I agree with the Minister that where a Minister makes appointments, they are subject to retrospective scrutiny by the media and by Members of the Houses but the simple fact is once those appointments are made, they cannot be unmade unless some massive scandal has emerged and the person is removed under the statutory powers. The context for all of this is that - I do not wish to leap ahead because I do not believe we will ever get there in any event - under section 143, the HEA is given power to: "adopt and issue gu…

We will not get into that.

I make the point that we are talking about fully preserving autonomy but we are also giving the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science the right to enunciate policy and are giving the HEA the right to cut off funding for people who do not comply with the Minister's policies. I find that that is not consistent with what I used to believe was university autonomy.

For the time being.

Does the Minister see any role for the HEA and–or guidelines issued by the HEA in ensuring universities, lecturers, student societies and student unions are free to pursue diverse opinions without being bullied out of it by one ideology or another on university campuses, in particular?

I strongly support the amendment.

Not agreed.

I do.

A little.

I welcome the Minister to the House. This is a very important Bill. Sadly, this House has got to the stage where contributions are limited to five minutes, which is inadequate. W.B. Yeats’s great speech “We are no petty people” would have been ruled out after about two paragraphs, given the way we now operate things. I have huge problems with this Bill. I want to outline some of them to the Minister. First, I do not think it is correct that the Minister should choose the appointees to the Higher Education Authority…

I welcome the Minister to the House. I listened to the contribution made by Senator Mullen and I saw a lot of common sense in what he said. I do not think he wanted to be pessimistic but realistic about where we are. It is becoming clear we will struggle significantly to comply with the 2030 carbon reduction targets. That is not a happy situation because once a public perception develops that the targets are not achievable, we are into a very fluid situation where people will ask why they should bother, if the ulti…

I do not say that.

Not in Athenry.

Will that happen?

It is not impossible, but will it happen?

It is an honour to second the motion that Senator Boyhan has brought before the House. I wish to say a few words to re-emphasise what he said. This is not point-scoring against the present Government. This is looking at a deficit that exists in the health system in Ireland. We are not moving this motion in a negative or carping spirit at all. We are endorsing the campaign for an increase in the resources that are going towards neurological nursing in Ireland and a recruitment and training campaign to make sure we h…

As one of the co-sponsors of this Bill, I thank Senator Norris for his initiative in bringing this legislation before the House. I also thank those who inspired him to do so, in particular the Mountjoy residents' association and other conservationists in Dublin. I welcome the Minister of State to the House. A few points have occurred to me regarding the conservation of our heritage. One relates to something Senator Fitzpatrick mentioned, namely, Mountjoy Square, which is an area I have a connection with, in that my…

I move amendment No. 10: In page 9, line 14, to delete “and”. Tá fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit ar ais go dtí an Teach seo. In January 1998, two applications for wind farm developments from two separate developers, Saorgus Energy Limited and B9 Energy Services Limited, were made to Galway County Council, seeking permission to erect 46 wind turbines on three sites in the locality of Derrybrien. Permission was granted to Saorgus for 46 turbines in March 1998. In the same month, B9 was granted permission to erect 23 turbi…

I want to briefly respond to what Senator Higgins quoted from the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union. I fully accept that you cannot have a situation where people benefit from ignoring the law and they get a slap on the wrists and that is it. However, there has been a poverty of imagination as to how we should deal with the decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union. It was possible for us to enact special legislation to deprive the developers of the benefit, to take it into communit…

I move amendment No. 11: In page 9, line 17, to delete “application.”,” and substitute the following: “application, (f) be accompanied by an independent review of the environmental, financial and community impact of the existing development or the decommissioning of the existing development on the lands under consideration.”.”.