2026-01-20

I want to tell the Taoiseach about the final hours of Stephen Lavelle's life, a man from Erris in north Mayo. On the night of Saturday, 10 January, he became gravely ill shortly after arriving at the pub in Binghamstown. An ambulance was called at 10.25 p.m. but despite several follow-up calls, no ambulance arrived. A doctor was called and by the time they arrived, Stephen's family were growing more and more distressed. The doctor told Stephen's son Anthony, "This is a category one emergency. You need to get him to hospital right now", but there was still no sign of the ambulance. In desperation, the family carried Stephen to a car to drive the 56-mile journey to Mayo University Hospital. His wife Martina, his son Anthony and his daughter-in-law Rebecca all accompanied him. As they drove, Stephen's condition deteriorated. He was screaming in pain. They kept getting disconnected from the ambulance service because of the bad mobile phone coverage. Stephen's head began to droop. His eyes were wide in his head. Rebecca started CPR in the car. They finally did meet the ambulance but that was when they were only three minutes away from the hospital. When they arrived, nobody was waiting for them at the hospital. Anthony ran in and got help. It was now well after midnight. Stephen's pulse came back after eight minutes of CPR. He was ventilated and brought to the ICU. Sadly, Stephen passed away the following morning. He was 68 years old. My heart goes out to Stephen's heartbroken wife and family. There are no words to adequately describe the horror faced by Stephen and his family. It highlights in a most harrowing way the severe crisis in our ambulance service. There are stories from all across the country of ambulances taking far too long to arrive. It is especially dangerous in rural areas where hospitals can be an hour or more away. We have outstanding paramedics but we do not have nearly enough of them. Four years ago, the Government was told that the service required an additional 2,000 staff by 2026 but not even a quarter of that number has been recruited. The service is badly understaffed and paramedics operate under incredible pressure. Because of a chronic lack of beds in our hospitals, ambulances often arrive at emergency departments to find that there is literally nowhere for the patient to go, so the paramedics cannot hand over care. The ambulance effectively becomes a bed outside the hospital and sometimes they are stuck there for hours, parked up rather than on the road responding to emergencies. The ambulance service is stretched to breaking point and the Government has known all of this literally for years, yet the recruitment of paramedics has not even scratched the surface of what is needed. The Government has stood by and allowed all of this to happen, and it is people at their most desperate and vulnerable moments who pay the price. Tá ár seirbhísí otharlainne i ndeireadh na feide agus ag cur saolta i mbaol. Caithfidh an Rialtas scála na géarchéime seo a aithint agus gníomhú go práinneach. Does the Taoiseach accept the scale of this crisis? Does he accept that ambulance delays put lives at risk? What will the Government do to make sure that no one ever has to go through what Stephen Lavelle and his family went through on that awful night?

Déanaim comhbhrón le clann Stephen Lavelle as ucht an méid a tharla. Is olc an scéal é gan dabht. Mar a dúirt an Teachta, ní féidir le héinne nó aon fhocail sásamh nó aon rud a chur in iúl don chlann. Is drochscéal ar fad é mar atá á léiriú ag an Teachta inniu. No words can console the family of Stephen Lavelle in terms of what happened and the loss of life in the circumstances the Deputy described. I am not aware of the case specifically, but I take on board what she said about the delay in getting Stephen to the hospital. I do not have the full details of the case or the background to it. It is a devastating loss to the family. It is important to say, although this is of no consolation to the family, there has been very significant investment in the ambulance service over many years. There has been significant investment in the first responder approach and the whole professionalisation of the paramedical area, the principle being that the more first responders we can get to the scene of an accident or to somebody becoming very acutely ill is the most effective way of preventing loss of life and dealing with patients in very difficult and life-threatening situations. That has happened over a period. The National Ambulance Service, NAS, devised a national framework for ambulance coverage. There has been criticism of that framework in terms of how it operates. NAS defends the framework, which replaced a locally in situ-based ambulance service, as one that is nationally governed and nationally organised into the future. That drew on a lot of expertise at the time. Additional posts have been allocated to the service. This year alone, we are looking at another €8 million for 180 additional posts and the development of NAS specialist services. About 81 of those have been recruited to date, with the remainder at various stages of recruitment. At the moment, investment by Government had seen the total NAS staff rise to 2,430 as of August 2025. That is a rise of 25%, or 502 staff, since 2020, with 85% of the National Ambulance Service staff working in direct patient-facing roles. It deals with about 430,000 urgent and emergency calls - that was as far back as 2024 - which is up 32,000 calls on the previous year. The demand is increasing and continues to rise. The focus is on improving and increasing the performance of NAS, particularly in terms of life-threatening cardiac or respiratory arrest. It is improving but we will not be happy unless it is 100%. That is where we want this to be. Again, anything I have said is of no consolation to the family concerned. I will refer the case to NAS and to the HSE for further examination of what happened here and what the correct response and specific conditions should or could have been.

I have given the Taoiseach the circumstances surrounding Stephen's death. My colleague Deputy Conway-Walsh has written to the Minister for Health setting it out. I cannot imagine the fear that must have been felt in that car that night. Imagine, on dark country roads, your father crying out in pain, your husband fighting for his life and knowing still how far away you are from the hospital. That is the cost of the failure of this service. An emergency like Stephen's should be responded to within 19 minutes. That is the rule. That is the standard. That did not happen in his case. As a matter of fact, in more than half of such emergencies the 19-minute threshold is not met. The paramedics themselves are crying out for more resources. The Government has failed to recruit and failed to resource and as a consequence, lives are at risk, and sadly and tragically, in this case Stephen's life was lost. I want to hear what the Taoiseach will do to make sure that this simply does not happen again.

There has been recruitment. An 25% increase in staff is a significant increase by any yardstick. The National Ambulance Service is also saying that it is developing alternative care pathways, which are important. It is in the process of reforming and expanding such pathways, which would include clinical capacity in terms of community paramedics deployed nationwide, clinical hubs and so forth. That would mean more appropriate treatment at the right level. That is something that clearly has to be worked on and further reforms need to be looked at with regard to the extent and nature of the coverage because the increase in urgent cases that the ambulance service is dealing with on an annual basis is quite significant. It will increase annually by a significant amount, so therefore resources have to be allocated.

A man died.

Let me make the point. I fully accept that anything I have said is not a consolation to the Lavelle family. However, without question the reform has to be far greater deployment and upskilling of first responders, and the primary and community care-based approach.

Last Tuesday, I raised with the Taoiseach the serious threat posed by US President Trump to Europe and to international law with his proposed annexation of Greenland. Over the weekend we have seen the threats from Trump become ever more serious. He has ratcheted up his language. He is essentially looking to blackmail his European allies with yet more tariffs. With these latest Oval Office outbursts, we are seeing dysfunction in D.C. wreaking havoc across the world. This is cause for huge concern. Not content with tanking his own country's economy, Trump's actions seem set on everyone else's too. Following his perceived Nobel Peace Prize snub, he has publicly acknowledged that his sights are set on imperialist action. We know the enormous threat to Europe posed from the east by Putin's barbaric authoritarian regime in Russia, but now we are seeing a threat of annexation of European territory from the west, from our so-called ally in the US. Trump is ripping up the rulebook when it comes to international diplomacy. After just a year in office, the uncertainty he is causing is doing enormous damage with his territory grabs, his tariffs and now the real likelihood of a Trump slump. Today I ask the Taoiseach about the potential impact of such a slump on Ireland and what we can do about it. Economic shocks do not just impact spreadsheets nationally. They hit kitchen cupboards, homes and communities across the country. When governments fail to prepare, ordinary people pay the price for failure. We all know how exposed our public finances are due to our disproportionate over-reliance on corporation tax from a small number of large US multinationals. Behind every export figure are workers, families, mortgages, rents and household bills that have to be paid. A great many people and households across the country are already living payslip to payslip in a cost-of-living crisis. The question we are hearing from people is: what happens if the work dries up? The uncomfortable truth is that this vulnerability to a global slump is no accident. It reflects choices made by the Government parties over many years. First is its failure to diversify our economic base, as the unions have pointed out. Second is its failure to use a historic boom to build resilience. Irish society is generally cash rich but asset poor with weak infrastructure, unaffordable housing, overstretched public transport and creaking healthcare. When the shock hits, these failures become dangerous. That is why the risk of a global Trump slump matters so much here at home. Fear alone is already destabilising investment decisions across Ireland and Europe. We know the EU must respond robustly and strategically to Trump's threats, but we must also work here at home to control the controllables and protect people. Labour has argued for a State-backed short-time working scheme to protect families and households against this potential shock. Will the Taoiseach consider this now and will he respond to Trump's tantrums with real action and a robust responses?

Aontaím leis an Teachta go bhfuil cúrsaí an tsaoil an-dainséarach, deacair faoi láthair agus go bhfuil dúshláin an-mhóra amach romhainn agus roimh mhuintir na hEorpa i gcoitinne. Is maith an rud é go ndearnamar an-chuid ó thaobh cúrsaí eacnamaíochta de agus ó thaobh an gheilleagair. Tá an geilleagar i bhfad níos láidre anois ná mar a bhí. We are in very uncharted territory and the situation is serious and potentially very grave for the European and Irish economies and, indeed, for the United States economy, if a trade war is break out and if we have a series of tariffs and counter-tariffs. In the latest iteration of this in the aftermath of the so-called Liberation Day last year, Europe prepared different scenarios in terms of tariffs. Those scenarios are still in place and can be deployed, if necessary. We are very conscious of this and the Deputy was correct that this affects people's jobs and their capacity to look after themselves and their families. That has always been my number one interest because in the conduct of foreign policy, we have national interests and the protection of livelihoods and workers is a key national interest in terms of how we contribute to these issues and how we help to try and resolve these issues. It is good that we are members of the European Union, by the way. At moments like this, the value of being a Single Market and being in a European Union should not be underestimated. Others are not and find it more difficult and more challenging as a result. The first principle that we adhere to is European Union solidarity in terms of fellow member states. Second, I recall that in the context of the budget, we focused on infrastructure. We said we wanted to deliver more and we allocated money through the national development plan to water, public transport ad the electricity grid with potentially up to €18 billion to be invested. We got criticised because we did not do the once-off packages, which could have been €2 billion or €3 billion and which Labour wanted us to do. Now it is criticising us for not being budgetarily or fiscally prepared. It is a bit rich, to be frank. I argue that we are better-----

We were against narrowing the tax base.

We are probably in a better position, although you could never be in a good position because of this. Tariffs are bad, but fiscally we are probably in a better position than we would have been if we had taken Labour's advice in terms of the expenditure side because we concentrated on looking after those on the lowest incomes and we concentrated on infrastructure to really make sure we can invest in the productive capacity of our economy, which is something we control and we can govern in the time ahead. It is very important that we protect that. We also put aside the future Ireland fund, which, again, Members of the Opposition criticised.

We supported it.

I did not say Labour. I said other Members opposed it. We also created the climate infrastructure and nature fund, which I think are important buffers, as well as having significant cash balances to hopefully help us deal with any potential negativity that could arise from this.

I do not appreciate taking lectures on the budget from the party that brought in the tax break for the burger barons and big builders. The Labour Party stood against the narrowing go the tax base. I do agree with the Taoiseach on European solidarity, absolutely. Between them, Putin and Trump have made the unthinkable normal now. They are normalising this hideous threat of annexation and the hideous threat of trade wars that are going damage us all. As my colleague Deputy Lawlor pointed out, there are huge implications for Ireland, by the way, if Trump is threatening military action in Europe and using Shannon Airport for US planes. That is a huge question for us. We absolutely need European solidarity. We need to stand together on this and the European Union must use every lever at its disposal. We must see a robust response to Trump to stand up to what is really a creeping fascism. We are seeing in his own country armed militias seizing people and shooting people and we are now also seeing the threat of annexation and the seizure of a leader in Venezuela against international law. This is appalling to see. I want to make one specific, practical ask. Last year, on so-called "liberation day" the Taoiseach and Tánaiste very helpfully provided briefings to Opposition leaders on the Trump threat.

Sorry, Deputy, it is not part of the question. The Taoiseach to respond.

I ask the Taoiseach to do the same now.

Yes, we have no difficulty in organising briefings of leaders of the Opposition. We need to be careful and look at things in perspective. The greatest threat on the European continent is Russia. It is not just a threat; it is happening and has been happening for four years. Hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, soldiers on both sides, all because of the decision by President Putin to illegally invade Ukraine, to bomb its civilian infrastructure to bits and to try to destroy its energy infrastructure. Nothing comparable to that has happened yet. Let us not try to equate the two. Let us not lose sight of the fact that Russia represents the greatest threat to other European Union member states on the Baltic and in Poland. We all talk to them regularly and they articulate that real sense of an existential fear, so we should not lose sight of that. This is why Europe has been endeavouring to work with the United States to get the fairest and most balanced outcome for Ukraine that creates sustainability for Ukraine into the future. That is very important. I will arrange a briefing for the leaders of the Opposition.

Today marks the one-year anniversary of Donald Trump's inauguration, so we have three years left to go. The question for EU leaders is whether can they spend all of that time trying to keep Donald Trump happy, because all the evidence shows that this strategy is not working. For 12 months, leaders in Europe have fawned over Trump. No matter what outrage, insult or international incident he has provoked, the response from Europe has been the same: to avoid direct criticism, and even to heap praise and flattery on him to try to keep him on side. Now we see where it has gotten us. Trump is demanding that the United States acquires Greenland and is refusing to rule out using military force to do so. It is clear we are through the looking glass when it comes to the Trump Administration. A long-standing trading partner is increasingly an aggressor. Trump says the United States needs Greenland because it is critical to US security, but Greenland is not mentioned once in his national security strategy published less than two months ago. What has changed since that strategy was issued is Trump's invasion of Venezuela and the kidnapping of Maduro. European leaders' lack of criticism of that flagrant breach of international law has clearly emboldened Trump. If he can invade one country and suffer no consequences, why not another? I listened to the Taoiseach's interview on RTÉ on Sunday in which he said that the trade deal between the EU and the United States should be ratified. I do not know how that is a credible position when Trump is telling everyone he wants to rip up that deal and go even further by attacking the sovereignty of Greenland and Denmark. How can the EU ratify the deal in these circumstances? I agree with the Government that any escalating trade war would be hugely damaging, and it is clearly something we want to avoid, but we will not do that by bowing to Trump's bully tactics. What is needed now is for the EU to stand firm and, instead of rolling over for Trump, to adopt a strong united response that makes it clear that all options, including the use of retaliatory tariffs and the anti-coercion instrument, are on the table. At the moment, Trump is openly mocking the EU. He does not take it seriously. Last night he said that European leaders would not "push back too much" on his attempts to annex Greenland. He published a picture depicting Canada and Greenland as United States territory. None of this is normal, and it is time the response from the EU reflected that. Does the Taoiseach agree that the strategy of flattering Trump has backfired? Does he agree that the EU needs to stand strong in a unified response and that all options must be on the table?

First of all, the European Union will adopt and is adopting a principled, firm and robust stance in relation to the territorial integrity of Greenland, the sovereignty of the Kingdom of Denmark and adherence to the international rule of law and to the United Nations charter. There are very clear positions from the European Union. Also, having already prepared various scenarios in respect of potential responses to any additional tariffs, we - Europe - have prepared significant packages, the clearest being the €93 billion of packages. There is no issue there other than that I think it would be better if this were resolved by dialogue. If the US wants to arbitrarily tear up an agreement or undermine an agreement it entered into, that is a matter for the US. Europe, however, should be very clear. We entered into an agreement. We want to honour agreements we have entered into. We are very conscious that a trade war between the US and Europe, being one of the largest trading relationships in the world, would have very damaging consequences for the US, Europe and the world, not just in terms of job losses, which would be significant, or decline in exports but also in terms of a read-across to the financial markets and the potential creation of real damage on that front, which would have a ripple effect on economy, society and jobs. Language is cheap here. We have to be very clear-eyed about what is at stake, and it is very serious. It is a grave moment for the transatlantic relationship. Europe will be strong and unified, and the principle of European Union solidarity is absolutely key here. We have been working. Canada has been pivoting more to Europe in terms of trade and other areas, as others have. Diversification has been happening in respect of trade, hence my visits and those of other Ministers to Japan, China and other areas to make sure we diversify trade and we are not focused on just one given area. Let us be honest, however, that the US-Ireland economic relationship is critical. It is a very important relationship. There is no point in saying it is not; it is. We have to do everything we possibly can to protect it and the jobs that depend on it without compromising basic principles in terms of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of EU member states. That remains our position. I do not accept the analysis that has been given in terms of Europe being just all about flattery. It has not been all about flattery. A year ago the situation pertaining to Ukraine was very dangerous. I would argue that European leaders successfully created a scenario where additional supports were maintained for Ukraine over what has been a very difficult year. These are very serious issues for people, not just for ourselves but for other countries like Ukraine as well.

I am in complete agreement that any trade war would be hugely damaging. We do not want one; the EU does not want one. It is Trump who is weaponising tariffs, threatening to renege on a trade deal that was agreed only a few months ago and refusing to rule out using force to annex Greenland. These are threats that nobody could have imagined until recently but they are now a grim reality. I recognise how difficult the situation is, but the strategy of EU leaders appeasing Trump has not worked. His belligerence and erratic behaviour are escalating. He has invited Putin, an indicted war criminal, to sit on the Board of Peace, which was supposed to be set up to oversee Gaza but now seems intended to undermine the UN. Then, last night, Trump posted a picture of Canada depicted as American territory. What are we supposed to take from that? Will Canada be next? Nobody really knows the answer to that question. That is the level of dangerous absurdity we are dealing with from the chaos merchant in the Oval Office. If this aggressive behaviour is not a red line for the EU, what will be?

As I said, the leaders of the European Union member states will convene next Thursday to consider the position we are now in. It is uncharted territory; there is no question about that. No one ever contemplated that Greenland would be under threat or that the friction between the US and Canada would be at this level, although when the leaders meet a different sort of vibe emanates from meetings between different leaders, including those of Canada and the US. There are profound shifts happening. From our perspective, the clear principles are solidarity with our fellow EU member states and a principled approach to international relations. Yes, we are committed to peace, but we are also committed to the United Nations, the United Nations Charter and international rules of engagement and to supporting Denmark and our colleagues across the EU in respect of any attempt to levy tariffs indiscriminately.

Will the Taoiseach and his European colleagues stop soft-pedalling or, worse, bending the knee before Donald Trump, and finally admit what everybody can see and what some of us have been saying for some time, which is that Trump is a bully, an imperialist, and a threat to the world and to humanity? Will they admit that it is time to stand up to this bully and call him out for what he is? His list of crimes, threats and bullying is too long to enumerate but let us give some of the highlights. He armed a genocide. He gave billions to Israel to carry out a genocide over two years, then invited Netanyahu, an indicted war criminal, to a New Year's Eve party in his mansion in Mar-a-Lago. The Taoiseach mentioned Putin and what a threat he is. Trump has now put Putin, an indicted war criminal, on the board of peace for Gaza, along with Blair, one of the major architects of the Iraq War, which claimed the lives of 1 million people, and, of course, Netanyahu and Israel, the people who perpetrated the genocide, will be on the board of peace as well. He has attacked Venezuela and kidnapped the president and his wife. Whatever the Taoiseach thinks about that regime, and I do not think much of it, he has no right to attack that regime. Trump has defended the execution of a 36-year-old mother and writer, Renee Good, by ICE agents, and has sent paramilitary forces into the cities of America to attack people of colour and immigrants. He has threatened Colombia, Mexico, Cuba, Canada and Iran. He pretended he was interested in Ukraine because of the warmongering of Putin, which clearly is not true but actually exposed that what he wanted was the rare earth minerals from Ukraine. He is threatening an economic war and trade war that is driving up the cost of living for working class people in America and threatens to do the same to hard-pressed working class people across the world. To add to it all, his pal is Elon Musk, who profits from selling child abuse material and misogynistic material on the Internet. The disgusting list goes on. He admits that his strategy is imperialist in the national security strategy, which states that the US "will assert political, economic and military power over the Western Hemisphere." He quotes the Monroe Doctrine, which was used to justify interventions in Nicaragua, Bolivia, Panama, Ecuador, and in Iran and Iraq in the 1950s. The Taoiseach can go through the list. Will the Taoiseach stand up to the bully? He is not seriously going to go to the White House with shamrock this year and celebrate our national day with them. Surely he is going to tell US troops to get out of Shannon Airport and he is not going to go along with the militarisation agenda that Trump is urging on Europe?

As I said earlier, we are in a very serious situation. Our national interest, quite frankly, is to protect Irish workers. We will behave accordingly to do that and to achieve that, and to make sure that we can get a reasonable international legal framework through the UN to get countries to adhere to the international rule of law. The world is in a very bad place. Thousands and thousands of people are losing their lives all over the world. I have referred to Ukraine, for example. Europe worked with the US. Why? Deputy Boyd Barrett condemns Russia, correctly so, but what has stopped Russia from taking over Ukraine in its entirety? Let us be honest. What has stopped it? The Deputy might not like to admit it.

Not Trump.

US firepower and US intelligence have, along with others in the European Union and the United Kingdom. That is the reality. If the Deputy wants to abandon all of that, that is fine. I agree with the Deputy in the sense that I do not agree with spheres of influence. I do not agree with the Monroe Doctrine but the Deputy is suggesting that we open up to that. I do not think he means it but those are the implications. Russia takes Ukraine and Moldova. Is that what we want? Iran does what it does. I mean, when we discuss the Middle East in this House, I never hear criticism of Iran - never.

Check the record.

No, no. In terms of the malign influence Iran has had in the Middle East, with Hezbollah, Hamas and - you name it - the Houthis in terms of trade routes and the economy, we never hear it really to any great extent or to any consistent extent. We are now hearing from Iran, potentially, that 4,000 citizens have been murdered, and up to 12,000 could have been murdered, because we do not know with the Internet blackout and so on like that. It is very difficult for citizens in Iran who want to adhere to the principles of freedom of association and freedom of speech. In Sudan, thousands and thousands have lost their lives in horrendous situations, with other external powers also being influential and negatively impactful on the lives of ordinary people in Sudan. We can go elsewhere in terms of violations of international law and so forth. Our guiding light is and has to be adherence to the international rule of law and to the United Nations, as imperfect as it is. I agree with António Guterres that the Security Council is long outdated, with the post-Second World War scenario there in terms of the powers that are on the Security Council.

I thank the Taoiseach. I call Deputy Boyd Barrett.

This is a broader issue that affects the entire globe and many malign actors are involved.

I thank the Taoiseach. Deputy Boyd Barrett to respond.

I have condemned, I do condemn and I will again condemn the Iranian regime for the violent repression of protesters, for shutting off the Internet and for the censorship of what is going on, as I condemn and have condemned Putin for the illegal invasion of Ukraine. The Taoiseach would not be presenting them with shamrock, would he? He is going to go over and present shamrock to Trump, even now. It has taken a threat to Greenland, because it impinges on the interests of the EU. Is it not the truth that this is the consequence of the Taoiseach and the EU remaining silent, or, even worse, echoing and reinforcing what Trump has done or at least being silent in the face of the genocide in Gaza, the actions in Venezuela, the threats against Canada and all the threats elsewhere and the silence of the world? It has now come back to bite Europe. What is the Taoiseach going to do about it? Surely, he is not going to go over the White House, celebrate our national day and hand him shamrock.

I thank Deputy Boyd Barrett. I call the Taoiseach to respond.

Will the Taoiseach tell the US troops to get out of Shannon when they are threatening the world in the way they are?

I thank the Deputy. The Taoiseach to respond.

Will he not dance to the tune of Trump who is saying we should spend more on militarisation-----

I thank the Deputy. The time is up. The Taoiseach to respond.

-----so we do not go down the road of militarisation and warmongering, which he represents?

Ireland has not been silent on the Middle East. Ireland has not been silent on Gaza. This is recognised around the world, no matter who it annoyed or may annoy. We have stood firm on a whole range of issues in the context of the Middle East, and we will remain so. In the context of the US, up to 40 million people in America claim Irish descent. We have always had a very strong relationship with the US, irrespective of who the President happens to be or who is in power on the Hill at any given time. That has underpinned a very significant economic relationship that puts bread on the tables of Irish workers. That is the reality. It is easy for me to make grand statements and for the Deputy and everybody else. Grand statements do not put bread on the table. It is easy to do but it does not put bread on the table. We need cool heads.

Trump is the one threatening-----

I thank the Deputy.

We need to be calm about this. We need to be firm on principle. We need to be showing solidarity with our European Union member states and I have no issue with doing that. I think that is the right thing to do, and that has to be our approach.