I call Deputy Sherlock. The Government has indicated that it is opposing the Second Reading of the Bill.

I move: “That the Bill be now read a Second Time.”

We in the Labour Party passionately believe that we need to have a serious overhaul of how waste is collected and regulated across every county in this country. In that context, I am very proud to see our Labour Party Bill proceed to Second Stage in the Dáil today. The Bill is the Waste Management (Single Household Waste Collection Service) Bill 2026. This is an issue that I have been working on for a number of years, both in my time working for SIPTU and while working as a councillor elected to Dublin City Council. Two years ago, Deputy Mark Wall and I, when we were in the Seanad, brought forward a motion there. Today, we see that work coming to the Dáil.

I warmly welcome all those who join us in the Visitors Gallery today, the residents from across Stoneybatter, Smithfield, Broadstone and Phibsborough, along with Rory Hawkins from SIPTU, who has joined us for this debate today.

I think it is fair to say that, three months ago, when Dublin City Council made its decision to finally start banning bin bags across communities in the constituency that I represent, it very much hit a nerve with residents. The council effectively made a policy decision but left it to the private bin companies to decide how to implement those changes. There was consternation at that result, and rightly so. For most households, the impact was going to be a doubling, trebling or even more of an increase in their existing waste costs. They were going to see a reduced incentive to reduce their waste because many would have to sign up to an annual standing charge as opposed to the pay-per-bag or pay-per-drop system they currently have. They were facing the prospect of the proliferation of unsightly bins sitting on the streets seven days a week. The reality is that many of the people in the constituency that I represent do not have a front garden or back garden. Their houses open onto narrow streets, yet very little account has been taken of that in the decision to move to wheelie bins or caddies.

With this outpouring of anger and frustration at the manner in which the changes are being handled by Dublin City Council, our communities have begun to see just how dysfunctional our waste system is. In recent weeks, I have seen a huge call for reform and an appetite for reform. That is why we have so many people sitting in on this final session of the Dáil today before we rise for the summer. They passionately believe that we need to have a better system in place.

The announcement in April is phase 3 of Dublin City Council’s plan to ban bags across 900 streets in the city that are currently exempt from bins. While the first two phases were in commercial areas, this current phase is the first attempt to introduce it in a residential area. There is an irony in terms of how it is being rolled out. Dublin City Council was able to negotiate for the installation of ten-tonne compactors in the commercial areas, yet when it came to the residential areas, I understand the council tried to negotiate with the bin collectors on the roll-out of shared collection systems, but to no avail. That pretty much sums up our dysfunctional system. Local authorities rely on private bin companies for waste collection, which is effectively a public service across our communities, yet our local authorities exert little or no power over them.

Our lopsided system means that multiple private bin companies get to drive the same roads in some areas and provide no service elsewhere. They have the luxury of driving past illegally dumped waste and litter on our streets, while local authorities have to spend millions every year cleaning up the mess. Providers get to charge what they want, with some companies making very handsome profits. They are the companies whose profits we are actually aware of, but many other companies are unlimited, so we do not know what they earn. The result is that we have serious underinvestment in public recycling and composting facilities.

Back in 2018, the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission said in very clear terms that the current waste management system in Ireland is inefficient, and that Ireland needs an economic regulator for waste companies. Eight years on, households remain at the mercy of unregulated price increases, and there is zero transparency over companies providing a crucial public utility. No other European city does it like this, and nor should we.

Our Bill sets out to make three fundamental changes to the Waste Management Act 1996. First, we provide for local authorities to be able to appoint a single operator for their local authority area. This would be a radical move away from what is called competition in the market to competition for the market. The reality is that section 2 and section 3 of the 1996 Act exclude local authorities from making waste collection arrangements in their area. Ironically, every time I submit a written parliamentary question to the Minister, and when I ask about waste management and local authorities, the Minister tells me that the statutory responsibility for decisions on waste collection arrangements, including any move towards franchise tendering, ultimately rests with the chief executive of each local authority.

I believe he is wrong on that, and, for whatever reason, the Department is misinterpreting the legislation. The reason I say that is that the Waste Management Act 1996 does confer powers on each local authority chief executive, but it was very clear in the High Court case Nurendale Ltd. v. Dublin City Council in 2009 that no chief executive could safely use those powers to restructure the waste collection market in his or her area. A chief executive cannot move to a franchise tendering system conferring exclusive rights without proper legislative underpinning. That is why we are here today.

Second, our Bill sets down conditions for the awarding of a waste management contract. It must specify the number of years. It must specify where exactly the contract applies because, again, we know that even in some pockets of Dublin, there is no waste collection service. We know that in some rural areas there is no service, but it also happens in urban areas. We also want to see a waiver scheme on grounds of personal hardship introduced and, crucially, coverage for all areas.

The third key part of our Bill is with regard to landlord responsibility. This is something that Dublin City Council and other local authorities are very much seeking from the Government. As a TD for Dublin Central, I am acutely aware of how very real comfort and deprivation live cheek by jowl. There is appalling exploitation of people right across my constituency who are in desperate need of appropriate accommodation and who are crammed into three- and four-bedroom houses where there could be 16 people. It is an inhumane squeezing of people into tenement-like conditions, and it is landlords who are facilitating it. To be fair, the least of the worries of many of those tenants is where they put their black bags, but we need to make sure that landlords are forced to have a waste management contract for every house or apartment they let.

We felt moved to introduce this Bill because we believe the privatised system of waste collection is not working. The theory of competition was supposed to deliver choice and affordable pricing but the evidence is very much to the contrary. We know that residents have faced extraordinary price increases in collection services in recent years. Panda’s bin collection prices have risen by 43% since 2024. The City Bin Company increased its charges by 26% in the past two years. Greyhound’s last increase was 48%, back in 2024, and we expect to see another announcement from it soon.

In May of this year, EU waste disposal rules came into force banning the export of waste beyond EU borders. That will force a further hike for households. The reality is that five years ago we were exporting about 70 million tonnes from our shores every year, and that has now doubled in five years.

The second key reason we believe we need to move away from the privatised system is that, ultimately, many of the private bin companies are effectively creaming profits from bin collection, with local authorities having to spend millions of euro. Dublin City Council has to spend millions of euro collecting 3,500 tonnes of illegally dumped waste on our streets every year. The reality is that we have serious underinvestment in recycling. The Government has effectively admitted that recycling rates have plateaued at about 41%, when we have serious targets to try to meet by 2030.

We know from looking at the accounts of some companies that they are making serious profits. We have no transparency as to what two of the biggest operators are earning because they are unlimited companies. Panda’s parent company, Beauparc, sold for €1.3 billion in 2021 to an Australian investment firm. It is also co-owned by a US private equity firm. They are not in Ireland for the good of their health. They are here because they know they can make serious money. We know Greyhound’s parent company is registered on the Isle of Man. Again, that speaks volumes about the types of company we are dealing with here.

Yesterday on the radio, the Irish Waste Management Association said it believed a conversation needed to be had about the price of what we were proposing here. I say to it: bring it on. Back in 2018, the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission very clearly called for an economic regulator. In 2020, we saw a price monitoring group, which involved a very pale shade of economic regulation and certainly not price regulation. It was just looking at the prices. We need to make sure that householders are paying a fair price.

The third key reason we need to move away from a privatised system of waste collection is that the promise of choice is failing. In my constituency, we see bin lorries traipsing around after one another, with all the congestion, confusion and diesel emissions that go with that. In Dublin 15 and other parts of Dublin, a single operator is effectively operating as a monopoly. There is no competition there. The company is hiking up prices and getting away with it.

I am very worried about the consolidation within the waste management sector. Back in 2012, analysis by my colleague in SIPTU, Michael Taft, showed that we had 81 bin companies across the country. Within a decade, by 2022, we were down to about 30 to 40. That number is going to contract in the future. Therefore, we will have extraordinary over-reliance on very large companies, with the State exerting little or no control over them. That is why we need to change our system. In transforming how we deal with waste in this country, I want to see the State take control of this vital public service. Ultimately, I see this legislation as a stepping stone towards local authorities providing this public service. For a variety of legal and practical reasons, however, we believe our Bill has to start in this place. Our Bill effectively provides for competition for the market as opposed to competition in the market. That distinction is important because, by tendering for a single operator, local authorities will be able to start controlling how precisely waste is collected.

It is important to say that, back in the 2000s, Dublin City Council, along with the three other Dublin local authorities, tried to tender for a single operator but failed. It failed because Panda, in the name of Nurendale Limited, brought it to the High Court and, effectively, it lost that case. It lost it because of EU competition law, but we believe the game-changer now is the 2014 EU concessions directive, which allows for tendering by a state, or an agency of the state, for services of general economic interest or general public interest, of which we believe waste is one. As we all know, waste management is not just about a private arrangement because, when it is done badly, it affects us all. That is why I want to see our local authorities moving from being just bystanders that license waste collection companies to actually controlling how the service is delivered.

I introduced this Bill because I do not believe the issue of litter and dumping on our streets, particularly in the communities I represent, where the issue of litter has existed for many years, is hopeless. I do believe change can be made. Inspiration can be taken from many European cities that have got their systems right. They have underground collection systems, compactors in their communities and innovative solutions. The way our system is set up ultimately does not allow for that investment, and I believe we need to change that. We also need to recognise the incredible work so many of our communities are doing against the odds to try to keep their areas clean. That is why I want to pay tribute to all the people who are here today, including Stoneybatter Pride of Place, Phibsboro Village Tidy Towns and all the people working within their communities to keep them clean.

The other key point in all of this is that, for many years, trade unions have spoken about the need to overhaul the system because of the wages, conditions and exploitation that have existed. I pay tribute to the More Power to You campaign. Fórsa, SIPTU and Connect are the three main unions behind it. At the end of the day, waste collection is a public service and the jobs should be decently paid. We spent a lot of time during the pandemic applauding those who had to go out to work, like those collecting our bins, when the rest of us got to stay at home, yet we know the terms and conditions in many of the companies are very poor.

Ultimately, this is very much about local issues, but we need national policy solutions. That is why we have brought forward our Bill. We are very disappointed to hear that the Government is opposing it. I want to pay tribute to colleagues like Deputy McAuliffe and others who sat on an Oireachtas working group on waste management in the previous Dáil and Seanad. We believe we need to change how we do things. We might disagree on the precise detail, but all of us who sat around the table recognised that we need to have change.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on the Waste Management (Household Waste Collection Service) Bill. I thank Deputy Sherlock and the Labour Party for bringing this legislation before the House. At the outset, I acknowledge that the Deputy has raised issues that are of real importance to households across the country. Reliable, affordable and environmentally sustainable waste collection services are essential public services. Every household should have confidence that their waste is being collected efficiently and managed responsibly and that the system supports Ireland's transition to a more circular economy.

Equally, households need to see that reducing, recycling and properly segregating waste not only benefits the environment but also reduces household waste costs. An effective waste collection system should reward positive environmental behaviour. I also recognise concerns relating to affordability, service quality, consistency of provision and illegal dumping. These are legitimate public policy issues and they deserve careful consideration.

However, while I acknowledge the intentions behind this Bill, the Government cannot support it. The principal reason is straightforward. The Bill seeks to legislate for a fundamental restructuring of Ireland's household waste collection market at the very time that Government is undertaking a comprehensive, evidence-based review of the future structure of that market. This is not about resisting reform, nor is it about defending the status quo. It is about ensuring that reform is informed by evidence. The Government has commissioned an independent study to examine the feasibility of moving Ireland's household waste collection system from the current side-by-side competition model to a franchise-based system. That study is examining the environmental, economic, operational and consumer implications of alternative market structures. It is considering issues such as service quality, competition, investment, affordability, environmental performance, implementation challenges and the wider impacts on the waste sector. Importantly, it is doing so independently and objectively.

The recommendations arising from that work will be considered as part of the updated waste action plan for a circular economy and the implementation of Ireland's second whole-of-government circular economy strategy in 2027. That is the appropriate policy process. If the evidence supports significant changes to the market structure, the Government will consider those recommendations carefully. If the evidence suggests improvements can be achieved through strengthened regulation, enhanced enforcement or targeted reforms within the existing framework, those options should also be considered. That is how good public policy should be made. It should be based on evidence rather than assumption. It should be informed by independent analysis rather than anecdote. It should also consider both intended and unintended consequences before major legislative changes are introduced. The Bill before us would effectively pre-empt that process. It would commit the State to one particular market model before Government has had the opportunity to consider the findings of the independent review it commissioned. I do not believe that is a responsible way to move forward and develop national policy.

The Bill assumes that replacing competition in the market with competition for the market will resolve many of the challenges facing household waste collection. However, that should not be taken as a given. In many instances, the greatest environmental and economic gains arise from strengthening the regulatory and economic measures that already underpin the existing market. Better outcomes may be achieved by improving the operation of the current system rather than replacing it entirely. That distinction is important. The objective of Government policy is not to favour one market model over another. Our objective is to maximise environmental outcomes, improve resource efficiency, provide high-quality services and support Ireland's transition to a circular economy.

The Bill focuses primarily on who collects household waste and how collection contracts are awarded. However, waste collection is only one component of Ireland's broader circular economy agenda. The waste action plan for a circular economy seeks to prevent waste arising in the first place, maximise reuse, improve recycling, support producer responsibility, encourage innovation and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Similarly, the circular economy strategy recognises that achieving national and European objectives requires action across government, industry, local authorities and communities. Any reforms to household waste collection should therefore be considered as part of the wider policy framework.

We should also be careful not to assume that changing market structure automatically delivers better environmental outcomes. The Bill contains no evidence demonstrating that moving to an exclusive franchise model would significantly increase recycling rates, reduce waste generation or materially improve Ireland's ability to meet its obligations under European waste and circular economy legislation. Those outcomes depend on many factors, including household behaviour, public awareness, producer responsibility schemes, recycling infrastructure, market development and effective regulation. Changing contractual arrangements alone will not necessarily address those challenges. That is why the Government believes that policy development in this area must remain evidence-based and proportionate.

There is no single model of household waste collection that has been shown to be universally superior. Across Europe, countries use a variety of systems, including municipal services, regulated competitive markets, concession arrangements and hybrid models. The success of any system depends not simply on market structure but on effective regulation, enforcement, infrastructure, investment, pricing mechanisms and consumer participation. The Government's objective is not to promote one model for ideological reasons. Our objective is to identify the model that delivers the best outcomes for Ireland. That is precisely what the independent feasibility study was commissioned to do. The House should allow that work to conclude before legislating for a permanent restructuring of the sector.

Deputy Sherlock has suggested that a franchise model could address issues such as illegal dumping and rising household costs. These are important concerns, and I accept that. No Member of this House underestimates the seriousness of illegal dumping. It damages our environment, imposes costs on local authorities and communities and undermines confidence in the waste management system. The Government remains fully committed to tackling illegal dumping through stronger enforcement, such as the most recent increase in litter fines, improved surveillance, enhanced compliance activity and public awareness. However, illegal dumping is a complex behavioural and enforcement challenge. There is no evidence before this House demonstrating that introducing exclusive franchise areas would, in itself, significantly reduce illegal dumping. Similarly, affordability is influenced by a number of factors, including labour costs, fuel prices, treatment costs, landfill levies, vehicle investment, inflation and regulatory requirements. There is no evidence that changing to a franchise system would automatically reduce those underlying costs. Indeed, depending on how exclusive contracts are designed, competitive pressures may diminish over the lifetime of a franchise agreement. These are precisely the questions being examined through the Government's independent feasibility study around the unintended consequences.

Another important consideration is investment certainty. Ireland requires continued investment across the waste and resource sector. We need investment in collection infrastructure, recycling capacity, material recovery technologies, organic waste treatment, digital systems and innovation. Those making long-term investments require certainty regarding Government policy. Introducing fundamental legislative change before the current review is completed risks creating uncertainty for operators, investors and local authorities. The Government does not believe that such uncertainty would serve the interests of households or the wider circular economy.

I now wish to address two elements of the Bill in particular, those being the proposed hardship waiver scheme and the provisions relating to landlords. At the heart of Ireland's waste policy is the polluter pays principle. This is a fundamental principle of European environmental law. It reflects the principle that those who generate waste should bear the costs associated with its management and that pricing signals should encourage waste prevention, reuse and recycling. The Government fully recognises that some households face genuine financial hardship. However, the question is not whether support should be provided. The question is how support should be provided. Waste charges are designed to recover the cost of providing the service while encouraging environmentally responsible behaviour. Introducing mandatory waivers through waste collection through waste collection permits risks weakening those incentives.

Furthermore, the Bill does not explain how those costs would be funded. The costs do not disappear and they must ultimately be borne by other households, service providers or the State. Where support is required, the Government believes broader social protection measures are a more appropriate and transparent mechanism.

The Bill also proposes to place responsibilities on landlords regarding waste collection in rented residential properties. Again, I understand the objective behind this proposal. However, in most rented properties it is tenants, not landlords, who generate household waste and make decisions regarding waste segregation, recycling and presentation for collection. The polluter pays principle requires responsibility to rest, as far as possible, with the person generating the waste. Landlords are generally not in a position to supervise day-to-day waste management practices within occupied properties. The Government therefore has significant concerns regarding both the practicality and effectiveness of these provisions.

More broadly, the Government believes Ireland's principal challenge is not simply how household waste is collected. Our challenges include how we prevent waste from arising, how we can increase reuse and recycling, how we support producer responsibility, how we reduce emissions and how we build a genuinely circular economy. Changing the market structure for household waste collection is only one potential element of that broader agenda. That is why the Government is updating the waste action plan for a circular economy and implementing Ireland's second whole-of-government circular economy strategy. It is also why we commissioned an independent feasibility study before making decisions on major structural reform. This is the responsible course of action. It allows us to consider evidence. It allows us to continue to engage stakeholders and it allows us to develop reforms that are effective, proportionate and capable of delivering long-term environmental and economic benefits.

The Government shares many of the aspirations underpinning this Bill. We want high-quality services, strong environmental performance, affordable services for households, to eliminate illegal dumping and to accelerate Ireland's transition to a circular economy. However, we do not believe this Bill provides the right mechanism to achieve those objectives. For the reasons I have outlined, and while acknowledging the constructive intentions of Deputy Sherlock, the Government cannot support the Bill at this time. Instead, we are continuing to pursue an evidence-led reform, informed by independent analysis, stakeholder engagement and the updated waste action plan for a circular economy in order that any future changes to Ireland's waste collection system are based not on assumption, but real facts and evidence and deliver lasting benefits for households, communities and the State.

I commend my Labour colleague, Deputy Sherlock, on her work on introducing the Waste Management (Single Household Waste Collection Service) Bill 2026. It is a tribute to her tenacity that she has worked for so many years on this issue. It is the culmination of a good deal of work across her constituency of Dublin Central and I welcome her visitors in the Gallery from Stoneybatter, Phibsborough, Smithfield and Broadstone. From canvassing alongside Deputy Sherlock for our candidate Ruth O'Dea in the recent Dublin Central by-election I know just how pressing an issue waste collection is in the constituency. It came up extensively on the doors. People were very concerned about the changes that are proposed. There were very concerned also about all sorts of issues like illegal dumping, as Deputy Sherlock mentioned, the proliferation of different companies - they see quite a number of different lorries going up and down the same streets - not to mention the seagulls and foxes puling apart binbags on the street.

My constituents in Dublin Bay South express similar concerns to me daily. In Portobello, across the south-east inner city and across the constituency I hear from constituents and experience myself these very same issues and concerns about waste collection and how these services are run in Dublin. For residents and businesses alike it is fair to say, as Deputy Sherlock has done, that the waste system is currently dysfunctional. Just today I and other local representatives got an email from the owner of two restaurants in Dublin city centre about this issue. The Minister of State’s brief includes not only the circular economy but also small business. The restaurant owner said he fully supported the council’s ambition to improve waste management to keep our city cleaner but that commercial waste regulations introduced since December 2025 are creating serious practical difficulties for many hospitality businesses, especially those operating from older city centre buildings with limited storage. He went on to say one of his greatest frustrations is that the regulations are making it harder to recycle. That is a real concern when we are all so committed to seeing the circular economy work and to meeting climate targets on waste. The owner says he no longer has space to accommodate additional recycling bins, cannot leave recyclable waste out for collection and cannot leave flattened cardboard outside for collection. Private waste companies must send a vehicle to collect this directly from premises. This is costly, inefficient and unnecessary. He makes a number of other points but his argument is the burden of solving the city’s waste problem has been transferred from the council to small business, many of which have no physical means of complying and will incur significant additional cost.

For householders expressing the concerns I and Deputy Sherlock have outlined, and for small businesses too, waste collection services are simply not working. That is why we need to see a change. The Bill Deputy Sherlock and the Labour Party are proposing is not one we suggest is a silver bullet or a panacea but it offers one small, constructive mechanism to address the dysfunction in waste services. It is a source of great disappointment to me, Deputy Sherlock and the Labour Party to hear the Minister of State say the Government is opposing this Bill. He has acknowledged the Government shares many of the aspirations underpinning this Bill. We want high-quality services and strong environmental performance. We all recognise waste collection is a climate issue and an environmental issue. We all support the move to a circular economy and want to eliminate illegal dumping. This being the case, why can the Minister of State not reconsider his view and let this Bill pass Second Stage? We will be very happy to work with him on developing the broader, evidence-based proposals he speaks about so rightly and which we are in support of. We would have been glad to work with him and Government on how to amend the Bill and work on a broader framework for waste management that addresses the dysfunction.

I am concerned to hear the Minister of State say there is an independent feasibility study without giving any timeline. I understand that was due to be published some months ago. Perhaps he or his Government colleagues might address when we are going to see that study report and hear what precisely are the new mechanisms the Government is proposing to fix the dysfunctional waste system. I do not mean just in Dublin, though Deputy Sherlock and I are focusing on Dublin and most of the TDs present are Dublin ones, as clearly this has ramifications across the country and the dissatisfaction and the concerns Deputy Sherlock’s constituents and mine are expressing are ones felt across the board. We are therefore disappointed at the Government’s decision to oppose the Bill.

This is very much a broader issue for the Labour Party. Waste management is an essential public service. It is a climate issue, as I have said, but also one about public services. We want to see remunicipalisation. We have been working with the trade unions on this. We have supported SIPTU and Fórsa’s More Power to You campaign, which is a fight for stronger public services. We want to see a move, as Deputy Sherlock has it in the Bill, from competition in the market to competition for the market and this Bill would represent an important positive step on that journey to quality public services provided by the State and to remunicipalisation. Deputy Sherlock has set out the detailed provisions in the Bill. I ask the Minister of State again to reconsider this and support the Bill past Second Stage. It is a Bill that is of significant interest to constituencies across the country and so many people, like the business owner who emailed me, and many individual householders across the country are, out of frustration, addressing waste, illegal dumping and litter issues by themselves. I pay tribute to Tidy Towns organisations. In Dublin Bay South we have superb Tidy Towns organisations that I am proud to work with from Ringsend and Sandymount across to Portobello in my area to Rathgar, Rathmines, Terenure, Donnybrook and Ballsbridge.

We see really important work being done by Tidy Towns organisations. They are addressing what is currently a real problem with litter collection and waste management in this city and this country. I urge the Minister of State to support the Bill on Second Stage and let us continue the debate about how we can improve services.

Since we are on the last sitting day, I want to thank the Ceann Comhairle, her staff, the ushers, the security staff and all the support staff, catering staff and everyone in the House who makes our lives and work environment better. I wish all our colleagues a good recess and I hope we return refreshed and reinvigorated.

Thank you very much, Deputy, and the same to you.

I thank Deputy Sherlock for bringing forward this legislation to bring bin collections back to public control. I am disappointed but not surprised that the Government is opposing this legislation. Fine Gael has a long history and policy of privatising public services. It has not worked in housing, water or transport and it definitely has not worked in waste management. By his own admission, the Minister of State knows there is a problem here because he would not have commissioned a report in relation to side-by-side competition otherwise. I am not sure that some of the issues the Minister of State raised could not have been teased out during pre-legislative scrutiny. Then, if they were not sorted out at that stage, the Minister of State had the opportunity to vote down the Bill but he did not even give it a chance. It has been a long-standing policy of Sinn Féin to bring waste management back to public control. Privatisation has failed ordinary people. Bin companies act like a cartel in how they raise their prices. When one company increases its price, the rest follow. I reported this practice to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, when I was a councillor in 2016, as referenced by the Deputy.

Earlier this year, Panda increased its prices by 9% for customers. Ordinary people are being pushed to the pin of their collar. No one's wages have gone up by 9% in the past year so nobody's bill should go up by 9% in the same time. Some bin companies have even increased their recycling fees, as the deposit and return scheme has reduced the amount of waste they recycle. It effectively means that people are paying more for less now.

We have a situation that allows multiple bin trucks to operate on the same street. On my road there could be three different companies coming down the road, sometimes at the same time. This goes against everything we are trying to achieve to make waste collection more environmentally friendly. Sinn Féin has raised the idea of taking waste management back into public control in the Dáil on several occasions. In 2019, I came in here after a by-election. I had nine sitting days before the general election was called. In those nine days I managed to introduce a Bill co-signed with Deputy Cullinane. It was a combination of the work I was doing on the council and the work Deputy Cullinane was doing in the Dáil. This legislation was to appoint an independent regulator for waste management with an aim of reducing fees. At the time, we had engagement with SIPTU and Fórsa, which backed this change in policy.

The Dublin city task force also recommended a single bin operator. In 2022, Dublin City Council commissioned independent research which looked at similar-sized cities to Dublin and compared their waste management systems. Dublin was an outlier. It was the only city that was fully privatised. In other jurisdictions, cities of a similar size at least had some part of their bin collection in public control.

Since bin collections were privatised, illegal dumping has been commonplace in Dublin. I am probably paraphrasing the Minister of State when he says there is no evidence that privatisation has led to more illegal dumping. That is the gist of what I thought he was saying. I can only go by what I see with my own eyes. I grew up in north Clondalkin back in 1980s. We did not have much. It was an area of disadvantage but it was a lot cleaner then than it is today. Illegal dumping has no place in our communities. People who do it need to stop because they are affecting all our communities.

In response to a parliamentary question of mine, the Minister for the environment stated that over €27 million is given to local authorities for anti-dumping initiatives. In 2025, South Dublin County Council alone, in my own area, spent over €2 million to tackle illegal dumping. This money could be better used to enhance our communities. We have sports clubs and community groups that are always looking for funding. We should be able to give them this funding rather than tackling illegal dumping.

Over the last number of years, the nature of what is in our waste has changed. For example, in 2012, there were no problems with nitrous oxide. However, earlier this week thejournal.ie reported that 160,000 nitrous oxide canisters end up in Irish waste facilities every year. This shows the scale of the problem. Over 13,000 nitrous oxide canisters have been collected by the local authorities in Dublin in recent years. There were 120 explosions over a two-week period in waste compactors in Ireland. This is costly and dangerous. I introduced legislation to tackle this scourge but the Government delayed it by nine months which means it will not be read again until October. We have youth health issues and environmental issues with nitrous oxide. The Government really needs to take this seriously. I gift-wrapped the solution but the Government kicked it down the road.

Sinn Féin is happy to support this Bill. The process of returning waste management to public control can begin with having one company per local authority. A single bin operator per local authority would reduce the number of bin trucks on streets and should reduce the incidence of illegal dumping. This would lead to a decrease in prices, which could be set out in the tendering process. We would like to see this go further by the introduction of an independent regulator. We are drafting our own legislation that will do this, as well as the remunicipalisation of waste and the introduction of a fee waiver. The Minister of State mentioned costs and how this would be paid for. That could be part of the tendering process as well and, again, could be teased out in pre-legislative scrutiny.

We would also allow for local authorities to re-enter the market. The independent regulator would set and review standards, prices for customers and the criteria for workers to be able to join a union, which is really important. Many of the bin companies are not unionised at the moment. As I said already, we introduced similar legislation in 2019.

I am probably the last Sinn Féin person standing before the recess. I thank the Ceann Comhairle and all the staff for their help over the year and their tireless work that keeps this place going. I hope everybody gets a chance to get out and enjoy the good weather and has some sort of a break over the summer. I will see you all after the recess.

Thank you, Deputy Ward. I look forward to seeing you in September.

I want to acknowledge Deputy Sherlock for her work in bringing forward this Bill. We in the Social Democrats will be supporting it. It is a shame that the Minister of State is not willing to engage further than to simply vote it down on the promise that a review will be released in an unspecified time. As somebody who believes in local government and local elected representatives, I want to acknowledge those in Dublin Central and the north inner city and Dublin 7 who do tireless work to advocate on behalf of the residents, many of whom are here today. That is why we are here and what is motivating us to come in here is the removal of the derogation for bags.

I will talk about that in a couple of minutes but before I do I want to come back to some of the things the Minister of State said in his opening speech, particularly the last paragraph. The Minister of State said:

Instead, we will continue to pursue evidence-led reform informed by independent analysis, stakeholder engagement and the updated waste action plan for the circular economy, so that any future changes to Ireland's waste collection systems are based, not on assumption but on evidence and delivers lasting benefits for households, communities and the environment.

Does the Minister of State consider the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission to be an independent body that uses evidence to come to its conclusions? The Dublin city task force was commissioned by Simon Harris and was chaired by David McRedmond from An Post. He engaged with the evidence and with stakeholders and came to the same determination, namely, that what we have at present for waste management services, not only in Dublin but nationally, is no longer tolerable. It has led to a system that is clearly not efficient or not suitable for the purpose intended. We need reform on a scale much broader than even what we are talking about today. There should be a process of the remunicipalisation of waste management. That is not an assumption. Nor is it an assumption to say that streets such as the ones I represent in Stoneybatter have narrow pathways. If they remove the capacity to leave out a bag and introduce a requirement to put out a wheelie bin instead, I will not be able to get a pram or a wheelchair past. It will create a scenario where vulnerable people will simply not be able to get up their street for potentially three days because there will be a multitude of different providers steaming up these streets, which were never created for such large vehicles.

This will mean that people simply will not be able to get through their locality easily. That is not an assumption. It will shortly be the lived reality for people in Dublin 7 as a result of the removal of the derogation relating to plastic bags. I can see the logic of that up to a point. We have a scenario where seagulls and foxes are tearing at these bags. Rubbish is being strewn along the street and that cannot continue. However, the solution is not to remove the means by which a person can simply walk, use their wheelchair or push a pram down the street. Those things should not be in competition with each other.

The remunicipalisation of waste is going to cost money. That is a simple fact, but public services often should operate at a loss. We have created a scenario where large-scale private operators are generating an absolute fortune for themselves but where the payback for the community is a service that often does not meet the standard envisaged. We simply cannot continue along those lines.

There is a lot in this Bill that I will be supporting, but we need action that happen quickly rather than being obliged to wait for a review that will released after an unspecified period. The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission released a report in 2018, which highlighted Dublin as an outlier in terms of having absolutely no control over its waste. The commission updated its report in 2025 and stated, "The current market structure will never properly deliver for the Irish public. A policy change is long overdue. That is a competition authority saying there is no competition for the market. We all have to open our eyes to that. We probably do not need any more reviews. I appreciate that there is a review coming. I ask the Minister of State to engage with Dublin City Council on something more urgent. The derogation relating to rubbish bags will end in October. The ending of the derogation has been delayed for three months as a result of the advocacy of councillors at local level. We cannot have a scenario that when October comes, people will simply not be able to walk the streets in the Stoneybatter area If the Minister of State is not going to support Deputy Sherlock's Bill, maybe he can support an appeal from all of us to engage with the local authority about finding a solution that is much better than the one people are quite literally dreading at the moment.

I thank the Ceann Comhairle so much for her work over the past year.

That is much appreciated, and by the staff too. I call Deputy McAuliffe.

In case I forget to do so at the end, I take this opportunity to thank all of the people who work here. This is a workplace, and I often remark that when we leave here at 11 p.m. or midnight on a Wednesday, the people we pass on the way out are often the first people we pass on the way in at 8 a.m. or 9 a.m. the following day when the work of Dáil is starting again. It is not a normal workplace, but it is a great place for people to work in together. I acknowledge the huge work the staff do here in extraordinary circumstances.

I rise to speak in favour of the Bill. I would like to see it proceed to Committee Stage. That is not because, on the last day of term, I have caught some sort of rebellious fever. I made a commitment to Deputies Gannon and Sherlock in 2019 in an agreement we signed together to pursue the issue of remunicipalisation. It was the right thing to do then and it is the right thing to do now.

It is not an accident that there are many Dublin-based Deputies in the House for this debate. Even within Dublin, there is disagreement among different political parties as to whether remunicipalisation is necessarily the way forward. Some of our colleagues in Dublin's county councils are often quite happy with the service they have or may have different views from us in the city. Deputy Mark Ward referenced the independent research which Dublin City Council commissioned in regard to this matter and which shows that councillors are of the view that greater control by the local authority is the way to proceed.

To break that down a little, the issues Deputies Gannon and Sherlock are having in the city centre are vastly different from the ones that are relevant in my constituency. We do not have an issue with bags. Nor do we have the same street structures or networks. It is entirely appropriate that there are different ways of collecting waste in different areas. I often think that this House over-regulates what happens at local government level. When I see legislation relating to licences for tables and chairs on pavements, I am aghast at the fact that we are sometimes so involved in local authority affairs. We should be empowering local authorities to make more decisions, including on local taxation. In the area of waste, we should enable local councillors to make decisions-----

Hear, hear.

-----to put in place waste solutions that suit their areas. If this means that there is a different solution in Dublin City Council's area than in the other local authority areas across the county, then that is how it should be. Unfortunately, that power rests with the chief executive. Despite councillors and the elected representatives of a city wanting something different, they are not empowered to do take action.

I would like the Bill to proceed to Committee Stage, particularly as this debate is only half of the discussion. Deputy Gannon is right. The Government believes that if Dublin City Council wanted to establish its own waste collection service tomorrow, it could do so. Do not forget that Dublin City Council decided to close its waste collection service and to withdraw from the market. The council did not privatise its service, it withdrew its service. It was open to the council to do that. The reality is that in the absence of the local authority having the financial ability to remunicipalise the service, no chief executive is going to make the decision in that regard.

As stated, the debate on the Bill is one half of the discussion. If we are saying that remunicipalisation is the solution, in some ways this Bill could send us in the wrong direction if it is not matched on the other side. For example, what is proposed in the Bill would provide competition. One downside - this is something I would be cautious about - is that if competition for the market were introduced, it would be private operators that would tender in the first round. This would mean that we could see a scenario where one private company would win the tender in all four Dublin local authority areas. As a result, we would essentially have one waste company. We could see other waste companies collapse or withdraw, and we would then be left in a second round with no company other than the one to which I refer proceeding to tender. That is one possibility.

I pay tribute to Deputies Sherlock, Gannon, Ward and others. We discussed all these potential outcomes and we know that what is proposed would not be a silver bullet. It would give the local authority control, however. It would also give it more power. It would allow it to say that in the context of my area of Finglas, it is not appropriate that because an area is more affluent, people living in that road have access to five bin companies and because somewhere else is less affluent, it is stuck with one bin company. In some cases, bin companies will not even go into certain places or will insist that residents have to bring their wheelie bins up a hill or out onto a main road. That is not right, but there is no way of regulating it because we have competition in the market not competition for the market.

I do hear what the Minister of State says in regard to the review. There are many in government who believe that, for a range of reasons, including environmental reasons, matters relating to the circular economy and so on, competition for the market has its positive benefits. In the context of the previous Government, some of our Green Party colleagues were also supportive of this for a range of other reasons relating to delivering the circular economy.

From what I hear, one outcome of the review could be the creation of a franchised service. The Minister of State’s commentary, in which he went on to explain all the negatives of a franchised service, does not fill me with hope. I ask him and my colleague Deputy Darragh O’Brien, if they cannot provide a national framework, to consider whether they could empower local authorities to make the decisions to which I refer themselves.

Deputy Sherlock stated that no other capital city runs its business this way. That is because they are capital cities. Capital cities should in a position to make way more decisions about everything that happens in their area. If Dublin City Council had been allowed address the housing crisis back in 2012, 2013 or 2014, when it was impacting the city far more than anywhere else, we would have been ahead of the curve. We should be allowing Dublin City Council, if its elected representatives so choose, to establish both competition for the market and its own bin service if it so wishes.

Deputy Gannon is right. This is going to involve difficult political choices, particularly as the waiver system that was there came at a cost.

It was a direct cost. I think it cost nearly €3 million every year. Councillors had to vote every year for that money and that meant that €3 million went on that waiver and it was not available for other services like parks, libraries and so on. That is what local councillors do. They make those decisions. Sometimes we do not trust our councillors enough and I say that because it was a Fianna Fáil Government that removed the powers of local councillors in regard to waste. It was done because there were not brave decisions being made on large-scale waste disposal and all of those reasons but we have moved on in Ireland. We have far better, committed local representatives. There is a very obvious demand by the people who are elected by Dublin city to change the way they collect their waste. This is something that national government should not be involved. Let them get on with it. Empower them to do it. Let them make the popular and unpopular choices that are part of that.

If I was in the Minister of State's place, I would allow the Bill go to Second Stage. We would need significant amendment and other elements to it but I would allow the debate to take place. In the absence of that, I ask that the Minister of State takes on board the comments that have been made here in the House by Members. Should he have the final review and the outcome, he should consider allowing Dublin city to do its own thing. Maybe it should not be limited it to just Dublin city and he should consider allowing any local authority that chooses to collect its own waste to do it in its own way. It is not rocket science. It is waste collection. They should, at the very least, be allowed to decide how that is done.

I thank Deputy Sherlock for drafting and bringing forward this legislation. The Green Party has long pushed for household waste collection to be brought back under public control. This proposal is a good example of how we might do this without maybe opting for full remunicipalisation and the risks that could entail in respect of the burden it could place on local authorities.

Waste collection needs to be seen as a public service that needs to be fully integrated into our circular economy frameworks. This Bill would create a situation where we can retain an element of competition but it would be for a market rather than within a market. That would avoid a lot of the inefficiencies and risks we in the current model. The solution is to rationalise the current system, put local authorities back at the centre of waste management processes and use this to get a better handle on pricing and illegal dumping through contracts that are right for each specific area, instead of the one-size-fits-all model we have at the moment that is not actually working anywhere.

The second part of this legislation, which would place a direct duty on landlords to ensure an adequate waste collection service for their tenants, is really important. This mirrors draft legislation that my colleague Councillor Janet Horner was involved with in 2024, which would have significantly helped with illegal dumping in urban areas. This Bill also tackles significant inefficiencies that emerge under the current competition within the market model. Under the current system, it is not uncommon to see several bin lorries from different companies driving down the exact same residential street on different days of the week. Under a single permit model, we would have rationalised routes that access all homes at the same time. This clearly does not make sense from either a cost or admissions perspective.

It would be remiss of me not to specifically reference Dublin as I know the issues this Bill addresses are in some ways most acute in certain parts of our city. My colleagues on Dublin City Council have been doing positive work in this space. Green Party councillors in Dublin have founded and led on the litter and waste committees for the city and on funding additional resources. Some 100 extra staff have been hired to the public domain team to tackle waste and dumping and our councillors will continue to fight for a cleaner and greener Dublin.

My colleague Councillor Janet Horner and our former Green Party TD Neasa Hourigan drafted a landlord waste contract Bill in 2024 to make it the landlord's responsibility to ensure that tenants have a waste contract in place. It is really positive to see that aspects of that Bill are included in the Bill that Deputy Sherlock has introduced. Councillor Horner succeeded in passing a motion in 2024 declaring a litter and dumping emergency in the inner city, and this was followed by a detailed position paper on what the future of waste management in the city might look like, several elements of which are reflected in the Bill. Again, that is something I really welcome. Importantly, that research examined best-practice examples in other cities, where each example has limitations and the approach of privatised municipal providers for Dublin has clearly failed the city, its resident and visitors. Too often, waste issues are characterised as a behavioural issue rather than recognising a poorly designed system that makes this system inevitable. Dubliners deserve a better answer than being blamed personally for the system's failure.

A single waste provider for the whole of Dublin city was recommended in the past 18 months by the Taoiseach's Dublin city task force report. A report is due to be provided by the Department investigating the feasibility of this. However, as with so many of the report's recommendations, that has yet to materialise. It just seems there is no urgency behind the recommendations of the task force anymore and instead of trying to deliver it, the Government is spending time looking for a political excuse and someone else to blame for why it has done nothing.

It is important to understand that a waste system that works everywhere in the country does not work in the inner city. This is due to several factors, including short-term tenancies, a high number of tourist lettings, flats, apartments, terraced houses and an overall lack of storage space provided for wheelie bins. Despite it being mandatory for households to be able to separate their organic waste, this remains practically impossible for a significant proportion of inner-city homes, as wheelie bins cannot be stored in flats or terraced homes. In the Dublin Central area, an average of 50 tonnes per month of illegally dumped waste is being removed by the council. It is a huge amount of waste, and this is more than is collected in an entire year from whole counties elsewhere in the country.

Our current model of waste management is a direct contributor to this. The status quo is simply leaving Dublin communities to suffer and it is clear again that while the one-size-fits-all approach that is applied to waste collection in our country might suit some of the suburban areas, it absolutely does not suit our city centre communities.

Waste is often an affordability issue as well. Not all households, particularly those in urban areas, have suitable spaces for storing wheelie bins. They have no outside spaces and, of course, they are not allowed keep them on the footpaths. This means that in many areas, bags are the notional solution but these cause issues with seagulls or foxes or are intermingled with illegally dumped bags. The net result is our footpaths are strewn with waste.

Dublin City Council recently rolled out a system of waste compactors in the core areas of the city centre. These seem to have been working well and it is actually similar to what is seen in a lot of cities across the Continent. Such a system could work here and would avoid people having to store bins in their homes, which I know is a significant concern for residents in areas like Stoneybatter and Smithfield. It was something I heard about a lot during the recent by-election campaign.

One of the biggest criticisms of the current privatised system has to be how ineffective it has been on keeping waste costs down. I know from my own area how many times residents have raised issues of seemingly arbitrary price increases and extremely opaque pricing structures implemented by the large waste companies. Many have also pointed to the illusion of choice in the current system, where multiple providers are all essentially providing the exact same service at the exact same price and are increasing prices in lockstep. It ends up conferring no benefits on households at all. These costs then end up disproportionately impacting families who are already struggling to make ends meet. Having children under the age of three adds to bin costs. Often, elderly families or a family with a member who has a disability have additional waste costs that all add up. A single provider would, I hope, allow local authorities to apply downward pressure on prices and keep them consistent for the duration of a multi-year contract with that particular waste provider.

I again thank Deputy Sherlock for bringing forward the proposed changes outlined in the Bill. We know this does not end here. A lot more work needs to be done to deliver a system that is simpler for users, incentivises and helps a greater volume of recycling and waste recovery and will ultimately lead to a greener environment for all our communities, both urban and rural.

On a final note, a Cheann Comhairle, I give my thanks to you, all the staff in Leinster House and all the ushers and caterers for their work over this term.

I know Leinster House does not shut down for the next two months but I hope the pace will be a little less onerous and people are able to get a break.

Much appreciated.

I thank all the Deputies who contributed to today's debate. I acknowledge and appreciate the thoughtful and constructive manner in which this debate has engaged with a really important issue. The one broad consensus and fundamental point that has been raised is that we all want a household waste collection system that is affordable, reliable and environmentally sustainable but also has the capacity to support Ireland's transition to a more circular economy. We want to continue to invest in ensuring we have cleaner communities and higher recycling rates. Deputy Sherlock made that point. We want to reduce illegal dumping and indeed we want a waste service that meets the needs of our householders, communities and businesses.

We also want to see a well-designed waste collection system that not only delivers environmental benefits but also provides householders with the opportunity to reduce their own household waste costs through reducing residual waste, correctly segregating recyclable materials and correctly segregating organic materials. All this can contribute to minimising disposal costs while contributing to our circular economy objectives.

I acknowledge Deputy Sherlock bringing the Bill forward. It provides us with the clear and genuine desire to improve the household waste collection system and to address the concerns that many have in regard to service provision, affordability and environmental outcomes. Those concerns are legitimate and deserve careful consideration. I also acknowledge Deputy McAuliffe for the constructive points he made.

As I outlined, however, the Government does not believe this Bill represents the appropriate means to address those challenges. As I said, the central proposal contained in the Bill is to replace the current household waste collection market with a mandatory franchise model. That is a really significant structural reform that has potentially far more implications for householders, local authorities, waste operators and the wider circular economy. That is precisely why the Government is opposing the Bill. It relates to the requirement for robust evidence, which involves looking at the pros and cons. I genuinely do not believe a CCPC report or a local authority report has that robust, evidence-led, fact-finding analysis.

As I said, the Government commissioned the independent report and study to examine the feasibility of transitioning Ireland's household waste collection system from the current side-by-side system to a more franchised model. That work examines the environmental, economic and operational implications and considers the experience of other jurisdictions and specific circumstances that apply here in Ireland. Importantly, the purpose of that study is not to validate a predetermined outcome. It is to provide an objective evidence base upon which further policy decisions can be made. Regarding the wider objectives, namely, to deliver better environmental outcomes, support householders and encourage investment, we need to continue to ensure we have investment in more innovative recycling centres. We have a lack of capacity so we need to continue that, and investment certainty is really important in that regard but also to enable Ireland to meet both our national and European obligations, which are far reaching. These will all benefit from a stable and predictable policy framework. That certainty is really important as we want to continue to invest in our waste collection system.

I again thank Deputy Sherlock for bringing the Bill forward and look forward to continuing our engagement with Members of this House. I thank the Ceann Comhairle, members of staff and everyone in Leinster House for their work over the past number of months. I wish them a very happy summer and wish the Mayo team, its manager Andy Moran and all the supporters who will travel up to Croke Park Sunday week for the All-Ireland final well. It will be a very exciting day and we hope they can deliver this time. I am sure we will end that 75-year famine.

In the spirit of solidarity, as a proud Corkonian who is very proud to now call Dublin home, I extend my support to Mayo as well. They might just do it this time round. I thank all those who came to support the Bill today, including Deputies Ivana Bacik, Mark Ward, Gary Gannon, Paul McAuliffe and Roderic O'Gorman. It is very clear that while we may all have a slight difference in emphasis about what we want to see, there is very much a clarion call that we do need to see some change, particularly in Dublin, and an acknowledgement by the Government that we have to empower the local authorities in Dublin to be able to bring about that change. Deputy McAuliffe made a really powerful point that we do not necessarily need to legislate for the whole country but we have to be able to empower and enable local authorities to find the right system for their areas because, as somebody who grew up in a very rural area, I know the challenges with regard to fly tipping there are completely different from the issues in my home in the north inner city.

The reality is that Dublin finds itself at a juncture. The reason so many people have come to express anger and frustration over the past few months is because a private bin company is effectively foisting a change upon them relating to what is a public service in terms of a bin collection service and the local authority has been rendered almost powerless because it exerts little or no control over those companies.

I pay tribute to a lot of the work that many officials and workers in Dublin City Council do because, in some ways, their hands are tied behind their back. They recognise the issue with regard to landlord responsibility. I am very disappointed to hear the Minister of State's comments about landlord responsibility. Nobody is talking about landlords hovering over their tenants to see whether they put out their bin on a Tuesday morning. This is about making sure there is a waste contract attached to the tenancy. It is then up to the tenants to try to make good that, but in many instances there is no contract and tenants are in the dark as to what they should do, so we need to try to ensure we do everything possible.

There is no silver bullet with regard to illegal dumping, litter on our streets and all the issues relating to waste. They will all add up but we have to show a willingness to take action. That is the regrettable thing today. We eagerly await this independent review and yet we see that so many of the arguments put forward effectively eviscerate what we are proposing today, so the Government is already pre-empting the outcome of the independent review by effectively rejecting the proposal we are bringing forward, and I regret that. My background has always been to support the evidence, but we see so many other European cities do things very differently and I think most of us would accept that when one walks the streets of so many other European cities, they are vastly cleaner than Dublin. We want to make our city better.

The other important thing to say is that we did not hear any new ideas today, and I say that with the greatest respect to the Minister of State. We did not hear any ideas with regard to the profound challenges we have regarding our plateauing recycling rates and all the other issues that are there.

That is disappointing. This is a forum to bring forward the Government's ideas. If it is not going to accept our ideas, it should bring forward its own ideas but we did not hear any of those. The leader of the Minister of State’s party, the Tánaiste, wrote very enthusiastically about the recommendations of the Dublin task force just before the general election in 2024, and a very clear recommendation was to move to a single operator. That seems to have fallen off the wagon in the months since then but it was a very clear recommendation.

The Competition and Consumer Protection Commission undertook a very detailed analysis in 2018. I would be very careful not to disparage the work that went into its report. I ask that the Government be very careful in its commentary with regard to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission. I disagree with it on many other things but we have to respect what it wrote, in particular with regard to waste management.

We eagerly await this report. It was supposed to be published in the spring. We have not heard a date from the Minister of State today and we would like to hear that date. This fight is not going away. It is about our communities, cost and control. We will stand unified in having another go at this to try to change how Dublin, in particular, deals with its waste.

As the final speaker before the Ceann Comhairle, I wish to thank her for her excellent work over the past year. I think everybody across this Chamber would acknowledge she runs a very tight operation and it is hugely appreciated. We all have lots of issues we want to bring forward and it is genuinely appreciated. I thank her for her work and everything she does here. I also thank all of the staff. There are many staff we never see in Leinster House, particularly those of elected representatives, in the Bills Office and in all the other areas. I say thank you to our cleaners, the catering staff, those in broadcasting and to all of our staff. This place would not run without the benefit of people's work over very long hours, as I know when I have to leave my office sometimes after midnight or 1 a.m. when the ushers are kindly asking me to allow them to lock up. I thank everybody and wish them a good summer.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta. That is very much appreciated. However, there remains a question.

As the Deputy knows, the division will be taken after the recess in September.

The Minister of State has the summer to change his mind.

Agus téarma reatha na Dála ag teacht chun críche, agus sinn ag díriú ar thús an tsamhraidh, táim buíoch do gach Teachta as a gcomhoibriú. Thar ceann na Comhaltaí go léir, gabhaim buíochas le Elaine Gunn agus lena foireann as a dtacaíocht agus an obair mhór a rinne siad. Gabhaim buíochas freisin le m’fhoireann i gContae Loch Garman as an tacaíocht luachmhar a thug siad dom. Cé nach mbeidh an Dáil ina shuí, tá a fhios agam go mbeidh na Teachtaí Dála ag déanamh ionadaíochta ar na daoine ina nDáilcheantair i gcónaí. Tá súil agam go gcuirfidh siad am ar fáil freisin dá muintir agus dá gcairde. Tá mé ag súil go mór le hiad a fheiceáil i mí Mheán Fómhair agus go mbeidh siad athnuaite agus ullamh do théarma an fhómhair.

As we come to the end of the Dáil term and head into the summer recess, I extend to all Deputies my gratitude for their co-operation. On behalf of all the Members, I thank Elaine Gunn and her large team for their support and hard work. I thank the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and my Acting Chairs who make it possible for me to carry out all of the other duties. I thank John Walsh and his staff in the dining room, Darren Brady and his staff, Alan Ruane and his team of ushers, and all those who assist us here in Leinster House. I thank my own staff in County Wexford for their valuable support and my private secretary, Jill Gray, and Barry Ryan, head of security.

Even though the Dáil is not sitting, I know TDs will continue to represent their constituents and I hope they also make time to enjoy the company of their family and friends. It is very important to come back refreshed. I look forward to seeing you all in September revitalised and ready for the autumn term.