I know, but-----

-----we are not going to get to all the amendments because the Minister has guillotined this Stage, as he has all other Stages. I am asking this at this point. I would like clarification. Does the Minister agree that information would be helpful for guiding public policy and, if so, will he ensure it is collated and published?

How do you know?

On that point, the Minister said we know it is 90%. We do not know that. I accept that it is probably the case that a large proportion, if not a majority and perhaps even a substantial majority, of people who claim international protection come via the common travel area. It is one of the reasons we tabled amendments in respect of the common travel area, which the Minister rejected. I have been rightly critical - and will be vindicated as such - of the fact that the Minister is prioritising this legislation rather …

But I want the exact specifics and the Minister should as well.

I know the Minister does not listen to me, but------

-----I would love for him to listen to himself sometimes, because he has just set out a paradox in terms of his position. He said his Department publishes the nationalities of people seeking international protection on a weekly basis and, on the other hand, he said it would be too burdensome for his Department to collate and publish their origin in terms of visa route. The information would be in exactly the same place. It would be in the application that was made. When people make an application, they state whethe…

I wish to speak to amendment No. 1 to Seanad amendment No. 91 in my name. It is important to state very clearly what the Minister is opposing here. This amendment calls on the Minister "to record, and publish in anonymised and aggregate form, annual statistical information on the routes of entry of applicants to whom this section applies, including - (a) the number of applicants presenting at a port or airport, (b) the number presenting inland, (c) the number reporting entry via the Common Travel Area, and (d) the …

I move amendment No. 1 to Seanad amendment No. 44: After subsection (3), to insert the following: “(4) A provisional representative person or a representative person appointed in relation to an unaccompanied minor shall, in the performance of his or her functions, comply with child specific safeguarding standards, and in particular shall— (a) ensure that all actions taken in respect of the unaccompanied minor are guided by the principles of child protection, child welfare and the best interests of the child, (b) ha…

I will just make a couple of comments on that. The Minister's rationale for refusing to accept the amendment is, I believe, that there is no need for it. I would contest that. On the Minister's latter point, I do not think there is any suggestion that people do not appreciate the challenges that are involved. We have had quite an amount of discussion on this at the Oireachtas justice committee. For sure, the committee members fully appreciate that this is a very difficult situation to manage. In the first instance,…

Will the Minister respond to the question I asked in terms of Tusla?

You wait for a long time for a bus and then a number of them come at once. A number of my amendments are in this grouping and I will restrict myself to them, considering the timeline. I know amendment No. 1 to Seanad amendment No. 65 has been disallowed but I want to make the case very strongly that we need to end the use of for-profit providers of accommodation for those in Tusla care. That is what this amendment sought to do. A judge in Dublin District Court recently hit out at what he quite rightly described as …

Transparency is what the amendment asks for.

The ordinary working people.

He did not like that.

There are a million workers-----

Is the only way-----

Arrogance personified.

You went on holidays when it was happening.

You failed.