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 41 of 84.
“Section 26 has not operated in the way we wanted it to when it was enacted by the previous Oireachtas back in 2009. I think this will benefit it. What I am putting in will make sure it is fair, as well as reasonable. Regarding the retailers, there is a specific section that puts in place what was previously a form of qualified privilege where they had to stop somebody and ask them whether or not they had paid for goods in circumstances where they had not. What everyone wants to hear about is the abolition of juries in the High Court. I would point out that if you take a Circuit Court action for defamation, you do not get a jury. The principle in respect of juries is that, since 1988, they are increasingly being removed from civil actions.”
“As a result of the provision being introduced here, there will now be a straightforward statutory procedure that will enable people to go before the Circuit Court. I think all colleagues will welcome that.”
“Third is the provision to enable someone to go to the Circuit Court to get an identification order against a social media company that has published information about them that is defamatory but where the identity of the person is hidden. These are significant developments that will assist individuals who have been defamed and who want to get access to the identity of those who have defamed them. Most defamation that takes place in Ireland, as I am sure my friends would agree, happens online by unidentified persons who defame people by means of social media platforms. At present, in order to establish the identity of the defamer, you have to go to the High Court to get a Norwich Pharmacal order to get the social media company to identify the person behind it.”
“I thank my three colleagues for their contributions. I also thank them for their support regarding the amendments that have been brought here from the Seanad. All three spoke about juries. I will deal with that matter presently. Before I do, I would not like people to think that the primary functions of this Bill are all to do with the abolition of High Court juries. There is much more to the Bill than that, as I am sure colleagues are aware. There are two areas that deserve recognition and attention. I will mention them briefly. They are the amendment to section 26 and the provision of a new defence for retailers.”
“The amendments seek to balance the concerns expressed in the Seanad with concerns raised during the review of the 2009 Act that the application of an entirely separate test of fairness and reasonableness in the existing section 26 defence was overly complex. I recommend that the House accepts these three amendments.”
“Concerns were raised in Seanad Éireann that section 11 removed the important element of “fairness” from the defence of fair and reasonable publication. Amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, respond to those concerns. Amendment No. 3 places the concept of fairness front and centre of the defence and clarifies that in order to avail of the defence, the publication must be fair in all the circumstances of the case. It goes on to set out that this will only occur where the publication can objectively be considered in the public interest and where the publisher, acting in good faith, reasonably believed this to be the case having conducted appropriate checks and inquiries. Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 alter the title of the amended defence to make it clear that fairness is a key element of the defence.”
“I will say a few brief words. I am back, a Cheann Comhairle, from a lengthy sojourn in the Seanad, which I have to say was interesting and productive. I think I was in the Seanad for over 28 hours on Committee and Report Stages but it was a worthwhile engagement. As a result of the contributions from Senators in the House, I am coming here with five amendments to the legislation. Amendments Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, are changes to section 11 of the Bill, which, as colleagues will know, were substantive changes to section 26 of the original Act. It was introduced on Report Stage in this House to amend section 26 of the 2009 Act by providing for a simpler and more concise defence of publication on a matter of public interest.”
“It is a question that maybe does not need to be answered, but, ultimately, if we want to move on and try to achieve some form of reconciliation and unity, we are going to have to look at this in a more selfless way and stop trying to just advance our own interests.”
“If we are going to allow legacy to be simply another battleground on which the green and orange politics of Northern Ireland are fought, we might as well give up. It is of no benefit to anyone because it will all be about whataboutery. We have to acknowledge our responsibility. Everyone in this House has a responsibility. Some have greater responsibilities than others in terms of what happened in the past and we cannot run away from the responsibility for the terrible things that were done on this island for a period of 30 years. When you look back on it, you wonder what it was all about. To get to the Good Friday Agreement? We did not need thousands of people to be killed to get to the Good Friday Agreement. It is depressing. I know it is hard for people who were involved in the violence to ask that question: what was it all about?”
“There are many people trying to think of mechanisms for it to be provided, but I would have thought that the last show in town is the legacy framework that at present is being worked on by the British Government and in respect of which I also will be bringing forward legislation again. I intend to bring forward legislation in this House to give effect to the responsibilities that will lie upon this State. I accept my responsibility. Others have to accept theirs and encourage others who have information to come forward with it. An Garda Síochána has established a unit as is required for the investigations of Troubles-related incidents. The Commissioner has been centrally involved in putting that in place. We need to ensure that where we can have investigations, those investigations take place.”
“The reality is that, in many instances, the information that is available will not be retained in a document, on a written piece of paper or in files that will be handed over. It is available to people who are still alive and who are still involved in it. That is why we all have to try to play our role in urging people who have information to give that information and bring it forward. There are people in the North who have information and could provide assistance in terms of truth and reconciliation. We may not have yet provided that forum where that can happen.”
“I criticised the British Government for allowing that and I criticised the Provisional IRA for being the parties that were colluding in the murders that were perpetrated by Freddie Scappaticci. When we are dealing with legacy, we have to be able to speak truthfully about issues. I know everyone comes to every debate with their own political objective but there will be no resolution of the legacy issue unless people are prepared to take on board uncomfortable truths and people are prepared to look to see that the entity they represent has answers to give in respect of this matter. In my engagement with victims and families in Troubles-related cases, they have told me that they feel time is running out for them and they are looking for truth and accountability.”
“In most cases relating to the atrocities and murders perpetrated in the past in Northern Ireland, the ones that have not been solved to date, where people have not been brought to the courts, the likelihood is that they will not be brought to justice. That does not diminish the benefit that can come from inquiries and investigations. We saw that with regard to Kenova in respect of Freddie Scappaticci. I read Kenova and I also read Richard O'Rawe's book. It is an horrific example of how lives were viewed as being so dispensable and so unimportant that people were able to allow Freddie Scappaticci to kill in such a relaxed way that it was not an issue.”
“However, I can tell the House that the opportunity that exists at present for a real and thorough legacy inquiry is much better now than it was with the previous British Government and we need to avail of this opportunity. We also need to recognise that when it comes to investigating the past, the passage of time affects it. This is what is so painful for the families involved in this who have experienced the lack of justice for 30 or more years. When I meet the families of victims, I try to be honest and straight with them and say that, on many occasions, people do not get the justice that they deserve or the justice they want.”
“I presume, interpret and hope it means that she is apologising for the murders perpetrated by the Provisional IRA. If that is so, it is a positive development. We need to move on from our comfort zones in respect of our legacy. I have been in discussions with the British Government in terms of trying to get agreement on the legacy framework. It is extremely difficult. I heard Deputy Tóibín say earlier that we should not allow the British Government to introduce legislation that enables X, Y or Z. Obviously, neither I nor anyone else in this House can control the legislation that is enacted in the British Parliament, just as the British cannot control the legislation that is enacted here.”
“When I have had meetings with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, I refer to his responsibility and the fact that he has answers that would be of benefit to people who were victims in Dublin and Monaghan. We have to be able to recognise that the political representatives of the Provisional IRA are Sinn Féin. That is not a party political point; that is a fact. In terms of trying to get answers for the actions of the Provisional IRA and for the crimes that were committed by the Provisional IRA, Sinn Féin has to answer that in the same way as I answer on behalf of the Irish Government or indeed Hilary Benn has to answer on behalf of the British Government. I listened very carefully to the leader of Sinn Féin. She said she was sorry. She said she was sorry for all the lives lost.”
“Maybe it was just because that he was the last speaker prior to the Acting Chairman but as an example of legacy, Deputy Mac Lochlainn referred to the outrageous murder of Eddie Fullerton, who was an elected politician. We need to remember as well that other politicians such as Robert Bradford and Billy Fox were also murdered. If we are going to have legacy and if it is going to work effectively, we cannot just decide individually that it suits my political agenda to refer to some legacy crimes from the past and not mention others. We need to have a much broader perspective of what is involved in legacy. What will be really difficult is people politically getting behind legacy inquiries into areas that make them feel uncomfortable. I am here as the representative of the Irish Government and I have to answer for the Irish Government.”
“There is a legitimate objective and political purpose why politicians and governments are seeking to pursue investigations into the past so we can get answers for loved ones who have not been provided with answers today What is the danger of legacy? The danger of legacy is that we just use legacy for our own narrow political purposes. We cannot do that. If we are going to allow the past to be the territory on which the modern conflict is contested, there is no point in having any involvement in the legacy process. Regrettably, it is the case that we do allow the past to be used for our own political purposes. I always listen to Deputy Mac Lochlainn. I mean that. I always listen to him because I think he has very strong contributions to make.”
“I thank all the Deputies who contributed. It is important at the outset to ask what the purpose of legacy is and what the purpose of Denton and Kenova, which we are discussing today, was. The purpose is to provide answers for families that never got justice and whose family members were killed in brutal circumstances in what everyone can agree was a dirty war on the part of everyone who participated in it. That is the purpose of legacy. There is a further purpose, which is to try to improve and enhance reconciliation so that there can be greater understanding between communities who, to be blunt, were involved in a bloody sectarian campaign and conflict that took place in Northern Ireland for 30 years. That is the purpose of legacy.”
“In the 1970s, family liaison was not an established concept in policing but, thankfully, policing today is in a very different position, and family liaison is embedded in policing practice. In the joint framework on legacy agreed by the Irish and British Governments last year, both Governments have recognised that we need to have a victim-centred approach to investigations into Troubles-related incidents.”
“That remains the case for all unresolved Troubles-related cases. I want to take this opportunity to refer to another incident, not so well known and publicly remembered, that was also examined as part of Denton. That is the Dublin Airport bombing on 29 November 1975, in which John Hayes, an Aer Lingus employee, a 38-year-old father of three young children, was killed. The 50th anniversary of his death has passed, and it is regrettable that no one has been held accountable. I met his son, Brendan Hayes, recently. Without commenting on our discussion, I would say that it brought to the fore the lack of awareness of the importance of engaging with family members in the aftermath of such traumatic events, and the need to keep them informed of developments in the investigations.”
“While Denton concluded that there was no single, easily defined group operating from the Glenanne farm, as has been extensively alleged, it is no less shocking that Denton found evidence that there was a wider, more diffuse network of loyalist paramilitaries and members of the security forces that acted together to carry out vicious sectarian attacks across this island. Ten of those incidents occurred in this jurisdiction, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. While Denton found that the prospect of any successful prosecution in relation to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings was extremely unlikely from a UK perspective, I would emphasise, as I have done repeatedly, that the Garda investigations remain open and An Garda Síochána is fully committed to actively pursuing any new evidence that comes to light.”
“Kenova has rightly framed the Provisional IRA's role in this savage violence against innocent people as grave violations of human rights intended to intimidate and subjugate the community. It is a fundamental principle of human rights that they are universal and transcend political affiliation. There was never any justification for these violations of human rights to occur, even in the course of a bitter sectarian conflict. In relation to Operation Denton, the summary report has underlined what was already either suspected or known in relation to many of the cases under review: that collusion between the UVF and the British security forces was taking place.”
“Informants are vital to policing and security the world over, to the prevention and detection of crime and to safeguarding democratic governments from those who would seek to undermine them by terrorist acts or other threats. What is catalogued in Kenova goes far beyond the rules with which informants and their handlers must abide. Being an informant is not a licence to commit unlawful acts of the most serious kind or to act with impunity. I want to put this on the record to reassure the House. Stakeknife's personal role in the violence carried out by the Provisional IRA is shocking and grotesque but it should not obscure the wider reality that Kenova's casework covered a total of 101 murders and abductions by that organisation.”
“Kenova expressed caution about the careless use of the term “collusion”, but there can be no doubt that collusion took place in relation to Stakeknife. It was a perverse form of collusion in which the interests of British intelligence and their efforts to protect their informant at the heart of the Provisional IRA coalesced with the Provisional IRA's own murderous and illegitimate actions to judge and savagely punish those it deemed a threat to its aims. On the part of the British security and intelligence services, there were repeated failures to protect the victims of the Provisional IRA from harm and to bring those responsible to justice. Consequent on this were 27 cases in which Stakeknife was personally connected to the commission of serious criminal offences, including murder, attempted murder and unlawful imprisonment.”
“It is the sad reality of the history of the conflict, however, that the question of collusion, which has been so damaging to the pursuit of consensus on the legacy of the Troubles, is at the heart of two of these: Kenova and Denton. As the Taoiseach has rightly said, it is the corrosive effect of all collusion, both known and suspected, that undermines the confidence of families in legacy processes and our collective ability to move on from the conflict. In relation to Stakeknife, the allegations about this figure in the Provisional IRA and his links to British intelligence have been notorious for many years. Kenova has exposed the nature and extent of the collusion that took place in relation to Freddie Scappaticci.”
“This report is a hugely important contribution to the search for answers and accountability. It represents the culmination of ten years of painstaking, rigorous work and I echo the Taoiseach's words of appreciation for the leadership provided by Jon Boutcher and Sir lain Livingstone and the dedication of the entire team behind the report. The work undertaken by Kenova across its four workstreams - Kenova, Denton, Turma and Mizzenmast - was wide-ranging and each is of significant public importance. I take this opportunity to express my condolences to all those who were injured or lost family members in the litany of incidents examined in the report.”
“As the Taoiseach said, the Kenova Report is a difficult read but it is an absolutely essential one for all of us in this House. Everyone must face up to the wrongs of the past honestly and squarely if we are to achieve lasting peace and reconciliation on this island. The survivors and the families of the victims of the atrocities detailed in this report, and society as a whole, deserve no less. We should not seek to excuse or minimise the harm and suffering caused, no matter by whom. We must continue to seek answers and engage with difficult truths such as those found by the Kenova team. The Government is committed to playing its part in addressing the legacy of the Troubles across these islands and has taken, and will continue to take, concrete actions to make this a reality. I will return to those actions later.”
“In addition, and as suggested by the Al advisory council, the Government is exploring amendments to the Artificial Intelligence Act to expand the list of prohibited Al practices. A lot of work is being done in this area. As I said, I welcome the Bill being introduced by Deputy Devine. I will give it serious consideration and I will work with the Opposition on it.”
“As I have said, the Government is taking the issue of online safety very seriously and I have listened with interest to what colleagues have said. I will turn now to the concrete steps that the Government has taken to address the use of Grok. As I indicated earlier, under the Digital Services Act, the European Commission is responsible for oversight. On 26 January 2026 the Commission decided to launch a formal investigation under the Digital Services Act into X and its Grok Al tool. The Government welcomes this decision, and I want to highlight that Coimisiún na Meán is formally involved with the European Commission in this investigation and was instrumental in the work leading up to its launch.”
“It would. The Attorney General has advised that the proposed increase in the penalty would be a disproportionate penalty for an offence where there is no requirement to prove any criminal intent. The reason we introduced Coco's Law was because images were being created and recorded and then being published and distributed. This was clearly very damaging and upsetting for the individuals concerned. We need to look at the fact that all that is being done by this Act is that the generation of the image would be a criminal offence and there would be no requirement for it to have been distributed it onwards. Such a significant penalty for an offence where there is no requirement to prove any intention to commit a criminal offence could be problematic in the context of Article 38 of the Constitution.”
“An issue of concern that I would ask Deputies Devine and Carthy to address is that under the Bill as drafted at present, if an individual in the confines of their home decided that they wanted to use an artificial mechanism to create a nude image of me on their computer and then they deleted it - they probably laughed at it - and never sent it anywhere else, under this legislation that person would find themselves having committed an offence which could expose them to a sentence of up to five years imprisonment.”
“Without question, it is very important to criminalise harmful behaviours in society to protect citizens and deter wrongdoing. However, it is equally important that criminal laws are fair, proportionate and justly enforced. It would be highly unusual if a five-year prison sentence were to be imposed on a person for creating an intimate image that is never spoken about and is never shared with anyone, including the victim, as could be the case under this Bill.”
“While initial phases of the Act, including setting out rules for prohibited Al practices, are now in effect, the provisions to enable surveillance, penalties and enforcement will come into effect in August 2026 and there will be formal regulatory mechanisms available to the relevant surveillance authorities to engage with individual companies There is also the EU violence against women directive. To a large extent, this has already been transposed into Irish law but any further transpositions will be done. It is also important to look at the other consequences in respect of this legislation. I believe that this Bill is well intentioned and I support the general objective but it is my duty to point out some concerns I have in relation to the proposed increased penalties.”
“The Artificial Intelligence Act introduces legal requirements that aim to ensure a high level of protection of health, safety and fundamental rights against the harmful effects of Al systems in the European Union. Under the Al Act, certain Al practices are prohibited, and certain Al systems and uses of Al by providers and deployers are subject to legal requirements in terms of governance, transparency and responses to risks and incidents. The specific use of Al by deployers is subject to the EU AI Act. A key objective of the regulation is to protect against harmful effects of Al systems in the European Union in terms of health, safety and fundamental rights.”
“The creation of an image, whether or not Al tools are used to do so, that shows a child, whether an actual child or one created by Al, engaging in sexually explicit activity or that shows, for a sexual purpose, their genitals or anal region is a serious offence under the Act. It is a criminal offence at present to generate an image of a child. That is relevant in the context of the legislation being proposed this evening by Deputy Devine. Under the Digital Services Act, the European Commission is responsible for the oversight of very large online platforms. These platforms are required to assess and mitigate risks that their services may create in relation to the proliferation of illegal content online and the protection of fundamental rights, including protection for minors.”
“I would like to add at this point that the definition of an intimate image under the 2020 Act is intentionally broad to include any visual representation of a person. Therefore, it will include an AI-generated image of a person. This will also intimate images which have been altered or doctored prior to their distribution or publication, more commonly referred to as deepfakes. I want to highlight that the Attorney General has confirmed this is indeed the case. The second piece of legislation relevant to the debate this evening is the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998. It is framed so that no distinction can be made between AI-generated material and other child sexual abuse material. The production and distribution of child sexual abuse material attracts a sentence of up to 14 years' imprisonment.”
“In this context, I would like to give a brief overview of the legislation that already exists in our legal system which is of relevance to today's debate. As has been mentioned, Coco's Law, the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act, was enacted in 2020. It creates a serious offence of distribution or publication of an intimate image without consent with intent to cause harm to the victim, attracting a maximum penalty of up to seven years' imprisonment. It is also an offence to threaten to distribute or publish such an image. The Act also provides for a strict liability offence, with a lower penalty, for engaging in the recording, distribution or publication of an intimate image without consent, with no requirement to prove an intention to cause harm.”
“I also believe it is fitting that we will be discussing the generation of intimate images using Al tools this evening as today is Safer Internet Day. We know that the use of AI to generate offensive material or to abuse or harass any individual is unacceptable. It represents a very serious violation of privacy and dignity. It promotes a culture of objectification, particularly of women, and disrespect. It is an issue the Government is taking very seriously and is taking concrete steps to address. I welcome the debate today as I am keen to ensure that there are no gaps in the legislation and that the current established legal framework is sufficiently robust to protect people from digital harms.”
“As the evidence available indicates the generation of non-consensual intimate images disproportionally targets women and children, the policy intention underpinning the Bill aligns with the Government’s commitment to a zero-tolerance approach to domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, which is a priority for me and the Government. Consequently, I will not be opposing the Bill on Second Stage. While there is a comprehensive range of legislation already in place in Ireland to combat these types of harmful digital practices, which I will speak about shortly, I have been examining the extent of the current established legal framework with the Attorney General to ensure it is sufficiently robust to protect people from digital harms like these. Therefore, on the basis of this ongoing review I will not be opposing the Bill on this Stage.”
“I want the House to know that the Government and I share the widespread revulsion at the fact that platforms have allowed the non-consensual nudification of images, primarily of women and children. We also need to recognise that aiding and abetting an indictable serious offence is a criminal offence itself. There is a very strong view that X itself has committed a criminal offence by aiding and abetting the commission of an offence under Coco's Law. Earlier today I brought a memorandum to Government seeking approval not to oppose this Bill and I can confirm that this was endorsed by Cabinet.”
“I want to start by thanking Deputies Devine and Carthy for introducing this important Bill. As has been indicated, the Bill seeks to seeks to amend Coco's Law by criminalising the generation of non-consensual intimate images and videos, and also by increasing the maximum penalties on conviction. At present, it is a criminal offence to generate images provided they are then distributed and-or published. I know that the Bill has been introduced in the context of recent public concerns and considerable political debate arising from the launching by X, on Christmas Day 2025, of a feature powered by Grok to allow editing of images. This feature was used at scale to create harmful and illegal content, in particular the nudification of people, including children.”
“We need to ensure that enforcement is effective, but it is also about behavioural change on the part of drivers on the roads. We need to slow down and be more careful.”
“The highest volume of detections was on bank holiday Monday, with over 800 speeding detections. A total of 193 drivers were arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence of an intoxicant. Nearly 400 drivers were detected for driving while using a mobile phone. Over 660 vehicles were detained by members of An Garda Síochána, with 50% for no insurance. This serves to highlight that some people continue to behave badly on our roads and make poor choices, the consequence of which is endangerment of fellow road users and in particular vulnerable road users. Despite this concerted effort by the Garda, unfortunately, over the course of the weekend there were two fatalities and 14 serious injury incidents due to collisions. We must redouble our efforts on all fronts to further ensure road safety for all.”
“This is facilitated by the provision of tens of thousands of drug rapid testing kits by the Medical Bureau of Road Safety each year. I welcome the significant awareness campaign the Road Safety Authority ran last year highlighting these drug-driving enforcement powers and capabilities. Since November 2023, the Motor Insurers’ Bureau of Ireland has been providing insurance details to An Garda Síochána. Details for 3 million vehicles and 5 million drivers are provided daily to identify vehicles being driven without insurance. The Garda continues to carry out enhanced road safety and traffic enforcement campaigns, with the latest over the recent St Brigid's bank holiday weekend. Over the weekend, An Garda Síochána and mobile and fixed GoSafe cameras detected nearly 3,500 motorists speeding.”
“That is 188 families and communities experiencing tragedy and loss and attending funerals of loved ones. Not only that, but for every fatality there are eight serious and possibly life-changing injuries. We obviously need to do better. For my part as Minister for justice, I am determined to see a return to the progress we have seen previously and know we can achieve. Enforcement is a key aspect of ensuring greater safety on our roads and the Garda continues to play a key role in prioritising road safety. This includes the implementation of 30 minutes of high-visibility road safety policing per garda shift. That was introduced in April 2024. In addition, since May 2024, the powers and provisions introduced by the Road Traffic Act 2024 mean that An Garda Síochána can now conduct mandatory drug testing at the scene of serious collisions.”
“Over the course of that strategy and its successors, we witnessed a remarkable improvement in safety on our roads, as deaths began to fall. From 472 deaths in 1997, we reduced the figure to 162 by 2012, with a further reduction to 133 by 2021, which was the lowest level since records had begun in 1959. Road safety strategies and measures taken by successive Governments have played a very important role in reducing deaths on our roads. However, these improvements have also only been possible as a result of a great many of us changing and improving our behaviours on the road. Unfortunately, more recent trends are less positive and the gains we have made are beginning to slip. Last year saw an increase in road deaths, with 188 fatalities on our roads. That is a very significant number.”
“Reckless behaviour, selfish choices, excess speed, drink and drug driving, distracted driving and not wearing a seatbelt are all choices and behaviours on our roads that, as we know, lead inevitably to death, destruction and despair. For my part, I want to be clear that the Government is committed to reducing road deaths and creating safer roads for everyone in Ireland. However, this will not be possible without behavioural change. We have done it before, and we now need to do it again. In 1997, almost three decades ago, there were 472 fatalities on Irish roads. That was an extraordinarily number of lives lost and, thankfully, today we do not have such high figures. That year marked a turning point for road safety in Ireland. In 1998 implementation began on the first national road safety strategy.”
“I also want to update Deputies about the unfolding accident on North Earl Street involving a bus and a pedestrian. I regret to say there has been a fatality and three others have been taken to hospital. Our thoughts are with the family of the person who has been fatally injured and the people who are in hospital. We wish them well. As a society, we find ourselves all too often expressing these condolences arising from serious road traffic accidents. Already in 2026, too many people have been lost on the roads in Ireland and we are just over one month into the new year. We need to grasp the simple reality in front of us.”
“I welcome the opportunity to address the House this afternoon to update it on road safety matters. I will be sharing my time with the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, and the Minister of State, Deputy Grealish, will be delivering the closing statement. I would like to take the opportunity to offer my sincere condolences to the family of Grace Lynch. Neither the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, nor I can imagine the pain the family are going through and the sense of loss they are experiencing. To lose someone so obviously cherished by her family is a traumatic event. The direct reason for this debate on road safety matters is the tragic accident that happened to Grace Lynch. There will obviously be significant Government and enforcement responses to that.”