I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy McConalogue.

I welcome the Minister of State. It should be noted that twice in the past two weeks I have asked to speak to the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade about this issue and the Department has not sent someone in, which is disappointing. In addition, this Commencement matter relates to the Department of justice, so there are actually six appropriate Ministers or Ministers of State who could have come to the House deal with it. I know that is nothing to with Deputy McConalogue, but I just wanted to put it on the record. It is incredibly frustrating and it suggests a lack of respect for the work that we do in this Chamber.

The Irish Government and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade have historically been fair and balanced defenders of the European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR, which makes the total U-turn on the commitment to the ECHR last December deeply concerning and perplexing. When Ireland signed the joint statement to the Conference of Ministers at the Council of Europe it served to blur and totally muddy the waters on Ireland's position in relation to the ECHR. Many human rights groups including the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, ICCL and the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC are hugely worried about this quiet but insidious shift in Irish policy. The Minister for foreign affairs has often spoken about the importance of human rights and international law, with which I absolutely agree but the ECHR is fundamental to that framework.

As I said two weeks ago, Ireland has brought two interstate cases against the UK on the grounds of ECHR Article 3 protections, including the torture of the hooded men in the North and the current case against the Tories' inhumane and cruel legacy Act. Linked to that, it is utterly appalling that a letter was signed by the Irish Government indicating support for changes to Article 3 protections. This would weaken our standards in respect of torture and inhumane and degrading treatment. The entire process around the political decision to support amending elements of the ECHR was done without any meaningful public debate. Relevant stakeholders like the IHREC, the ICCL, the Committee on the Administration of Justice, CAJ, NGOs and academics have been shut out of the dialogue relating to this issue. I am deeply concerned about the complete lack of transparency regarding this policy shift on the part of the Irish Government on the question of the universality of human rights. That is why I am particularly frustrated that twice in a fortnight I have raised this and nobody from the Department has come in to respond. That is because it points to questions of transparency and accountability.

Next week, the Steering Committee for Human Rights, CDDH, will be taking dealing with the concluding stage of this. The latter is the final time Ireland can influence the text before it moves on to the next stage. The proposals put forward on the political declaration by Denmark, the UK and others are incredibly regressive in terms of the universality of human rights. They are also hugely concerning when it comes to the integrity of the Good Friday Agreement. Two weeks ago, I got a set-piece response from the Department regarding my question about whether a risk assessment was undertaken specifically in relation to the Good Friday Agreement before the December signing. Which political and civil society stakeholders did the Department meaningfully consult with as part of this risk assessment? I got no answer from the Department two weeks ago. I hope the Minister of State can give me an answer today.

Many of our EU partners, including France, Germany and Spain, did not sign the joint declaration. Why did our Government choose not to align itself with those partners? We are living through utterly terrifying times in terms of global norms being ripped apart. During times of turbulence and polarisation, we need to hold on to the legal frameworks which underpin our self-proclaimed values of human rights and dignity. We are seeing complete existential threats to our human rights systems and state inconsistencies on issues of international law. Attempts to alter the ECHR represent a retreat from the concept of the universality of human rights. Does this Government believe that all people are born equal? That is a direct question. Does the Minister of State believe that we are all born equal or do he and the Government believe that some people deserve fewer rights? Does the Minister of State believe that we should materially alter our universal human rights standards in order to send a message to people that we are not, in fact, born equal? That is what this represents.

The Government is campaigning for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council, UNHRC. How does pulling out of provisions of the ECHR framework look within that context? What is the Government's position in advance of the CDDH next week? Will it commit to protecting Article 3 and Article 8 rights? Will it practice what it preaches about upholding international law and human rights? Will it meet and consult with stakeholders like the IHREC and the ICCL next week in advance of that meeting and before Ireland's contributions to the steering committee?

I thank the Senator Stephenson for raising this matter, which I am taking on behalf of the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade who is unavailable. At the outset, I want to underline Ireland's long-standing and continued support for the ECHR and the role of the European Court of Human Rights as essential elements of the architecture of the rule of law in Europe. As a founding member of the Council of Europe, Ireland fully supports the Council’s essential role in promoting human rights, democracy, and the rule of law across Europe. We continue to advocate for and fully respect the independence and integrity of the court, the maintaining and upholding of the convention and respect for the universality of human rights.

The significance of the convention as a core safeguard of the Good Friday Agreement is well recognised by this Government and by the British Government and we are unwavering in our determination to maintain that protection. We remain committed to maintaining and upholding the convention, including on the island of Ireland, and respecting the vital work of the court in its efforts to uphold fundamental rights and protections across Europe.

As the Senator will be aware, there have been growing concerns among member states of the Council of Europe about ensuring a fair and effective migration system while fully respecting the integrity of the ECHR. Senator Stephenson referred to two convention provisions that can arise in this context, namely articles 3 and 8.

Article 3 of the convention provides that "no one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." This prohibition is absolute. It permits no derogation.

Article 8, paragraph 1 of the convention provides that "everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence". Article 8, paragraph 2 of the convention provides that:

There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

An informal ministerial conference was held in Strasbourg on 10 December 2025 to address member states' concerns about ensuring a fair and effective migration system, while fully respecting the integrity of the European Convention on Human Rights. On foot of that conference, the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, on 10 December, instructed the steering committee for human rights, CDDH, to prepare elements for a political declaration reaffirming the obligation to ensure the effective enjoyment of the rights and freedoms guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights to everyone within the jurisdiction of member states in the context of the contemporary challenges posed both by irregular migration and by the situation of foreigners convicted of serious offences, taking duly into account, in particular, governments’ fundamental responsibility to ensure national security and public safety. The committee furthermore invited the CDDH to report back before 22 March 2026 to allow for the ministers' deputies to finalise the declaration to be submitted, together with other relevant documents, for adoption at the 135th session of the Committee of Ministers, which is to take place in Moldova on 14 and 15 May 2026.

Ireland is following developments on this matter very carefully and is engaging constructively with other members of the Council of Europe, with a view to achieving a consensus around a political declaration fully consistent with and respectful of the convention, including the universality of human rights, the unqualified nature and non-derogable status of Article 3, and the independence of the court.

I thank the Minister of State. Can he be explicit about whether the Department and the Government will meet IHREC before those negotiations in less than two weeks? IHREC has a clear mandate in this area. It has been given that mandate by the Irish Government and has a clear interest and stake in this. I get that the Irish Government believes in the Good Friday Agreement but I did not get an answer on what consultation was done about the implications of signing a letter that would see us question Articles 3 and 8, two areas on which the Government has taken inter-state cases against the UK Government. It is absolutely absurd.

On the issue of maintaining and committing to the convention, that is not what the signature in December last year represented. It represented a significant waiver on our question of human rights. That is what is concerning.

As for contemporary challenges posed by irregular migration, France, Germany, Spain and Türkiye were not among the signatories to this letter, despite these four countries alone hosting 50% of all refugees and asylum seekers and people under temporary protection in Europe. Those four countries, the states which, objectively, have the biggest migration challenge, are not jumping on the populist bandwagon of signing this joint statement. The French ambassador at the Council of Europe described the move by the 27 signatories as "insidious" to human rights and the human rights frameworks. That is why I am concerned.

The Minister for justice, when asked by my colleague Deputy Gannon, could not provide any figures for the number of deportations blocked due to the ECHR or the European Court of Human Rights. There is no data available for that. Again, I point to the veracity of the argument around needing to sign this letter. In his speech on December, the Minister referred to the need for clarity about inhumane and degrading treatment. I do not know why we need clarity on what is torture, what is inhumane and what is degrading treatment, particularly in light of the inter-state cases we took on the hooded men. It is obscene.

I will ask the Department to respond directly to Senator Stephenson on any plans it has to engage with IHREC in advance of the meeting and also on her query in regard to previous consultations. As the Government has made very clear, Ireland's support for the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Court of Human Rights is very strong. We see both as vital components of the European rule of law architecture. We are very conscious of the role the Council of Europe plays in promoting human rights.

Human rights are at the heart of Ireland's national policy and respect for and promotion of human rights continue to be a cornerstone of our foreign policy. We also view the European Convention on Human Rights as being at the core of human rights protection in Europe.

We will continue to engage in the ongoing discussions at the Council of Europe in Strasbourg in order to reach a consensus among member states around a political declaration. We remain committed to maintaining and upholding the convention, including on the island of Ireland where it is a core safeguard of the Good Friday Agreement, and respecting the vital work of the court in its efforts to uphold fundamental rights and protections across Europe. I thank the Senator for raising this matter.

I note the point Senator Stephenson made about the line Minister. I have written to the Cathaoirleach asking that Senators be informed if the line Minister is not available to attend.

I was informed by the Department last night. I appreciate that but the issue still stands that for two weeks in a row, we have not had suitable representation in the case of six Ministers.

That is noted.

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the House to discuss my question about short-term lettings. I was speaking to a number of business owners in County Limerick, small landlords who let out their properties on a short-term basis. It is my understanding that a register of short-term rental properties, especially those for tourists, is to be established and it will be run by Fáilte Ireland. I understand planning regulations have to be followed. Some of these businesses have been in operation for a long time. They talk about a "grandfather clause" where they have been in operation for over seven years. What will happen to the short-term letting properties that tourists stay in when using Airbnb? There are many small business owners who have such properties, which are their only source of income. They are afraid their building may not meet the criteria or there will be a delay in obtaining planning permission. Will the Minister of State make a statement on that?

I thank Senator Byrne for raising this matter in the House. Action 7.16 of Delivering Homes, Building Communities 2025-2030 states that the Government will:

Introduce increased regulation of the Short-Term Letting sector by: introducing a Short Term Letting and Tourism Bill; and a National Planning Statement will provide guidance for local authorities when deciding on planning applications for short-term lets.

On 1 July 2019, planning legislative reforms to regulate the short-term letting sector came into effect as an amendment to the Planning and Development Act 2000 and the 2001 regulations. These regulations provided that, where a person owns a property which is not their principal private residence and intends to let it for short-term letting purposes, they are required to apply for a change of use planning permission, unless the property already has a specific planning permission to be used for tourism or short-term letting purposes.

Approval was received from the Government on 15 April 2025 for a threshold-based approach to generally preclude new planning permissions for short-term lets in larger towns and cities with a population in excess of 20,000 at the most recent census of population, subject to Cabinet approval. It is intended that accommodation providers in all other locations, that is, outside the largest towns and cities, will have an extended period to meet planning compliance requirements. In line with existing established rights, where it can be proven that a residential property has been operated by a short-term letting accommodation provider for at least seven years and no enforcement action has been taken by the planning authority, planning permission for retention may be sought to regularise an established but unauthorised use.

To give effect to the agreed policy framework approach, the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage is finalising a national planning statement, under section 25 of the Planning and Development Act 2024, for short-term letting activity to supplement and support the introduction of the short-term letting and tourism Bill.

The national planning statement will ensure there is a clear view both at national and local authority level as to the overall policy approach to determining planning applications for short-term lets. National planning statements replaced section 28 ministerial guidance and require the approval of Government. They are intended to provide consistent national planning policies that all regional and local authorities must follow. This will ensure better alignment with Government priorities and more effective delivery of housing and infrastructure throughout the country.

I am glad people who are in this business for a long time are being looked at. Once they can prove that they are in the business for over seven years, while they have to apply for retention, it looks like it should be favourable for people. I know the Minister of State cannot comment on that. However, it is a way of dealing with people in this kind of short-term letting over a long time. There was that fear factor and people did not know what their futures held, so I appreciate the Minister of State's answer.

I appreciate the concerns in the sector among those who have been operating in this space for quite some time. I have a number of them in my constituency, as I am sure the Senator does in Limerick. The Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment has published the general scheme of short term letting and tourism Bill which will establish that register to be managed by Fáilte Ireland. It is the intention that the national planning statement will assist local authorities by providing clarity, as I outlined in my original response, that areas with populations of up to 20,000 will, in general, be looked upon in a favourable manner, subject to conditions, of course, while in areas with populations above 20,000, in general they will not be facilitated, subject as well to a number of conditions. We are working on finalising that national planning statement within our Department. The Department of enterprise is progressing the legislation through the committee to try to ensure we have this in place as quickly as possible.

I thank the Minister of State for coming to the Seanad today to address my Commencement matter seeking an update on the GPO on O'Connell Street, Dublin. The GPO on O'Connell Street is so much more than just a post office. Designed by the famous Irish architect Francis Johnston, it was first opened in 1818 and has gone through many iterations in its lifetime of more than 200 years. In 1916 it was the centre point for the Rising. The building was largely demolished after 1916. It was not until the twenties that a decision was made by the new State to rebuild. The facade was retained but the interior was dramatically altered and the footprint massively extended to the point where, for over 100 years, the GPO has operated not just with the classical facade that we see with the columns on O'Connell Street but right behind it all the way down Henry Street, where there are the shops, offices, retail space, commercial space and the GPO Arcade.

The GPO has been largely de-tenanted by An Post, which has relocated most of its staff to its new offices by the Point in the docklands, . The post office is still operating as is the fabulous GPO museum, which brings to life our history. Masses of space remain however and the GPO has been earmarked, something the Government called out in establishing the Dublin city task force, a statutory agency dedicated to making the city safer, more livable and more vibrant for everyone, by naming the GPO as an anchor to that plan.

I am hoping the Minister of State can share with the House the progress that has been made by the Government and the Dublin city task force in developing a plan for the GPO. I am particularly keen to understand, and I am sure the Minister of State will appreciate, the huge public interest in the GPO. It is not just a place people go to buy stamps. It is sometimes a place where they go to protest when they have an issue. If a you want to build a romance, is a good place to meet. Everybody knows it and there can be no mistake where you are meeting. The GPO is intrinsic to Dublin and to our daily life, but also to our history, our culture and our very independence. There is a huge interest in the redevelopment of the GPO and I believe the public should have an opportunity to be consulted on this and have a say in what is going to be the next 100 years of our GPO. I hope the Minister of State can update the House today on that process. What has been done to date? Will there be an opportunity for public consultation?

I thank Senator Fitzpatrick for raising this important matter and indeed for her leadership and advocacy on the redevelopment of the GPO in a way that will make sure it will play as strong a role in the next 100 to 200 years of this State as it has in our State's history up to this point.

The Government established the task force in May 2024 to take a holistic view of the measures required to rejuvenate Dublin city centre, including O'Connell Street. The Dublin city task force took an evidence-informed approach in its work and published a report in October 2024, making recommendations, or Ten Big Moves, to improve the city centre's public realm, safety and experience. One measure identified in the Dublin city task force report was the redevelopment of the General Post Office. With the publication of the Dublin city task force report, an interdepartmental group was established and mandated by Government to prepare a high-level Dublin city centre implementation plan setting out how recommendations are to be taken forward, including arrangements for tracking progress, oversight and governance arrangements, and to assess the multi-annual cost and policy implications of the recommendations at local and national level to inform future departmental prioritisation within the overall budgetary process and parameters, the national development plan allocation and overall Government policy. Arising from its deliberations the interdepartmental group developed a road map for delivery of the Dublin city task force recommendations which includes the redevelopment of the GPO.

The GPO complex comprises more than 25,000 sq. m of accommodation and remains in use by An Post under licence from the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport, both as a public post office and for back-of-house operations. An Post back-of-house operations have largely decanted from the GPO complex to alternative office accommodation, but several hundred An Post workers remain operating from the GPO complex. In addition to the office and public post office, there are a number of retail premises in the existing GPO Arcade and on Henry Street.

The Office of Public Works is engaged with the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport regarding the future transfer of ownership of the GPO complex. The OPW is leading on the redevelopment of the GPO complex as outlined in the Department of the Taoiseach's interdepartmental group report and road map for delivery and previous Government commitments. It is anticipated that the future GPO complex will incorporate at least some or all of the following: the retention of a public post office function; high-quality offices on the upper floors to provide critical accommodation to meet ongoing or additional Government requirements; significant cultural use or uses; retail components within the existing retail footprint; significant public realm enhancements at street level to encourage public use of the GPO complex.

A GPO steering group is in place since November 2024. This steering group is chaired by the Office of Public Works. Its membership includes representation from my own Department of Culture, Communications and Sport, Dublin City Council and others. There are several GPO steering group work streams operational at present.

These include progressing property-related matters, the development of a non-statutory public consultation engagement process and the development of potential temporary meanwhile uses while the permanent redevelopment plans are being progressed.

That is welcome progress. I particularly welcome the fact that provision is being made for public consultation on the future use of the GPO. It is identified as a building that can accommodate many different uses and not just the post office and museum but also the commercial and retail space. That complex is over 2,500 sq. m. It is an enormous building complex when you are inside it. The facade is impressive but does not do justice to the space that lies behind it. We need actively and ambitiously to pursue the use of the facility for cultural uses.

We already have great cultural institutions on and near to O'Connell Street, with the Abbey Theatre and Gate Theatre. The Ambassador Theatre has reopened. There is also the new library on Parnell Square and the Hugh Lane Gallery. The GPO presents a real opportunity to again foster and support culture in the heart of the city centre. We recently lost The Complex. Others are struggling for space in the city. I believe that the steering committee responsible for managing the property and those meanwhile uses should engage with local cultural organisations, which have a national reach, to animate the property in the interim before the full redevelopment commences. I understand, and perhaps the Minister of State will confirm, that will take place in 2029.

I again thank the Senator for raising the matter. I hope I have reassured her that from a Government point of view, the GP will remain as a public-facing post office. The process under way is to enhance it to ensure we bring in more people and it becomes more central in the life of O'Connell Street and Dublin city centre than it has been in recent years. That work will be led by the Office of Public Works, OPW. The long-term ownership of it will come to the Department of Culture, Communications and Sport, and we are engaging with the process to decide how that will happen. The OPW is leading the work.

We want to see the post office aspect of the GPO become enhanced and attract more people, and become even more of an active part of O'Connell Street and Dublin city life. We also want to ensure that the very large complex in the GPO footprint is maximised in its use. We want to ensure it is living and delivering for the local community and retains the important retail aspect of the part of the building that faces onto Henry Street.

This is an issue that the Senator has been leading on in Dublin city and within her constituency. Her leadership and advocacy have been important in making sure that the process we have seen so far has stepped forward. I know the Government looks forward to working with her and seeing this important work step out in the best possible timeframe and that investment is made to ensure that the GPO will be an important part of our future as it was of our history.

I raise an urgent and deeply troubling matter concerning the abrupt discontinuation of English for speakers of other languages, ESOL, classes at Waterford and Wexford education and training board, ETB, just before the recent mid-term break. Students were informed the day before the break that they would not be returning to classes despite having enrolled with the understanding that tuition would run for a full academic year. Many of those affected are individuals under international protection or with refugee status in Ireland. Some students lost their classes after just ten weeks while others were discontinued after approximately 20 weeks of study. In all cases, learners were left without provision, clarity or an alterative pathway.

Under the International Protection Act 2015 and broader national integration policy, the State recognises the importance of facilitating access to education and integration supports for those granted protection. Language acquisition is central to integration. Without English, individuals face hindrance in accessing employment, participating meaningfully in community life, supporting their children in school or consolidating their independence.

If the State permits individuals to enter and remain in Ireland under international protection, it surely carries a responsibility to ensure that the structures necessary for integration are accessible and stable. Abruptly withdrawing language provision mid-year undermines that responsibility and destabilises some of the most vulnerable members of our community.

The consequences have been immediate and serious. Students have been left confused, distressed and feeling discarded. Many had structured childcare, transport and weekly routines built around these classes. Teachers had their hours dramatically reduced. Trust in publicly funded education provision has been damaged. The emotional impact on learners has been particularly concerning. Many have already experienced sudden upheaval and displacement, for example, people in Ukraine.

If budgetary pressures in one part of the further education and training, FET, system are resulting in the reduction of language supports for individuals under international protection, it raises serious concerns about equity and prioritisation. ESOL learners are among the most vulnerable participants in our educational system. Any reduction in their access to provision should be subject to transparency and public scrutiny. Waterford and Wexford ETB already had significant waiting lists for adults awaiting English-language education with 300-plus students reporting waiting for two years or more for a place, only for that place to be taken away in a cursory fashion.

This Commencement Matter seeks to establish whether ESOL provision has been reduced due to national funding pressures within the FET system; seeks to clarify whether apprenticeship expenditure overruns have resulted in reallocations, impacting adult literacy and ESOL programmes; seeks confirmation from SOLAS and the Department of further and higher education as to how ESOL capacity is being protected for learners under international protection; and advocates for the reinstatement of provision or equivalent alternative arrangements for those who enrolled in good faith for a full academic year. I am also very concerned about the wider funding decisions within the FET sector. I understand that apprenticeship provision has experienced significant cost pressures nationally. I am seeking to ascertain whether funding reallocations at a national level, through SOLAS and the Department of further and higher education, have impacted the level of ESOL provision available locally.

I thank the Senator for raising this issue, which I am taking on behalf of the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, who apologises for not being able to be here in person.

By way of background, Ireland’s 16 ETBs provide free ESOL classes for those who need support in developing English language proficiency. Courses range from beginner to intermediate levels, as well as advanced or professional ESOL. In some ETBs, ESOL courses are also linked to career areas such as healthcare, hospitality and childcare. Since February 2022, demand for ESOL programmes provided by ETBs has risen sharply. This follows the start of the war in Ukraine. For comparison, in 2021 a total of 9,095 learners were enrolled in ESOL provision across the 16 ETBs. Last year, 30,630 learners enrolled in ESOL. The numbers have more than tripled.

Through SOLAS, the Department of Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science provides funding to support delivery of FET programmes, including ESOL, across the 16 ETBs. Each ETB then has the autonomy to use this funding, within its overall budget, in the way that best meets the needs of learners, communities and local enterprise. Following the outbreak of the war in Ukraine in 2022, the Department provided significant temporary funding to ETBs to support ESOL provision. This funding was essential in meeting the immediate language needs that arose during the initial response. The Minister wishes to acknowledge the commitment, creativity and flexibility shown by ETBs and their staff in responding to this rapid increase in demand. Their efforts have offered vital support to people fleeing the war, helping them feel welcomed and to begin to settle into life in Ireland.

The Minister extends sincere thanks to ETBs and their staff for their dedication. While this temporary funding enabled a rapid expansion of classes across the sector, it was always intended to be time limited. It supported the emergency phase of assisting displaced Ukrainians as they began integrating into Irish communities. The Department has now moved towards a more sustainable long-term model. As this emergency allocation has now concluded, and in line with budget 2026 parameters, ESOL funding has returned to its 2021 level.

To be clear, ESOL classes have not ceased. ESOL programmes continue to be delivered in Waterford and Wexford and across all ETBs. Waterford and Wexford ETB has assured the Minister that more than 2,000 learners are currently actively engaged in ESOL courses delivered by their ETB which will continue to completion. Waterford and Wexford ETB's initial plans for 2026 include longer ESOL programmes for approximately 2,100 learners, alongside ESOL courses supporting an estimated 400 learners as part of its wider further education and training provision. This demonstrates that ESOL provision remains fully operational across the region.

The demand for ESOL remains strong and continues to grow in some areas. Waterford and Wexford ETB is working closely with SOLAS, local integration partners and community organisations to ensure that provision is targeted towards those with the greatest need and that learners are supported to progress into further education, training and employment. The ETB remains committed to maintaining accessible language learning opportunities and will continue to review provision as part of its planning for the 2026 academic year.

The words of the Minister of State come as a measure of great reassurance. I am sure it will assuage the worries and fears down in Waterford and Wexford ETB. There is a disjoint between the evidence that I am getting from the local people and the statement from the Minister of State this morning. However, I am not in a position to immediately take up issue with it and will just sit down and have a look at it over the weekend.

I again thank the Senator for raising the matter and providing the opportunity for me, on behalf of the Minister for further education, to outline the situation and background. I assure the Senator that proactive steps are being taken by officials to maximise the impact of ESOL provision within available resources. Since February 2022, demand for ESOL programmes provided by ETBs has risen very sharply. That ESOL provision was critical in supporting migrants in the development of English language skills, while also strengthening communities and supporting access to the labour market.

While the end to temporary funding will have impacts in many local areas, the Department, through all the 16 ETBs, continues to support the provision of ESOL courses. The development and learning achieved by ETBs in ESOL provision over the past four years places the system in a stronger overall position than it had previously. With this in mind, the Department will continue to work closely with SOLAS, ETBI and the ETBs to maximise ESOL provision. The Department will also engage with colleagues across government to co-ordinate wider ESOL provision and ensure that impact is maximised for learners and their communities.