Roderic O'Gorman
Dublin West · Green Party · Ireland
“These are men and women who served their working lives within the British civil service system but who, following unification, would be drawing their pensions in a united Ireland. The question of the funding of that will be extremely significant in any talks following a "Yes" vote on both parts of the island.”
“Some 100 extra staff have been hired to the public domain team to tackle waste and dumping and our councillors will continue to fight for a cleaner and greener Dublin.”
“These challenges are magnified by the continued failure of the current political institutions in Northern Ireland to operate for the best interests of the people rather than achieving best political advantage for the parties.”
“In the Dublin Central area, an average of 50 tonnes per month of illegally dumped waste is being removed by the council. It is a huge amount of waste, and this is more than is collected in an entire year from whole counties elsewhere in the country. Our current model of waste management is a direct contributor to this.”
“This means that in many areas, bags are the notional solution but these cause issues with seagulls or foxes or are intermingled with illegally dumped bags. The net result is our footpaths are strewn with waste. Dublin City Council recently rolled out a system of waste compactors in the core areas of the city centre.”
“The solution is to rationalise the current system, put local authorities back at the centre of waste management processes and use this to get a better handle on pricing and illegal dumping through contracts that are right for each specific area, instead of the one-size-fits-all model we have at the moment that is not actually working anyw…”
The complete record
Every one of 975 lines we hold for Roderic O'Gorman, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 20.
“How does the Government expect the public to believe it can deliver on promises like that when simply altering two sections of this Bill to help the NTA run regional bus services in Cork has taken almost a year? Managing existing public transport services is probably the least ambitious part of the list of public transport plans. If this is any indication of how the Government will proceed, things are looking pretty bleak. During our time in government, the Green Party introduced or enhanced 180 bus routes for rural areas in just four years. At one stage, a new or enhanced bus route was being launched every single week. That progress has been stalled, the planned routes are being left unfunded and promises to communities all over this country are being broken.”
“I am confused as to why this was the case, particularly because at the joint Oireachtas committee I sit on, we decided to waive pre-legislative scrutiny for this legislation in October of last year. That was a decision of Opposition and Government TDs on the committee to move the Bill along in order to support the roll-out of the Cork BusConnects as quickly as possible. When you compare the published Bill to the draft available last year, it seems only 13 words have changed. The Government talks extensively about the €24.3 billion allocated to public transport as part of the national development plan. We have been told this will result in the delivery of, for example, MetroLink by 2035.”
“The central purpose of the Bill is to allow the NTA use its expertise to expand our regional cities' transport services and bring them up to a more uniform standard. The Green Party supports streamlining of services but the purpose of streamlining needs to be to make things more effective. The Government seems to be doing everything in its power to counter any such efficiency effects. I questioned the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, about this Bill in February and was told it was on the priority publication list for the spring session. Then it was moved to the priority publication list for the summer legislative programme and it was only published in mid May.”
“It was even on his predecessor's desk as well. It may be that he does not wish to follow some or all of the recommendations in it. If so, it is legitimate for him to make that decision. I do not propose that we delay the Bill in any way on foot of that. This Bill has merit to work on its own. Perhaps in his wrap-up or in the near future, he would set out his proposals regarding the potential publication of the draft report on the wider question of guardianship.”
“This legislation has been with us for some time, since 1964. My understanding is that this report, which has not been published yet, contains some recommendations, particularly around the acquisition of guardianship duties. It is probably a good time to consider that. Recognising the different ways across which families are formed these days, it is fair that we look at how guardianship duties are acquired. I have tabled a number of parliamentary questions to the Minister over the past 18 months about where this report is, whether he will publish it and whether he will implement all, or, indeed, some of its recommendations. To date, his replies have not been hugely illuminating. It would be valuable to publish that report. It is my understanding that it is completed and it is on the Minister's desk.”
“Any additional time period in which a parent who has undertaken this grievous crime has guardianship over a child represents a longer period within which the potential abuse that we are recognising in this Bill and are legislating to restrict could take place, and in which additional traumatisation of that child and additional damage to their welfare could take place. I am sure the Minister has given this some thought but I ask him, particularly as he brings this Bill through Committee and Report Stages, to give some consideration to that particular point of an interim order. There are other jurisdictions which implement it and perhaps we can look at that model there. Second, I step back to a slightly wider point. The Minister's predecessor commissioned research and a wider analysis of guardianship in infancy.”
“Ultimately, the Bill recognises that the killing of a child's parent by the other child's parent represents an abuse of that child and it is for that incredibly severe reason that this significant restriction is being proposed. On behalf of the Green Party, I will support this Bill. I will make points. First, has the Minister considered the possibility of providing for an interim order? A former colleague of mine, Dr. Brian Tobin, in the University of Galway has made the case that there should be provision for an interim order, particularly if there is a lengthy trial or a length of time between conviction and sentencing.”
“The Bill provides that new power at law, namely, that a court can make an order suspending the guardianship held by a parent who has been convicted of killing the child's other parent. It is a very significant interference and significant restriction with guardianship rights but one which is necessary and for which there is a basis. The Bill would give that power to Tusla within six months of a conviction for the killing of a child's parent to bring forward an application to the court seeking such an order and that application could be made within a further six months if there were particular circumstances for that.”
“I welcome the opportunity to speak on this important legislation. I acknowledge the work the Minister has done in bringing forward this necessary change to the laws around guardianship. Guardianship currently refers to the set of legal rights and responsibilities to make major decisions about the upbringing of a child or a young person. This includes everything from what school they attend, what religion they are raised in, major medical decisions, whether they are allowed leave the country for a holiday or for other reasons and all that set of significant decisions in a child or young person's life. We separate out the power to make those big decisions from the day-to-day decisions about a child, which are governed by the rules surrounding custody.”
“To be clear, I am not talking about humanitarian funding or agreements on tax revenue withholding, I am asking if the Minister intends to put that existential question of Palestinian statehood at the centre of the EU meetings she will chair, where she will set the agenda over the next six months.”
“I want to broaden this discussion to the future of the State of Palestine. In less than five weeks' time Ireland takes on the Presidency of the European Union. The Minister will personally chair meetings of the Foreign Affairs Council and the General Affairs Council. It is a unique privilege and it is a unique responsibility. Does the Minister intend to put the question of EU support for Palestinian statehood on the agenda of those meetings? Our recognition of Palestinian statehood in 2024 was an important moment but the Minister's Government cannot keep referring back to that as if our responsibilities are fulfilled.”
“While sailing in international waters, these civilians had their boats boarded and were captured and taken away at gunpoint. In any other circumstance, we would describe it like it is - an act of piracy by the Government of Israel which is again showing why that country has become a pariah in the international community. Earlier this morning, the Minister clarified that the 14 Irish citizens are among those being deported to Turkey. Does she and her officials know if any of the Irish citizens have been physically harmed in any way while they were imprisoned? What meaningful steps will Ireland take against the Israeli Government for its brazen breeches of international humanitarian law?”
“Instead we see an Israeli Government minister in a state that claims to be democratic and claims to uphold the rule of law brazenly parading his power over captives. If we look at the current political situation in Israel, the reason becomes more clear. There is a debate going on in the Knesset about a Bill that could dissolve the Israeli Parliament early and force a snap election. This is while the current Israeli Government is behind in the opinion polls, so Irish citizens are being used as props by the minister, Ben-Gvir, in his pre-election campaign. This is a new low from the far-right parties that prop up Netanyahu's regime. While our immediate focus is on the treatment of these civilians, we must not forget why they are imprisoned in an Israeli port.”
“I want to raise the treatment of the 14 Irish citizens and hundreds of other civilians illegally held by the State of Israel. After the genocidal campaign of violence mounted by the IDF in Gaza, much of it documented by Palestinian victims on the ground, we felt we could not be shocked any further. Yet, the images and videos of Israel's national security minister, Ben-Gvir, haranguing prisoners who were bound and kneeling before him reveals a new element of performative cruelty. It brings to mind the pictures of detainees in Guantanamo Bay or in Iraq that leaked online following the invasion of that country. Even the then American Administration had the sense of shame to try to conceal the images of abuse undertaken in their name but here, we see no shame.”
“This does not mean being ignorant to the reality of the current geopolitical dynamic which has led to a paralysed UN Security Council. We must enunciate a visible alternative as a State. The solution is not to engage in partisan or ad hoc efforts to administer the UN framework as that way lies the Trump Administration's Board of Peace which is little more than an authoritarian vanity project. We should instead work with like-minded neutral states within the UN framework.”
“Peacekeeping means the deployment of the minimal multilateral force necessary with the agreement of all sides to a dispute with a mandate to provide a security presence to protect civilian life, to prevent a conflict from escalating further and to create space to build the peace through humanitarian aid and peacebuilding programmes. Peace enforcement, on the other hand, is the deployment of a force without the specific consent of the parties to a conflict and which uses a coercive military force to impose a cessation in fighting between two or more parties. We should not allow Government proposals around neutrality to confuse these two types of intervention. Ireland's commitment to peacekeeping is in line with the values of the UN Charter and it gives us credibility on issues of peace.”
“The Government has now proposed the removal of the triple lock authorisation for foreign military activities which has a direct implication on that core ideal of impartiality in military deployments. The Government's proposals risk changing the way that we, as a State, engage with peacekeeping efforts and it will erode our credibility as a neutral voice in conflict scenarios. Ireland has a positive and, in many ways, a unique voice in international peacekeeping efforts as a post-colonial nation within the EU and one that has avoided being tied to military blocs or to great-power politics. That unique perspective is one that is worth defending. We must also try to avoid any effort to elide the difference between peacekeeping and peace enforcement.”
“Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta Stanley as an rún seo a mholadh inniu. Neutrality has served this country well for generations. It keeps us focused on peace, diplomacy and humanitarian leadership, not on military alliances. Neutrality is not about standing aside. It about standing firmly for peace, international law and human rights. Our military neutrality gives Ireland credibility on the global stage as a voice for dialogue, conflict resolution and humanitarian action. With this in mind, we should be investing in peacebuilding, climate action and public services, not drifting towards the increase militarisation we are seeing in Europe and across the globe. Neutrality reflects the values of many Irish people: independence, solidarity and a commitment to peaceful international engagement.”
“Unfortunately, until the Government can demonstrate a clear funding source for the scale of the nature protection we need to address the interlinked nature and biodiversity crisis, pretty much everything the Government representatives say today will ring hollow.”
“It is worth reflecting that the biggest potential source of funding for restoring nature, and particularly for paying farmers for actions they agree to undertake on their own land, is gone with the raiding of the Climate and Nature Fund last year by the Government to plug holes in existing infrastructure funding. Hundreds of millions of euro had been put aside in the Climate and Nature Fund, money taken from the annual surpluses that were available to create new revenue streams, particularly for smaller farmers on marginal land. From where will we replace this money that the Government took from the Climate and Nature Fund, which would have financed nature restoration? So much of the rest of what the Minister of State and the Government say about nature protection hangs on this question of where the money will come from.”
“Since last year, I have raised in the Dáil the status of Lady's Island Lake in Wexford on a number of occasions. Last weekend, members of the Oireachtas climate committee travelled to Wexford to see the condition of the lake. I acknowledged in the Dáil earlier this afternoon that an initial tranche of funding provided has allowed baseline and scoping work to begin there. Lady's Island Lake could become a beacon for nature restoration across this island but it will require the State to step up with more funding and support actions on the ground that will turn the story there around.”
“Right now Ireland sits 13th from the bottom of countries worldwide in a biodiversity intactness index. Maybe this is unsurprising when we consider that Ireland spent the lowest share of GDP on nature of all EU member states. My colleague, Senator Noonan, has said a reframe is needed when it comes to nature and that it should be treated as critical infrastructure in its own right. What the Government fails to see is the link between our future financial sustainability and our environmental sustainability. It needs to shift its thinking towards one of investment in flood prevention, resilience in our farming system, community well-being, restoring our rivers, abundant seas and cooling our urban centres. This reframe should mean this and future Governments do not view nature restoration as a financial burden.”
“Everywhere we see signs on roadsides and in parks stating areas have been left aside and allowed to go wild. This scheme is very much driven forward by the Tidy Towns groups around the country. The Tidy Towns movement itself has changed and evolved in many ways over recent years. There was once a time when the local clean-up involved a war on weeds but now local Tidy Towns groups are very much making space for nature, wildness and a bit of messiness in towns and villages. Community gardens, local authority allotments, the slow food movement and seed savers are manifestations of communities' desire to get closer to nature. This passion has to be matched with Government action and funding. In 2019, the Dáil declared a biodiversity crisis in Ireland alongside the climate crisis. The Dáil recognised that the two were deeply interlinked.”
“I am sure that, like me, the Minister of State has been out knocking on doors in Dublin Central and Galway West over the past number of weeks. One of the things I have been struck with in the many conversations I have had with voters is the deep connection that people in our country feel with nature. This connection applies irrespective of where people live, be it in urban or rural communities. Whether they are planting trees along streets in Stoneybatter or growing on the land area protected by Connemara National Park, people across Ireland want to see action taken to protect the nature around them. Many Irish people are taking this action themselves. We can look at how communities around the country have embraced the all-Ireland pollinator plan.”
“On National Biodiversity Week, will the Taoiseach give a commitment to more investment to fund the work of the strategic oversight group to deliver long-term restoration of the lake through supporting local farmers? Lady's Island Lake could become a beacon of restoring nature across this island but it requires the State to step up and support actions on the ground that will ultimately turn this situation around.”
“The Green Party has highlighted the pollution and damage to nature at Lady's Island Lake in Wexford with the Taoiseach in the past. Last Friday, the climate and environment committee visited Lady's Island Lake, and met with the strategic oversight group and the save Our Lady's Island Lake community group. What has been done to date is encouraging, and I welcome the initial tranche of funding provided to begin the baseline and scoping work. However, more State support is needed. My colleague, Senator Noonan, stated that the restoration of the ecological status of Lady's Island Lake could take up to 20 years, and with a huge collective effort.”
“Can we take it that the policy of an additional 1,000 gardaí in the city centre is being moved to the aspiration column? Is there a clear set of measures that the Tánaiste can point to that this commitment the Government made for an additional 1,000 gardaí in the city centre will actually be delivered within a timeline?”
“In October 2024, the Tánaiste launched the report of the Dublin city task force. One of its key recommendations was to recruit an additional 1,000 gardaí for the city centre. He strongly endorsed the report. I am sure he will remember he wrote in the Irish Independent , "I am up for it. I hope you are too." Eighteen months later, only an additional net 40 gardaí have been recruited across the city centre divisions. I asked the Minister for justice about it this morning. He said that it is still Government policy but was unable to give me a timeline for when this would be delivered. He went on to say it was very much dependent on recruitment and retention in Templemore. He mentioned the fact that communities all over the country are calling for extra gardaí as well so he did not sound particularly up for it, to be honest.”
“This is not just about, as the Minister said to Deputy Gannon, gardaí outside Leinster House. This is gardaí located in communities creating a sense of safety. Will the Minister give us some indication of when those 1,000 gardaí will be available?”
“To put the numbers in perspective we have seen approximately a 4% increase in city centre garda numbers. On the current trajectory, to meet the figure of 1,000 additional gardaí, it looks like we will meet that sometime around 2063. I hope the Minister understands the frustration people feel when governments announce big headline figures. The then Taoiseach and current Tánaiste wrote a big editorial in the Irish Independent after that report was published. I remember he used the line, "I'm up for it, are you?" It does not sound like the Minister and his Department are up for achieving recommendation number four of 1,000 extra gardaí. This is central to creating a sense of safety and security across the inner city and in the communities in the inner city.”
“The Dublin city task force report was published in October 2024 and there was a lot of fanfare about it at the time. It was presented as a definitive blueprint to reclaim the capital's streets after the events of the Dublin riots and a wider visible decline in public safety across the inner city. Big move number four of that report was the deployment of a minimum additional 1,000 gardaí within the city centre on a phased basis. That number was not pulled out of thin air. It was seen as the minimum required to meet average European policing standards for a city of this size. We are now well into 2022 and for the people living, working and commuting across Dublin the reality on the ground tells a different story. The net increase in garda numbers across the city centre district is 40 in the year and a half since the report was published.”
“I am seeking an update on the recruitment of an additional 1,000 gardaí for Dublin city centre. This was one of the ten big moves recommended in the Dublin city task force. Is it still Government policy to recruit these additional 1,000 gardaí and what is the timeline for delivery?”
“Throughout all of this debate, the Minister has failed to address the issue of how section 15 has been found by our Supreme Court to benefit these big projects, particularly where they are seen to have a positive climate impact. When judicial reviews are taken against big public transport proposals, as they always are, that provision is going to be denied to them. In future, the granting of a designation of critical infrastructure to big projects may actually be the death knell of those projects because they will be harder to defend in the courts, not easier.”
“The tangible evidence we have about the impact of section 15 of the climate Act is the Supreme Court decision in the Coolglass case four months ago, which made it very clear that section 15 applied to a planning decision and was used to overturn the denial of planning permission. Section 15 protected the infrastructure development in that case. The Government's Bill is disapplying section 15 to the biggest types of infrastructure development that the Government and future Governments are seeking to bring forward. This Bill removes legal provisions that have been held to weigh in favour of the granting of planning permission.”
“I will come back to the central issue of whether this Bill will make it more or less likely that judicial reviews will be taken, and also the question of whether it will mean judicial reviews are more or less likely to be successful after they are taken. The Minister noted that there have been academic articles discussing the impact of the climate Act. He said this is tangible evidence of the risk of section 15 of the climate Act. I am sure those particular academics are absolutely delighted now to have the Minister reference their work. The impact scores for their research are going to go off the charts now that they have been cited in the Dáil. With respect, however, this is not tangible evidence.”
“We are making it more likely that public transport projects will be successfully judicially review by courts and plans with planning permission will be overturned. We are doing that wilfully. I have raised this throughout. The Minister has at no point come back and explained why he is ignoring the powerful decision of the Supreme Court in the Coolglass case. That judgment shows that section 15 of the Act protects projects that are seen to have a positive climate impact. We are wilfully doing that today. I want to put it on the record of the House that this Bill will not advance big public transport projects. It undermines and lessens the chance that they will get planning permission. It particularly strengthens the case of those who want to judicially review for personal reasons.”
“We have to very clear: we are taking away the extra protection that section 15 gives to these particular projects, and public transport projects are explicitly listed as one of the areas that this Critical Infrastructure Bill is to apply to. It has been described as something that will help deliver these projects. It is exactly the opposite. We can be sure that as this Government and future governments advance major infrastructure projects, and particularly in the area of public transport, they will be judicially reviewed. They always are. People do it because they do not like the compulsory purchase order and they do not like losing a piece of their land. They have a right to do that. However, by passing this Bill tonight, we are making it more likely that those judicial reviews will be successful.”
“These were people with a personal property right objection to these particular projects. Time and again, they are the source of the majority of judicial reviews that come before the courts, not environmental matters. This Bill does nothing to restrict the ability of somebody to take a judicial review on the basis of protecting their property rights, the much bigger driver of judicial reviews within our courts. In each of those cases, and one of them has been litigated before the courts, the National Transport Authority, the body taking the projects forward, strengthens its case for getting acceptance of those particular projects by saying that it is implementing its climate objectives by bringing them forward under section 15.”
“This notion being put forward that what we are doing is going to help us deliver big infrastructure projects is entirely wrong, and this is demonstrated by a recent decision of the Supreme Court. Earlier in this process, I referred to three real-life judicial reviews against public transport projects: the judicial review of the Luas in Finglas, the judicial review of DART+ West and the judicial review in my constituency of BusConnects between Blanchardstown and the city centre. In each one of those cases, an individual was protecting their private property rights through a judicial review. I did not agree with those judicial reviews. I wish that they had not gone on. I am glad that two of them have been resolved, but someone exercised their rights. These were not environmentalists. These were not people with climate objections.”
“The Supreme Court held that An Bord Pleanála had not applied its section 15 obligation to consider the climate obligations of this particular wind farm development and did not consider its pro-climate benefits. Section 15 was the critical factor in the Supreme Court overturning a rejection of planning permission. The Bill that the Minister is putting forward provides that section 15, which we have demonstrated protected a major infrastructure project three months ago, will no longer apply to those projects. This entire piece of legislation is being conveyed on the basis of changing the law to get stuff over the line and to get these big projects delivered. The one time that section 15 was actually used in our courts, it was the decisive factor in a rejection of a wind farm swinging to an approval.”
“By disapplying section 15, it is more likely that challenges to big infrastructure projects, particularly infrastructure projects that are going to help us reach our climate targets in the area of public transport, will be successfully judicially reviewed in the courts. I want to take the House back to the decision of the Supreme Court earlier this year relating to Coolglass and section 15 of the climate action Act. Coolglass Wind Farm Limited had applied to a wind farm in County Laois. The then named An Bord Pleanála rejected that application on the basis that the Laois county development plan said that there should be no wind farms in particular areas.”
“Having been denied the opportunity to tease out some of the provisions of this legislation by the decision to waive pre-legislative scrutiny, giving a mere 60 minutes to the debate on Report Stage is entirely inappropriate. I have deep concerns about what the Government is doing tonight. It is seeking to undermine the climate action Act by the back door. More significantly, by the provision of section 7 of this legislation which disapplies section 15 of the climate action Act, it is actually going to make it more likely that challenges against big infrastructure projects will be successful. I will repeat that.”
“Third, we need transparency in revenue and safety objectives. Too often, speed cameras are viewed as revenue raising rather than as the safety devices that they primarily are. We must proactively communicate the safety gains made through the use of cameras. We must ring-fence the revenue earned from them directly for road safety and better infrastructure. We have the means to make our roads safer, we have the data that tells us where the accidents happen and we now have this strategy. What we have to ensure now is the delivery of this strategy. The 185 families who were in mourning in 2025 are looking for us to act. We need to take that action now.”
“They are visible and predictable and they preclude behaviour like slowing down for a speed van before speeding up once it is passed. They change behaviour on our roads by being consistent, and that changed behaviour goes on to save lives. The people in my constituency and the other areas I have mentioned will not be protected by a strategy that just exists as a PDF online. We need to see three immediate steps. The first is a definitive roll-out timeline. We need to know exactly when the next 50 cameras and beyond will be operational, not "in the coming months", but with specific dates. Second, we need to see increased roads policing. Cameras are a force multiplier, but they cannot replace the physical presence of gardaí. The decline in the number of dedicated roads policing members must be reversed.”
“These are just a couple of examples of areas where cameras could make a real difference to making public transport more efficient and, in particular, increasing road safety for all users. The Government needs to offer that clarity on timelines and actions. It is important to note, that in the EU context, we are real outliers in this regard. As of today, we have just nine static cameras and five average speed camera zones in operation across the entire road network. We can compare that to France, which has over 4,000, or the UK, where these types of cameras have been part of the fabric of roads policing for decades. In comparison to those countries, it is clear that we are trying to police a 21st century network with 20th century tools. Static cameras are a significant improvement in technology over mobile vans.”
“Moving to the home county of the Minister of State, at Eyre Square in Galway, the high volume of pedestrians makes it particularly dangerous when a car runs a red light. Cameras are needed to keep pedestrians safe. The Newcastle Road-N6 intersection is also noteworthy because that junction gets a high volume of cars travelling in both directions. Galway has planned for bus gates to be rolled out as part of BusConnects, whenever that is fully funded. It will need camera enforcement to ensure those bus gates are obeyed and that the issues we are seeing in Dublin, which I have already cited, are not repeated. The city council has not yet said how this will be enforced, but the view of my colleague, Niall Murphy, is that there should be cameras to ensure smooth movement of public transport through the bus gates.”
“Targeted enforcement of yellow boxes via cameras would prevent this. Similarly, on the red line, cameras are needed where Luas junctions intersect with car traffic to prevent encroachment on the line, which has previously led to crashes where full trams have been taken out of service. At Doyle's Corner in Dublin 7, for example, one of the busiest intersections in the city for bus and car traffic, there are issues with red light jumping, putting pedestrians at risk and delaying bus routes. Similarly, at the bus gates on the quays, we have seen repeated instances of cars intermingling with buses and slowing down public transport. This is mirrored in other bus lanes, such as the southbound lane from Broombridge.”
“Now that the strategy has been published, what will happen next? Is the Minister of State going to indicate to the NTA that he backs red light cameras - not just that he is verbally backing them, but that he will be coming through with funding as well? When will residents in Kempton and the hundreds of other places around the country that could benefit from these cameras see a tangible result from the publication of this report, which has been delayed for so long? In inner city Dublin, there is a specific need for these cameras to keep vital public transport moving, and I would cite the Luas in particular. The Luas green line is experiencing delays in crossing the quays due to drivers remaining in yellow boxes. The Luas cannot get through and, of course, given the length of the Luas, it ends up blocking everything.”
“I read through this report, which gives us a brief history of red light cameras and of a pilot that was done in 2015, but there is no clarity on how residents in Kempton, or residents in hundreds of other areas that would benefit from this technology, will actually see an improvement in their situations because of the publication of this report. Let us not forget that, in January, the National Transport Authority confirmed that, pending a decision on the strategy that has just been published, it will not proceed with developing camera enforcement at a small number of isolated locations, including proposed sites in Dublin. Therefore, the delay of the publication of this report is the reason the NTA is delaying rolling out enforcement cameras around the country, including in Dublin.”
“Bearing in mind the urgency with which I believe the roll-out of safety cameras must be treated, I would like to highlight a couple of areas in my constituency and around the country that some of my Green Party colleagues have flagged with me and that could be changed for the better by the introduction of these cameras. In my own constituency, I would point to the Kempton estate, just off the Navan Road and close to the Ashtown roundabout. Residents seeking to exit the estate onto the Navan Road, or pedestrians trying to cross the road to get to a bus stop or access the Phoenix Park, are put at risk by cars that are speeding, but in particular by cars running red lights at that junction. This location would be perfect for red light cameras.”