Nicole Ryan
Administrative Panel · Sinn Féin · Ireland
“This is not just happening in my area; it is also happening in other places where estates are not being taken in charge and, therefore, residents do not know who to call if something happens. They are left alone. Tanyard Wood is unique because nobody has taken charge of the estate for ten years.”
“By 2007, the developer had gone bust and therefore, Cork County Council submitted an appeal to take charge of the estate. It has been almost ten years and it still has not taken charge of the estate. It sits in no man's land. The estate has not been maintained. No proper maintenance at all is happening.”
“It means that cancer patients in the mid-west have virtually no opportunity to access clinical trials. Accident and emergency access, dentistry and now access to clinical trials for cancer patients - how did we get to this point?”
“I will speak briefly on amendments Nos. 39 and 41. Amendment No. 39 is quite straightforward. It ensures that applicants are clearly informed of two fundamental rights within their international protection process.”
“At the core, the amendment is about ensuring individuals entrusted with supporting some of the most vulnerable children in our system are properly trained, suitable for the role and held to appropriate standards.”
“We need clear timelines. Interim measures are required to ensure residents are not left feeling unsafe or conditions are allowed to deteriorate while progress drags on. People bought homes in the area in good faith.”
The complete record
Every one of 598 lines we hold for Nicole Ryan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 7 of 12.
“Working people are not looking for handouts; they are looking for their fair share. The Government says that if they work, contribute and build a life in their communities, they will not be penalised for it. However, this budget tells them the opposite. It tells them that the harder they work, the less it matters. That is why people are disillusioned and that is why trust is breaking down. If the Minister and the Government want people to believe in work, they should reward that work. If they want people to live in rural Ireland, they have to invest in rural Ireland. If they want to talk about fairness, they should deliver it - not in headlines but in people's homes.”
“For years, people across Ireland have done everything right. They have worked hard, paid their taxes and kept their communities going, yet they are the ones being punished now. They are told there is no money for the GP service, no bus for their kids and no counselling for their teenagers, but somehow there is always money for tax breaks for developers and billion-euro profits for banks that we still will not tax properly. The Government calls this a pro-enterprise budget. However, the Minister would have to tell that to the small business owner in Macroom who cannot get staff because people cannot afford to live locally. He should tell it to the young couple in Kanturk who are saving for a deposit while rent swallows half of their wages. This is about equity.”
“The more they try to get ahead, the more they feel like they are carrying the system on their backs, supporting others when no one seems to be supporting them. I am not talking about the people who genuinely need help. I am talking about those who can work but who choose not to because the system rewards inertia instead of effort. Meanwhile, the nurse doing 12-hour shifts, the teacher staying late to help a struggling student and the ground worker driving 60 km to a site before dawn are footing the bill. Where is the incentive to work in rural Ireland today? When we do the maths and factor in the cost of fuel, childcare, rent and endless stream of bills, it is no wonder people are better off staying at home. This is not sustainable. It is not fair and it is not what people voted for.”
“I welcome the Minister to the Chamber. It is lovely to have him here today to discuss budget 2026. In this section of the budget, there are lots of welcome initiatives, including the VAT reduction. I am sure many people are really thankful for that. However, every October we hear the same story of record budgets, record spending and record promises, but people in constituencies like the one in which I live, Cork North-West, are looking around and asking about where the change is taking place. The budget was billed as one for working people. When we strip it back, however, we can see that it is the workers who are still paying the highest price. The more they work, the more they are taxed. The more overtime they do, the more they lose in deductions.”
“If I do not go to therapy, it is incredibly dangerous. It opens doors for exploitation of people who are vulnerable and seeking help. I ask that the Minister for Health come before the House to explain these standards, how they were approved, what consultation took place and how the Department intends to respond to the legitimate concerns raised by the ICP and others. This is about ensuring safety, quality and respect for the profession that supports some of the most vulnerable people in our society.”
“The ICP and all other professional bodies in this area are united in opposing these weak standards. They have said clearly that what CORU is proposing would put Ireland below the international norms, particularly those of other EU countries, and would pose a grave threat to public safety and the profession itself. It is not just a fringe concern by a couple of organisations as CORU has said. Rather, it is a collective voice of an entire profession saying that what is being proposed is not fit for service. Given the vital role that psychotherapists play in mental health care, especially when services are already under severe strain, we cannot afford to undermine professional standards and public trust. This is incredibly dangerous. As a therapist, I cannot fathom how I am to help other people if I cannot help myself.”
“I wish to raise serious concerns about the new rules in psychotherapy, put forward by CORU, which have caused alarm across the sector. A recent report in The Irish Times highlighted that CORU had refused to allow a derogation sought by the Counsellors and Psychotherapists Registration Board, a derogation that would include the requirement for personal therapy during training. That is the basic standard in most countries and is seen as an essential for both practitioner competence and client safety. What is worrying is that CORU's own head of strategy and policy has said there is insufficient evidence to show that personal therapy improves outcomes, yet the Irish Council for Psychotherapy, representing ten member organisations, has strongly refuted that and submitted detailed evidence to the Minister for Health.”
“It requires the Government's willingness to stand up to insurance companies, reform access to credit, strengthen workers' rights, plan for constitutional change and deliver the infrastructure we need. That is how we build resilience. That is how we secure the future of our small businesses and our retail sector.”
“SMEs cannot grow where there is no housing for their staff, no reliable water for their operations, no broadband to sell their products online and no transport links to bring customers through the door. IBEC has warned repeatedly that Ireland needs a clear strategic vision and timely delivery on infrastructure, innovation and skills. Yet, delays and failures in delivery are undermining our businesses every single day. Resilience is not just a buzzword. It is about whether the café in Macroom keeps its doors open, whether the pharmacy in Millstreet can hire another assistant or whether a small engineering firm in Cork can expand and export. SMEs have proven time and again that they are innovative, adaptive and rooted in our communities. Resilience cannot be built on the backs of small businesses alone.”
“However, that is only a fraction of the potential. Imagine what could be achieved if agriculture, tourism, the green economy and creative industries had a unified institutional framework. Belfast is home to the island's only deep-water port. A deep-water port is essential for offshore renewables. Mid-Ulster is a global hub for manufacturing. The North has world-class universities and a young ambitious workforce. Together with automatic re-entry to EU on unity happening, we would not only grow resilience but transform it. Yet, the Government still refuses to plan, prepare or even acknowledge the economic case for constitutional change. That is a missed opportunity, not just politically but also economically. We cannot talk about SME resilience without referring to infrastructure.”
“It continues to defend some minimal youth rates of pay which punish young workers for their age and do not reward their work. The programme for Government contains a commitment to publish an action plan on collective bargaining required under the EU directive on adequate minimum wage by the end of this year. It is now October, however, and we still have not seen any sign of it. If we are serious about resilience, we must be serious about fair pay for people, collective bargaining and workers' rights. Anything short of that is not acceptable. I want to turn briefly to the potential of an all-island economy. Cross-Border trade has more than doubled in the past decade, from €5.5 billion in 2011 to €12.4 billion in 2023. This trajectory is proof of what can be achieved when barriers are lowered and businesses work together.”
“Too often, small businesses simply do not have the time, expertise or digital know-how to navigate the automated process. The days of the local bank manager who understood your business, your community and your challenges are gone, and with them a lifeline of support. We cannot talk about resilience if SMEs are locked out of affordable finance. Students are a fantastic lifeline for many small rural businesses. The issue we have in rural areas is that students can only work so many hours. If they work over that threshold, they lose their grants. It is a catch-22 situation for many of these businesses. Workers are the greatest asset of any SME. Protecting them is not at odds with productivity, it actually strengthens it. The Government has promised a living wage but we are still waiting for a clear timeline in that regard.”
“The Government has tinkered with reforms in this area, but the benefit of those reforms has not been passed on. When Sinn Féin put forward a Bill that would require insurance companies to demonstrate to the Central Bank that they are lowering premiums to reflect the reforms, the Government refused to accept it. Another persistent obstacle is access to affordable credit. SMEs want to expand or modernise or simply need capital, yet in 2024 we saw no growth in the level of SME bank debt. Banks are either pulling out of the market or refusing risk. The departure of Ulster Bank and KBC has only worsened the squeeze. A recent IBEC survey found that 63% of SMEs find the application process for loans overly complex and lengthy.”
“I can name countless examples, from small butchers and bakers in Millstreet and Macroom to the independent retailers in Newmarket and Kanturk. They are interwoven into the fabric of our towns and villages. Too often, however, these businesses are hanging on by a thread. One of the greatest and most persistent burdens is insurance. Public liability and employers' liability insurance premiums have soared by 56% in the past ten years. This is at a time when the sector's loss ratio, that is, the amount of money actually being spent on paying claims has fallen dramatically, from around 80% to just 53%. In plain terms, that means businesses are paying more while insurance companies are paying out less and have pocketed double-digit profits three years in a row.”
“I thank the Minister of State for being here and welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate. SMEs are the backbone of our economy. Across the island, more than 1.45 million people are employed by SMEs. That is far more than the number employed by FDI enterprises. That is a staggering number. It proves what most of us already know instinctively, namely that SMEs are the lifeblood of our communities, the drivers of employment and the foundation of economic resilience. Shops, cafés, builders, family firms, pharmacies, hairdressers and small manufacturers are the businesses that sponsor local GAA clubs, that buy tickets for parish fundraisers, that donate spot prizes, that take on apprentices and that give young people their first jobs.”
“Today is a reminder that politics is not just what we say here but what we are willing to do when human lives are at stake. I am incredibly proud of Senator Andrews, who has shown he is not only willing to talk the talk inside this Chamber, but equally walk the walk with the other activists on the flotilla. We are proud of Senator Andrews and stand with him and all of the activists onboard, along with the people of Palestine. We need to stop the genocide now. Saoirse don Phalaistín.”
“I commend my colleague Senator Andrews, who has shown real courage in joining in the Global Sumud Flotilla to bring humanitarian aid to Gaza. It takes bravery to step into those boats knowing the risks, but he did so out of conscience. He was not alone. Irish citizens, activists and human rights defenders from across the world were on board, standing in solidarity with the people of Gaza. Too often, we applaud words but shy away from action. These activists have taken the step, putting their own safety on the line, to highlight a genocide that can no longer be ignored. They deserve not just our respect, but equally our support. The Irish Government cannot sit idly by. We welcome the update from the Deputy Leader this morning, but we must ensure that Senator Andrews and all those aboard are treated with dignity and brought home safely.”
“It is done over their heads where people just give planning permission to these organisations and companies to make profit. Some of this electricity will not be seen in the community but it is the communities that have to carry the brunt of it and all the associated risks, especially a battery storage plant.”
“I thank the Minister of State for the time and effort he has put into this matter - I know it is not his brief per se - but the response did not deal with the core issue. It had nothing to with the price of milk, so to speak. I am talking about action No. 4 specifically. The issue is the people in Newmarket felt they just were not heard. They were just completely bypassed. It is a trend for rural areas. We would not put these kinds of projects in urban areas - people just would not accept it - but in rural Ireland we are supposed to just accept it, take it lying down and not have any issue with it. Nobody is opposed to energy or having renewable energy and climate action. Rural communities are more than welcoming of this. The problem is they are not consulted.”
“The success of our transition depends on partnerships with communities. Rural Ireland is ready to play our part but it must be done with respect, not imposition.”
“Rural communities are not dumping grounds. Projects cannot simply be dropped into towns and villages without engagement, transparency or accountability. Action No. 4 must be more than just a line in a policy. The stakeholder forum must give local people a seat at the table with early consultation, accessible information and real influence on outcomes. Otherwise, projects like Newmarket will only deepen mistrust and resistance. How will the stakeholder forum be structured to guarantee communities and not just industry are represented? What measures will the Department take to ensure lessons from Newmarket are applied nationally? How will the Department ensure rural Ireland is treated as a partner in climate action and not just a convenient location for infrastructure nobody else wants?”
“My Commencement matter is about the electricity storage policy framework ten-point action plan, in particular section 4, which promises to establish a stakeholder forum for electricity storage projects. Electricity storage is vital if we are to meet our renewable energy and climate targets. How it is delivered matters just as much as the technology. I will highlight a case of proposed battery energy storage in Newmarket in my area in County Cork. Residents there have never been consulted. Decisions have been made over their heads, leaving them feeling excluded and ignored. Naturally, they are feeling dismissed and unheard. Communities like this are not against renewable energy. Far from it, in fact, but rural Ireland has already carried a huge share of wind farms, pylons and energy infrastructure.”
“Communities like Newmarket want to play their part in that climate action but not at the expense of their health, their environment and their future. I ask that time be allocated in this House to properly debate the regulation of BESS developments to ensure safety, sustainability and community input are at the forefront.”
“Once such a facility is built the community bears a risk while large corporations reap in the profits. This raises a wider question around how energy infrastructure is being planned and where it is being placed. Rural Ireland is not a dumping ground for projects that would never be tolerated in urban areas. Communities deserve proper transparency, consultation and independent safety assessments before developments of this scale are considered. The voices of local residents, farmers and environmental group should be respected because we need clarity on safety protocols around these sites, the environmental safeguards and who will carry the responsibility if something does go wrong with one of these sites. This is not about being anti-renewable or anti-progress. Everybody wants the future to be robust.”
“I want to raise a serious issue that concerns the proposed battery energy storage system, BESS, in my constituency in Newmarket in Cork. The proposed site is right beside a sensitive ecological area. It drains into a watercourse that connects to the River Dalua and then onto the River Blackwater, both of which are designated special areas of conservation. These are habitats for species of European importance, including Atlantic salmon, yet the dangers posed by the lithium-ion batteries have not been adequately addressed. If a leak occurs, these batteries contain liquid electrolyte, which can react with moisture to form hydrofluoric acid. The potential consequences for the environment, drinking water and community safety are enormous. We have already seen in other countries the risks of fires and toxic contamination from BESS sites.”
“I thank the Minister of State. I was aware of that. The majority of people in Macroom are aware of the upgrades that Uisce Éireann will be doing. The issue is in the interim, between now and 2026. What seems to be happening is, any time there is really bad weather or flooding, all of a sudden there is a boil water notice. Are we saying to the people of Macroom that they are supposed to continue with this pattern of boil water notices until these upgrades are done? It is going to put people under pressure and out of pocket. Uisce Éireann has offered nothing else that can be done for people, just telling them to boil their water and continue as they are or else go out of pocket and pay for water, because until 2026 nothing really is going to be done for them and they are going to keep going through the cycle.”
“What specific remedial works are under way right now and when will they be completed in Macroom? Most importantly, when will the residents and businesses be guaranteed safe, reliable water supply permanently and not just until the next crisis? Macroom town is a growing town with new housing developments, new businesses and a wider rural hinterland depending on this supply. The infrastructure is not keeping up with the pace. Clean, safe drinking water is not a luxury, it is a right for people. The people in Macroom deserve better than repeated notices, extra costs and empty reassurances. They deserve a concrete plan with clear timelines and a guarantee that this pattern will not continue into 2026 and beyond.”
“This is more than an inconvenience and it undermines trust in public services where it hits people's pockets. The people in Macroom are asking a very reasonable question. Why should they accept this as the continuous normal and why should they just take it lying down? I know in the response today that the Minister of State will probably rightly point out the investment programmes that Uisce Éireann has delivered nationally and progress in modernising our system, but that means very little to the people in Macroom, to be honest. It does not make it easy on families fearing their own tap water. It does not ease the burden for the businesses that are already under pressure. It certainly does not excuse the fact that a growing town has been left in a cycle of boil water notices for years.”
“I am here again today to raise the issue of the boil water notice that has been placed on households and businesses in Macroom. Sadly, it is not an isolated incident. Since 2022, this is the eighth or ninth boil water notice that the people in Macroom have endured. Every couple of weeks the story repeats itself. The boil water notice goes in and families and businesses are massively disrupted. People are left with added expenses, worry and uncertainty about something as basic as clean, safe water. The cost of water is not cheap yet people are paying for it daily and weekly because they fear the tap water they have. Parents are boiling kettles to make bottles for their children. Elderly residents and those with health conditions are anxious about their safety. Cafés, restaurants, schools and community facilities face added costs.”
“We owe them not sympathy but a law that keeps people safe, services that are joined up and funding that matches our words. For every family that has been failed, for every young life lost, let the Seanad show that the law can be levered as dignity, care and prevention and let us fix this Bill so that the next family do not have to carry the same funeral, grief and unanswered questions.”
“The practice is condemned by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, yet here we are passing a law that leaves the door open for children to be placed in an environment that is wholly inappropriate for them. If we intend for this Bill to be progressive, then we have to prove it. We must embed rights, early intervention and integrated care and accountability into the law. We must not let the Bill be another half measure that leaves families burying their children. I will close where I began, with the voice of this mother. She asked me to bring her son's life here, not to be rendered invisible by our differences. She has asked that his story would be heard, not for spectacle but for change in how we act. We owe that to her as she sits in this Gallery right now and watches this debate, and to the hundreds like her.”
“There is also a power dynamic and imbalance here. When there is a power imbalance, there is very big room for error and abuse. There is also no statutory right to independent advocacy, no independent complaints mechanism, as other Senators have mentioned, and no clear safeguards for the use of chemical restraint. Without those protections, people are detained involuntarily and remain voiceless and at risk of prolonged coercion without redress. Despite years of commitment, the Bill does not explicitly prohibit the admission of children to adult psychiatric units. We have already said this and the Minister of State said there were only two, but two children are two too many.”
“The Bill currently drafted allows involuntary treatment to begin before capacity assessment is completed. That is a profound breach of rights. Capacity is not static, it fluctuates. To allow forced treatment without first assessing whether someone can make their own decision undermines every principle of dignity and autonomy that this reform claims to uphold. It also extends the timeframe for involuntary treatment from 21 days to 42 days without requiring fresh capacity assessments during that extended period. This risks prolonged coercion with little oversight. The Bill widens the criteria for forced treatment to any intervention a psychiatrist believes likely to benefit a person. The phrase is dangerously vague because that treatment is not likely to benefit in theory. This hands excessive discretion to override consent.”
“He was seen by a psychiatrist in the Garda station and advised to present himself to accident and emergency, a place where no person in such crisis should be expected to self-refer and wait. He was advised in April to self-refer to a day programme for people who are suicidal. He did not have the capacity to do that. Over the course of his life, he attempted suicide eight or ten times. Four weeks after she found him hanging and two days after he graduated from his course, he went to a hotel room and ended his life at 26 years of age. This is not an isolated story. It is a mirror of a systematic failure and fragmented services, families abandoned and laws too weak to protect the vulnerable. If that is the human cost, it is not hyperbole to say the Bill must be transformed. This is where we must confront the text before us.”
“On New Year's Eve, at 16 years of age, he told his mother he would end his life. He was admitted to Lakeview in Naas after hours of a battle and his mother refusing to bring him home. We all know that facility was found in 2024 to be non-compliant in a number of cases, raising stark questions about the care received by those detained there. For this young person, early intervention would have made the difference but, instead, he endured bullying and escalating anxiety and depression, and turned to substances to soothe and self-medicate. His mother spent nights in her car outside Naas hospital as she begged them to take him in, but he was not once admitted. In April of this year, he again told his mother he was suicidal and he told the registrar also. On one occasion in the past, she had found him hanging and had to cut him down.”
“I want to share a story that I was asked to carry into this Chamber. It is a mother's testimony that is painfully ordinary in its horror. Her son was referred to CAMHS at five years of age and for eight years she begged the services to find out what was wrong. At 13, he told his mother he was suicidal. She went to the emergency department in Temple Street. An urgent referral was made back to CAMHS, but nothing had changed. She had no option but to go private to secure proper assessment for her son, only for him to receive a diagnosis of Asperger's, alongside profound anxiety and depression. The response of CAMHS was a one-line report. For years, he was passed from pillar to post. The rhetoric of Ministers and some officials about joined-up services does not match the reality on the ground.”
“Sinn Féin has tabled amendments on dual diagnosis, CAMHS, the creation of a comprehensive youth mental health service for those up to 25 years of age, removing ambiguous practical caveats and providing a five-year funding and implementation strategy. These are not extras; they are essentials. There are limits to our drafting but there are also limits to our cruelty. There are limits to cruelty in general. A law that does not actually name dual diagnosis or require integrated pathways for people living with mental health and substance abuse will leave people falling between the two stools. Addiction and mental ill health often feed one another, and if a Bill fails to acknowledge that reality into law it will continue to fail the people who need both supports and care at the same time.”
“I welcome the Minister of State back to the House. I am here to speak on the Bill at Second Stage not as a conjurer of statistics but as someone who has listened to parents, clinicians, advocates and young people who have been failed by a system that often treats their crises as an administrative problem rather than a human tragedy. We support the aim for reform. We welcome parts of the Bill, but we cannot, in good conscience, allow a Bill that contains glaring omissions, weak safeguards and a lack of real resourcing to pass without demanding it is strengthened. The lived experiences of families across the State tell us this is not a technical exercise. It is a life or death intervention.”
“I offer my sincerest apologies to the Cross-Party Group, which I skipped. It is the first week back. Our next speakers will be from the Cross-Party Group. I believe the Senators are sharing time. Is that agreed? Agreed.”
“Before we move on to our next speakers, on behalf of Senator Flaherty, I welcome to the Gallery, Cyril Carter whose father Thomas was a TD between 1921 and 1951. He represented Sinn Féin, Cumann na nGaedheal and Fianna Fáil. Cyril's brother Frank was a TD from 1951 to 1957 for Fianna Fáil. I also welcome Councillor Paddy Meade. Our next speakers are from Sinn Féin and I understand that Senators Murphy and Tully are sharing time. Is that agreed? Agreed.”
“The respect must be for those who arrive and for the communities who welcome them. Sinn Féin's position is simple: we must manage migration in the best interests of all, end profiteering, give communities a voice and ensure integration and solidarity are at the heart of the approach. That is how we build a fair society that is compassionate and united.”
“This debate is not just about systems and policies; it is about people. We must ensure proper support for integration. We need strategies that work from the ground up, backing community-based initiatives that help newcomers and long-standing residents alike to build shared communities. There must be zero tolerance of racism. When the Government fails to plan, it is not only migrants who are let down but the local communities who are left without resources and support. If managed properly, migration can be a positive force for Ireland. Our health service relies heavily on migrant workers. Many towns and villages have been enriched by new families joining schools, sports clubs, community groups and so on, but for this to succeed, migration policy must be rooted in fairness, planning and respect.”
“The Irish people are best placed to make decisions that reflect our unique challenges, whether that is in the housing crisis, pressures on services or our responsibilities under the common travel area. The Government's handling of the temporary protection directive is another case in point. Continuously extending temporary measures for Ukrainians until 2027 is not sustainable. People need certainty and clarity, whether that is to support them to return home when it is safe to do so, or a clear pathway into our permanent immigration system. Then we have the ARP. The scheme is not only unfair but has had a distorting effect on the rental market, pushing up rents and reducing availability at a time of unprecedented crisis. We have consistently said that this must be means-tested, limited and restricted to genuine housing within family homes.”
“Our international protection system is not working. Decisions and appeals take far too long. Deportations are not enforced, even in cases of criminality. Meanwhile, profiteering of IPAS centres and accommodation has reached scandalous levels. We now know that private operators, some with links to organised crime, have made millions off State contracts, while communities have been stripped of any real say in decisions that directly affect them. This cannot continue. We in Sinn Féin have called for a full review of the IPAS contracts, to end planning exemptions and to properly engage with local communities before centres are located. This was not happening. We are also deeply concerned by the Government's decision to sign up to the EU asylum and migration pact. In doing so, it is handing over powers that should remain in Irish hands.”
“Migration is one of the most important issues facing Ireland today. It touches housing, public services, education, employment and, above all, the type of society that we build. Migration must be managed properly. It cannot be left to the chaos of global markets, nor can it be dictated by the short-term needs of corporations. States have a responsibility to plan migration in a way that serves both the needs of those who come here and the communities that welcome them. Unfortunately, the Government's approach has been nothing short of an inexcusable disaster. It has failed to plan, failed to engage with communities and failed to ensure the capacity of housing and public services to meet the growing demand. The result has been division, frustration and fertile ground for those who seek to exploit people's fears for political gain.”
“We have talked at length about this amendment but the one thing we have not yet heard is why the Government is proposing this now and why it is being proposed in this legislation. We still do not understand why that is being pressed now.”
“With some flexibility and humility, this could have been a moment for unity and cross-party agreement and a powerful signal that we as legislators can protect freedom of expression and the right to a good name without diminishing either. Instead, we are being asked to be remembered in this House as a House that removed the voice of the people from one of the most human and reputationally damaging of trials. I urge the Government to support this amendment and let us legislate with principle, balance and respect for both the Judiciary and the public.”
“This Bill amends the law as it was, not as it is. That is a serious error. We are legislating blind to the outcomes already in motion. There is also a question of fairness to those currently in the system. This law will not apply retrospectively so we will not even have a clear, measurable view of the impact for some time. This amendment is a middle ground. It lets the courts, not the Oireachtas, decide if a jury is appropriate in a given case. It mirrors the approach taken in the North and across other common law jurisdictions. It recommends traditional oversight while preserving democratic involvement. We do not need to burn the house down to fix the window. I regret that we are here.”
“We will force citizens to run two separate cases: one for defamation without a jury, and one for malicious falsehood with the potential of a jury. That does not reduce cost; it actually increases it, and it does not streamline justice; it splinters it. We wish to be clear this is not about savings; this is about centralising decision-making power and limiting public participation. We already have the tools to address excessive awards. The Higgins case was pivotal in this regard. The judgment created a new framework for assessing damages and introduced judicial guidance that brought balance and predictability. Since the ruling, there have been at least four cases where the recommendations held and functioned as intended. Would it not be fair then to pause and fully review the post-Higgins landscape before making this permanent change?”
“It is also a safeguard and a check on judicial overreach and potential bias. Without it, we risk judicial caprice where one voice becomes the only voice in cases that cut to the core of a person's identity. I ask the Minister directly: why now? Why is the Government creating this exception for defamation alone? Why is this the only area in law, uniquely among all torts, being carved out and stripped of its jury protection? This move has been justified on the grounds of efficiency and cost, but the rationale falls apart on closer inspection. If somebody brings a case for both defamation and malicious falsehood, they currently can be heard together in a single trial without the option of a jury but under this Bill this will no longer exist.”