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 7 of 20.
“Yes, that is important in terms of the regeneration of O'Connell Street and the surrounding areas but the work on Dublin City Council's social housing stock is not being led by the special purpose vehicle. So many of those tenants are suffering from the energy price crisis now but that work is not being led by that. Will he give me clarity on who leads that work?”
“The Taoiseach says the Government will not be found wanting and he has listed a number of undoubtedly valuable projects, like the Moore Street regeneration. However, these were in train years before the Dublin task force published its report. The whole idea behind setting up the task force was because additionality was needed to move the dial within Dublin's city centre. It was never meant to be a repackaging of stuff we were doing already. The Taoiseach says he has been out canvassing, and I am sure he will be back again. I think the Taoiseach will need better answers for the people of Dublin Central because he has consistently cited the special purpose vehicle.”
“When will the large-scale regeneration of social housing begin? Is the Government still committed to the additional 1,000 gardaí, and when will they be delivered by? How much additional spending - I am speaking about additional spending - has been provided to date to implement the task force's ten recommendations?”
“I cannot say the Government is doing nothing about that last recommendation. The Dublin Inquirer reported that in the 18 months since the report was published, 40 extra gardaí have been appointed across the two city centre districts. On that trajectory, those additional 1,000 gardaí will be provided some time in mid-2063. I have been out canvassing across Dublin Central with our candidate, Councillor Janet Horner. The lack of Garda presence and the sense that low- to mid-level antisocial behaviour is now just tolerated are prevalent across all communities. The task force report itself sets out that a total of €750 million to €1 billion in extra investment is necessary to deliver all ten big moves. As the voters of Dublin Central put their attention to the by-election, I have three questions for the Taoiseach.”
“City council officials have told councillors that the special purpose vehicle Robert Watt will head up will lead on the vacancy and dereliction work and will have another role in one of the other recommendations, namely revitalising O'Connell Street and the surrounding areas. Two of the recommendations, therefore, are being led by the SPV. I want to ask the Taoiseach about some of the other recommendations. What of the recommendation for a total regeneration of social housing complexes in the city centre, giving tenants warmer homes and protecting them from the worst of the next energy crisis? What about the recommendation to deliver better and more localised services for vulnerable populations? What about the recommendation to provide an additional 1,000 gardaí across the city centre area?”
“Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle. At Cabinet today I understand the Government approved Robert Watt to head the special purpose vehicle, SPV, charged with addressing dereliction in Dublin city centre. His appointment comes a full 18 months after the report of the Dublin city task force was published but, helpfully, 24 hours before the writ is moved for the Dublin Central by-election. The task force report proposed a set of ten recommendations, or ten big moves, for the city. Tackling vacancy and dereliction and bringing abandoned sites in the city centre back to productive use is one of those big moves.”
“Hundreds of thousands of Hungarians saw that in their own country, but hopefully the pendulum of progress can begin to swing back now after Sunday's election results. We have seen a retreat in safety for members of the LGBTI+ community in our country. That is a source of real concern to me and many people in this House. Bearing that in mind today, with the law that is before us we have an opportunity to clearly restate our values as an Oireachtas and as a country. We have an opportunity to recognise and right the wrong that was done to hundreds of our citizens over many decades.”
“There are other groups that the State probably needs to do more to recognise, particularly those who were institutionalised for a disability or for having a mental health illness. Deputy Donnelly rightly drew our attention to the increasing levels of homophobia and transphobia in our society. Deputy Rice spoke to that issue as well. While it is positive to be here today looking to advance important legislation, it is sad to say that Dublin and Ireland today are less safe for members of the LGBTI+ community than ten years ago. I have seen that retreat in safety in my own lifetime. One naively assumes that progress and enhancement of rights is always going to be one way, but that it is not the case. I saw that in Poland.”
“It made being in love with another man and acting on that love a crime. It made taking a fancy for a guy and acting on that fancy - something as basic as that - a crime. It criminalised those very basic elements of humanity. The Bill we are debating seeks to make some reparation for that treatment. What we are doing today is entirely consistent with a set of actions that Ireland has taken over the past 15 or 20 years to recognise, and try to make some recompense for, how our State treated other minorities and other vulnerable groups after we gained our independence. We can think of our treatment of women who became pregnant outside of marriage. We can think of our treatment of the children of those women. We can think of our treatment of members of the Traveller community. For each of those groups, certain steps have been taken.”
“Yes, it can be a real thorn of the side of a government, but always in a good sense. It is always trying to make things better for all children, particularly the most vulnerable children. What I learned on my trip to Poland illustrated to me what happens when the weight of power of a state is aimed against someone for something that is so basic and intrinsic for them. The power of the State is very real. That is why a process for lifting or removing State sanction, when that sanction was implemented for the wrong reasons, is so important. I think we all accept that a person's sexuality is an innate part of their humanity and that the expression of that sexuality is part of a body of rights protected by human rights and constitutional rights. In that context, we have to recognise that Irish law made being gay a crime in this country.”
“It is one of the true defining factors of a state that it has that power to punish its citizens. In my time as equality Minister, I had the opportunity to travel to Poland and meet with leaders of Polish LGBTI+ groups. This was at the time when the Law and Justice party was in government there. They were telling me how that party was co-opting and marshalling apparatuses of the state. I was struck by what they said about how the government there had used the ombudsman for children in Poland, as an organisation, and had used the sanction of the state to target LGBTI+ groups that were working with young people. It was casting that work as some sort of act of child abuse or grooming. I know the role that the Office of the Ombudsman for Children plays in this country.”
“I am deeply grateful to their work over many years. The consequences of a legal conviction are very real. There is the direct impact on the person who has been convicted in terms of a fine or maybe a prison sentence. There is a social stigma. We know that stigma is one that will continue very often for a long time after a person has served their time and has been released. There is the impact on families. There are very practical issues around the loss of income. There is the practical necessity of separation when somebody is incarcerated. Again, the stigma that attaches to somebody who has been convicted can often attach to their wider family. They can see exclusion within their local community. That power of the State to officially sanction its own citizens has real meaning and real strength.”
“While recognising the real achievement of being here and debating this Bill today on the floor of the House, this has taken a long time. It has taken too long. I hope, in the spirit the Minister and Minister of State have come into this House and made commitments to move this swiftly, we see that brought forward. The reason we are here today with the Bill finally arriving at the floor of Dáil Éireann, despite the elapse of time, is because of the tireless efforts of a number of campaigners over many years. Some of them are here in the Gallery and many are watching online. I wish to recognise that tireless work on this, and indeed, many issues. The rest of us across the LGBTI+ community and I owe them many, if not all, of the rights that we enjoy today as citizens - rights that had to be fought for.”
“To begin, I express my deep appreciation to Deputy Ó Snodaigh for bringing this Bill forward and continuing to put his experience and passion behind this particular issue. I also thank those Deputies who are cosignatories of the Bill as well as the Deputies who have spoken and joined this debate tonight. I appreciate the openness of both the Minister, Deputy O’Callaghan, and the Minister of State, Deputy Troy, to engage with the core principles of this particular Bill and their commitment to bring forward amendments to it. As a cosignatory of the Bill, there is real openness to have a constructive debate on this Bill and look at amendments to see how we can strengthen elements of it. It is important this is done quickly.”
“An assurance was given to Deputy Heneghan. I ask that I also be kept informed about the timeline for the delivery of this measure. Action needs to be taken now.”
“The issue here is a question of speed. One million households in Germany use plug-in solar right now. There has been an 18-month consultation on this issue here. I agree that safety issues have to be addressed but the Minister has suggested that there may be a need for some form of regulation. We need some speed on this. Look at what the UK Secretary of State, Ed Miliband, did. He brought in the manufacturers, providers and installers to ask them about the specific issues and the regulatory challenges that needed to be addressed. What are the regulatory challenges we need to address? As I have said, this matter has been going on for 18 months. Irish people, particularly those living in apartments, are being denied the opportunity to benefit from free energy in the midst of the worst energy crisis we have seen in this country.”
“Over the last number of months, I have been asking the Minister about the issue of plug-in solar to ensure that more households in Ireland can benefit from cheap solar power. Will the Minister give me a timeline on when we will have a clear decision from him and the Department as to whether plug-in solar can be used in this country?”
“If this climate action plan does not contain some big, bold and new ideas to decarbonise and does not provide greater energy security or affordability for Irish people, and if it does not have a clear financial commitment behind it, it will not be worth anything.”
“I think what the Government is proposing there is actually counterproductive, but we will have that debate another time. In terms of the big step that was taken last week with a huge package of additional funding to deal with the emergency crisis to end the protest and the blockades, does the Minister believe the Department will get the financial backing across the Government to take some of these really big steps, steps beyond what have been budgeted for previously and steps that might make eyes water in the Department of public expenditure and in the fiscal council, but steps that are now necessary when we see for the second time in four years the vulnerability of our economy to its addiction to fossil fuels and the consequent impact on our emissions?”
“I will not get into a back-and-forth over what was said at Christmas because I do not think it is useful at this stage. However, given how far off track we are at this current time, the climate action plan for this year, which sets out the priorities for the next five years within the carbon budget, is absolutely crucial. The Minister spoke about priorities. He will need to take some really big extra steps. It is not just about ticking the box and puttering along from where we are now. I see the focus that the Government is putting on the Critical Infrastructure Bill, as this is going to be some big part of it. Deputy Whitmore made some points about it earlier and I have made some points to the Minister, Deputy Chambers.”
“Beyond trying to convince me about the importance of these steps for the Government, how can the Minister convince the Irish people if the central policy document for what happens next is delayed? He has given me a list of what brought us to here. Where we are is that we are behind our targets. The next big steps we need to see have to be set out in the climate action plan. The 2026 one is particularly important because it is the start of the next carbon budget cycle. We know we are a long way off and it needs to see some really big ideas, really big policies and how they will be funded within it. We are a third of the way through the year. We are losing time and we are losing the opportunity to implement these policies. Can the Minister give me any better sense of when it will come in?”
“I specified the date today because last year the climate action plan for 2025 was published on 15 April. At least last year there was there was some excuse for delay - there was a general election followed by the formation of a new Government, and the Minister needed to get a sense of his new Department. This year, those excuses do not exist and it starts to look like a lack of interest, a lack of urgency. With the Minister saying, as he has just done, that the plan will be published later this year, that sense of urgency is not coming across to me. By his own admission, Ireland will not meet its 2030 targets. I know he has been trying to reverse what he said over Christmas since then. The climate action plan for 2026 is vital not just for this year but also for the next five years.”
“In each of those cases, section 15 of the climate Act, which the Minister wants to disapply, would actually have strengthened the case of the National Transport Authority, NTA, the State agency looking to take the particular project, just as section 15 strengthened the case of An Bord Pleanála in the Coolglass case. The Minister is getting this wrong. He is not looking at the implication of what he is going to do. The Minister should read the Coolglass judgment and understand that he is weakening the State's hand in defending judicial review cases on major projects that will actually help reduce our carbon emissions.”
“The Minister continually puts the blame for judicial reviews on environmentalists and on people who are concerned about climate action but let me cite three actual judicial review cases. Not the hypothetical ones that the Minister continues to cite, but actual cases that took place on three major public transport projects. There was the judicial review on DART+ West in our constituency that was taken by a landowner. There was the judicial review on the BusConnects project to Blanchardstown in our constituency that was taken by a landowner. There was the judicial review taken against the Luas Finglas project that was again taken by a landowner.”
“Mario Draghi may have rightfully highlighted real challenges in our planning system but I do not think he placed the blame on the climate action Act or section 15. As I said in the Chamber on Tuesday, we are talking in a context where the previous Government signed up to legally binding international and European targets but the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, announced over Christmas that we would not reach those targets. The climate Act was central to our ability as a state to reach those targets and now the Government is systematically trying to take out one of the central elements, the climate duty under section 15. It has been systematic. It is seen in this legislation, it is seen in the airport cap and it is in the strategic gas Bill. I asked the Minister to name the judicial review cases taken on the basis of section 15.”
“I want to ask the Minister, Deputy Chambers, about his intentions through the Critical Infrastructure Bill, particularly section 7, in terms of the removal of the climate duty, a duty on all public bodies to assess the climate impact of infrastructure projects they are advancing.”
“Right now, Belfast is the only port that could sustain the development of offshore turbines. That needs to change. We know solar panels on people's roofs and balconies provide immediate savings for households. The Green Party has proposed the introduction of a scheme to provide six free solar panels for every household that gets the fuel allowance, immediately cutting electricity costs for some of the most vulnerable households. As a short-term measure, the Government needs to allow for plug-in solar to be used in Ireland just as it is in the UK and across the EU, giving people without a roof access to the savings of solar energy. I have two brief points on electric vehicles. The Government should cut VRT on imported electric vehicles. We are developing an industry here. Let that continue to roll out.”
“On Sunday, the Government announced a huge package of over €500 million to address the fuel price spike being experienced right now. The Green Party believes that Government needs to take similar big, bold steps to ensure that this is the last energy crisis that Ireland ever experiences. Let the response to this crisis be more than just being about getting the blockades lifted. I want to highlight measures across three broad areas. First, the Government needs to speed up the delivery of offshore wind farms that were successfully bid for during the term of the previous Government. An Coimisiún Pleanála and the Marine Regulatory Authority need additional expert staff so they can more quickly decide on planning applications for offshore wind. The Government also needs to speed up the investment and development of our ports.”
“The reason we are experiencing an energy price crisis in our country is because of Ireland's over-reliance on fossil fuels. Until the Government takes decisions that will break that over-reliance, our economy and our people will continue to be vulnerable. The war in Iran has shown for the second time in four years how our economy is at the mercy of the whims of Putin, of Trump and the Ayatollah. Yesterday's ESRI report reiterates that point. Our high electricity prices are driven by our disproportionate reliance on natural gas, but it also found that renewable energy provides protection against fuel price volatility. Speeding up that move to renewables will give us energy security, it will protect families from higher prices, and it will help our country to decarbonise.”
“As I said when I spoke on the confidence motion and on the Government's retreat from the carbon tax earlier today, this Government has demonstrated it does not possess the belief in our energy transition and the decarbonisation of our economy to make the case for the change convincingly to the Irish people. This Bill is one more articulation of that ideology which lies at the heart of this Government.”
“Can he confirm that a direction under section 6(2) of the Bill cannot include a direction to a local authority or An Coimisiún Pleanála to grant or reject planning permission for a specific project? In his conclusion, the Minister spoke about judicial reviews being taken for ideological reasons. This Bill represents an act of gross irresponsibility but I recognise it is entirely consistent with the approach the Government has taken since it assumed office last January because there is ideology at play here. A clear ideology is articulated across Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and the Independents. It is to lessen, undermine, defund and reverse climate action whenever it gets the opportunity.”
“It is about repealing the climate action Act by the back door and protecting carbon intensive projects, the very projects that have caused our existing high levels of emissions as a country, from public scrutiny. No pre-legislative scrutiny was permitted on this Bill, despite its huge implications for climate and planning policy. Therefore, in place of PLS, I will ask the Minister a few questions. Can he confirm that a strategic infrastructure project can only cover a project being proposed by a State body or agency and cannot cover a privately-funded project? Will he state whether he intends for data centres to fall within the definition of what could be designated as critical infrastructure?”
“However, the Government has produced no evidence that the climate duty is delaying infrastructure delivery. When the Minister launched the Accelerating Infrastructure Report and Action Plan in December, there was not one single reference to the climate action Act as a source of delays. I put the question to civil servants at the transport committee and the climate committee whether removing the climate duty would speed up the process and, on both occasions, the relevant civil servants were unable to say, "Yes, this will speed up the process." This evening, the Minister has indicated he is advancing section 7 because of judicial reviews. Can he enumerate the judicial reviews that have been taken on the basis of section 15 to date? Will he list them for us? Section 7 is not about speeding up the delivery of infrastructure.”
“The argument that in deciding to advance the project, the NTA was fulfilling its climate duty under section 15 of the climate action Act will no longer be available to the NTA because of section 7 of this Bill. While projects that will have a negative climate impact will be shielded by this Bill, the big projects that will have a positive climate impact will lose the additional legal protection that they enjoy as a result of the climate duty. Considering how damaging section 7 is, why is it being proposed? This Bill is being promoted by the Government on the basis of cutting timelines and eliminating delays. We need to speed up our planning system and there are elements in the Government's accelerating infrastructure plan that I welcomed last December. If they were in a stand-alone Bill, I would have no problem supporting it.”
“The real-life implication of section 7 is to specifically deny bodies, such as An Coimisiún Pleanála, the ability to take the climate impact of major projects into account when making decisions about granting them planning permission. It applies irrespective of whether the project has a potentially positive climate impact, such as the wind farm in the Coolglass judgment, or a negative impact, such as a new liquefied natural gas, LNG, terminal. Section 7 of the Bill will, ironically, prevent the climate benefits of some projects counting in favour of whether that project should be granted planning permission. Let us take an example. Say the NTA is trying to advance a new Luas line and there is a judicial review challenge to it on the basis that somebody does not want his or her garden to be the subject of a compulsory purchase order, CPO.”
“It places a climate duty on all public bodies, including the National Transport Authority, NTA, An Coimisiún Pleanála and the Department of public expenditure. It places that duty on all public bodies. Under section 7 of this Bill, when the Minister designates a project or programme as critical infrastructure, that climate duty no longer applies. To put this in context, over Christmas, the Minister for climate, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, announced that the Government was giving up on achieving Ireland's 2030 emissions targets four years before the deadline. Today, this Bill proposes to remove the climate duty from public bodies when they are undertaking assessments of major projects in the areas of water, transport and energy. Those are the very projects that will be the most consequential to our ability to meet those climate targets.”
“Section 7 of this Bill represents a fundamental attack on the provisions of the climate action Act passed in this House in 2021 with the support of 129 Members from the Green Party, the Labour Party, the Social Democrats, People Before Profit, Sinn Féin and, crucially, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. Now, five years later, this Critical Infrastructure Bill means that any project that is designated as critical infrastructure will no longer have its climate impact examined. Today, the Government is seeking to repeal, by the back door, a central aspect of the climate action Act. Let me set out how the Critical Infrastructure Bill does this. Section 15 of the climate action Act 2021 puts a legal duty on public bodies to perform their actions in a manner that is consistent with the climate Act.”
“It has provided fodder for those who argue falsely that the carbon tax - a tax that only brings in 1% of our country's tax revenue - is the source of all ills. Now that the Government has demonstrated that the carbon tax is negotiable and that when pressure is applied, it will bend, how can we expect to see the next increase take place in October? The people who blocked public transport and who prevented workers from moving are watching. They know that the Government cracked in April and it will crack again in October. A Rubicon has been crossed today and the Government has lost the argument for us all.”
“In the six years I have been a TD and for much of the decade before that, there was a coalition in this House - a coalition that existed across Government and Opposition that supported the carbon tax. There was a coalition that recognised the arguments that a dedicated, predictable and increasing fund of money was necessary to fund the changes needed to transition our economy away from fossil fuels. There was a coalition, again, across Government and Opposition, that took difficult votes against populist amendments and spoke against populist motion and a coalition that recognised that sometimes, in this House, we need to genuinely look towards the long term and not just towards the next election. Today, with these financial resolutions, the Government has smashed that coalition. It has bowed to the pressure of populists.”
“Yet, as part of its response, the Government is undermining the very actions that will reduce our dependence on foreign fossil fuels, measures like the warmer homes scheme and retrofitting. The funding for these measures has now been put at risk by the deferral of the carbon tax. Our country will remain vulnerable to energy shocks until we transition our entire economy to renewable sources of energy and across the past 15 months, the Government has demonstrated it does not possess the belief in that transition to be able to make the case for it to the Irish people.”
“The Green Party has no confidence in the Government, and I will vote against the motion. Over the course of the past week, the actions of the Government continually made a difficult situation worse. Ministers caused confusion, unnecessarily raised tensions and ultimately failed to protect the Irish people's ability to move and go about their business for five long days. Hospital appointments were missed, emergency vehicles were delayed, people could not get to work and, vitally, access to fuel was disrupted, and continues to be. The origins of the energy price crisis lies in our country's over-reliance on fossil fuels. The war in Iran has shown for the second time in four years how our economy is totally at the mercy of the whims of Putin, Trump and the Ayatollah.”
“Maybe for people leaving international protection accommodation, we should be looking at doing more with this model, not doing less with it. Finally, I agree with other speakers who have said that if the temporary protection directive concludes next year, there needs to be a pathway for the 80,000 Ukrainians here. Others have spoken about merging them into the IP process. That would be a disaster as it would flood the IP process. There needs to be a pathway.”
“We took important steps to support families across the country yesterday and it has to be borne in mind that we may well see a continued cost-of-living spike later this year when the Minister is considering reducing that payment. I ask him to bear that point in mind. We also have to remember that in terms of value for money, the pledged accommodation system supported by the recognition payment is one of the most cost-effective ways of supporting vulnerable people. The pledged accommodation by the Irish Red Cross and the offer-a-home accommodation by the local authorities is a model of good practice across the European Union. That was not the case at the start, when there were teething problems, but supported by the ARP, this programme has become hugely successful. We should be looking to replicate it for other vulnerable people.”
“I welcome the renewal of the ARP this evening and I will vote in favour of it. It will offer clarity to the 42,000 Ukrainians in ARP-supported homes but also to the thousands of Irish families who are actively supporting them. It is very important that the Minister provide clarity on what was being briefed in the papers in terms of the move from a payment of €600 to €400. It is important that the Minister bear in mind the cost-of-living crisis that is unfolding. The Minister will reply that the payment was never a direct monetary compensation. That is correct but it is undoubtedly part of the calculus for some families who have properties supported, particularly when they are actively involved in supporting a Ukrainian family.”
“I joined my Green Party colleague Niall Murphy in Galway last weekend, and buses were a central concern of the people we met. The NTA has announced that it expects 60 double-decker, electric buses to be used in Galway by the end of 2027, which is about a year away now. That represents an increase of capacity on individual buses. The important question is: are these going to be new buses, or are they simply going to replace decommissioned buses? Are we going to see more buses on the roads? Will commuters see an improved and more regular timetable? I cite one route, the 424 Galway-Lettermullan service as a clear example of a route that requires extra services but as the Taoiseach knows, there are many more. Will he speak to the improvement of the services in Galway?”
“Yesterday the UK Government announced it would make plug-in solar panels available in the near future to British households. Plug-ins are low-cost solar panels that families can put on balconies or outdoor spaces. Retailers and manufacturers are working with the UK Government to make them available in shops within months. They would save people money on their bills in the UK and they could do the same here as well. However, when I got a reply to a parliamentary question I put to the Department of energy in February, the Department told me it had been considering plug-in solar for 18 months and still needed more time for consideration. In the middle of an energy crisis, the luxury of time has gone past us. Will the Taoiseach move on this? Will he look to make plug-in solar panels available in Ireland immediately?”
“There is a clear consequence to the fact that this addendum report has not been fully reviewed by the Department and that the meeting did not take place. That consequence is that it is now likely that this school will not even get funding until post-2027. These three schools have been ready and willing to take this important step, advance this project, and give kids in three really good schools a better condition of education. It is really disappointing at this stage. The delay has real consequences. It is pushing back the ability of this project to be delivered in the lifetime of many of the students who are currently in these schools in those cold classrooms. The Minister of State has indicated that she will ask the Minister for education, Deputy Naughton, to come back to me in writing with a date. That is all I can ask for today.”
“I thank the Minister of State for her response. I recognise that she is responding on behalf of the Minister, Deputy Naughton, and she is from a different Department. I am disappointed with the response she provided from the Department of education. Again, there has been a failure to give a date for this really important meeting between the Department and the school's design team. There is a consequence to this delay because due to the addendum report, which was given almost five months ago - officials in the Department were not being given the full detail on 31 October; they were being given an extra piece of information that they sought – the school missed the opportunity to be on the 2026-2027 priority list.”
“I have no doubt the Minister of State has a lengthy reply from the Department. I am sure it will recount a long history of engagement between the Department and the relevant schools. With respect, I know the history. We do not need to go through all of that this evening. What I really want to know is, first, what the date is for the long-delayed meeting between the schools’ design team and the Department of education so they can move past the stage 2A process and, second, how this project can get on the Government's priority list. It is 6 p.m. on a Thursday. Anything else is not really of huge relevance right now. Will the Minister of State give me a date for this meeting? Will she tell me how the redevelopment of these three schools can get on the priority list?”
“In December of last year, I was able to hold a Topical debate in the House, in particular on the Department's delay in holding that stage 2A meeting with the schools’ design team. At the time, the Minister was not able to give me a date for when that vital stage 2A meeting would happen between the Department and the schools’ design team. We are now three months on from that Topical debate. I had a parliamentary question in two weeks ago, and I also wrote directly to the Minister, Deputy Naughton, two weeks ago. In the replies I got to those queries, I still have not been able to get a date for that meeting. Of course, in January, we saw that long-awaited list of the priority projects, and this project was not on it. The parents and the school saw that, and they noticed that they are not seen as a priority now.”