I thank the Minister for Justice, Home Affairs and Migration for making himself available for this Topical Issue. It is an example his colleagues in Cabinet would do well to follow but I commend him for doing so. I also wish to take the opportunity to put on record my best wishes to Deputy Michael Healy-Rae following the disgraceful attack on him earlier. I am sure the Minister came away from the "RTÉ Investigates" programme like myself. There were seriously concerning revelations in respect of protected disclosure…

I never pretend to have a better understanding of the court system than the Minister, as somebody who has practised. As he said, I just look at the facts before me. Even if we were to accept the bona fides of the his rationale for introducing this system, and he says the primary reason is a more effective and efficient court service. Nobody could argue that we have a more effective court system as a result of these changes brought in. The court system is in disarray. The secondary reason is the costs, the excessive…

-----of the State. I apologise, I meant the civil legal aid scheme, which saw a 60% reduction that has been attributed to the fee model that was applied there. The Minister has repeatedly stated that he has a responsibility to address the excessive adjournments, and I agree with that. However, he follows it by saying the excessive adjournments resulting from the pay structure. Yet, he has provided zero evidence that it is actually solicitors or their want to get additional payments that is actually the cause of a s…

What was the corresponding figure last year?

You sent a letter saying you would not engage with them.

Hear, hear.

Deputy Sheehan is looking for extra time.

Is the Taoiseach concerned about what is happening in our courts as a result of the debacle in handling criminal legal aid reform? We have seen substantial numbers of solicitors withdraw from the scheme. I am told that the solicitors who have withdrawn provided representation in the majority of cases involving the legal aid scheme last year. More important, we have seen thousands of criminal cases adjourned. We have seen victims turning up to court only to be turned away. They are waiting for justice. We have also …

I am just asking for engagement.

No, there has not.

Well, there are more now than ever.

The Taoiseach will not call for dialogue this week.

I move: That the Bill be referred to the Select Committee on Justice, Home Affairs and Migration in accordance with Standing Order 187(2).

I move amendment No. 1: To insert after "on 2nd July, 2026": "and: further calls on the Government to provide that the Accommodation Recognition Payment (ARP) scheme shall apply only to: — existing recipients with respect to the beneficiaries of temporary protection currently benefitting from the scheme where those beneficiaries of temporary protection have satisfied a means test similar to those applicable for other housing assistance payments; — new applications who propose to host a beneficiary of temporary prot…

As I mentioned on Second Stage, I welcome the fact that this Bill has progressed as speedily as it has. I have commended the Minister and his officials on prioritising what is a singular piece of legislation. It is a huge testimony to the family of Jennifer Poole, particularly Jason, because they have convinced the entirety of political opinion in this House of the merits of this measure. That is a phenomenal achievement on their part. I want to say to them that they have done Jennifer proud by being able to do so …

I move amendment No. 2: In page 3, line 29, after “subsection (4)” to insert “and (4A)”. Amendments Nos. 2 and 4 are in my own name and I also record my support for amendment No. 3 in the name of Deputy Gannon. Amendment No. 2 may appear to be technical and inserts “and (4A)” after subsection (4). Amendment No. 4 proposes to insert in page 4, between lines 7 and 8, the following: “(4A) For the purposes of subsection (2)(d), the court shall be satisfied that— (a) the consent of the victim is freely and voluntarily g…

I move amendment No. 4: In page 4, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following: “(4A) For the purposes of subsection (2)(d), the court shall be satisfied that— (a) the consent of the victim is freely and voluntarily given, (b) the victim has been provided with sufficient information and access to appropriate supports, including from specialist domestic violence services, to enable informed and safe decision-making, and (c) such consent may be withdrawn at any time prior to the inclusion of the judgment in the Re…

I move amendment No. 5: In page 4, line 33, to delete “3 years” and substitute “5 years”. All of these amendments are linked and are the critical amendments that we will be discussing this evening. Amendments Nos. 5, 6 and 7 are fairly simple in their wording. They are to substitute the words "5 years" where "3 years" is currently in place. Amendment No. 8 inserts the following section 9A on page 5: Notwithstanding subsection (9), the court may, in making an order under subsection (2), specify that a longer period …

I will make a couple of ripostes. In terms of the bar being set high and the logic behind using that phrase, I am sure the Minister will accept, and he probably knows this better than anybody in the Chamber, that it is an indisputable fact that the vast majority of cases of abuse are never reported. That has been well-documented. The vast majority of reported abuses never result in court cases at all. The majority that result in court cases do not subsequently result in a conviction for one of the 17 offences the M…

I move amendment No. 6: In page 4, line 37, to delete “3 years” and substitute “5 years”.