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 28 of 30.
“We need to see an urgency in establishing the local community safety partnerships that were provided for under this Act. Dealing with financial matters, I note that the briefing document which the Minister received upon taking office, highlighted that the criminal injuries compensation scheme was due to be exhausted by the end of last month with claims exceeding the money available. That is deeply concerning given that this scheme is vital for supporting victims of crime, including those who have experienced life-changing injuries. I ask the Minister to give the Dáil an update on the situation and if additional funds have been made available for the scheme. That this fund is running out of money so early in the year highlights a wider problem about the need for the criminal injuries compensation tribunal to be put on a statutory footing.”
“Sinn Féin also raised concerns during the passage of the legislation about transparency, accountability and the potential weakening of oversight by some of these changes, including the creation of an internal Garda board, taking some of the powers that would have previously been held by the Policing Authority. I ask the Minister for Justice to look again at ensuring that the oversight bodies, particularly the policing and community safety authority, have the ability to conduct unannounced visits and inspections. That is crucial in its work. That the Policing Security and Community Safety Act is only now being commenced has left a vacuum at a time when many communities are struggling with issues of crime and antisocial behaviour.”
“As the Minister said, the motion is necessitated by the commencement of the Policing, Security and Community Safety Act 2024. He will be aware that Sinn Féin expressed a number of concerns during the passage of this legislation about some other changes being introduced. We have to recognise that the lack of real oversight and accountability where wrongdoing has taken place has been one of the significant contributing factors to the undermining in some instances of public confidence in An Garda Síochána. The oversight bodies have not had the powers or the resources needed to ensure that the Garda is properly accountable. There was a real problem with the slow pace of GSOC investigations and the extent to which complaints were passed back to gardaí - a situation of gardaí investigating gardaí.”
“I urge the Minister to consider those people who will be entitled to a payment when the Bill is passed who may be in situations of financial hardship now and to ensure that there is some supplementary or discretionary payment made available to them. This is a good start but there is a long way to go.”
“It must also be noted that even as the Bill stands, there will be many people who were discriminated against for years who will now be entitled to a payment going forward. One of the things I would urge the Minister to do is ensure that a public awareness campaign starts now so that those people know that a historic injustice is going to be addressed. I urge the Department to engage on this and go through the records because I am sure, based on my own experience, that there were thousands of representations made over the years. Representations were made, pleading with various Ministers to make an exception due to the hardship involved. I ask the Minister to ensure that all of those people are contacted by the Department rather than them having to go through a rigmarole themselves.”
“It went right up to the Supreme Court, in fact, before that court adjudicated that the same Government was in breach of the Constitution. I cannot help but think about all of those families who were discriminated against and in many cases, put into severe financial hardship. The loss of their loved one was compounded by the State declaring that their partner and their relationship was somehow lesser in the eyes of the Government. We now know that had any of them at any stage had the ingenuity and determination of John O'Meara, it would have been declared that they too were being treated unconstitutionally. Therefore, it is deeply regrettable that the Government is providing for backdated payments not to the date of death, when losses were incurred, but to the date of the judgment. I join others in urging the Minister to reassess that.”
“I know that approach by the Department led to the break-up and breakdown of other relationships, particularly in cases of single parents or carers with dependent children. Upon the relationship becoming embedded, the Department virtually immediately decided they were a cohabiting couple. Often the financial strain of one partner losing their social welfare supports actually prevented the relationship from becoming embedded. Of course, it is absolutely welcome that this Bill is being progressed and that, to a point, some of the cruel anomalies I have mentioned have been addressed. I note the welcome by Government representatives of this move and their commendations of John O'Meara but it should be noted that this Government and the parties that make it up actually dragged him through the court to get to this point.”
“Among the most distressing cases I have ever dealt with as an elected representative are those when one partner dies in a loving couple who have been living together for years, often with dependent children. I have dealt with cases where tragic circumstances were involved. Just because at no point in the relationship did they go to the effort of getting a piece of paper to say they were married, the surviving partner received no support whatsoever in terms of the widow’s pension. I always felt it was cruel in the extreme by the State. The cruelty was compounded by the fact that it was implemented by the Department of Social Protection which, when the same couple were alive, was quick to decide they were essentially the same as a married couple.”
“I am asking all TDs today to support the Sinn Féin amendment to the motion before the House to only extend this scheme if the Government commits to, first, end the distortion of the private market by limiting new entrants to the ARP to primary residents - in other words, people hosting in their own homes; second, ensure there is an introduction of a means test for beneficiaries of temporary protection seeking to be housed under the ARP; and third, and importantly, banning the practice of top-up payments within this scheme. If the Government does not accept the Sinn Féin amendment, this House will have no option but to vote against the motion because we cannot stand over the current unfair scheme.”
“Sinn Féin does not want any cliff edge that would put anyone at risk of homelessness. That is why we have been calling on the Government to address these issues since the last extension and why I have been calling on the Ministers to bring forward the proposed changes that are needed since January. We have always recognised - and it is important we say this clearly - that there is an important distinction to be made between those who are hosting families in their own homes and landlords in the private sector who are availing of the accommodation recognition payment. The Government needs to also recognise this because change is absolutely needed if the ARP is to be renewed for another year.”
“It is putting other renters, including people who might be on lower incomes, at a severe disadvantage as the scheme incentivises landlords to rent their properties under this scheme, particularly in areas with traditionally lower rents. To compound problems, the Minister also acknowledged to me that her Department is aware that some of those who are receiving the ARP are also receiving top-up payments. The feedback I have received, including from landlords, is that this practice is, in fact, widespread and is further distorting the rental sector. The Minister shrugs her shoulders, says the legislation is silent on the matter and suggests it is a matter between the parties concerned. If top-ups are not banned, the proposed rate reduction will not make any difference to the fundamental problems with the scheme.”
“It is either impacting it or it is not. The fundamental unfairness with the scheme, however, is the lack of means testing. There is no other housing assistance payment where the beneficiary does not have to satisfy a means test. A Ukrainian person housed under the ARP could be employed in a well-paid job, working alongside other people from anywhere else in the world, including Ireland, who have an equal need for housing but only one gets access to this unique support and the others do not. That is exactly the type of unfairness that winds people up and creates the tensions that, quite frankly, we could do without.”
“Until now there has been absolutely no acknowledgement from the Government of the impact of this scheme on the rental sector. Last week, the Minister, Deputy Foley, confirmed to me in a reply to a parliamentary question that she had not sought any briefings, reports or analysis on the impact of the ARP on the rental sector and, apparently, is relying on a survey which was taken voluntarily instead. Given that this issue was repeatedly raised by myself and others, it is totally unacceptable no analysis of the impact of the ARP was carried out. In the same reply, the Minister stated categorically that the ARP was not interfering with the rental market, despite confirming she had no way of actually making that assertion. We are now told the Government believes a cut of €200 will reduce the potential impact on the rental market. Which is it?”
“The accommodation recognition payment was originally paid at a rate of €400 per month. Then Government increased it to €800 per month but now it has been reduced to €600, so the approach has been confused, chaotic and uninformed by any analysis whatsoever of the impact on the rental sector. There are serious questions about the use of taxpayers' money on the scheme and why the payment was increased to €800 in December 2022. I hope the Minister will confirm today that she plans to carry out an assessment of the money spent on the scheme to date, because if she now believes the payment can be reduced to €600, people will rightly ask if there was ever any justification for having paid a rate of €800 per month since December 2022.”
“However, we are now increasingly seeing that landlords in the private rental sector are availing of the ARP because in many areas it is financially advantageous for them to do so compared with renting to other potential tenants. They are guaranteed a lump sum monthly payment from the Government. They can get top-up payments from beneficiaries that are totally unregulated and have none of the obligations accrued that they would have for any other tenant. That puts other renters, including people who might be on lower incomes, at a severe disadvantage as the scheme incentivises landlords to rent their properties to Ukrainians, particularly in areas where rents would traditionally have been lower. Nothing encapsulates the haphazard approach of the Government more than the actual rates.”
“Now, at the eleventh hour, days before the scheme is due to expire it brings forward another motion with just one hour of debate, which is quite scandalous, without addressing the serious flaws within the ARP. The truth is that the ARP is divisive, deeply unfair and it has to be ended in its current guise. The motion should only be passed, therefore, if the Sinn Féin amendment is passed because we cannot allow the current situation to continue. At the beginning, it has to be recognised that this scheme was brought forward as an emergency measure to support those who opened up their homes to people fleeing war, and Sinn Féin commended all of those who opened their homes.”
“I move the amendment mar, tá an scéim cóiríochta seo éagórach. Tá sé ag cruthú fadhbanna sa mhargadh cíosa. Theip ar an Rialtas aghaidh a thabhairt ar na fadhbanna seo agus, mar sin, ligfidh Sinn Féin amach inniu cad iad na hathruithe atá le déanamh. Sinn Féin has repeatedly raised its concerns about the Ukrainian accommodation recognition payment, both in relation to the unfairness inherent in the scheme and the impact that the scheme has on the private rental sector. Last year when there was a similar motion before the Dáil, Sinn Féin also put down an amendment to give the Government the opportunity to address those issues with the scheme. Unfortunately, in typical fashion the Government pushed ahead with the scheme as it was despite growing reports, even at that time, about the adverse impact it was having on the rental sector.”
“I move amendment No. 1: To insert the following after "6th March, 2025": ": provided that this Order shall take effect only after the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 has been amended to provide for the Accommodation Recognition Payment (ARP) scheme termination date to be extended, only for the following: — 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 Relief scheme in the previous 12 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.".”
“It is about a determination by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael to abandon Irish independent foreign policy and lock us in entirely to an EU framework that will not always be in Ireland's interests. The triple lock neutrality protection must be protected by this Dáil and shame on anybody who votes to abandon it.”
“The triple lock was sold to them on the basis that they would have nothing to fear from the ongoing drive towards militarisation and a centralised military command at a European level. In my view, only the Irish people can undo that democratic decision, which forms the basis of our current membership of the European Union. The rhetoric coming from the Government is dangerous. Abandoning the triple lock will allow any future Government at any particular time to engage Irish troops in a conflict situation that has no direct connection to Ireland. One wrong move could undermine decades of Irish diplomacy, humanitarian aid and the long-standing reputation we have across the world. This is not about broadening our horizons.”
“We accept that the world has changed dramatically and that it is changing. We accept that it is right that we have a conversation to consider and examine Ireland's place in the world and what is necessary to ensure Ireland's security. It is also necessary to ensure that at such times, we do not set aside our integrity or our precedent, or that we do not do things out of short-term interest that can have profound long-term effects. It is widely recognised that the triple lock is a neutrality protection. It was recognised in the now Taoiseach's statements when he was the leader of Fianna Fáil in opposition before he abandoned every principle in order to hitch his wagon to Fine Gael. The triple lock ensures that the democratic wishes of the Irish people are protected. The people rejected both the Lisbon and Nice treaties.”
“In many ways, last year was a sea-change. I hope it will mark a turning point in how this House and society deal with and recognise carers. For the first time ever, there was a political unanimity that we needed to do better. When Deputy Mary Lou McDonald announced at the Sinn Féin Ard-Fheis that Sinn Féin was committed to abolishing the carer's means test, many people thought that it was pie in the sky stuff. However, very quickly, virtually all other parties followed suit and committed to doing so. The Minister said that the Government will abolish the means test. Do not make people wait any longer than they already have. Please just do it.”
“I thank the Labour Party for bringing forward the motion on this important issue. The truth is that this State fails carers. We do not give them the support they need and deserve. We do not truly recognise that carers are not only providing an essential service to their own loved ones; they are also providing society with an essential service. The truth is that far too many carers are struggling to survive. When you speak to those people who are caring for their family members, it is hard to comprehend how they are doing it. On top of the myriad of duties outlined by Deputies that fall to carers, we have added an extra duty, which is the duty to campaign. They have to campaign for recognition. They have to lobby politicians to bring their pleas to this House urging Government to do the right thing.”
“-----is that Fine Gael in particular has no principle left other than to oppose whatever position Sinn Féin takes. Sinn Féin continue to use any real opportunity we have to say that the bombardment of Gaza and the occupation, annexation and apartheid regime must end because that is the only viable route to peace in the Middle East. Not only that, we will be consistent in our approach. It is the consistency of our approach of demanding adherence to international law and respect for the institutions of the United Nations that gives us our greatest strength. To move to a point where the argument and answer to any question is somehow to send Irish troops to conflict regions without a UN mandate means you are asking yourselves the wrong question.”
“I notice none of the representatives had anything to say about the SDLP and the Alliance Party taking a similar positions. What that points to------”
“When our Taoiseach had an opportunity to speak truth to power and to make an appeal - whether it was heard or not is irrelevant - to the institution that has the most likely opportunity to change things in respect of what is happening in the Middle East, he barely uttered a word on the need to protect international law and to tell Israel to stop the flagrant and ongoing violations of international law. Less than 48 hours later, we witnessed the Israeli bombardment on the innocent men, women and children of Gaza recommence. It is utterly shameful that Ireland had the opportunity to speak the truth and failed to take it. Some people have taken issue with the fact Sinn Féin did not participate in the social events in the White House on St. Patrick's Day.”
“It is quite sickening to hear representatives from those parties actually point to the weakness in our Defence Forces that they have overseen as an excuse for the need for us to abandon what has been a position of neutrality that has served Ireland and allowed us to serve the world very well. I can point to moments in history when Ireland stood out as a voice for peace, conflict resolution and the rights to freedom and self-determination. I reiterate that they are principles and a legacy that were lost in the Oval Office last week.”
“The Government is not expanding our horizons; it is narrowing our horizons. The Government is narrowing our influence to scope that is entirely condensed within the European Union, failing to recognise that Ireland's reach has gone and should go much further. That issue and the difficulty with all of that is that this tying us in to an EU policy framework now extends to a militaristic agenda that I have huge fears of. We are witnessing a drive towards militarisation that we have seen at different points in history. I cannot find any one of those points in history where there was the arms race of the type we are seeing now that had a happy ending. Our own Defence Forces are in a perilous situation. They have been decimated by successive Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Governments.”
“This is the proud legacy we have earned from previous generations who upheld Ireland's right to have an independent foreign policy and ensured we had neutral status that allowed us to be voices for peace, conflict resolution and dialogue in the world. Let us make no mistake about it: the trajectory the Government is setting us on is one that moves us away from that proud legacy.”
“I welcome the opportunity to take part in this debate on international security and trade. Of course, there are very particular dangers facing Ireland in respect of the international trajectory of trade policy, ones we must be very cognisant of and ones we must be very committed to addressing head on in a way that protects the very important FDI sector and recognises that we have paid a price for the failures of successive Governments to adequately and consistently support indigenous enterprises to allow us to withstand global shocks when they occur. What protects us in trading terms is our greatest protection as a State and that is our positioning in the world.”
“The two counties we are talking about have virtually no interconnectivity in terms of public transport. This must be taken into consideration in light of, as I say, the emergency situations in which people may find themselves. Will the Minister revert to the commitment given by his predecessor not to deliver a centre for between Cavan and Monaghan, which is taking far too long, but, rather, to deliver one for Cavan and one for Monaghan? The latter is the minimum that is required.”
“We need to be clear. The previous Minister for Justice committed to ensuring that there would be at least one refuge in every county. In January, Cuan confirmed to me what the Minister has repeated here, namely that rather than delivering one refuge in both Cavan and Monaghan, the plan has changed to one centre between the two counties. That is not good enough, particularly when we consider the circumstances that would lead somebody needing to enter a domestic violence refuge. If a person lives in Carrickmacross and the centre is in Belturbet, the distance between the two is 67 km. That is further than the distance from this House to Navan. That is not acceptable, particularly in view of the disruption that arises in the context of school life.”
“He mentioned some aspects of potentially expanding Templemore or changing the way it functions but have there been any real deliberations in terms of the potential of opening a second Garda training college? That is something that I think would be very appropriate and much needed.”
“Government representatives have increasingly cited the increase in population as a rationale behind the increase in crime figures. For example, earlier this morning the Minister cited it as an explanation for the increase in the number of people offending while out on bail. Yet, we have a Government target that has 15,000 members of An Garda Síochána, a target that is nowhere near being met at the moment. Surely the Minister accepts that target is not enough considering the increase in population and what are very clear demands from communities all over the State, who do not see enough gardaí within their communities at present. At some point, will the Minister give the Dáil a comprehensive report and update on the work of the Garda recruitment training capacity planning group?”
“I note that in recent weeks the Commissioner said that it will not be possible to meet the Government goal of 1,000 new members this year and it is likely to be as low as 800. The Minister is on record as saying that he wants to see an additional 5,000 gardaí by the end of this Dáil term. It is incumbent on him to say, given the current parameters, how the hell he is going to make that happen.”
“It absolutely is. A career in An Garda Síochána has the potential to be a very fulfilling life experience. However, the difficulty is not people applying to join An Garda Síochána but, with due respect to the Minister, it is the intake capacity and the experience of some people who apply but who do not make it into Templemore - in other words, they have a negative experience which they convey to others that would in time prevent them from following suit. Some 750 recruits left Templemore in 2023. Last year, 2024, the number was 631. The strength of the force at the end of 2024 was just about 14,000 which is only 200 more than at the start of the year and 500 less than when Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael formally came into government in 2020.”
“Further to the previous debate, I hope the Minister will accept what I consider to be an absolute fact and that is we now have a clear and ongoing crisis in respect of Garda numbers and in particular Garda visibility within our communities. That crisis will not be addressed unless we substantially increase the training uptake capacity for An Garda Síochána. What measures does the Minister intend to apply in order to achieve this?”
“My difficulty with the Minister's answer regarding the progress that has been made through the courts in recent times is that it suggests that he is not committing to reviewing the operation of the bail laws, including changes to them that might be necessary. Does the Minister agree that a real problem results from the fact that we simply do not have enough gardaí in our communities to be able to monitor all these things, particularly to monitor those who have been released on bail?”
“I will go back to the Minister's original response where he repeated figures included in the initial reply to the parliamentary question in respect of the most common offence types carried out by offenders who were on bail. He mentioned public order, drunkenness, theft from shops, possession of drugs for personal use and criminal damage, which accounted for 59%. Will the Minister outline to the Dáil the detail of the categories that make up the other 41% of crimes for which no figures were given in that reply? The number of crimes committed while suspects were on bail went up from 26,000 in 2016 to 40,000 in 2024.”
“To be clear, no one is suggesting that every bail application end with a remand order. Is the Minister satisfied with the extent to which adherence with bail conditions is monitored and enforced? I received another reply to a parliamentary question from the Minister on 25 February that revealed that, although people were suspected of committing more than 40,000 crimes in 2024 while on bail, there were only 4,146 arrests that year where there was reasonable cause to suspect the person was in breach of a bail condition. Does the Minister agree that the discrepancy between the number of crimes being committed while suspects are on bail and the number of arrests for breaches of bail conditions suggests there is a significant problem with monitoring bail conditions and holding those on bail to account for breaches of those bail conditions?”
“Many people were shocked - I certainly was - at the reply I received from the Minister that revealed that known suspects in 40,348 crimes carried out in 2024 were on bail. I submitted the question on the back of a number of high-profile instances where habitual offenders, including people who had repeatedly breached bail conditions, were subsequently convicted of very serious crimes. Will the Minister outline what actions he will take to address this very serious issue?”
“If the Minister decides to proceed with what I consider to be another stumbling block by reverting this issue to the justice committee, will he instruct his Department and An Garda Síochána to provide the justice committee with any documentation it seeks as part of its work in following up on any examination of this case and the report?”
“There are two distinct elements here. One is the recommendations of the scoping exercise report. I agree that we should look at all of those and perhaps there is a role for the justice committee in deliberating on whether those are achievable. Every recommendation ultimately comes down to whether the Minister or another Minister decides to accept them. One of the recommendations is that there is no scope for a public inquiry. I fundamentally disagree with that recommendation. Just like any recommendation in any report, it can be discounted by the Minister if there is a just reason to do so. In my view, there is very just reason to ignore that recommendation and to pursue the democratic decision of the Dáil and establish the inquiry.”
“Does the Minister believe that there is scope or capacity within the justice committee to actually get those answers? I would contend strongly that there is not. If the Minister shares this view, then he should do the honourable thing and not delay this process any longer and establish the public inquiry that is required.”
“I agree entirely with the Minister that one person alone is responsible for the death of Shane O'Farrell, that being, Zigimantas Gridziuska. However, at the heart of this case is the indisputable fact that Gridziuska should have been imprisoned at the time of Shane's killing. He was in breach of multiple bail conditions set by multiple courts. He had been stopped on several occasions by gardaí when there was an arrestable offence clearly taking place, including just a short time before Shane's death. The Minister has indicated that the O'Farrell family want answers. It is in the public interest that we get to the heart of why this individual was not imprisoned at the time. How do we get those answers for the O'Farrells? It is my belief that the only way those answers will be got is through an independent public inquiry.”
“This is my first opportunity to present oral questions to the Minister for Justice. I wanted my first question to be in respect of the case of Shane O'Farrell, with which the Minister is very familiar. The Minister moved a motion on the case previously, which was adopted by the House, calling for the establishment of a public inquiry into the circumstances of the death of Shane and the actions of State agencies in respect of it. Will the Minister now establish that inquiry?”
“The Department now tells us that frozen food it is not an acceptable compensatory item, even though it is probably the single greatest expense that many families endured. Will the Taoiseach intervene with the Department of Social Protection and ensure those people financially impacted as a result of the fact that they had to discard food from fridges or freezers will be compensated in some small way?”
“We know, regrettably, more severe weather events will hit our country in the time ahead and how the State responds to them, particularly in terms of how it supports people who are impacted, will be very important. During and immediately after Storm Éowyn, Ministers, including the Taoiseach, promised those people who were financially impacted and who were suffering as a result would be supported, and they were continuously pointed towards the humanitarian assistance scheme. I estimate that in recent days tens of thousands of people, if not more, have received rejection letters to their urgent appeals to the Government for support after the impact of Storm Éowyn on their families as a result of the power outages, in particular in respect of the need to discard frozen food.”
“Is cúis mhór díomá é go háirithe an laghdú i líon na ndaltaí a fhreastalaíonn ar scoileanna lán-Ghaelacha a tharla i dtréimhse an Rialtais Fhianna Fáil agus Fhine Gael dheireanaigh. Tá sé thar am don Rialtas tacaíocht chuí a thabhairt d’oideachas trí Ghaeilge agus cúnamh a thabhairt do na pobail Ghaeltachta mar is iadsan atá mar bhunchloch do thodhchaí ár dteanga. Mar fhocal scoir, gabhaim buíochas le mo chomhghleacaí, an Teachta Aengus Ó Snodaigh, as ucht na hoibre atá déanta aige chun an teanga a chothú. Glaoim ar an Rialtas na moltaí faoin teanga atá leagtha amach sa rún seo a chur i bhfeidhm.”
“Maidir le Seachtain na Gaeilge, ní leor é ráitis sheanchaite a thabhairt don teanga; gaoth mhór gan aon chur leis. Tríd an rún seo a thabhairt chun tosaigh inniu, tá an méid a chaithfimid a dhéanamh chun cearta oideachais trí Ghaeilge a chur ar fáil leagtha amach go cruinn ag Sinn Féin. Mar thuismitheoir páistí a d’fhreastail ar Ghaelscoil agus ar Ghaelcholáiste, creidim go hiomlán go gcaithfidh an deis chéanna sin a bheith ar fáil do gach páiste. Is féidir linn i bhfad níos mó a dhéanamh chun an Ghaeilge a chothú agus a chur chun cinn agus seans a chur ar fáil do gach duine an teanga a fhoghlaim agus a labhairt. Mar dhuine atá ag déanamh iarrachta faoi láthair feabhas a chur ar mo chuid Gaeilge labhartha féin, tuigim go bhfuil sé níos éasca do pháistí teanga a fhoghlaim.”