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 13 of 28.
“People navigating the system must clearly understand their rights, their timelines, the obligations on them but also on the State and, crucially, all of the language must be in an accessible format. In the context of people knowing their rights, I note serious concerns have been raised on what is referred to in the legislation as "legal counselling". This is not a term in Irish law. We need to have real clarity on who will provide legal counselling and what qualifications they will have. Can we now guarantee that AI chatbots will not be used, as was initially considered? The idea we would ever consider using AI chatbots for legal counselling is appalling.”
“The limitation of oral appeals to circumstances where they are deemed necessary raises serious concerns around fairness. The right to be heard should never be a procedural luxury. It is a core element of natural justice to have fair and unbiased hearing before any decision can be made about an individual. Particularly in protection cases, credibility findings which determine if an application is believable, consistent and plausible can determine a person's safety. An oral hearing should be the norm where facts are disputed. Information provision to applicants remains vague. There is no clear statutory guarantee that an applicant will receive timely and comprehensive explanations of decisions, appeals rights and deadlines. The idea that we can make a decision without giving any explanation to the applicant seems to be entirely cruel.”
“Without clear statutory safeguards we risk treating children as adults, with profound and lasting consequences. I will also mention vulnerability assessments. Vulnerability is not a statistic. Survivors of torture, trafficking, gender-based violence and medical trauma may not disclose their experiences at the first interaction with the State. It is a really normal trauma response to not open up about those horrific incidences you have experienced. We need to account for the fact that people do not open up about traumatic incidents in the first instance. We need to account for that in any vulnerability assessment, and for each person to be able to feel safe enough to share that freely and safely. An effective protection system must provide a continuous assessment and appropriate supports throughout the process.”
“We all accept that the State needs to manage migration. However, any migration Bill must be grounded in human rights, fairness and the rule of law. It must reflect our obligations under international protection frameworks and indeed our own values, but this Bill raises serious concerns on both points. I am deeply concerned that key safeguards for vulnerable applicants remain absent, particularly around the provision of age assessment. The provisions are unclear and lack the fundamental child-centred principles required under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Under the UNHCR, the age assessment must be child centred and the use of medical exams should be removed. Age assessments must be multidisciplinary, independent and trauma-informed.”
“Finally, I also want to lend my voice to those requesting condemnation from the Irish Government of those engaging in breaches of international law. No matter what country is doing it, we have to call it out in every single instance.”
“She might not even have knowledge of where to look to find out the current family financial picture. Access to justice requires proper resourcing. Legal aid centres must be adequately funded and staffed to meet demand. Practitioners working on family law and domestic violence cases must receive specialised training in coercive control and trauma-informed practice. Critically, mediation should never be required when domestic violence is present because it risks retraumatisation and reinforces power imbalances. Mediation is often used in these cases but that goes completely against any understanding of trauma-informed responses. Access to justice is a cornerstone of equality and I ask for a full debate on civil legal aid reform because it is a significant barrier for women and children in upholding their right to safety and justice.”
“When we apply a gendered lens, this failure becomes stark because women are disproportionately applicants for civil legal aid in family law and domestic violence cases. They are the ones seeking protection orders, custody arrangements, maintenance and safe housing. When the system does not work, it is women and children who suffer first. The financial means test in particular is failing survivors of domestic violence. A woman who is fleeing abuse might share her income and assets with her abuser. That is a technicality and it will count in terms of the threshold for accessing legal aid support. However, we know that those assets and bank accounts are often used as tools of coercive control. On paper, a woman might be ineligible but in actual reality she has no safe access to those resources for legal support.”
“Access to justice must be available to everyone whether they have the ability to pay or not, particularly in contexts of domestic violence. For survivors, fear of the unknown, of an alien court system, about where she might live, about whether she will have custody of her children and about financial uncertainty are all challenges that affect people's access to justice. Legal aid should be a system that helps women to escape violence, to secure safety for their children, to protect their home and to rebuild their lives but today the system is totally overwhelmed, under-resourced and unable to meet the demand. Waiting lists are long and the financial thresholds are rigid. Those who earn more than €18,000 per year do not qualify for legal aid. As a result, far too many women are left navigating complex legal proceedings alone.”
“I want to address the issue of civil legal aid. It is an issue that deeply impacts women experiencing domestic violence. Two weeks ago, Women's Aid painted for the justice committee a stark picture of the barriers to justice for survivors of domestic violence because of the long-term systemic failure to resource the Legal Aid Board. Legal aid should, in theory, remove barriers for accessing justice, but it does not work like that in practice in Ireland. In 2024, FLAC answered over 11,000 queries, of which 500 were for domestic violence cases. Shockingly, it had the capacity to deal with only about 21% of those queries for support. Civil legal aid is not an abstract administrative scheme. It is the bridge between vulnerability and justice.”
“I cannot support this motion, not because I do not agree with the principle of it or because I do not welcome the opportunity for this debate, but because I cannot say Ireland has a robust online safety framework at this time.”
“If any company exercises editorial control and profit-driven amplification, then it should carry responsibilities as a publisher. That means real liability for systemic harms, real transparency around recommender systems and real consequences when platforms fail to act. Online safety needs to be much more than parental education or responsibility falling solely to parents through TV adverts. It requires structural accountability. We need stronger enforcement powers, anticipatory regulation of emerging harms like AI-generated abuse, genuine independence and oversight, and a clear shift in responsibility back to the companies that design and profit from these systems. That is how we protect users and children. That is what online safety looks like.”
“The idea of taking children off it and not trying to make the space that exists safer seems pointless. They will get to 17, go onto these toxic spaces and be influenced. We have seen adults take their own lives because of the influence of chatbots. We see a lot of harm to people over the age of 18 all the way up to later in life. It is absurd that we are not trying to tackle the safety of those spaces. We cannot continue with a model that treats these companies as neutral hosts. These companies are not passive actors. They use algorithms to amplify, recommend and monetise content. They monetise our shock, our horror and our clicks. They want to keep us on the screens for longer so that they make money off us. They curate, prioritise and profit.”
“They risk driving young people into less visible, less regulated spaces and do nothing to address the design of the platforms. We can take children off online spaces and make it more difficult for them to access them, but we are not making those spaces safer or doing anything to address the negative algorithms that push hateful comment to us, to children and to people across society. They create toxic online communities, which is spreading into our everyday space. Let there be no doubt about that. We need regulation of these companies, with meaningful penalties and prosecution of individuals in companies responsible for perpetuating these harmful conditions. That is why it is important we look at making the Internet a safer space. The Internet is here to stay. We all access and use it and will all use it forever.”
“That really concerns me. We have an issue with reactive, crisis-driven policymaking when it comes to AI. We are not anticipatory. Academics are writing about this. The risks are well noted, so there is no reason we should not be reacting better. There is a fundamental structural contradiction. We speak about digital excellence and innovation, yet online safety is housed in a Department whose core mandate is enterprise and industry. I do not think AI protection and regulation belongs there. I do not think it makes sense. There is an inherent tension in this. Regulation must be robust and independent, not influenced by any economic interests in any sector, particularly when it comes to the safety of children. The Social Democrats do not support a blanket ban for under-16s from social media because bans are blunt instruments.”
“Our regulator, Coimisiún na Meán, stated at the Oireachtas AI committee that it does not have the power to directly take down sexual abuse images. This is a clear failure. Victims of image-based abuse should not be left to navigate opaque reporting systems that seldom work, while harm spreads in seconds. The Data Protection Commission told the committee that the so-called nudification apps had not come onto its radar until the Grok scandal. Nudification apps have been around for many years, so the idea they have only come onto the radar as a consequence of the Grok scandal shocks me and makes me we do not have a robust safety framework. I do not think we are ready for the new challenges that face us. These nudification apps were not hiding. They were in plain sight, yet they did not come onto the radar until there was a massive scandal.”
“This is something the Government has explicitly come out in support of. The idea we can self-congratulate about the era of self-regulation being over is not in line with what is happening at EU level or with the Government's position on the digital omnibus. We cannot declare victory in that space when so many safeguards are actively being diluted at EU level. The omnibus package completely undermines user protections we have achieved up to this point. Here at home, it feels as though responsibility is being pushed back onto parents, children and victims, rather than it being placed where it belongs, on the platforms that design and profit from these systems, on the Government and on us as legislators.”
“I really agree with the spirit of this motion and I am delighted we have the opportunity to discuss these issues because they are pertinent and pervasive and they affect everyone across the country. I have a challenge with some of the wording, such as "Seanad Éireann ... agrees that ... Ireland has a robust online safety framework". We are repeatedly told Ireland has some of the strongest online safety regulation in Europe. I do not think we can make that argument given what we have seen over the past few months. We are also told the era of self-regulation by big tech platforms is over, yet at EU level, particularly with the digital omnibus proposals, self-regulation is back on the agenda. These proposals risk stripping back many hard-won rights and protections and will weaken enforcement architecture around the digital space.”
“In the final seconds I also reiterate that it would be good for the HSE to meet the hospital staff. While we recognise that there is additional staffing in place, it is over-reliant on agency staff to meet the basic needs. That is so costly for the HSE, as we know. I reiterate the point on the perceived lack of balance in terms of how St. Luke's as a model 3 hospital has been treated in relation to other model 3 hospitals around the country.”
“The absence of a second scanner has a knock-on effect across the entire hospital. It delays diagnosis, slows clinical decision-making and prolongs stays in hospital for patients and contributes to discharge delays for patients who are medically fit to leave but still waiting on imaging. This in turn obviously leads to pressure on beds. A second scanner is essential to improve patient flow and reduce wait times. Staff in St. Luke's are crying out for additional support. The pressure on the ground is incredibly real. Without additional resources, they simply cannot meet the growing need.”
“In comparison to other model 3 hospitals, simply put, St. Luke's receives less funding and has fewer key consultant positions. There is a sense that St. Luke's is being penalised for performing well over the years. The staff on the ground are working hard and the management are doing all they can. Indicators show the hospital is under huge strain. There appears to be an implicit assumption that the hospital can continue to manage without the investment it desperately needs. However, the hospital is struggling, particularly with the absence of a second CT scanner, which is urgently needed. A business case has been submitted and it is now at the appraisal stage. The existing scanner at St. Luke's is operating 24-7 under significant critical strain as the hospital is experiencing such high demand.”
“Consultant-led care is directly linked to improved patient flow, faster diagnosis, safer discharge decisions and reduced admissions. When three emergency medical posts are vacant, for example, that pressure cascades through the entire hospital system. What really concerns me is the broader structural inequality at St. Luke's. As a model 3 hospital, it serves not only Carlow and Kilkenny but a huge catchment area. When we compare this to other model 3 hospitals nationally, there is a clear perception and operational reality that St. Luke's is not receiving matching funding, workforce allocation or capital investment. Letterkenny University Hospital and St. Luke's are both model 3 hospitals, but Letterkenny has 1,000 more staff. Other model 3 hospitals in Sligo and Tralee have bigger budgets than St. Luke's.”
“St. Luke's Hospital is the seventh biggest hospital in the country. There are very few hospitals in the centre of the country, which leads to St. Luke's having a huge catchment area, well beyond counties Carlow and Kilkenny, and the surrounding hospitals are not performing well. Yet in St. Luke's, posts remain unfilled across cardiology, dermatology, respiratory medicine, rheumatology and neurology. These are not peripheral specialties. They are at the core of a service for any modern model 3 hospital. St. Luke's is facing severe understaffing. The absence of permanent consultants in these areas has very real consequences: longer waiting times, increased reliance on highly expensive locums and agency staff, reduced continuity of care, pressure on existing staff, and, ultimately, an impact on patient outcomes.”
“I would like us to consider having a health debate specifically related to disordered eating because it is so pervasive in our communities. The online space and social media contribute to people's sense of self-image. Disordered eating is, first and foremost, a mental health condition and it merits a substantive debate in this Chamber.”
“Despite increased awareness around those who suffer from eating disorders, sufferers are still woefully under-served in Ireland. One in 20 people will have an eating disorder at some stage in their lifetime. While this is something that predominantly affects girls and women, data from 2023 indicates that 25% of sufferers are men and boys. This is something to be cognisant of because there is still so much stigma for people who suffer from eating disorders in terms of being able to express it and that stigma is particularly difficult for boys and men. We have major gaps in eating disorder services, particularly for those under 18. The timelines for the additional 19 adult beds that have been promised are still very much up in the air.”
“I was appalled but not really surprised yesterday by the US Government's abstention on the UN General Assembly vote calling for a ceasefire. The idea that a ceasefire or an end to the killing is in any way controversial is ridiculous. As peace talks continue, we need to acknowledge that they are fragile. For a lasting and just peace, Ukraine cannot be strong-armed into an agreement which does not reflect the brutality of Russia's illegal war. I have always believed Ireland has a role to play, given our position of neutrality, in engaging as a meaningful interlocutor on these questions and I would like to see the Department of foreign affairs doing so much more. I also want to acknowledge that this week is eating disorder awareness week.”
“The Irish Red Cross is leading on mental health supports through a trauma-informed approach. Wwe must ensure that it is equipped and funded to keep that service going. The ongoing trauma is significant for people in Ukraine and for those Ukrainians living in Ireland who have family and friends at home, living in a war zone, from whom they are separated. The EU has committed to a loan to Ukraine and I would like to see Ireland lead on getting that funding transferred to Ukraine as quickly as possible to support the reconstruction and humanitarian efforts, despite the obstacles coming from Hungary. War is never the answer and peace can never be achieved through military means. Dialogue is the only way. It is the only pathway for securing peace and the international community must stand firm against Putin's breaches of international law.”
“This week marks the fourth anniversary of the war in Ukraine. Across Ireland over the past few days there have been vigils that have been both sober and emotional for the Ukrainians who are living here. Since the beginning of the war Russia has abducted around 35,000 Ukrainian children but that figure could actually be much higher. So far, more than 15,000 Ukrainian civilians have been killed, including 739 children, due to the relentless and indiscriminate attacks from Russia, according to figures from the UN. I would like to see Ireland leading on negotiations specifically around the return of these children. In October last year I asked the Ukrainian ambassador what support they needed and she drew specific attention to the question of mental health.”
“Thank you, Senator. We are reaching eviction rates not seen in Ireland since the 1850s. How evocative and how horrifying. This is from an article by RTÉ, so if our national broadcaster is presenting misleading information we can take that up with it. It is from something we would call a trusted news source. This Bill is going to see more evictions. The Minister will talk about the six-year tenancy but I have mentioned before I have sat in this Chamber for hours of debate to discuss this legislation because I care about the impact it is going to have on people. We have major concerns that we are going to see a tsunami of evictions coming from this. We have major concerns about it and reading this article about a level of evictions that has not been seen since the Famine is horrifying and should send shivers down our spines.”
“I appreciate Senator Casey believes this is going to provoke change but we do not. I thought having meaningful debate was the whole role of the Seanad. Sorry if I am misunderstanding the idea of scrutiny and the extra perspectives we are supposed to bring.”
“To say we should have used our time when we had it is pretty egregious in the context of such important legislation, which is being guillotined. There is no doubt about that. We heard from the other side of the Chamber that we were filibustering but we are just trying to have a meaningful debate about legislation we fundamentally think will not reduce rents. The Government side believes it is-----”
“I do not see how, and, critically, when, this Bill is going to help. At what point can renters be promised there will be a decrease in rents?”
“The reason the evidence and analysis on the impact of this Bill is so important is the aspect of affordability and the difference between the Minister's belief that supply will inevitably bring down rents and my belief that it will not because of what market-driven housing will actually mean. The market wants profit. That is the nature of capitalism. The market will seek profit. Affordability is so important when we are talking about what types of properties will be built. If we take the median salary of a teacher - and I know we are talking about rental tenancies here, but it is all part of the same holistic context - they can take out a mortgage currently of €180,000. We know no teacher by themselves is buying anything with that. Will they be able to find affordable rental properties? We have gone over this.”
“It is all very well to create those conditions, and I think this might be the Minister's argument: that we need the private sector to build because if it does not, then there will be no building. I actually trust the State, though. Maybe not the State run by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, but in theory, I think a good, strong State can actually deliver and build. We have seen that historically in Ireland and I would love to get us back there again with things like a State construction company. Also on the premise that the State is building, the Government actually underdelivered in 2024 by almost 10,000 homes on its promise of State building.”
“It is subcontracting building to private contractors and developers that are making quite a substantial profit off that. Linked to that, the State is then giving tax breaks to those developers, which led to €1 billion less being collected in the last budget. That was significant. It would also be great if we had a definition of what "State building" means. To me, that means the State actually doing it and not subcontracting it out to private developers for profit. Maybe that is an ideological difference we have or a difference of definition. If it is, then we are all debating in circles without really understanding what we are debating. The State is certainly creating the conditions for developers to build. The problem with that is that developers are making money off people being able to put a roof over their head.”
“I do not know if the Minister's Department actually funds Threshold, but just let us say it did. We would ask the organisation to produce a report on how that money has been spent and the successes of it, if it is working well and if the project is working well from a monitoring and evaluation perspective. These amendments are for just that purpose. They are seeking that we would gather evidence we can review and reflect on it. I appreciate that the Minister said that these things are always in motion and changes are always made. These amendments are very much facilitating that, as opposed to anything else. We heard the notion that the Government and Fianna Fáil are building and building and have always built, but the State is not building at scale.”
“I would like to ask the Minister a quick question. One of the Senators said we are all inconsistent on this side of the Chamber between what we say inside and outside here. I personally would like to know how I am inconsistent, because I actually think I am not inconsistent in my policies and values that are based in human rights, equality and social justice. I think I march to that beat and drum in here and in my personal life and in public life outside of the Chamber. I will comment on the reason for these amendments around review. Purely from a project management perspective, let us say, for example, we were subcontracting a project in the NGO and civil society sector. Let us say funding was being given and we were asking one of these organisations to do a project.”
“When they do, properties will be set to market rents and that is going to have devastating consequences for these people who are already struggling to keep their heads above water. Look at people with living with disabilities. We were criticised for using the phrase, "choosing between heating and eating", which was absurd because that is actually what disability rights activists and groups are telling us. They will be impacted by this. There are lots of people in that space who are renting and who will have to move for a range of reasons. This idea that people are static and do not move around and do not move between tenancies because of necessity is not living in reality. This Bill does not reflect the reality of people's lives and that is driving my concerns about it.”
“These are people who are fearful about what this means for them because they are struggling. I spoke last week to the Minister about survivors of domestic violence, for example. They have to leave whenever they have to leave. They will have to move to new tenancies. There is no six-month- or three-and-a-half-year period. If they have to flee, they have to flee. I do not see provisions and protections for them in this Bill. People leave and they have to travel for all sorts of different reasons. If a husband or wife gets a job in a new city or in a new part of the country, they have to leave. I understand the motivation for having protection for six years. That is noble but it does not reflect the reality that people move for a plethora of reasons.”
“I am hearing feedback from groups like Threshold of their deep concern that this Bill is not going to have the intended consequences. I believe the Minister sincerely thinks that it will. I also believe that the Bill is not going to have the impact he thinks it will. That is why we here and that is why I am making these cases to the Minister. It is not because I am trying to get some great clip for social media. By the way, accountability and showing what I do on social media is also perfectly fine because that is how one reaches people, especially younger people. That is okay. I am pleading with the Minister to explore some of our amendments. I do not believe he will because that has not been the modus operandi up to this point. I am not doing it for any reason other than to represent the people who want me to tell their stories.”
“For example, I cannot afford to use most paid services and even have to save on transportation costs, such as bus fares... This person says they prefer to walk. They cannot afford a bus fare because of the cost of their accommodation. Yesterday I quoted someone whose parents are paying for their rent, as many parents do. The parents are actually spending more on their child's rent than they are on their monthly mortgage. We talk about the squeezed middle. Could you get a better example of that? They are paying twice their monthly mortgage payment to support their child and God help them if they have two children in education at the same time. This all points to our sincere and deep concerns. I am not trying to peddle misery here.”
“That could be a way for the landlord to squeeze people and get more money from them. This is a serious issue for many people. A DCU student contacted me, stating as follows: I have very little left to cover basic necessities such as food, clothing, and other everyday expenses. As a result, I regularly rely on free volunteer services, such as Olio and similar platforms [Olio, for those who do not know it, provides free food] to receive some food for free. The DCU Pantry services, providing free breakfasts and weekly food packages, are also extremely helpful - thank you very much for these initiatives, they truly make a difference. Even with these wonderful free services, maintaining daily life remains stressful and requires strict budgeting on my part.”
“Even if they do not have a car, they must pay it anyway. There might be service charges for the use of utilities or common spaces. In DCU, there was a 120% increase in monthly service charge costs, from €57 to €117, which is phenomenal. The Minister, Deputy Lawless, was quoted last September in The Irish Times voicing great concerns about this. He said that in this case DCU was not acting within the spirit of the law. He said he would discuss it with the Minister, Deputy Browne. I would love to know if that discussion has taken place because I do not see any protections in this legislation for students or anyone else in a serviced apartment because of this idea of what rent is. That is a way to have increases. The legislation says that within six years the rent cannot increase but the service charge could increase.”
“The Minister spoke about the average rental tenancy of three and half years. We are all aware of that. He hopes the Bill will increase the average. The problem is that it is three and a half years as opposed to it just being a case of people getting kicked out by their landlords after that length of time. People's lives change and they move. I particularly want to make a point about students who move every year. Each year they will be faced with increased rents. The Bill does not define what rent is. That might sound like a stupid statement to make but there is an issue here, particularly in the context of students. Serviced apartments come with many ancillary costs. Some serviced apartments might come with an added cost relating to a car parking space. For some people, that is not optional.”
“The problem is that this is premised on the notion that an increased number of properties will lead to market-driven rent reductions. That has never happened. The market increases the cost of rent and does not decrease it. The Minister spoke about the Opposition having no solutions. He will have heard from my colleague Deputy Rory Hearne at length. We do provide solutions. The State building affordable rental properties is a major example. Relying entirely on the market has not worked up to this point. The definition of idiocy is doing something again and again and expecting a different outcome. I would love to know a timeframe for when exactly the Minister thinks rent will be reduced, and not a response with regard to having supply or a critical mass in respect of supply.”
“We are not aware of any modelling done to determine the impact that this change could have on the market rent levels. Because the Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, mentioned it yesterday, I assume that the Minister's response will be the same with regard to when exactly he thinks these changes will happen. What is the timeframe for when we will see rent decrease? What we are seeing are mechanisms to increase rents. It is very hard for us to understand the Minister's arguments on the idea that rents will somehow be reduced when the Bill allows for them to be increased. The Minister's response will be about supply and when we will see the critical mass of that supply. He can come back to me if that is not his response.”
“The Minister used the term "soundbites". I sometimes wonder about that. We speak to people all the time who have serious concerns about the impact this will have on them. The Minister of State, Deputy O'Sullivan, was in the House yesterday. He mentioned that Threshold and various other organisations were consulted with regard to the Bill. I want to make it clear that I am here because I am concerned about the very real impact this will have on people who are not able to afford to pay their rent. Threshold is concerned that the option for landlords to set market rates between tenancies may result in an unintended consequence whereby renters, particularly those who move home, will end up paying high rents within three to four years and will see their overall rent security undermined.”
“I want to make a point for the record. It is nothing to do with the Minister of State but I understand that, under Standing Orders, I am now unable to submit a similar Commencement matter for six months. I would have withdrawn it and waited to have the Department here. It is very frustrating when the Department does not inform us in advance that not one Minister under its brief will be present to answer the questions. I do not think it respects the integrity and role of this House.”
“Ireland has wavered. That is why I am asking for confirmation on the exact steps Ireland will take in the run-up to the Moldova declaration. I am not clear if an assessment was made regarding the Good Friday Agreement. I know the Minister of State said the Government upholds it but I am not clear exactly what assessment of risk was taken. The Minister for justice, when he was asked by my colleague, Deputy Gannon, could not provide any figures for the number of deportations blocked through the ECHR or the European Court of Human Rights. In regard to that migration piece in Article 3 and Article 8, they are fundamental rights and if we chip away at them, we actually do chip away at the whole international system and international law.”
“I ask the Minister of State to outline specifically and to be clear on whether Ireland will advocate for the protection of all elements of Article 3 and Article 8. We cannot pick and choose fundamental rights; they are fundamental. The Minister of State has said the Government is unwavering. There was wavering in December; the joint statement represented wavering. The Minister's comments in his speech in December regarding the need for clarity about inhumane and degrading treatment are concerning. Case law from the ECHR makes it clear that Article 3 is a non-derogable right. The court's case has established an incredibly high threshold for treatment to be considered inhumane and degrading. To amend the threshold via the proposed political declaration threatens the judicial independence of the court and erodes rights protections.”
“I hope we can get some much-needed clarity to allay the profound concern that many people in the human rights space have.”