I thank the Deputy for raising this. I absolutely recognise the value of developmental check-ups for children. As the Deputy said, it provides peace of mind in the vast majority of instances, but also, where there is an issue, early detection and warning is vital when it comes to intervening and making a difference. I do not know the detail of the area and the case the Deputy raised. I assume it is related to recruitment. I will ask the Minister, Deputy Donnelly, to look into this and revert to the Deputy. Certainl…

I recognise the value in having a visible Garda presence in communities. I am sure that is something that the Deputy and her constituents are seeking in Carlow as well. In the last budget, we provided funding for the recruitment of 800 additional gardaí. There is a recruitment campaign currently under way. The allocation of Garda resources is a matter for the Garda Commissioner, but it is absolutely the Deputy’s right to make the case to the Commissioner as to why Carlow should be getting a greater allocation of ga…

I do not have a date to hand, but I will ask the Minister, Deputy Darragh O’Brien, to confirm that date. I am sure his Department will be in touch with local authorities about operationalising that decision, which was a very positive one. It reflects the market reality that is present at this time.

I fully agree with the Deputy about the incredible role our carers play. We can never properly recognise the work they do. In the previous budget, we did make the first changes in the means test in about 14 years, which was a step forward. All of this will be considered in the lead-up to the budget. Of course, there are issues arising from the Pensions Commission that are directly relevant to carers, and that matter is also under active consideration at the moment. It is an issue that is close to my own heart and w…

My understanding is the planning regulator makes recommendations to the Minister, who considers those recommendations and makes a determination. It is fair to say the views of the Office of the Planning Regulator would be a very important consideration for the Minister in making the final decision but, as I understand it, it is a final decision for the Minister.

I acknowledge this is an issue Deputy Smith has consistently raised, and I recall our meeting with local authority members for the Cavan-Monaghan area last year. It is also the case that, given the current cost of resurfacing works and with bitumen, an oil-based product, being particularly expensive, the work we did in reforming the public works contract, including in respect of energy, will be important to make sure we have a comprehensive road resurfacing and maintenance programme over the course of the summer. I…

I thank Deputy Naughten for raising this issue, which I know has quite a history to it. I assure him of the work that is ongoing within the Government to make progress on this. As many of the issues fall within the remit of the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, the Minister of State, Deputy O'Donovan, who has responsibility for the Office of Public Works, OPW, has referred these matters to the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, for his early consideration and has highlighted that OPW officials are availab…

I will ask the Minister, Deputy Donnelly, to revert to Deputy MacSharry directly on this issue. We all acknowledge that when it comes to responding to a cardiac incident, time is paramount, but so too is the quality of the service. I have heard what the Deputy had to say in regard to a cardiac cath lab and the requirements at Sligo. I will ask the Minister to come back to the Deputy directly on that.

As I said to Deputy MacSharry, I appreciate the importance of this issue. I will ask the Minister, Deputy Donnelly, to respond as a matter of urgency, given the latest developments on this issue.

I am delighted to be here for Committee Stage of this important Bill. I will speak to this group of amendments. This is a very important area of the Bill and a very important set of issues have been raised that I am anxious to address insofar as I can. These amendments concern the retrospective application of the protections of the legislation to workers who have reported wrongdoing prior to the enactment of this Bill. This is the main item outstanding from the recommendations I have accepted from the pre-legislati…

I thank Senators Boyhan and Davitt for raising the issue. The Protected Disclosures Act 2014 protects workers from penalisation if they report concerns about wrongdoing or potential wrongdoing in the workplace. The term "worker" is defined in section 3 of the Act as being an individual who is or was an employee, a contractor, an agency worker, a work experience student pursuant to a training course or a trainee. The Protected Disclosures (Amendment) Bill before us provides, under section 4, for a significant expans…

That is correct.

I thank Senator Flynn for raising these issues. On the proposal to include bringing vexatious proceedings against a worker in the definition of penalisation, it is already a penalty under section 24 of the Bill. It does not need to be specifically included in the definition of penalisation. My officials gave detailed consideration to the pre-legislative recommendation on medical and psychiatric referrals. They consulted the Attorney General who highlighted that the proposed amendment is not the language of the EU w…

Section 3 outlines repeals, including the repeal of section 5(7A). This is a technical amendment to remove a reference to subsection 7A of section 5 of the Principal Act. Section 5(7A) was inserted into the Principal Act by the European Union (Protection of Trade Secrets) Regulations 2018, which provided for the transposition of the trade secrets directive. This directive required that a person who made a protected disclosure could only disclose information deemed to be trade secret if he or she acted for the purpo…

I thank Senators Flynn and Higgins for this amendment. We had some discussion earlier on the retrospective application of the Bill and I am sure we will revert to that on Report Stage. This amendment provides that employers with 50 or more employees shall establish, maintain and operate reporting channels and procedures within six months of the commencement of this section. The core provisions of the Bill, including the requirement for employers to establish and maintain internal reporting channels of the Bill, are…

I acknowledge the points the Senator has made. However, the derogation on the issue has been sought, and the time set out in the amendment is in conflict with that. Therefore, I cannot accept it. I understand the point the Senator has made. We are anxious to put the Bill into operation as quickly as possible. Detailed guidance will be issued and there will be an information campaign. I know we will discuss more of those issues later in the debate. As a result of the derogation on that aspect, I cannot accept the am…

I thank the Senator for raising the issue. If I set out our thinking, we can then have a discussion and exchange on these matters. These three amendments propose to remove the 50-employee threshold for employers performing a public contract with a value of more than €1 million and employers that are companies with an annual turnover of over €1 million. This would mean that any employers in these categories would be obliged to establish formal internal reporting channels and procedures. I am not proposing to accept …

I thank the Senator for her constructive approach on this issue. I do not think there is a fundamental difference of opinion between us on this point. I am concerned about imposing additional costs on very small businesses. The Senator mentioned the example of a local corner shop or the local plumber. There are costs involved in requiring these processes to be established. The Senator also mentioned particular sectors that have significant impacts. It is also provided for within the Bill that the threshold does not…

I take the Senator's point. It is our intention that the threshold will not be applied across the public service. We would be more than happy to tease out with the Senator in a technical way how we envisage the regulation-making power will work and how it might go some way, at least, to addressing the concerns the Senator has raised.

The issue here is that the date is set in Article 26.2 of the EU whistleblowing directive. For countries that avail of the derogation, the date of 17 December 2023 is enshrined in that. It is the case we have at this point signalled to employers that fall within this category of between 50 and 250 employees that this is the intended date for this provision to come into effect. Given we have availed of that derogation, we do not have discretion to vary the date in the directive of 17 December 2023. It is a reasonabl…