I welcome the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration, Deputy Jim O'Callaghan, to the House.

I thank the Minister for being here today. In 2024, the previous Minister published the review of the enforcement of child maintenance orders. There were 26 recommendations grouped under three approaches, a consensus-based approach, a compliance-based approach and a deterrence-based approach. I acknowledge the Minister's work on the matter of child maintenance and efforts on the implementation of these guidelines.

Every day, in every room we sit in, chances are we are in the company of a parent raising children or a child without any form of maintenance being paid to them by the other parent. That is a disgrace. It is indefensible for someone not to be willing to step up and own their responsibility by financially providing for a child they have brought into this world is indefensible. Child maintenance is not a bonus or a luxury used to get your hair done, go on holiday or buy a car. It is not optional. It is a legal and moral responsibility to ensure that children that you have brought into this world have their needs met and are provided for. Anyone raising children knows it costs money to meet their needs. Children do not survive on fresh air.

If a parent does not pay maintenance, what happens? The answer is often "very little." The parent who should be receiving the payment must go back to court repeatedly, at their own expense, taking time off work, arranging childcare and reliving conflict, all while the child, who, I repeat, was brought into the world by two parents, continues to go without. Compare this with how we collect taxes, fines or social welfare overpayments. Those systems work efficiently, with money tracked, payments enforced and consequences that are real. When it comes to child maintenance, however, which is money that directly affects children's well-being, there is no automatic follow-up and no assumption that a missed payment is urgent.

To recover arrears through the District Court, a parent must complete detailed applications, file multiple copies, arrange personal service of documents, swear statutory declarations, meet strict deadlines and attend court hearings, often repeatedly. Any small mistake can delay the case or cause it to be struck out entirely, forcing the parent to start again from the beginning.

If the paying parent is employed, an attachment of earnings order may be sought. If that parent is self-employed, unemployed or evasive, enforcement becomes even more difficult. Even when non-payment is proven, outcomes can include adjournments, variations of the order or further delays, while arrears continue to grow and children continue to go without. Other countries that have centralised child maintenance service agencies that calculate payments collect them and enforce them automatically. These systems reduce conflict, ensure consistency and, most importantly, put children first.

We need a system that recognises child maintenance as essential rather than optional, one that enforces responsibility fairly and consistently, and stops forcing parents to fight the same battle repeatedly just to secure what their children are entitled to. This is the heart of the problem. The system relies on persistence rather than protection. It rewards delay, avoidance and non-compliance, while exhausting the parent who is already carrying the financial and emotional load.

Child maintenance should not depend on how resilient or legally confident a parent is. It should be enforced consistently, efficiently and automatically. Child maintenance is about dignity, stability and fairness. Our children deserve a better system than one that looks the other way. It is time we fixed it.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Seanadóir Costello as an gceist a chur. Is ceist fíorthábhachtach í do na tuismitheoirí, go háirithe tuismitheoirí os comhair ár gcúirteanna.

I thank Senator Costello for raising this important issue. The issues the Senator has identified clearly reflect the importance of child maintenance and of receiving child maintenance and the significance attached to being a parent. As she indicated, my Department carried out a review of enforcement of child maintenance orders. The review, which was completed two years ago, on 8 January 2024, made 26 recommendations.

The key recommendations required the development of a set of child maintenance guidelines, the introduction of mandatory mediation information sessions for child maintenance applications, the strengthening of attachment of earnings orders and exploring the possibility of attaching an order to a personal public services, PPS, number rather employing entities. Also, there was the proposal to introduce a single enforcement procedure when the receiving parent makes an enforcement application. This would allow the judge to choose the most appropriate enforcement option. It was also recommended that there be simplification of the bench warrant process and that the onus be placed on paying parents to pay costs associated with enforcement proceedings. Finally, it was recommended that there be a provision put in place for deductions from social welfare, the paying parent's bank accounts and Government grants and subsidies, and allowing for the recovery of arrears from tax refunds.

An interdepartmental group was then established in February 2024. It was tasked with the responsibility of setting a series of child maintenance guidelines for use by all parties on a voluntary basis and with the development of an online calculator to help determine fair child maintenance payments.

The objectives of the child maintenance guidelines include: establishing consistent, fair and predictable amounts of maintenance for children whose parents are not together; increasing transparency; reducing conflict and tension between parents since they will know what the appropriate payment should be; and reducing the number of child maintenance applications made to the courts in order to ensure consistent treatment of parents and children in similar circumstances.

In April 2025, the child maintenance guidelines committee conducted a survey-based consultation to get the views of the public. I am pleased to inform the Cathaoirleach and Senator Costello that on Monday last, I published Ireland's first set of child maintenance guidelines along with the report relating to the public consultation. The aim behind the published guidelines is to improve fairness, consistency and transparency and reduce conflict when parents are making child maintenance arrangements. The guidelines will be voluntary for parents and can also be used voluntarily by the courts. The courts will find them of great assistance.

I will shortly launch the innovative new online child maintenance calculator, which will help parents to make private arrangements directly where possible and appropriate. In line with another recommendation in the review, my Department undertook a social media campaign in October 2025 to reinforce the importance of paying child maintenance orders. As a number of recommendations in the review will require legislative changes, work on examining those changes is taking place within my Department. Officials in the Department are liaising with other organisations and bodies to implement the other recommendations in the review, which I outlined and which, I know, Senator Costello wants to see implemented. As a large proportion of civil justice proceedings relate to family law, it is important that we have a consistent and transparent method of making child maintenance calculations in order that people will not have to go through the process of very complicated applications in court and will know that there is a procedure available for them to be objectively and fairly calculated.

I thank the Minister for his response. When he took up this role, I knew that there would be movement in this area because I had spoken to him about it previously. He understood at that time how important it was, and it was something he had worked on prior to taking up his current role. In that context, I am happy with today's response. I am happy that he took the 26 recommendations seriously and that he has made certain moves, particularly as this was a priority for him previously. Prior to his being in this role, I had asked the question and there had not been as much movement. What he listed out today is really positive. Conflict resolution and the avoidance of conflict between parents is important. The Minister is making really good strides in achieving that, so I thank him.

Family law is the aspect of law that affects the majority of people in the country. Fortunately, most people do not end up before the courts. If, unfortunately, you find yourself in a family dispute and there are children involved, you probably do need to go before the courts. It is important that we, as legislators, ensure that the system for family law in place is fair, efficient and helpful to people who come before the family courts. Our sole objective should be trying to facilitate the individuals before the courts. It is not about lawyers or judges; it about the litigants.

The calculator for the maintenance guidelines will be coming in shortly. I urge Senators to have a look at the maintenance guidelines that were published. A huge amount of work went into them. The calculator sets out a very mathematical and logical basis for people to calculate how much maintenance should be paid. It is based on the financial capacity of the parents and the amount of time they devote to the children. Other resources are also taken into account. It is a very useful tool. I urge all Senators to have a look at it.

I thank the Minister for coming to the House this morning. It is it is greatly appreciated by Members.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, for coming to the House to take this matter, which relates to the participation framework in the defence procurement process. Senator Ahearn has four minutes to set out his stall.

I welcome the Minister of State. I also welcome the opportunity to raise the issue of defence and security procurement, in particular the importance of ensuring meaningful local participation as Ireland increases its investment in this area. It is clear that public understanding of Ireland's defence and security environment is evolving. There is growing awareness of our vulnerabilities, our responsibilities within the European Union and the reality that decades of underinvestment in defence capability must now be addressed. As this expenditure increases, it must be seen as an opportunity not only to strengthen sovereign capability but to deliver tangible economic and regional benefits across the State.

Ireland already has a growing number of indigenous SMEs operating in these areas. There is a clear need to strengthen local participation within defence procurement policy in a manner fully consistent with EU procurement rules. We must ensure Irish firms are engaged early in capability planning and delivery whether through maintenance, training, logistics, research and development, systems integration or long-term life cycle support. Early engagement with domestic industry delivers three clear benefits. First, it strengthens national resilience by ensuring critical knowledge, skills and support capacity exist within the State. Second, it delivers better long-term value for the taxpayer by reducing life cycle costs and dependency risks. Third, it de-risks the delivery of major programmes at a time when the Defence Forces increasingly require private sector expertise to support complex systems. As these negotiations progress, there must be clarity on how industrial participation measures are being embedded and how Irish SMEs and third level institutions can play a meaningful role in these programmes. This approach is also fully aligned with Ireland's obligation to contribute to the European defence technology and industrial base. Bringing non-traditional dual-use Irish companies into European defence supply chains strengthens not only Ireland's position but Europe's collective security and resilience.

There is a strong case for ensuring that Enterprise Ireland supports are aligned with the specific needs of defence and security-related innovation, including support for research and development collaboration with the Defence Forces and European partners. With the right alignment, Irish firms can scale, develop, export potential and contribute more effectively to national security objectives. We are increasing defence spending. We are already committed to buying major capabilities. The question is why would we not ensure Irish companies and our research and innovation sector benefit from that investment. We should be making absolutely sure that a proportion of this expenditure remains within the Irish economy, supporting Irish businesses, skills and local communities. That can only be achieved through a clear and dedicated local participation policy framework.

We have heard positive statements from the Government on the floor of the Dáil and in the media. The Tánaiste stated:

While Ireland does not have a traditional defence industry ... we do have industry that could have a defence application ... Irish industry should be in a position to take advantage of the significant growth opportunities in this sector.

I strongly encourage the Minister of State and the Government to do two things. First, formally introduce local participation requirements in defence procurement - make it a requirement that Irish SMEs must be involved. Second, publish a clear policy framework setting out how this will be delivered. Doing so will strengthen our Defence Forces, support Irish enterprises, deliver better value for the taxpayer and ensure that increased defence investment builds lasting national resilience.

I am responding on behalf of the Minister for Defence who unfortunately cannot be present today. She sends her apologies.

On the Minister's behalf, I welcome the opportunity to respond to Senator Ahearn and thank him for raising this important matter. I know of his interest generally in such affairs. He has taken a great interest in and support for Ukraine after the Russian invasion. If I am not mistaken, I think he was in Kyiv and showed a great understanding of that particular matter. It does not surprise me that he is raising a matter like this. The importance of ensuring a strong local participation framework within Ireland's defence procurement process is timely. As the Senator is well aware of, the programme for Government committed to strengthening Ireland's defence by increasing investment in our capabilities and thereby safeguarding our citizens.

The 2026 budget demonstrated that commitment in the most practical manner by allocating €1.49 billion to defence expenditure. In addition, the national development plan sets out a longer term capital investment in defence totalling €1.7 billion from 2026 to 2030. This significant funding increase reflects the Government's commitment to continue to increase investment in our Defence Forces. It will enable targeted progression on key elements of Government commitments from the report of the Commission on the Defence Forces. As recently outlined by the Minister, Deputy McEntee, the report aims to speed up the modernisation of the Defence Forces and improve defence capabilities across land, air, maritime and cyber domains.

The potential for increased local participation in Ireland's defence procurement process is a timely issue, particularly in the context of a changing security environment, the increased investment in defence capability and the continuing need to ensure value for money for the State. With that in mind, it is important to emphasise that defence procurement is not simply about the acquisition of equipment. It is about the delivery of long term, sustainable capabilities for the Defence Forces. For this reason, the Department has adopted a whole-of-life cycle approach to procurement, encompassing design, acquisition, maintenance and upgrade. Local participation has the potential to play a significant role across each of these phases.

As an island nation, Ireland must also consider the practical and strategic implications of overseas dependencies. Transporting platforms or systems for critical components across the Continent for routine maintenance, repair or upgrades can introduce unnecessary costs, extended downtime and operational risks. This is particularly relevant for naval and air assets where availability and responsiveness are critically essential. Where it is feasible, the component with EU and international procurement obligations, local or regional maintenance and support arrangements can specifically reduce turnaround times and improve operational resilience.

A sustainable procurement model also supports the development of indigenous skills, expertise and industrial capacity. By embedding local participation requirements such as in-country maintenance, training, technical support or supply chain involvement, the State can help foster specialist eco-systems around key defence assets. Over time, this builds institutional knowledge, reduces reliance on external providers and enhances sovereign capability in critical areas.

Furthermore, local participation contributes to broader Government objectives, including regional development, high-value employment and skills retention, particularly in engineering, technology and advance manufacturing. These outcomes align with the whole-of-government approach to resilience and economic sustainability, while remaining consistent with our policy of military neutrality.

The Minister, Deputy McEntee, is conscious that any such framework must be proportionate, legally robust and deliver clear value for money. It must also balance openness and competition with long-term strategic benefit. Work is ongoing to ensure that future defence procurement fully considers life-cycle costs, sustainability and opportunities for meaningful local participation.

In light of ongoing geographical tensions and the lessons learned from Covid-19, supply chain resilience and security of supply have become increasingly important in the context of national security. With that in mind, the Minister will look to ensure an appropriate amount of diversification among suppliers to ensure a resilient, efficient and secure supply chain.

A well-designed local participation framework is both pragmatic and beneficial. It strengthens defence capabilities, improves availability, supports resilience and ensures the investment in defence delivers lasting benefits for the State and Irish society as a whole.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, for his comments. Like me, he has visited Ukraine many times and has a keen interest in the country. I welcome the line from the Minister, Deputy McEntee, that a well-designed local participation framework is both pragmatic and beneficial to Ireland and Irish companies.

This is common practice in other EU states. Spain requires significant industrial participation in defence contracts. Finland mandates industrial co-operation for large procurements. Denmark links industrial co-operation obligations to contract value. Germany embeds domestic industry involvement in major programmes. This happens right across the European Union. We would not be an outlier. What we are essentially saying is that the increased investment in defence should remain in Ireland.

Here is a simple analogy that the Minister of State will understand well. There are sports capital grants coming out some time this year. I hope some Tipperary applicants will be successful, including my local GAA club and the Minister of State's in Clare. If they are successful, we want local builders to get the jobs so the money stays local. It is no different in defence spending. If money is being spent, it should be spent in Ireland.

The Senator has rightly identified the positive that can come from this. The Minister outlined previously that her priority is to ensure that the operational capability of the Defence Forces is maintained and developed. This will enable the Defence Forces to carry out its roles as assigned by Government. In addition, the Government is going to provide for the development of a full spectrum of defence capabilities that will bring Ireland in line with similar sized European countries, as the Senator has identified.

Over the coming years, substantial expenditure will be directed towards infrastructure development, capability enhancement and technological innovation. While these investments will enhance Defence Forces capabilities, they will also have the potential to unlock opportunities for Irish industry and create pathways for SMEs operating in the dual use area to grow. As the Senator is aware, Ireland has a strong and highly innovative SME base, no more so than in light engineering, which is very much part of the local economy in the Senator's county, Tipperary, with many firms active in advance technologies relevant to defence and security.

The continued structured engagement with these enterprises will broaden co-operation, support innovation and strengthen the domestic contribution to Ireland's defence capabilities. By fostering that collaboration with the Defences Forces, industry and our European partners, the State can ensure that the increased investment in defence delivers lasting benefits, both in terms of operational readiness and, importantly, as the Senator keeps emphasising, the wider economic resilience of those communities.

I propose that we suspend as the Minister of State, Deputy Buttimer, is in the Dáil. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I thank the Minister of State, who will be here for the next two Commencement matters.

I thank the Minister of State for being here. At the outset, I will say he has taken this Commencement matter from me before. He is not the Minister who I had hoped would be here this morning, unfortunately, although that is nothing against him. I am back with this Commencement matter for the third time. The responses I have received to date have been wholly inadequate. Each time, I raise this on behalf of real people who have issues trying to use a service to get to college. Each time, instead of getting straight answers, I receive vague replies about Midleton, Cobh and investments in parts of Cork that I do not have anything to do with and that do not matter to my constituents.

Today I had hoped to ask the Minister two specific questions. The first relates to the lack of a Monday morning train from Banteer to Cork. As I outlined previously, there is no early-morning train from Banteer to Cork on Mondays. There is a 5.32 a.m. train from Millstreet which does not stop in Banteer and arrives in Cork far too early. The next one is at 8.15 a.m. and it arrives at 9.15 a.m., which is too late. That is not acceptable when there are students who are trying to attend college and cannot live in the city due to the housing crisis. That means people are forced into cars, there are longer journeys and there is more expense. It completely undermines the claim that the Government is serious about climate change when it expects people in rural Ireland to drive cars to wherever they need to go. We talk endlessly in this House about encouraging public transport use. We cannot expect people to use a service that simply does not exist when they need it most. When will an early morning Monday train from Banteer to Cork be restored?

My second is on the Leap card from Millstreet. The Leap card is supposed to be the backbone of the public transport system of this country. It is supposed to ease travel, make it cheaper and more accessible but, once again, rural towns are left behind. In the reply to my last Commencement matter I was told the Leap card was not the responsibility of the Department of Transport. With respect to the Minister, Deputy O’Brien, that is simply not credible. Either he is the Minister for Transport or he is not and either integrated ticketing falls under his remit or it does not. Right now people in Millstreet are being told no one is responsible. When will the Leap card be extended to Millstreet rail services? I do not want to hear that there is a travel card. People know that. We know Leap cards exist.

It was the Minister of State who asked me how many people this affected. I did a survey in the constituency and received 79 responses. I can share the issues people raised. These are college students who use public transport. One student said they stay with a friend in Cork city on Sunday night just so they can get to college on Monday morning. That is ridiculous.

My two questions are simple. When will the Monday morning service from Banteer to Cork be restored? When will the Leap card be extended to Millstreet? If the Minister cannot do that, he should just say it cannot be done. I ask the Minister of State not to give me waffle and say it cannot be done and that he commit to coming back to give an update on when it will be done.

I thank Senator Ryan and call Senator Buttimer. Sorry, I call the Minister of State, Deputy Buttimer.

Former Senator.

Former Senator, and he will always be welcome back.

I thank the Acting Chair. I apologise to the House for being late. I was in the Dáil and could not get over here fast enough. l thank Senator Ryan for raising this important matter. I would like to clarify for Senator Ryan that the Minister for Transport, on whose behalf I am taking this matter, has responsibility for policy and overall funding in relation to public transport but neither the Minister nor his officials are involved in the day-to-day operation of public transport services. That is an important point to make. The statutory responsibility for securing the provision of public passenger transport services nationally rests with the National Transport Authority, NTA, as the Senator knows quite well.

I reassure the Senator that the Government is strongly committed to providing all citizens with reliable and realistic sustainable mobility options and public transport plays a key role in the delivery of this goal. In our own county of Cork we have seen significant investment in the Cork area commuter rail programme. To support this objective, in budget 2026, the Department of Transport secured €940 million of funding for PSO and TFI Local Link services, providing a significant 43% uplift, an increase from €658.4 million in 2025. The allocation further supports subsidised bus and rail services across Ireland, including in Cork, as well as maintaining targeted fares initiatives such as the recently introduced free travel for all children up to the age of nine and the young adult card, as part of the NTA's national fares strategy.

Senator Ryan raised extending the Cork city Leap boundary to Millstreet station. The NTA has advised that it has no current plans to extend the boundary. However, I would like to remind Senators that there are currently two Leap card options available which offer 50% discounted travel for young people and students.

The young adult card is available to all young adults aged 19 to 25 and the student Leap card is available to full-time students aged 16 to 18 and those aged 26 and over. Qualification is based on students being in full-time education or training for at least 16 hours per week. Any student who meets the eligibility criteria, supported by a valid student ID, can have a student Leap card. The NTA encourages all customers to use the TFI Leap card to ensure they receive the best possible value on fares. Leap card users can save up to 30% compared to paying with cash, making it a more cost-effective option for regular travel.

In relation to train services, there are two trains, as Senator Ryan knows, which commence from Tralee on a Tuesday-to-Friday basis and which serve Banteer and Millstreet. The first operates at 5.45 a.m. and goes from Tralee to Cork, and the second train is the direct 7.05 a.m. Tralee-Heuston service from Monday to Saturday.

On Mondays, there is a specific and consistently strong demand for an early connection to Dublin. To meet this requirement, the first train is deployed to operate the 4.30 a.m. Tralee-Mallow service, which connects into the 5.40 a.m. Cork-Heuston train, facilitating an arrival into Dublin at 8.17 a.m. This ensures early morning Dublin-bound customers have a workable connection at the start of the working week.

larnród Éireann recognise this results in the absence of the 5.45 a.m. Tralee-Cork service for customers travelling on Monday, including those from Banteer and Millstreet, who benefit from the service from Tuesday to Friday. At present, the fleet is fully deployed across the network and there is no train set available to operate this service on Mondays without displacing the early Dublin connection. There are, however, alternative bus services available on a Monday morning, operating on the Expressway service and commencing at 6.15 a.m. I understand the NTA is in discussions with larnród Éireann on the scope or otherwise to introduce an early Monday morning Banteer to Cork rail service. The new DART+ fleet begins entering service from 2027, at which time we can review deployment of intercity and commuter trains which become available as a result. Their deployment will be subject to the approval of the NTA.

I assure the Senator I have been in discussion with the NTA and will meet its representatives again. I am from Cork and am very familiar with Banteer and Millstreet. Senator Lynch has also raised it with me and I know of the issue from talking to family members living in the area. I look forward to working with Senator Ryan and others to ensure the best outcome for commuters.

I am grateful that I got some answers today but disappointed it took three attempts to get here. The answer is that the Leap card is not being extended yet to Millstreet and the Minister of State is looking at potentially putting on an early-morning train, hopefully in the near future, and is meeting with the NTA. It is great the Minister of State is willing to work with me, Senator Lynch and everybody else. He will know at first hand how it impacts people across the rural constituency I am in. I thank the Minister of State for taking this and giving me the appropriate answers. I really appreciate it.

I thank the Senator for raising the matter. I apologise for it taking three attempts. She should not have to raise the matter three times to get the answer from the Department. As a Minister of State and formerly a Member of this House for 19 years, it is about representing constituencies and commuters in the Banteer-Mallow area. It is an important issue.

As Minister of State with responsibility for rural transport, I am aware of the pertinence of the Cork area commuter rail programme to people's lives. It is progressing well. I will not read out all the different things because the other areas are not important to her. What is important to her is that passengers and commuters get access to services. I will work with the NTA, Iarnród Éireann and the Senator. Iarnród Éireann expresses its thanks to passengers and local communities for their patience and support while it looks to deliver rail projects across Cork and, hopefully, build capacity and greater frequency. I will work with the Senator to ensure the outcome we both desire.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I return to the matter of the full reinstatement of the western rail corridor, specifically the 73.5 km stretch between Claremorris and Collooney. I have been left with no alternative but to raise this as a Commencement matter due to the inconsistent and unclear messaging from the Government.

I will give a little bit of background. As a previous speaker said, rail use in Ireland has changed and we, as a population, make more frequent use of rail and demand more services in the rail infrastructure. While the 1980s and 1990s saw prioritisation of road over rail for passengers and freight, attitudes, times and values have changed. In 2016, for example, The Sligo Champion reported that the Sligo-Dublin line was at risk of closing. Just 1.3 million passengers had used the route in 2015. These figures have steadily climbed, especially following the pandemic, and Irish Rail has seen significant passenger growth year on year. Passenger numbers grew from 17.8 million across the network in 2020 to 50.7 million in 2024. Irish Rail expects those numbers to have grown by 5 million in 2025. Freight rail has experienced a similar renaissance.

Times and contexts have changed since the decision was made to close the Claremorris to Collooney rail line. Rail is again recognised as an effective and efficient method of passenger and freight transit. We recognise the environmental benefits of rail and Iarnród Éireann has declared its goal is to be the backbone of Ireland's sustainable transport network.

All other phases of the western rail corridor have either been opened or approved for opening. To exclude Claremorris to Collooney not only denies the people and enterprises of Sligo a vital link to Mayo, Galway and beyond, but it jeopardises the integrity and logic of the entire corridor. Sligo has to connect to it in order for the corridor to achieve its potential. Without the Sligo connection, we risk condemning the corridor to disuse.

This rail corridor is a 73.5 km strip of land. In 2023, it was valued at €957 million. Its untapped value is the final piece of the jigsaw of reopening the western rail corridor. Comments from a number of Government politicians in recent weeks indicated they would like to see a greenway and that there are plans to install a greenway on the existing rail corridor. Will the Minister of State give a commitment that the existing stretch of rail line will be retained for rail use only, as has been indicated by Irish Rail, and that no other structure, including anything described as a temporary structure, should be permitted on it? The narrative we hear is a temporary greenway will be placed on the track to keep it in public ownership. That does not add up because it is already in public ownership. In this day and age, can we honestly see the waste of taxpayers' money involved in creating a temporary structure that will cost millions and then be ripped up to put in a rail line in the future? It makes no sense and is inconsistent with Government policy regarding the western rail corridor. Please, can we get a straight answer and put to bed the idea of a temporary greenway along the existing track?

I thank the Senator for raising this important matter and again apologise for being late. I am taking the matter on behalf of the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, who is genuinely apologetic he cannot be here.

The Department of Transport, together with the Department for Infrastructure in Northern Ireland, published the rail project prioritisation strategy last year. This strategy outlines how to best sequence and optimise the recommendations of the all-island strategic rail review, which was published in July 2024. The strategy specifies short-term rail infrastructure investments, referred to as early interventions, to be delivered by 2030, including new track, passing loops and platforms to boost the rail network’s resilience and capacity, which are funded under the NDP sectoral investment plan for transport published by the Department in November 2025. The strategy also identifies major projects to be progressed in the longer run, involving intercity electrification and significant capacity upgrades on the rail network. This includes the reinstatement of the western rail corridor between Claremorris and Athenry. The NDP sectoral investment plan also provides funding to help commence this reinstatement project.

Modelling undertaken as part of the rail review published in 2024 found that investments on the disused line between Claremorris and Sligo and onwards to Donegal would result in very low demand for passenger rail services and that building a railway would have a significant adverse impact on the environment. For these reasons, the project was not included in the recommendations of the rail review; hence it was not identified as a major project to be progressed in the rail project prioritisation strategy.

However, the rail review will be reviewed and updated once a decade. This review will provide the opportunity to reconsider a potential extension of the western rail corridor further north, taking account of the latest policies and developments, for example, if there is an increased passenger demand as a result of the reinstatement of the line between Claremorris and Athenry.

In relation to the proposed greenway between Claremorris and Collooney, the section of the disused railway from Claremorris to Bellaghy has never been included as a scheme within the greenways programme, which is funded by the Department of Transport through Transport Infrastructure Ireland, TII. Sponsoring authorities, generally local authorities, may submit a case for annual funding to TII for consideration in relation to the greenway schemes. Separately, on the section of the disused railway line in County Mayo, to date, no submission has been received by TII from Mayo County Council in relation to progressing a greenway route between Claremorris and Charlestown. A feasibility study cannot be completed on a greenway scheme that has not been submitted for consideration of funding by the relevant sponsoring authority for review by TII.

The section of the disused railway from Bellaghy to Sligo was an active scheme within the greenways programme until the end of last year. As part the development of this scheme, a third public consultation was held in November of 2024 regarding the emerging preferred corridor. The emerging preferred corridor was centred on the disused railway line, which remains in the ownership of Irish Rail, or Iarnród Éireann. Iarnród Éireann communicated in December 2024 that it was no longer able to support the greenway on the existing alignment at this time. Accordingly, Sligo County Council initiated a review in mid-2025 to ascertain if it is feasible to accommodate a greenway and a railway on the railway corridor. This review took account of the available width of the corridor as well as parameters maintained by Iarnród Éireann in relation to the offset distances required between a railway line and a greenway corridor.

This review concluded that it was not possible to accommodate both modes within the railway corridor. The report also reviewed the potential to develop an alongside option that would be guided by the principle of aligning the greenway parallel to the disused railway line. It concluded that this was not feasible due to a range of factors including increased cost, the potential impact on special areas of conservation and land acquisition, as well as various engineering challenges. On this basis, Sligo County Council opted to suspend work on the greenway scheme in late 2025 as the alongside option was not a viable option. I hope that this helps clarify the matter for Senator Cosgrove.

It was my understanding, and the Minister of State has cleared it up, that there is going to be no greenway on this rail structure, which is wonderful. Unfortunately, our local representatives in Sligo are continuing to press, saying that there is an option to have a greenway developed here, whereas in Mayo and Galway all the politicians from Opposition parties and all parties have come together and this is why they have made a very firm case, and they have seen it. In fairness to the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, he has done Trojan work on this because he is passionate about having balanced development and opening up the western rail corridor.

Am I right in saying that there is going to be nothing except rail infrastructure on the existing line? My reading from the Minister of State's response is that there is going to be no greenway on the existing railway.

As previously mentioned, there are no active schemes within the greenways programme planned for any section of the disused western rail corridor between Claremorris and Collooney. The all-Ireland strategic rail review sets out 32 strategic recommendations to enhance and expand the rail system in Ireland and Northern Ireland on a phased basis up to 2050. Included in these recommendations is the reinstatement of the western rail corridor between Claremorris and Athenry. This project was also identified as a major project to be progressed under the rail project prioritisation strategy published in December of last year. The NDP sectoral investment plan published by my Department in November also includes funding to help commence this reinstatement project. The section between Claremorris and Collooney is not included in the recommendations of the rail review strategy. The rail review will again be reviewed and updated once a decade, taking into account, as I said, the latest policies and developments, which point to potential extension of the western rail corridor further north to Collooney, and can be then reconsidered. I will ask the office of the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, to liaise with the Senator if she has any further questions.

I thank the Minister of State very much for his time this morning. I thank Senators for their engagement on the Commencement matters.