Matt Carthy
Cavan-Monaghan · Sinn Féin · Ireland
“I move amendment No. 1: To insert after "on 2nd July, 2026": "and: further calls on the Government to provide that the Accommodation Recognition Payment (ARP) scheme shall apply only to: — existing recipients with respect to the beneficiaries of temporary protection currently benefitting from the scheme where those beneficiaries of tempor…”
“10 reads, "In page 5, line 31, after “section 2” to insert “or section 3”." Section 3 criminalises recording, sharing or publishing an intimate image without consent where it seriously interferes with a person's privacy or causes alarm, distress or harm to them.”
“In terms of the legislation, as well as the breadth of the issues covered in the Bill, the other problem is the number of amendments the Minister has introduced on every Stage on new and unrelated matters that just have not been discussed in this House at all and will not get discussed here because of guillotines being applied and the Min…”
“It is not an additional punishment to be included on the register. As has been said, this is just about having a mechanism whereby the constitutional diktat that justice should be done in public is actually made available. This is not an additional punishment. It is actually a protection for others.”
“We must bear in mind that the vast majority of domestic violence offences and abuses never make their way to court. Most of them never result in a complaint. When complaints are made, most of them never see a file being sent to the DPP. Even when that happens, most of them never actually make it to court.”
“She made the point that when a woman, in the majority cases we are talking about women, goes to a Garda station to make a complaint about domestic violence you can virtually bet your life that it is not the first instance of domestic violence that she has encountered.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,467 lines we hold for Matt Carthy, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 30.
“I have to say I have no confidence whatsoever that Tusla has the resources and capability to be able to deal with the additional responsibilities. Amendment No. 1 also called for an implementation timeframe to confirm the Minister is satisfied that the State is in a position to meet all requirements and obligations. Again, this is absolutely and eminently sensible. The difficulty is that a very short period of time ago I was told that amendment No. 1 is in conflict with the principle of the Bill. How is it in conflict with the principle of the Bill? It basically states the Minister will outline how he will implement the Bill before he enacts it. I would have thought this was a completely and eminently sensible proposition.”
“I am sure other members of the committee will tell the Minister that we had a discussion on the civil legal aid system. It is already at bursting point but it will have more obligations and more responsibilities under the Act. However, the Minister has provided no clarification as to when or if he will implement the recommendations of the civil legal aid review. There is a very good chance that civil legal aid will burst as a result of the additional responsibilities under the Act. This is before we start talking about Tusla. There has been a lot of discussion in the House in respect of the capacity of Tusla to do the very important roles the House has already conferred on it. Additional responsibilities will be added to Tusla in the Bill.”
“In other words, it should be stated that the Minister will not enact legislation until he can be assured that he can implement it and that the resources allocated for the purpose of implementing the Bill, including staffing levels, accommodation capacity, interpretation services, legal assistance provision and IT systems, are in place. This is eminently sensible. The Minister is signing us up to obligations which he cannot assure the House will be adhered to. The Minister should ensure measures are taken to ensure that all relevant bodies, agencies and contractors are capable of performing the functions assigned to them under the Act. This should be an assurance the Minister would be happy to include in legislation. He should state that he would not enact it until he can be assured of this.”
“We have no way of scrutinising a number of the amendments, particularly the amendment I tabled on section 1, which we are discussing now. I would have thought that amendment No. 1 was eminently sensible. I would have hoped that the Minister was willing to put forward a stipulation that would have stated the Bill would not come into operation until he can assure the House that the Department has the capacity to bring it into operation, and that administrative, operational and staffing arrangements have been put in place to enable the State to comply with the requirements of the Bill. This is eminently sensible.”
“What is really frustrating from my point of view is that we are in a situation where we are being rushed and we have very limited time to scrutinise the amendments brought forward by the Minister and by other parties. It was only within the past hour or so that we got details of which amendments have been ruled in or out of order. I have great sympathy for the staff in the Bills Office who were run to such a short deadline.”
“The Joint Committee on Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, which I chair as the Minister knows, agreed unanimously that we would make ourselves available at any time and for as long as it would take to actually go through each amendment in detail with the Minister. Instead, unfortunately, we are presented with legislation that is absolutely rushed. Literally within the last number of minutes, we adopted Second Stage of the legislation and now we are moving on to Committee Stage. The irony of it was that the Second Stage debate was still ongoing when the deadline for amendments to this legislation was reached. That is no way to carry out the legislative business of the House. It makes a mockery of the Second Stage process and of any semblance of democratic discussion taking place here.”
“It is because the Minister and the parties of Government have locked us into an EU migration and asylum pact and they are desperately now chasing to try to get legislation in place prior to the deadline for that pact, which is the summer, even though the Minister knows there is absolutely not a chance in hell within this year at all, at any stage in this year, that the Government is going to be in a position to adhere to the stipulations contained within either the asylum and migration pact or this Act. Therefore, it is deeply regrettable that we are not having detailed scrutiny within the committee. This is not the forum to have proper conducive discussions around the merits or otherwise of debates. We should be doing it in the committee.”
“We have a long track ahead of us. I want to put on the record that this is not how we should be dealing with this legislation. The Minister has described it as the most substantial piece of immigration legislation this House has dealt with in many years. The truth is that it is being rushed. It is being rushed not because it is emergency legislation. If it is an emergency, it is no more an emergency today than it was three or four years ago.”
“The motion is as simple as anything; it seeks to prevent investment funds from buying homes that should be available to Irish families in desperate need of them. Any Member who refuses to support that has no authority whatsoever to claim they are in any way interested in resolving the housing crisis.”
“They introduced legislation that will allow those rents to accelerate even faster. I do not need to remind the house that homelessness figures have increased time and time again. We recall at different points the outrages and the things that spurred communities across Ireland to action. One of those occasions was in 2021 when it was disclosed that an investment fund attempted to buy 135 of 170 homes on an estate in Maynooth. There was of course outrage that this could be happening and the commitment we received from Ministers then was that this would never happen as they would put a stop to it. They did not put a stop to it, just as they have not lived up to any of their targets and have not delivered the homes people need at prices they can afford.”
“I will tell the Minister of State what madness is. It is repeating the same speech Ministers and Ministers of State have been making for the past ten years at a time it is blatantly evident that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael simply are not capable of dealing with the housing crisis. Many people chose to forget the two so-called opponents of Irish politics, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, were forced to drop the facade and coalesce in large part as a response to the public outcry in 2020 at the housing crisis and the failures of those parties to address it. Let us ask what has happened since. Let us compare December 2020 to where we are now. House prices have increased by almost 50%. Rents have increased year on year to levels that would have once been unimaginable and what did the two parties in government do, supported by rural Independents?”
“Bluetongue could not have happened at a worse time, especially when the broad climate was generally positive in terms of prices being received. We know there are threats coming down the road. We do not yet know what the situation regarding Mercosur will be. We hope it will not be provisionally applied and that the Government will ensure there is no support for the provisional application of the deal. We know there are other global challenges coming our way. We need to make sure that any challenges that our farmers are presented with are not imposed on them because of the failures of the House and Department to provide support. The core point I want to make is that we deal with this on an all-Ireland basis and stop the lunacy whereby people are being prevented from trading with their counterparts a few short miles away.”
“I want to make an incredibly strong case for an all-Ireland approach and that we ensure the cross-Border limitations are lifted. I also want to seek the assurance of the Minister that the Government is raising this matter at an EU level in order to ensure that animal health certifications are amended, as the virus obviously affects both jurisdictions. This is necessary in order to ensure the live trade experts can resume. We need to scale up testing to ensure there is absolute certainty in respect of where the virus is before the weather gets any warmer and it begins to spread. We have had a desperate number of weeks in terms of weather conditions and farmers are undoubtedly under pressure. As we move forward to the spring, many wonder whether we will see a spring at all.”
“It could be argued that during the entire Brexit process, when all of Europe and the entire British establishment was in absolute turmoil, this House remained steadfast in setting out very clearly that the only way we could operate in terms of the food market was on an all-Ireland basis. Yet, it appears to many farmers that with the click of a finger, that can be upended. It is completely crazy. Farmers in Monaghan cannot trade with farmers in Armagh. Let us be very clear about how those communities operate. It would be the equivalent of telling a farmer in Kerry that they could not trade across the border with those in Cork. It is unbelievable that we are even at this point. Not only are we at this point, this has continued for a number of weeks.”
“I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle for his indulgence. I welcome our guests from Roscommon. I am half a Roscommon man and the way the GAA is going this year, I think I will be a Rossies supporter this season. I want to support what has been said by my Sinn Féin colleagues in respect of ensuring that bluetongue is addressed on an all-Ireland basis. In my view, it is absolutely crazy that we have a situation in my county, which I am sure is the same across the Border region, if not further beyond, whereby trading North and South has essentially been curtailed. That should not be the case, considering the efforts that went into ensuring we have an all-Ireland system in the outworking of Brexit.”
“The Kenova report has stripped away many of the old excuses. No one can now claim that collusion is speculative. No one can pretend obstruction was accidental. After Kenova, ignorance is no longer plausible. The only question left is whether there is the will to act. Maybe the Taoiseach would like to take the remaining minute of my time to answer that question. Is the will to act there right now?”
“The Irish Government supported the establishment of a historical investigations unit under the Stormont House Agreement in 2014 and legislated for co-operation in 2019. That unit was never delivered. Instead, the British Government introduced the shameful legacy Act, rejected by victims and widely criticised. If this State recognised the need for historical investigative units in the North, it cannot credibly argue against establishing an independent, time-bound unit here. Seeking truth about Dublin-Monaghan, John Francis Green, the Dublin Airport bombing, the bombings in Castleblayney, Belturbet and elsewhere, The Widow Scallans and other attacks - this is not about reopening wounds. Those wounds have never healed because the truth was withheld. Justice was not unavailable; it was deferred and denied.”
“On the first occasion that I had to attend a commemorative event on Talbot Street to remember the Dublin-Monaghan bombings, the involvement by this State on that occasion was the presence of special branch men who were taking notes of the family members. That speaks to what I am talking about today.”
“How much more could have been done and how much more could have been uncovered if this State had insisted early, forcefully and consistently on full accountability for crimes committed within this jurisdiction? Sovereignty has to mean something. It carries responsibility. The first duty of any sovereign state is to vindicate the lives of its citizens.”
“From the 1970s through to the 1990s, attacks were carried out in this jurisdiction by loyalist paramilitaries operating with the knowledge, assistance or protection of British state forces. In too many cases, investigations stalled, lines of inquiry involving British state actors were never fully pursued and files went cold. The truth is that the evidence says quite clearly that the authorities in this State often stepped back when they should have stepped forward. There was and is an abdication of responsibility, a dereliction of duty, a shameful record. Operation Kenova confirms that British intelligence agencies were prepared to obstruct investigations, withhold evidence and interfere with due process to protect agents. That raises an unavoidable question.”
“Almost forgotten is the bombing at Dublin Airport which killed Aer Lingus worker John Hayes from Balbriggan and injured nine others. Decades later, there is still no clarity for the Hayes family as to whether a full investigation file was ever sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions. That uncertainty alone speaks volumes about the inadequacy of the investigation. As in other cases, questions arose about access to intelligence, forewarning and whether lines of inquiry involving British state actors were ever fully pursued. Once again, not a single person held to account. Even into the 1990s, the attacks continued. At The Widow Scallans pub in Dublin, Martin Doherty was murdered and a massacre was only narrowly averted by his actions. Again, no prosecution. Again, no closure. None of these were isolated incidents.”
“Families were not failed by a lack of sympathy, although in many years since they did not even get that, but they were particularly failed by the absence of urgency and resolve on the part of this State. That failure did not end in 1974. In 1975, John Francis Green was murdered in Monaghan. To this day there has been no prosecution. Serious and unresolved concerns remain regarding the involvement of the British state forces. Again, despite credible information and repeated appeals from his family, there was no investigative urgency matching the gravity of the crime. Once again, the burden of seeking truth fell on grieving families rather than on the institutions that were there to protect them. Deadly attacks linked to the conflict continued here in the years that followed.”
“While Operation Kenova did not investigate those bombings and made no findings on collusion in that case, it did expose the protection of agents, the withholding of intelligence and the prioritisation of operational advantage over human life, which is all directly relevant to the understanding of how such atrocities were allowed to occur. More than 50 years later, not one single person has been held to account in respect of the Dublin-Monaghan bombings. Reports have been published and limited investigations have been carried out but this State has never delivered a full public inquiry with statutory requirements to compel all relevant evidence, particularly material held by British authorities. Nor has there ever been a sustained diplomatic or legal pressure applied to force disclosure from the British Government.”
“Kenova exposes a central truth about the conflict on this island. Collusion was not accidental. It was not exceptional. It was embedded in British state policy. Today I want to focus on an issue this House cannot avoid. Many of the crimes exposed by Kenova did not stop at the Border. They crossed into this jurisdiction. When they did, Irish citizens were entitled to the full protection of Irish law, but they did not receive it. The most searing example remains the Dublin-Monaghan bombings, the single deadliest attack of the conflict, with 34 people killed and hundreds more injured.”
“However, I would contend very strongly that this is one of the areas where we can work together and actually deliver a solution fairly quickly. That is why I commend this Bill to the House. I welcome that Government is not opposing it. I assume that means we will have unanimous support here. Let us take this to Committee Stage, iron out whatever creases may be there and actually get this Bill into law as quickly as possible.”
“A review of Coco's Law in 2024 showed that between 2021 and 2023, some 100 cases were prosecuted by the DPP but in the same period, almost 1,500 victim reports were made. That shows us that there is a significant gap between reports and prosecutions. It shows that while the law has acted as a deterrent, as I believe it has, it is still not delivering adequate justice for many victims. We also know that for far too many victims and survivors, the judicial process is too slow and in many cases is actually retraumatising them. The Justice Indicators Report published by the Law Society last week makes it clear that chronic delays in our court system are denying people timely access to justice. The Minister and I know that there are many priorities across his Department and many areas of work that we need to address.”
“These companies have to be held accountable by Coimisiún na Meán and if Coimisiún na Meán does not have the powers to hold these companies to account, then we have to give it the powers because the full weight of the law must be brought to bear on platforms that flout their obligations. We also need to ensure that the Garda, particularly the divisional protective service units, has the personnel and the resources required to investigate and prosecute offences involving the recording, creation, distribution or the publication of non-consensual, intimate images. We have heard and we all should listen to the voices of victims and survivors about the important role that the divisional protective laws have played. We need to ensure that they are properly resourced and staffed.”
“If technical amendments are needed and if Government points out what it believes they are, we will be quite happy to work with it on Committee Stage. What matters now is that we work with together to fix this law without delay. The legislation, of course, is only one part of the response. The other is accountability for the social media companies and platforms that enable or ignore this behaviour, and indeed profit from it. There is a sense that these platforms believe they are above the law. We saw the refusal of representatives of X to appear before the Oireachtas Committee on Arts, Media, Communications, Culture and Sport.”
“I make the point that if this was clear in law, then we would not need a minister to sit down with the companies involved. If the Minister or I were suspected of breaking the law, a Minister does not come to our house to discuss it; the appropriate powers hold us to account. We now need to ensure that we make a move. Sinn Féin is prepared to work constructively and quickly to fix this problem but we need to see a sense of urgency from Government. Sinn Féin seeks to amend Coco's Law to explicitly criminalise the generation of non-consensual intimate images and videos and to increase the maximum penalties for those convicted. It is a straightforward but, in my view, absolutely necessary step. We are asking for all TDs to support this at every stage.”
“The current Act references images that purport to be intimate images but it does not explicitly state that generating intimate images of an adult is illegal. The Grok nudification scandal exposed this loophole that should never have been allowed to remain open. Grok, X's nudification tool as it is now being described, allowed users to upload photos or videos of real people and have their clothing digitally removed. The vast majority of the sexualised AI images produced were of women and children. This should have prompted immediate action. The Government could have brought for brought forward an immediate short and targeted amendment to close this loophole. I know there is a suggestion as to whether or not the law actually covers this.”
“Molaim mo chomrádaí, an Teachta Máire Devine, as a cuid oibre ar an mBille seo. Despite lots of rhetoric and good intentions, the fact is the Government has been far too slow to address what is now apparent as a clear gap in the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020. I welcome that the Government has indicated that it will not be opposing this Bill. I look forward to working on a cross-party basis to ensure that we deliver this legislation in a timely manner. As has been outlined Coco's Law was designed to protect people from the recording, distribution and publication of intimate images without consent. However, there is an ambiguity over whether the Act covers the creation of non-consensual intimate images generated through artificial intelligence.”
“The Government needs to grow a backbone and use the leverage it has. Will the Tánaiste call in the top brass of these insurance companies and private hospitals to demand they stop ripping people off?”
“Yesterday, VHI announced a third increase in health insurance premiums in less than 12 months. It will kick in from March. These three increases over the past year will see many families paying more than €500 extra per year in insurance bills. It seems for many people that there is no end to the rip-off and price hikes. It is not just health insurance. It is energy bills, rent, groceries, motor fuel and childcare. Households are being hammered non-stop, yet Government sits back and does nothing to stop the rip-off. There is something the Tánaiste could do on health insurance costs. The Government has real leverage to tackle to the insurance companies and get a break for customers. Private healthcare relies completely on the public system. Private health insurance is supported by generous tax subsidies of up to €400 million every year.”
“-----are telling the Tánaiste that confidence has been lost in the chair of Bord Bia. The Government is trying to be evasive and to look for different ways out of this situation. The ultimate truth is this: the chair of the State agency charged with promoting Irish produce across the world is also head of a company that is importing beef from Brazil.”
“It is not Larry Murrin or Bord Bia that is delivering the highest standards met by farmers anywhere in the world. It is our primary producers, who are doing so. They - not just me or some backbenchers in the Government parties-----”
“-----but it appears that he is oblivious to what that success is built on. It is built on the work of our farmers. It is not Larry Murrin or Bord Bia that are out in this weather milking cows. It is not Larry Murrin or Bord Bia dealing with cows calving in the middle of the night.”
“Irish agriculture is already under immense pressure, facing new challenges all the time, including the emergence of bluetongue disease. Farmers do not need a self-inflicted crisis of governance at the very top of the agency that is supposed to support them. The Government appointed Larry Murrin. It has the power to act. My question is direct and plain: will it use its powers to restore confidence in Bord Bia and remove its chair?”
“In response to Deputy Martin Kenny, the agriculture Minister launched what I consider to be an unprecedented attack on the largest farming organisation in the country, the IFA, seeking to blame it for this crisis. That was, frankly, unbelievable and deeply irresponsible. It shows a Government lashing out rather than facing up to its own failures. Bord Bia, we all acknowledge, plays a pivotal role in promoting Irish food on global markets, but that role is based on trust. Above all, what is required is the trust of our primary producers. Farmers are out in all weathers. They are meeting ever higher environmental, animal welfare and regulatory standards. They are doing what the State asks of them. Their confidence in Bord Bia is depended upon. Their confidence in Bord Bia has been broken.”
“Yesterday, the Taoiseach's response to my party leader was confused, evasive and, frankly, all over the place. Instead of showing leadership, he appeared either unwilling or unable to grasp the clear powers the Government holds in relation to this appointment. Instead of addressing the substance of the issue, Ministers have resorted to dismissive language, talking about witch hunts and hikes and suggesting that farmers are somehow doing their own sector a disservice by speaking out. I met with the farmers protesting at Bord Bia headquarters yesterday. I spoke directly to them and to their representative organisations. All farming organisations are unequivocal: Larry Murrin's position is untenable, confidence has been lost and he has to go. Matters deteriorated further this morning.”
“Caithfidh an Rialtas bata agus bóthar a thabhairt do Larry Murrin mar chathaoirleach ar Bhord Bia. Tá muinín na n-eagraíochtaí feirmeoireachta agus an phobail i gcoitinne caillte aige. Caithfidh sé imeacht. We are now nine days into a serious and escalating crisis of confidence in Bord Bia. It is a crisis entirely of the Government's own making. At the heart of it is a clear and undeniable conflict of interest. The chair of Bord Bia is head of a company that imports Brazilian beef that is produced to lower standards and is the subject of weaker safety requirements. At the same time, he is presiding over the State agency charged with promoting Irish beef, which is produced to the highest environmental, welfare and food safety standards. The contradiction goes to the core of Bord Bia's credibility, and farmers know it.”
“These include the right of the Irish people to know that their legislators looked through every line of what the Minister described as the most significant piece of migration legislation to come before these Houses in many years.”
“Will he give a commitment that when the Opposition goes to the effort of preparing amendments, he will show us the courtesy of allowing them to be properly considered and scrutinised? Will he also give a commitment that the select committee will have an opportunity to scrutinise, debate and tease out the amendments he brings forward. The only way we can do that is if we actually deal with Committee Stage at the select committee. Will the Minister to give a commitment that he will not try to guillotine this Bill or bring it in here as a mechanism to try to rush it through? There are things more important than EU pacts.”
“Last year, 669 applications for family reunification were granted, including in respect of 452 children and 153 spouses. That compares with the more than 2,500 deportation orders that were not enforced last year. Family reunification plays a critical role in the successful integration of refugees. There need to be mechanisms around self-sufficiency and we need a robust system that is enforced, but we do not need to either be performative or undermine integration, which is key to social cohesion. Family reunification policies need to be sustainable but also fair, particularly in the reunification of parents and their children. The Minister mentioned a number of times that there will be lots of opportunities for the Opposition to bring forward amendments. I think he said he would welcome amendments from the Opposition.”
“It is crucial that those granted international protection are integrated into Irish society, that they are facilitated in participating in their local communities in order that they can get to know their neighbours and wider community and that they be given the opportunities to learn about Irish culture, language, history and values and share their own with us. In other countries where this has not been done, we can see how it has undermined social cohesion and created divisions and ghettoisation. The Minister has indicated that he will bring forward amendments to delay family reunification by three years. These proposals are a distraction from the real problems with the system, including delays and the failure to enforce deportations. The latter have had a much more significant impact in terms of numbers.”
“There is understandable apprehension about the ability of the State to keep vulnerable children safe and particularly given the role of traffickers and people smugglers in bringing minors into the State and their involvement in their subsequent disappearance from State care. Given that this legislation contains provisions in respect of vulnerability checks, I want to highlight again the continued links the Department has with a company that was previously found to have supplied fake Garda vetting documents in the context of vulnerability assessments. It is questionable how the timeframe set out in the EU pact will be met while maintaining a fair and robust system, particularly in view of the current processing timelines, increasing the risk the State will face infringement proceedings and large fines.”
“The total number is nowhere near the projected requirements. There are also very serious concerns that neither Tusla nor the civil legal aid system will be able to cope with the demands they will face under this legislation. The Legal Aid Board has indicated that it may struggle to meet the demand for its services within the tighter timeframes provided for under the Bill. Of course, there are very good reasons to have very serious concerns about the capacity of Tusla to fulfil the responsibilities ascribed to it under this Bill when we consider the number of unaccompanied migrant children who have gone missing from State care in recent years and the myriad other debacles Tusla has been involved in. It is easy to understand the questions people will ask about the logic of adding to its role.”
“As I mentioned, there are serious questions regarding the Government's ability to meet the timeframes for processing set out in this legislation, given the extensive delays that have characterised the international protection system to date. The Government's implementation plan for the EU migration and asylum pact projects staffing numbers in the event of either 15,000 applicants being in the system or in the event of there being 18,000 in July. The staffing complement required to process 15,000 applicants is 1,549. The staffing complement to process 18,000 applicants is 1,769. Last year, between the International Protection Office, the international protection and integration division of the Department and the International Protection Appeals Tribunal, there were 926 staff and 107 vacancies. That is a vacancy rate of over 10%.”
“The availability of services, including GPs and school places, proximity to transport and existing levels of disadvantage in areas should govern the selection of locations for accommodations, not simply the fact that a private operator has a building they are willing to allow to be used in this process. Again, the planning exemption for IPAS and Ukrainian accommodation should end now. These were emergency measures that are now being abused as a mechanism to avoid any input from local communities. We have increasingly seen the ludicrous situation across the State where planning exemptions are being sought by property owners for a buildings the Department insists it is not even considering for this purpose. That becomes fertile ground for those with negative agendas to create confusion and division within communities.”
“It is an approach that has caused division and created anger and frustration in communities who have felt they are entirely disconnected from decisions that affect their local area. Sinn Féin has been clear that new IPAS centres should only be placed in areas where the resources are in place to accommodate them. That means not in areas where people are already struggling in terms of a lack of resources. We have said that the Pobal HP deprivation index should be used to identify communities that should absolutely not be considered for emergency accommodation. The process of identifying suitable locations should commence with a pre-assessment of the needs of communities. That is the only way to ensure that the needs of both the communities and IPAS residents can be met.”
“Given what has been exposed to date in regard to contracts relating to IPAS accommodation, the committee also recommended that due diligence, vetting and beneficial ownership takes be required in respect of any company or organisation that seeks to secure a contract for the provision of accommodation or services for those in the international protection system. If we are to address the problems with the international protection system, then we need to also address the matter of where IPAS accommodation is located. To date, the location of IPAS accommodation has been decided on one criterion alone, namely the availability of a building or, in other words, by the private interests of property owners.”