Search the record

their careers would not excel and they might have to look for references. They were used to sign non-disclosure agreements. This is wrong. Under the Maternity Protection, Employment Equality and Preservation of Certain Records Act 2024, NDAs are void when victimisation occurs, including harassment, sexual harassment … somebody to admit guilt - eight years. How many more non-disclosure agreements have been signed to prevent the course of justice? That is what I want to know. Will these people be fully protected under this Act if they come forward now? I do not want to hear

about national security; it is about protecting institutions and people from accountability. Victims and families are entitled to ask simple and legitimate questions. Who knew? What did they know? Why were they allowed to act with apparent impunity? Disclosures from State records have suggested that knowledge existed between … waited over 50 years. Any continued withholding of information cannot be justified by appeals to historical sensitivity or institutional protection. The Irish Government has consistently called for full disclosure through independent international judicial examination of all British-held records. That demand remains not only valid but absolutely urgent

public interest, and it shows that no one can expect to be protected in their actions. We are always coming back to a place of national vetoes on information and we need maximum disclosure and for all parties to be willing to stand for truth, to be brave

more injured. While Operation Kenova did not investigate those bombings and made no findings on collusion in that case, it did expose the protection of agents, the withholding of intelligence and the prioritisation of operational advantage over human life, which is all directly relevant to the understanding … relevant evidence, particularly material held by British authorities. Nor has there ever been a sustained diplomatic or legal pressure applied to force disclosure from the British Government. Families were not failed by a lack of sympathy, although in many years since they did not even get that

survivors to secure a compliant report before their first-instance decision is made. That creates a real risk of people being wrongly refused protection. On detention, the Bill expands detention powers but includes no enforceable healthcare standards. There is no guarantee of access to mental health professionals … replace proper continuing assessments but the Bill ignores that reality. On fitness to interview, trauma survivors can be prone to dissociation, can avoid disclosure because of fear or shame and can present inconsistently due to their psychological state, yet the Bill does not require that fitness-to-interview

outset. Its findings are stark and deeply disturbing. A senior British agent was involved in killings. The British state knew, and it protected him. It allowed violence to continue in order to preserve operational advantage. Victims were not warned, families were left in the dark, lives were treated … will assert its responsibility to its own people when another state has demonstrably acted unlawfully on this island. By withholding truth and blocking disclosure, British state actors have forfeited any claim to good faith in dealing with the past. The evidential gaps in Kenova echo what

collusion by the British state. The report also makes clear that the republican movement protected Freddie Scappaticci. His victims were silenced to protect the movement. The reality is that for them directing terrorism had nothing to do with political ideals, but everything to do with power, self-enrichment … failure to disclose several files to Operation Kenova until after the investigative process had taken place. The absence of full disclosure has failed victims and their families, including those of Sean Brown and the disappeared. This clearly has a bearing, not just on the investigation that is reported

points that need to be made. The first relates to our duty as legislators. We need to identify and address gaps in child protection legislation to ensure our legislation is now robust and fit for purpose and that the State is no longer able to outsource or neglect … debt of appreciation and gratitude to all those brave survivors and victims who have shown such tremendous courage in coming forward to make disclosures and reveal to us all the true extent of abuse in religious-run and State-run institutions, which occurred for far too long

Migration whether it is Departmental policy or practice that Ministers are not provided with the substance of correspondence that may constitute a protected disclosure; if so, the legal basis for such a policy; and whether, where correspondence is subsequently determined not to be a protected disclosure, the Minister

Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the arrangements currently in place to ensure that protected disclosures made to him under section 8 can be read, assessed and followed up where the OPDC is unable to access its systems … made to him but cannot be read by him and may not be accessible to the OPDC complies with the requirements of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014 and Directive (EU) 2019/1937. [7790/26

mechanism to receive or assess systemic or organisational ethical breaches affecting professional practice; whether she considers reliance on internal organisational processes and protected disclosures sufficient to meet the State’s public-protection obligations; and if not, when she intends to bring forward proposals to address the regulatory

statutory remit to examine systemic or organisational ethical failures affecting professional practice; whether she accepts that reliance on internal organisational processes and the Protected Disclosures Act places the burden of regulatory escalation on individual workers rather than an independent regulator; the independent mechanism, if any, which currently exists

exercised in circumstances where correspondence raising serious allegations is not provided to the Minister on the basis that it may constitute a protected disclosure; and whether any guidance exists to ensure that the Minister’s discretion is not unintentionally fettered in such situations [14353/26

Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration what procedures and timelines apply to internal reviews of protected disclosure assessment decisions within the Department; whether there are target timeframes for completion; and how procedural fairness is ensured for reporting persons during such reviews

Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation the protections available to franchisees or workers of a company (details supplied) who make protected disclosures regarding corporate governance, employment status, or misconduct. [10232/26

Deputy Ken O'Flynn asked the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration the number of protected disclosures which were transmitted by him to the OPDC under section 8 during the period 1 November 2025 to-date in 2026. [7787/26

Department of Finance which confirm that PRSI liabilities from misclassification are enforceable and material; the Department of Social Protection has been consulted by Revenue on the Karshan Disclosure Opportunity and related PRSI matters; and manual PRSI records for 2024–2025 are now being created under the Karshan scheme

Flynn asked the Minister for Children, Disability and Equality whether her Department has considered how a statutory safeguarding-disclosure framework for the early years sector could be designed to protect children while also ensuring fair procedures, independent assessment, appeal rights, and proportionality for staff;; and if she will