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 8 of 16.
“Given the potential for irreversible harms, I call on the Minister to appear before the House without delay. We urgently need clarity on how often Tusla removed newborns. What safeguards exist to protect their nutritional and developmental needs? What oversight mechanisms hold Tusla's leadership, under CEO, Ms Kate Duggan, accountable for these decisions? If we are serious about protecting the most vulnerable, our youngest citizens, we must interrogate this practice openly and thoroughly. Therefore, I call on the Minister to attend this Chamber at the earliest opportunity to address these critical questions. We should have learned from the mother and baby home scandals. We do not want this coming down the road again in our futures. No newborn should ever be whipped away from their birth mother like that - ever.”
“I wish to highlight a deeply troubling trend in the removal of newborns by Tusla. Recently, it has been reported in the media that a newborn who was taken just 14 days after birth is now failing to thrive. The child has lost weight, is vomiting after every feed and is on reflux medication. All of this is occurring post-removal and the switch from breastfeeding to formula in State care. This infant's suffering underlines a failure of proportionality in State intervention. The damage inflicted in these early days, including malnutrition, developmental setbacks and emotional trauma, can leave life-long scars. We do not know how many newborns face this fate each year. Tusla's published performance data contains no separate metric for newborn removals and there is no public accountability around whether breastfeeding options are prioritised.”
“It reflects a simplistic, black and white attitude that undermines Israel's right to exist, challenges a two-state solution and conflates the Jewish people with the sanctions of the current Israeli Government. This is amateurish, fanatical thinking. If we want our voice as a nation to have moral authority, we must do better.”
“We rightly reject this rhetoric, which conflates an entire people with the actions and beliefs of a few, as the language of oppression and genocide. Likewise, we must rise above such rhetoric if we are to lead as a moral voice on Gaza. At the moment, we are failing. I refer to the push to rename Herzog Park in Dublin. It would be one thing if the park wore the name of Benjamin Netanyahu, but this park in our historic Jewish neighbourhood honours Chaim Herzog - a man from that community, a former president of Israel, a progressive politician and the son of Yitzhak Herzog, a former Chief Rabbi of Ireland. Yitzhak Herzog was a fluent Irish speaker and a supporter of our independence. The proposal to strip Chaim Herzog's name from the park is a deplorable act of erasure against Jewish-Irish history.”
“I rise today with a heavy heart to express my deepest condolences and solidarity with the victims of the abhorrent attack at Bondi Beach. On the first evening of Hanukkah, a night that was meant to illuminate hope and unity, two individuals inspired by Islamist ideology opened fire, killing at least 15 innocent people, including a child, a Holocaust survivor and two rabbis. This grievous act has rightly been condemned as antisemitic terrorism. In offering our thoughts and prayers, we must also reflect, seek moral clarity and be watchful of antisemitism emerging in our country. All too often, we see extreme Israeli and Zionist voices conflate the Palestinian people with terrorism and extremist groups such as Hamas.”
“I thank the Minister of State very much. I thank the Minister, Deputy Calleary, as well. I have been raising this issue every six months for about three years. This morning, many fathers out there will be absolutely delighted that this legislation was signed yesterday. I thank the Minister of State from all of the fathers in Ireland who have remained nameless on birth certificates over the past number of years. That has been rectified this morning. I thank him from the bottom of my heart on behalf of all of the fathers of Ireland.”
“This level of delay would be farcical if it were not for the human damage it has caused in the past decade. It is time for action and no further excuses.”
“For a decade, unmarried fathers have been denied the right to have their names recorded on their children's birth certificates. This affects legal rights, identity and the ability of children to trace their lineage. In 2014, 37% of children were born outside marriage. By 2022, that figure rose to over 43%. This is not a marginal issue; it affects thousands of families and thousands of fathers. I am asking for clarity. Why has the commitment to commence section 6 by quarter 2 not been met? What specific obstacles remain? When will the provision finally come into force? What steps will the Minister of State take to ensure this House is not debating the same question in another six months? Families have waited long enough and fathers have waited long enough.”
“The Minister of State is very welcome to the House again. I thank him for attending this morning. I regret, however, that I must raise this issue yet again. Section 6 of the Civil Registration (Amendment) Act 2014 remains uncommenced, despite assurances from the Government that it would be operational by the end of quarter 2 of this year. We are now at the close of quarter 4 and there is still nothing. This is my fifth time bringing this matter before the House. An entire ten years has passed since this legislation was agreed. The technical error was corrected in 2024 and the Government assured us last February that training would be completed and that we would see commencement by mid-2025. The promise has not been honoured. The delays are not a mere administrative inconvenience; they have a real human cost.”
“They must be given their own independent solicitor and an independent auditor for budget time. That is what the councillors around this country need. We should up their local representational allowance from €5,160 to €12,000 and I am sure they could manage that themselves.”
“If it is the latter, I can tell you immediately that it would raise serious concerns. Many councillors expressed concerns about confidentiality and conflicts of interest in a shared arrangement. They also worry that such a system would disproportionately benefit political parties over independent councillors. Furthermore, in rural councils, pooled assistants would likely favour councillors in central LEAs near council offices, leaving those in peripheral areas at a disadvantage. Let us be honest: this is a very worthy Private Members' Bill, but the question is whether this is a full-time role or a part-time one. Everybody in this Chamber knows it is a full-time role. Councillors need to be rewarded and remunerated for the work they do. We must pay them properly and give them technical advice.”
“Anyone who knows me knows that I am an ardent supporter of empowering local government, whether through greater technical and financial support or by granting greater powers to local authorities. However, while I support this Bill in spirit, after consulting several councillors, I will raise some questions and give constructive feedback. I and councillors to whom I have spoken find the Bill, though brief, to be very ambiguous. Since this is a general debate, I hope our discussion today will steer us in a good direction. What exactly is the nature of this administrative support? Does it mean granting each councillor a budget to hire their own assistant or does it mean creating a pool of administrative assistants shared among councillors in a given council?”
“Everybody's time will now be reduced. This is a very important matter for local government and for all our councillors around the country. People need to hear what we have to say in relation to this Bill. Can we extend the debate on the Bill?”
“Excuse me. On a point of order, can we extend the debate in light of that please? There are a lot of people here who have not got in. Despite my name being before the Cathaoirleach and the Seanad Office today, I have not got in to speak.”
“Instead of fixing the crisis it created it is telling our young people to grin and bear it, as if losing independence is just a lifestyle choice. That is not leadership; that is gaslighting.”
“If the Government wants to understand why people are angry and are pushing back, it should start looking in the mirror. The greatest extremism in Ireland is extremism of failure. We have failure on housing, immigration, law and order and basic governance, and until that changes, the backlash will continue, no matter how many surveys are published pretending otherwise. The subject of tone deaf responses leads me to the second issue I want to raise. We have all seen the Government's video, released over the weekend, telling young people how to cope with moving back in with their parents. How to cope is not policy; it is capitulation. It is an admission that the Government has failed so spectacularly on housing that the best it can offer is a demeaning pep talk.”
“This study from the Office of the Ombudsman for Children is a perfect example of that. It is framed as if young people are clueless victims, brainwashed by extremists lurking in the dark corners of the Internet. That framing is insulting. It assumes our young people have no agency and no ability to think critically, and we are conveniently led to the conclusion that the State must swoop in to save young people from themselves. Let us look at the methodology. Twenty-eight schools, hand-picked from a list of 200, many already linked to OCO programmes, voluntarily participated. There was no random sampling, no definition of extremism and no weighing for gender imbalance. This is not robust research; it is a narrative dressed up as data. For that reason, it is worthless as evidence for policy.”
“I would like to address two things, the first of which is a recent report from the Ombudsman for Children warning of the rise of so-called extremism among the youth. The first thing to say is that extremism does not appear out of thin air. It is a response, a backlash, to a deteriorating situation in this country. Furthermore, when we look at what has been labelled as extremist among the legitimate cases, we too often find views that most people for most of history would have called common sense. This is the Government's latest trick. Slap the word extremist on anyone who dares to question it. It is a way to villainise the ordinary people, ignore its own horrific level of failure, and scapegoat the natural backlash as the work of some shadowy agents spreading addictive, nefarious ideas online.”
“There might be all these teams around the country, and fair play to them, but we do not have the beds. All I am asking the Minister of State for is more beds so that these children will stop dying.”
“Certainly, I spoke out earlier about children who were in hospitals or medical settings that were not suitable for their needs. I know what Cherry Orchard does and I know the great people who work in Cherry Orchard. I fostered a young child for over a year who spent some time there before she came to me, so I am well of the work done in Cherry Orchard. I am also aware of Lois Bridges because another child I fostered attended that facility. I am aware of the facilities that are available at this moment in time. However, I can tell the Minister of State that there are no beds available for a child with an eating disorder awaiting a bed in hospital. The Minister of State knows that, I know that and the people in those beds and their parents know that.”
“I could not get CAMHS for the children. They must wait for two years, if they are lucky, to get on the CAMHS list. That is not good enough. Children are being failed when it comes to access to mental health services. A child with bad eating disorders cannot get beds straight away. That is the reality of what is happening. Will the Minister please check with her Department?”
“There is not one bed available for a child with an eating disorder to access services today; there are waiting lists for beds. That is not good enough while children are dying. I have encountered the worst case in Ireland. The child is 16 and the HSE is recommending that she be put into St. Loman’s psychiatric hospital. That is not good enough. I deal with teenagers all the time. I specifically set up a mental health project in my town because I could not get services elsewhere for the people in my area.”
“Sorry, but I am talking about children who are dying. It is awful. I hear about this all the time. There are children dying in hospital waiting for CAMHS. They receive medical intervention but medical intervention is no good when a child is actually dying. What services exist for children with eating disorders? There are none. There is not one bed available. I am not being dramatic.”
“Ireland is pledging another €100 million in non-lethal military support and €25 million for energy needs today. This is taxpayers’ money. Before we deepen economic ties, we must demand accountability and robust anti-corruption measures. Standing with Ukraine must also mean standing for integrity and good governance.”
“We must stand against this corruption, especially when it harms their own war efforts and the lives of their own civilians, and even their own combatants. In recent days we witnessed the resignation of Andriy Yermak, one of President Zelenskyy's closest aides, following raids linked to what is described as the largest corruption probe in Ukrainian history – an alleged €100 million embezzlement scheme in the energy sector. This is not an isolated incident. Transparency International ranks Ukraine among the most corrupt states in Europe. I chose not to attend the address to the Oireachtas this afternoon. Why? It was because while we rightly condemn Russia's brutality, we cannot ignore the scale of corruption within Ukraine's institutions.”
“I acknowledge the historic nature of today's visit by President Zelenskyy to Ireland. It is right that we stand in solidarity with the Ukrainian people in the face of Russia's aggression. Ireland has offered sanctuary to more than 120,000 Ukrainians since 2022 and 85,000 Ukrainians still live here today. That is something we can be proud of. So many Ukrainians have come to Ireland for sanctuary. While here, they have contributed to our society through their hard work. I have worked at first hand to welcome those who arrived in my constituency to find support and to integrate. I have heard the same stories from so many of them – about having to pay extortionate and, in some cases, ruinous bribes to officials simply to be allowed to leave.”
“For clarity, I do not oppose the approval of the opt-ins to a justice programme, nor to negotiations with the Republic of Korea, but I am calling on this House to vote against the first two motions, on the internal security fund and the asylum, migration and integration fund, because these represent a dangerous trade-off, sovereignty for short-term cash. This is about principle. Do we want to govern ourselves or do we want to be governed by press releases from Brussels? I say stop trading sovereignty for short-term cash. Opt out, stand firm and start using Ireland's position to get a fairer deal for all of our people.”
“Opting in does not change that, it just means we pay in and then beg for some of our own money back, with conditions attached. If we are serious about sovereignty, we should opt out of the migration pact entirely and stop this precedent of surrendering control for cash. Instead of meekly signing up, the Government should be throwing its weight around Brussels and demanding a rebate for opt-outs at the next MFF negotiations. Other countries have rebates and we, too, should be negotiating a better deal for what we pay in and setting a precedent that Ireland will defend its sovereignty.”
“Yes, opting in means more money for cybersecurity and for Garda resources, but again it is our own money coming back with conditions. Those conditions matter to the Irish people. They tie Ireland into the EU security strategies and operational frameworks. That is a slippery slope for a country that values neutrality. Today it is data sharing and infrastructure protection. Tomorrow, it could be deeper integration into EU security and defence policy. We need to ask, where does this end? Are we comfortable with Brussels shaping our policy priorities and, by extension, our security posture? Yes, we might lose some funding in the short term if we opt out. However, Ireland is a net contributor to the EU budget. We pay more in than we get out.”
“Opting in to the AMIF means binding ourselves to the EU migration pact with its mandatory solidarity mechanism. That means Brussels decides the rules and Ireland either takes relocated migrants or pays €20,000 per head for refusing. Is that sovereignty or is that a cheque with strings attached? Look at Poland. Donald Tusk has clearly said that Poland will not implement any migration pact that forces it to accept migrants. That is a sovereign stance. The Netherlands and 14 other countries have signed letters demanding tougher rules and external processing. They are pushing back. Meanwhile, in Ireland we nod along, sign up and hope for a few crumbs from the EU table. Let us talk about the internal security fund.”
“I welcome the Minister to the House again. He is probably the most active Minister for justice we have seen over the past five years, since I was elected to the House. I wish him well, always, in the work he does. He plays a major role in how our society is going forward. Today we have been asked to rubber=stamp Ireland's opt-in to two major EU programmes, the internal security fund and the asylum migration and integration fund, for the period 2028 to 2034. On the surface, these sound sensible. There is money on the table. Who would not want extra funding for our underfunded security infrastructure or for migration and border control infrastructure? However, let us call it what it is: cash for sovereignty. Every time we sign up to these schemes, we are not just taking money, we are handing over control.”
“Five years later, after all that investment, we are still relying on emergency legislation instead of giving businesses the certainty they deserve. For the record, I fully support our hospitality sector and the right to provide outdoor dining and drinking. This is why I will not oppose the extension today. I will not punish businesses for the Government’s failure to legislate properly. Let me be clear, though. This is a reluctant agreement and it comes with a demand for action. I do not want this Groundhog Day to keep repeating. I believe I speak for everyone when I say the next time I want to be debating this issue as permanent legislation and not an eternally repeating extension.”
“This is the third time we have been here. We were first promised the sale of alcohol Bill, a major reform that never materialised. The intoxicating liquor Bill 2024 was then announced with great fanfare and was quietly dropped. Now, we are told the criminal law and civil law (miscellaneous provisions) Bill 2025 will finally put these measures on a permanent footing. The Cabinet approved this in May, yet here we are, kicking the can down the road for another six months. Let us not forget that back in 2021, the Government pumped millions into outdoor dining infrastructure through the outdoor dining enhancement scheme. Businesses received grants of up to €4,000, and €9 million was spent on permanent weatherproof structures in towns and cities.”
“I attended that launch last week in Tiglin with Senator McCarthy. I was blown away with the work that is actually done in Tiglin, not just in that area but throughout this country. We are in the Ha'penny Bridge, so to speak, in relation to the work Senator McCarthy does daily with people who are on the margins in this country. I commend him on the work he does every single day. I wish to address the motion that will be before us to extend Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2021 yet again. This Act was brought in during Covid as an emergency measure to allow outdoor seating for a licensed premises. Five years later, we are still leaning on emergency legislation and this recurring debate is beginning to feel like Groundhog Day. This is not good governance. The Government has once more abandoned legislation for outdoor dining.”
“I move amendment No. 2: After the last paragraph under “urges the Government to:” to insert the following paragraphs: “- seek flexibility within the EU Migration Pact to address migratory pressures, and to give due consideration to an opt-out of the Pact if the needed flexibility cannot be found within the Pact; - review deportation policies for international protection applicants convicted of criminal offences, and in particular to consider immediate deportations for those found guilty of criminal offences; - examine citizenship criteria to ensure meaningful contribution to society, such as a requirement for five years of employment contribution, constitutes a part of such criteria; - ensure that unaccompanied minors whose age cannot be verified are not accommodated with verified minors, and that placement decisions take account of cultural and religious sensitivities to prevent potential conflict."”
“I also ask the Minister of State to consider reviewing procedures for applicants who fail to attend interviews - I speak in particular of their section 35 or substantive interview - including consideration of stricter consequences, such as the cutting of supports or issuing of deportation orders, if they do not turn up for that interview. There have to be consequences and I want the Minister of State to take those considerations into practice.”
“Citizenship is not just a legal status; it is a shared commitment to the common good. We urge the Government to ensure unaccompanied minors whose ages cannot be verified are not accommodated with verified minors and that placement decisions take account of cultural and religious sensitivities to prevent potential conflicts. Protecting the vulnerable means protecting all minors from harm. These amendments are not about closing doors. They are about keeping Ireland open but in a way that is fair, safe and sustainable. They are about ensuring our welcome remains strong because it is grounded in confidence, prudence and respect for our own identity. While I have the Minister of State's attention, I ask him to share with this House Government statistics on interview attendance rates so we can have an informed debate based on facts.”
“Above all, I urge the Government to upgrade Ireland's domestic capacity with more resources for processing, enforcement and accommodation so that our policies are not just words on paper but actions in practice. I acknowledge the work the Minister of State and his team have done so far under immense pressure, but as they say, "lots done, more to do". Second, we urge a review of deportation policies for international protection applicants convicted of criminal offences and, in particular, to consider immediate deportations for those found guilty of serious crimes. Our compassion must never come at the expense of public safety. Third, we call for an examination of citizenship criteria to ensure a meaningful contribution to society such as a requirement for five years of employment contributions.”
“While I personally believe we should pursue an opt-out, I would like the Minister of State to know I will be closely following the new international protection Bill 2025, which aims to bring us into line with the pact, and I look forward to the debates and discussions which will follow. In light of the UK's situation, I also personally urge the Department to take a look at whether the European Court of Human Rights is having any unintended impact on Ireland's ability to enforce its migration laws. If it is not the ECHR, then we must ask whether our own domestic laws need to be reformed, just as the UK has recently done, to ensure our system is fair, efficient and sustainable.”
“It is a statement of confidence in who we are and a call to act wisely so we remain who we are and we remain fair to those who come to our nation in good faith. Principle must be matched with practical action. That is why I am also proposing amendments that deal with the realities we face today. First, we urge the Government to seek flexibility with the EU migration pact to address migratory pressures, and, if that flexibility cannot be found, to give due consideration to an opt-out. Ireland must retain the ability to act in its own best interest when circumstances demand it.”
“Throughout our history we have brought others into our nation, from the Norse to the Norsemen. We must also acknowledge two truths. First, these assimilations were often long and sometimes conflict-filled processes. Second, migration today is on a scale never seen before. Poorly managed mass migration into a country that does not believe in itself can turn a nation into a divided land of strangers. We are a welcoming people but we must be prudent and fair in whom we welcome and ensure our welcome is not abused, because if we lose that welcome, we lose part of who we are as a people. That is why this amendment matters. It affirms that the Irish people, through the democratic process, have the right to shape migration policy in a way that protects both our openness and our identity.”
“I thank my colleague for bringing this Private Members' motion this evening and I rise to speak on my first amendment because I believe, if we centre this debate, it is an open statement of principle that focuses on the positive rather than the negative and is a discussion that cuts to the very deep question about who we are and what we must do. This debate is not, and should never be, about hatred of the other. It is about love for ourselves and for our identity as a unique people and nation. That love often forces us to find balance between contradictory things. We must acknowledge that we as a people can and will change, but we must also preserve those essential things that make us who we are: our culture, language and the remembrance of our history and heritage. Part of what makes us Irish is that we are a welcoming people.”
“I move amendment No. 1: After the last paragraph under “acknowledges that:” to insert the following paragraph: “- the Irish people, as the historic community indigenous to this island, possess a unique cultural and linguistic heritage of global significance; further acknowledges that, consistent with the principles of the founders of the Republic and the democratic mandate, the Irish people act through the State to determine migration policy in a manner that reflects their economic interests and cultural continuity, while respecting Ireland’s international obligations;””
“I do not think anyone who looks at Ireland can begrudge or question his decision to go, because while Paschal was a hard-working and competent Minister, his achievements were sadly limited by the system and the political environment we have created in this country; an environment of obstructionism, indecision and inertia. On leaving the Civil Service, Flann O'Brien reportedly said it was a pity such a fine institution could not carry a few more floaters. I say it is a dire situation when the institution of Government cannot keep its best and its brightest.”
“It has been steadily creeping higher and higher in our society and our economy as foreign institutions and firms poach leading experts, boardroom members and even CEOs. Most recently, and shockingly, they have now poached our finance Minister. I wish Paschal Donohoe all the best in his new role and I wish him and his family all the best in their new life. He will be a great credit to himself because, regardless of political differences, there is no question that is he is a man of great intelligence, deep knowledge and good character.”
“Today, I speak about one of the major crises that is affecting Ireland, which is brain drain. This problem has arguably been with our nation for centuries. The latest wave is ongoing since the crash in 2008 but it is lately reaching critical levels. In many ways, we can all come up with explanations or stories to help us cope with or dismiss the issue of brain drain. We say things like it is just a few students going abroad or we have probably have too many graduates anyway and they will come back after a few years when they have made their money and they will settle back in. Such explanations will not cut it anymore because brain drain is no longer restricted to unemployed graduates.”
“I move amendment No. 14: In page 15, lines 40 and 41, to delete “manifestly unfounded” and substitute “an abusive lawsuit against public participation, the court shall determine the application as expeditiously as possible consistent with the administration of justice”.”
“To reiterate, I still believe that the way forward is to give real powers to councils to build and not merely advise on zoning. Let us fix inequities like the rental accommodation scheme, RAS, where tenants lose €11,000 compared with council tenants when they try to buy their home. Let us cut the red tape, reduce the quango sprawl, and give people the incentives they need to put homes onto the market. That is how we deliver homes and build communities.”
“Here we are calling on the Government to do one thing and its councillors are doing something else on the ground. What we see in this plan is a ballooning of quangos, a housing activation office, six new task forces and agencies and billions poured into a complex web of bodies. We already have 500 housing agencies and 31 local authorities. Adding layers will not build homes faster. Government should exercise its executive functions, not outsource responsibilities to a quango complex. Where are all the real incentives? I have said before that we should declare a temporary amnesty on capital gains tax for house owners selling to families, not vulture funds. Remove the stick and offer a carrot. This would unlock thousands of homes overnight. Why is that not in the plan?”
“I know he has given an instruction to the county councils to get out and build houses. I would bring every local authority and senior planner into one room and tell them to go out and build houses on serviced sites. We had that opportunity last week in Meath but, unfortunately, county councillors from Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Sinn Féin decided not to look at the land that was dezoned, that was serviced sites in the 2019 plan. That was a shame because there will be no houses built in my town. There will be no houses built in many towns around County Meath over the next number of years. The Government needs to start talking to its own councillors on the ground. Regarding rates, Meath County Council's rates are going up next week as well by 10%.”