Hear, hear.

I know.

Keep going.

I second the amendment.

I second the amendment.

Today, I speak about one of the major crises that is affecting Ireland, which is brain drain. This problem has arguably been with our nation for centuries. The latest wave is ongoing since the crash in 2008 but it is lately reaching critical levels. In many ways, we can all come up with explanations or stories to help us cope with or dismiss the issue of brain drain. We say things like it is just a few students going abroad or we have probably have too many graduates anyway and they will come back after a few years…

I move amendment No. 1: After the last paragraph under “acknowledges that:” to insert the following paragraph: “- the Irish people, as the historic community indigenous to this island, possess a unique cultural and linguistic heritage of global significance; further acknowledges that, consistent with the principles of the founders of the Republic and the democratic mandate, the Irish people act through the State to determine migration policy in a manner that reflects their economic interests and cultural continuity…

I thank my colleague for bringing this Private Members' motion this evening and I rise to speak on my first amendment because I believe, if we centre this debate, it is an open statement of principle that focuses on the positive rather than the negative and is a discussion that cuts to the very deep question about who we are and what we must do. This debate is not, and should never be, about hatred of the other. It is about love for ourselves and for our identity as a unique people and nation. That love often force…

I move amendment No. 2: After the last paragraph under “urges the Government to:” to insert the following paragraphs: “- seek flexibility within the EU Migration Pact to address migratory pressures, and to give due consideration to an opt-out of the Pact if the needed flexibility cannot be found within the Pact; - review deportation policies for international protection applicants convicted of criminal offences, and in particular to consider immediate deportations for those found guilty of criminal offences; - exam…

The ambassador is very welcome here this afternoon. I note the contribution that Latvians have made to our economy and our country over the last number of years. There are now about 25,000 Latvian people here and they make a marvellous contribution to our country. We all agree that desperate times call for decisive measures. The Government's new housing action plan for 2025 to 2030 has many welcome elements: planning reform, statutory guidelines and a promise to tackle judicial review delays. These are a step in th…

I move amendment No. 14: In page 15, lines 40 and 41, to delete “manifestly unfounded” and substitute “an abusive lawsuit against public participation, the court shall determine the application as expeditiously as possible consistent with the administration of justice”.

I rise today to highlight a deeply troubling issue in our family courts, namely, the misuse of the concept of parent alienation. Yesterday, I attended a presentation by the Alliance of Birth Mothers Campaigning for Justice. What I heard was harrowing. They told us how parent alienation is being used as a legal weapon and a tactic to dismiss mothers' allegations of child abuse against fathers. Instead of protecting children, this concept brands protective mothers as manipulators and transfers custody to the very par…

I rise today to speak on the state of the immigration debate in Ireland or, more accurately, the debate about having a debate. It is progress, but not enough. In one breath, we are told to tread carefully when discussing the origins of the rapist of the ten-year-old girl in Citywest because the case is ongoing, but in the next-----

Yes, I am not going to mention anything.

Thank you. But in the next breath, TDs fall over themselves to denounce the phantom far right in connection with the horrific burning of an IPAS centre in Drogheda only for it to emerge that the alleged arsonists were linked to organised crime and the attack was likely part of a gang feud. Many in the so-called Opposition were quick to point fingers at the Government for even hinting that immigration levels might be too high, accusing Ministers of pandering to the extremists. One Member even claimed there was a dir…

I have tabled amendment No. 10b to introduce reasonable caps on damages awarded in defamation actions before the High Court. To say something very simple, justice should be fair, proportionate and predictable. This is not a radical idea but the foundation of any functioning legal system. When it comes to defamation laws in Ireland, we are falling short of that standard. At present, there is no statutory cap on general damages in High Court defamation cases. This means a jury or a judge can award any amount they see…

I move amendment No. 10b: In page 13, between lines 12 and 13, to insert the following new section: “ Amendment of section 31 of Principal Act 17 . The Principal Act is amended by the insertion of the following new section after section 31: “ Caps on damages in defamation actions 31A. (1) Subject to subsections (3) and (4), in any defamation action before the High Court the amount of general damages (including damages for injury to reputation, hurt feelings or distress) shall not exceed €250,000. (2) Subject to sub…

I move amendment No. 11: In page 14, to delete lines 6 to 22 and substitute the following: " 'abusive court proceedings against public participation' means defamation proceedings or part thereof that pursue unfounded claims and that are not brought to genuinely assert or exercise a right, and have the effect of preventing, restricting or penalising public participation, frequently exploiting an imbalance of power between the parties, including but not limited to— (a) where a claim is of a disproportionate, excessiv…

I have great concerns about the health committee's recent pre-legislative scrutiny report on the health (assisted human reproduction) (amendment) Bill. This report is not based on a general scheme but on the policy paper from the Department of Health. The committee admits this is not best practice. Why are we bypassing legislative norms for a matter as ethically complex and legally fraught as surrogacy? The committee invited only two stakeholder groups to make submissions, both of which are advocates for surrogacy.…

Is the discussion on the Bill itself?