2026-07-02

Tá níos mó ná €50 milliún curtha amú cheana féin ar chóras bainistíochta tráchta Iarnród Éireann, córas a theip ar na tástálacha sábhála agus tá níos mó ná dhá bhliain taobh thiar de sceideal. Gan dabht, is teip iomlán é. Anois, tá sé foghlamtha againn go bhfuil na cáiníocóirí ag íoc suas le €100,000 i gcaitheamh le seachtain mar nach bhfuil cinneadh glactha ag an Rialtas ná an NTA ar cheart deireadh a chur leis an choradh seo ar fad. Anois air sin, tá an Rialtas ag caitheamh €200,000 eile le fiosrú cén dóigh a tharla an tubaiste seo ar an chéad dul síos. Beidh, agus tá, an pobal ag fiosrú cén uair a gcuirfear deireadh leis an chur amú ama agus cur amú airgead poiblí seo. Once again, the public is asking who is taking responsibility for the extraordinary waste of taxpayers' money that has become the hallmark of the Government. The latest revelations surrounding the failed Irish Rail traffic management system are absolutely staggering. More than €50 million has already been blown and written off on a project that has failed safety testing, is more than two years behind schedule and, by any reasonable measure, has been a complete and utter failure. Incredibly, the waste does not end there. We now learn that taxpayers are footing a bill of €100,000 every single week while a decision is made on whether the contract relating to the project should be terminated. In addition, the Government is spending a further €200,000 simply to find out how this debacle happened in the first place. Members of the public are rightly asking when the waste of public money under the Government will stop. While tens of millions of euros have been squandered on this failed project, commuters are being told that there is no funding to deliver new bus, rail or rural transport services this year. That is the cost of the Government's waste. Every euro squandered on failed projects is a euro that cannot be invested in better buses, better rail services and better public transport for people who rely on it every single day. We know from Iarnród Éireann's briefing papers that it asked for the contract relating to this project to be terminated a year ago. The company warned that it had lost confidence in the contractor's ability to deliver the project and recommended that the contract be terminated. The Department was told last October that there were risks relating to this project and that red flags had been raised. Surely the Minister should have been doing his job and should have intervened to try to find out what was going on. The Government has allowed this to continue. A year after Iarnród Eireann's request that the contract be terminated, over €50 million has been written off and taxpayers are still losing €100,000 every single week, and there is no end in sight. This is not simply about one failed contract. It is also about a culture of waste that is tolerated and an absence of accountability. Nobody in government ever appears to carry responsibility for the millions in public money that are squandered. I have lost count of the number of times I have stood here and asked what the Government is going to do to end the constant waste of public money. I will again ask the question again on behalf of the people who are frustrated about the continuation of waste. Fifty million euro is not a small amount of money. It has been completely written off. We are now told that €100,000 is being paid every week, with no indication as to when this will end. That is the definition of public waste. Who is going to be held responsible for this latest fiasco? Why are taxpayers still being forced to pay €100,000 every week while this drags on? What immediate steps is the Government going to take to stop further public money being poured into a project that has already become one of the most expensive failures in the history of our public transport system?

How the Deputy characterised Government spending does not tally with the reality of the situation. More than €10 billion has been allocated for public transport projects across the country. The overwhelming majority of those projects are on budget, on time and making a real and meaningful difference. The list of projects delivered on time and on budget by this Government includes the national broadband plan, which the Deputy's party actively opposed. Sinn Féin did not want broadband rolled out to rural communities in Donegal and right across the country. We rolled it out. Sinn Féin opposed it vigorously. That is true. My party, Fine Gael, was the only party which supported it. We delivered it on time and on budget. Other projects include Rosslare Europort, Luas cross city, Woodbrook train station, the new platform at Kent Station in Cork and the Bray transport interchange. There are countless examples of public money being well used and resulting in projects being delivered on time and on budget. We are investing more in public transport, as we should and as we can, as a result of the strength of our economy. The Deputy is right to highlight a specific issue regarding the traffic management system, however. The national train control centre building was delivered on time and within budget. Let us acknowledge that. It is currently in use by Iarnród Éireann and by approximately 100 members of An Garda Síochána. The new traffic management system to oversee signalling and other railway systems has been delayed beyond its completion date. That is factually correct. The Minister for Transport met the National Transport Authority, NTA, and the contractor, Indra. The Deputy asked what the Minister is doing. He is engaging intensively. He met the representatives of both entities last year and had further meetings in January of this year regarding the delivery of the traffic management system as soon as possible. A baseline programme has been agreed between Irish Rail, the NTA and the contractor, Indra. Quite rightly, an Oireachtas committee scrutinised this issue yesterday. I do not accept the Deputy's characterisation that the Government is accepting that the €50 million gone and that the taxpayer must foot the bill, and neither does the Government. The reality is that the Irish Rail accounts have been submitted for consideration to the Department of Transport. They will also be scrutinised and considered by NewERA, which looks at all these issues. As the Deputy knows and as he would expect us to do, there will be a contract in place. We need to work through the issues. We should not jump to any conclusions about when and where the bill will fall due. I expect the Minister, Irish Rail and NewERA to perform their roles in terms of ensuring that the terms of the contract are delivered upon. I want to assure people that there are contingency plans in place from a safety point of view. From a railway safety perspective, there is not an issue here. The project is taking longer than it should. No decision has yet been made regarding the approval of the annual accounts. They will be reviewed by the Department and NewERA and then published. There is a way to go in terms of working through this issue. The Government's record of delivering projects on time and on budget in communities right across this country is there for all to see. When things go wrong and projects are delayed, it is quite right that Oireachtas committees, on a cross-party basis, scrutinise the issues involved, as happened yesterday.

This project is not just delayed. Does the Tánaiste not know what is going on here? A sum of €50 million has been written down in the accounts. Irish Rail has formally recommended ending the contract. It has been saying that since last year. It has no confidence that the project can be delivered. This is not just a project that will be delivered in a couple of months' time. The problem is that along with the €50 million that has been written down in terms of the accounts, €100,000 is being paid out on a weekly basis because a decision still has not been taken to end this contract. The NTA is telling us it will take months of engagement between it and the Department to make a recommendation. I say to the Tánaiste very clearly that this is taxpayers' money. The NTA was very clear that there will be no new bus services, no new rail services and no new rural services this year and, yes, the €50 million could have funded some of that. The NTA representatives were very clear about that yesterday at the committee. I will again ask the Tánaiste some specific questions. Why is the taxpayer on the hook for €100,000 every week for a project that is not going anywhere? Does he accept that Irish Rail has asked the Government to end the contract? When will the Government ensure that this type of wasting of public money will no longer happen? Crucially, as everybody asks me, who will be held accountable for this? It is not good enough for the Tánaiste to come in, shrug his shoulders and just brush off €50 million of taxpayers' money being wasted, along with another €100,000 every single week.

Hear, hear.

Of course, it is not and, of course, that is not what I am doing but it will make a great clip on the Deputy's Instagram. It is not the truth. I hope he plays the full-----

This is a serious issue.

It is a very serious issue.

Deputies, please allow the Tánaiste to answer.

When I am asked about a serious issue, it is nice to be allowed to respond without a cacophony trying to shout me down, as happens every time in this House. I have made a very serious point that Deputy Doherty should not come into this House and make the point that €50 million is lost to the taxpayer when the State is doing its job in making sure that terms and conditions of contracts are scrutinised, that NewERA, a body we set up to make sure we derive value in the delivery of projects, is doing its jobs and that Oireachtas committees are doing their job as well. We should allow that process to work its way through. That is all I am saying. I am also making the point that the Deputy's categorisation of Government spending on public projects is not borne out by the facts. He asked about €50 million. Would he get as exercised if it were £140 million? In the Department his party runs in Northern Ireland, £140 million was spent on road projects that have not even started.

How boring this is.

That Department is led by a Sinn Féin Minister and it has wasted £140 million. Thank God the SDLP highlighted that terrible waste of money.

Are you getting upset? There was the £300,000 as well.

You are pathetic. Do you practise that in front of the mirror every night?

I do not need to, Pearse.

Do you stand there saying, "I wonder how this looks"? Honest to God, do you consider even for a minute what the public thinks of it?

Deputy Doherty, please resume your seat.

Sinn Féin wasters.

Tánaiste, please stop provoking him. I have called Deputy Cian O'Callaghan.

You have wasted public money and do not care what taxpayers feel about it. You can go on with your gimmicks all you want.

Deputy Doherty, you are out of order.

Do not point your finger at me, Tánaiste.

You are out of order, Deputy.

TikTok props.

You are a serial waster, Tánaiste.

I have called Deputy O'Callaghan.

I was waiting for both of them to stop. President Zelenskyy's visit to Ireland yesterday was cut short due to another deadly attack on Ukraine. At least 17 people were killed and more than 50 injured overnight after missiles rained down on Kyiv. As we speak, emergency workers are at a collapsed nine-storey apartment searching for survivors in rubble. This is the biggest attack on Kyiv since the war began. The mayor has declared a day of mourning tomorrow to remember those killed. This has been the reality of life in Ukraine for more than four years now - death, destruction and devastation from attacks by Russia. According to an independent investigation, some of the weapons used in those attacks are made with raw materials manufactured in Ireland. Yesterday, President Zelenskyy said as much. He criticised the EU's failure to sanction companies still under the effective control of Russian oligarchs. He said: "Every tonne of raw material that ends up in Russia is used against us in this war." In March, The Irish Times published details of an extensive investigation it carried out with the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project. It revealed that alumina produced in Ireland is being used by Russia to manufacture weapons that are killing Ukrainians. The Government is fully aware of this but has refused to act on the evidence. Instead, it has commissioned its own inquiry into the matter. How much evidence does the Government need? What exactly is it looking for? The foot dragging by the Government is in sharp contrast to the actions of the Australians. They did not need to conduct any investigation before they acted back in 2022. As soon as Putin invaded Ukraine, they banned all exports of alumina to Russia. They did not want to be complicit in the murder of men, women and children in Ukraine. More than four years later, exports of alumina from Ireland have at least doubled and the Government is still burying its head in the sand and refusing to do what everybody knows is needed. It needs to ban the export of alumina to Russia. These delaying tactics are not just immoral and damaging to Ireland's international reputation. They have made the risk to the almost 500 jobs at Aughinish Alumina much worse. When Putin invaded Ukraine more than four years ago, 23% of exports from the plant went to Russia. That figure has at least doubled since then, if not tripled. If the Government is scrambling around trying to find alternative markets for the company, that work is now much more difficult. The Government cannot keep beating its chest about support for Ukraine in public while, in private, it knowingly facilitates the export of alumina to Russia, which is ending up in weapons that are killing Ukrainians. I ask the Tánaiste to be specific in answering my questions. When will the Government's investigation be completed, what kind of evidence is it looking for that it does not already have and when will it stop this pretence and ban the export of alumina to Russia?

I thank the Deputy. The first thing we must do here is be very careful in our language. There is no pretence from the Government of Ireland to the people of Ireland or any party in this House in relation to the horrific, illegal and brutal war Russia is carrying out on Ukraine. President Zelenskyy certainly did not feel any pretence when he was here yesterday; quite the opposite, in fact. We decided as a country, as we decided as a Government, that we wanted to be joined here in Ireland by President Zelenskyy on the first day of our Presidency of the Council of the European Union, which we were, to show solidarity with the people of Ukraine and support for his courage and the inspiration he is providing to his own people and, indeed, to all Europeans. This country and this Government have acted in support of Ukraine and the people of Ukraine at every opportunity. We need only look at the number of people we have supported in terms of refuge, with the opening of homes and hearths, the amount of financial assistance we are giving and the support we provide to Ukraine in terms of its journey towards European Union membership. While there is a legitimate issue of importance here, it can in no way muddy the waters in terms of the very clear, consistent and unequivocal stance taken by the people of Ireland and the Government of Ireland, which, I think, reflects the political consensus in the Oireachtas, in terms of support for Ukraine. I join the Deputy in condemning the horrific attack on Kyiv last night. It is just another reminder that Putin has no interest in peace and, therefore, we must continue the process in terms of sanctions and hurting the Russian economy where it matters by applying maximum pressure to Putin and his regime to end this brutal and illegal war. In relation to Aughinish Alumina, the first thing to say is that it is the European Commission, not EU member states, that proposes sanctions. The Commission proposes sanctions and member states ultimately vote on those packages of sanctions. The Government has supported every single package of sanctions. We believe in sanctions. We have had 21 packages of sanctions in regard to Russia and I hope we can see the development during our Presidency of a 22nd package of sanctions. We need to establish the facts in respect of Aughinish Alumina. I think President Zelenskyy understands that. Indeed, I think he appreciates the work that is being carried out in that regard. This issue would have been discussed when he met yesterday with the Taoiseach and the Minister, Deputy McEntee. The European Commission is being kept fully plugged in to the information coming out of the investigation. My understanding is that the investigation is nearing finalisation. I do not want to cut across that process. I again make the point, which I made this morning, that I do not think it is a binary choice, which the Deputy is not suggesting it is, between supply chains and sanctions. We have seen time and again that Europe has had to diversify and find workarounds and other ways. We are very clear in our minds and in our position that we cannot cherry-pick when it comes to sanctions. What we are doing is establishing the facts. We have received information from a variety of sources, including the Ukrainian Government. We are plugged in with the European Commission. That information is now being stress-tested and I expect the process to come to a conclusion very shortly. We will keep the European Commission fully briefed. Ultimately, it will be the European Commission and not the Irish Government that will decide whether to propose sanctions or not on a company or individual.

Australia acted more than four years ago, as soon as Putin invaded Ukraine, because it did want to have anything to do with the supply of raw material to Putin's war machine. It was abundantly clear to Australia that it needed to act and it did so. More than four years later, the Government has not acted. That is despite the growing evidence staring the Government in the face. Exports of alumina from Ireland since the invasion began have at least doubled, if not tripled. According to Swedish tax authorities, the plant in Aughinish is controlled by a Russian oligarch who is a supporter and close ally of Putin. We had the independent investigation published in March showing that alumina going from Ireland was being sent to Russia to smelters where it was making aluminium that was then being used by the Russian military. What more evidence does the Government need before it acts? When will it act on this? When will it stop these exports? When will it take the kind of action that is needed to show that we actually do as a country stand in solidarity with Ukraine in everything we do?

Australia is obviously not in the European Union, so it has taken its own decisions on measures and sanctions imposed on Russia. We have imposed sanctions as part of the European Union, not on one, two or three occasions, but on 21 occasions. We have been very clear that, during the Irish Presidency of the Council of the European Union, we want to work with other member states on developing further sanctions. Be it from a defence, security or economic point of view, the best way of having impact on Putin is through financial sanctions. We remain absolutely committed and resolute on that. The Minister, Deputy McEntee, will be working with her colleagues through the Foreign Affairs Council, FAC. The Taoiseach, everyone else and I will be working to continue to maximise the pressure on Russia. Alumina has not been classified as a dual-use product. There has been on many occasions, as the Deputy will remember, information around the plant in Limerick. On many occasions, it has been assessed by Europe and the US and the assurances given have been satisfactory at the time. The Deputy is right that new information has come into the public domain. That is not an investigation in itself. It has to be investigated and facts have to be established. We, as a member state, are providing the maximum amount of information and facts to the European Commission. It will be the European Commission that will decide whether sanctions should be imposed on any company. Let not the word go out in any way contradictory to this from this national Parliament: the people of Ireland deplore the actions of Putin, as does this Government, and we will take every step we can to support the people of Ukraine for as long as it takes.

The EU Presidency gives Ireland the opportunity to set the agenda, lead discussions and influence decisions that will be felt across Europe, including Ireland, in the coming years. We should use that opportunity ambitiously. Over the next six months, there will be hundreds of meetings and countless headlines, but for the families struggling with the cost-of-living crisis here and with issues like accessing childcare, none of this will matter unless we can deliver results that work for them. The Government has identified priorities, including strengthening competitiveness, enlargement, security and delivering an EU budget. The decisions taken over the coming months will shape Ireland and Europe more widely for years to come. A major objective is advancing EU enlargement, and President Zelenskyy coming yesterday underscored that. Ireland, rightly, strongly supports Ukrainian membership. However, enlargement must be accompanied by reform. We must streamline how the EU institutions make their decisions. We have repeatedly seen how a single veto can paralyse the European Union. If Europe is to become larger, it must also become more effective and make decisions faster. The most important challenge that the Government may face is the multi-annual financial framework, MFF. There are growing demands to increase funding for security, research and competitiveness, all of which is understandable, but with that comes pressure to divert funding from agriculture and cohesion, which Ireland has often pulled from. As a significant net contributor, Ireland has influence. We must use that influence wisely. The Government must insist that new priorities be funded through new EU revenues, not through cuts to the Common Agricultural Policy, CAP. Ireland must place food security firmly on the agenda. This means protecting agricultural land, supporting family farms and ensuring that Europe remains capable of feeding itself. Food security is no longer a future issue. This summer, Europe is once again experiencing prolonged droughts and extreme weather events, damaging harvests and reducing output. Europe cannot allow itself to become increasingly dependent on imports of food while simultaneously reducing its own capacity for production. Ireland must firmly stand against attempts to weaken the CAP and undermine investment to protect Ireland and Europe's long-term food security. I have four questions. Will Ireland support institutional reform of the EU to ensure that decisions on issues like Palestine and enlargement of the EU bloc can happen quickly? Does the Government support the EU having new revenue sources to fund new priorities? Will it ensure that the next EU budget continues to fund food security? Will the CAP be protected?

I thank the Deputy for the question. Let me assure him and the people of the country that while the Government is very pleased that Ireland has the Presidency of the Council of the European Union for the next six months, we take seriously the Deputy's point about the domestic agenda. I would make two points on this. Governments have to do more than one thing at a time. There are 97 days until the budget, if anyone is counting. We are continuing to work on a budget that will address many of the cost-of-living issues that were highlighted, namely, a personal income tax package, childcare and how we can make structural progress on issues that are of concern to the Deputy's constituents and mine. The second point I would make - in fairness, the Deputy has acknowledged this - is that the work at European level is not decoupled from the important impact on our own citizens. We are of Europe and in Europe. We are at the heart of Europe, so having a successful Presidency on issues such as competitiveness and budgetary matters will have an important and positive impact on people in this country. Regarding the multi-annual financial framework, it is a commitment of the European Council that Europe would seek to agree its multi-annual budget for 2028 onwards before the end of this year. That is an important thing to do. At a time when there is a lot of uncertainty in the world, we have to look at what certainty we can bring to it. In the European Union, it is entirely within our gift to agree a budget, so why not do that and provide that certainty to our citizens and businesses and to those who wish to invest when there is so much uncertainty in the world? Ireland's job will be to intensively engage with member states as an honest broker, hear their views and, ultimately, publish a negotiating box - a new compromise proposal, so to speak - towards the end of September, but more likely the start of October. At that point, it will get sent to the European Council and fall to the President, António Costa, to work with European leaders to seek an agreement. There are different views on the budget. Some members think that the proposed size is too large and some that it is too small. It is not too dissimilar to a domestic budget - everyone has ideas on new things to spend money on. It is often harder to find agreement on how to fund those things. There is a need to continue to fund important programmes like the CAP and the social cohesion funds. We are also living in a new world in terms of defence and security, the green transition and the digital transition. Ireland's job, which is not easy, is to try to find a balance among all of those things. On the issue of institutional reform, Ireland is always open to exploring ways for the European Union not to have to work at the pace of the slowest member state. However, at the same time, our diversity is our strength and we have to operate within the treaties. We are always willing to have those conversations. The point about new money for new initiatives was a fair one. During our Presidency, we have been tasked by the President of the European Council to look at the issue of own resources. Any decision on own resources has to be something that can pass the European Council and be deliverable in terms of having a real impact by 2028. I do not underestimate the significance of that. We have to act as an honest broker by not prejudicing the budgetary process. However, issues such as food security, agrifood and protecting the agricultural sector, not just in Ireland, but across the European Union, are core, vital issues for any MFF.

We both know that Europe works by consensus and that there is only so much we can do to facilitate as an honest broker. While competitiveness is incredibly important, with the capital markets union and the 28th regime coming forward, workers' rights were not mentioned once yesterday at the event in Dublin Castle. This gives us an opportunity to bring the Irish people with us rather than this Presidency just being felt within the bubble of Leinster House. I am not sure if people outside these walls understand its importance or understand it will directly affect them. This question is at national level rather than supranational level, but what concrete milestones does the Government have in mind for us to achieve during the six months we have the Presidency that will benefit Irish people outside the walls of Leinster House?

That is a very fair question. Europe can often seem something remote, so it is our collective job to do as the Deputy said and bring it home in terms of the real impact it makes. I think workers' rights were mentioned, but if they were not, they should have been because they are very much a core part of competitiveness. We cannot make our economies more competitive and grow our wealth without the workers who run the industries and deliver that productivity. There is a whole load of areas where Irish people can expect to see benefits. To give the Deputy one, the whole issue of online safety for children is a core concern for parents right across this country and, I would argue, right across this Union. There is a very clear commitment in our Presidency's priorities to make progress on that. We have always been of the view that it is most impactful if it can happen at an EU level. If it cannot, we reserve the right to take our own action here. Listening to the comments of President von der Leyen, there is a real chance that we could make progress on that during the Irish Presidency. In terms of providing access to funding and investment for Irish businesses, including SMEs, getting an agreement on a savings and investment union and on deepening our capital markets union will benefit Irish businesses. Of course, reaching an agreement on the MFF will provide certainties for farmers and fishers. There are many more examples, too. As the House continues to reflect during this six-month period, we should look at making the work being done at Presidency level relevant to people, because it certainly is.

Today, I am raising the issue of wind farms and their health implications. A number of weeks ago, I was copied into a serious letter from the Communities and Environmental Protection Alliance, CEPA, to the Minister of Health. I am informed that there has been no response, not even an acknowledgement. Representatives from five counties are in the Public Gallery today. They are from Limerick, Mayo, Kilkenny, Wicklow and Offaly, including members of the Stonestown community in County Offaly who live beside the Cloghan wind farm. For more than three years, that community has raised noise complaints with the local authority, the HSE and the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. The crucial point is that the HSE environmental health service examined the matter, visited the community and requested a public health investigation into the complaints. The public health section denied it. One part of the health service was looking for an investigation but the Department's public health section denied it. I want to understand why. The HSE is our expert public health agency. If its own environmental health service believes a matter warrants further investigation, what justification does the Department of Health have to refuse its request? This is not an isolated issue. In Limerick, there are long-running complaints relating to turbine noise and shadow flicker in Kilmeedy and Morristown. In County Clare, the HSE investigated a wind farm following complaints and at the request of the local authority. I have a copy of that investigation. The Tánaiste and I met CEPA a number of years ago and we discussed these complaints. The Taoiseach is on the record 13 years ago saying that there are health implications to wind farms. There is something that I want the Tánaiste and all other Members sitting around the House today to do. There are two children sitting in the Public Gallery with their parents, a 12-year-old and a ten-year-old. I want the Tánaiste to tell them that he is going to sit there and not investigate the issues and hide things until 2030. Their parents get complaints that they have to come to school because their children are falling asleep in class. If it was the Tánaiste's child, how would he feel as a parent? Would he deny this for 13 years? Would he deny it for ten minutes if it was his child? It has been proven without doubt that there are health implications to wind turbines in certain areas. I am not against wind turbines in areas where they do not have health implications, but this one does. So, when the Tánaiste is giving his reply, I want him to think of the children and families this is affecting.

I thank Deputy O'Donoghue. It is not the first time he has raised this issue. I acknowledge his genuine interest and active involvement in this issue. I am consistently on the record on the importance of publishing new guidelines in relation to wind energy and wind farms. I am a believer, as I believe the Deputy said he was, in the switch to renewable energy. It is really important. We have seen what happens when we live in a country that is too reliant on fossil fuel. We all know that. We can have debates about how to make that transition but our country is still addicted to fossil fuel. The impact of that on consumers and citizens in the Deputy's constituency and mine every time somebody makes a decision thousands of kilometres from here is not an abstract thing any more. It has happened not once, but twice in the last five years and plunged us into challenges like the cost-of-living crisis and real difficulties for people. We all accept that point and are not rowing on that point or debating it. What the Deputy is saying is that it is important that there be guidelines that are clear, evidence based and published. The Deputy will remember the Planning and Development Act, which passed through this House at the end of 2024. That replaced ministerial guidelines with a new structure of national planning statements. It is a more robust and better process. Work is nearing conclusion on a national planning statement in relation to this issue. That needs to provide certainty and clarity on who can and cannot build a wind farm, where they can be built, the distance, the flicker and a number of the other issues the Deputy has raised. I hear different things. I am not getting into a row or dispute with anybody, but I am told that in Offaly, for example, the council has been extensively engaging. Perhaps people have different views but that is what I have heard from my engagement with Deputy Clendennen on this. It is important that people engage. It is important that the planning authority engage and take on board the views of local communities. It is most important that we have clarity, as we need renewable energy. We need to make that switch with a sense of urgency. In fairness to everybody, including the children, communities and constituents the Deputy referenced, settling the question once and for all and having clarity as to what an appropriate distance is will be useful. We had Private Members' legislation on this matter from, I believe, Deputy Stanley. The Government took the decision not to oppose that but to have a timed amendment to provide that space for the new national planning statement to conclude. On foot of Deputy O'Donoghue raising this matter, I have asked the Minister, Deputy Browne, and the Minister of State, Deputy Cummins, to revert to him.

I thank the Tánaiste. The issue here is the inconsistency. In the Dún Laoghaire–Rathdown area, all noise complaints received by the local authority are investigated by the HSE. Residents in Offaly and Limerick are wondering why this other approach is being taken in their case and why it depends on what county one lives in whether one gets investigations. It is inconsistency that is going on here. Why should access to a health investigation depend on the county where somebody lives? We can see that it is different in Dún Laoghaire. It has been more than two years since the Tánaiste met CEPA and the people with the wind farms. I want the Tánaiste to meet them and the people in Offaly. I will attend as well. I would also like to have the Minister for Health there to meet these people and to see if we can relieve concerns and meet young people and their families' entitlement to a night's sleep. This cannot go on for more years. We have been talking about this for years. We must think of the health implications and how we can help. Will the Tánaiste agree to meet CEPA and family groups with the Minster for Health and me?

I am at this long enough to know not to start making diary commitments on the floor of the Dáil. However, the Government will continue to engage with communities on this issue. Indeed, the Deputy has referenced some of my own constituents. Obviously, I engage with my own constituents. I am happy to do that also. I am not across the level of detail the Deputy has just given me - let me reflect on that - but the point he makes around inconsistency in general is an issue we want to stamp out. A planning system does well when it is consistent. That is one of the reasons we changed the rural planning guidelines this week. It is one of the reasons we are changing the exempted development guidelines. Particularly in a small country, we should not have a different approach to planning from one place versus another above and beyond normal norms that local authorities may wish to have. The purpose of moving to national planning statements is to move away from those inconsistencies. I accept, and it would be wrong and disingenuous to suggest anything to the contrary, that it has taken a very significant period of time to get to the new wind guidelines. It is true. I know it is a cause of significant frustration for communities, as it was when Deputy O'Donoghue and I had that meeting. However, I would point out that a lot has changed since, including the Planning and Development Act. It is really important that these new standards be up to date with the best possible information, and-----

Will the Tánaiste meet us?

-----I expect that to happen this year. I will certainly arrange for a meeting to take place with the Government in terms who the appropriate people are. I will revert to the Deputy.