I hate to interrupt the Deputy. The issue of carers is very important, but it is not part of the amendment.

It may well be.

I know.

I apologise, but I am conscious of time.

I apologise. My intervention was just on the carers' issue. That was all.

The Minister is entitled to respond in due course. He is being asked if he accepts the amendment. He can reply to that or not as he sees fit.

Amendment No. 1 is in the name of the Labour Party. I take it that it is being pressed.

The Minister has heard that the amendment is being pressed.

The Minister is perfectly entitled to respond to that. He should bear in mind that he has been asked a specific question on the amendment. That is all. He is perfectly within his rights to respond to the issues on those amendments.

The Minister is entitled to respond. There is no motion before me so I am going to let him respond. He has heard what the Deputy said and perhaps he will facilitate it.

I have given the Minister an opportunity to respond. Deputy Duncan Smith has called for the closure of the debate and for the vote to be formally put. The Minister still has not indicated if he is accepting amendment No. 1. I presume he is not accepting it.

Yes. I am presuming from the Minister's reply that he is not accepting amendment No. 1.

I appreciate Deputy's interest in the topic but we are out of time. We will be in trouble in terms of the time for Leaders' Questions.

I thank the Social Democrats for using their time to put the spotlight on this topic. We need more than a spotlight. Continued light must be shone on it through the democratic process of Deputies asking questions and getting answers. I am afraid that I am not reassured by the Minister. I have a difficulty when things are personalised, but something somewhere is very wrong in the Minister's Department. Looking at his speech, the term "weasel words" comes to mind - absolute weasel words. We deserve more than that, bu…

I support the Deputy's request on this matter. Language is meaningless if we accept what the Minister said today, that on the one hand he was not opposing the motion but, on the other, he gave no clarification regarding the extension of the commission. We need clarity and we can only have that in an open discussion in the Dáil, in which the Minister and Taoiseach clarify the matter and we are allowed to ask questions.

Briefly, in the context of the programme for Government, there are many positive commitments one of which states that inclusion in and access to education is the foundation for a more just and equal society. I have tried everything before standing up here today. I have written to two Ministers, namely, the Ministers for Education and for Transport. I have tabled Dáil questions. It is a very net issue. I acknowledge the funds given during Covid for schools to keep them going and for packages at home. In terms of my …

The Select Committee on Justice has completed its consideration of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) (Amendment) Bill 2020 and has made no amendments thereto.

I call the Minister of State, Deputy Feighan, who will share time with the Minister of State, Deputy Butler.

To be clear, Deputy Gould's colleagues have five minutes left. Is that it?

The Minister of State is off the hook. I will go back to the Deputy's colleague unless the Minister of State wants to take 30 seconds.