Sharon Keogan
Industrial and Commercial Panel · Independent · Ireland
“The future of European border security is being decided right row at the European Commission. It is currently drafting the renewed mandate of Frontex, the EU border police force. As Ireland holds the rotating EU Presidency, the Minister for justice cannot simply pose as a disinterested broker while our European borders are compromised.”
“Holding the EU Presidency gives this Government massive agenda-setting leverage at the Council of Ministers. The Minister must use this chairing power to strip out counterproductive rights promotion provisions. Under the guise of good intentions, these provisions and their enforcers have defanged and undermined Frontex.”
“I thank the Minister, Deputy Calleary, and I appreciate that he will engage with the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, on this. We live in the land of technology.”
“The Minister, Deputy Calleary, is welcome to the House. I rise to focus the attention of the House on a vital public service that sits at the very heart of social inclusion on this island, the free travel scheme.”
“Sitting down with Stormont to deliver a single unified rule book for free travel means we lift everyone to the same high standards of dignity and mobility, ensuring that a person's vulnerability is not penalised simply because of the jurisdiction they happen to live in.”
“It will point to the senior pass scheme, where a resident here can apply for a separate concessionary card to travel into the North. Let us be completely honest with ourselves.”
The complete record
Every one of 772 lines we hold for Sharon Keogan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 16.
“I welcome my intern Noel Monahan and his mother and grandmother, Nessa Teehan and Angie Teehan. Noel has been an intern in my office over the last six to eight months. He has been a valuable asset to my team and I thank him for his contribution. I want to raise an issue that warrants urgent attention from the House and from the Minister. Last week a young mother named Grace died by suicide after spending more than a year trying to be reunited with her infant son who was removed into care shortly after his birth. Her death is a tragedy and I extend my sympathy to her family. It compels us to look more closely at a broader issue that receives remarkably little scrutiny. International research has found that parents, particularly mothers, whose children are taken into care face significantly elevated risks of self-harm and suicide.”
“If the system is not working, and clearly it is not, then the responsibility lies with those who lead it. The answer is not to sideline local authorities but to empower them properly, meaningfully and with the tools they need to do the job. It is easy to point at derelict buildings but not so easy to account for a dereliction of leadership. I must say the Acting Leader is doing a marvellous job. It can be difficult. I know he is temporarily there.”
“Irish local government operates in one of the most centralised systems in Europe. Councils are tightly constrained with limited autonomy, restricted financial powers and a heavy reliance on central government for both legislation and resourcing. Yes, they have powers on paper but in reality those powers are slow, complex and in many cases ineffective, particularly under outdated legislation that makes enforcement difficult and prolonged. At the same time, these councils are expected to deliver more and more with limited resources and competing demands. To criticise them for failing to deliver outcomes in a system designed and controlled at central level is not accountability but a deflection. To then use that criticism as justification to take powers away from local government and centralise them further is simply cynical.”
“This is a direct example of our infamous culture of silence. The reality is simple: you cannot make good policy without good data. It is extraordinary that something so basic would need to be debated at all in a council chamber. This information should be collected as a matter of course. If the State does not even understand the full picture of its own housing system then how can it possibly make fair, informed and effective decisions? The second issue relates to the Tánaiste’s recent comments on derelict property taxes where he accused local councils of having not done enough to collect them. He even went so far as to call them appalling and said it was a cause for central government to take over the matter. These comments are deeply unfair and hypocritical.”
“I rise to address two issues arising from recent debates at local authority level which point to deeper problems in how we approach governance and accountability. The first comes from Kerry County Council where councillors debated whether the State should collect data on the nationalities of those on social housing waiting lists. What is most striking here was not the proposal itself but the reaction to it. We heard claims that even asking for this data or discussing it would somehow fuel tensions or contribute to misinformation. That thinking is very flawed and dangerous. There is a culture of bodhaire Uí Laoghaire, or selective deafness, from much of Ireland’s political administrative class and an idea that if we pretend a problem does not exist, or even if we scold people for bringing it up, that this will somehow make it disappear.”
“I feel this is only fair because the Government bears some responsibility for this mess in its failure to regulate the ticket industry, which is my second proposed action. The fact that Tickets.ie has been mishandling millions of euro in revenue without submitting to the Companies Registration Office since 2022, without a tax clearance and with no obligation to ensure the money was underwritten is utterly baffling and must be fixed post haste. I have heard from Councillor Jim Ryan in Thurles that DEAG, the German owner of Tickets.ie, has not been responding to organisers. Finally, I call on our Government to immediately reach out to its German counterparts, whether it is the German Minister of Commerce and Industry or, indeed, our German ambassador to seek a rapid solution.”
“These festivals have become a cultural institution to attendees and artists and provide a huge annual windfall for the communities that host them, boosting local businesses. With the future of these festivals in question, all of this is now in danger. There are, therefore, three major actions that I call on the Government to undertake. The first is to make emergency supports available to the festivals the question. This is not a matter of handouts. It is a matter of keeping alive a diverse and thriving range of festivals across the country in a moment of crisis and preventing the potential ripple effect that their collapse will have on our rural communities and our cultural sector.”
“I rise today to echo the concerns raised by other members of both Houses on the recent Tickets.ie fiasco where the company in question went into liquidation with no warning. Even the festival organisers were unable to receive the ticket revenue that has already been paid by thousands of attendees. It is estimated that over €1 million collected on behalf of over five major music festivals has now vanished, leaving the organisers on the hook and unable to pay the staff, suppliers and musicians. Several major festivals have been affected by this, such as the Liberty Music Festival in Thurles, the Rory Gallagher festival in County Donegal, which was already highlighted by Senator Boyle, and Rockathon in County Meath. These are not small fringe or independent events.”
“I believe it is. Can the Minister of State please check that? Ethnicity is at this moment in time on the PULSE system. Some gardaí do fill it in and others do not, but it is actually on the PULSE system.”
“For clarity, will the Minister of State outline what data at this moment in time is actually collected on the PULSE system when a garda stops and searches a person? On a stop and search, what data is currently collected on the PULSE system by An Garda Síochána at this moment in time?”
“I support the amendments by Senators McDowell, Ruane and Black. It not an onerous task that we are asking the Minister to accept in these amendments. I will put it very simply. It is giving gardaí the pen. They have the ink in the pen to use when they are recording this data. It is important that this data is collected. We want a fair and just society for everybody living in this country, including people of different colour, race, ethnicity and nationality. Sometimes, they can be targeted because of that. It is important that we record that, get the statistics in relation to that and that the Minister produces those statistics on a yearly basis. I 100% support these amendments today.”
“The IMF made it clear that without serious investment in reskilling and upskilling, workers would be left behind, yet we hear vague assurances from the Government that it will have people's backs. That is not a plan. Unless the Government takes seriously co-ordinated action to align skills with future jobs to reduce our over-reliance on multinationals and to ensure that people can live and work here, we are heading into a period of disruption for which this country is simply not prepared. A meeting with or a briefing from the Minister of State with responsibility for AI, Deputy Smyth, to discuss that would be very welcome.”
“At the same time, we continue to rely heavily on multinational tech companies as the backbone of our economy. The IMF has warned clearly that this reliance is itself a vulnerability. Where is the plan to address that? Where is the strategy to diversify employment and protect workers? There is a contradiction at the heart of our labour market. Youth unemployment still stands at approximately 6%, yet employers say they cannot find workers. This is not a functioning system. It is a failure of policy. We must also be honest about youth emigration. When young people are forced to leave the country to find work, that, too, is unemployment, just exported beyond our borders.”
“I rise to address the recent International Monetary Fund, IMF, report warning of the impact that artificial intelligence, AI, could have an on employment in this country. I must say that it represents a stark warning to the Government. The IMF has stated that AI could affect more than 40% of the jobs in Ireland and that Ireland is more exposed than most advanced economies to these risks. That should set alarm bells ringing, yet what do we see at the same time? We see major layoffs already happening. Meta is cutting 20% of its Irish workforce, which equates to some 350 jobs, while Oracle is reportedly planning to cut approximately 150 jobs. Government sources are now briefing that further job losses are expected in the months ahead.”
“The second thing that is clear is that we cannot neglect the risk Northern Ireland poses in terms of migration. We have an open border with that jurisdiction and it, in turn, has, in effect, an open border with Britain, which is struggling with the impact of years of unprecedented levels of irregular arrivals. The Government, with imminent urgency, must, first, commit to a serious programme of vetting arrivals and, second, it must do so on all-island basis. We need to reach out to Stormont and London immediately to begin forming a system to ensure we can know and control who is coming into our island. I second the amendment to the Order of Business proposed by Senator Andrews.”
“We have seen this here with the murder of a young Ukrainian refugee, the stabbing of young children near Parnell Street, the beheading of two gay men in Sligo and the terrorist assault on our own An Garda Síochána last year. Most recently we have seen the brutal murder in Galway of the Iranian mother of two, Masuma Sohrabi. Let us remember her name today, her partner standing accused. It is true enough that we already have problems with violent crime in this country. If anyone is still questioning the dangers of uncontrolled migration to the safety of our citizens, I must ask what more proof they need. Will there ever be evidence that will satisfy them or will they continue to stick their head in the sand while blood is spilled on our streets?”
“I rise to address the harrowing news we have received from Belfast today, where a local man is in a critical condition after surviving what appears to be an attempted beheading by a man believed to be a Sudanese national, confirmed by the Police Service of Northern Ireland. I express my praise to those community members who bravely intervened to save his life at great risk to their own. I hope the House will join me in offering our prayers for his safety and survival. The investigation is ongoing and the motives are unclear. Those involved are unnamed and the attacker's status has yet to be confirmed but two things remain clear. The first is that reckless migration policy is putting lives in danger.”
“It is a trajectory where, step by step, decisions are taken that reshape our economy, our sovereignty and our policy space, often without sufficient alignment to Ireland's long-term interest.”
“This is not a technical adjustment; it is a fundamental change to how sovereignty functions within the Union. I ask the MEPs present for their views on that. Do they support the removal of vetoes in areas that clearly touch on the national competence and economic interest? Finally, on a broader point and directed particularly to the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael representatives, what is their position on Ireland's absence from the recent meeting of the so-called "frugal" or net-contributor member states? At a time when budgetary pressures, fiscal rules and allocation of resources are being actively discussed, is it not a dereliction of duty for Ireland not to be present at the table? My concern is not with any one measure in isolation but a broader trajectory.”
“To imagine that a provision or legal safeguard signed into a deal will suddenly make it workable seems absurd to me. We see a similar issue, albeit at a smaller scale, with the updated EU-Mexico trade agreement. It is often presented as a more balanced deal and I accept that it is not Mercosur, but it is still part of a wider trend of a cumulative opening of EU markets to agricultural imports from outside the Union. Even if each individual agreement is relatively modest, the combined effect is not. It increases competitive pressure on Irish producers particularly in sectors like beef and dairy, which are already under strain. I also want to raise the Commission's ongoing push to move away from unanimity voting and national vetoes in the Council.”
“Do they believe this deal should be rejected outright or do they believe it can somehow be salvaged through amendments and safeguards? I want to be clear about my own position. It seems to me that the deal is in its nature damaging to Ireland's economy, particularly to our agricultural sector. It is simply not feasible that Irish cattle farmers could fairly compete with South American mega-ranches. We were told that safeguards and monitoring mechanisms will address these issues but I find that difficult to accept. Many of the countries involved in the agreement face serious governance and enforcement challenges. Many of these countries tied to or involved directly in the deal have serious issues of corruption and some struggle to maintain state control over their own territories.”
“What have they done in the group meetings, in the committee stages, and in the negotiations that take place long before anything reaches the plenary floor, particularly for the Mercosur trade deal and the migration pact? I ask because we all know that the vote is not the decisive moment. The real shaping of these measures happens months and even years in advance. If that is the case and the direction of travel within these groups consistently produces outcomes that are misaligned with Ireland's national interest, then I think it is fair to ask why remain within those structures without fundamentally changing their course? I will turn to the Mercosur deal. I ask each of the MEPs, very directly, what is their position?”
“I do not want to rehearse all the details of those debates again but what strikes me is the pattern. Again and again, the EU moves forward with legislation packages and trade agreements that are not in Ireland's national interest. To their credit, Irish MEPs sometimes diverge from those European political groups when it comes to the final vote. We saw that dynamic clearly in the more recent legislation, although I note that in the case of CETA in 2017, Irish MEPs largely followed their party group lines in support of the agreement, even as concerns were raised domestically. Regardless, even when divergence does occur, we still end up here, in this House, dealing with the consequences of decisions that have already effectively been made. I want to ask a more fundamental question. What action do the MEPs present take before the vote?”
“I thank the MEPs for coming before us. I want to direct my remarks in particular to those representatives here who are members of the Government parties and those who sit with the EPP and Renew groups because those groups form a central part of the governing coalition at EU level. Last week in this Chamber we debated the Canada trade deal, known as CETA, and its worrying provisions, especially the inclusion of investor-state dispute mechanisms that allow cases between foreign firms and the Irish Government be arbitrated by bodies outside our national courts. That raises serious questions about sovereignty. Not long before that we debated the application of the EU migration pact, which likewise has implications for our sovereign control over migration policy, infrastructure and resources.”
“Both have pros and cons but we should be consistent and not switch for selective reasons based, dare I say, on the ethnicity of the victim and the accused. I and others have been accused of sowing hatred and division. I do not. Upholding double standards is what creates division. Pointing them out is about defending fairness, and fairness is the foundation of peace and harmony.”
“I have also heard from staff, of whom there are more than 300, and customers of Arnotts who are now worried about their safety. That concern should not be dismissed out of hand. More broadly, I am troubled by the tone adopted by many in public discourse, including Members of this House, who referred to security guards involved as murderers. That is outrageous. It is jeopardisation of an ongoing investigation and if those men are found innocent, it will be defamation. Meanwhile, we saw the murder of Alex Coughlan in the past week. In that case there were calls for restraint and, in fact, people were expressly urged not to share horrific footage. The question I ask is a simple one. Which standards are we applying? Either we speak freely or with caution.”
“I want to carefully address some of the public and media reactions following the tragic death of Yves Sakila because it raises serious concerns about consistency and fairness in how we discuss these issues. In recent days, footage emerged of African religious rituals being conducted outside Arnotts in response to Sakila's death, where the officiate tells the camera he is cursing death on all who enter the premises. That conduct has not been treated with the seriousness it warrants. In fact, it has been dismissed or trivialised. At the same time, we have laws in this country where a person praying quietly within 100 m of an abortion facility can face criminal sanctions. That is a contradiction that needs to be acknowledged.”
“Without safeguards of this kind, journalistic privilege risks being recognised in theory but eroded in practice. This is also about public confidence. A free press does not exist for the benefit of journalists alone. It exists for the benefit of the public. If sources believe that speaking to journalists carries an undue risk of exposure through routine policing powers, fewer people will come forward and matters of genuine public interest may never reach daylight. Supporting these amendments does not create a caste of people who are above the law. It recognises that certain forms of State power can have consequences far beyond the immediate investigation if exercised without sufficient care. For those reasons, I will be supporting this group of amendments. They strengthen both the Bill and the constitutional values it should reflect.”
“These amendments introduce an essential pause for judicial scrutiny. Where applications proceed without notice, An Garda Síochána is required to explicitly draw the court's attention to constitutional protection, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and the requirement for necessity and proportionality. That does not weaken policing. It strengthens oversight and decision-making. These amendments sit particularly well in the context of the expanded digital powers provided for elsewhere in the Bill. As we have already discussed, modern devices collapse vast amounts of information into a single place. A journalist's device may contain years of work on multiple investigations and numerous sources that are entirely unrelated to the matter under inquiry.”
“To put it plainly, searching a journalist's phone, laptop or files is not the same as searching an ordinary premises. Journalists routinely hold unpublished material, communications and information that, if exposed, could have a chilling effect well beyond the individual case in question. A simple hypothetical illustrates this point. Let us say a journalist is investigating alleged wrongdoing by a powerful organisation and An Garda Síochána believes some material held by that journalist may be relevant to the investigation of an offence. Without these amendments, a warrant could be sought and executed without the journalist being heard. By the time the journalist becomes aware of it, confidential sources may already have been exposed. Even if no charges follow, the damage cannot be undone.”
“The Bill already contains detailed provisions on legal professional privilege but it is largely silent on journalistic privilege. This is despite the fact that Irish courts and the European Court of Human Rights have repeatedly recognised the protection of journalistic sources as a corner-stone of any democratic society. If we value freedom of expression and freedom of the press, it makes sense to recognise that explicitly on the face of the legislation. Amendments Nos. 30 to 33, inclusive, give practical effect to that principle. They do not create an absolute shield for journalists. Instead, they require applications for search warrants involving journalistic material to be made on notice and heard inter partes by default unless genuinely exceptional circumstances exist. That strikes me as a reasonable and balanced approach.”
“I thank my colleague Senator Sarah O'Reilly for putting down this amendment. I will speak to the grouping, which addresses a clear and important gap in the Bill as it currently stands. At the outset, I will say that I am not approaching these amendments from a position of hostility to Garda investigations. I fully accept that there will be circumstances where journalistic material is relevant to serious criminal inquiries. These amendments do not seek to block investigations but to ensure that when the State interferes with journalistic material, it does so in a way that is careful, proportionate and consistent with long-established constitutional and European principles. Amendment No. 3, which introduces a definition of "journalistic privilege", is a modest but necessary starting point.”
“The Government must come before this House to explain who authorised this decision, the rationale behind it and how it aligns with the values we claim to uphold. Before I conclude, I wish to respectfully address remarks made last week when I blew out some of the candles on Fianna Fáil's 100th birthday cake. I appreciate that some colleagues defended their party in a measured and thoughtful way. That is always welcome. However, I noted a sharper tone from others. I must ask why they were shouting and raising their voices. What made them shout about what I said? By all means, let us have robust debate but challenge my viewpoints based on the arguments I have actually made.”
“At the very same time, across Europe, there have been serious discussions about designating an element of that state's apparatus, namely, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, as a terrorist organisation due to its role in repression and destabilisation and, in some cases, it has been decided to do so. I ask again: what changed between the decision to postpone this accreditation earlier this year and the decision to now proceed? What assessment was carried out? What assurances, if any, were received? How does the Government reconcile this step with Ireland's stated commitment to human rights? Ireland has long prided itself on speaking with moral clarity on the world stage. Today, that clarity appears absent.”
“This House must not allow any blurring of responsibility, something I feel the media latched onto as the Government hid behind the President's more outspoken views. The Executive made this decision, not the President. We must ask who made this call, and why now? This decision comes against the backdrop of ongoing repression in Iran, a regime accused of killing thousands of protesters and detaining tens of thousands more with credible reports of torture, rape and systemic brutality used to silence dissent. Whatever one may think of America's ongoing war with Iran, this does not change the fact that the current Iranian regime has the blood of its own citizens on its hands.”
“I wish to speak to the recent acceptance of the credentials of the Iranian ambassador to Ireland, a decision that raised serious and deeply troubling questions. I believe we need to be clear about two things. First, this was not a ceremonial inevitability. Second, this was not the President's decision. While the President formally receives the letter of credence, the decision to allow that ceremony to proceed rests squarely with the Government, specifically the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade acting under the authority of the Minister.”
“If we are serious about addressing the ongoing shortages of nurses, then we need to rethink this model and examine whether nursing should be an apprenticeship. We must also look at retention. Whether through tax breaks, newly qualified nurses or requirements to remain in the public system for a number of years, we need to ensure that Ireland can train and retain its own nurses rather than losing talent abroad.”
“Many students must work evenings and weekends just to afford basic costs such as transport or a car, while also managing the academic demands of the course and their own work placements. What is unbelievable is how much has changed. There was a time, not that long ago, when student nurses were instead apprentice nurses and they were paid while they trained. They were recognised as part of the workforce. Now we have a situation where the work is the same, the shifts are still early, the pressure is still high, the responsibility is real but the pay is gone. Students are doing essential front-line work and paying for the privilege of doing so. Let me reiterate that: we have student nurses working full, back-breaking shifts and we are having them pay to do that. That is insanity.”
“I wish to raise concerns brought to my attention today by a constituent regarding the current situation with nursing education in Ireland. She outlined the situation facing her daughter who, like her mother once did, is applying for a general nursing degree. She highlighted a growing sense of frustration among families and within the profession itself. While nursing is formally a four-year honours degree, in reality it functions very much like an apprenticeship. Students spend long days on clinical placements, often starting early morning shifts working alongside fully qualified staff in high-pressure environments, yet they receive no pay for that labour. At the same time, they are expected to pay full university fees of €3,000 per year with limited grant support.”
“In the meantime, the community of Slane is demanding that a few of its needs be met. First, people want clear assurances around public safety, including that an ambulance be stationed in the village at all times. Second, they want a €5 contribution levy for each ticket sold to be distributed to local clubs and organisations. Slane is a unique place. No other concert in the country involves the same restrictions on freedom of mobility. These are reasonable and practical requests. I urge MCD, the owners of Slane Castle and all relevant parties to engage constructively with the community to deliver on them.”
“They are asking for practical assurances around access, for a fairer contribution to local groups and services that are currently being given a paltry €10,000, and for a recognition that, while these events generate commercial returns, the benefits to the village have been limited. More broadly, this highlights a wider issue in Ireland. While a formal consultation process exists for events of this scale, it is often procedural rather than meaningful. Communities can make submissions but they do not always have a structure or ongoing role in shaping outcomes, with engagement often coming late in the process. One practical way to address this would be to formalise a stronger role for local councillors at local electoral area, LEA, level and a mediation layer between organisers, authorities and residents.”
“I wish to raise the proposed two-day concert event at Slane Castle and its impact on the residents of Slane village. At the outset, it is important to say that people are broadly supportive of concerts in Slane. These events are an important part of Irish cultural life. However, what is now proposed is not a one-day concert but a two-day event and that brings a very different level of disruption. For local residents, this effectively means four days of significant disruptions from early set-up to the clear-out, with traffic restrictions, reduced mobility and pressure on daily routines. Fundamentally, their freedom of movement is limited. The community is not objecting to the event itself. Residents are saying their legitimate concerns must be recognised.”
“When a party loses that connection, it loses more than votes. It loses its purpose. There is an historical irony to all of this. Fianna Fáil was born out of a split with a Sinn Féin that had become inward-looking, fragmented and detached from practical politics. Lemass himself later described it as a movement that had drawn in "all sorts of queer cranks", losing sight of the central task of governing with "people making speeches in favour of vegetarianism and the single tax". The uncomfortable question is now whether that description sits more easily with parts of modern Fianna Fáil than it might like to admit.”
“This was a party that, in the 1930s, when the country was far poorer than it is today, had the ambition to build entire towns. Today, we have record homelessness and a State that struggles to deliver even basic housing at scale. That brings me to what I found most striking about the Ard-Fheis itself. There was a sense that the party is no longer entirely sure what it stands for. In seeking to be everything to everyone, it risks becoming nothing to anyone. It is not just about policy, but about tone. There is a growing perception that the leadership is more concerned with signalling its progressive credentials to a small urban liberal audience than listening to the instincts of the party's traditional base. That base was never abstract or ideological. It was practical, local and rooted in communities, work and family life.”
“It was a vision of a State that would stand firmly on its own feet and yet, 100 years on, we find ourselves presiding over a crumbling agriculture sector, fuel protests driven by real hardship and an economy that is abjectly dependent rather than self-sufficient. There is a disconnect there that cannot simply be brushed aside as a consequence of the passage of time. I do not say that lightly nor do I ignore the many people within Fianna Fáil who continue to work hard and who believe in public service. The councillors, activists and ordinary members deserve better than what they are being given. They have been let down repeatedly by a leadership that has too often been improvisational rather than principled and managerial rather than ambitious. The contrast with the party's own history is stark.”
“Today, I want to address the issue of the Fianna Fáil Ard-Fheis that took place last week. I speak not just as a former member, but because the 100th anniversary of the founding of that party should be cause for reflection on the history and development of this nation not just for current and former Fianna Fáil members, but for us all. What struck me most was the distance not just in time, but in purpose, between the party that was founded in 1926 and the party that gathered last weekend. Its original programme was rooted in economic independence and keeping families rooted in the land.”
“I 100% agree with Senator McDowell in relation to this amendment. It is absolutely in order, and it should be allowed. If we need to suspend the House for five or ten minutes to enable people to discuss this and allow the amendment in, that is what we should do. Minorities in this country are already targeted. It has happened to somebody in my family. He was taking a phone call outside a restaurant one day. He happens to be a solicitor as well. He was on the phone and all of a sudden he was surrounded by undercover gardaí who were looking for somebody who looked like him. Those incidents are not recorded and they need to be recorded. That is all I will say. I hope this amendment is allowed in.”
“It is total absence of engagement, information and planning that fuels fear, rumours and tension. That is what puts everyone at risk; IPAs and locals alike. Let me be clear: criminal attacks on accommodation centres are wrong, indefensible and must be condemned without reservation but pointing to those risks as a justification for secrecy is backwards. The Government is citing the consequences of its secrecy to justify its continued secrecy. Transparency must come before the headlines, not after them. In Deputy McEntee's previous role as Minister for justice, she allowed all this to happen so she is to blame.”
“It has a long record of supporting vulnerable people without complaint. That matters. The people of that area matter and their reputation matters. The Government's implication that communities like this are hostile and unreasonable is simply not borne out of facts. What people object to is not compassion but secrecy. That is also why it is so galling to hear about this and other secretive house purchases across the country described as "in-community" accommodation when the communities in question are being kept entirely in the dark. Now we are told that this secrecy is necessary to protect the privacy, safety and well-being of residents and staff. It must be said plainly that it is not transparency that creates danger; it is the lack of it and it is chaos.”
“I want to return to the situation in Stamullen. In response to serious concerns about the quiet purchase of private residential homes for international protection applicants, the Government's position has been that communities must be kept in the dark for the safety and well-being of asylum seekers. That claim deserves scrutiny. It claims that Government secrecy and failure in community engagement is somehow necessary. It is important to clear this community's name. Stamullen is a generous and decent town, as is every person in it. Its generosity is beyond question. It already hosts homeless families in Stadalt House. It has housed over 300 Ukrainians in Gormanston Park. It is one mile from Mosney, which houses almost 700 international protection applicants. It has provided care accommodations through Nua Healthcare and Redwood.”