Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move:

That Dáil Éireann approves the following Order in draft; Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 (Section 4(2)) (Scheme Termination Date) Order 2024, a copy of which was laid in draft form before Dáil Éireann on 25th January, 2024.

I thank the Members of Dáil Éireann for making time to discuss this motion today concerning the order I propose to make to extend the termination date of the financial contribution scheme for hosts of beneficiaries of temporary protection from Ukraine, which is known as the accommodation recognition payment scheme. The scheme commenced in July 2022 and, where relevant, payments were backdated to March of that year. I increased the monthly payment to hosts from €400 to €800 with effect from 1 December 2022.

To date, in excess of €90 million has been paid to more than 13,300 hosts in respect of hosting almost 30,000 beneficiaries since the payment was brought in. The payment is supporting the accommodation of almost 22,000 Ukrainians around the country. This scheme is important because it has diverted Ukrainian individuals and families away from State-supported accommodation, which is often in hotels and guesthouses and which is unsuitable for long-term stays, particularly for families raising children. It is also far more cost-effective to the Exchequer and, importantly, it allows Ukrainians to have greater independence in moving out of State accommodation.

On the proposal itself, Part 2 of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 introduced the scheme with a termination date of 31 March 2023. That date reflected the duration of temporary protection under Council Directive 2001/55/EC of 20 July 2001, or the temporary protection directive, which was activated on 4 March 2022. The directive was subsequently extended to March 2024 and the accommodation recognition payment was extended to mirror that extension. In a continued spirit of unity and support for the Ukrainian Government and its citizens, the European Commission has extended temporary protection until March 2025. It is, therefore, appropriate to make an order to extend the accommodation recognition payment scheme termination date to the end of March 2025.

Section 4(2) of the original Act of the primary legislation enables me to make such change to a date considered appropriate following consultation with the Minister for Social Protection and the Minister for Public Expenditure, National Development Plan Delivery and Reform. I can confirm to Dáil Éireann that I have undertaken those consultations with the two relevant Ministers and both are in support of the scheme’s extension. In changing the scheme termination date, I was also mindful of the need to continue to provide for a financial contribution to assist in maintaining, if not increasing, the availability of accommodation for temporary protection beneficiaries. I thank all who have welcomed those fleeing the war in Ukraine into their homes and provided them with shelter, a safe space and, importantly, a level of autonomy over their own lives. The Act of 2022 requires a draft order to be laid before and approved by both Houses of the Oireachtas. The motion was approved by Seanad Éireann on 15 February. Approval of today’s motion in Dáil Éireann is essential to ensure the continuation of the scheme beyond March 2024.

I understand that colleagues in Sinn Féin have proposed an amendment to the motion I am putting forward that seeks to curtail the conditions attaching to the accommodation recognition payment. This would result in reduced availability of accommodation for beneficiaries of temporary protection. I am not in a position to accept that amendment for two reasons. First, it contradicts the policy objectives of the recognition payment scheme. The accommodation recognition payment is a goodwill payment to recognise the valued contribution of those who have opened their homes to those fleeing the war in Ukraine. It is not intended to be a substitute for rent and is paid in recognition of the generosity of those who host. The legislation is very clear in that regard. The accommodation recognition payment is not a rental payment. It does not create any obligations or rights for the beneficiaries in the accommodation, rights that payment of rent would accrue.

Second, on a more procedural point, my understanding of, and advice on, the legislation is that the amendment proposed by Sinn Féin is outside the scope of the primary legislation. Section 4(2) of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 only allows me to make an order to amend the scheme termination date. My understanding is that I am not allowed to make by order any other changes to the scheme. Any other changes to the scheme would have to be through primary legislation. In light of this, I am not in a position to accept the amendment to the motion proposed by Sinn Féin. I look forward to the Deputies’ contributions.

Pearse Doherty (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

To insert the following after "25th January, 2024":

": provided that this Order shall take effect only after the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022 has been amended to provide for the Accommodation Recognition Payment Scheme termination date to be extended only for the following:

— existing recipients with respect to the beneficiaries of temporary protection currently benefiting from the scheme; and

— new applicants who propose to host a beneficiary of temporary protection in their property which is also their own principle primary residence and who have not availed of the Rent-a-Room Scheme in the previous 12 months".

What we are dealing with here is the €800 tax-free payment that is made available to hosts and landlords who provide their properties to Ukrainians and the extension of the scheme for another year. I acknowledge this was brought in two years ago at a time of great uncertainty but we now need to look at its impact and fairness. I applaud the generosity of thousands of Irish families who opened their family homes to thousands of Ukrainians. We need to provide certainty to Ukrainians who are currently availing of the scheme that they will continue to be supported by extending the scheme until 2025.

However, like any policy, we must achieve balance and avoid unintended consequences. It is clear that what the Government is proposing will provide an incentive for the displacement of private renters who are not beneficiaries of temporary protection and that is not fair. It was hard enough to find a place, never mind an affordable place, to rent but many people simply cannot compete with a Government scheme that provides €800 tax free to landlords who offer their properties to beneficiaries of temporary protection. It is a scheme that is in direct competition with private renters. Sinn Féin raised these issues with the Minister in the Seanad last week but it is clear the Government has not listened. When speaking about this in November last year, the Minister said, "We do not want to pursue a measure that interferes with the private rental market." I agree with that statement. However, that is precisely what the Government is doing.

Take my own county of Donegal, where the average rent is close to €800. A landlord can either rent out a property to a private renter for €800 and then pay tax on that €800 or take €800 tax free and rent it out to a beneficiary of temporary protection. Landlords have been very open about the choice they face. One landlord has said he gets €800 tax free, equal to about €1,500 in rent, which is more than he would get for the place if he rented it out on the private market. How is this fair? How is this not interfering with the private rental market?

Our amendment is about supporting Ukrainians who are currently availing of the scheme by extending it for one year and supporting host families who have opened their family homes, including for future applicants, but it roots out the unfairness at the heart of the scheme. The State should not be providing support to a home for those benefiting of temporary protection that should otherwise be available to private renters. Those who open their own family homes to Ukrainians should continue to be supported, but if this room was previously let out under the rent a room scheme, it should not be supported as all the Government is doing is directly denying the student in need of that accommodation a home.It is clear this scheme is already affecting private renters. Extending it in full for another year will make matters worse and, worse still, the impact will be greater in the time ahead as Government policy is now to increase social welfare payments to Ukrainians who secure private rental accommodation. This will turbo-charge the pressures renters are already experiencing.

Our proposal is a sensible one, but more importantly, it is a fair one. It supports existing beneficiaries of the scheme and new applicants to the scheme where it has no impact on private renters and students but, crucially, it blocks State support from tilting the scales further against private renters and this House should adopt it.

John Brady (Wicklow, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Government motion before us today seeks to approve an order to extend the accommodation recognition payment scheme, which is due to expire on 31 March of this year. We very much appreciate the value this scheme has brought by providing shelter to thousands of people fleeing war in Ukraine.

I acknowledge the compassion of the thousands of Irish families who have opened up their homes and who have welcomed and provided refuge to Ukrainian families in their hour of need. Host families deserve the certainty of knowing that this payment will remain in place until at least the end of the temporary protection directive next year. We appreciate that thousands of Ukrainians have benefited from this scheme, and they must continue to be supported by the scheme.

However, the further extension of the scheme creates an unacceptable level of competition for private rental properties. This is leading to a situation, unintended or otherwise, where the Government’s actions are incentivising the displacement of non-beneficiaries of the temporary protection directive - private renters - and afford an advantage to Ukrainian people over other renters. In our view, this is unfair and untenable. Equality and fairness have to be at the heart of this, consistent with social protection entitlements for new arrivals.

Therefore, in line with the approach to social welfare for new arrivals, it is imperative that we bring our offering more in line with that of other EU countries. Our priority must be to protect renters in the private rented sector from any further pressure.

Private renters are being crippled by record rent increases right across the State. The latest RTB report indicates that across the State record rent increases have resulted in an 11% increase in new rents, while existing rents have increased by 5%.

The further extension of the scheme creates an unacceptable level of competition for private rental properties. It incentivises the displacement of non-BOTP private renters and affords an advantage to Ukrainian renters over other renters which is unfair.

With that in mind, we have tabled an amendment to the Government's motion before us today. We propose that the scheme should only be extended for existing recipients with respect to Ukrainian people who are currently benefiting from the scheme and new people who sign up to host people in their own homes, or new hosts. The purpose and intent of our amendment would be that no new vacant properties could be signed up to the scheme and no new people could sign up to the scheme using rooms that students would otherwise avail of.

It is a sensible amendment. It seeks to alleviate pressures on people renting private accommodation whom the Minister's scheme, if allowed to proceed in its current guise, will heap additional pressures on right across the State.

Sorca Clarke (Longford-Westmeath, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Sinn Féin appreciates the value of this scheme which has provided shelter to those fleeing war and thanks should be given to the families who have opened up their homes, welcomed and provided refuge to Ukrainian families in their hour of need.

However, the further extension of the scheme, as the Minister is putting forward, creates an unacceptable level of competition for private rental properties at a time when pressure on this market has never been higher, and that incentivisation of displacing some private renters while affording an advantage to others is simply unfair.

The Minister spoke about this scheme being used to divert Ukrainians away from State-provided accommodation. To where exactly is that diversion taking place? In my constituency of Longford-Westmeath, the data shows that rental prices for new tenancies in Westmeath have increased substantially from quarter 3 2022 to quarter 3 2023 and Longford's rental prices of new tenancies has increased by 14.9%. This is at a time where the families in a complex of over 70 units in Kilbeggan are looking at eviction because the owner has indicated they are leaving the market, putting increasing pressure on a market that is simply unable to cope with today's requests.

Every day, all over the world, people make that really tough decision, the toughest decision of their life, to flee their homes in search of somewhere that is safer. Many of us here will never be able to imagine what that is like, but this is about fairness and balance.

As it stands, we cannot support the Government's motion that seeks to embed further inequality among those who are simply seeking a home for their families. We are completely opposed to the Government's proposal to force Ukrainians out of accommodation after 90 days because that will put those who are in areas of high rental prices at risk of homelessness but will also force further pressure on the areas where prices may be lower by increasing demand.

Government has failed to prepare for this. The fingers are being pointed at the Government and at those on that side of the House because of that failure to plan. Re-enforcing a bad decision with further bad decisions will not help anybody who is in need of a house. Sinn Féin's amendment is a sensible one. It will continue to support those who are already being hosted by Irish families and continue to provide those hosts with certainty. I ask the Minister to take on board this amendment.

Denise Mitchell (Dublin Bay North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Moving on to the Social Democrats slot, I call Deputy Cairns.

Holly Cairns (Cork South West, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Social Democrats are fully supportive of continuing the accommodation recognition payment scheme. Some 25% of Ukrainians who have sought protection in Ireland are in host accommodation and pledged properties. Over 21,000 people are currently being hosted in nearly 10,500 homes across the country. The EU average for hosting is approximately 8% to 9%.

The level of support and solidarity Irish hosts have shown to Ukrainians is incredible. It is indicative of the welcoming society that we are - a country that understands migration, mass displacement and how vulnerable people feel when they arrive into a country so far from home.

The host model is incredibly beneficial to the integration and inclusion of Ukrainians in our communities, but it is essential to acknowledge that it does not work for everyone. People are fleeing war. Many are traumatised, many need their own space.

As much as the high numbers show the commendable level of solidarity from households across Ireland, they also clearly show that families are picking up the slack for the Government. Host families are currently saving the State approximately €386 million annually. Continuing this payment is a no-brainer, so too is implementing the findings of the Catherine Day report - building those six State reception centres and delivering those 700 modular homes.

As it stands, the State is far too reliant on the private market. It is wholly dependent on entering into expensive contracts with private providers for accommodation for Ukrainians, as it has done for 24 years under direct provision, handing over our responsibility to accommodate and care for asylum seekers to private entities which have profited massively from this State failure while treating asylum seekers appallingly along the way.

A clear plan for the future of Ukrainians in Ireland is needed. The temporary protection directive ends in March of next year. Ukrainians need clarity on what happens next. The temporary protection directive was an EU-wide response triggered, for the very first time, because of the biggest mass movement of refugees across Europe since the foundation of the EU. There must be EU-wide agreement on what the response will be when the directive expires in 2025. The Government must outline its preferred approach and communicate clearly with the Ukrainian community.

Some 92% of all hosts say that they have had a positive experience, with 74% stating that they would recommend hosting to others. The main challenges faced by host families were language and cultural barriers, as well as onward accommodation planning. This is something the Minister might address. The financial supports are important to hosts but there needs to be more work done on improving practical supports in order to ensure that the hosting experience is as positive an experience as possible for everyone.

Hosting should be brought into our integration strategy permanently on some level, but we cannot rely on it to the extent that we do now and we cannot continue to only make it available to one specific category of people seeking protection in Ireland. We need a clear short-, medium- and long-term plan from Government when it comes to housing asylum seekers and Ukrainians under temporary protection.

There are currently 970 international protection applicants on the streets, with numbers likely to breach 1,000 by the end of the week.

The Irish Times reported yesterday that only three people have been accommodated since last week. What is Government doing to fix this? People are getting hurt. Some of those 970 people were protesting outside yesterday. Among them was a 25-year-old man from Afghanistan who had arrived in Ireland on 20 December and has not received accommodation from the State. The level of payment from the Government is so low that he has only been able to afford a hostel bed for two weeks out of the two months he has been on the streets of Dublin. He has slept rough, been verbally abused and physically attacked. There has been a complete lack of urgency from the Government in addressing this humanitarian crisis on our streets, and it is not good enough.

Denise Mitchell (Dublin Bay North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Rural Independent Group is next. Will Deputy Danny Healy-Rae take the full five minutes?

Denise Mitchell (Dublin Bay North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will keep you going until they come in.

Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Aontú)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I believe this Government’s policy on accommodation for immigrants coming into the country is turning into a serious disaster. I think most people want compassion but they also want common sense. Most people have a humanitarian instinct to help those who are really in need but they see the Government dividing communities across the country. The Minister is the Minister for integration but nobody can deny that what we are seeing unfolding in towns and cities across the country is disintegration. The Government has become massively dependent on the hospitality sector. I received a reply to a parliamentary question which stated that 85% of the locations in which asylum seekers are located are hospitality centres. This is having a significant effect on communities. It significantly reduces the downstream tourism income and jobs of people living in those towns and villages. Places where people celebrate birthdays, communions and weddings are being taken away from them. The Government is not providing any background help on this. Recently, I put in a parliamentary question asking how much of a community dividend the Government had paid out. Only €10 million out of €50 million promised two years ago had been paid out to communities. Look at what has been paid out on: things like pathways, picnic benches, etc. It is not on the real bread and butter issues like doctors, nurses, accommodation and transport.

There is an incredible situation where the Government is offering so much to hotels that they cannot resist the offer. The D Hotel was getting an income of €100 per night. Then the Government came along with a contract of €312 per night. That is an incredible contract when it comes to value for money for the Government. We also found out through a parliamentary question to the Minister’s Department that it has bought 37 buildings in the past 12 months for the provision of accommodation to asylum seekers and it has only been about to confirm to me in a reply that one of those has been used. That is one out of 37 buildings. Some 85% of the rooms that were pledged for Ukrainians were never activated and of the 700 or so planned rapid-build buildings that the Minister promised two years ago, only half are currently in existence. That is because this Government does not do anything in a rapid fashion. This Government has a major problem with the delivery of capital projects. It is right through society and this is another example.

Not only is there dysfunction in the provision and its location but it is also in the asylum process itself. I asked a parliamentary question that found that 76% of asylum applicants in this country are applying in the IPO office and the Government is not asking them how they came into the country. We do not know how they came into the country. We also know that 85% of deportations are not enforced by the Government at the moment. A total of 5,000 people came into the country last year on documents either lost, false or fake. That makes it extremely hard for the Government to be able to differentiate between those who need help and those who do not. That is all anyone wants: just a system that efficiently differentiates between those who need help and those who do not. All this dysfunction has a serious consequence. There are 970 asylum seekers homeless on the streets of Ireland today.

Some 5,000 people are living in direct provision with their applications having been agreed to, but despite this success they are still not able to move out of direct provision because the Government cannot provide accommodation to them. Of course, 13,300 people who are homeless are in emergency accommodation. The State absolutely has international responsibilities but it also has domestic responsibilities. That means we have to treat people in this country fairly. We cannot have any cohort of people who have a better chance of achieving a necessary resource or who are receiving more money than another family in seeking to achieve a necessary resource. If we do that, in the first instance it is unfair but secondly it is a recipe for anger, jealousy and disintegration. This is incredible stuff.

We have even seen a situation in Tipperary where a local authority had a contract with a property for homeless people and then the State entered into a bidding war with that local authority for refugees, which had the effect of pushing the price up and displacing a group of people who were in need, to the detriment of another group of people who were in need. We need a government which is getting serious around these issues. We need to treat people equally and fairly. While we must adhere absolutely to our international responsibilities, I ask the Minister not to forget our domestic responsibilities.

Michael McNamara (Clare, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to echo what previous speakers have said. I listened to the last two contributions, in particular, and I find myself in agreement with them. It might well be because of an accident of geography as much as anything else, given that I represent a constituency which has borne a disproportionate burden. Every state has a burden to bear in accommodating recipients or beneficiaries of temporary protection, just as every area of a state has. However, that burden has not been spread equally across the State, not by any stretch. This is something I have been highlighting for two years now. I have asked the Government what the plan is, but there is no plan. The Government's plan is to stick them wherever it can. That is the plan. It is not fair to them or to communities in Clare. It is not all the fault of the Minister but he is a member of the Cabinet and there is collective responsibility.

I am aware that a game of ping-pong is being played between the Minister’s Department and that of the Minister, Deputy O’Brien - the Department of housing - with regard to who is ultimately going to house people when they come out of direct provision. That is a different conversation, which I look forward to having with the Minister during Topical Issues, when I hope I will finally get some information which I have been seeking for a long time.

This motion relates to beneficiaries of temporary protection from Ukraine who have come to Ireland. Of course the State was stretched to find accommodation quickly. It did what it could. The Minister is to be commended on that, as are the people who provided accommodation. It seems to me, however, that not having something more systematic in place two years later is scandalous, as is the lack of checks of the accommodation being provided. Throwing money at a problem is understandable at the start but to be still throwing money at a problem without a plan, two years later, is not understandable or acceptable.

I am aware of a direct provision centre. I have to be careful not to conflate direct provision centres with centres which accommodate beneficiaries of temporary protection because they are two different things. The lack of oversight from the Minister’s Department in both areas is similar. According to my understanding, inspections are being carried out with a view to determining that they meet building regulations and safety regulations, etc. That is to be commended. These inspections are important but so too are inspections which determine how many people are staying in a facility that the State is paying a great deal of money for.

Deputy Tóibín just highlighted the amounts which are being offered in respect of one particular hotel. I was not aware that they are that high. I fear for the Minister that other hotels which are offering accommodation for less will now say that if the Minister is prepared to pay that amount in Drogheda, he can pay that amount in Lisdoonvarna, Killarney, Glenties or wherever.

I have been asking the following question: what supervision is there of occupancy levels? It is separate from what I want to find out from the Minister during Topical Issues. It is clear from the information I have received on foot of asking that question that up to now there has been next to no supervision. Yes, facilities are inspected but they are inspected before people arrive, by and large. If they have not been inspected before they arrive, they are inspected after people arrive. That inspection, by its nature, must be to ensure the accommodation is safe and complies with building regulations, rather than being an inspection of occupancy levels. The occupancy levels are provided to the Department by the providers. Many of these providers are reputable businessmen and upstanding citizens - I do not wish to suggest otherwise - but as with all groups, there are rogue providers. Of course they are going to say that they have a full house, that everyone is happy and that they are happy for the cheque to be sent out. I want to know what is being done to root out any rogue providers. I am aware of a hotel where 20 rooms have been paid for every night since this crisis began, but there are never more than 11 rooms occupied. At some times of the year, that hotel is in a position to resell on the open market a room the State has already paid for. That is unacceptable. The lack of a mechanism to carry out inspections and to catch people who do that is unacceptable when it comes to the expenditure of Exchequer funding.

Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputies for their contributions. As provided under the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2022, the draft order laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas cannot be made law until a resolution approving the order has been passed by each House. Therefore, approval of the motion by the Dáil today is essential to ensure the continuation of the scheme.

As I said in my opening contribution, it is certainly my understanding of the legislation that we cannot make the change proposed by Sinn Féin via a motion. The only thing that a motion can change is the day on which the payment is made. Any other changes would require primary legislation.

I listened to the contributions from Deputies. I do not like addressing Deputies when they are not in the House. I appreciate that Deputies are busy. I was criticised by a number of them on value for money. I suggest that the accommodation recognition payment represents very clear value for money and a saving for the State at a time when we are spending significant sums of money on meeting the accommodation needs of Ukrainians. That is accepted. The accommodation recognition payment is a far more cost-effective means and, probably, a far better means for Ukrainians in the context of their independence.

I was also criticised by a number of Deputies with regard to the impact on tourism. That is recognised. I assure Deputy McNamara that I recognise that the impact has certainly been greater in certain parts of the country. Right now there are 22,000 people in accommodation, supported by the accommodation recognition payment, who are not in hotel beds. That also has to be recognised. One of the core reasons we introduced this was to provide options so that we were not just relying on the tourism sector. We have 75,000 people in accommodation right now and 22,000 of them, representing a very significant proportion of the accommodation needs of Ukrainians, are not in hotel beds. Without this payment, I do not think we would see that level of take-up and we would probably have an even greater degree of pressure on the tourism sector.

We are in a position of change now with regard to our offering towards Ukrainians. As Deputies know, a new accommodation regime involving a 90-day limit will be introduced at the end of this month. That change will be intensively notified to Ukrainians in Ukraine, around Europe and here in Ireland so that they can provide that information to family members. Since Christmas, we have already seen quite a significant decrease in the number of Ukrainians seeking temporary protection in Ireland. We are going to see vacancies occurring in our Ukrainian accommodation. That is occurring now and that is why we have not added to our stock of Ukrainian accommodation. In the past two to three months we have been able to house new people who arrive through vacancies.

As the new system applies and as Ukrainians move into private accommodation here, move back to Ukraine or move elsewhere in the EU or the world, we will see more vacancies in the hotels my Department has contracted. The Department will be actively looking to manage that and to step away from contracts, because we want to be responsible with the payment of State money and to be in a position where we can release accommodation back into the tourism sector in particular. This piece and the piece the Minister, Deputy Humphreys, has been working on are essential to the implementation of the new policy. Once that policy is implemented, we will look at how we start to consolidate our existing very significant stock of accommodation contracts. Where we have evidence of people overcharging us or charging us for vacant nights, we have moved away from them. We have moved away from a significant amount of accommodation around the country and we will continue to do so. When we are consolidating, contracts with providers we have a challenge with will be some of the first sets of contracts to be ended.

I am aware that Deputy McNamara has tabled a significant number of parliamentary questions about international protection. We are extremely scrutinous of occupancy rates in our existing international protection centres because I could not stand over a situation like the one we have right now - over 900 people are unaccommodated and we are at risk of not being able to accommodate all families - if there were significant vacancies in our international protection accommodation. In almost all cases, especially those involving family accommodation, the numbers in a room and the numbers in a family do not match, so it creates a disparity. The Deputy has called that out. I am confident on this, having gone back to my Department on it many times. In practical terms, it is far easier to ensure all our beds in existing places are in use than to open somewhere new. If that easy win was there, we would take it, and we have taken it. I am strongly reassured by my Department that where there is a variance between total occupancy and current occupancy, it is due to family configurations. I am strongly reassured by my officials that it is not the case that there are beds lying vacant all over the place.

Seán Ó Fearghaíl (Kildare South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As a division has been demanded, in accordance with Standing Order 80(2) it is deferred until the weekly division time this evening.