I move:

Wednesday's business shall be:

- Motion re Proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development (Street Furniture Fees) Regulations 2024 (back from Committee) (without debate)

- Motion re Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions (without debate)

- Statements to mark Europe Day (not to exceed 2 hrs 27 mins)

Wednesday's private members' business shall be the Motion re Affordable Housing, selected by Sinn Féin.

Thursday's business shall be Statements on Progressing Special Education Provision (not to exceed 3 hrs 32 mins).

Thursday's private members' business shall be the Motion re Challenges facing the Childcare and Nursing Home Sectors, selected by the Independent Group.

Proposed Arrangements for this week's business:

In relation to Wednesday's business, it is proposed that:

1. the ordinary routine of business as contained in Schedule 3 to Standing Orders shall be modified to the extent that, notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 34A(1)—

(i) private members’ business may be taken later than 6.12 p.m. and shall in any event be taken on the conclusion of the Statements to mark Europe Day;

(ii) questions pursuant to Standing Order 46(1) to a Minister other than the Taoiseach shall not be taken; and

(iii) the Dáil shall adjourn on the conclusion of topical issues pursuant to Standing Order 37 which shall be taken on the conclusion of private members’ business;

2. the proceedings on the Motion re Proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the Planning and Development (Street Furniture Fees) Regulations 2024 shall be taken without debate;

3. the proceedings on the Motion re Ministerial Rota for Parliamentary Questions shall be taken without debate; and

4. the Statements to mark Europe Day shall not exceed 2 hours and 27 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply thereto:

(i) the arrangements for the statements, not including the Ministerial response, shall be in accordance with the arrangements agreed by Order of the Dáil of 30th July, 2020, for 135 minutes, and the Resolution of the Dáil of 20th September, 2023, providing for two minutes for non-aligned members;

(ii) following the statements, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes; and

(iii) members may share time.

In relation to Thursday's business, it is proposed that:

1. the ordinary routine of business as contained in Schedule 3 to Standing Orders shall be modified to the following extent:

(i) no motion for a Committee report pursuant to Standing Order 102 or private member's Bill pursuant to Standing Order 160 shall be taken;

(ii) private members' business pursuant to Standing Order 159(1) and Standing Order 169 shall be taken for 2 hours and 2 minutes on the conclusion of the Statements on Progressing Special Education Provision; and

(iii) topical issues shall be taken on the conclusion of private members' business, and the Dáil shall adjourn on the conclusion of topical issues; and

2. the Statements on Progressing Special Education Provision shall not exceed 3 hours and 32 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply thereto:

(i) the arrangements for the statements, not including the Ministerial response, shall be in accordance with the arrangements agreed by Order of the Dáil of 30th July, 2020, for 200 minutes, and the Resolution of the Dáil of 20th September, 2023, providing for two minutes for non-aligned members;

(ii) following the statements, a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed 10 minutes; and

(iii) members may share time.

Is that agreed?

It is not agreed.

I call Deputy McDonald.

Last week, when the Taoiseach was challenged about the tent city that had grown up on Mount Street, he said the law of the land must be applied and that this would not be repeated. Yet, here we are, and it has been repeated, this time along the Grand Canal where there are now some 100 tents. It is an outrage that any human being would be living in a tent on the side of the street or on a canal bank. However, this is certainly a monument to the Government's abject failure to manage this situation. I ask, therefore, that we have statements from the Ministers, Deputies O'Gorman and McEntee, and that questions are taken from Members of this House.

The situation, and I can speak directly for Dublin, is that the population's confidence in the Government to manage a very challenging situation is now entirely set at zero, and all the evidence of its failure is there to see. It is a deplorable, disgraceful situation, and we need the two Ministers to make statements and take questions from Members.

We do need to have statements on the Government's policy to ensure adequate accommodation is in place for those who come here seeking refuge. I was back at Percy Place this morning, having been there yesterday. The numbers of those forced to sleep in tents have increased over those days. I commend the local volunteers who have been providing support. Clearly, this is inhumane and unsustainable, and the Government has failed to offer the coherent plan that is needed longer term to provide accommodation. Today, at the IPAS office in Mount Street, a notice has been put up advising those who are now in tented accommodation that they can have an increased daily expense allowance if they leave that tented accommodation. This is clearly a desperate stopgap attempt to move people on without any reality in the provision of longer term accommodation. We need to hear from the Government, particularly from the Taoiseach, as to how it proposes to implement the Catherine Day report, its own commissioned report, which last year recommended six reception and intervention centres with adequate capacity to give accommodation and shelter to those who come here seeking refuge.

The Social Democrats also believe we need to have statements and a discussion in the Dáil on the process for asylum seekers and the tents that are cropping up around the city. All the Government's policies have done to date is move tents from one part of the city to another. The Taoiseach can shake his head but that is all that has happened.

That is completely wrong.

What is the Taoiseach's plan? What is he going to do? Clearly, Government policy is failing the men who are in tents, the communities where the tents are cropping up and the local businesses. What is the Government's plan and when is it going to implement it? What it has done to date is not good enough. The Social Democrats called for a full audit of IPAS and Ukrainian accommodation to see if there were any gaps in the system. At the time, there was no objection from the Government to that motion. Where is that audit and when will we see those figures?

It has been nearly two weeks since the Tánaiste was given the go-ahead to bring legislation before the Dáil to get rid of the triple lock in the context of our neutrality, and we have not seen that legislation. He will not answer questions directly on it. I have done my best to extract from him very important information for the Irish public as to why he is proposing it and where he intends troops should go if he removes the triple lock that maintains our neutrality. We need to discuss it. We cannot be left in a position where we sit here and a Bill comes before us, probably without debate, when we do not have a preparatory, long discussion in the House that is elected to represent the country on something that is fundamental to our constitutional position, our history and our rights. Very important, in the current state the world is in and the possibility of war breaking out, where does it leave us? We need that discussion on the triple lock and we need answers from the Tánaiste.

It is amazing how the tide changes in here when a local or European election comes along. We would not be allowed to mention the word "migrant" in debates here over the past eight or ten months. Our motion opposing the migration pact was voted down last week. The Minister for Justice told Senator Keogan today and me last week that the Government would not publish the Attorney General's advice or, indeed, the interdepartmental advice on the questions we have about this migration pact. It took eight years of gestation in the European Parliament and Commission, and we are expected to come back here next week and we might get a few extra hours. We had committee for three hours on the first day two weeks ago, and we had committee last week when the usual suspects, the NGOs, were rounded up to answer questions and tell us all we were so well off that we should have more and more migration.

When is the Government going to muzzle the NGOs, try to get them out of its way and stop allowing them to take all the money - €6 billion they are costing - to give us all a lecture last week at the committee? We had no officials from the Department of Justice to answer questions. That is what pre-legislative scrutiny is about. This is a farce, and I call on the Government to have a proper and meaningful debate here and to publish all the AG and interdepartmental advice, which we know it has. Did it learn anything from the referendums? It might have got rid of its Taoiseach as a fall guy. It withheld information from the public and it is doing that now again with this.

Just to be very clear, what we did on Mount Street had a very positive impact. A total of 290 more people got accommodation and access to sanitation and we managed to avert a public health near-emergency. I am very pleased with that multi-agency response. I continue to believe it was the right action to take.

I became Taoiseach four weeks ago. I took charge of this situation. There had been, in my view, a tacit acceptance by many State agencies that the situation on Mount Street could just continue and was just a new norm. That was not right. I thought there was a consensus in this House. Good action was taken by good government in terms of the work of agencies, and I welcome that.

People were back later.

It is absolutely true that a situation has now arisen in respect of the Grand Canal. Last week in this House, I stood here and told the Deputy we had to deal with Mount Street. I am telling him now that we will deal with the Grand Canal. Action will be taken. I accept Deputy Bacik's bona fides on this matter, knowing it is in her constituency as well.

I need to say this: we have to have a broader discussion about migration that is not just about accommodation. If it is solely one about accommodation, we will find ourselves in a situation-----

The Government will not allow debates.

-----where we provide more accommodation and that accommodation will fill up. We also need to be very honest about this. We now have some parties in this House talking about not being in favour of open borders. Deputy McDonald used to say there was no such thing as an open borders policy. I would like her to identify for me which open border on the island of Ireland she would like to now close, as it did not come up in my conversations in Belfast last week. The Government has worked with Sinn Féin and others on the common travel area.

Is that the Taoiseach's answer to my question? Jesus.

Sinn Féin's local election candidates are delivering leaflets promising that it will end the open border policy. I do not know what that means. Will Deputy McDonald please explain it?

They are not, actually.

That is not true.

It is true.

There is a video of the very fine Deputy beside her saying Sinn Féin is against it. I look forward to the debate we will have in this House on an open border policy because there are no open-----

May I, a Cheann Comhairle?

No.

The Taoiseach made a specific point regarding literature, but-----

The only open border-----

-----it was factually not true.

That has nothing to do with the Order of Business.

Was that true, Taoiseach?

It absolutely is true.

No. It is factually-----

It is true.

Sorry, I do not know what is going on here.

It is not in order-----

Even the rest of the Opposition thinks it is true.

I am sorry. It is not in order to accuse the Taoiseach of telling untruths.

It is not in order to tell untruths.

Make an apology.

It is not in order. Deputy Ó Laoghaire should resume his seat, please.

He should go back and watch the video he made.

He was in the video.

He was in the video standing outside on the plinth.

The Taoiseach stated-----

Was it AI generated?

-----that Sinn Féin candidates-----

Deputy Ó Laoghaire, le do thoil, will you please resume your seat?

The Taoiseach stated that Sinn Féin candidates were delivering leaflets-----

Deputy-----

-----saying Sinn Féin would end open borders, and that is not true.

Deputy, will you resume your seat? Thank you.

To assist the House, I will rephrase. The Sinn Féin Deputy sitting beside Deputy McDonald appears in a video on the plinth offering to close open borders.

No.

That is not true either.

I want to know which open borders were meant, because we cannot go around-----

In a desperate attempt to keep Sinn Féin's coalition of opposition together, it is trying to play to people's worst fears. We need an honest debate around migration-----

We cannot have one in this House.

-----and that is what we are actually going to have.

Regarding the triple lock legislation, the Ceann Comhairle might advise, but I do not believe there has ever been a Bill before this House that was not debated. That is not how this House works. Of course, there will be plenty of debate. There is no legislation to share with the House yet, as the Tánaiste only got permission to draft legislation.

We are happy to have a debate on migration, but the next substantive debate-----

Will it be after or before the election?

-----should be on the migration pact. I look forward to that, too.

Are the proposed arrangements for this week's business agreed to?

Not agreed.