We will now proceed with the business. For the first Leaders' Questions of the session, I call Deputy Mary Lou McDonald.
Wednesday 16 September 2026
Leaders' Questions
125 contributions, as the Official Report records them.
RTÉ has reported very serious allegations and tonight four Garda whistleblowers will speak publicly on them for the very first time. They will detail how the process for reporting and investigating wrongdoing within the Garda has been repeatedly undermined by senior management, including former Garda Commissioner, Drew Harris. A process was established in the aftermath of scandals that rocked An Garda Síochána more than a decade ago, in particular the treatment of sergeant Maurice McCabe. At that time, we were promised a fresh start. However, the Garda whistleblowers on tonight's programme say that instead of being protected, whistleblowers are targeted, penalised and vilified by those at the very top for making disclosures of wrongdoing. Protected disclosures made by these whistleblowers include the dangerous storage, movement and handling of firearms, defective ammunition and the issuing of defective holsters - all of which put gardaí at risk.
Those speaking out are senior members of An Garda Síochána. They include Dr. Donal Corcoran, the person who was in charge of the Garda protected disclosures office; Ms Rose Sweeney, a case manager; and Detective Superintendent Brian O’Reilly, head of the Garda Technical Bureau. What is absolutely astonishing here is that the very person running the protected disclosures office, Dr. Corcoran, and another charged with managing protected disclosures cases, Ms Sweeney, were themselves forced to make a protected disclosure. The question is: why? They state they did so because of the wrongdoing they observed and the absolute hostility they encountered in the Garda culture. They too became whistleblowers, and they too were targeted and penalised. Ms Sweeney says that she was repeatedly pressured to close files prematurely. Dr. Corcoran says that after he made his protected disclosure he was targeted and forced out of his job, reassigned a different role, sent to an office on the other side of the building, given no real work and left to spend his day staring at the four walls.
Why was Donal Corcoran so ruthlessly targeted and penalised? On whose order was Donal Corcoran removed from his job? Who repeatedly pressured Ms Sweeney to close files prematurely, and why? Why has this culture of hostility among the most senior management towards Garda whistleblowers been allowed to grow and go unchallenged?
Members of the Garda go to work every day to protect us and they in turn deserve to be protected when they step forward to blow the whistle on wrongdoing. However, instead of being supported they are being destroyed. Following the disgusting treatment of Maurice McCabe we were assured things would change but more than a decade on, we learn that hostility towards whistleblowers and towards accountability at the highest echelons of the Garda is as bad as ever.
Did any member of Government know about this? What action will the Taoiseach take to establish precisely what happened and what is currently going on within the Garda protected disclosures system?
First of all, I have not seen the programme yet and I did not hear any of the material on radio this morning; I did not get the opportunity. The first thing I will do is get an opportunity to see the programme itself. I will not see it live tonight. I am at a function this evening but I hope to get an opportunity. I will get to see it. It is difficult to pre-empt seeing the entirety of it. Deputy McDonald is asking me to comment before the programme airs. That is problematic - day one. The second point is that there is, as the Deputy knows well, comprehensive legislation governing whistleblowers and there are robust structures, policies and procedures in place across the criminal justice system - indeed, across the entire governmental system. That is to ensure the effective management of protected disclosures and to provide support to people making disclosures under the Protected Disclosures Act 2014, which was amended in 2022. Those Acts were part of the then Government's comprehensive approach to strengthening protections available to whistleblowers, including members of An Garda Síochána. Under the Acts and the legislation, as the Deputy knows, Garda members and staff may confidentially disclose allegations of wrongdoing within An Garda Síochána to An Garda Síochána or to Fiosrú, and An Garda Síochána and Fiosrú are operationally independent and both bodies have their own protected disclosures mechanisms in place.
The Deputy's questions at the end were fairly loaded as if she was suggesting someone politically might have ordered. I hope she was not. I am not clear what she was saying by putting those questions. We are not operationally involved in protected disclosures. Government Ministers are not either. There is a very distinct mechanism in place and both An Garda Síochána and Fiosrú have their own protected disclosures mechanisms. The Act also affords protection to persons making protected disclosures.
Again, part of that protection rightly prioritises the confidentiality of the process, which is central to the efficacy of the process. There is a real paradox here now in that the very people within An Garda Síochána, or within the management and so on, are actually not in a position to comment specifically because protected disclosures have been served. That is something, because the Oireachtas passed this. There was never any issue about this and about the confidential nature of it as a protection for those who might wish to make a protected disclosure in any area of public administration.
Again, I will look at the programme. In the first instance, a new protected disclosures unit was established by the Garda Commissioner in January of 2025 within the Garda professional standards unit. My understanding is that was undertaken to strengthen the arrangements in place for investigating protected disclosures; strengthen in terms of personnel and exclusive control. By that I mean rather than having part-time people overseeing protective disclosures that there be a dedicated unit with a dedicated lead person in respect of it.
I am given to understand from An Garda Síochána and the Department of justice that An Garda Síochána encourages and supports employees in disclosing wrongdoing. Any allegations that have been made under the Protected Disclosures Act to An Garda Síochána are treated seriously and are examined for any potential discipline or criminal matters that may arise, so there is a process under way already.
Is rud an-tábhachtach é seo. I dtús báire, caithfidh mé an clár a fheiceáil.
Although the programme has not yet aired, certainly the central kernel of the issue has been published by RTÉ. In fact, there is extensive material in the public domain on the core issues - not the detail perhaps but the core issues at play here - so I am surprised that the Taoiseach or somebody around him has not briefed him on that. Be that as it may, the nub of this is simply this. Tonight, the very person, Dr. Donal Corcoran, who was in charge of running the protected disclosures office will tell a story of how he and others experienced and observed consistent undermining of the independence of the office and active interference at the most senior levels, to the extent that he and another colleague were forced to become whistleblowers themselves and when they did that, they too were targeted and penalised.
Neither of those two who worked in this office are still in the jobs that they held. As Taoiseach, you need to establish the facts around it. I ask in good faith because I want to know and because we deserve to know-----
The Taoiseach will respond.
-----did anybody in Government know that this was going on?
Did anyone in Government know what was going on?
It is rhetorical.
The specific allegations with respect of those who have made protected disclosures - I cannot interfere in a protected disclosure.
That is not what the Taoiseach is being asked.
It was rhetorical, Deputy.
I cannot interfere.
That is not what he is being asked, but anyway.
The Deputy knows that. The Deputy has asked me to override, just now, the entire whistleblowers Act. That is what she has done.
No, I have not.
What is she asking me, so?
I have asked-----
The Deputy is trying to make it political-----
-----that Donal Corcoran-----
She is trying to land it-----
Deputy.
-----and Rose Sweeney-----
as she always does.
-----resigned
Deputy, please.
The Deputy is interfering again and interrupting me. This is what she always does. I think the first thing we should do-----
Would the Taoiseach answer the question?
With the greatest of respect, if we had a bit more whistleblowing in Sinn Féin a long time ago, we would have all been better off.
But could I just make the point, I think the first thing that has to happen-----
That is a pretty disgraceful comment to make.
No, sorry, it is not actually, but the first thing I want to say is we need to watch the programme this evening. I will watch it in its entirety. That is the first thing. I worked with previous whistleblowers. I worked with Maurice McCabe extensively, but I think it is important. It is also important to get a response from An Garda Síochána. What is An Garda Síochána's response to the programme this evening? That has to happen.
The Taoiseach is tasked with more than watching a TV programme. He is the Taoiseach.
Deputy.
Is mian liom cúpla ceist a chur ar an Taoiseach faoi ghéarchéim an chostais mhaireachtála. Mar is eol dó, tá neart daoine ar fud na hÉireann ag streachailt le costais laethúla na tíre seo. Is deacair an rud é dóibh iad féin a bheathú nó na soilse a choinneáil ar siúl.
Eight energy companies have put up their prices in recent weeks. These increases will add hundreds of euro to people's energy bills, which are already the highest in Europe. We all know that Donald Trump and his disastrous war are to blame for rising prices but there are things the Taoiseach can do.
Why is it that Irish households are expected to shoulder the entire burden of these skyrocketing costs, especially when the profits of energy companies are booming? They have never been healthier. Just yesterday, the ESB announced its profits for the first six months of the year. They were up nearly €100 million. Today, we learned that its CEO is in line for a salary boost of a staggering €161,000, an increase of 51%. Energy companies are making enormous profits while pensioners go cold.
Instead of allowing this blatant and scandalous profiteering, the Government could introduce a windfall tax on their excess profits. The Taoiseach could take a stand by telling energy companies the burden of paying for these costs will not be borne by Irish households and that the people of this country, who are already paying the highest electricity prices in Europe, will not be bled dry. A windfall tax would push energy companies into reducing prices by threatening to take their entire excess profits. This would directly help households that are really struggling.
My questions are very straightforward and I would appreciate straightforward answers. Does the Taoiseach agree that it is immoral for these companies to be making such eye-watering profits? Will he introduce a windfall tax on their excess profits?
The energy crisis is fundamentally a global, external situation in terms of war in the Middle East, particularly the war in Iran and now the situation in Yemen with the Houthis gaining control of key ports and potentially a key waterway. It is compounding what has happened in respect of the Ukraine crisis and the massive increase in inflation and energy prices that arose from that.
In the first instance, the scale of the Government's response has been very significant, at about €1.4 billion to date. No windfall tax will come near that. Let us be very clear and straight about that. I think our last windfall tax, which was introduced during the Ukrainian crisis, might have brought in €200 million or more. I can get the precise figure for Deputy O'Callaghan. That is not without implications across the sector as well. There are a number of factors we have to take on board in respect of that.
The budget and the measures we have taken are and have been targeted in particular at low-income groups. The Parliamentary Budget Office, in its review, will say that even the measures taken in respect of diesel and petrol were proportionally better for lower income groups in our society. Add to that the changes we made to the fuel allowance and the child support payments, which were record increases, in the last budget. Furthermore, there was the expansion of the free fuel allowance in terms of the number of people who benefit from it. We have had energy supports through the Minister for Climate, Environment and Energy, Deputy Darragh O'Brien, which have hit about 640,000 families in terms of getting their prices down long term because of installation of solar or various other retrofitting measures. That has been quite impactful and there will be more on that front.
In the forthcoming budget, the cost of living will be the central focus of the Government, particularly in terms of the income tax system and reducing the tax burden on people, the home heating situation and further supports for energy efficiency measures, retrofitting and so on. We will keep all taxation measures under review.
I accept that in times of crisis the supply chain, be it wholesale or retail, can inflate, or there can be price increases that are more the responsibility of the supply chain than the actual crisis itself.
Some work has been done on that in the UK. Our focus now, coming into the budget, is to have a range of supports to try to protect people. We will also look at childcare and the disability sector in terms of easing the burden. However, I think it has to be targeted and focused on those who are enduring the most of what is undoubtedly a significant hike in energy prices more generally.
I thank the Taoiseach. Excuse me, I was distracted. I call Deputy O'Callaghan.
That is unusual.
The vast majority of what this Government has done has not been targeted. The Taoiseach is kidding himself if he thinks that.
I asked the Taoiseach two very straightforward questions. I asked him to give his view as to whether it is immoral for energy companies to be booking record windfall profits off the backs of people who are struggling with the energy crisis. Does he think that is immoral? Does he have any view on it? Does he have anything to say about that? It is a straightforward question.
Keeping things under review is no good. Households are struggling now. We have put forward a proposal for a windfall tax, the aim of which is to reduce energy bills because companies could no longer pocket and keep excess profits under the proposal. That would create an incentive for them to reduce energy prices and bring down people's bills directly. It is a very straightforward proposal. It can and should be done. It has been done previously. Will the Government do it? Will it take action as quickly as possible to reduce people's energy bills by introducing a windfall tax? I have asked two very straightforward questions.
Of course it is immoral to exploit any emergency such as that we are experiencing right now. It is absolutely immoral for any part of the supply chain, be it a wholesaler, retailer or anybody else, to exploit the international crisis to extract more from people. In respect-----
So, will the Taoiseach act?
Take it handy. There is no evidence that putting on a windfall tax would reduce any prices. We did it during the last crisis and prices did not reduce. However, its merit is in bringing some revenue back to the Government in terms of any windfall gains that were made. It does not have wide prevalence in respect of who in this country we could hit. We are not blessed with massive oil or energy companies. We also have issues around refining and so on, which we have to be careful about, frankly, on the supply side. It is easy to come up with simplistic things. I accept that we did a windfall tax the last time. Revenue of €200 million or more came in. It did not bring down prices but it at least gave the Government back some revenue. We are keeping that under review. It is something that has not been ruled in or out.
After the controversy surrounding the treatment of Garda whistleblower Maurice McCabe a decade ago, a new Garda protected disclosures system was developed to protect whistleblowers and to ensure that where concerns are raised, they are followed up. An "RTÉ Investigates" programme from Rita O'Reilly, which will air tonight, will outline that these systems are not working as intended and, worse, that the people who bravely exposed institutional failures are being penalised and even purged. Just last week, Deputy Alan Kelly and I met the courageous whistleblowers involved and heard their stories directly. Many of their revelations relate to the question of serious failings within Garda firearms practices. In particular, there are serious issues with defective gun holsters. Horrifyingly, the issues with holsters arose in the capital murder of Detective Garda Colm Horkan in June 2020 and the serious injury to another garda just days before that. Other serious failings relate to the storage and processing of guns and ammunition. These alarming matters were ignored by senior Garda management for a long time. Amid these appalling practices, as we know, there were people who blew the whistle, brave individuals who put their careers on the line to expose the truth. They will speak for themselves on RTÉ this evening.
Earlier today, we heard the voices of Dr. Donal Corcoran and Detective Superintendent Brian O'Reilly, two of the whistleblowers, on "Morning Ireland". The detective superintendent said that those who came forward were silenced. Tonight's revelations will highlight the need for the Government, and in particular the justice Minister and the previous justice Minister, to respond to a series of important questions about the integrity of the governance system within our national police force and institutional failings. I know that the Taoiseach has not seen tonight's programme, but the Labour Party has been raising these questions for years and to date, we have had no answers. The current justice Minister had to correct the record, having given Deputy Kelly false information about when precisely his Department became aware of allegations about bad firearms practices in the Garda. Just last year, the Minister, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, said that the Department of Justice was not on notice of defective gun holsters until November 2022.
In fact, it was more than two years before that, in August 2020, that the justice Department was first alerted to these concerns, as the Minister then acknowledged in written correspondence with Deputy Kelly. At different times, he gave three different responses to Deputy Kelly, and the difference in dates matters. We will hear more tonight, clearly, about how badly whistleblowers were treated and about the entire reconfiguration of the protected disclosures unit in response to the allegations made. We heard Dr. Corcoran say this morning that the Garda is now in a worse position than it was in the time of Maurice McCabe. Clearly, there are serious outstanding questions for the office of the Garda Commissioner, and both the current and former Commissioners. There are also serious questions for the Taoiseach about ministerial knowledge and Government inaction. Precisely what did this justice Minister and the previous Minister do when alerted to the defective gun holster issue? What did the Taoiseach do when a protected disclosure was made to him on this back in 2022?
The Deputy knows what happens when a protected disclosure is made. It does not go to the officeholder. It does not go to a Minister and it does not go to An Taoiseach. The Deputy knows that well. Why try to distort it? Let us get to the truth here; that is fine. It is reprehensible for any whistleblower to be intimidated or punished. I have no time for any of that. If the Deputy is serious about and honest in what she is saying, she should not be asking me questions that she knows well the answer to.
Oh dear.
That is dishonest politics.
Bí curamach.
I have not seen the programme and I have not met the whistleblowers. The Deputy has.
Of course, and here we go again. Let us change the legislation because it is not tenable that we - all of you, with Government - put into law that we have to have confidentiality around the process. That gets broken in certain ways, whatever way you want and people might feel so frustrated that they have to.
You dealt with McCabe.
I did and the legislation was changed subsequently. Whoever was in the Dáil in 2022 amended the legislation. It seems to me to be an untenable framework now where, on one hand, if a protected disclosure goes in, it is meant to be dealt with independently and separately from Government, which I think is proper actually. It is proper that there is not political interference one way or the other in a protected disclosure. There is not political interference or intervention, nor can or should there be.
In the first instance, I want to see the programme this evening. With the greatest respect to everybody, at the very least what should be required is that everybody look at the entirety of what has been alleged and also hear the response to the entirety of what has been alleged. That is fair. I believe that one or two of these cases might have ended up in the courts already and that process might have come to a different conclusion.
From my perspective, we have to change the entire system now. It is very difficult for Government to respond to loaded questions as to who knew what, when and where when we amended the legislation in respect of how these protected disclosures are to be dealt with in respect of confidentiality and all of that. That is a problem. The Oireachtas should now deal with that from here on in. We need to develop a different system, it seems to me. Some people want confidentiality.
I am disappointed, frankly, to hear the Taoiseach's dismissal of these very serious issues. There are grave public safety concerns here. A Winchester sawn-off shotgun disappeared from Garda custody for 13 years. A protected disclosure was made in relation to that. This is in the public domain already. It referred to assertions against the Commissioner, Drew Harris. At that time, as the Taoiseach knows, the Garda Commissioner had to notify the justice Minister of this issue, as was required under the then section 41 of the Garda Síochána Act, now section 36 of the amended Act. Of course there was ministerial responsibility here. The questions we have to ask, from the Labour Party, clearly relate to ministerial accountability and oversight of the process as legislated for.
It is Kafkaesque and GUBU-esque if those who are in charge of protected disclosures within An Garda Síochána - who have to be independent, absolutely, under legislation - are being victimised and even purged by the senior leadership of An Garda Síochána. That is a matter of concern for the serving Minister of the day.
The Taoiseach to respond.
Undoubtedly we will hear more tonight and we will return to this, but there are very serious matters and serious questions for the Taoiseach's Government.
There absolutely are serious questions but, again, you have to differentiate clearly with regard to a protected disclosure. If a person makes a protected disclosure, it has to be investigated. Would the Deputy accept that? If it has to be investigated, Ministers cannot interfere-----
In accordance with-----
Ministers cannot interfere in the investigation of the protected disclosure. What the Deputy is really implicating and insinuating here is that Ministers should. She is basically saying Ministers should interfere.
No.
Yes, the Deputies are. They are basically saying that the Minister should find-----
If the Garda Commissioner is involved, Ministers have a role.
If the Deputies allow me to finish, what they are saying is the Minister should find out what is going on-----
It is in the legislation.
Again, Deputy Kelly, shouting does not get you everywhere.
I am not shouting. Read the legislation. Tighten up your argument.
You tend to shout almost to prove the veracity of your case or your position.
Deputy, please.
Deputy Bacik is the leader.
Thank you, Taoiseach.
There are legitimate issues of accountability, yes, in respect of issues that fall to An Garda Síochána, its management and all of that but not in terms of protected disclosures. That is the point I was trying to make.
There is a growing number of people who support full Irish independence. Polls show that the majority in this State believe that the people who live on the island of Ireland should make decisions over what happens on the island of Ireland. Brexit has shown that London neither cares nor knows much about the North of Ireland.
Irish independence and Irish self-determination are in touching distance of this generation. The North was purposely designed with an inbuilt two-thirds unionist majority to safeguard British rule but today, according to election results, not one of the Six Counties has a unionist majority.
Unity offers an amazing opportunity. I authored an Oireachtas report for the enterprise committee a number of years ago and I spoke to about 100 people from different backgrounds, including people from businesses, trade unions and civic organisations. Many of them were from different constitutional backgrounds but all of them agreed that if we fund, plan and deliver services together, they will be better services and they will cost less.
An example of this is the healthcare service. Catherine Sherry was married with three children and she lived just north of the Border. She was diagnosed with lymphoma in September 2024 at the age of 42. Treatment was not available to her in the North of Ireland. It was available in Dublin but she was not allowed to access it. Despite the fact that she was extremely weak, she was forced to go to London for treatment for long periods of time away from her family and she died in London, away from her family.
We should have a very simple policy of treating people in the closest hospital they need in this country. It would be of benefit to all people in this country. The Taoiseach should not tell me that we have, at this stage, cross-Border healthcare. It is minute and glacial. It is not as transformative as what unity would bring.
The Taoiseach is becoming increasingly isolated on the issue of Irish unity. He spent the weekend back-pedalling and downplaying the significance of Trump's statement. The Taoiseach is out of kilter with the Dáil-----
That is not true.
-----with his Government partners and also with his own party. Indeed, Fianna Fáil supporters came into our Aontú tent at the ploughing yesterday and stated that they were angry and frustrated with the fact that Micheál Martin is gutting such a core value of Fianna Fáil.
The Taoiseach has given many excuses as to why not to proceed with a unity campaign. At one stage he said that we have to have reconciliation first before it should be considered. What evidence has the Taoiseach got that reconciliation is more likely in a six-county state under British rule? Reconciliation happened far faster in the South than it did in the Six Counties.
At the Taoiseach's next meeting with Andy Burnham, will he raise a key issue: that the mechanism for decision on the referendum for Irish unity will be made clear to the people of the North of Ireland, whom it affects? The Good Friday Agreement was about the North determining its own future. Surely they should know what that mechanism is.
First of all, I am a member of a party and for me and my party, Irish unity is not a slogan or a campaign.
It is not a priority.
The Taoiseach, uninterrupted.
It is a very precious aspiration that has informed the foundation of my party-----
Sitting on the fence.
-----and sustains us to this day.
Hear, hear.
I do not take lectures from Deputy Tóibín or anybody else.
Oh.
The party he is a former member of did more to divide this country and damage the prospect of Irish unity for over 30 years. Deputy Tóibín endorsed that violent campaign for years.
That is not correct.
That is true.
Will the Deputy allow the answer, please?
Unity is about building trust. It is about building understanding with those who do not share our aspiration.
It means grinding out the hard yards of reconciliation. I do not dismiss reconciliation like the Deputy does. It is important that we work at it and do it. It means acknowledging and atoning for wrong done in the past. That has not been done yet. The only people doing that are state actors.
The Good Friday Agreement.
Deputy, your party has had its question.
The British and Irish Governments have had the inquiries, but others have not come to the table in terms of atoning and saying what you did was wrong and so on. That has to happen. It means developing our shared understanding-----
You have forgotten the people of the North.
-----of what it means to live on this island and how we share it into the future, and sometimes it means absorbing and ignoring the abuse of those who prefer to use it as a slogan.
I support unity. I am satisfied with the work we are doing to develop the potential for unity on this island. The Government and I have established the most dynamic and consequential North-South investment, development and research programme in the island's history. We have secured a budget of €2 billion. As of today, we have allocated more than €1 billion of our shared island fund to projects that actually change things, that bring people together and that give us a greater insight into the reality of life on our island than at any time since partition.
The Good Friday Agreement was not just about self-determination for one political tradition. There were three sets of relationships to the Good Friday Agreement: British-Irish, North-South and the two traditions within the North. The British and Irish Governments anchored that peace process. I was in government when we signed off on the Good Friday Agreement.
A long time ago.
The British and Irish Governments working in lockstep was critical. Northern Ireland was never embroiled in the politics of the union, in terms of Wales or Scotland or anything else like that, because we always asserted the exceptionalism of Northern Ireland because of partition. We always did that. If we embroil it in the union, strategically what will happen is the Westminster Government will look at everything in Northern Ireland through the prism of the union, through the prism of Scotland and Wales. What happened over the last two days is a strategic error. It is a real strategic error all for the sake of a photocall and a press opportunity.
Thank you, Taoiseach.
You are rattling in your boots. You cannot lead.
That is not advancing unity in this country.
You are out of step and soon you will be out of time. Next year you will be gone, fortunately.
Excuse me, Deputy Tóibín is on his feet.
Go raibh maith agat. The Taoiseach often strategically tries to make this debate one between him and Sinn Féin. I think he tries to do that to narrow the appeal of the issue. However, all the parties on this side of the Chamber support Irish unity.
And on this side.
Here is the key issue. At the heart of the Good Friday Agreement is the idea the people of the North of Ireland would determine their future. Right now they have no idea how that can happen. The secretary of state for the North of Ireland recently said that this was an obscure mechanism and that he would not put detail in relation to how that mechanism can be exercised. Why is it that people who have the right to vote are being denied the understanding of what makes that vote likely to happen? Why is it that the Taoiseach will not even ask that question of Andy Burnham? Why is it that he has said he will meet Andy Burnham but he will not raise the issue of the mechanism for a referendum? The best poll in the North of Ireland is the election. Stormont should be the body to decide whether there is a referendum or not. That is the most defining view of the people of the North.
The Taoiseach to respond, please. Thank you, Deputy.
Will he raise it with Andy Burnham?
There are two things. The Deputy has limited in his commentary the level of engagement North and South on health. I do not know whether he has been to Altnagelvin and the cancer centre or the cardiac centre. I have met people from-----
That is 25 years in the making.
Sorry, Deputy, uninterrupted.
It is very significant for people living in Donegal-----
Not much has changed.
Deputy Tóibín.
The Deputy has just dismissed it. It is a very significant investment by the Republic in the cancer centre in the North and also in cardiac care so that if a person in Donegal needs heart treatment immediately, they can get it in 20 minutes if they live on the Inishowen Peninsula.
Patients are still likely to go to Galway.
Likewise, the Deputy talked about reconciliation. I witnessed the marvel of Comhaltas in Belfast this summer. I went there. I went to east Belfast to witness the loyalist pipe bands participating in the Fleadh Cheoil.
Will the Taoiseach ask Andy Burnham?
Deputy, that is unacceptable.
I have asked him twice and he will not answer.
Deputy, please.
Let us not dismiss the prospect of reconciliation-----
Why will he not answer the question?
-----as a never-never, as the Deputy seems to be asserting. I will meet Prime Minister Burnham. Legacy will be on the agenda, which would be a real, substantive breakthrough-----
The time is up. We now move to Other Members' Questions.
-----for the people who have lost family members-----
Thank you, Taoiseach.
-----because of the violence over that 30-year period.
We now move to Other Members' Questions and I call Deputy-----
I will also raise reform of the institutions of the Good Friday Agreement and we will discuss the British-Irish situation more generally then.
Thank you. The time is up.
← Back to the rest of Wednesday 16 September
Debate record: official record, fetched 16 Sep 2026
SHA-256 b21cbd87ff9f…
Provenance
View raw