Patricia Stephenson
Labour Panel · Social Democrats · Ireland
“A number of us on this side of the House have concerns around what this is opening us up to. We are concerned that we do not have the correct protections and safeguards in place to ensure that the supply will be State-owned and State-led because it is not included in the definitions in the legislation.”
“The world is literally on fire in some places. We have a forest fire in Ireland for the first time in years perhaps. I know we sometimes have them in the Mourne Mountains in the North. This is cause for concern, not just for future generations but for us today.”
“I thank the Minister for coming in. This is a really positive step. I am delighted she is pushing it forward. By and large, the oral contraceptive is incredibly safe. A lot of well-studied medicines are available. Over-the-counter oral contraception has been recommended by the WHO since 2019.”
“I move amendment No. 1: In page 7, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following: “ “emergency” means a situation where the State is experiencing a significant and protracted physical disruption of gas supply, or other catastrophic deterioration of the supply situation, and where— (a) all relevant market-based measures have been fully…”
“The Department has stated this facility "will provide the resilience required to support our energy transition" and that "the reserve will only be used in genuine emergencies", yet there is no definition in this Bill of what the Government means by an emergency and when that would apply.”
“We also have to be mindful of the burden it will place on pharmacists without the correct resourcing for pharmacies to deliver the scheme to safeguard against them withdrawing from this or any future scheme simply because they feel they do not have the resources to deliver it in a timely manner.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,369 lines we hold for Patricia Stephenson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 28.
“However, more than that, the traditional structures of our communities seem frayed in many ways and youth work offers space to bring children and young people back into the space to ensure they are not further isolated from mainstream society. Young people are under such stress. All of us have young people in our lives. When I look back at being at that stage, I feel that young people today are burdened with so many worries they should not have on them. Youth work and youth spaces offer a really safe environment for them to articulate that and overcome those things in safe spaces.”
“We have already heard in this debate that the National Youth Council of Ireland needs an investment of €27.3 million to sustain and develop the work it is doing. Senator Flynn used the phrase, which is quite beautiful, that youth work saves lives. She spoke so eloquently about what it was like to be a young woman from the Traveller community who has faced so much systemic exclusion from society. Hearing from her about the key role of youth work shows it is so crucial. I grew up in Belfast and I was involved in lots of cross-community projects delivered by youth workers. While we are very far from the early nineties and 2000s today, we are seeing so much division in our communities. Social cohesion is being undermined. The horrors of the digital space and the online world is leading to a lot of trouble for young people.”
“It is considered the voluntary sector or voluntary space when in fact these are people with master's degrees and PhDs, who have gone through many levels of education and provide such a vital service. Youth work has had a funding cut in real terms leading to an 8.1% shortfall it is experiencing. That cannot be bridged in only incremental increases. We need to see funding to allow the sector to grow, to expand and to deliver for future young people. We have of course already heard about the importance of multi-annual funding. It is so important for every civil society NGO. Annual funding is an absolute nightmare no matter what the space because it does not allow you to plan and be forward thinking.”
“They are all incredible organisations doing such cool work and such important work in providing supportive spaces for young people but also challenging young people by challenging all of the harmful norms we are seeing a lot of young people being exposed to in the online space. Youth workers play such a key role in providing that mentorship, particularly when young people often feel quite isolated. We have all been teenagers. They can feel quite isolated from their families and their parents. Youth work provides that space where they can engage with an adult in a partnership of equals. Staff are highly skilled and highly trained but often experience burnout. The level of professionalism a lot of the staff in the youth work space have is not reflected in their contracts. It is not reflected by society.”
“I thank Sinn Féin for bringing this motion forward and I really appreciate the cross-party support around it. Comhairle youth work is very much the cornerstone of equality for young people. It is about social justice and meaningful participation. When so many children are excluded from accessing spaces, youth work is an entryway to civic engagement, being "real adults" and that level of growth they can undergo. The sector is supporting thousands of young people every year. Where I am based, in Carlow and Kilkenny, we have Ossory Youth, the Drum Youth Centre and Carlow Regional Youth Services.”
“The housing crisis is not new, it is systemic and it has become normalised. As we have heard from other Senators, we just accept these figures every week. We have an over-reliance on the private sector. There is no ban on no-fault evictions. The new rent controls have actually led to people being evicted, as we said would happen. There were 36 evictions in Wexford two days before the Bill came in, for example. There are more than 8,600 entire homes listed on Airbnb in Ireland with short-term lets now vastly outnumbering the number of long-term rentals in many areas. In communities across Carlow-Kilkenny, people can see exactly what is happening. Homes are vacant or are being used for short-term profit and tenants are being pushed out through rising evictions. There is no mystery here.”
“According to the Residential Tenancies Board, more than 5,200 eviction notices were issued in just the final three months of last year, a 41% increase on the previous year. Over the year, more than 20,000 tenants received notices to quit. We heard a lot in the Minister of State, Deputy O’Sullivan's contribution about social housing and that is obviously important, but it is also about public housing. There are plenty of people who have the salaries. It is not that they need the support from the State to rent somewhere; they have the money to rent. They have the money to buy, but there is simply nowhere to rent or buy. In Carlow, for example, in 2024 there were two affordable homes available or built - two in all of Carlow in 2024. The Social Democrats have continued to point out the successive failures and issues with our housing policy.”
“The official homeless figures are increasing all the time - we all know that - and we know that is actually only part of the problem, because there are so many more people who are experiencing hidden homelessness and who are not counted in those figures. At the same time, let us talk about dereliction and vacant properties. In Carlow-Kilkenny, there are almost 2,000 vacant properties lying empty when we know so many families are struggling to find somewhere to live. We have homes without families and families without homes. That is ridiculous in the crisis we are in. There are 2,000 homes lying empty and vacant in Carlow-Kilkenny in one of the worst housing crisis emergencies. Why do we not have a vacant property tax with teeth that actually stops people allowing these homes and properties to stand empty?”
“The Government speaks about the progress it is making on housing, and I appreciate that is something it feels it has to do, but it is meaningless for a lot of us in the face of the growing number of evictions we see and the people entering homelessness. It is a very different reality from the updates we hear from both of the Ministers who have been in the room. The reality we hear is fear of an eviction notice, not being able to afford rent in a cost-of-living crisis, of overcrowding, and of the hidden homeless who are living in their parents' homes. It is not being able to leave a domestic violence situation because there is simply nowhere to go.”
“We can all agree that what happened in the past week and how it was handled was incorrect. To use a dead, old phrase, we need to see lessons sincerely and genuinely learned so that we can deal with this in the future because there will be more.”
“Investor funds and big multinationals are given tax breaks while working people are pushed to the pin of their collar, with soaring grocery, fuel and energy bills. The front-line workers, farmers, hauliers, nurses and carers who keep this country going are struggling to keep the heat on and keep food on the table while paying mortgages or rising rents. These are the people we depend on every day. These are the people who the Government has not listened to, the people who had enough of this shambolic Government’s response in the past week. What we need now are real solutions. The Social Democrats have tabled a motion tomorrow in the Dáil that proposes a range of different supports, including a targeted energy credit of €400 to the most vulnerable households and a supplementary mileage scheme for emergency workers such as nurses and carers.”
“While I do not agree with the blockading of fuel depots and critical infrastructure, which is highly problematic, the response from the Minister for justice to announce, it seems without any prior ministerial discussion, the deployment of the Defence Forces only fanned the flames. It raises serious questions about how this Government manages, or does not manage, civil disobedience. Rather than acknowledging the lived experience of those behind the protests, the response was to frame protesters as a problem to be managed, rather than a signal that they should be listened to. People have been struggling for a long time to keep their heads above water, so it is no real surprise that this latest fuel crisis was the tipping point for so many people across the country. The core issue goes well beyond the protests last week.”
“Many households, particularly in rural Ireland, are being crippled by rising fuel costs. This has been going on for a long time, not just in the past few weeks. Approximately 315,000 households are in arrears on their energy bills, and that figure is up 20% in the past year. Rather than acknowledging this reality, the Government chose to respond disdainfully and dismissively to protesters’ very real concerns, and the response was totally out of touch. What we saw from the Government was a failure of leadership and empathy, which escalated the situation, deepening frustration and anger, rather than resolving it.”
“If we are serious about inclusion, we have to invest in community-led infrastructure for all types of sports, even if they fall outside of the traditional model. We need facilities that are accessible, shared and designed to meet the needs of diverse and growing communities. Until we address that imbalance, we are not really supporting inclusive sport; we are simply reinforcing the inequalities we already see. I would love us to have a debate in this Chamber on how we can ensure groups like Kilkenny Storm that fall outside of traditional sporting structures have a place to thrive.”
“The fact that they can achieve this should be a source of pride for us but it should also be a wake-up call because their success is not the result of a strong system of support; it is happening in the absence of that support. All people want is access to proper facilities, no matter what sport they play. Regardless of whether they compete in ice hockey or swimming, they want to have access to a safe and warm place to do their sports. That does not exist for many different groups. We all know that sport brings enormous benefit. It builds confidence, strengthens communities, improves physical and mental health, and creates a sense of belonging, especially for young people. It is so important when we talk about things like youth diversion, but access to those benefits is not equal in Ireland currently.”
“Recent analysis by The Journal highlighted a key issue in how funding is distributed in Ireland. While significant investment is allocated nationally for sports, much of it is tied to organisations and projects that already have facilities, structures and capital in place. That is the problem. What happens to communities and teams who do not start from that position? What happens to clubs such as Kilkenny Storm, which sent many of those young athletes to Canada, due to the failure to fund them? They are travelling to Canada. Their travel is self-funded. They are competing and they are winning, and yet they do not receive any funding.”
“We have all heard the names of athletes such as Troy Parrott and Kelly Harrington who have represented Ireland on the international stage, but I wonder if anyone here has heard of Indie Cummins or Aidan Sweeney from Kilkenny Storm, who play with the Irish Saints team under the Irish Ice Hockey Association. They are just two of many young athletes from Kilkenny, Cork, Dublin and all over Ireland who returned from Canada two weeks ago with gold and silver medals from an international ice hockey tournament. This extraordinary achievement is even more remarkable because they do not have access to an ice rink and travel to Belfast once a month to train. It is in that context that I want to speak today about local sports funding and what it truly means for communities across Ireland.”
“I do not see that the market, or the private sector, is going to respond in any clear way, since we know that Expressway has already said it is not financially viable for it. Why would it be different for a different provider? What we actually know is that the NTA has said it does not have funding to deal with these routes.”
“The Minister of State has mentioned that the 717 is a private service that is going to be cut. We have talked about the Expressway service being a private service that has a public service obligation, but that we have to wait for the market to respond. I understand the market to mean the private sector. The Minister of State might clarify whether the market means something else within this context. My concern is that there will be a massive gap for people. I appreciate that this does not pertain to the Minister of State’s Department but it is a question of rural connectivity. There is a huge gap. The NTA has told me there is no funding available to fill these gaps, so the Department needs to make a commitment.”
“The Minister of State talked about the market needing to respond. My concern in this regard is that there will be period for which we will have to wait, meaning there will be a gap in service. Effectively, the Minister of State is telling me there will be a gap in service for the affected communities. We have outsourced and privatised everything in Ireland to the point that nothing is functioning, including this service. We are seeing insufficient-----”
“I know how crucial these services are for rural communities but when they are systematically cut, it feels like the people implementing these policies do not take the train or bus. I encourage policymakers and Ministers to do so regularly as part of their commute to address so many of these issues. Public transport has to be designed around how people live and work, not confined to narrow operating windows that fail to meet demand. Will the Minister of State commit to the continuation and protect the bus route, Expressway 4, that goes through Mullinavat, Ballyhale, Thomastown, Gowran and Leighlinbridge?”
“I took it this morning and as with most mornings, it was standing room only from Athy onwards to Dublin. This train is always packed. This is an issue that urgently needs to be addressed because limiting passenger numbers at a time when we should be encouraging greater uptake of public transport makes no sense. The lack of late-night train services to and from Dublin on the line is also another glaring gap. At a time when we are urging people to reduce energy consumption and asking people to shift away from car use, the absence of flexible services sends the completely wrong message. I wonder often whether the people making policy on public transport actually use it. I personally depend on the Expressway route 4 and the JJ Kavanagh route 717 to get to and from the airport. I use it all the time either from Kilkenny or Leighlinbridge.”
“Can the Minister of State give me a clear and unequivocal guarantee that there will be no break in service and no further cuts to the route 4 service, and that the Department for Transport will provide the funding for its continuation? Anything less risks leaving entire communities isolated. Rail services present another set of challenges. The Kilkenny to Waterford line, for example, does not provide a viable option for commuters who need to be in Waterford by 9 a.m. That is a basic requirement for any functioning commuter service, but it is unmet. Capacity issues persist due to infrastructure decisions, including the reduction of platform length in Kilkenny. This has resulted in fewer carriages being used and that is limiting the capacity on commuter trains. I am a regular commuter on this train.”
“Two weeks ago, commuters heard about the axing of the Expressway route 4 service through local media, which is absolutely the wrong way of doing things. It has caused significant concern for the people who depend on that route daily. The NTA has acknowledged that this route carries a public service obligation. That recognition is important, but I was contacted only last night by a representative from the NTA who told me that any plans to maintain this route will depend on funding availability. The NTA representative also said that it should be noted that any measures proposed to be introduced will depend on funding availability.”
“The axing of key segments of this route through rural parts of Kilkenny, particularly Castlecomer, has had a tangible impact on the people who rely on it daily. As well as being a direct link to Dublin Airport, these are essential links connecting people to their work, education, healthcare and social life and are now gone. Rural communities already face structural disadvantages in accessing transport and decisions like this only deepen that inequality. I have been in touch with the NTA multiple times regarding this route reduction. Following a review, it was deemed a necessary route, which is great, but the NTA told me once again that there is no funding available to fix the gap. If we are serious are balanced regional development, we cannot allow routes like the 717 to be hollowed out and we must provide a public service in its place.”
“Without funding from that Department, those commitments are simply aspirations. It would seem that many will remain aspirational when we consider that the Connecting Ireland and all-Ireland rail review capital spend is down €1 billion from the plans adopted by the previous Government. If the overall capital spend is down by €1 billion, how is the NTA meant to deliver when its budget is so severely reduced? There is no funding to address the new plans, but there is also no funding to address the gaps caused by private providers pulling out. Communities are left dealing with real and immediate service reductions instead of the much-needed enhancements. One of the recent changes last year was to the 717 route operated by JJ Kavanagh & Sons.”
“I thank the Minister of State for attending to discuss the growing concern about public transport in Carlow and Kilkenny. I recently met with representatives of the National Transport Authority, NTA, who outlined their ambitious plans for Carlow and Kilkenny after I raised a long list of concerns that had been brought to me by residents. The NTA representatives outlined plans for improved connectivity, enhanced rural links and climate-aligned transport policy. It is absolutely fantastic in theory, but the issue is that it is all very much theory at this stage. I was told directly by the NTA's representatives that there is simply no funding available to implement their plans. The Department of Transport is not providing any funding for increased public transport infrastructure for rural communities.”
“This is not about political differences; this is about fundamental human rights systems being undermined for cheap political wins. We use the word "fundamental" for a reason.”
“That is why I am very concerned about attempts to undermine it. That is why I would like to see it built into our legislation. The Government, like all states, is the custodian of the convention. There is no suggestion coming from me that it should not discuss the convention's system fundamentally. The question is whether we believe in the rule of international law and the existing convention. Do we want to strengthen it or weaken it? Do we want to bolster it in a time of crisis or do we want to undermine it? This is not about shutting down debate around human rights. It is about the effectiveness of the system. It is about honest good faith discussions based on facts and evidence and well-established international law. That is what I see as fundamentally missing from the 27 declaration.”
“That relates to Article 8, which has a lot of proportionality built into it which would allow for the deportation of criminals, and Article 3, which is an unconditional right. My concern is that we chip away at the integrity of the ECHR for cheap political wins. In times of crisis it is important to go back to where this all came from. Senator Higgins talked about the slippery slope of inhumanity and that might is right. The ECHR was born out of a time when, if you were not a citizen, you had no rights. Your citizenship was the only thing that gave you rights. You did not have human rights as they did not exist. It was only if you were a citizen. The UN Declaration of Human Rights and the ECHR were to give people rights by virtue of being human, after the horror of the Second World War.”
“In order for national courts to fulfil their roles as principal interpreters of the ECHR, the European court needs to work ever more closely with national judiciaries and have that to ensure maximum understanding and coherence. There is also a question around transparency. The entire supervision of the execution of judgments is too secretive and exclusive. That could be a way that we could have dialogue with the court to strengthen what is coming out of it. As I mentioned before, there is also participation with civil society. The ECHR has been amended seven times with additional protocols, but only to extend rights or to add new rights. My point earlier was about the fact that it is unorthodox for this to be the first time in the history of the ECHR to weaken rights.”
“I spoke about positive ways Ireland and other states could engage with the court on the question of efficiency, the clarity of judgments and the consistency in communication of judgments so that there is greater trust in what the court is putting out. That is really important. I talked about the margin of appreciation. These principles have been repeatedly reiterated since the early 2010s and the Interlaken process. They rightly focus on the primary role of states through their elected representatives rather than appointed judges in interpreting the convention in light of prevailing domestic circumstances. This scope to interpret, therefore, actually exists. That is the reality of it. I have promoted the idea of dialogue with superior courts.”
“I believe in this idea, which I have mentioned before and which I think the Minister acknowledged, of having proper engagement and political dialogue with the court. That is really important. The Minister said it was not unorthodox but up to this point, the dialogue we have had has only ever been to strengthen it and has never been to weaken protections. We heard that nothing was sacrosanct when it came to human rights. I actually agree, but I believe nothing is sacrosanct because we can always be increasing and strengthening human rights and can always be giving greater protections to humanity and to all people as equals and as individual equals. My challenge to the narrative that it is not unorthodox to have political dialogue and declaration with it has only ever been done to strengthen rather than to weaken.”
“Deportations under criminal grounds have taken place. Moreover, we have a handful of anomalies that should not have happened where deportations were blocked, but the domestic courts should be going back to the ECHR and having those proper litigation strategies in place when they do not agree with a decision on those things. Article 8, as I mentioned before, is something that can be looked at with proportionality and it is the one that is blocking the deportations, so it is really important to clarify that again. To pick up on something Senator Mullen said about judges as dictators, that is not anything I am implying. I recognise the relationship between all those things. I recognise the role of elected members, which was mentioned too, in engaging with that.”
“There have been cases where that has happened but it has been an overinterpretation by national courts, as I have mentioned before. There is that dialogue and it is ultimately the responsibility of domestic courts to go back and challenge that legislation. Those cases were horrific but deportations on criminal grounds have happened as well under the rulings.”
“That raises some pretty serious questions about the commitment of the Government in that space. There seemed to be a sense I was saying we should not have political engagement on the ECHR but I never said that and it was a mischaracterisation as well. Political engagement is incredibly important and that is why I talked about how states were fundamental to the court of human rights. I talked about how states were really important for implementing it and that states should be developing litigation strategies, challenging judgments they do not agree with and ensuring ongoing dialogue with Strasbourg to make sure there is harmony between what it and their domestic courts say. I said that very clearly. I highlight again that it is disingenuous to say the court is preventing deportations of foreign criminals.”
“Human rights organisations, including the ICCL, which seemed to get some stray bullets in the contributions from other Senators, IHREC and human rights organisations across the Council of Europe have tried, tried and tried again to engage governments around the steering committee for human rights, CDDH, process. There was zero appetite for that engagement, so we cannot be claim to be champions of the rule of law while ignoring one of the fundamental pillars, which is civil society engagement. Within our aid and development work through the Department of foreign affairs, we have programmes on democracy and rule of law in countries in the global south and we expect them to have a metric of effective, meaningful and inclusive civil society engagement, but we are not doing that here.”
“The Minister has said the commitment is absolute but I would argue you cannot have an absolute commitment to the ECHR while also seeking to lower the threshold of non-conditional rights, especially around Article 3. Again, that is double-speak. Up is down, left is right and black is white. You cannot have an absolute commitment while undermining the absolute protections of Article 3. The Minister talked about democracy and rule of law. I commend those principles but a key element of democracy and rule of law is, of course, the civil society strand, that is, the space for civil society participation and inclusion. The Chișinău process has been utterly uninclusive.”
“To pick up on the Minister’s last point, no one is talking about open borders. No one has said that phrase. That is not anyone’s consideration. The Minister may forgive me, as it might not have been him, but certainly other senior members of the Government have made a comment about getting us in line with the UK to make Ireland an equally hostile environment for people seeking asylum. What we are saying is people have the right to seek asylum, which I assume the Minister agrees with conceptually as well. However, it has been said by members of the Government, though perhaps not by the Minister, that we should have an equally hostile environment to deter people. That has been said and has been implied by the Government. I was a little mischaracterised in some of the responses.”
“I appreciate why the Minister is saying he has to comply with the ECHR but I do not see why we could not accept the amendments, especially the amendment on reporting. I just think it is a non-argument and we have had that in the Chamber before, though not in relation to justice. I think in the mental health Bill we were told we could not include the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child for some reason. The idea we cannot put the legislation and governing articles the Government says it abides by in its legislation is like double-speak. I do not know why we would not have it in the legislation. There is no clarity on that. It seems it should be a non-issue to accept the amendment if the Government is in fact abiding by the ECHR. I have a whole messy set of notes here so Members will have to bear with me.”
“What the Minister risked by signing that letter was setting a precedent, in that states, without evidence, get to drive domestic agendas in our international human rights framework. That is worrying. It is also worrying when human rights are conflated with national security. I do not know what that means in practice. If the Government is already meeting the guidelines on the ECHR, why can both of my amendments not be included in this Bill to show our legislative commitment to upholding human rights?”
“There was a good reason for a different decision but the court did not communicate the distinction or explain the decision clearly to the public. There is a sense of inconsistency and lack of trust due to that. These are ways the work of the court could be strengthened rather than undermining its judicial independence, which is super concerning. There is a significant margin of appreciation when it comes to the court. Perhaps there have been instances of overinterpretation by national courts but that is the responsibility of national courts, not of the European Court of Human Rights. The court is clear that states have a huge margin of appreciation and are not limited by the convention.”
“There are other ways the Government could engage to make the court and the ECHR more efficient, for example, the backlog of the courts could be looked at, as could clarity, because the court sometimes introduces concepts that are not very clear. For instance, in the SAS v. France 2014 case, the court introduced the "vivre ensemble " concept. which is still not clear to a lot of people. Consistency is another area. Sometimes, people perceive inconsistency in judgments by the court. At times, the court appears to find differently even in similar cases, for example, in Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz v. Switzerland where a violation was acknowledged or in Carême v. France where there was no violation.”
“For example, I do not believe the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, or the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, ICCL - two of our leading human rights bodies, one of which holds a mandate from this State - have been engaged in the attempts to change elements of the universality of our human rights through the ECHR. The reason I want this amendment and to have the ECHR acknowledged in this legislation is that political engagement with the ECHR is really important. We should see states engage meaningfully with the courts. I do not have a problem with the concept of political declarations. However, the letter signed by nine states - not Ireland - last year had racist undertones.”
“There is no evidence immigration cases are being escalated to the court in high numbers. We cannot say we are maintaining the absoluteness of the ECHR while also narrowing the scope of Article 3. I mentioned the Good Friday Agreement. Have the unintended consequences of changing the ECHR been considered? We could also talk about procedural norms around engaging civil society. Civil society participation is a key pillar of a healthy democracy, as is meaningful debate on legislation and giving time to talk about every single amendment, for that matter. We see a chipping away at the norms of democracy and of civil society engagement. That is an unintended consequence of what is happening with the ECHR.”
“When it comes to Article 8 and deporting criminals, Article 8 allows for proportionality, unlike Article 3, which does not allow for proportionality. The court has provided detailed criteria to govern expulsions. Adherence to the ECHR does not prevent the deportation of criminals, according to the case law of the court. I want to get that on the record. That is the argument through which we are saying that we should reduce the language and commitment on torture. That is the argument in which we are saying that we should withdraw from components of Article 8 of the ECHR. As I say, Article 8 allows for proportionality. It allows for the deportation of criminals. That exists within the existing case law. Why do we not look to that? The truth is that states have been able to deport criminals under the existing case law of the ECHR.”
“It could be horrifying for any one of us because once you change those human rights frameworks for one group, you change them for everyone. The ECHR is increasingly deferential. I want to get that on the record. It is increasingly differential to national courts and national decision-making spaces. That is the truth and the simple reality. Any populist call to the contrary is a fallacy and is not rooted in any real data or facts. However, I believe it is a nice soundbite to say that the ECHR is somehow impacting judicial sovereignty or independence in Ireland. It sounds great. What we are seeing is a politicisation of human rights. Judicial independence of the European Court of Human Rights is fundamental to the rule of law and democracy. Attempts to give political direction to the justice sector are concerning.”
“He wanted to stay in the EU and here we are, so many years later. Brexit was a travesty for this country in terms of the people in the North who wanted to remain in Europe. We and the Government risk engaging in a race to the bottom. It is a race to the bottom on standards of human rights. There was a time when Ireland was a champion of human rights. It was considered that across the world. We led on this, whether that was in the UN or the Council of Europe. When did that change? Was it because of this migration crisis and under the cover of this migration crisis? The idea that we would lower the threshold on what is considered torture and inhumane and degrading treatment is horrifying. I said previously that it is not just horrifying for people who are in the asylum seeker and international protection system.”
“It brings into question our meaningful practise of international law and human rights. I am speaking about this and submitted these amendments because of my fear of the trickle-down effect. I mentioned earlier that the Labour Government in the UK will not be able to out-Reform the Reform UK party. We cannot out-right the far right. The UK Labour Government, sensibly, wants to stay in the ECHR. It is leading on this and suggesting these amendments, these tweaks, shall we say, of the universality of human rights and tweaking the concept of the universality of human rights. It is a complete misnomer. You cannot do that. It is either an absolute right or it is not. The UK Labour Government's attempts to do that is it pandering to Reform UK. We have seen it in the past. David Cameron's Tory Government did not want Brexit.”
“If a superior court in Ireland, or indeed in Denmark, where we have seen some of these cases, issued a ruling whereby it found a criminal could not be deported because of the ECHR, it is not because of the court in Strasbourg. It is not because of the European Court of Human Rights. In such cases, it is a matter for the Danish or, in our case, the Irish courts. In such cases, the state should develop a proper litigation strategy, challenging such judgments and ensuring ongoing dialogue with Strasbourg in order to ensure harmony between what Strasbourg says and what, for example, the Danish court says. That is it being implemented properly. That is why I am requesting this amendment be accepted. The Irish signature among the 27-country declaration in December is disturbing.”