I will withdraw the amendment.

I move amendment No. 27: In page 16, line 21, after “The” to insert “Minister and the”.

I will speak to amendments Nos. 49 and 50. The Minister of State will be familiar with amendment No. 49 because it was raised in the Dáil on Committee Stage as well. It refers to the perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, otherwise known as PFAS. These are the coatings that are used in single-use items. It was raised with us under pre-legislative scrutiny. In fact, a report that was lodged with the committee found that items which are used for takeaway materials in the Oireachtas have much higher levels of …

I move amendment No. 49: In page 22, between lines 14 and 15, to insert the following: “(e) food contact materials in which perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) have been used;”.

I move amendment No. 50: In page 22, line 15, to delete “ paragraphs (a) to (d) ” and substitute “ paragraphs (a) to (e) ”.

I move amendment No. 54: In page 23, line 4, after “food” where it firstly occurs to insert “loss and”. These amendments are all connected. I touched on this earlier. Some of them relate to the definition of food waste as compared with food loss. Many people are familiar with food waste and that one third of food purchased goes into the bin without being consumed. That is just the food that makes it to the shop or retail outlet. Food loss relates to food that might not even make it as far as the shop. It may relate…

It is great progress

I will probably repeat some of the points that have already been made. First, I welcome those in the Gallery from the National Youth Council of Ireland, the Dublin Youth Theatre, and some individuals as well. God love them, they have really seen democracy in action today because they have been here for hours waiting for this amendment to come up. I commend my colleague, Senator Warfield, and also Senator Ruane, for all the work they have done on the previous legislation. Senator Warfield feels passionate about this…

I want to raise what appears to be a complete lack of urgency regarding the new demand-side reduction strategy. Even before the war in Ukraine and the pressure this is placing on energy provision, there was a need to address demand-side pressure on our power supply. The previous Government's policy to make Ireland the data centre capital of the world is coming home to roost. Only yesterday, the Dáil debated the rushed legislation to allow for €400 million of temporary gas-powered generation. The Joint Committee on …

Nobody doubts that the unprecedented crisis in the European market is because of the war in Ukraine but the crisis in the Irish energy sector precedes the war. It is disappointing that the Minister of State did not acknowledge the fact that EirGrid's generating capacity statement, which came well before the war, stated that all new demand between now and 2030 would be from data centres. We are living out the consequences of Fine Gael's failed policy. I welcome that residential premises are proposed to be included b…

I wish to raise issues relating to housing but before doing so I wish to express my concern that, yesterday, amendments were submitted that are non-consequential to the Circular Economy, Waste Management (Amendment) and Minerals Development (Amendment) Bill 2022 and which seek to amend the planning Act. There has been no pre-legislative scrutiny of these amendments and no notes as to why they are being produced. It is not the way we should be doing business. Tomorrow morning at 9.30 a.m. we will be discussing amend…

I was not going to come in on this section. However, with all due respect to the Minister of State, I think there are questions that have come to light. The last time we were having this conversation, I accepted that Departments will seek outside expertise. That happens in lots of Departments. Many organisations will hire consultants who have the expertise that is not in-house. What I am seeming to hear today, however, is that the Minister of State will not confirm that it was in-house or, if it was not in-house, w…

I reiterate the point. Nobody is saying that the IAA is not independent. Is the Minister of State saying that the Department sought the advice of the IAA with regard to legislation that was relevant to the IAA? That is the critical point here. Nobody is calling into question that the IAA is being set up as an independent body. Is the Minister of State saying that she sought advice on this legislation, which refers directly to the IAA?

I apologise on behalf of Senator Warfield, who cannot be here today. Amendment No. 39 will insert after the word "violent" the words "accidental, homicidal, undetermined or suspicious deaths". This will expand the criteria listed in the section by which An Garda Síochána would have to be alerted to evidence of human remains. The current requirements are quite limited and, therefore, there is a significant possibility some deaths would not be adequately examined if such a death were to occur.

I move amendment No. 17: "In page 15, to delete lines 31 to 34 and substitute the following: “(5) The Government shall make every effort where a site proves problematic to resolve difficulties and thoroughly examine burials on the land, before it is determined that memorialisation of the burials on the land, is more appropriate.”." This amendment seeks to delete lines and substitute them with the following wording: “The Government shall make every effort where a site proves problematic to resolve difficulties and t…

Could the Minister elaborate on how we categorise substantive reasons for not engaging in an intervention? How do we balance that? I am aware that there are sites where exhumation is not the agreed outcome by everybody involved. How does one balance that to make sure that we get as much information about those burial sites as possible in order to be in compliance with our EU and UN conventions?

It is again about reassurances on making sure that all the families, as far as is possible, would be contacted and all their opinions taken on board and not just perhaps a more vocal cohort of the families. It is just about reassurances that the safeguards are there to make sure that, if that was put as a substantive reason, all the voices are around the table and nobody is excluded from making their views known.

I move amendment No. 21: In page 16, line 13, to delete “, at the time of such burial,”. The rationale for deleting "at the time of such burial" is that there is no principled reason to specify that contemporary burial practice from the 1940s, 1950s and-or earlier or later should apply to any potential burial lands. Public awareness and perception of common decency and dignified burial have evolved and matured over the years and these burials should be viewed as in compliance with the burial requirements we have no…

I move amendment No. 23: In page 16, lines 18 and 19, to delete “and would reasonably have been so considered at the time the burials took place”.

I move amendment No. 25: In page 16, lines 27 to 38, to delete all words from and including “important” in line 27 down to and including line 38 and substitute the following: “significant burial sites, the Government shall make every effort to thoroughly examine and make interventions using the full resources and powers of the Director.”.