Paul Nicholas Gogarty
Dublin Mid-West · Independent · Ireland
“As I have mentioned in the House before, if a border poll passes by 52% to 48%, the legal threshold of the Good Friday Agreement is met but the social consensus is not and moving 800,000 citizens into a new state against their explicit, democratic will does risk causing civil unrest.”
“We also have other gaps that are much smaller, like a ten-year phased transition, reducing the net annual cost to between €2.5 billion and €3 billion. We then had the middle figure of about €11 billion. We actually do not know how much it is going to cost but we do know it is going to cost something.”
“For example, adopting a single currency, getting rid of the exchange rate volatility and the transaction costs for cross-Border businesses are all advantages.”
“I would be loath to call a border poll right now because of the risks associated with that, but if a border poll did occur, the State would have to be prepared for the huge structural disruptions that would follow, so we have to start working now - that is why this debate is welcome - without arrogantly presuming it is going to become a r…”
“I have been listening to this debate in my office since Deputy Currie started her contribution. I always follow these debates on Irish unity with interest as someone who wants to see a united Ireland by consent.”
“Some have been mentioned in this House, such as a devolved regional assembly in Stormont to preserve local governance for the unionist community, a shared bill of rights protecting the dual Irish-British citizenship, and re-evaluating our relationship with the Commonwealth.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,194 lines we hold for Paul Nicholas Gogarty, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 24.
“It is great that the Department has accepted all the in camera review's recommendations and work has begun on establishing the regulated national panel of court assessors, which will replace the ad hoc unregulated, and what I would say is a damaging and dangerous, system currently in place. Even if this works out as we would all like it to, which it may not, it still needs scrutiny and transparency. We can take an overview over a period but shining a light often only works if it is available immediately. Hence the need to change the in camera rule. Reference was made to a new private family law reporting project which works in tandem with the likes of the child law project, going back to 2012. It does so, however, in my view and that of some others, by creating a centralised and, for want of a better term, curated reporting mechanism.”
“I also thank members of the cross-party committee I am on that is seeking the reform of expert reports, the in camera rule and other relevant issues pertaining to people suffering in the system. Go raibh maith agaibh go léir. I thank the Minister too for his thoughtful contribution. In discussions, I always find that he is a thinker and that he does not get into points scoring. He tries to look at things rationally and reasonably. I do again acknowledge the work he is doing in relation to the reform of family law pertaining to experts, as I mentioned earlier in the context of the parliamentary questions, and the issue of transparency. I want to reiterate and make clear, however, that as far as the families and women are concerned and as far as the best interests of children are concerned, more needs to be done and faster.”
“I had submitted some parliamentary questions to try to get the up-to-date situation in respect of the rollout of reforms the Minister mentioned. It is clear that he has done a considerable amount of work over the past 18 months. I do hope the work on experts will show significant improvement. I reiterate, however, that there is sometimes a confirmation bias even among experts. It depends on their background, their training, and the guidelines given. We have to be absolutely certain that what goes forward is going to work. We need transparency shone on this area. I thank, first and foremost, my Opposition colleagues from all groupings for their support for this motion and for sharing their experience, knowledge and practical suggestions to add to the wording.”
“As I pointed out earlier, fathers have been shown to be damaged under the current flawed system, and I have been very sure to mention this aspect, but the system has hurt mothers a lot more. It is unfair, opaque and needs to change. I mentioned Dr. Charlotte Proudman, one of several advocates in the UK. Her research found that the secrecy and gender bias in family courts in England concealed poor practice and a lack of accountability. There is no reason to believe it is not the case here that there is a systemic gender bias that needs to be addressed. As I mentioned at the outset, no matter which parent has the issue and who is telling lies and who is telling the truth, the main issue is the harm being caused to children. This has been first and foremost in my thinking, and this is why we need transparency.”
“I believe people are in favour of transparency, so let us bring in that transparency, pilot it and can fix any errors as they arise. The time for secrecy has ended; the time for meaningful action is now. It is time to do the right thing and shine a light on the system. We need to remember we are trying to put the best interests of children first. Even if 80% of the allegations are hearsay and false, that means 20% are true. Shining a light on bad decisions and putting scrutiny on something leads to improvement. We need to shine a light and I call on the Minister to do the right thing.”
“My understanding is that there are 23 court areas in Ireland at District Court level, with those districts subdivided into the eight Circuit Court regions. Surely we could pilot a scheme in Ireland that could be initially rolled out in several of these areas. I hope the reason the recommendations have not been implemented is not fear of a backlash from the Judiciary. We know that Dr. Charlotte Proudman in the UK, for example, was trolled online and called a bitch. She was got horrendous abuse from members of the Judiciary who did not like her involvement in the case in question. There was a collective effort by many people in the UK. Dr. Proudman comes over here regularly and is a keen advocate of the removal of the in camera rule. She got dog's abuse. It is highly unfair. I believe members of our Judiciary are more civilised.”
“I am aware that the Minister is talking about having a regulated accredited-journalist system, but any journalist who meets the criteria should be able to report. Where they do not, there would be prosecutions. We have to assume the right to report first and foremost in a democracy. The president of the family division in England, retired judge Sir Andrew McFarlane, said the following about the system there: The establishment of the open reporting provisions in all family courts in England and Wales is a watershed moment for family justice. He also stated: There have been no known breaches of anonymity of children, and the aims of the pilot, to increase public understanding and awareness of the Family Court, are being realised.”
“Pilots were set up that removed the in camera rule and allowed accredited journalists and legal bloggers to report on family law proceedings, subject, of course, to strict anonymity protections. This system has been found to work, with ongoing protection of anonymity, and as a result it has now been rolled out extensively, including through a pilot in Northern Ireland. The open reporting provisions in this system, which is one of the closest to our own legal system, mean there is a presumption that a transparency order protecting the anonymity of children and their families is granted unless there is a legitimate reason not to do so. Therefore, the system is totally different. It is a case of assuming you can report on matters and that names are going to be protected, and of having trust in the journalists.”
“This requires legislation to be implemented. There is also no statutory right for parties to request transcripts. Ironically, this slow and piecemeal progress – I have to give the Minister credit for speeding things up a bit – now presents us with an opportunity. Incredibly, and despite all the evidence, one of the conclusions of the report on the in camera rule was that family law proceedings should continue to be held in private. A kind of halfway house is suggested, but it is not the abolition of the in camera rule. Like the Minister, I believe that if new evidence comes to light, conclusions must change. My understanding is that the evidence from across the water is overwhelming. The English and Welsh legal system recently had a sea change in how the family courts were reported on.”
“It found the in camera rule is inconsistently understood and applied in Ireland. The report emphasised that while privacy is essential, the rule creates a striking absence of public knowledge about what happens in family courts. This lack of transparency undermines public confidence. The report states the current operation of the in camera rule is an impingement on young people's lives, especially when it prevents appropriate information sharing with those supporting the child. As I understand it, there are steps to address this specific area, but in general terms very few of the recommendations of the long-delayed review have been implemented in full, or even partially. We have no new primary legislation, no automatic access to redacted orders for certain professionals, such as those in foster care, schools and support services.”
“Of course, again, it is all hearsay, because we have no reporting due to the in camera rule. It provides shelter for abusers. I am aware that the 2024 report made recommendations, and some things are coming online. I hope this positive feature will help but we still know that, even if we have the new panel of assessors, with the new scrutiny arrangement, we still have to have transparency and scrutiny regarding the decisions being made because even the most qualified people make mistakes. We have seen this with judges and we see it everywhere, which brings us back to the in camera rule. No doubt the Minister referred to the report on the operation of the in camera rule in family law proceedings, by Drs. Parkes, Burns and McCaughren. This report was comprehensive and based on multiple interviews with many stakeholders.”
“I have seen social workers commit perjury. I have proof of it. I have an admission of perjury from [one] ... We see how these experts facilitate false accusations in the court system and that many parents have been denied access to their children as a result. We have heard stories of alienation in the general sense, but we have also heard about cases, especially concerning women, of those who have been wrongly accused of parental alienation, with one social worker in the system, a cult-like devotee of Gardner's discredited theory of parental alienation syndrome, who has consigned numerous children to prolonged stays with narcissistic and abusive parents under so-called immersion therapy. Some would say that man deserves a special place in hell, but he is not the only expert who has caused pain.”
“Even when this expert [was] presented with proof my ex was not being alienated and he was lying about access he still spun a total lie that I was alienating him. This is Sophie's story: (Sophie reported that her teenage daughter had been sexually abused by her father. The case went to the family court where a court expert accused her of parental alienation. Custody of the children was given to the father. She has not seen her children since early 2022). "I despise all of them. If I had to pick an organisation that is the worst it is the family law courts. It is the people in them. They are liars. They have no honesty. The in-camera rule needs to be lifted. There is no justice. Your basic human right is being violated, and it is hidden by the in-camera rule. People commit perjury every day in the family law courts and nobody outside knows.”
“Lied on the stand in court. Stood with my exes legal team despite supposedly being independent. And multiple meetings with my ex and phone calls but I wasn't afforded the same. He dismissed my child when bringing up inappropriate behaviour said she got it wrong. The only other person he discussed the case with [believe it or not] was with the woman my ex had an affair with who [had] walked out on her own family. He dismissed 1 child's learning issues said they were a performance I made her put on, despite a report from an OT. He made kids stand under a tree and told to bond with [your] father or be brought back. This is despite being told by the children my ex had told them he was getting bailiffs to drag me out of the house and frightening them. He [was] completely dismissive of domestic abuse.”
“Erica stated: I eventually did get a barrister, and she would just turn up that morning, and my solicitor would fill her in on details. It was so obvious she never spoke to the barrister before that. When it became really serious, she absolutely let me down. It was like having no representation. Here is yet another story, from somebody who contacted me directly: I was labelled as "bitter because I didn't have money". The expert told me he wrote what my ex told him. He wrote on a report that my ex said I had issues with alcohol [she does not] but when I asked had he any proof he said no. I gave him proof in the form of a recording of my ex saying I didn't have a problem. But he refused to listen. I asked him was he accusing me of PA [parental alienation] and he said where did I say that then went and wrote it specifically [in his report].”
“I have paid him around twelve thousand euro. I do not know what he received from my ex-husband." Here is another story from the book: (Erica's troubles began many years ago when she reported child sexual abuse to Gardaí. Over time she succeeded in preventing the family court from giving custody of her children to the father, who was the perpetrator of that abuse. In her most recent court appearance, however, a judge accepted a court expert' s claim that she was guilty of parental alienation and ruled that custody be given to the father. Erica appealed but could not secure free legal aid in time. She was forced to borrow twenty thousand euros from family, friends and her local credit union to hire a private solicitor).”
“A court expert was appointed who wrote a report recommending that the children be handed to the father. He accused Amy of parental alienation and recommended that she have no access to the children at all). "I went into it very naively, thinking the assessor would hear what I had to say and what my children had to say. The opposite happened. The court expert told me he was a psychotherapist. He gave himself a number of different [professional titles] ... He ignored the sexual abuse and the domestic violence. He recommended that custody be removed from me and given to their father, the man my children named as their abuser. Supervised access was run by a for-profit business charging more than two hundred euros a week. If I could not pay, visits were cancelled. He came to every court case and charged for each appearance.”
“Another man who shared his story moved to Ireland and remained an involved father, but after his arrival his contact with his son was steadily reduced. A single, very positive visit from his perspective later became the basis for removing all access, with no specialist evaluation. Years of proceedings ultimately left him with no meaningful relationship with his child. He was dependent entirely on the child, a very young child, initiating contact, which was unlikely without external support. To be clear, men do suffer in this system. It is important to note that but, as the other stories will show, the balance is massively skewed against women. Let me quote a passage from Justice for Birth Mothers : (Amy's troubles began when she reported to Gardaí that her children were being sexually abused by their father.”
“Personal testimony is very powerful so I will take time to read a collection of stories about experiences. I got a message from a father who describes how his life changed in 2018 when his partner suddenly left with two young daughters and accused him of emotional abuse. Despite there being no evidence, he spent months without contact and endured repeated allegations, Garda investigations and blocked access. Each time he was cleared, new claims emerged leading to long gaps without him seeing his children. When access resumed, the girls showed fear and distress shaped by their mother. After years in court, he eventually secured shared custody but his relationship with his youngest remained strained. He highlights the severe harm caused by what he describes as deliberate alienation and calls for better awareness among professionals.”
“It mentions how experts are commonly sourced through word of mouth instead of through a formal panel, that verification of qualifications is informal and inconsistent and varies by judge and that challenges to expert recommendations were shown to occur in only 10% to 20% of cases according to interviews with the Judiciary. That means that eight or nine out of ten times, the so-called expert makes recommendations and he or she is not challenged in court. The review notes that every judge interviewed described extra reports as extremely useful and central to the decision making in private family law disputes. This makes these experts hugely powerful. Experts have been accused of making allegedly skewed decisions for money at the end of the day and the judges must take reports at face value.”
“Family law cases are by their nature adversarial. Parents will lie. Some parents will weaponise their children. Parents will make true claims, serious claims and false claims. The reality is that despite policy efforts to encourage mediation, family court cases have increased in number. This means the system can often be overloaded with long delays. This has meant that expert reports are used more often, which can actually escalate conflict rather than resolve it. I refer to the 2024 review of the role of expert reports in the family law process from the Department of justice.”
“In court, she proved that some of the most serious claims made against her were simply false. She said that she had proved in court that Tusla lied in sworn affidavits. She said that judges tell Tusla to get its house in order but that nothing changes and that Tusla blocks children from speaking to verify the truth. She said that some lies are disgusting and easily disproven but Tusla keeps them hidden and that she did not know how these social workers could sleep at night. We need a radical overhaul of Tusla. It is dysfunctional - not because there are about 50,000 referrals when we take out multiple referrals for children but because it is not organised properly and not adequately resourced. I hope the promised review will overhaul things but I fear it will be too little, too late. Then, of course, there are the court-appointed experts.”
“These stories make numerous allegations but without scrutiny and transparency, they remain hearsay. Let us start with Tusla. We are all aware of the recently reported failures to protect children in its care but in family law courts where parental disputes arise, there is an equal failure by Tusla to provide necessary supports and protections. Justice for Birth Mothers: The Fight Against Forced Separation in Modern Ireland contains 357 references to Tusla. There are good, kind and conscientious people in the agency but it paints a picture of a collective and structural influence that is often malign. A story from Clara illustrates this. Clara fled to Ireland after testifying against a dangerous criminal. Gardaí wrongfully arrested her on more than one occasion and removed her children three times handing them to Tusla.”
“As the Minister may know or have inklings of, the family law system is harming our children. If we do not take serious action, what is going on today will be perceived in the years to come as State-sanctioned child abuse. There is something seriously wrong with the courts, with Tusla, with experts and, above all, with the in camera rule. There are so many stories I could tell the Minister today if I had the time. Many of them are contained in a recently published book entitled Justice for Birth Mothers: The Fight Against Forced Separation in Modern Ireland . Many other people have also contacted me directly with their experiences of group think and lazy decisions by members of the Judiciary, revolving-door barristers with varying levels of interest and the absolute reliance on court-appointed so-called experts.”
“I move: That Dáil Éireann: notes that: — family law proceedings concerning child custody, access, guardianship and childcare matters, continue to be heard otherwise than in public under statutory provisions including, Section 27 of the Guardianship of Infants Act, 1964, and Section 29 of the Child Care Act, 1991; — the recently published book entitled "Justice for Birth Mothers – The Fight Against Forced Separation in Modern Ireland", documents numerous experiences of women who report feeling disempowered, unheard and unable to challenge decisions made behind closed doors, illustrating the broader impact of secrecy and silence on vulnerable families; — such secrecy in the decision-making process also affects men, and can contribute to a sense of injustice and exclusion; — the Review of the Operation of the In Camera Rule in Family Law Proceedings, published in 2025, found widespread confusion among parents about what they may lawfully discuss, and reported that many feel isolated, silenced and unable to seek support; — few of the recommendations of this long-delayed review have been implemented, and its conclusion that family law proceedings should continue to be held in private has been overtaken by real world developments in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, where accredited journalists and legal bloggers may report on family law proceedings subject to strict anonymity protections; — international best practice, informed by sustained advocacy and research by legal experts, including Dr Charlotte Proudman, increasingly favours controlled transparency with strong anonymity safeguards rather than blanket secrecy, particularly in cases involving allegations of domestic abuse or parental alienation; — the lack of transparency surrounding alleged abuses of the system, groupthink, incompetence, under-resourcing and poor decision making, ultimately impacts children most of all; — the In Camera rule has left children exposed to emotional harm, re-traumatisation, and unsafe contact, creating conditions linked to severe distress, post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and suicidal thoughts; and — the constant additional conflict and negativity caused by the lack of transparency, and related poor decision-making, can hinder their emotional, social and cognitive growth; further notes that: — investigative reporting and academic research have highlighted concerns regarding the use of unregulated or insufficiently accredited court appointed experts, including in cases involving allegations of parental alienation; and — concerns have been raised about Tusla's role in family law cases, including inconsistent implementation of expert recommendations, and instances of non-compliance with court directions; acknowledges that the transparency reforms in England and Wales, including the Family Court Reporting Pilot and its subsequent national rollout, have been independently evaluated and shown to: — increase public understanding of family court processes; — maintain full anonymity, with no known breaches; — provide clearer information to parents through transparency orders; and — improve scrutiny of professional practice; and calls on the Government to: — initiate stand alone, specific legislation, to replace the current blanket In Camera rule, with a modern transparency framework that: — permits attendance and reporting by accredited journalists and legal bloggers; — mandates full anonymisation of children and family members; and — provides judicial discretion to restrict reporting, where necessary for child welfare or safety; — amend the statutory provisions requiring private hearings in child related family law cases, including: — the Guardianship of Infants Act, 1964; — the Child Care Act, 1991; and — the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2013; — introduce statutory transparency orders in all child related family law cases, clearly setting out what may be reported and how anonymity is protected; — establish a regulatory framework for court appointed experts, including minimum qualifications, accreditation and oversight, and ensure that contested or unvalidated theories are subject to clear evidential standards; — strengthen statutory oversight of Tusla, to ensure timely compliance with court directions and consistent practice in child welfare cases; — create clear education and training pathways for An Garda Síochána in relation to family law matters, including domestic abuse, coercive control and contested expert evidence; and — provide clear guidance to parents on their rights and obligations under any new transparency system, including how they may seek support and engage with accredited reporters, without breaching court rules.”
“People have grown up and left the area. In line with national density regulations, we need to improve the density in areas to have a critical mass for services. Will the Taoiseach prioritise this Bill, so it passes through all Stages by the summer?”
“I would like to visit the issue of people being able to build modular homes in their gardens and subdivide them because it is a hugely important issue. It is definitely not a panacea for the housing crisis but it will help in certain situations. For example, yesterday I had a gentleman on to me worried that the legislation will not cover an area where the person who has a big enough house and wants to live on the garden and rent out the house. There are a lot of older people who want to live in the ground floor of their houses and then let someone else move into the upstairs of the house because they do not want to leave an area. They are close to their local churches, shops, etc. Where I grew up in the 1980s there were ten shops within a mile from where I lived. Now there is just one. That shows the population has declined.”
“As I have said previously, this legislation is not worth the paper it is printed on without resourcing the enforcement. We have better enforcement in the Bill, but unless we resource the enforcers and ensure that action is taken, it is pointless. We require quite a lot of money in additional annual funding. I hope that we can claw back some of that funding and resourcing through proper fines. We have very inadequate fines in many areas, litter being a case in point. I hope the fines that are being looked at for breaches of this legislation will be sufficiently robust. Hopefully, we will get the income to pay for some of the enforcement in the short to medium term, so environmental health officers and anyone else doing test purchases and so on will be able to go in and catch the people who breach the legislation.”
“The other risk is that when we move away from so-called nicotine products, and I am not trying to pass the buck and start looking at another line of argument, companies and different supply chains, for want of a better term, will probably try to find zero nicotine-type chemicals as workarounds. They will always find something. We have had debates about nitrous oxide canisters in this Chamber. There are other types of chemicals and drugs that people will be encouraged to get. The Department should be ready to see what is starting to trickle in in other countries where the legislation has been tightened up and start working on legislation to deal with that if it is not covered under existing legislation. I do not think the other two listed colleagues are coming to the House, so Deputy Ward will be able to speak shortly.”
“It is complementary to the Public Health (Single-Use Vapes) Bill 2025, which we debated in this Chamber a while back. Again, it attempts to strip away the attractiveness and visibility of nicotine products in the same way the single-use vapes Bill targets the equipment by banning cheap disposable vapes. The industry found workarounds in the UK with regard to that, so we must constantly be on our toes. A shortcoming of this Bill is the fact that, as far as I can gather, menthol and mint flavours are still available. Is that the case? No. It is good to get some clarification on that. I did not want to be just making that statement as if I knew it. It is good that this has been dealt with.”
“If we can inspect the supply chain and target any type of advertising and website marketing these nicotine products to minors, it is a good thing. Maybe I am not 100% sure and maybe I rushed through the legislation too quickly or did not read it thoroughly enough, but will the Minister of State outline whether this Bill will also target influencers and the social media side of things because that constitutes advertising as well? Section 20 contains an outright ban on advertising and point-of-sale display of e-cigarettes and pouches in what is called the mixed retail environment. Some of these outlets will not like this but it is critical. Any sort of restrictions on imagery and clamping down on flavour descriptions are great.”
“I am reminded of the old ads in the 1950s where smoking was seen as glamorous, cigarettes were fitted into movies and it was stylistic. The industry is doing that with the flavours as well, not just with tobacco but also with vapes, which we are trying to make progress on. It reminds me of alcopops in the nineties and noughties when companies were trying to get young people into these types of products by making them more consumable, for want of a better term, so we will have to keep up. We have to make sure the industry does not start creeping ahead again. It will have to be monitored constantly. There are some good elements in the Bill. Section 18 contains a prohibition on the sale of all nicotine consumption products, such as pouches and gels, to anyone under the age of 18 and expands enforcement powers.”
“I welcome this Bill. I have been critical of the Government in lots of areas but I have to say that this legislation is a positive further step in protecting the health of all our citizens but especially our children. It would be remiss of me not to be a bit critical and say that I am not sure if it is enough in itself because we are dealing with what I would call a subversive and well-resourced industry. We think back to the Philip Morris days in the 1950s. The industry is still finding clever ways to sneak in and get people to buy its drugs so it will try to find loopholes around whatever laws we have as it did before in marketing colourful and dangerously addictive nicotine products directly to young people and diversifying them to tie in with modern lifestyles.”
“I might not be in the Chamber to hear his response but I will have a look at the transcript later. I am referring to the meeting in May of the European Political Community that involves 47 member states. It is a wider body that is not on a statutory basis. Could the Minister of State put on the record the level of engagement not just with the EU accession states but also with countries that are not anywhere in the pipeline for EU accession? What enhanced co-operation and economic pooling can we have on a Europe-wide basis, excluding, obviously, the countries that are not involved, which include Russia and Belarus? We are talking about the likes of Armenia, Georgia, Türkiye, Moldova and Ukraine. Some of them are EU accession states, but there is a lot of potential on an EU level for enhanced co-operation.”
“I want to try this angle as well: perhaps there needs to be an EU Cohesion Fund that would ramp up our energy production capacity as part of a European energy security network. In this regard, we would get some funding not from private corporations but from member states to have a kind of a quid pro quo 50:50 arrangement whereby we would still have enough capacity to sell to gain revenue from data storage companies. Some of the funding would come from Europe directly to build up scale and the energy would then go automatically through the French interconnector or by whatever means are necessary. This is because we need to ramp up our energy security from a national level but also from a European level. I am not sure whether the Minister of State got to comment on the meeting in May.”
“The other issues I want to focus on, which did not get discussed in Brussels but which I understand are coming up in the next couple of days, are the multi-annual financial framework and the long-term budget. Getting the framework right definitely has potential to provide some security in uncertain times. Another area that is relevant concerns energy security and high fossil fuel prices, which are very topical right now. I have mentioned this in this Chamber during the debate on the fuel crisis but I reiterate that we need to see more movement from Europe on long-term energy security. I have criticised the Government constantly for not investing in long-term offshore wind, tidal and wave energy, storage capacity off the west coast for conversion to hydrogen and battery storage. We could be a massive exporter of energy.”
“We can have the argument over whether services should be included during the debate on the legislation, but let us get to the stage where the legislation is coming up. On engagement with our European colleagues, the matter of Israel seems to have gone even further down the agenda. It needs to be kept as topical as possible. Issues like security and defence were also mentioned at the March meeting. It is in the EU's security interest not to have a belligerent Israel and to have a more settled, long-term peace plan, which might not suit the Netanyahu Administration but might suit the Israeli people going forward, as well as the Palestinians, obviously.”
“I missed that because I was at a committee meeting. It is fantastic to hear. The Middle East is going to come up again, I am sure, just as it did before. You never know from one day to the next what is going to happen. The last thing I heard related to the status of the blockade. I know matters are complex because of the historical and neighbourly relations some member states have with Israel, but we seem to be letting the genocide, the occupation of Gaza and the occupied territories fall through the cracks. I am aware that the Irish Government will say this is not a debate on the occupied territories Bill and that I have raised it before, but we have got to keep moving on this.”
“Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I note that in Brussels in March, the key areas were again Ukraine and the €195 billion or so in support. Since then, we have had the Hungarian election, which, as others have noted, will hopefully free things up. I hope that at the informal meeting in Cyprus tomorrow and the day after, we will receive some signs of positive engagement from the Hungarian side, if we have not already done so.”
“There has been underinvestment in public transport and the grid to allow us to be self-sufficient and self-reliant in energy and have EVs powered solely by Ireland. We have done nothing about tidal or wave power. We are gradually getting towards offshore wind power and have done very little about solar power either. We are way behind in terms of meeting our 2030 obligations and have to wake up and smell the coffee. We might be making a small net contribution to climate change, but we are disproportionate in terms of population and we have a responsibility towards Ireland and the world.”
“No one likes a carbon tax, and obviously in the context of the fuel emergency right now we need to give short-term measures to people, but the concept of a carbon tax is accepted worldwide. It is the implementation of it that is the issue. Some of our Sinn Féin colleagues mentioned that it does not necessarily help rural Ireland enough and that the current implementation of it does not help poorer families, that it disproportionately helps those who are better off. However, the principle of a climate tax actually makes sense to discourage the use of fossil fuels and encourage people to move towards alternatives. This is where we get to the point that we do not have those alternatives.”
“As Deputy Cummins said, Ireland declared a climate and biodiversity emergency back in 2019. This motion aims to renew that because absolutely nothing has happened. It is a bit like St. Augustine when he said, "Grant me chastity and continence, Lord, but not yet". We talk the talk, but we never walk the climate action walk, and that is a depressing fact. I do not have time in two minutes to talk about biodiversity but my statements on biodiversity were made quite recently and are on the Dáil record. However, I do want to talk about our overall approach to climate action. It is a pity that there are no Sinn Féin Ddeputies in the House because Shinners speak with forked tongues when it comes to climate and carbon taxes.”
“What we need are firm commitments in respect of the phase 1 modular building, the timber framed and well-insulated building. That is all well and good but in the original outline of the building, can we get clear answers from the Department that phase 2 can be commenced very quickly, because it is modular? The same goes for phases 3 and 4. Can these be designed and planned so they can go in a lot quicker and that in 18 months to two years, we can see the buildings?”
“Another very concerning thing is that because of the overcrowding in the school, on a number of occasions students have been found eating their lunches in toilets when it is raining because they have nowhere inside to go. The staff do not allow this and they are told to move as quickly as possible but some of them go in there because there are radiators and it is a warm places to eat. That is not acceptable in 2026. This is the level of the conditions the students are being forced to endure. There are no areas for kids to have extracurricular activities and to meet and have casual chats that make school days, days to remember. It is all about into class and out of class. There is no room to engage and have that quality of life in the school environment. It is heartbreaking to see this for the children.”
“The school has had to take the decision to subdivide rooms and to move students in order to have special educational needs classes in a setting that is not going to disturb students. I will give a few quotes from parents. Parents have said that every month that passes is actively harming children, that the school is not fit for purpose, that children with additional needs have been failed despite explicit promises and that children are stressed, more constrained and are falling behind through no fault of their own. There is confusion in terms of earlier responses from the Minister, Deputy Naughton, which said that phase 1 would include special educational needs classrooms but now it does not. Another parent said that it is entirely unclear as to the process and that the lack of transparency here is atrocious.”
“Everyone thought this was going to involve tweaking and shaving stuff off because we know the costs have increased but no, the plan was now to build a modular building that was well insulated and long lasting, etc., but on a much smaller footprint, with no indication of what is going into the original footprint and over what period of time. Phases 2, 3 and 4 are very opaque. There is no transparency. No one knows exactly what is going to happen. We need a commitment today that phases 2, 3 and 4, because we are talking about modular builds, can be designed and put into the current footprint, if that is possible, or if it needs a new planning application, that process can start so that in a matter of a year or 18 months, we can move on.”
“To put it in context, I first heard about this and I was raising Dáil questions in previous terms going back to 2007 when it was gradually moving towards the architectural planning stage in 2010. However, it took several more years to get the design and the planning permission in and it dragged on to 2020-21 when, eventually, it started moving towards the tender. In 2024, however, there was a delay in terms of issuing letters of intent. The school felt huge relief when this finally came through. They thought the extension was finally coming but last summer, in replies to parliamentary questions, it was indicated by the predecessor of the Minister of State, Deputy Naughton, that due to the length of time between planning and construction, there was going to be a review of the project.”
“However, it soon found itself needing to increase its intake. It has approximately 956 pupils today. Its capacity has not matched that increase in population. Different parts of the school started deteriorating over time - stuff that could not be fixed with summer work schemes and other tranches of funding. It is now overcrowded. It needs a major extension and significant refurbishment. These days, parents apply to get their kids into the school in spite of, not because of, the facilities of the school. I have been told by several exasperated parents who have more than one child in the school that this is the case. They know that the school facility is not great but that the teachers are fantastic. A lot more is needed, but the Department is dragging its heels.”
“By 1997, with population increases, the new Lucan Community College was established on its current location in Esker Drive under what is known today as the Dublin and Dún Laoghaire Education and Training Board, DDLETB. This school rapidly gained a reputation as a centre of excellence, so much so that it started to need lotteries for places at a very early stage. Today, even acknowledging the deficit of second level school places and the fact that the Department is always behind the curve in providing places, it is the co-educational school of choice in Lucan. Lucan Community College has always been massively oversubscribed. Parents and children want to go to this institution because of the quality of teaching and the depth of its curriculum. When it started out in the new building in 1997, it was a state-of-the-art facility.”
“The Government seriously needs to reassess and reconfirm its commitment to imminently provide the full extension and refurbishment project promised to Lucan Community College going back to 2010. We are talking about dedicated classrooms for children with special educational needs, physical education space and refurbishment. The current piecemeal solution of a reduced phase 1 and temporary repurposing of some rooms for special educational needs and reviewing the situation in relation to the originally promised phases 2, 3 and 4 is not satisfactory. Lucan Community College has a long and illustrious history in my constituency. It goes back to the vocational education committee, VEC, in the 1950s on the Lucan Newlands Road.”