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 2 of 30.
“The other person, who earns the same wages and who, perhaps, has the same housing needs, because they were born in a particular place on the planet, has access to a housing support to which no means test applies and for which the landlord is getting a tax-free payment in respect of which a top-up can be paid. That is clearly a roadmap to create division and dissent. It is absolutely unforgivable. Everybody recognises and accepts that there was an emergency situation in 2022 and that there was a need to be nimble and introduce measures quickly. However, to allow that to continue for five years is inexcusable. That is why we have brought forward similar amendments on several occasions suggesting that a means test be introduced in order to ensure fairness. The Government rejected those amendments.”
“The Government completely ignored the unfairness at the heart of this scheme regarding the putting in place of a housing support for one cohort, the members of which, nobody disputes, were in need of housing, but that was not available to any other cohort. It put in place non-means-tested housing assistance. That was deeply unfair and led to the heightened division which we have seen over the past number of years and which have been exploited by some nasty actors. Let us imagine a situation where two people on a factory floor whose earnings are the same are in need of housing. One is left to languish on a local authority housing list or, perhaps, does not even for that list and is forced to deal with the private rental market in circumstances where they are extorted.”
“That is why we have seen the backtracking that has taken place over the past number of months, and the ultimate decision to bring the scheme to an end on 31 March 2027. What we still do not have is clarity as to what impact Government decisions will now have regarding private rental accommodation and the wider situation relating to housing. The truth is that after March of next year, there will be thousands of Ukrainians who will be moved from either ARP accommodation or State accommodation. Once again, in an all too familiar story, we will end up with a belated and, probably, knee-jerk response.”
“Likewise, it ignored the concerns repeatedly brought to its attention regarding the impact this was having on the private rental market in certain areas. For several years, the Government refused point-blank to acknowledge that this was having an impact on the private rental market until the Department of housing's reports highlighted out what was already blatantly obvious. The scheme was being utilised by landlords to receive tax-free payments in respect of which they could demand top-up payments from tenants or residents but with none of the obligations that would apply in respect of other tenants in a dwelling. It took a huge amount of effort and wherewithal to drag the Government to a place where it finally and reluctantly acknowledged that there were serious problems with this scheme.”
“However, Government moved away from the original intention behind that scheme, at one stage increasing the payment to €800 per month. That was a tax-free payment given directly to landlords, with no means test applied. This meant that a person who was on more wages than someone who was in desperate need of housing could benefit from the scheme when the latter could not. The exclusionary nature of the scheme, available to Ukrainians fleeing war but not to anybody from anywhere else in the world, including Irish citizens in this State, led to heightened division in communities all over the country. We in Sinn Féin repeatedly brought people's concerns to the attention of the Government, but we were repeatedly ignored.”
“The Minister and Minister of State know that Sinn Féin and I have been raising serious concerns about the Ukrainian ARP scheme for a long time. It is interesting that the Minister of State suggests that the motion is about returning to the original intention behind the scheme. That is a tacit acknowledgement that there was a move away from the original intention. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the onset of war, there was an enormous and generous response from the Irish people, particularly those who opened their homes and their spare rooms to Ukrainians fleeing the war. Those people absolutely deserve to be commended. When the ARP scheme was brought before the House, there was absolutely unanimous support for it.”
“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 temporary protection have satisfied a means test similar to those applicable for other housing assistance payments; — new applications who propose to host a beneficiary of temporary protection in their property which is also their own primary residence and who have not availed of the Rent-a-Room Scheme in the previous 24 months; ensuring that the ARP does not further distort the rental sector; and — recipients who are not in receipt of any additional or 'top-up' payments from a beneficiary of temporary protection.".”
“We cannot allow the chaos in our courts system to continue over the summer months. Will the Taoiseach ensure that there is real dialogue this week to bring an end to this?”
“Is the Taoiseach concerned about what is happening in our courts as a result of the debacle in handling criminal legal aid reform? We have seen substantial numbers of solicitors withdraw from the scheme. I am told that the solicitors who have withdrawn provided representation in the majority of cases involving the legal aid scheme last year. More important, we have seen thousands of criminal cases adjourned. We have seen victims turning up to court only to be turned away. They are waiting for justice. We have also seen people who should be in custody today being released on bail. At the same time, we have seen remand numbers increase exponentially, putting huge pressure on the already overstretched Prison Service. Will the Taoiseach ensure that there is dialogue with the stakeholders? Sort this out.”
“I ask the Minister to examine the proposals of the Oireachtas justice committee’s report, including in relation to matters such as bail, the enforcement of domestic violence protection orders and ensuring that An Garda Síochána is held to the highest standards possible when it comes to domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. As I said, I welcome the fact that we are at this point. This is but a small step in what has to be in an all-of-society effort in tackling the scourge and epidemic of violence, particularly against women.”
“This is something I am also hoping the Minister will look at again and accept amendments on. Unfortunately, in the past week alone, two more women have lost their lives in violent circumstances. As I said last week when we were launching the Oireachtas justice committee’s report on tackling domestic and gender-based violence, we all have to redouble our efforts to confront this crisis. This means focusing on prevention, safety, having an effective justice system and properly supporting victims of domestic and gender-based violence during and after the judicial process.”
“The other key issue is in relation to what convictions qualify for inclusion in the domestic violence register. There is a concern that the remit of the legislation is too narrow and may not actually capture the bulk of domestic violence offences. Women’s Aid has warned that many domestic violence-related offences under the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997 are prosecuted summarily in the District Court and would not be captured by the proposed register as drafted. We also know that many domestic violence charges are reduced to lesser offences through plea bargaining, for example, from a section 3 to a section 2 assault. Even where this is against an intimate partner, this could result in a person not being included on the register when, in fact, there may be a much wider pattern of domestic violence.”
“While I welcome the Bill, I do believe there are a number of small changes that could be made to the Bill. I appeal to the Minister to accept amendments on Committee Stage tomorrow. There are two key changes that I think the Minister should consider which, in my view, would strengthen the legislation. The period before a person can apply to be removed from the register should be increased from three years to five years. If it is recognised that being included on a domestic violence register is not an additional punishment on the perpetrator but rather about the protection of potential victims of domestic violence, then increasing that period cannot be seen as punitive. Three years is far too short. I appeal to the Minister to accept amendments to increase the period to five years.”
“I also acknowledge the Minister and commend him for bringing forward this legislation. By providing a mechanism through which relevant information can be disclosed in appropriate circumstances, the legislation has the potential to empower people to make informed decisions about their safety. The legislation lists the offences to which this will apply. Of course, it will not be a panacea for the crisis of domestic and gender-based violence. We know that abuse is not always apparent at the early stages of a relationship and understandably many people would not even think to consult a register such as this at that point. For those who have concerns, a domestic violence register will be important. It is crucial that those with concerns who seek to consult the register are offered other supports.”
“It is fitting that this legislation will be known as Jennie's law in memory of Jennifer Poole who was murdered in 2021 by her former partner Gavin Murphy. It was only after Jennifer's death that her family became aware of Murphy's history of domestic violence. The Bill introduces a register of domestic violence judgments that will apply to individuals convicted of domestic violence against a partner or former partner. Ba mhaith liom tosú le moladh a thabhairt do Jason Poole. Táim cinnte go bhfuil a theaghlach an-bhródúil as an méid atá bainte amach aige i gcuimhne ar a dheirfiúr. I acknowledge the service Jason Poole has given by campaigning for this legislation during his family's own grief. I believe that what Jason has achieved will save lives and will protect many others from danger.”
“There is chaos in our courts as a result of the justice Minister's mishandling of the criminal legal aid scheme review. We now see solicitors resigning from the criminal legal aid panel, increasing numbers of cases being adjourned, people going without legal representation and others with no legal expertise attempting to represent themselves. This is a criminal justice system on the brink of collapse, and the justice Minister seems entirely satisfied to let this continue. Will the Government allow this to continue or will it intervene to ensure the complexity of this issue is recognised? Will it suspend the changes made by the Minister, engage in real consultation with all stakeholders and deliver a criminal legal aid scheme that is efficient for court services, prudent with public finances and has the confidence of the Irish people?”
“In all instances, I made it clear to the Minister that if there was an issue with wording, we would be satisfied if he wanted to bring forward amendments of his own. However, as has become the habit of this Minister in this Government, concerns have been dismissed. Unfortunately, I think we will reach a point in time, probably in the not-too-distant future, where either the current cohort of Ministers in the Department or a future cohort will be forced to bring forward amending legislation. That could have been avoided if the spirit and approach of partnership had been taken by the Minister and the Department.”
“This is concerning for communities that often deal with crime and antisocial behaviour. The Minister of State, Deputy Ardagh, will be aware of communities that cannot afford to lose gardaí for any substantial period of time. I reiterate that we support the legislation in principle and we will support its passage. We will ensure that there is monitoring of its implementation, but the spirit the Minister of State has seen from the Opposition, in terms of facilitating the Government with this legislation, has not been matched by a real engagement in dealing with the amendments that we have put forward. As I said at every stage, we brought forward amendments that were about strengthening authorisation and monitoring, as well as ensuring that we are protected as a State.”
“They are at the same levels as they were in 2016, despite much larger immigration numbers, a significant and substantial number of unenforced deportation orders and rhetoric from the Government that a new framework is in place which will ensure we have an adequately managed migration system. The Minister needs to give us clear updates. We are passing legislation in this House, but that is only first step. If we do not have gardaí across all the specialist areas, including within community policing and cybercrime, then the legislation counts for very little. We are also seeing the impact of the additional policing pressures as a result of Ireland's Presidency of the Council of the EU. As a number of colleagues in the House have said, gardaí have been moved from communities and local Garda stations to other locations.”
“It is also important to note in the context of this amendment that the Bill is being considered against the backdrop of serious recruitment and retention problems in An Garda Síochána. Insufficient action has been taken to increase Garda numbers to the level that we need. The Government has not taken the type of innovative recruitment measures that we have set out and which are desperately needed. We see at all levels of An Garda Síochána that there is a serious dearth of the numbers required. We see it in community policing and we will see it in cyber-policing, other specialist activities and in general. I got a response from the Minister last week in respect of the Garda National Immigration Bureau, which showed that the numbers within that section have dropped over the past couple of years.”
“For example, some of these companies have direct links with the Israeli military and intelligence bodies that have been involved in war crimes and genocide. We wanted to include in the legislation a provision that would ensure alternative suppliers would be sought where equipment originates from states that are involved in war crimes or genocide. What is striking and surprising is that the Minister for justice did not accept a provision that is already in place in the Defence Forces. The Government has already prohibited future purchases of military equipment from states like Israel, so it is hard to understand why a similar approach would not apply to surveillance and investigative technologies used by An Garda Síochána, considering how sensitive this technology could be.”
“Considering that the implications of biometric surveillance technologies could go much further in terms of scope, it is disappointing that the Minister did not accept amendments during the passage of this legislation. They would have put in place strong authorisation mechanisms, particularly the need for approval at chief superintendent level before the technology can be deployed. It is also unfortunate that the Minister did not accept amendments that propose prohibiting the use of surveillance technology supplied by states that could be engaged in war crimes, genocide or crimes against humanity. The Minister of State will already be aware that concerns have already been raised regarding the use by An Garda Síochána of surveillance and cyber investigation technologies from Israeli companies.”
“We will be supporting this amendment to the Seanad amendment. As I stated on earlier Stages, Sinn Féin supports the use of biometric recognition technology for serious crime investigations, national security purposes and missing persons cases. However, we have also made it clear at every stage that the use of biometric technology has to be accompanied by strong safeguards to prevent discrimination, excessive surveillance, the misuse of personal data and inadequate oversight. We brought forward amendments in that vein throughout the passage of this legislation. We made it clear, although I do not think that it has been received clearly, that lessons have to be learned from previous mistakes, in particular, the misuses of the PULSE system that we are aware of.”
“I have seen it every day of my life where the people of Cavan and Monaghan have been denied their natural hinterland of Fermanagh, Tyrone and Armagh. It has held us back for too long, so now is the time to plan, prepare and deliver the potential of this great nation, especially the Border region. All of that is in this Bill. This is about choices. It is about making a choice to move forward or finding excuses not to. I appeal to Members to support this Bill and let us build a fairer, better and united Ireland together.”
“Today, we have every reason to believe that change is within our grasp if the political leadership is there to grasp it. The reunification of Ireland is the democratic right and the unfinished business of the Irish people. It is our right to live in a united country, free from a border imposed without consent and with devastating consequences, especially for Irish citizens North of the Border. As representatives of the Irish people, we have a responsibility to shape the future of this island. Irish unity is not something that we should have to beg for. It is a right recognised by history, by democracy and by the provisions of the Good Friday Agreement. The Border is, and was, artificial. It has divided communities and families.”
“Anois an t-am le haghaidh Éire aontaithe. In one respect, I am stunned. Today I walked past the Mansion House where the First Dáil sat, and I wondered what it would be like to explain to people in that House that now, in 2026, we need to have a discussion on whether there is a case for a united Ireland. What would they think of a Taoiseach and a Tánaiste in a future Dáil essentially saying that 107 years after the First Dáil, 50 years after conflict, 30 years after the Good Friday Agreement and ten years after Brexit, that it is too soon to talk about delivering a free and united Ireland because that is what their remarks can be summarised into.”
“It is imperative that when this House becomes aware of anomalies or issues in the legal system that we address them head-on and with urgency. It is not good enough for us to simply sign up to conventions or EU frameworks if we are not domestically introducing the measures required to save people who are under constant threat of abuse, often in fear of their lives.”
“We had the review of the civil legal aid scheme carried out by an independent review group, chaired by the former Chief Justice Frank Clarke. That has been on the Minister's desk since last year. There is an urgency in dealing with this and I raise it because of the particular issue as regards victims of domestic violence trying to secure civil legal aid representation. I ask the Minister of State to give us an update on plans to move forward with the recommendations in the independent review group's report or the justice committee's report published last week. Violence against and abuse of women and girls are all too prevalent in society, with often devastating consequences, as we saw in news bulletins today.”
“I hope the Department will examine this. However, there also needs to be a review of its operation to ensure the legislation is right to meet the needs of victims and that victims are constantly informed about its provisions. I recently spoke to someone who had secured a coercive control conviction against the perpetrator and who did not know about their entitlements under this section. When I asked the Minister about this previously, he stated that officials in his Department would highlight issues such as this with An Garda Síochána. I ask the Minister of State for an update on that. I will also raise the issue of civil legal aid. The Minister of State may be aware that the Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Home Affairs and Migration published a report last week on the crisis in civil legal aid.”
“One of the few options open to people dealing with such circumstances is seeking to obtain what is called an Isaac Wunder order in the High Court, but the costs associated with this make it prohibitive for many. Has the Minister of State looked at the issue of financial barriers faced by victims of vexatious litigation such as I have outlined? Previously, I raised with the Minister what I believe to be the need to review the operation of section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Victims of Crime) Act in relation to information regarding investigations and criminal proceedings. This needs to be expanded to include informing a victim of the death of an offender who is released under supervision. I raised this with the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan. I do not believe it would be overly burdensome if applied to those released under supervision.”
“I am talking about circumstances where an individual repeatedly initiates unfounded court proceedings against the same person. I am aware of one particular case, but I am sure there are others, where such actions continued over a period of years, costing the persons subjected to the vexatious applications tens of thousands of euro as well as considerable time and stress. Cases were taken in multiple District Courts across the State and it was clearly a pattern of harassment of a former partner with whom the person had no ongoing contact. Is this something the Minister of State is aware of? Are legislative measures being considered to provide greater protections for victims in such cases?”
“The Minister has acted by adding a number of additional offences to the Schedule of the Bail Act, as recommended by the Staines report, but the issue of a breach of a domestic violence order has not been added to date. In his closing remarks, I ask the Minister of State to set out the timeframe under which it is intended to add a breach of domestic violence to the Schedule of the Bail Act. That, of course, also requires the maximum penalty on conviction to be increased to five years' imprisonment, if tried on indictment. A specific issue that has arisen is the misuse of civil protection orders for coercive control. I raise the vexatious misuse of applications for civil protection orders as a form of coercive control or harassment.”
“I have spoken to the Minister, Deputy O'Callaghan, on a number of occasions about the recommendation of the Staines report on bail laws that a breach of a domestic violence court order, as per section 33 of the Domestic Violence Act, should be added to the Schedule of the Bail Act. Issues related to bail and domestic violence have been raised with me, both by members of the legal profession acting on behalf of victims of domestic violence and those who are survivors of domestic abuse. From survivors, there is a sense that the application and enforcement of bail laws are not adequate to ensure their safety. They feel their abusers know they can get away with breaches of bail.”
“These deaths are shocking and a reminder of how much more needs to be done to tackle domestic, sexual and gender-based violence. While we need to ensure there is focus on the prevention of domestic, sexual and gender-based violence, we also need to put the supports in place to help those who are seeking to escape such violence to get justice and rebuild their lives. I make the case that there have to be increased efforts to deliver refuge places, including delivering refuges in both counties in my constituency, Cavan and Monaghan. I will raise a number of specific issues with the Minister of State. The first relates to bail and domestic violence.”
“As the Minister of State said, this motion facilitates the State opting in to Council Decision (EU) 2023/1076, relating to the EU's ratification of the Istanbul Convention in areas related to judicial co-operation, asylum, and non-refoulement. Sinn Féin will not be opposing this motion. Primarily, as recognised by Ireland having the opt-out under Protocol 21, matters related to justice should be dealt with through domestic law, with the exception being areas where cross-border and international co-operation is required. I am very conscious that as we discuss the Istanbul Convention on preventing and combating violence against women, in the news today there are two cases of women who have been killed in violent circumstances, including in one case where a husband has been charged with the murder of his wife.”
“As well as looking at demographics, we have to look at geography, particularly when dealing with counties like Cavan and Monaghan, where the public transport network is so deficient. We need a refuge in each centre. The timeframes we are talking about mean that we need to advance the second refuge now as opposed to putting it on the long finger.”
“The difficulty when dealing with gender, sexual and domestic violence is that there is not a neat provision. That is why refuges are required. There is not a neat one-size-fits-all approach. I am aware, as I am sure colleagues are, of situations where it is not feasible and certainly not in the victim's interest to return to her home, and it is predominantly her home, particularly in rural areas. Peculiarities about the homestead or home parish need to be taken into account. We know there is demand from Women's Aid and all the organisations. In fact, Men's Aid tells us there is a need for men's refuge spaces too, although much fewer. We know there is a critical need. Women's Aid, Rape Crisis Ireland and all the front-line organisations have told us that there needs to be much greater capacity in terms of refuge spaces.”
“When I was first elected as a TD and raised this issue, the Minister at the time disputed that there was a need at all. There has been quite significant movement. In fact, after the horrendous killing of Ashling Murphy, there was unanimous agreement in this House that every county should, at a minimum, have one refuge. I am holding Government to that. The process for delivering refuges needs to be speeded up drastically. The suggestion that from the beginning of planning to final completion stage could be three or even four years is far too long to deliver what should be a simple infrastructure project. The second point I want to emphasise relates to the geography of Cavan and Monaghan. The distance from Blacklion at the far end of Cavan to east County Monaghan is a third of the width of the island of Ireland.”
“-----or is holding back? If the Minister wants it and says that the British Government is not refusing, where is the delay in securing a bilateral arrangement? Does he accept that designating Britain a safe third country is pointless if we do not have a returns agreement in place? What proviso or mechanism in law will the Minister use to implement returns if there is no bilateral agreement?”
“The Minister knows that I and Sinn Féin support the returns regulation. The big contradiction in everything that the Minister has said is that the returns regulation is important in the context of the EU, but we will manage if we do not have it for the source of 80% or 90% of arrivals. I do not know if the Minister is willing to give a percentage now because a lot of it is pure conjecture and speculation on his part. The Minister says he cannot reach an agreement if the British Government is not willing to agree. Is that the state of play? I have asked for an update. Is the update that the British Government is refusing to enter into negotiations-----”
“The Minister has said in the House on numerous occasions that the vast majority have come across the Irish Sea using the common travel area.”
“I would appreciate if the Minister would outline what progress has been made. He outlined that individuals have had British passports and driving licences in their possession when they have applied for international protection. The Minister has no power to do anything about that because there is no bilateral returns policy in place. I love the Minister's confidence that international protection applicants have been following the passage of his legislation through the Oireachtas and awaiting the President's signature. The truth is that he knows there will be periods of time when the system comes under pressure. That is how the international protection system has operated to date and will likely operate again.”
“I will return to the issue of a bilateral returns policy with Britain. The Minister and other Ministers have put on the record of the House on numerous occasions their belief that between 80% and 90% of international protection applicants are travelling here via the common travel area. It would be useful if the House could get a report on any progress that has been made on securing a bilateral arrangement with Britain.”
“If the Minister accepts my point – I am told that anybody who understands the District Court and how it operates would – does he also accept that there is genuine potential that solicitors will withdraw from the scheme in the same way as they withdrew from the civil legal aid scheme because it simply was not viable for their businesses to continue?”
“I have engaged with a large number of those from the legal profession regarding these changes to the legal aid scheme, and I really do believe it would be helpful if the Minister took the opportunity to apologise for the manner in which the remarks have been interpreted. It is being generous to him to say he castigated an entire profession and suggested there is widespread abuse of the current system. The representatives of the legal profession have challenged him to provide evidence of that. I certainly have not seen that evidence yet. Does the Minister accept, for example, that custody cases, children’s cases, psychiatric cases and probation-linked sentencing cases cannot reasonably be run within five hearings? This relates to the evidence and testimony our committee received and that I have heard directly.”
“However, I can tell the Minister that people I know and trust, whom I have contacted in respect of dealing with vulnerable cases in the past, have told me they now feel their work is being undervalued, underappreciated and underrecognised by the Minister.”
“My question was not about whether the Minister thinks this will have an impact but, rather, whether he carried out an assessment prior to introducing this scheme. I have to take it from the Minister's answer that he has not carried out any such assessment. I welcome the Minister's statement that he does not want to aggravate the situation. It would have been helpful if he had given himself that advice a number of days ago. Many solicitors I have spoken to feel the Minister made an allegation of widespread abuse of the current system against an entire profession. There is deep, deep anger and hurt that has been palpable. The Minister said I know about the system. I do not pretend to know the intricacies of this system.”
“As predicted by many, we now have a chaotic situation in the courts, and in the District Court, in particular, due to the Minister’s new criminal legal aid scheme. It would be helpful if the Minister would outline to the House the assessments he carried out beforehand in respect of the risk of the changes to the criminal legal aid scheme, any potential for reduced participation by solicitors in this work and the implications of any such reductions.”
“Before the last general election Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael promised parents they would deliver childcare bills of €200 per month maximum. That promise has disappeared without any plan to deliver it. On the other hand, Sinn Féin has a credible roadmap to reduce childcare costs, expand capacity, improve pay and conditions so providers can recruit and retain staff, reform the funding model and properly support childcare. Deputy Kerrane has set out how these policies can be implemented and we need to take that advice. We need to give parents a real choice. Some want to return to work quickly and others want more time at home with their babies. Extending paid parental leave would recognise caring for our youngest children is valuable work that deserves the support of the State.”
“Tá cúram leanaí ró-chostasach agus níl dóthain áiteanna ann. For far too many families childcare is no longer just a challenge but a barrier to having children, returning to work or simply making ends meet. I am aware of couples who have delayed starting a family because of the pressures bought about by the combined costs of childcare and housing. That is not their failure but a failure of Government. This is one of the wealthiest states in Europe. There is no excuse for parents still paying over €800 a month per child for childcare while also facing soaring housing, energy and commuting costs. In my constituency, over half of childcare services in Cavan have waiting lists while in Monaghan almost two thirds have. That tells its own story. Families are paying too much yet still cannot get a place.”