Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 15 Jun 2023

Vol. 1040 No. 2

Ceisteanna ó Cheannairí - Leaders' Questions

Táthar ag dréim go n-ardóidh An Banc Ceannais Eorpach rátaí úis don ochtú uair ó a bhí mí Iúil ann. Méadóidh sé seo costaisí morgáiste do na céadta mílte de teaghlaigh arís. Tá sé in am faoiseamh úis morgáiste a thabhairt isteach le tacú leis na teaghlaigh seo.

Today, the European Central Bank, ECB, is expected to increase interest rates for the eighth time since July of last year. For workers and families who must deal with the rising costs of food and spiralling energy bills, this is another massive blow to their incomes. In April, the Central Bank estimated that for one in five mortgage holders in this State, the cost of servicing a mortgage has risen by more than €4,800. It stated that more than half of mortgage holders have seen their annual costs rise by more than €1,200. Those estimates were made before the ECB's rate increase in May and the further hike expected later today.

Some 250,000 households are on tracker rates and have had to bear the full brunt of these interest rate hikes. Those on variable rates have also been affected. The mortgages of 85,000 households were sold to vulture funds without their consent. They will remember the words and promises of the Taoiseach and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael McGrath, who told them that they would be no worse off if their mortgages were sold by the banks. I said at the time that was nonsense and that the vulture funds would not hesitate to hike interest rates more aggressively than the retail banks. Unfortunately, that is exactly what has come to pass. Vulture funds are now charging interest rates well in excess of those being charged by the banks. Many people are now being charged interest rates of over 8%. The scale of these interest hikes is crippling many families.

A single parent contacted my party leader recently. Her monthly mortgage repayments have risen by €700 per month. That is an increase of €8,400 per year. She fears losing her home or going into arrears. She says she sees no future here for herself or her child. A taxi driver also contacted us. His mortgage was sold to a vulture fund and he has seen his monthly mortgage repayments rise by €400, an increase of almost €5,000 per year. That is before today's increase. He said that with more to come, he cannot see how he will sustain things. With his wife unable to work and a child with special needs, he says they are living day to day and week to week.

These stories are just a snapshot of what is happening in wider society. Many people and families are feeling the brunt of eight interest hikes. Month after month and week after week, they are seeing the pressure on their incomes. Action must be taken to support these families. We have been raising the issue with the Government for months and asking it to do something but the members of the Government have their heads in the sand. The Government has so far refused to take any action despite the fact that families are seeing bills and mortgage repayments increase by thousands of euro. I have been calling on the Government to introduce temporary and targeted mortgage interest relief to support these households. We have brought forward credible solutions and proposals that would offer a helping hand to those whose mortgage interest rates have spiralled by supporting households with 30% of the rising mortgage costs, benefiting households with up to €1,500 per annum, with appropriate limits and caps.

Hundreds of thousands of households are anticipating another letter in the coming days telling them their mortgage repayments have increased again. It will be the eighth such letter that many of these families have received in less than a year. Is it not time for those in government to get their heads out of the sand and take action to support families who are trying to keep a roof over their heads? Will the Government take action? Will it introduce mortgage interest relief to support these struggling households or is the Government's message the same as it has been in recent months, that is, people are on their own?

Táim buíoch as an cheist thábhachtach faoi mhorgáistí. I assure the Deputy that no one has their head in the sand. No one will be left alone, as the Government has proved during the cost-of-living crisis with the additional measures we have brought forward for families and individuals across the country. The average interest rate on new mortgages in April, prior to today's expected increase in ECB rates, was 3.6%. Mortgage rates in Ireland are the fifth lowest among the 20 countries that use the euro. Roughly 90% of new mortgages over the past year or so, as the Deputy should know, have been fixed-rate mortgages. These products will, thankfully, protect borrowers in the event of further interest rate rises in the market.

The last time there was mortgage interest relief was in 2008. The full-year cost at that time was €700 million. It would be a significant intervention and it is not one that anyone should take lightly or bring forward on an ad hoc basis. The pre-budget submission that Sinn Féin published before the budget last September made no reference whatsoever to mortgage interest relief. The reintroduction of a tax relief on mortgages does need to be considered. There is no question but that families and individuals are suffering because of the mortgage rate increases. However, such a relief cannot be done on an ad hoc basis. That is what the Deputy has suggested to deal with nearly every problem. He changes from one week to the next. That is not the way to manage an economy or the country. The budgetary process is the most appropriate way to consider further action in respect of the cost-of-living challenge and the introduction of mortgage interest relief, should it be decided that ought to be done.

Sinn Féin's proposals, brought forward by the Deputy, do not help people on fixed-interest mortgages. There are questions about fairness in respect of who gets relief and who does not, and at what levels they get that relief. While tracker mortgage holders and some people on variable rates have unquestionably been affected by higher payments, recent Central Bank research shows that having benefited from lower repayments over the years, the increases they now face will move their repayments roughly to the level of other borrowers. Fairness and equity are important in any measures we would take.

In respect of non-bank lenders, the Minister for Finance and senior officials recently met with providers in the non-bank sector. The Minister raised concerns about the impact of recent mortgage interest rate rises on borrowers and the potential this may have to increase mortgage arrears. That is a real situation with which the Minister has been dealing. He has emphasised it is a Government priority to reduce mortgage arrears and noted that the higher rates being charged by non-bank lenders act against achieving this objective. The Minister also recently wrote to the Central Bank in the context of the review of the consumer protection code to highlight the issue and to underline the importance of customers with performing mortgages being supported and facilitated to switch to avail of the lower interest rates that are available in the market outside the non-bank lenders. Many borrowers within the non-bank sector who are fully repaying their mortgages should be in a position to switch their loans back to the banks if they wish to do so. There are approximately 72,000 borrowers with tracker or fixed-rate mortgages with non-banks so it is a significant sector. On that point, I agree with the Deputy. Any measures the Government decides to implemented will come, in the round, by way of a budgetary response, as we did in the last budget to bring forward additional measures on the cost of living. The Deputy will recall that every week last year, members of Sinn Féin were jumping up and down and looking for emergency budgets. What type of security or certainty would that have provided? This Government was able to bring forward a budget last year to help people. I assure the House we will do the same this year.

The Minister talks about security and certainty. He has his head firmly in the sand. I gave him examples, including those of the single mother whose mortgage interest rate has increased by €8,400 per annum and the taxi driver whose interest rate has increased by €5,000. The Central Bank has stated that one in every five mortgage holders across the State will see an interest rate hike of €4,800. That is before we figure in today's interest rate hike and the increase in May. That is the reality. What the Government has done is nothing. The Minister spewed figures about new mortgages but there are 750,000 existing mortgages. The ECB states that in Ireland, the figures are 53% higher than the European average. That is the reality.

Since December, we in Sinn Féin, the Opposition party, have been putting forward proposals in respect of a tailored and targeted measure to support mortgage holders dealing with high interest costs.

The Government has come up blank. It has said to wait until October and it may do something. These families, the single mother, the taxi person and the people whose loans the Government allowed banks to sell to vulture funds are being charged 8% and 9%. The Government is telling them to hold on until October and that it might do something at that stage. That is not acceptable.

The Deputy's time is up.

This is out of control and we need to intervene now.

Unquestionably, there are people badly affected by the interest rate increases we have seen in recent months. I remind the Deputy that when Sinn Féin brought forward its alternative budget, it made no mention of mortgage interest relief whatsoever. What does that show about Sinn Féin's foresight or planning with regard to the economy? Every week, the Deputy comes in with further asks for additional spends, additional taxes and additional reliefs. That is not the way any responsible Government would manage an economy or manage the country. That is why we have thankfully more than 2.66 million people working in this economy. You do not just deal with things on an ad hoc basis. I assure the people who are affected by this issue that the Government will consider it in the context of the budget-----

We do not have time.

-----and appropriately so, as we did in the most recent budget in the context of the cost-of-living crisis. Let us remember the Sinn Féin proposed energy price caps that would have spiralled out of control. We targeted the supports for people and families. We targeted additional social protection payments for our elderly and those with disabilities. He knows what we did.

There are no supports left.

What he did every week was come in with the last thing he heard outside the door and asked for it here in the Chamber.

We have been arguing for this since December.

EU nature restoration hangs in the balance. It is unclear at this stage what the ultimate law will look like after the final vote was postponed at the EU environment committee this morning. If it is undermined, there will be plenty of blame to go round. The Minister's party's coalition partner, Fine Gael, has been among the chief critics of the proposed law. Instead of supporting the measures, the Taoiseach has slated them. He has propagated fears that farmers will be forced to rewet their land as part of the law. He has done so despite the fact that he knows, or at least should know, that this is not true. The Taoiseach is not alone in cynically politicking on this. Sinn Féin MEP Chris MacManus also joined in and voted against one of the of the most important pieces of legislation in EU history at the agriculture committee. Like the Taoiseach, he chose to pit farmers against nature and stated there is too much ambiguity about the impact the law would have on farmers. If there is any ambiguity, most of it has been caused by MEPs like Mr. MacManus and the Taoiseach, who chose to ramp up fears rather than alleviate them. Also centrally engaged in project fear was Fianna Fáil MEP Billy Kelleher. He has been at the forefront of Irish media in recent weeks arguing that the law threatens the livelihoods of farmers. Mr. Kelleher has made these claims in the absence of any evidence. In fact, the nature restoration law aims to provide new funding streams for farmers to ensure the viability of farms long into the future.

I hope the Minister is as concerned about this matter as I am. Let us be clear that there is no future for farming unless we protect our ecosystems and biodiversity. I should know because I am a farmer. My mother is also a farmer. I have lived and worked on a farm for my entire life. I am deeply committed to ensuring that farmers have a future in this country. That means being deeply committed to protecting our critically endangered habitats and biodiversity. I do not see these things as being in any way in conflict with each other. It is quite the opposite. They are intrinsically linked. I have to say that the kind of dangerous distortions about nature restoration coming from some in government and in the main opposition party are worrying. We only have to look at the results of yesterday's Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, report for evidence of the huge problems we face. The EPA report found unacceptably high levels of pollution in our rivers and lakes due to human activities. We cannot credibly claim we want to deal with that and with all of the other immense climate challenges while arguing against the nature restoration law.

The Minister has responsibility for biodiversity in his Department. Is he also concerned about the scaremongering from his own party and from Fine Gael and Sinn Féin about nature restoration? Are Fianna Fáil MEPs going to vote for nature restoration – a law with teeth?

I thank Deputy Cairns for raising this important issue. I believe, as does the Government, that the proposed regulation to which she refers provides an opportunity for transformative change with regard to achieving nature restoration in Ireland and in the EU as a whole. That is absolutely to be welcomed. She made reference to yesterday's EPA report and the challenges we face when it comes to water quality in watercourses across the country. Healthy ecosystems provide food and food security, clean water, carbon sinks and protection against natural disasters caused by climate change.

As previously outlined, Ireland remains absolutely supportive of the ambition and principles underpinning the regulations. There is a challenge involved in meeting the ambition proposed, and that remains significant. One need only look to the debates that are happening across the European Union and in the European Parliament to see that is the case. Among the challenges we face are the extremely tight timeframes for quantification of targets and measures for the preparation of national restoration plans and the delivery of targets. There will be a need for a considerable level of scientific data collection, collation and analysis, including emerging information from the land use review. The resources required for preparing, implementing and monitoring the national restoration plan are not currently in place.

Anything farmers will be asked to do will be voluntary, and they will be supported financially in the context of any measures that need to be taken. The Deputy is right to raise that issue, because it is not a question of pitting farmers against biodiversity. My experience in north County Dublin and across the country is that farmers, in the main, are protectors of the environment and biodiversity. They understand it, as do our communities. For argument's sake, we can take the success of the agri-climate rural environment scheme, ACRES. Some 46,000 farmers signed up to its largest ever agri-environmental scheme. This shows that farmers are leading from the front and playing their part. They are being rewarded for taking measures to combat climate change. Rewetting is one of the many tools, and this is a matter in respect of which there has been scaremongering. It is one of the many tools to meet our restoration commitments. Under the Council's proposals for regulation the extent of rewetting required would be at the discretion of the member state. Ireland will be relying on State lands, such as those owned by Coillte and Bord na Móna, to facilitate the majority of rewetting required. There should be no fear in the sector of measures being taken without individual farmers or farming communities having the choice to op in voluntarily. The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy McConalogue, has outlined both the significant flexibility under the Council's proposals and the fact that agriculture production is not expected to be significantly or adversely affected. State lands will contribute almost all of the initial commitment in this space. This is an important time for the member states of the European Union to act together positively with regard to nature restoration. There are discussions and debates happening, which is appropriate.

I thank the Minister for his reply, but he has again made clear one of the major problems we face, namely, that there is no shortage of supportive rhetoric from the Government but very few results. We are repeatedly told the Government is committed and has passed one of the most ambitious climate action laws in the world. However, we are missing all of our targets. Our emissions are going up. Our rivers and lakes are choked with pollution. Our biodiversity is in crisis. More than half of native plant species are in decline. More than 60% of Ireland's wild bird species are in decline. The failure of successive Governments to address biodiversity loss has left us with little time to reverse it. The time to act is now. I agree with the Minister that farmers know exactly the risks they are facing in terms of biodiversity loss. They know those risks better than anybody. They are constantly underestimated and spoken for as one homogenous group in this Chamber, when that is not the case. Actions will speak louder than words. I return to the question I asked in my first contribution. Will Fianna Fáil MEPs vote for the nature restoration law?

Ireland has not been on the sidelines in this, nor indeed has this Government. We brought forward the most comprehensive climate action plan. We underpinned that in law.

All the targets have been missed.

Some parties decided to vote against it. Reversing the loss in biodiversity and tackling climate change is the single biggest challenge the world faces. Doing so is this generation's responsibility. This is probably the last generation that can actually do something about it. There will be tough choices. I want to give the Deputy a couple of examples of where we have already moved.

I asked the Minister a question.

We have made substantial progress in delivering over 13,000 ha of rehabilitated peatlands in Bord na Móna ownership. The Climate Action Plan 2023 has committed to a further rehabilitation of 77,000 ha by 2030. There are many measures being undertaken and these are just examples. I attended the Committee on Environment and Climate Action this morning for my own Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and we were looking at what we are doing to ensure we are reducing emissions within the housing and local government sectors through retrofitting measures. This Government supports the nature restoration law. The European Parliament is separate from this Parliament.

All I would say to the Deputy is that I agree completely as to the importance of this matter and that Europe acts as a whole in a very considered but also in a very effective way.

Has the Ceann Comhairle ever noticed how happy this Minister is when he takes the Leaders questions?

The Deputy is fairly happy there himself, by the looks of things.

I would not usually describe Deputy Barry as being happy.

(Interruptions).

One would almost think that the Minister was at an audition or something. He might not be the happiest man in the House though as earlier on I could have sworn I saw the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science skating down the corridor with a copy of The Irish Times tucked under his arm whistling a tune and polishing a piece of cutlery, and I do not think it was a spoon.

The Tánaiste got a little upset this morning when I questioned the line-up of speakers at his consultative forum on international security policy, which is due to kick-off in Cork next Thursday.

The chairwoman of this event, as the Minister knows, it is a dame of the British empire who has offered up explanations bordering on justifications in writing for the bloody interventions of US governments in Latin America. She is also due to write the official report of the forum.

This morning I listed a number of speakers at the forum who I felt were reflecting a one-sided debate, so to speak. My point, of course, was that this is not a genuine forum or genuine debate and that it is a stitch-up. The whole point of it is to soften Irish public opinion for increased military spending, military co-operation with imperial powers and de facto associate membership of NATO. The Tánaiste did not like this and said that I had displayed a shocking intolerance to the whole idea of debate and he warned that I was not going to get away with it.

Following on from this morning’s exchange, I asked my office to analyse the list of 71 invited speakers to the forum. We calculate that there is a 5:1 ratio between speakers who on the one hand are overtly pro-NATO, overtly pro-EU militarisation, have a history of doing work for the military machines or have previously advocated for militarisation and, on the other, speakers with a history of strong or consistently strong opposition to those forces and agendas. The main debate which will take place at that forum is not on whether Ireland should join the rush to militarise but rather on the degree to which we should do that, at what pace and in alliance with which imperial forces, thanks to the way in which the forum has been rigged.

Will the Minister admit that this is an extraordinarily biased speakers' list and invite an equal number of speakers who reflect the majority view of the Irish people, or would that undermine the actual agenda of the Minister and of the Government?

I see the Deputy carried out that extensive research on the list of speakers at breakneck speed and I suggest that the research and the results thereof would probably require some independent verification so I am not going to take the results of his research as gospel here this morning, if he does not mind.

As a Government and as a country, we are very conscious that since Russia’s brutal and illegal war on Ukraine, on which some would question the Deputy’s response, international relations and the international security environment have changed. Unfortunately, there is, whether Deputy Barry likes it or not, an increase in the geopolitical risk and Ireland cannot be complacent. We need to discuss, debate and analyse our international security and neutrality in a measured manner. We need to listen to experts from Ireland and abroad.

Against that backdrop the consultative forum established by the Tánaiste on international security policy is being convened with a view to initiating an open and evidenced-based discussion on the State’s foreign and security policy.

I reject outright the Deputy’s assertion that this is about joining NATO or becoming some de facto member of NATO. It is absolutely not. That may suit the Deputy’s narrative and his megaphone political points but it is not about joining NATO, as some would suggest. There are no predetermined or preconceived outcomes from the discussion of the forum. Participants will be free to raise any relevant issues during deliberations. A consultative forum is designed to build public understanding and to generate discussion on the link between the State’s foreign, security and defence policies. That does not mean a rush to militarisation. It covers everything from cyber security and our own maritime security to international cables and all those various things. Should there be another cyber attack here, Deputy Barry would probably be one of the first Deputies in the House to be jumping up and down to ask why we have not put the required resources into it. He would not apportion blame, however, as to who was behind it, I am certain, either.

The forum will discuss these issues in a broad policy context, including a focus on Ireland’s work to protect the rules-based international order through engagement in peacekeeping. We are very proud of the unbroken track record our Defence Forces have in peacekeeping right across this world, much of which Deputy Barry and his party does not support.

The forum will consider the lessons from our UN Security Council membership in this regard, the global strategic stability, international arms control, proliferation challenges, as well as the challenges posed by new and emerging threats. It will examine the threat landscape in relation to cyber, hybrid and critical infrastructure. The forum, as the Deputy knows, will be under way on 22 June at UCC, on 23 June at the University of Galway and on 26 and 27 June at Dublin Castle. The Deputy should not be afraid of debate or of listening to people with potentially differing views and I reject the Deputy’s assertion that in some way, shape or form the list of speakers is stacked.

It is stacked pretty high. We would welcome genuine independent verification of that speaker list. I believe it will show that the figures we have put forward are pretty damned accurate. Certainly, it will show that this is far from an even debate. As I say, it is arranged in such a way that the debate is about how fast and what exact alliances we should consider rather than whether we maintain what the Government says is the traditional policy, or change it in a significant way.

Of course, what the Minister describes as the traditional policy of neutrality has been chipped away at and undermined for years and years by Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael. How many US military personnel have passed through Shannon Airport now? I think it has gone over the 3 million mark.

The Minister says that his agenda is not to join NATO. The Irish people will not allow that but it is pretty clear that the Government’s agenda is increased military spending, increased military co-operation with European powers, including imperial powers, and de facto associate membership of NATO. That is what the stitch-up in Cork, Galway and Dublin is all about and is why there will be protest on the issue and real debate generated by people who support the majority view of the Irish people on this issue.

The nub of the Deputy’s comment was at the very end when he said that is why there will be protests at this forum. I am sure that Deputy Barry will be outside there in Cork himself with his megaphone and placards, which is his right if he wishes, and I respect that while I disagree with him.

There is no stitch-up here. Even Deputy Barry must realise that the geopolitical situation across the world, but particularly here in Europe, has changed in the past 16 or 17 months even though he was slow to admit that at the time. I am not sure if his definition of “imperial powers” also includes the Russian Federation.

It certainly does.

That is a good change in his outlook.

That is not a change at all.

It is right as a sovereign nation that we allow debate within the country, that we have fora such as this, particularly when we look at how things have changed on our own Continent with the largest outbreak of war on the European Continent since the Second World War. Should we just sit there silently and not even discuss what the potential issues would be and how we can strengthen our own security as a sovereign proud state within the European Union?

It is also the European Union acting together in solidarity with our friends in Ukraine, and a European Union that neither the Deputy nor the Deputy's party support.

I wish to raise a very important issue with the Minister, which is the inability of our Defence Forces to recognise the bravery of their troops due to overly restrictive regulations placed on them. I wish, if I may, to use the tragic case of Private Billy Kedian as an example of this. Billy was a very young Irish soldier who was killed in action 24 years ago in south Lebanon. I welcome a small delegation of his comrades, who were also there on that fateful day, who are in the Public Gallery. It is great to have them here. His post was hit by indirect fire. He could have saved himself very easily by running straight for the bunker, but he did not. He ensured that all his comrades were in there first and was one of the last people to make for the bunker. Unfortunately, and tragically, about 6 ft short of the main door, a mortar bomb landed and he was killed on site, which was a huge tragedy. To compound that tragedy, many of his colleagues and indeed his commanding officer have requested that the military recognise the outstanding bravery he brought on that day. It has not been possible for very restrictive and unnecessary reasons. There is a so-called "two year" rule that if colleagues and comrades do not apply for a medal within two years of an incident taking place, it is regarded as completely null and void, which is ridiculous. I am sure the Minister recognises that. I am grateful that the Minister got to meet the delegation briefly earlier this morning. That matters a lot. Administrative convenience should never be a factor when it comes to the award of military decorations. It should only be on the merits of the case before us and whether the actions of the individual or individuals met the high bar to warrant the award of a medal.

Current regulations are completely outdated. They are not up to international best practice or even national best practice - Commissioner Drew Harris has no problem going back decades to identify individual gardaí who put their bodies on the line and award them Scott Medals accordingly.

We should always in this House recognise excellence when we see it, in all its forms. In the case of Private Kedian, it is the highest degree of excellence; we should certainly focus on that. In summary, I ask the Minister to intercede with the Tánaiste and his other Cabinet colleagues to dispense completely with the ridiculous two-year rule. No other organisation I know of does that. It is said that the pen is mightier than the sword and this is a classic example of when a Minister can intervene directly and change the regulations and ensure that the people who genuinely display the highest acts of valour and their families are awarded accordingly.

I thank Deputy Berry. I welcome Private Kedian's comrades who are here today. I had the pleasure and honour of meeting them earlier this morning. I thank the Deputy for his continued advocacy on behalf of our Defence Forces, both serving and retired. It is important that we all remember the sacrifice Private Kedian made for his country and the UN on a peacekeeping mission in south Lebanon. He lost his life - it was the ultimate sacrifice - in protecting his own comrades. That is the type of bravery in service to which I referred in my previous response. We should respect, and this Government does, our Defence Forces, both serving and retired. The terrible loss for Private Kedian's family and friends and his community is still felt, I have no doubt, to this day.

The Defence Forces have been central to Irish foreign policy and our record as a nation strongly committed to a rules-based international order. Irish soldiers, through their dedication and professionalism, have made an honourable and internationally recognised contribution to United Nations peacekeeping efforts, which they continue to do to this day.

However, as we were very recently reminded, unfortunately, this work is not without risk. I recognise that the awarding of medals is a very sensitive and important issue for many people. There is, as Deputy Berry outlined, a deliberative process around the awarding of medals, which are awarded to members of the Defence Forces on the basis of various criteria such as length of service, service overseas and, in this instance, acts of bravery at home or abroad. From discussing this particular former member of the Defence Forces, Billy Kedian, and what happened to him and his comrades, he demonstrated such bravery associated with service. Regulation A9 sets out the qualifying criteria. There is a time-bound provision. I know that the Tánaiste in his previous role, as well as now, has examined how we could make sure, through the independent review group for Jadotville, for argument's sake, that proper recognition was made both posthumously and for those who still remained who fought so bravely in the Congo so many years ago. I assure the Deputy, Private Kedian's colleagues and Senator Craughwell, who has also been advocating on his behalf, that I will raise this matter directly with the Tánaiste. He has asked the Chief of Staff to consider a review of the medals process, particularly in the context of the recommendations of the independent review group on Jadotville.

I am glad that Deputy Berry raised this matter today. I fully understand the importance of it for Private Kedian's family, his comrades and his community.

I thank the Minister for that encouraging response. The country could do with a few heroes these days. The great irony is that we already have them; we just have not found a way to recognise and acknowledge them. We have done so in the sporting and business worlds, but not in the military world. I look forward to engaging with the Tánaiste on this issue because it is long past time that both Private Billy Kedian and his family got the recognition and acknowledgment they rightly deserve.

I assure the Deputy that following his intervention and his question today, I will raise the matter personally and directly with the Tánaiste. I reiterate that he has asked the Chief of Staff to consider a review of the medals process, perhaps using the incidence of Private Kedian as an example of some other outstanding matters in relation to recognition of Defence Forces personnel. I assure the Deputy that I will discuss this directly with the Tánaiste and Minister for Defence. I will ask him to revert directly to Deputy Berry. I wish to thank his comrades who have taken the time to be in Dáil Éireann this afternoon.

Top
Share