Nessa Cosgrove
Labour Panel · Labour Party · Ireland
“The Minister of State recognised that there was a grassroots movement and the documentary "Groundswell" captured it. There is also the documentary "Gasland", which was made in America and came out in 2010. We know it is going to come from America. Again, this is the Trojan horse.”
“The amendment defines "fracked gas", which does not appear anywhere in the Bill. This, with amendment No. 13, would make clear that the importation of fracked gas would not be possible under the Bill. LNG particularly when sourced in the US, is usually derived from fracking.”
“I move amendment No. 3: In page 8, after line 39, to insert the following: " "hydraulically fractured gas" means liquefied natural gas, or natural gas in any other form, that has been produced, in whole or in part, by means of hydraulic fracturing within the meaning of section 5A of the Petroleum and Other Minerals Development Act 1960;".…”
“I am sorry but I just do not buy the argument that it is security. A floating LNG storage facility in Qatar was blown up. It is actually more of a risk to our security to have a floating LNG terminal. This whole thing is mad.”
“All of us were probably at the IFA briefing yesterday. When they gave us the briefing document I saw that it was exactly the same as the one last year and I wondered whether it had got anything it looked for. I was told not really, apart perhaps with regard to areas of natural constraint.”
“Historians, no doubt, are going to refer to this legislation in that way, because the reserve is not going to be used solely for emergencies. We are trying to define what an emergency is. There is no definition. Seven years ago, we led the way in the international community by committing to phase out oil and gas exploration.”
The complete record
Every one of 951 lines we hold for Nessa Cosgrove, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 20.
“The prison conditions were appalling and one of those prisoners, Bernie Sweeney, reported that they were frequently beaten in Peterhead and to such an extent they were often unrecognisable. These prisoners were chained and subjected to hard labour using 7 lb or 14 lb sledgehammers to split the hard granite used to build a harbour that in later years saved the lives of countless sailors and oil rig workers caught off Scotland’s north-east coast during stormy weather. Conditions were so harsh that two of these ten men tragically died soon after their release. I bring it up today because I was contacted earlier this month by Linda MacManus, the grand-niece of one of these men, Joseph Reynolds of Aghacashel, County Leitrim.”
“I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach for fitting me in. One hundred years ago this month, a group of ten republican prisoners, including five from County Leitrim, were released from Peterhead prison in Scotland. They were among the last IRA prisoners to be released from British prisons in 1926. This group was arrested by crown forces while engaged in a cross-Border raid in 1922 intended to kidnap high-profile unionists as part of a tit-for-tat prisoner-taking and exchange campaign that continued after the Treaty of 1921. They were arrested and briefly detained in the North before being transported to Peterhead prison in Scotland. These men did not receive political status and were subjected to brutal conditions in what has been described as Scotland’s "most notorious prison", "Scotland’s Alcatraz" and "Scotland’s gulag".”
“It was my understanding, and the Minister of State has cleared it up, that there is going to be no greenway on this rail structure, which is wonderful. Unfortunately, our local representatives in Sligo are continuing to press, saying that there is an option to have a greenway developed here, whereas in Mayo and Galway all the politicians from Opposition parties and all parties have come together and this is why they have made a very firm case, and they have seen it. In fairness to the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, he has done Trojan work on this because he is passionate about having balanced development and opening up the western rail corridor. Am I right in saying that there is going to be nothing except rail infrastructure on the existing line?”
“Will the Minister of State give a commitment that the existing stretch of rail line will be retained for rail use only, as has been indicated by Irish Rail, and that no other structure, including anything described as a temporary structure, should be permitted on it? The narrative we hear is a temporary greenway will be placed on the track to keep it in public ownership. That does not add up because it is already in public ownership. In this day and age, can we honestly see the waste of taxpayers' money involved in creating a temporary structure that will cost millions and then be ripped up to put in a rail line in the future? It makes no sense and is inconsistent with Government policy regarding the western rail corridor. Please, can we get a straight answer and put to bed the idea of a temporary greenway along the existing track?”
“To exclude Claremorris to Collooney not only denies the people and enterprises of Sligo a vital link to Mayo, Galway and beyond, but it jeopardises the integrity and logic of the entire corridor. Sligo has to connect to it in order for the corridor to achieve its potential. Without the Sligo connection, we risk condemning the corridor to disuse. This rail corridor is a 73.5 km strip of land. In 2023, it was valued at €957 million. Its untapped value is the final piece of the jigsaw of reopening the western rail corridor. Comments from a number of Government politicians in recent weeks indicated they would like to see a greenway and that there are plans to install a greenway on the existing rail corridor.”
“These figures have steadily climbed, especially following the pandemic, and Irish Rail has seen significant passenger growth year on year. Passenger numbers grew from 17.8 million across the network in 2020 to 50.7 million in 2024. Irish Rail expects those numbers to have grown by 5 million in 2025. Freight rail has experienced a similar renaissance. Times and contexts have changed since the decision was made to close the Claremorris to Collooney rail line. Rail is again recognised as an effective and efficient method of passenger and freight transit. We recognise the environmental benefits of rail and Iarnród Éireann has declared its goal is to be the backbone of Ireland's sustainable transport network. All other phases of the western rail corridor have either been opened or approved for opening.”
“Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I return to the matter of the full reinstatement of the western rail corridor, specifically the 73.5 km stretch between Claremorris and Collooney. I have been left with no alternative but to raise this as a Commencement matter due to the inconsistent and unclear messaging from the Government. I will give a little bit of background. As a previous speaker said, rail use in Ireland has changed and we, as a population, make more frequent use of rail and demand more services in the rail infrastructure. While the 1980s and 1990s saw prioritisation of road over rail for passengers and freight, attitudes, times and values have changed. In 2016, for example, The Sligo Champion reported that the Sligo-Dublin line was at risk of closing. Just 1.3 million passengers had used the route in 2015.”
“Relying on them as a legal basis for detention places an unfair burden on clinicians and risks inconsistent or overly cautious decision-making. We must be extremely careful about creating or maintaining legal frameworks that allow people to be deprived of liberty based on perceived risk rather than actual harm or need. The threshold for such a serious intervention must remain high and the focus must always be on the individuals own health, safety and rights, not on the vague or unproven concerns about others.”
“Using a person's potential risk to others as a stand-alone basis for involuntary detention is not consistent with human rights standards. It shifts the focus away from the individual needs and rights and instead frames them as a threat, reinforcing stigma and discrimination against people with mental health difficulties. This approach risks criminalising mental illness and undermines the therapeutic relationship between individuals and mental health services, which we spoke about when considering the previous amendment. Furthermore, psychiatrists themselves have repeatedly raised concerns about the criteria. Many have pointed out that they are not trained to reliably assess future risk to others and that such assessments are often speculative and prone to error.”
“I move amendment No. 48: In page 27, line 7, to delete ", or that of another person,". Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. These amendments, which Senator Harmon and I have tabled, seek to delete the reference to threats to the life or health of another person being grounds for involuntary admission. Involuntary admission should be permitted only in cases where the failure to admit involuntarily could have a serious impact on the health or safety of the individual and where it would be likely to benefit to a clear and material extent. This reflects the principle that involuntary detention must be a last resort, used only when all other options have been exhausted and when the person's well-being is at significant risk.”
“[...] In this context, we respectfully request your endorsement of the Amnesty 2.0 campaign, calling on the Minister for Justice, Jim O’Callaghan, to grant permission to remain to the 1,500 [that is all it is] ADPI members still living in Direct Provision and emergency accommodation.”
“Their work ethic, strong integration, and outstanding references from employers, educators, and community leaders directly counter harmful stereotypes and show a community ready and fully equipped to continue contributing to Ireland’s social and economic life. Our request is reasonable, constructive, and in the national interest. We are not seeking new financial supports or additional public resources. We are simply seeking the right to remain lawfully in Ireland the country where our members have studied, worked, paid taxes, raised children, integrated into communities, and built meaningful lives. In return, Ireland gains stability within essential sectors experiencing labour shortages, strengthens its social fabric, and moves closer to ending an outdated and costly [direct provision] system.”
“Many of our members [of Abolish Direct Provision Ireland] have spent prolonged periods five, ten, or in some cases more than fifteen years living under a system characterised by restriction, isolation, discrimination, and systemic dehumanisation. These experiences include social exclusion, reputational harm, emotional distress, and repeated incidents of verbal and physical abuse. Such conditions have no place in a modern and compassionate Republic. Despite these challenges, the people within Direct Provision have demonstrated exceptional resilience, commitment, and civic responsibility. Our members are workers, learners, community volunteers, and parents contributing daily to Irish society.”
“In the last few weeks I have met a remarkable group of people, originally from various African countries, who have made their new home in Sligo. They are anxious to contribute to their new home in whatever way possible and have asked me to draw attention to a letter on behalf of the Abolish Direct Provision Ireland group, addressed to all elected representatives. This letter calls for the endorsement of the group's Amnesty 2.0 campaign. It states as follows: For over twenty-six years, the Direct Provision system has subjected thousands of individuals and families to conditions unworthy of a State committed to human rights.”
“Is the minimum wage going to be in that for apprenticeships, and even if it is and if we get the perfect action plan, what about young workers? Will they still be exploited? Even within young workers, it is exploitative of women workers. I heard in the briefing today that young hairdressers in apprenticeships are not even getting an incremental amount of pay, so they are being doubled down on with discrimination. I am disgusted, to be honest. I commend Senator O'Reilly for listening and I encourage other people on the Government benches to do the same.”
“If we keep going this way, where we are bringing Bills from Opposition and Government is just rejecting them, we are heading off a cliff. We are all in this together. That is why I got elected, by saying we are all in this together and we are here to work together, but clearly we are not. Three out of five young people are thinking of leaving our country because of the housing crisis and cost-of-living crisis, and although we need apprenticeships more than ever, they are not taking up these jobs. I do not know how the Government cannot listen to this and reconsider pushing it out to 12 months, which I would accept. The Minister of State talked about the apprenticeship action plan. Will this be the same action plan as the disaster that has been the housing action plan?”
“At 18, you can get married and vote. This idea that, because of your age, you will be paid less for doing exactly the same job as someone older than you is outdated, unfair and discriminatory. We are in the middle of an absolute housing catastrophe and 20% of apprentices are dropping out in their first year. How is this solving the housing crisis and how is this engagement? If the Minister of State had come here today and listened to Connect Trade Union and its representative, Paddy Kavanagh, he would have seen that, with the neoliberal politics and this circle of privilege the Government is driving and continues to drive, 47% of apprentices dropping out in the UK in the first year. We are heading off a cliff.”
“This is our fourth Private Members' Bill we have introduced and I thought this one would, like the other three, go into the filing cabinet of timed amendments, but it has not. It has been totally dismissed and the Minister of State encouraged people here to reject it. I know people on all sides of the House want to vote with their conscience because they know this is the right thing to do. We can see from the low representation on the Government benches here today that people want to vote for this. I agree with Senator Craughwell that this is within the Minister of State's gift. He could decide to push it out for a year. Surely, this is what timed amendments are about. On the argument of 16-year-olds or 17-years-olds, at 16 years of age, you can drive a motorbike and get a pilot's licence. You can drive a tractor at 16.”
“Since being elected to this House, I expected a timed amendment because, as the Minister of State said, it is so complicated. If it is that complicated, why did he not give us a timed amendment and 12 months to discuss it? Is that not what committees are supposed to be about, so we can discuss this? The Minister of State asked us to engage and I invited him to do so but he did not show up. All the Opposition showed up, and I thank the Members for doing that and showing up in masses to the briefing today. It was a really important briefing and was obviously able to change the mind of someone like Senator O'Reilly. Government talks about engagement but this is not engagement; this is becoming like a dictatorship. Everything we introduce into this House is rejected.”
“To say I am disgusted is an understatement. Clearly, all of us are equal but some are more equal than others. I do not know how the Minister of State is able to stand up in front of all these young people and trade unionists who I invited to come. Fair play to Senator O'Reilly for showing up today. He came and listened to the voices of the people representing those working in trades. He listened to ICTU's arguments about pushing forward and supporting this Bill and he listened to representatives from the National Youth Council of Ireland. He was able to have the bravery to stand up and say they are right, this is exploitation of young workers and we are not treating people the way we should be. People are doing the same level of work and they should be treated fairly.”
“It extends the right to the national minimum wage to all of those people who are working in our economy. Increasing pay and adducing a benefit to the least well-off, while impacting them positively, does not negatively impact those who already receive more. Nobody loses with this Bill; everybody wins. I am hopeful that my colleagues in the Seanad and the Dáil from all parties will agree that change is necessary and that the National Minimum Wage (Inclusion of Young Persons, Apprentices and Interns) Bill 2025 will become law in 2026.”
“We were told today by Paddy Kavanagh of the Connect Trade Union that 47% of apprentices in the UK dropped out in the first year because of low pay. In the unlikely event that none of us have noticed, we have an acute shortage of housing. We have serious deficiencies in infrastructure and a chronic shortage of skilled craftsmen and craftswomen. We need to address these shortages and deficiencies in any way we can. I know that the Oireachtas committee on higher education is busy preparing a report at the moment on the very issue of apprentice pay and I fully expect it to recommend that apprentices are paid at least the minium wage. The introduction of the national minimum wage had a positive impact in reducing the levels of poverty in the workplace. This Bill will complete the work that started in 2000.”
“The third argument often given is that only a small number of apprentices and interns are affected by these low rates of pay and it will not impact most apprentices. The whole point of minimum wage legislation is that it sets a minimum. It is not intended to have an impact on those who are already in receipt of the minimum or who exceed it. This is legislation designed to raise the floor of wages and not the roof. If it is only going to help a small number then surely that is the point of any progressive legislation. It is designed to help those who need help the most. Employers tell me that it is increasingly difficult to attract apprentices into the trades and approximately 20% of apprentices drop out of their apprenticeships. That is because of low pay.”
“It is bad for diversity and it is bad for the economy. What about young parents for whom full-time work or part-time work is a necessity? In 2022, 857 babies were born to teenage parents. That is 1.5% of all births. Do those 857 babies deserve to be born into systematically engineered childhood poverty? Childhood poverty has a lifelong and multigenerational impact, especially in communities already experiencing poverty. Why would we not challenge childhood poverty where we can? Many young people do not have access to college, apprenticeships or parental funds. Many go into full-time work rather than going on to third level education. That is not because of a lack of ambition or ability but because this is what they want to do. Young adults generally want to be self-supporting. I know this from working as a youth worker for many years.”
“The second argument often given is that young people do not need the money because they are supported by their parents. While this argument might ring true for some 17-year-olds or 18-year-olds, we all know 18-year-old students who are working hard, studying and trying to support themselves, whether living away from home or at home. Anyway, many parents cannot afford to keep supporting their young workers. Not only does the expense of supporting someone who should be able to support themselves put a strain upon finances of ordinary families, it also has a more insidious effect. It means that many opportunities, such as unpaid internships, are only available to those who have access to the bank of mum and dad. This leads to a continuation, even a magnification, of middle-class domination of certain sectors.”
“The first argument is that it will lead to a reduction in employment opportunities for young people but the same claims were made in the run-up to 2000. We heard widespread claims from some employers that a steep rise in unemployment would follow, especially among the lowest paid, less skilled workers. The same claims are being made by some employers today that the unintended consequences of this policy is that employers choose not to give an opportunity to those who need the experience. However, academic studies and our own experience since 2000 have shown that these claims were unfounded. The introduction of a minimum wage had, in fact, no significant impact upon employment rates among the public, and there is no reason to think it will have a negative impact upon young workers now.”
“As a result of this, the number of unpaid internships on offer has plummeted, but the fact is that they are still out there and a small number of them are still being advertised openly. I believe the Bill before us today embodies the core values of equality and fairness in the workplace. It was these values which brought me into trade union activism, into politics and into the Labour Party at the very start many years ago, when I became an active trade unionist. Equality and fairness demand that we extend the protections of the national minimum wage to these three groups of workers. Of course some people do not agree with this logic or with the introduction of this Bill. I have heard arguments against this and no doubt we will hear some of these arguments tonight, from those opposed to the extension of the minimum wage.”
“As we heard so clearly today, first year craft apprentices often fare worse, with rates of €7.67 per hour, which is just 30% of the adult minimum wage. This rises to €11.50 for second year apprentices before reaching the minimum wage rate in third year. All of us have many experiences and know fine well that people will not give up a minimum wage job to do an apprenticeship that will only pay half of that wage, and interns fare even worse. However, lot of work has been done in tightening up on the prevalence of unpaid internships over the last number of years. The law is clear. Anybody doing work of a similar level of responsibility as an employee is an employee and is entitled to the minimum wage.”
“The introduction of the minimum wage was a transformative experience for the Irish economy because it lifted not only individuals but whole cohorts of workers out of poverty wages. Unfortunately, the job was never finished. Apprentices and interns were excluded from the benefits of a mandatory minimum wage. Employers were given permission to employ young people at rates consistently and considerably below the national minimum wage. At the moment, a young person under 18 is entitled to a wage of €9.45 per hour, which is 70% of the minimum wage. Eighteen-year-olds are entitled to €10.80 per hour, which is 80% of the minimum wage and a 19-year-old is entitled to 90% of the full rate, which is €12.15 per hour.”
“Despite this shortfall, the impact it had was immediate, not in the job losses predicted by those opposed to the introduction, but in the raising of wage levels for all low-paid workers. Some 163,000 workers, the majority of whom women and many of whom were under 25, received a pay rise on April Fool's Day 2000. A total of 80,000 of them received an increase of at least £1, that is, their wages rose by a quarter overnight. It seems hard to remember a different Ireland, an Ireland where employers could choose to pay adult workers less than £3 per hour. While most of the low-paid jobs were then, as now, in retail and personal services, other low-paid sectors at the time were highly dangerous and in sectors such as agriculture, forestry and fishing.”
“I am very grateful to my Cross-Party Group colleagues, Senators Laura Harmon, Malcolm Noonan and Patricia Stephenson for allowing us to use our Private Member's time for this very important Bill. The introduction of a national minimum wage in Ireland in 2000, which is 25 years ago now, was a turning point in workers' rights in this jurisdiction. Overnight, on 1 April 2000, we saw 22% of workers receive an immediate and significant boost to their income. Today the minimum wage is set at €13.50 per hour, but four months into the new millennium it was set at just €5.58 per hour or £4.40 in the old money. While the then minimum wage commission had recommended a rate of 70% of the average male wage at the time, the Government at the time opted for a rate of just 53% of the average male wage.”
“Marie had previously brought legislation before the Seanad seeking the payment of the minimum wage to apprentices in 2023 and, in turn, in 2022. The fact that previous attempts have been made by other parliamentarians demonstrates that the specifics of this Bill have political precedence and that they are steeped in the ideals of equality and fairness, which should inform all of our efforts to remake Irish society. The understanding that previous attempts to bring about an extension to the minimum wage legislation for all workers was not achieved, unfortunately, during the term of the previous Oireachtas should give fresh impetus to the need to pass this Bill today, which combines the need to fairly and adequately pay apprentices, interns and young people.”
“Ben Friel, President of the National Union of Students NI and Aontas na Mac Léinn in Éirinn. My thanks to all the Senators and TDs who were able to attend and, if they were not, who sent their representatives. I also thank those who assisted and advised me on this Bill throughout this drafting process. I give a special shout out to Mr. John Davey, my parliamentary assistant. Advice and input has come from the entire trade union movement, particularly the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, with thanks in particular to former Senator Paul Gavan for his consistent advice and guidance on this. I am also especially grateful to my immediate predecessors as Labour Party spokespersons on workers' rights, former Senator and now Deputy Marie Sherlock and Deputy Ged Nash, who did so much to bring these issues to the fore.”
“I am very excited and delighted to be bringing forward my first Bill in the Seanad. I welcome the many trade unionists and representatives of the National Youth Council in the Public Gallery today. Their presence is very much appreciated. We had a fantastic briefing in the audiovisual room today. Representatives from the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, SIPTU, Connect, Mandate, the Financial Services Union and Aontas na Mac Léinn in Éirinn attended. Representatives came from across the board and this is indicative of the importance of the matter we are raising today. The speakers were: Mr. Owen Reidy, general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions; Ms Maeve Richardson digital organiser of the Financial Services Union; Mr. Paddy Kavanagh, general secretary of Connect Trade Union and Mr.”
“This Bill and section could have extended the coverage for the purpose of the scheme to be for the entire State, which makes sense. Why not? It is a simple common-sense approach but, instead, we see more half-hearted, piecemeal changes fiddling at the margins of the scheme that simply do not work. Our amendment would require the Government to face it head on and look properly and carefully at the implications of extending the geographical scope of the scheme to include the entire country.”
“Many of us in the House who have spoken on the Bill know that the western coast from Donegal to Limerick has borne the brunt of the crisis. I, like many of my colleagues, have seen the devastation up close in places like Sligo and Donegal. Equally, we know that these blocks can be found across the country, as the Government is now acknowledging by making the provision for Fingal and Wexford. With the lack of testing to date, it is possible that further cases will emerge over the coming years. The patchy coverage of the scheme risks creating a postcode lottery where those outside predesignated counties will need to fight, campaign and struggle to have their counties added, which has been the case all down the west coast counties already.”
“Moving this amendment, I would like to briefly speak about what is not contained in the Bill but should be, that is, an extension of the geographic scope of the scheme. As all Members know, the 2022 Act designated counties Clare, Donegal, Limerick and Mayo and allowed the Government to designate additional counties by order, as occurred in Sligo in 2024. As we heard on Second Stage, the Government will now move to extend the scheme to Fingal and Wexford. That is welcome but it has taken almost four years to get these affected areas on to the scheme. These piecemeal changes underline the arbitrary, incremental, half-measure approach that runs through so much of this scheme, and both the Act and this Bill.”
“I move amendment No. 22: In page 30, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following: “Amendment of section 51 of Principal Act 31. Section 51 of the Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (2): “(3) Without prejudice to subsection (1), on the passing of the Remediation of Dwellings Damaged by the Use of Defective Concrete Blocks (Amendment) Act 2025 the Minister shall commence, and shall within 6 months complete, a review of the need to designate additional local authorities or additional designated local authority areas under section 5 of the Principal Act and, not later than 3 months after the completion of the review, shall make a report to each House of the Oireachtas of his or her findings and conclusions resulting from that review.”.”.”
“I move amendment No. 17: In page 29, between lines 33 and 34, to insert the following: “(2) Section 39 of the Principal Act is amended by the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (10): “(10) Following consideration of the appeal, the Appeals Board— (a) affirm the decision the subject of the appeal, or (b) where the Appeals Board considers that an error of law or fact which detrimentally affected the party who made the appeal was made by the designated local authority or the Housing Agency, annul the decision and replace it with such other decision as it considers it appropriate to make in accordance with this Act.”.”.”
“Amendment No. 17 is a very similar amendment. Like Senator Black said, it would strengthen the appeal system. It would require the appeals board to annul and replace a decision when an error of law or fact has occurred. Under the 2022 Act, the appeals board can either annul the decision or refer it to the local authority or Housing Agency for consideration. This asks families who have already been through so much to fight battles and get decisions right. If a decision is wrong, it is wrong and the appeals process should address that. Families who are going through this through no fault of their own should not have to go through these hoops. This common-sense change would end one barrier faced by a lot of families. I hope the Government will accept the amendment.”
“We need to see a full end-to-end scheme, not based on grants, because we know that the State can do it - we have done it before - but based on actually delivering the reconstruction of work the families have done across the way, which they are crying out for.”
“It is a slow, incremental change and we can see that people are continuing to have to fight. They would not keep fighting if they thought this Bill was okay. All those amendments would not have been tabled in the Dáil last night if it was okay. The moral imperative to stand by a family who repaired their home on 28 March is just the same as for those who did so on 30 March. The arbitrary nature of that date sums up the Government's attitude to these families. It is an attitude of disinterest and disdain that has been plain to see throughout this whole saga. Unfortunately, this Bill does nothing to reassure me that it is going to change. It is a sticking plaster when it is evident that we need to have a wholesale reset. The Minister has seen communities destroyed, not just in Donegal but also in Sligo, Limerick, Leitrim and Mayo.”
“It is welcome that the Government is moving to rectify this, but I note the concerns raised that it does not go far enough. The incremental approach of the Government to this scheme, making a tweak here and a twist here and delaying all the while, is failing the communities. At this time of the year people are trying to heat their homes but the heat is going straight out through cracks in the walls. The families are exhausted. They are campaigning to fight for this and they should not have to. The Government could do the right thing. I know the Minister has been to the north west and he has seen this. He could introduce an end-to-end scheme because we know it works. We saw this on the east coast where there was the pyrite remediation scheme and it did work but this Bill is not allowing this.”
“There are some welcome tweaks in this Bill, there is no doubt about it, but it does not tackle the fundamental issue that the scheme we have does not work. It is a scheme that does not deliver the end-to-end redress that these families need and deserve. Putting a sticking plaster on a failing grant scheme is just not good enough, and the need for the Housing Agency to review determinations is simply not good enough either. It only underlines why we need a proper end-to end-scheme. Option one, namely, full demolition and reconstruction, is the only viable option. We all know of cases, and I have seen them myself in Donegal, and it just makes no sense, where one of a pair of semi-detached houses was demolished because it was seen as defective while the other one was left standing. This illustrates the bit-part nature of the scheme.”
“Hard-working parents and communities did everything right to build these homes for their children. They have taken out mortgages. We have seen this right across communities - community centres, schools, crèches - in Donegal, Sligo and all down the west coast. I commend the work of 100% Redress and Deputy Charles Ward on raising this and the fact that he has been elected to the Dáil. It shows how much of a catastrophe it actually is. I also commend the four councillors in Donegal, Councillors Joy Beard, Ali Farren, Tomás Devine and Denis McGee. They are living there and are dealing with people who are living in defective homes. The emotional fallout from that for them is enormous as well and I think that has to be put on the record.”
“I thank the Minister for coming into the House today. We have to get this right and we want to get it right. I know that the Minister visited Donegal so I know that he has seen at first hand, as I have, the impact this has had, especially at this time of the year when putting up Christmas lights. There is water pouring down inside people's houses, and I know the Minister knows this. We know it is a man-made catastrophe and it has befallen the communities the length and breadth of the north west. The devastation that has been experienced in those communities will leave a long legacy, and we all know this. Families are spending years paralysed with fear that the roofs are going to fall on their heads and the floors are going to collapse below them.”
“Early years services and voluntary and community services sector organisations may currently fund from their own or other resources additional staff, such as level 7 staff in the early years sector, beyond legal requirements in order to reduce the ratios and provide auxiliary services. The staff will not necessarily appear on the core funding applications or be accounted for in allocations made to organisations through core funding. Have the implications of this been clarified? I ask for clarification. Some services have opted not to go into the core funding model. Will such organisations have their pension contributions fully funded? I look forward to the response from the Minister.”
“There are shortfalls in maternity payments, parental leave, access to the working family payment for single parents and the full jobseeker's rate for young people. I want to welcome the auto enrolment system. It is very much needed. There are some logistical implications for the auto enrolment scheme in the early years and childcare sectors and the voluntary sector. I worked in the sector for a long time. Organisations have asked me to raise this issue. How will the voluntary sector and small independent providers be funded for their contributions towards the auto enrolment scheme? If the State is to cover the cost, will this be the total cost of all employees or only those employed on statutory ratios and through the core funding model? Some people do not opt into that model.”
“There is a paltry increase in core social welfare payments for many people on fixed incomes such as pensioners. An increase was recommended by the ESRI, which stated at least €16 per week was needed to keep up with the cost of living. We know pensioners are choosing between food or fuel this winter. A targeted second tier of child benefit payment, which would have reduced child poverty by a quarter and cut the child poverty gap in half, should have been a priority for the budget. It is a shocking failure of our society that child poverty figures are rising relentlessly. The number of children living in consistent property nearly doubled in 2024 to 8.5%. Some 104,780, or one in five, children live in families below the poverty line when housing costs are factored in. I could go on.”
“The Bill follows a budget that underlines the Government's failure to deliver real and radical policy in the social welfare system that would be fair to all and make everyone's life better. Sometimes I think we are living in an alternative universe. Senator O'Donovan listed the benefits available. At the same time, the budget left disabled people significantly worse off. People with disabilities will be €1,400 worse off next year. Social welfare payments keep them just above the poverty line. Rather than wasting €700 million on an untargeted VAT rate cut for the hospitality sector, the Government could instead have introduced a cost of disability payment starting at €25 per week and abolish the carer's allowance, something we committed to in Labour's alternative budget.”