Garda College to take up positions across the country, beginning a career of service to their communities and the people of Ireland. Another 167 new gardaí attested in February this year, bringing the number to 786. I look forward to the attestation of new gardaí in two weeks' time, on 1 May next. Seven probationer gardaí were assigned to Deputy O'Reilly's division in February and 39 probationers were assigned in 2025.”
“At the end of February, the latest date for which published figures are available, there were 764 Garda members of all ranks assigned to the division, supported by 70 Garda staff and 23 Garda reservists. The allocation of gardaí represents an increase of 13% since the end of 2016, when there were 676 in the division. The Garda staff number has increased by almost 63% in the same period, from 43 assigned in 2016, which in turn has freed up more gardaí to undertake front-line policing duties. The request I get most of the time is for more gardaí in communities. As people will be aware, I have a policy to have high-visibility policing in our cities and towns and throughout the rest of the country. We have already been able to see that in Dublin, Cork and Limerick there has been a very noticeable increase in high-visibility policing.”
“I thank Deputy O'Reilly for putting down this important Topical Issue. If I am available for Topical Issues in the justice, home affairs and migration area, I will do them. I am happy to be here to respond to the Deputy's query. It is repeatedly the case - and it is very fair - that Deputies want more gardaí in their communities and constituencies. That is a good sign. It shows the constituencies and people of Ireland have faith in and are supportive of An Garda Síochána. That is not universal throughout the world. In some places there can be a negative relationship between the police forces and the communities they police, but it is not so in Ireland. Dublin Fingal West is covered by the Dublin metropolitan region north division. It also covers Dublin Fingal East and parts of Dublin Bay North.”
“I am sorry for interrupting Senator Joe Conway's business in the dining room, but I hear what he said about the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan. I will speak to him in respect of that, and get some further information from him.”
“I thank Senator Kelleher for what he said about CAB. It is important that CAB is given public support, as it has been. It was very much an innovative solution when it was introduced nearly 30 years ago. Senator Martin Conway also mentioned crypto assets. As I have indicated, this is very important, and amendments will be made in respect of that. I welcome Senator McCormack's support. Lifestyle is being challenged. CAB will go after lower amounts of the proceeds of criminal activity, so it is not limited to the large criminals. If Members look at the annual report of CAB, which reports to me, they will see the type of assets it has seized. They are very much everyday assets that are flaunted by criminals in their use of the proceeds of crime.”
“I welcome the fact that this legislation recognises that civil forfeiture is sometimes the way to go, as opposed to circumstances where a criminal conviction cannot be secured against the person who is the brains behind the crime. I thank Senator Boyhan for his contribution. It is great to hear so many Senators being in favour of the legislation. Again, it is illustrative of the support that exists for An Garda Síochána that the money going back from CAB into the community is representative of the fact that the criminal proceeds are made at the outset from the people of that community. Senator Keogan spoke about crypto assets. As I mentioned in my contribution, crypto assets will be dealt with on Committee Stage, the amending stage in the Seanad. It is important that we cover crypto assets.”
“I thank all Senators for their contributions and, more importantly, for their support. It is my job to be here when I am bringing legislation through the Houses, so it is important that I am here. I have great support from my two Ministers of State, Deputies Colm Brophy and Niall Collins. It is a fundamental requirement for all the members of the Government to attend the Houses of the Oireachtas because they are the lawmaking entity under the Constitution. I will deal with some of the very useful contributions that have been made. I agree with Senator Gallagher when he says that criminal convictions can be very hard to secure. We see the difficulty that gardaí have to go through during investigations, and it can take time for them to happen.”
“We will have an opportunity on Committee Stage in the Seanad to look at a number of matters in terms of what the Bill does or does not cover. I commend this Bill to the House and I look forward to hearing what Senators have to say.”
“There are a number of matters I intend to return to on Committee Stage and I will flag the most notable of these for the information of the House. The first concerns the transfer of the main domestic functions under Part 4 of the Criminal Justice (Mutual Assistance) Act 2008, relating to the execution, enforcement and realisation of external confiscation orders from the office of the DPP to CAB. These amendments will not alter the underlying mutual assistance framework, the role of the central authority or the supervisory role of the High Court. I also propose to introduce further amendments to specifically target and regulate crypto assets. This updated regime will equip law enforcement with tailored powers to freeze and seize these assets. Many details will merit debate and I look forward to working with Senators as the Bill progresses.”
“Section 18 amends section 16 of the Criminal Justice (Terrorist Offences) Act, mirroring the changes made in section 8. Mirroring the changes made in section 8, this section reduces the waiting period before a disposal order can be made in relation to terrorist funds, from seven years to two years. Section 19 is a technical provision amending section 22 of the Criminal Justice (Corruption Offences) Act 2018. It aligns anti-corruption legislation with the 1994 Act. As the Bill passed through the Dáil, I noted the remarkable unanimity across that House. I suspect that will be here as well. Regardless of our political affiliations, we share a resolute determination to tackle organised crime, to dismantle the gangs that bring drugs and devastation into our communities and to ensure that in this State, crime does not pay.”
“In Part 2 there are also several technical and consequential amendments, set out in sections 6, 7, 10, 12, 13 and 14. Part 3 of the Bill seeks to ensure that the broader legislative framework is aligned and effective. Section 15 amends the Schedule to the National Archives Act 1986 by adding the CAB to the list of bodies. Section 16 amends section 43 of the Criminal Justice Act 1994 to harmonise the definition of cash and bearer-negotiable instruments with Regulation (EU) 2018/1672. Section 17 amends the Criminal Assets Bureau Act 1996 to enhance the operational capacity of the bureau. First, it allows non-Garda experts in the bureau to attend and participate in Garda interviews. It also explicitly extends the anonymity protections for CAB officers to cover them even after they have ceased to be officers.”
“This reform ensures that once the court has decided assets are derived from crime, they are seized much more quickly. Section 9 is a consequential amendment to section 4A of the 1996 Act, which governs consent disposal orders. It removes the current time limitation, providing the flexibility for CAB and a respondent to agree to the forfeiture of an asset at any stage while an interlocutory order is in force, thereby avoiding needless litigation. Section 11 strengthens the powers of receivership by amending section 7 of the 1996 Act. It creates a mandate for the court to appoint a receiver upon application when an interlocutory order is in force. The receiver's purpose is now explicitly enshrined in law as being to deprive the respondent of the ongoing benefit and use of the property.”
“The judge may authorise continued detention in increments not exceeding 28 days, up to a maximum aggregate time of 90 days, provided there are reasonable grounds to suspect the property represents proceeds of crime. Section 5 introduces new powers to freeze financial accounts. A senior bureau officer can issue a payment-freezing direction to place an administrative freeze on the account for up to seven days, allowing time to conduct a preliminary investigation. Following this, CAB can apply to the District Court for a payment-freezing order for a period of up to 90 days. Section 8 amends section 4 of the 1996 Act by cutting the waiting time required before the High Court can make a final disposal order to seize criminal assets from seven years down to just two years.”
“Included are details on how to register for a webinar that will be held on 21 April. It aims to support organisations to prepare their applications. I will now take Members briefly through the Bill and its specific sections. There are 19 sections in it. Part 1 of the Bill comprises sections 1 and 2, which are standard provisions. Part 2 of the Bill amends the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996. Section 4 amends section 1A of that Act. The latter section currently allows for the seizure and detention of movable property by CAB for an initial 24 hours, which can be extended for a further 21 days. Section 4 amends the provision to allow a CAB officer to apply to the District Court for further extensions of the detention period.”
“To date, it has successfully supported 127 community safety projects right across Ireland. The sheer volume and breadth of the applications we have received for the fund demonstrates beyond any doubt the immense value of this initiative. Applications for the 2026 community safety fund opened last Monday, 13 April, and the total fund value for 2026 is €4.75 million, which represents an increase of 58% since the fund was initially launched in 2022. I welcome applications from community safety initiatives. I remind Senators that they should inform their constituents or organisations that come within their responsibility of the fund that is available and how people can apply. You can make an application on my Department's website, because that is where the application form is available.”
“At every step in the process, a judge must be fully satisfied that the actions taken are reasonable, necessary and proportionate to prevent any serious risk of an injustice. Ultimately, these reforms will create a highly streamlined and effective system. The State will be far better equipped to swiftly deprive criminals of their wealth, disrupt their enterprises and redirect those funds back to the Exchequer for the benefit of all citizens. At the heart of this effort is the community safety fund. This vital initiative redirects the proceeds of crime directly back into our communities. By doing so, we are able to fund innovative local projects that share a single unified goal, building stronger, safer communities. Since the fund’s launch in 2022 as the community safety innovation fund, we have seen the profound impact it can have.”
“A new administrative payment-freezing direction can be issued by a senior bureau officer for up to seven days, while a payment-freezing order may be made by the District Court for a period of up to 90 days and may be renewed by the court for as long as it is deemed necessary and proportionate to do so. These tools empower CAB to act instantly on intelligence, thereby preventing the transfer or dissipation of money while a full investigation is conducted. Crucially, these enhanced powers are carefully balanced with the protection of fundamental rights and are anchored by robust judicial oversight. The District Court will supervise the new powers for asset detention and account freezing. The High Court retains exclusive authority over major decisions such as appointing receivers and ordering final asset forfeiture.”
“First, after the High Court rules that an asset is derived from crime, the State must wait seven years before assuming final ownership through a disposal order. This Bill reduces that period to two years, ensuring criminals cannot continue to exploit their frozen ill-gotten gains. Second, once an interlocutory order is made, the Bill will provide for the automatic appointment of a receiver, subject to the avoidance of a serious risk of injustice. This measure is expressly designed to secure immediate possession of the assets and deprive the respondent of any ongoing benefit and use of the property pending final disposal. Third, this Bill equips the CAB with new mechanisms to freeze suspected illicit funds at the very earliest stages of an investigation.”
“We should reflect on the great success of Ireland's pioneering framework that established the Proceeds of Crime Act in 1996 and the Criminal Assets Bureau Act of the same year. This is now an internationally recognised model and it is built on two foundational elements. First, there is a system of civil forfeiture that builds a case around the unlawful origin of assets. Also, the Criminal Assets Bureau, CAB, by bringing together the Garda, Revenue, social protection officers and other specialists, leverages cross-agency intelligence to target profit-driven criminality. To date, this approach has successfully seized over €220 million and returned it to the Exchequer. This legislation introduces three central reforms to strip criminals of their assets much faster than is currently possible.”
“I am pleased to introduce to the Senate the Proceeds of Crime and Related Matters Bill. As we all know, organised crime inflicts a huge amount of damage on communities and preys on vulnerable people. Behind it all is the fuelling of a ruthless drug trade. Too often, criminals blatantly flaunt their illicit wealth on our streets and that creates a corrosive culture where hard-working, law-abiding citizens feel the system is failing them while criminals operate beyond the reach of the law. We know, on the basis of the strategy we have had in this country for nearly 30 years, that we go after and seize the assets of criminals. The strategy was initiated after the murder of journalist Veronica Guerin nearly 30 years ago.”
“If it is the case that people in the House are going to say that we should stick with the reception conditions directive and should provide accommodation, it necessarily means that we are going to have to spend money on accommodation. I am trying to get State accommodation to provide it. I am actively cutting down costs. I have cut down the numbers of people who have come to Ireland claiming asylum. As I said, in 2024 there were 18,500. In 2025, the number was 13,000. I want to seek to reduce it further.”
“At present, I am making savings in the area of IPAS. In any renewal that has been done I am saving money and I am cutting down costs. I am being very careful with the amount of money that is being spent. I never heard anyone in the House say they disagreed with the reception conditions directive, which requires us to provide accommodation to international protection applicants. If people want to say we should not do so - and there are people in Ireland who say that we should not do so - then say it, but if it is the case that people are-----”
“I know, but it is a big obligation and it comes at a big cost. I am entitled to try to - and the Oireachtas is entitled to say that we are going t -, shift the balance slightly towards the State on those scales. It is also the case that for family members who are already here it does not apply, and, obviously, it does not apply for an unaccompanied minor who is granted status here. I will deal with Deputy Carthy's point on the cost of IPAS. I agree with him. I want to reduce the amount of money the State is spending on IPAS. It is too high and it needs to be reduced. Deputy Carthy has got to acknowledge that the driver of the cost is the number of people coming in. That is the main driver behind it. I hear what he says about contracts that were entered into. I have said previously that contracts were entered into too highly.”
“One of my concerns was that if Ireland had a family reunification policy for refugees that was more attractive than in the UK it could become a pull factor in Ireland. The Oireachtas is entitled to objectively set out what we think is reasonable when it comes to family reunification. It is a big obligation to place on a State that when it takes somebody in who is a refugee, it will also take in their family.”
“In terms of family reunification, on 4 September last year the UK on suspended refugee family reunification. They suspended it in the UK. An aspect of UK policy I have to be conscious of is that if something is changed in the UK which makes Ireland a more materially attractive place for persons to come, it is a factor I have to take into account. It may not sound virtuous, but I want to try to reduce numbers of people coming into Ireland claiming asylum because I know from the statistics that there are too many people coming here claiming asylum who are found not to be entitled to it. I am not asking anyone to comment on the matter or agree with me, but that is the policy objective here.”
“That is why the proposals set out which state they have to wait to years and show they have the financial wherewithal to support their family if they want them to be reunified in Ireland is a reasonable proposal. Asylum policy in Ireland must also take into account what is happening in the UK. I cannot ignore what is happening in the UK. It has a significant impact on what happens in Ireland.”