Mary Butler
Waterford · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“Major improvements are happening across services: enhanced access to proactive and preventive healthcare to support a better quality of life; the embedding and upscaling of women's health initiatives put in place through the implementation of the previous women's health action plans, including, as the Senator knows, free contraception, sp…”
“In relation to any proposal, a proposal for a new location requires a detailed business case, a premises, support from the regional HSE management, and the necessary funding to resource the staffing of the service. That is where I come into it and what I will be trying to do.”
“We are currently working closely with it to support the expansion of Jigsaw services to Waterford and the south east, as well as to County Clare. The location of Waterford was picked because we have no services in the south east at all. It is great that we will have the hub and spoke model the Senator spoke about.”
“That is where I do not agree with the Senator. I believe €180 million of funding ring-fenced for women's health, when we have come from a low base, is absolutely unbelievable.”
“The plan will build on our knowledge of women's health through research and innovation and will spotlight important areas such as endometriosis and cardiovascular health. Recently, the Minister announced €2 million in funding for women's health research.”
“This plan will continue to focus on how we can improve access to specialist endometriosis care and treatment. As the Senator knows, we have established two super-regional specialist centres, one in Tallaght University Hospital and another in Cork, alongside the development of five regional endometriosis hubs.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,499 lines we hold for Mary Butler, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 21 of 50.
“It is very small group of people - a tiny subset. I do not want anyone to be triggered by this, but I do not want any unintended consequence of people being refused admission to an approved centre when they need support, because of being a risk to someone else.”
“For that reason, I cannot support this or any similar amendment in this grouping because I would worry about the unintended consequences, that someone with a mental disorder who may need to be admitted involuntarily because of posing an immediate and serious risk of harm to another person would be excluded from a mental health facility, an approved centre or department of psychiatry. I ask Senators to think about what they are saying. Someone is at risk of harming another person and for that reason cannot be admitted. Where will they go? Will they go out on the streets? They have a mental disorder and Senators do not want them to be admitted because they pose a risk to someone else. It is okay that they are a risk to themselves. If they pose a risk to another person, however, it must be remembered that any of us could be that person.”
“If people cannot be admitted involuntarily due to an immediate serious risk of harm to others - we will come back to this; they are at risk of harming themselves and, potentially, others - there is a strong possibility they will end up in the criminal justice system. By ensuring that there is a treatment pathway, which the Senator spoke about, for this small group of people, they can be diverted from the criminal justice system. They can be given the chance to have their disorders treated and the risk of harm they pose will be minimised or eliminated entirely when their condition improves. Conditions do improve. As I say all the time, recovery is possible in the context of mental health.”
“The Bill contains effective safeguards for these people, such as a robust set of admission and treatment criteria, regular reviews of detention by independent review boards, free and independent legal representation and a very active regulator in the Mental Health Commission.”
“People who are involuntarily admitted are not guilty of committing a crime and we must also be very clear about that. They are in hospital and in the best-case scenario, they can make a full recovery. We do not talk enough about recovery. They can make a full recovery and no longer pose a risk of harm to any person. There could be a snapshot or moment in time when they are a risk to another person. They could be psychotic and in a really bad way. Effective and timely treatment for people with a mental disorder who pose a risk of harm to others is something we should be supporting. I just cannot understand how Mental Health Reform could support amendments like these. It beggars belief.”
“We are talking about removing the fact that they are a risk to others but there is always going to be a subset of people who, due to their mental disorder, which could involve a dual diagnosis, may need to be involuntarily admitted because they pose an immediate and serious risk of harm to another person. Are we going to not admit a person with a mental disorder who is a risk to himself, herself or another person? Are we going to insert an amendment into this Bill to say that we are going to remove the risk to other people criterion? It could not be clearer. We can talk about civil liberties and we have to get this Bill right but mental health settings are not prisons. That is the first point. I have to be very clear about that. They are not prisons.”
“Senator Black spoke about a person-centred approach. Where is that approach when the reality is that there is, and always will be, a subset of people who, due to their own mental disorder, may need to be involuntarily admitted because they pose an immediate and serious risk of harm to another person? If they are not involuntarily detained due to their mental disorder because they are a risk to other people, what happens if they leave the emergency department or the department of psychiatry and go outside on the street? Where is the person-centred approach for the people on the street? We have to look at the unintended consequences of this.”
“The Senators have spoken about civil liberties the whole way through our consideration of this Bill – this is my fifth session considering it in the Seanad – so I ask them to reconsider their proposal. I do not believe it is well thought out, and it would do untold damage.”
“I acknowledge that only a very small minority of people affected by mental disorders and mental health difficulties pose a risk of harm or violence to other people. Statistically, a person with mental health difficulties is more likely to be a victim of violent crime than a perpetrator; however, I must reiterate that I do not believe it appropriate to remove the risk of harm to other people from the legal basis for involuntary admission. If we accepted the amendments, a person who is a risk to others could not be admitted by a consultant dealing with his or her case in real time. I do not know whether the amendments are worded incorrectly or otherwise, but they are unworkable and would have unintended consequences. I would genuinely worry if they were passed.”
“If involuntary admission were no longer possible, clinicians would have no ability to admit involuntarily a person who, due to his or her mental disorder, was an immediate and serious risk of harm to another person. The Senators are asking for the removal of risk of harm to "another person". Often when people have mental illnesses or have had psychotic incidents, at which times they can be completely not the people they normally are, they can be a risk to themselves or others. I actually cannot understand the reasoning behind the proposal to remove from the Bill the provision referring to a risk to others. I have serious concerns about the potential unintended consequences if these amendments are carried. For that reason, I have no choice but to oppose them.”
“Amendments Nos. 48, 49, 114, 115, 133 and 134 relate to the criteria for involuntary admission and treatment in the absence of consent. They propose to remove the risk of harm to another person as grounds for detention. I have seen many amendments in my lifetime and believe the one before us is one of the most inappropriate I have ever seen. I actually cannot see the reason for it. If the amendments are carried, it will mean that for the very small number of people detained on grounds of risk and who represent an immediate and serious risk to another person – we have seen cases of this – involuntary admission will no longer be possible. I believe the unintended consequences of this amendment have not been considered properly.”
“Furthermore, the detention of the person must be likely to benefit his or her condition or must be likely to reduce his or her risk to self or others. I will leave it at that, but I do believe what is being proposed in the Bill is appropriate and it needs to happen, to be honest.”
“I want to be very clear. The Bill as currently set out revises the criteria for detention. It is the biggest facet of the Bill. It revises the criteria for detention and uncouples the criteria from the definition of mental disorder. Intellectual disability and dementia have been removed. Therefore, any child or adult will not be involuntarily detained just because he or she has an intellectual disability or dementia. Thank God, we have gone so far away from that. The criteria in the Bill represent both a narrowing of criteria both on the grounds of risk and on the grounds of treatment. Regarding the risk criteria, a person must be at risk of immediate and serious harm to his or her health or their life or that of another person. We will discuss that later.”
“The criteria in the Bill, I believe, represent an appropriate balance between ensuring a high level of protection and ensuring involuntary admission is available when needed. To be very clear, a person is not detained involuntarily because he or she lacks capacity. That is a fact. Capacity fluctuates every day and sometimes within a day. Somebody might decide in the morning that he or she does not want any family involvement or any support from friends or family and then change his or her mind by that afternoon. If lack of capacity is a criterion for admission, then a person must be released if he or she regains capacity after a day. We need to think about what is being proposed. Somebody cannot just be involuntarily detained on the basis that he or she lacks capacity because his or her capacity could change ten times that day.”
“Regarding the risk criteria, to be involuntarily detained, a person must be at risk of immediate and serious harm to his or her life or health or that of another person. Furthermore, the detention of the person must be likely to benefit his or her condition or to reduce his or her risk to self or others. That is what the Bill says in black and white. Regarding treatment criteria, the person must require the treatment immediately. The treatment required can only be given in an inpatient setting. Quite a lot of people with enduring mental health conditions need treatment that cannot be provided outside of an inpatient setting. In addition, the treatment must be likely to materially benefit the person's condition. That is what the Bill says.”
“I said I would not speak again on this amendment but as so many Senators have spoken on it, it would be rude of me not to touch on all that has been said. The criteria for involuntary admission are the result of extensive consultation over many years. That is the first point. The Bill broadly reflects the expert group's recommendations to revise the criteria for detention. It uncouples the criteria from the definition of mental disorder. On Senator Clonan's point, intellectual disability and dementia have been removed in the Bill as sole grounds for involuntary detention. I want to make that very clear. It is such a complicated Bill, with 220 sections, and it is hard to be over the detail of every single element of it. The criteria in the Bill represent a narrowing of criteria on the grounds of both risk and treatment.”
“When the amendments were submitted, amendments Nos. 19, 21, 22 and 47 were submitted as a grouping. I remember speaking at length on this particular part of the Bill. What I said about this particular amendment, which was also discussed in the Dáil, stands, and I will not be discussing it further.”
“These amendments fix various typographical and smaller errors in the Bill. For example, amendment No. 45 adds a comma after the word "means" in section 11. Amendment No. 59 adds a comma after the word "person". Of consequence is Government amendment No. 58. This amendment changes "may" to "shall" in section 14(2) so that an authorised officer must request information on the circumstances and medical history of the person being examined that the person requesting the application may reasonably know. This amendment was requested by the HSE's mental health engagement and recovery team made up of experts of lived experience.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann, pursuant to Standing Order 33, and with effect from 21st January, 2026, approves the Seventh Report of the Standing Committee of Selection, copies of which were laid before Dáil Éireann on 16th January, 2026.”
“I note all the various requests from the various Whips. There have been many requests in the past weeks here and before Christmas in relation to statements on water and on international developments. They are all being facilitated tomorrow. We have important legislation this week including the home support providers Bill, the Copyright and Related Rights (Amendment) Bill and the Criminal Law and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill. We have a very busy schedule in place. It was discussed last Thursday and it will stand.”
“the proceedings on the Second Stage of the Criminal Law and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2026 shall, if not previously concluded, be interrupted and stand adjourned after 3 hours and 24 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: (a) the first speaking round shall be in accordance with those contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (b) where speeches conclude before the 3 hours and 24 minutes have elapsed and no other member is offering, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes, whereupon proceedings shall be brought to a conclusion; and (c) members may share time. Gov SF Lab Gov SF Mins 20 20 12 12 4 SD Gov SF IPTG Gov Mins 20 12 4 20 12 SF ITG Gov SF OM Mins 4 20 12 4 20”
“and shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 60 minutes by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Enterprise, Tourism and Employment. In relation to Thursday's business, it is proposed that: 1. notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, topical issues may be taken earlier than 7.24 p.m., with consequential effect on the commencement time for Second Stage of the River Boyne Task Force Bill 2023, and on the time for the adjournment of the Dáil; and 2.”
“the Statements on Water shall not exceed 3 hours and 32 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: (a) the statements, not including the Ministerial response, shall be in accordance with the sequence contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (b) following the statements, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes; and (c) members may share time; and Gov SF Lab Gov SF Mins 35 25 15 15 5 SD Gov SF IPTG Gov Mins 15 15 5 12 15 SF ITG Gov SF OM Mins 5 12 15 5 8 4. the proceedings on the Report and Final Stages of the Copyright and Related Rights (Amendment) Bill 2025 shall be taken no earlier than 7 p.m.”
“the Statements on International Developments shall not exceed 2 hours and 25 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: (a) the statements, not including the Ministerial response, shall be in accordance with the sequence contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (b) following the statements, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes; and (c) members may share time; Gov SF Lab Gov SF Mins 25 15 10 10 3 SD Gov SF IPTG Gov Mins 10 10 3 9 10 SF ITG Gov SF OM Mins 3 9 10 3 5 3.”
“when the order of business shall resume with the Copyright and Related Rights (Amendment) Bill 2025; and (c) the time allotted for Government Business shall be extended in accordance with the arrangements for that business, with consequential effect on the commencement time for the weekly division time; 2.”
“(c) members may share time; and Gov SF Lab Gov SF Mins 20 20 20 12 4 SD Gov SF IPTG Gov Mins 20 12 4 20 12 SF ITG Gov SF OM Mins 4 20 12 4 20 6. notwithstanding anything in Standing Order 177(2), the proceedings on Second Stage of the Sale of Nitrous Oxide and Related Products Bill 2025 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 2 hours. In relation to Wednesday's business, it is proposed that: 1. notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders: (a) the Dáil may sit later than 9.30 p.m.; (b) in the event the Statements on Water conclude before 7 p.m., the sitting shall stand suspended until 7 p.m.”
“the proceedings on the Second Stage of the Health (Amendment) (Home Support Providers) Bill 2025 shall, if not previously concluded, be interrupted and stand adjourned after 3 hours and 24 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: (a) the first speaking round shall be in accordance with those contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (b) where speeches conclude before the 3 hours and 24 minutes have elapsed and no other member is offering, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes, whereupon proceedings shall be brought to a conclusion; and notwithstanding anything in Standing Order 177(2), the proceedings on Second Stage of the Sale of Nitrous Oxide and Related Products Bill 2025 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 2 hours.”
“the proceedings on the Motion re Appointment of Chairperson of Standards in Public Office Commission shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately; 3. the proceedings on the Motion re Seventh Report of the Standing Committee of Selection shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately; 4. the proceedings on the Referral to Select Committee of the Public Health (Single-Use Vapes) Bill 2025 pursuant to Standing Order 188, shall be taken without debate and any division claimed thereon shall be taken immediately; 5.”
“Proposed Arrangements for this week’s business: In relation to Tuesday’s business, it is proposed that: 1. notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders: (a) the Referral to Select Committee of the Public Health (Single-Use Vapes) Bill 2025 shall be taken on the conclusion of proceedings on any motions without debate; (b) the time allocated to Government business shall be extended in accordance with the arrangements for that business and the Dáil may sit later than 10.48 p.m.; and (c) private members’ business shall be taken following the proceedings on the Second Stage of the Health (Amendment) (Home Support Providers) Bill 2025, with consequential effect on the commencement times for the items following in the ordinary routine of business; 2.”
“Wednesday's business shall be: - Statements on International Developments (to conclude within 2 hours and 25 minutes) - Statements on Water (to conclude within 3 hours and 32 minutes) - Copyright and Related Rights (Amendment) Bill 2025 (Report and Final Stages) (to commence no earlier than 7 p.m. and to conclude within 1 hour) Wednesday's private members' business shall be the Motion re Flexible Work and Commuter Delays, selected by the Labour Party. Thursday's business shall be: - Criminal Law and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2026 (Second Stage) (to adjourn after 3 hours and 24 minutes, if not previously concluded) Thursday evening business shall be the Second Stage of the River Boyne Task Force Bill 2023, sponsored by Deputy Ged Nash.”
“I move: Tuesday's business shall be: - Motion re Appointment of Chairperson of Standards in Public Office Commission (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) - Motion re Seventh Report of the Standing Committee of Selection (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) - Public Health (Single-Use Vapes) Bill 2025 (Referral to Committee) (without debate and any division claimed to be taken immediately) - Health (Amendment) (Home Support Providers) Bill 2025 (Second Stage) (to adjourn after 3 hours and 24 minutes, if not previously concluded) Tuesday's private members' business shall be the Second Stage of the Sale of Nitrous Oxide and Related Products Bill 2025, selected by Sinn Féin.”
“We cannot underestimate the services that are being provided. The issue the Deputy raises today relates to acute mental health beds in Wexford. There are none currently planned but we are certainly going to look at the issue, perhaps in the context of a crisis house or a high-level hostel. It is on my radar. I will give the Deputy that but I want to acknowledge the good work that is done in the department of psychiatry in Waterford.”
“I know the teams that work there and I know the work they do. As the Deputy knows, under the capital plan there will be a new-build unit in University Hospital Waterford. A new 50-bed department of psychiatry is in the capital plan and has been progressing, albeit slowly, over the last three years. It was meant to be adjacent to the hospital. The consultants there and the executive clinical director wanted it to be part of the hospital and that is exactly what is going to happen. We must acknowledge the work being done by all six general adult teams in Wexford, the psychiatry of later life service in Wexford, and the two CAMHS teams in the county that I have visited. I also want to acknowledge the services that are available, including the liaison services through Wexford General Hospital.”
“I am trying to count to five here because, as I reiterated, only two children across the whole country were admitted to adult wards last year. Two 17-year-olds were admitted, with the consent of their parents, for their own safety. There are no children being admitted to the department of psychiatry at University Hospital Waterford. That is the first thing I want to put on the record. Second, when we are finished here I suggest that the Deputy takes a look at the Mental Health Commission's report on foot of its visit to the department of psychiatry at University Hospital Waterford last year and the results therein. I am not going to leave it hanging in the air that there is a service in Waterford that is not fit for purpose because that is not the case. On three occasions, Deputy Ó Súilleabháin has disparaged that service.”
“Indeed, this has been raised with me by the Minister for housing, Deputy Browne, on several occasions and by other public representatives in Wexford. I want to give a shout out to Mental Health Ireland which is very strong in Wexford. Over the last five years I have launched many of its initiatives in relation to mental health, well-being, and emotional distress in the Wexford area and I want to applaud it for all the work it does on the ground. To go back to what the Deputy has said in relation to acute beds, I am aware that there are none in Wexford. I am also aware that there are none in Tipperary. We have done a capacity review of mental health beds and we will be having a look at this in the new year.”
“There were two cases last year, taken in real time when a clinician - a consultant psychiatrist - had to make a life or death decision on whether to admit that child or young person. In both cases, the patients were 17-plus and they were admitted with the approval of their parents. I cannot let that hang in the air. Wexford is being very well served by community mental health teams. There are six adult community mental health teams, one in Maryville, New Ross, two in Carn House in Enniscorthy, one in Tara House, Gorey and two in Summerhill in Wexford town. There are also two CAMHS teams and there are plans to put a third team in place. That said, I do accept what the Deputy has said in relation to the fact that there are no adult psychiatric beds. That is the nub of the issue in Wexford in general.”
“I know this inside out because I have lived it for the last five years as Minister of State with responsibility for mental health. We have a service-level agreement with St. Patrick's, a private hospital in Dublin, when we have issues with capacity. The Deputy has spoken about the number of presentations of children to emergency departments in Wexford. As he will know, when Wexford General Hospital had a fire a year and a half ago, University Hospital Waterford partnered very closely with it to take any of the overflow that could not be dealt with at that time. In response to the Deputy's comment that the unit is antiquated and not suitable for children, only two children were admitted to an adult department of psychiatry last year across the whole country, down from 100 when I took over in 2020.”
“Reynolds in the next two weeks to discuss mental health services across Waterford and Wexford. I take umbrage with how the Deputy portrayed the department of psychiatry led by the clinical director, Dr. Vwoke Akpubi, in University Hospital Waterford. On two occasions, the Deputy said it was an antiquated service. That is not true. Maybe the Deputy meant the building, but the service is not antiquated. St. Senan's closed in 2013 before the Deputy and I became involved politics at national level. When St. Senan's was closed a decision was taken that all referrals would be made to University Hospital Waterford. There are 42 beds in the department of psychiatry at University Hospital Waterford. We also have a service-level agreement with St. Patrick's in Dublin.”
“I thank the Deputy very much for his question. I am quite disappointed at how the Deputy has presented the situation in Wexford. I think of all of those who are working in mental health services in Wexford today. They would be disappointed by the Deputy's statement that Wexford has been completely left behind in relation to mental health services. I will approach this issue in three different ways. First, as the Deputy knows, we have six new regional health areas. Community healthcare organisations, CHO, 5 and 6 have been amalgamated and broken down into three substructures. Waterford and Wexford are amalgamated under one integrated healthcare area, IHA, manager, Dr. Sinéad Reynolds, whose background is in mental health. She is a strong advocate for mental health. I will meet Dr.”
“Almost 30,000 patients were treated in the first six months of last year alone through a National Ambulance Service alternative care pathway, which is also important, with 40% of these patients not requiring subsequent conveyance. The Deputy is speaking about the emergencies that arise and the challenge that arises for patients and their families. I reiterate two points. In relation to the action card, which the Deputy said has been issued in two other counties but not in Roscommon, I will bring that point back. I reiterate also that I have been advised that the National Ambulance Service will continue efforts in 2026 to address the vacancies identified in Roscommon. I thank the Deputy again for raising this extremely important matter.”
“I thank the Deputy for articulating the current situation in County Roscommon. The Deputy referred to people being put at risk. When anybody makes a 999 call looking for an ambulance, the call is triaged in relation to how serious the situation is, for example, whether it is a cardiac case, stroke, a broken limb, a fall or whatever else. The first response from the National Ambulance Service is always to triage and respond to the most critical incident first. It is important that anybody tuning in to this debate hears that. The Deputy said lives are being put at risk because the service is not available for 12 hours during the week. It is important to say, however, that all calls are triaged appropriately.”
“It points to the fact that if that service had not been available, the outcome may not have been what we would have wanted it to be. I am taking this question on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Jennifer Carroll MacNeill, and I will certainly feed back to the Minister the Deputy's concerns, especially the point she made about paramedics filling in for advanced paramedics. For the record, I asked for a breakdown on NAS clinical staffing in County Roscommon. The total number of paramedics, including six advanced paramedics, is 21. There are two paramedic supervisors and six emergency medical technicians. That amounts to 29 staff currently in place. I will speak to the Minister about the 12-hour period and the issue of paramedics filling in for advanced paramedics.”
“I can also update that the HSE is progressing plans to establish a new National Ambulance Service helicopter air ambulance service this year, which will predominantly serve the west and north west. This service will be particularly beneficial in providing additional emergency coverage to patients in County Roscommon. As well as front-line urgent and emergency care, the National Ambulance Service is a vital partner in the development and expansion of a range of clinically appropriate alternative care pathways to improve patient flow and reduce pressure on emergency departments. However, I take on board the point the Deputy made in sharing the story about a young man who had an asthma attack. I thank her for sharing that and his family for allowing her to do so.”
“I am also informed by the National Ambulance Service that the rapid response vehicle in Roscommon is currently rostered on a 24-hour basis, six days per week and on a 12-hour basis on Thursday nights. I understand that the daytime shift on Thursday is covered by available emergency resources in the region and the rapid response vehicle from surrounding areas. Roscommon also benefits from the emergency aeromedical service operated by the National Ambulance Service in conjunction with the Irish Air Corps, as well as additional aeromedical support provided by the Irish Coast Guard in the region on an as available basis for its bases in Sligo and Shannon.”
“Turning to the specific issue, I am aware that this topic has been raised by the Deputy, as I said, on a number of occasions. The National Ambulance Service operates two rosters at its Roscommon ambulance bases, one for the operation of a rapid response vehicle and the other for emergency ambulances. The RRV roster has four paramedic posts and there have been two vacancies on this roster. The National Ambulance Service made repeated attempts to fill these vacancies in 2025 through its national transfer process. I am informed these attempts have been unsuccessful and the National Ambulance Service will continue efforts in 2026 to fill these vacancies. This is not about trying to save a few euro or trying to save money. The NAS is actively trying to recruit into this role and will continue to do so.”
“I thank the Deputy for raising this important issue in relation to having a rapid response vehicle on a 24-7 basis in County Roscommon. I acknowledge that the Deputy has been continuously raising this issue and advocating in relation to advanced paramedics. By way of background, as the Deputy well knows, the National Ambulance Service serves County Roscommon out of three bases located in Roscommon, Boyle and Loughglinn, which all operate on a 24-7 basis. All three bases are staffed by a highly skilled workforce of pre-hospital emergency care practitioners, including paramedics, advanced paramedics and emergency medical technicians. In addition, the National Ambulance Service operates a modern fleet of emergency ambulances, intermediate care vehicles and rapid response vehicles from these bases.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann, in accordance with section 8(3)(a) of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission Act 2003, as amended, appoints Deputy Brian Brennan to be an ordinary member of the Houses of the Oireachtas Commission in place of Deputy Frank Feighan who has resigned his office in accordance with the aforementioned section 8.”
“I note the various proposals from the Opposition Whips. Any time there is an announcement about special classes for children with additional needs, that should be welcomed regardless of who announces it. It is important, and I want to compliment both Ministers on all of the work they have done in regard to special classes. I have noted all observations. We have a busy schedule for the week. I will not be accepting any of the changes to legislation and the Order of Business stands.”
“and shall in any event be taken on the conclusion of the Statements on Artificial Intelligence, with consequential effect on the commencement time for Second Stage of the Derelict Sites (Amendment) Bill 2022 and on the time for the adjournment of the Dáil; and 2. the Statements on Artificial Intelligence shall not exceed 2 hours and 25 minutes and the order of speaking and allocation of time shall be as follows: (a) the arrangements for the statements, not including the Ministerial response, shall be in accordance with the arrangements contained in the table immediately below (to be read across, not down); (b) following the statements, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes; and (c) members may share time.”
“the proceedings on the Report and Final Stages of the Environment (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2025 shall be taken no earlier than 7 p.m. and shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 60 minutes by one question which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Climate, Energy and the Environment. In relation to Thursday's business, it is proposed that: 1. the ordinary routine of business as contained in Schedule 3 to Standing Orders shall be modified to the extent that topical issues may be taken earlier than 7.24 p.m.”