Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 24 May 2017

Vol. 952 No. 1

Leaders' Questions

The collapse of the longest running criminal trial in history, involving charges against Sean FitzPatrick, former chairman of Anglo Irish Bank, represents a damning indictment of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, but also reflects poorly on the Garda and indeed on the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. In essence, the State's capacity to investigate serious white-collar crime has been shown to be inept, negligible, wasteful and virtually redundant. It raises fundamental questions about the continued existence and effectiveness of the ODCE and makes it an imperative to consider alternative mechanisms to deal with white-collar crime in this country.

This has been, by any measure, a catastrophic systemic failure. The reputation of the ODCE is in shreds. There was a nine-year investigation that cost tens of millions of euro. Documents were shredded and the method of taking witness statements was fundamentally flawed. The judge described them as statements by committee. The ODCE was trying to build a case rather than investigating a case impartially and independently. There was a high degree of coaching and cross-contamination in the preparation of statements. The statement-making process involved negotiations between investigators and solicitors A&L Goodbody, and resulted in witness statements included in the book of evidence that had been drafted entirely by people other than the witnesses themselves.

In the judge's words, the statements of Mr. Bergin and Mr. Kelly were scripted, coached, and contaminated by the views of others, including the ODCE. They were cross-contaminated in every significant detail from start to finish. Significantly, the ODCE accepts this criticism. There had been missing evidence, evidence of innocence had not been pursued and so on.

The handling of this case shatters public confidence in the prosecution of white-collar crime in this country. The jury never got to make the call because of the shambolic handling of the case. This raises fundamental questions. Given the gravity of the case and what it reveals, will the Taoiseach ensure that the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, comes before the Dáil to make a statement on the case and take questions? Can the Taoiseach confirm that the Minister has received a report from the Director of Corporate Enforcement in respect of this case or that she has sought such a report from him? Has the Government considered this? Let us be straight; there were indications of how this case might turn out for quite some time. All the issues have now been revealed in the public domain. It seems that the Government must have considered these matters at some stage. What is its response?

I agree with Deputy Micheál Martin. Despite all the criticism of and cynicism about politics, at least there is political answerability in the sense that a Minister in charge of something like this would face instant dismissal. The situation is that this person has been acquitted and is not guilty of any offence. As a result, the taxpayer takes up all the costs involved. The indications given by Judge Aylmer are very clear, as the Deputy has pointed out.

The ODCE is a statutory independent body. Its mother Department, the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, has no responsibility or power of enforcement. The ODCE takes its own legal advice. There were gardaí attached to the ODCE in the beginning but they were not involved in the way this case was taken. The judge did point out that the most fundamental error was the way in which they went about taking evidence from the auditors of Anglo Irish Bank, who were both from the firm of accountants involved. He said that it was intended that their statements would be taken in the normal way by members of the Garda Síochána who were then attached to the ODCE. Instead, however, the statements were obtained through solicitors from a legal firm.

The ODCE pointed out that it has now undergone substantial organisational change and that it was simply not equipped to undertake parallel investigations on the scale involved. I want to say this: I have not spent the past six years as head of Government and making very difficult decisions only to hear again now the allegation in respect of white-collar crime that people can walk away, that nobody is guilty and that nothing is being done about it.

It is not an allegation.

Let us, as a Parliament, decide what we must do with an organisation like the ODCE. I can confirm that when the Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Bruton, had responsibility for jobs, requests by the ODCE to his then Department for resources were granted. Now I find that the ODCE says it was simply not equipped to take parallel investigations on the scale involved. I can confirm that the Minister has asked the Director of Corporate Enforcement for a full report, including on the role of all professionals involved in this case. That report will cover the issues involved since 2008 when this case commenced - almost ten years ago. Nothing is ruled out.

When Deputy Catherine Murphy had her full group, she put forward a proposition for a statutory standing body in the Dáil to deal with matters of corruption and so on.

The Minister will bring this before Government in due course. The Government will consider it next week, but I want the Minister to carry out an absolute review of what happened. It is not good enough. I agree with Deputy Micheál Martin. We cannot have a situation where an independent statutory agency that does not take legal advice from the Office of the Attorney General proceeds on its own and seeks resources from the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. Despite provision of the latter, this trial collapsed. We know why the first trial collapsed.

We have a question from Deputy Micheál Martin.

We heard the condemnation of a judge yesterday who had said that this case cannot proceed any further.

The Taoiseach will have another opportunity. I know it is important, but he has exceeded his time.

The Government will consider the matter on Tuesday next. The Minister will bring her report in due course. I would expect representatives from the ODCE to go before the relevant Oireachtas committee as well.

Is the Taoiseach suggesting that the Government had not been forewarned about this catastrophe? Is he suggesting that the Minister, by means of an early warning system, would not have been alerted to the impending disaster? The dogs on the street knew about the impending disaster for some time. Indeed, the Director of Public Prosecutions was alerted to the issue as well as the manner and methodology of the collecting and making of statements as far back as 2010. Hence, I say there has been systemic failure across the system. People are operating in silos, apparently. Did the Minister received any report, any early warning or any notification whatsoever from her Department officials about this case or about the ODCE failures relating to it? Is the Taoiseach suggesting that it is only from now on that the Department and the Government are going to respond to this case? It is inconceivable that there would not have been early notification to the Minister about the impending disaster that was about to unfold in respect of the case.

The Taoiseach mentioned that it is a matter for the Oireachtas. It seems the Government does not yet have a policy response to this matter. I put it to the Taoiseach that the Commission on the Future of Policing in Ireland should be asked about the optimal structural, approach and methodology of dealing with and enhancing the State's capacity to combat white-collar crime. The public will be angry because the capacity of the State to pursue white-collar crime has been laid bare. Something has to happen as a result of this in terms of a proper considered policy response.

A final response from the Taoiseach.

We cannot simply prolong it in terms of reports.

Let us have the final response from the Taoiseach.

Will the Minister come before the Dáil this week?

I am implementing the rules.

Yes, the Minister will come before the Dáil, make a full statement and answer all questions in so far as she can at this point.

Two things are important in this instance. First, the ODCE is an entirely independent statutory authority. Therefore, it is not subject to Government direction. Second, the trial was under way. While concerns were being raised, it would not have been possible to interfere with a trial that was under way in the courts.

The comments made by Judge Aylmer speak for themselves. They are an indictment of the ODCE. The ODCE had some success in 2014 and 2016. In April of this year, a person was arrested and charged with fraudulent trading based on an invoice relating to a fraud and entered a plea of guilty.

I think that the ODCE looked for resources and expertise, in so far as I can understand this, and that those requests were granted. When the ODCE says that it was simply not equipped to undertake parallel investigations on the scale involved, one would have thought that there would have been a specific request for the capacity to take in necessary expertise or whatever, either through Government or from outside sources, to deal with parallel investigations. In any event, it was not possible for Government to intervene in any way in a pending court case and was not possible for Government to give directions to an independent statutory body.

Since the current director was appointed, quite a number of changes have taken place. That does not deal with the fact that this case has gone on for ten years and is one of the longest and most expensive in the history of the State. The taxpayer has to pick up the tab here because the person who was acquitted yesterday has already been declared bankrupt.

The Minister will come before the Dáil, make a statement, give a report and answer questions on this. She is to receive a full and detailed report from the Director of Corporate Enforcement-----

Tá an t-am imithe. Teachta Gerry Adams.

-----and keep people fully informed -----

I know this is an important issue.

-----as to the options that are open to us now.

If there is going to be a decision to change Standing Orders, that is fine. While I am here, however, we have to adhere to the current rules. I know that Deputy Adams will adhere to his three minutes.

I have raised with the Taoiseach on a number of occasions the lack of accountability with the high rollers, with the elites, with the golden circles in this State. This blatant lack of accountability contrasts sharply with how people of few means and little power or influence are treated. This goes to the heart of public alienation from politics and disillusionment with the agencies of this State. The Taoiseach's answers today will not assuage people's concerns.

I have also raised with him the need for this State to get serious about white-collar crime, the need to develop a proper and credible approach to investigating and prosecuting such offences. Yesterday, the State's trial of the former chairman of the Anglo Irish Bank, Seán FitzPatrick, collapsed. My focus is not on that trial, it is on role of the ODCE in this sorry affair and the lack of will by the establishment to investigate white-collar crime. In 2016, there were 35 staff in the ODCE. They were assisted by five gardaí. This gives an insight into the State's attitude towards white-collar crime and corporate enforcement. Under the Taoiseach's watch the staff of this office has been cut from 42 to 35. The number of gardaí has been cut by half. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, the then Minister, Deputy Micheál Martin, refused requests from the office to increase its workforce by 20. The office at that time described its resources as wholly inadequate. The Taoiseach of the day, Bertie Ahern, dismissed this. That was when the bankers were running amok. They cost the people of this State billions of euro and yet there is still no law against reckless lending. In 2014, the lack of resources to which I refer was highlighted by a senior barrister who said, "It's enough to make the tin-pot dictator of a banana republic blush." It was not a Shinner who said that, it was an individual who is an expert in white-collar crime and a senior barrister. Of course, if someone is accused of welfare fraud, the full weight of this Government will be visited on them. When it comes to wrecking the economy, reckless lending, fixers fees and complex interest relating to billions of euro, however, the State looks the other way. This Government spends €5 million on the ODCE. That is €5 million to investigate white-collar crime. As Deputy Pearse Doherty pointed out, by contrast it spends over €17 million on our membership of the European Space Agency. Is that where its priorities lie? It is little wonder that the judge in the Seán FitzPatrick trial pointed out the shortcomings of the investigation conducted by the ODCE.

Even at this late stage would the Taoiseach agree that we should draw on international best practice for tackling white-collar crime and that we should get rid of the ODCE and replace it with appropriate and properly-resourced agencies and strong, robust legislation?

Deputy Adams makes the point that there was not a seriousness about the investigation. The point is-----

The judge made the point.

-----that this office was set up to oversee companies and to deal with those that stepped out of line. It has its independence and statutory authority and therefore it was not subject, and is not subject, to direction by the Minister or the Government, although it was set up by the Government for a very specific purpose. When the current director was appointed with effect from August 2012, the ODCE's investigation on the FitzPatrick case had been completed and the file passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions. The scale and complexity of the investigation into the affairs of Anglo Irish Bank was unprecedented in the history of the State, as Deputy Micheál Martin pointed out.

In light of the complexities of modern corporate law enforcement, the current director has overseen a number of organisational improvements in the ODCE.

Those improvements include reorganising the structures of the office, recruiting additional expertise, most notably five forensic accountants, because clearly in the determination of the case in the first place the forensic analysis was not strong enough. A digital forensic specialist is due to begin with the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement in the coming weeks. Fundamentally, it has amended the investigative procedures used by the office with members of the Garda Síochána now taking the lead on all criminal investigations. This is where there has clearly been a weakness in the system. While the ODCE may deal with civil cases at a lower level, when it comes to serious criminal law, we need to be able to deal with it with serious criminal forensic intent. That obviously was not what was followed here, as outlined by Judge Aylmer in his comments yesterday. There have been a number of successful prosecutions. Clearly, the judge has made a decision. The trial is over and Mr. FitzPatrick is a free man. The taxpayer takes up the tab here. The Minister has requested a full and detailed report from the director of the ODCE. The Minister will come before the Dáil, make her statement and answer questions. The director is prepared to go before the appropriate Oireachtas committee. The Government will reflect on this next week and when the report from the director becomes available to the Minister, it will be published and made available for everybody. We need to reflect on the fundamental question here.

A Deputy

Money.

Is the ODCE fit to deal with the situation that might arise here-----

-----or do we need far greater clarity and other expertise to be made available, either from Government level or elsewhere, to deal with complex criminal law?

I am informed the European Space Agency supports over 2,000 high-tech jobs in Ireland, with increasing employment and funding when it is necessary.

The Taoiseach claims every request was honoured yet in November 2015 the then Minister, Deputy Bruton, turned down requests and said the ODCE, other offices, and their respective management "have had to reconfigure their organisations and adapt to a constrained-resources environment in continuing to deliver their mandates" because of the moratorium. That is a complete, sharp contradiction of what the Taoiseach has just asserted. The fact is there is one law for the elites. This is deliberate and very conscious. There is another law for everyone else. That is endorsed by the successive policies and the historical attitude of the two larger parties here. The fact there is no appropriate and robust legislation dealing with these issues is another example of the way the State turns the other way. The Taoiseach has also acknowledged this principal law enforcement regulatory agency has not conducted its business properly. For example, the chief investigator has no previous experience. He has admitted in evidence he made many fundamental errors, including the destruction of documents. Who appointed him as chief investigator given his lack of experience? To whom was he accountable? Why were gardaí not involved in the taking of statements from the two key witnesses? It goes on and on. The Taoiseach is responsible.

I call on the Taoiseach.

Tá mé críochnaithe anois. I go back to what I said previously.

The Deputy has exceeded his time.

Does the Taoiseach agree we should draw on international best practice for tackling white collar crime with appropriate and properly resourced agencies and strong robust legislation and get rid of this agency?

The Taoiseach has one minute and one minute only.

Judge Aylmer made the point the ODCE completely lost sight of the nature and extent of the evidence on guilt and innocence. It completely lost sight of what was involved. The Deputy said there is no robust legislation in place here. In 2014 two gentlemen were convicted for the giving of unlawful financial assistance by Anglo for the purchase of its own shares. In 2016 both of them were convicted for fraudulent trading on foot of a plea of guilty. The second conviction was for failing to maintain a bank register of loans to directors on foot of a plea of guilty. The law in those cases actually worked in respect of white-collar crime. The Deputy mentioned comments made by the then Minister in 2015.

When the current director was appointed in 2012, the investigation of the FitzPatrick case had been completed. It is in the space before the current director was appointed that the judge made his damning comments in regard to the structure and management capacity of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement, ODCE, at that time. I would expect that when Mr. Drennan appears before the Oireachtas committee, he will provide every detail necessary to point out the changes in structure that apply now. The question is whether the ODCE is now fit for purpose or whether we need to clarify where the criminal law kicks in.

All citizens of the State stand before the courts innocent until proved guilty and we depend on the courts to uphold this vital constitutional principle. However, we also depend on our investigating and prosecuting authorities to ensure that proper, thorough, accurate and convincing investigations of allegations of crime take place, particularly crimes that have rocked the nation. The manifest incompetence of the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement in the case brought against Mr. Seán FitzPatrick has not only caused a public outcry but it beggars belief. As to the notion that it is a matter of resources, coaching of witnesses and tampering with evidence are not matters of resources. The same issues arise when we talk about the Garda Síochána. There are fundamental ways in which proper conduct of business takes place.

This case brings to light that we need to tackle these matters. Some suggestions have been put forward. We need to ensure these fundamental questions result in fundamental answers being brought and discussed by the House. We will participate in this discussion. However, we must also acknowledge that much of the root cause of public anger relates to the cost to the people of bailing out the banks. The desire of the public to see convictions of those who gambled with the economic security of our State is absolutely understandable. Criminal convictions are not, however, the only way to tackle public anger over the bailout of the banks. As the banks return to stability and profitability, we should begin to use the funding they generate to repair the social damage done in the State. The investment made to bail out the banks came from the National Pensions Reserve Fund and people are entitled to see a result from that investment.

Last week, the House voted in favour of a Labour Party proposal to delay the sale of the State's shares in Allied Irish Banks until such time as we can invest the proceeds in vitally needed infrastructure. Disturbingly, the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, has made known his intention to disregard this vote. If the Government disagrees with the vote of the House, it can try to rescind it, but that is not, I understand, the course to be taken. The Minister referred to a commitment in the programme for Government which has no more standing than a resolution of the House. Even if that were not the case, the programme for Government simply commits the State to use the banking shareholdings in the best interests of the people. Few would argue with the proposition that it is infinitely more in the interests of the Irish people to invest these moneys in vitally needed schools, hospitals and roads than in taking 1% off our national debt.

Before the Taoiseach vacates his office in the coming weeks, will he ensure the vote of the Dáil is respected and the policy adopted by the House last week is vindicated by his Government? Any other action would undermine the legitimacy of and public confidence in this people's assembly. Will he accept that proceeding with an initial public offering, IPO, in the face of the opposition of Dáil Éireann is an action that undermines the legitimacy of the House? Will he reconsider this bad proposal and work with my party and all other parties in the House to ensure the proceeds of this investment can benefit the people and that they get something back from the bailout of the banks?

The Deputy mentioned that the investigative procedure should be thorough, accurate and convincing and everybody supports that.

It was none of those in this case.

Clearly, the position that applied with the investigation carried out by the ODCE in the FitzPatrick case was none of those.

The judge himself made the point, which is a damning indictment of the procedure that was followed here, that the ODCE had completely lost sight of the nature and the extent of the evidence in respect of guilt and innocence. Everybody before the Irish courts is innocent until proven guilty. Now, the longest running trial in the history of the State has collapsed, the central individual is now free and acquitted and the taxpayer must take up the tab.

All of these issues - a lack of procedural capacity, lack of investigative capacity and lack of forensic analysis competence - were all evident in the structure of the ODCE prior to the current director being appointed in August 2012 where serious changes have taken place. The Minister will outline that to the Dáil and take questions on it. Director Drennan will be happy to go before the Oireachtas committee and have a serious discussion about it. The Government will reflect on this next week. The Minister will produce and publish the report when it is made available to her by the director.

The Minister, Deputy Noonan, and the Government have already commented on the IPO in respect of a portion of AIB being sold on and being applied to the reduction of debt. He has already made the point that it is a paper transfer in terms of whatever the value of the 25% being offered amounts to. The Government is not under any pressure to deal with this because the question of infrastructure is one it is now considering in terms of the capital review. All of the extent of the capital programme at the moment is up to €42 billion between State agencies, PPPs and the Exchequer. Yesterday, I pointed out the scale of what is available that is as yet unallocated, which is now the subject of a review here.

It is also important, as Deputy Howlin is well aware, that we do not want a situation where we apply so much money to infrastructure that all of the inflation costs then result and developers continue to make the rewards from all of that. It is much more important that the infrastructural needs are dealt with, and we are able to deal with these. Yesterday, both the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform were in Europe talking to the European Investment Bank about a number of major infrastructural projects, which can be accommodated through lending from the EIB at low interest rates long term. Issues have already been mentioned, like the development of the metro, like the development of the major motorway from Cork to Limerick and others where potentially there is a stream of income that can come from those to pay off those loans.

I respect the fact that the House made a decision last week in respect of a matter in regard to AIB, but Deputy Howlin will also respect the right and the responsibility of Government to make its decisions, and this decision has been publicly announced by Government for quite a long time and will stand in the context of what Government is doing.

The decision is, frankly, wrong. The Taoiseach referred to having too much money but the capital review involves €2.6 billion, which is paltry in investment terms. There is no such thing as "too much money". The additional €3 billion that we would get from the sale of AIB would increase that to €5.6 billion, which in itself is not enough. That is why we have also argued for the rainy-day sum to be deployed for this purpose.

The potential new Taoiseach, the Minister, Deputy Varadkar, has said that he will abandon the target set by the Minister for Finance, Deputy Noonan, of reducing our debt from 60% to 45%. He will have it at 55%. I welcome that, but we need to invest in our vital infrastructure now. The EIB being able to give us money that we can deploy through PPPs for profit is not the issue. Rather, it is the fiscal space that restricts how we spend it. The Taoiseach knows that we had money for social housing from the sale of the Bord Gáis Éireann facilities. That was €400 million that we could not spend because of the restrictions on the fiscal space. This is not about the availability of money. It is about readjusting the fiscal space. I spent yesterday talking to the Germans, who are now well disposed towards accepting that adjustment.

Will the Taoiseach put this on hold? Will he put the sale of AIB on hold until we get this agreement?

I am glad the Deputy is using his office as leader of his party to talk to others internationally. That is part of an important negotiation in which Ireland has always been involved in order that others fully understand our position. It is applied in the case of Brexit and the main priorities for our country. I hope the Germans have listened carefully to what the Deputy had to say. We voted for the fiscal stability treaty.

They have already given adjustment to Greece.

We voted for the rules here in a referendum, the only country to do so in the middle of a recession, and we voted 60:40 for that. The Deputy is right that it is not about the question of money being available; it is about the extent of how much we can spend. That is a very valid point, and I take that point. In the context of setting out what it is we can do in terms of infrastructure development, we need to consider that.

There is very little that can be done with €2.6 billion.

For example, the Government put €5 billion on the table in respect of social housing and we are struggling to get local authorities to measure up to the requirements. We gave them the money to buy houses, to reconstruct houses, to build houses and to have private enterprise come onto public lands to build social housing. It is a real challenge.

It is all about the private sector.

It is privatisation.

The Taoiseach to conclude.

Many of the developments, such as the Gort-Tuam project and the Rosslare bypass, are under way. These are major developments. The point the Deputy makes about the extent of fiscal space and the capacity to spend money is an issue we are considering and will continue to consider. The question about AIB is a decision we have already made as a Government and we will follow through on it. The question of flexibility is a matter the Minister, Deputy Noonan, is dealing with all of the time.

The issue of 11 beds being closed at Linn Dara in Cherry Orchard was raised in the Chamber yesterday. This is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to staff shortages. I want to list the theatres throughout the country where there have been closures because of staff shortages, as I believe this is a symptom of something else. Our Lady’s Children’s Hospital, Crumlin, had two full theatre closures over a six-week period due to staffing shortages, while Temple Street Children’s University Hospital had one theatre closure for the same reason. Theatre closures were reported in all constituent hospitals at the Dublin Midlands Hospital Group. At St. James’s Hospital, there were two to three theatres closed per day, depending on nursing shortages on the rota. In St. Luke’s Hospital, Kilkenny, an elective theatre closed because of staffing shortages. A new theatre had not opened in Wexford General Hospital due to the difficulty in securing specialty theatre nursing staff. This is a symptom of something much bigger, and that something bigger is pay and conditions for nurses.

I want to move on to something equally crucial which nobody has picked up on in the Chamber this week. A report in The Irish Times this week on mental health assessments for children is quite damning. The report states:

There were 2,520 children and young people on waiting lists for an initial assessment for mental health services in February 2017, an increase of 44 per cent on the same period last year, according to the HSE. ... Barnardos has said these delays are having “long-term unnecessary consequences” on children and “affecting every aspect of their development”. ... It found almost 60 per cent have been waiting for more than a year while a quarter (26 per cent) have been waiting more than two years for an initial appointment.

I find this incredible. The reason Linn Dara has a shortage of nurses is that nurses are emigrating for better pay and conditions. The past year has seen systematic cuts to their conditions and pay. We are living not only with a two-tier health system but a two-tier pay system, whereby nurses and medical professionals are going to the private sector rather than the public sector.

The mantra of Fine Gael over the past six years has been to create the conditions for growth and prosperity. However, the Taoiseach and his party have created the conditions for this crisis. Fundamentally, I think the Taoiseach is a very decent man, but how can he, after six years, turn around, hold his head high and say that, in his tenure as Taoiseach, this was a success?

I would actually find that embarrassing as a member of the party he is in and as a citizen of this country. How can the Taoiseach justify those cuts and that shortage in this country?

The Deputy is a decent man too. I respect his right to raise in the House any issues he feels strongly about. When the predecessor to this Government was elected, we were blocked out of all the international markets, bond yields were at 15%, the unemployment rate was 15.2%, we were haemorrhaging jobs by the ten thousands, and there was despair and disillusionment all over the place. Now, because of the sacrifice of the people, that has changed considerably. We are now able to borrow money for the State at less than 1%. The unemployment rate is down to 6.3% or 6.4% and is heading in the right direction. More than 225,000 jobs have been created since the Minister, Deputy Bruton, introduced the first Action Plan for Jobs.

The Deputy referred to the recruitment of nurses. The Minister, Deputy Harris, has addressed this on a number of occasions. There are now incentives for nurses. Permanent contracts are offered to all new nurses coming out of highly specialised training here in Ireland. There are opportunities for nurses to return home to work in the hospital service here in Ireland. Not everybody will do that. Young people in all walks of life tend to move to other countries for experience in travel and to develop their skills.

The Minister of State, Deputy McEntee, has been working very hard on the issue of mental health. Yesterday she went to the Linn Dara facility where only half of the 22 beds are occupied. During her visit she was given assurances that any patients discharged from the Linn Dara facility are children who are discharged for clinical reasons only. The HSE confirmed to the Minister of State that no young person will be discharged unless deemed clinically appropriate by their mental health team. Nobody is being discharged to allow a bed to be closed.

The HSE has also assured the Minister of State that for patients who are discharged for clinical reasons, dedicated follow-on support is available from the community-based child and adolescent mental health services, CAMHS. They will continue to be provided as required on a routine basis. The Health Service Executive will also increase the capacity of the child and adolescent mental health day services during the summer to enhance the level of support available for those children and their families.

The core issue facing the Linn Dara facility relates specifically to staff recruitment difficulties for mental health professionals, which unfortunately, as the Deputy has pointed out, reflects wider health system recruitment and retention issues. I assure the Deputy that the problem facing the Linn Dara facility does not relate to funding availability but to staffing availability. Intensive efforts are under way to increase staffing to allow more beds to be reallocated. The HSE is actively engaged in a recruitment process, with a number of staff due to support the service in the near future. I hope that will improve things.

An allocation of €15.5 billion is now going into the health services. All nurses coming out of Irish training institutions are offered permanent contracts giving them the opportunity to work at home here in our own hospitals.

While that all sounds well and good, there seems to be a perennial problem and we go from crisis to crisis in the health service. It is not rocket science. In a country where there is a lot of money sloshing around, we should have a health system that works for everybody, regardless of whether they are millionaires or unemployed. That is how it should work. Nobody should have to wait two years for any sort of assessment. It is a disgrace.

The closures at the Linn Dara facility and elsewhere come down to not paying nurses properly. The past seven or eight years have taken their toll on nurses and other public sector workers. They are demoralised and have to work an extra hour per week just to make ends meet. This is the fundamental problem. On Friday at 4 o'clock in Cherry Orchard there will be a protest over the cutbacks.

There is another point about public sector pay. I do not want to make it personal because I try to differentiate between the personal and political.

However, the Taoiseach is going to walk away with a massive pension in two weeks' time. He will get a golden handshake and a pension of €150,000. Most people listening to these proceedings will be nauseated when they hear that. That is the two-tier system we have in this country, where politicians go off into the sunshine with golden handshakes and big money. Is the Taoiseach not ashamed of what he has left behind?

I am very proud of the people of this country for responding to an unprecedented economic crisis in a way that has made us the envy of many in Europe and has left us with the fastest growing economy in the European Union for the past four years running.

People are waiting two years for simple assessments.

Deputy Gino Kenny got his opportunity.

I admit that we have many challenges ahead but the changes that have been brought about have put the country in a much safer position than was the case previously.

Not if one is trying to get a hospital bed.

No doubt Deputy Gino Kenny has spoken to many constituents who have been treated by the health service and who have nothing but praise for the doctors, nurses and attendants who looked after them. The problem has always been to get into the system and to have the capacity to deal with that. That is why the Government has treated the health service as a priority, why €14.5 billion has been allocated and why changes are constantly being made through primary care centres, home-care packages and the provision of community care teams to look after people.

In respect of the payment situation the Deputy made for nurses, the same arguments are made for gardaí, members of the Defence Forces, teachers, public servants and others. Those talks are now beginning in full with officials from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the trade unions. The Minister hopes to engage intensively in those talks now with a view to concluding them by the end of June, and getting an extension of the Lansdowne Road agreement where benefits were won and agreed with the unions involved.

In respect of the matter relating to pensions, I will, when I leave this seat, continue to be paid as a backbench Deputy.

But a big pension will follow.

That completes Leaders' Questions. Deputy Boyd Barrett should remember that Deputy Gino Kenny is leader today.

If it is that easy lads, come into government.

Top
Share