The House has agreed that, for the duration of the Covid-19 emergency only, the rapporteur's report of the Business Committee shall not be read out but shall be taken as read. Arising from it there are just two proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with today's business agreed? It is not agreed. I call Deputies Barry and Pringle.
An tOrd Gnó - Order of Business
We have arranged for a debate to take place about the keeping of files on the families of children with autism who had the temerity to take legal action against the State and I welcome the fact that we have a debate. To have a proper session on that, we need to have - if the Deputy speaking now might excuse me - a situation where the Ministers who are in the Cabinet who are or have been Ministers for Health, namely the Minister for Health, Deputy Donnelly, the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Deputy Harris, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste, available to answer questions in that debate. That is not part of the arrangements and needs to be which would mean that the debate would need to be a bit longer. I am also not in favour of shunting Deputy Pringle’s very important motion on direct provision off the agenda as it should be included in it. I propose that the Business Committee would meet today and arrange the debate in such a way. On that basis we do not accept the proposal as it stands.
There are two issues I wish to raise. The first is the changes in the Covid-19 arrangements which were announced last night on television by the Taoiseach and which should be debated in the Dáil here as well, particularly the changes in the vaccination programme. Time should be made available for that.
The debate on the "RTÉ Investigates" programme last week is vitally important. I note that the Government has accepted that the debate will take place and have shunted the asylum seekers’ debate to tomorrow because of that. Time should be made available today for that debate and I have made a submission under Standing Order 42 on that, as I know other Members have also done. This debate should be taken today as a priority because it is very important, as should the other debate. I thank the Ceann Comhairle.
I too want to look for change to have time here to discuss the very serious situation of An Garda Síochána not being given the vaccine. It was number ten on the list and now it has gone way down below and we do not know where it is on the pecking list. An Garda Síochána is our front line.
I also want time to be made available for the Minister, Deputy Stephen Donnelly, to come in to correct the record of the House, as Deputy McNamara has asked for. The Minister told us there would never be penal provisions with regard to public worship offered by a priest and that a priest could not be summonsed, fined or imprisoned. Now we are told the opposite by the Taoiseach, the Garda and others. I want time for the Minister to come in to correct the record of the House and not have us told lies in the House.
I support my colleagues who have raised the issue of the "RTÉ Investigates" programme. It is bad enough that individuals were forced to go to the courts to vindicate their rights but it is immoral that there is any assertion that information was being collected that would force them to withdraw those particular actions. There is huge concern among people who have taken a case against the State to vindicate their rights or to address issues of misdiagnosis or malpractice that such files exist, not just in the Department of Health but in other Departments. It is imperative that this issue is fully clarified, not just with regard to autistic children but to the Pandemrix narcolepsy cases, the audiology misdiagnoses in the west of Ireland and even with regard to cervical cancer cases. We need absolute clarity on this and we need the Minister to come before the House today to clarify it.
With regard to the "RTÉ Investigates" issue, as a member of the Oireachtas health committee, and without wanting to pre-empt what the Taoiseach might say, nobody in the House has a monopoly on the sense of disgust, alarm and shock at what unfolded and emerged in the documentary. Interestingly, it is safe, genuine and sincere for me to say the Oireachtas health committee has adopted a very non-partisan approach to this. We are seeking every relevant witness to come to address the committee and be interrogated by it on the details of what happened, whether it be a Minister or a senior official. This will happen. Our objective on the Oireachtas health committee is an objective shared with every Member of the House, which is that we get to the bottom of the issue and get as much truth and as many facts as possible. I also acknowledge this will take a little bit of time. I assure the public and all those stakeholders in the autistic position, whether parents or children, that the House and committees of the House could not be taking this matter more seriously.
I thank Deputy Lahart. For the sake of accuracy-----
I am not sure that it is appropriate for a Government Deputy to speak, mar dhea, on behalf of everybody in the House when it is abundantly clear that the will of the House is for statements from the Ministers, including previous occupants of the Department, to establish facts, publish the review report to which the Taoiseach referred earlier, for us to have full disclosure of the facts and to have an assurance that the families and children on whom these files are held have actually been informed of that fact and have access to those files.
Again, for the sake of accuracy, I did not propose or make any alteration for the proposed agenda for the week. The Government amended the agenda, I would have thought in an attempt to take on board the request from Members to have a particular debate. Does the Taoiseach want to address this matter?
There will be statements tomorrow on the "RTÉ Investigates" programme and the issues raised in it. There will be 100 minutes provided for the debate tomorrow, in accordance with the wishes of the Business Committee and the House. Again, I say to the House in respect of Deputy Barry and others, and I am very clear on this, the role of government is to act as advocates for children. In my role as a Minister with responsibility for education and health my objective was always to prevent litigation and to provide the services, particularly in education. We made huge progress at the time. Relative to the time it was groundbreaking with regard to the mainstreaming of special education. We can see this in the numbers of special needs assistants and resource teachers. It was a big change in itself. My impulse, and as leader of the Government I can say the approach of the entire Government, is designed to provide services for children in education and health, to advocate for children and to do better because we can do better and we need to do better. Things are far from perfect and I do not like situations where families of children with special needs are constantly in a position of fighting for additional services. This is something we will continue to work on.
I take some issue with Deputy McDonald's dismissal of Deputy Lahart's genuine contribution that we just heard. Just because he is a Deputy on the Government side of the House it does not invalidate his objectivity on this question or his sincerity. Sometimes Deputy McDonald's party leaves the mask slip and loses any sense of its democratic impulse and endeavours to suppress other people in the House who have a legitimate perspective on these issues.
Thank you, Taoiseach.
I would welcome the Oireachtas Committee on Health assessing it. This is an important point with regard to examining this issue in its entirety and bringing forward witnesses. I want the full truth on this out there. I have no issue with that happening.
We cannot get into a lengthy debate now. I thank the Taoiseach.
The Department itself is preparing an urgent brief that will facilitate Deputies also. This is an important point because assertions are being made. I welcome the fact that objectivity is being brought to this also.
I take what Deputy Naughten has said, that this is a broader issue with regard to other litigation relating to vaccines and other issues. The debate will be held tomorrow, with statements and questions and answers in the House. This has been facilitated.
Deputy Pringle raised issues that we discussed on Leaders' Questions earlier, with regard to some aspects of yesterday's announcement. There are time constraints on what can be achieved.
As I understand it, on Monday the Ceann Comhairle received requests from a number of Members for a Standing Order 42 debate on the adjournment on this issue. Subsequently, the Government proposed changing the agenda for tomorrow. The Business Committee had agreed the agenda for tomorrow last Thursday. I would like clarity on how this has happened. We requested the Ceann Comhairle to provide a debate and he came back and said there was no need because the Government was giving time for a debate. When did the Government actually propose to do this? Was it on foot of the motions going in and the Ceann Comhairle's request to the Government or was it totally independent?
I do not liaise with the Government on these matters. What happened was quite clearly this. Under Standing Order 29, the Government's prerogative is to determine the business of the week and how it will be taken. This is what the Government has done. I considered carefully the two requests from Deputies Naughten and Pringle under Standing Order 42 for a special notice question on this matter. Since the Government had at that stage already agreed to have a debate, it was not in order or appropriate to have Standing Order 42 special questions accommodated also. There is no need to have two debates on one issue. We are trying to make the best use we can of very scarce time.
I call Deputy Tóibín and I ask him to be very brief.
This issue is of such import that 100 minutes is absolutely not satisfactory. It goes to the heart of what is happening in the HSE day in and day out, where the HSE is in combat with patients and the only way people can get justice is through the court system. It also goes to the heart of ministerial responsibility. We need to know what former Ministers with responsibility for health knew about this. How can something like this happen without Ministers knowing about it? Last week, the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, said this issue was raised a couple of times in the Department. The democratic mandate has been mentioned. Only six minutes are being allotted to groups such as ours. Surely we have a democratic opportunity to question the Taoiseach and former Ministers with responsibility for health on this issue.
Everyone will have the opportunity to question when the debate takes place. I am conscious that I have a list of 36 people who want to ask questions on promised legislation. They are having increasingly less possibility of doing so because we are eroding the time.
Is the proposal for dealing with it agreed? I call the Taoiseach.
I ask Deputy Tóibín to withdraw the statement he just made to the effect that the HSE is in combat with patients.
Yes.
Let us get a sense of perspective here. The HSE and the many people who work for it day in and day out are working to protect the lives of people. That needs to be acknowledged. It is outrageous that a Deputy would say that. The Deputy made a general statement that the HSE is in combat with patients. That is an outrageous statement.
It is not outrageous.
It lacks perspective. It lacks any balance. We are talking about people who are on the front line, working every day to protect people.
The Taoiseach has made the point. We do not need to have a debate about it.
I think that should be withdrawn.
Is the proposal for dealing with Wednesday's business agreed to?
Níl.
Question, "That the proposal for dealing with Wednesday's business be agreed to", put and declared carried.
Is the proposal for dealing with Thursday's business agreed to?
Agreed.
It is not agreed. I want to see all the former Ministers for Health in the Cabinet taking questions in the debate. I want to put the matter to a vote if that is not agreed.
Precisely how many Ministers would the Deputy like to see? If we are going to vote on something, we need to be sure what it is we are going to vote on. How many Ministers and going back over what period?
The four Ministers in the Cabinet, namely, the current Minister for Health, Deputy Stephen Donnelly, the Minister for Further and Higher Education, Research, Innovation and Science, Deputy Harris, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste. The latter three are all former Ministers for Health.
I thank the Deputy. Is it agreed that the Government will facilitate that?
The Government has laid the order before the House. This is apportioning blame in advance. There is an Oireachtas committee that can examine everything, and there is no issue there. Again, in the context of the assertions that have been made, I stated earlier that I never authorised anything. Innuendo, of course, is Deputy Barry's favourite pastime - to damn people by innuendo and by making assertions he cannot stand over.
I thank the Taoiseach.
It is outrageous carry-on but it is nothing new from the Deputy. I say again for the record what I said earlier, namely, under no circumstances would I ever authorise any breach of patient-client confidentiality or the collection of dossiers on people or children in terms of their rights. The opposite is the case in terms of my political record. I fought for children's rights from the very beginning. Since I became a councillor or a Deputy, that is what I have been about in politics, with varying degrees of success, that I acknowledge. The bottom line is my commitment has been very clear. I would not stand over some of the assertions that were made in the programme, if they happened, particularly the documentation relating to a psychiatrist apparently being contacted. That is wrong and I certainly would not authorise that.
We cannot have a debate on the floor of the House.
No one can justify in any way the breaching of patient-client confidentiality.
To be clear, the proposal is merely that the former Ministers for Health in the Cabinet answer questions in the course of the debate. It is a simple democratic point. The Taoiseach doth protest a bit too much, methinks.
Strictly speaking, it is a matter for the line Minister. There is no precedent of which I am aware for retired or former Ministers to come in and answer to the House. In any event, the proposal for dealing with tomorrow's business has been challenged and I am going to put the question.
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with Thursday's business be agreed to."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 27; Níl, 18; Staon, 0.
Tá
- Bruton, Richard.
- Burke, Colm.
- Byrne, Thomas.
- Cahill, Jackie.
- Cannon, Ciarán.
- Chambers, Jack.
- Connolly, Catherine.
- Costello, Patrick.
- Durkan, Bernard J.
- Farrell, Alan.
- Griffin, Brendan.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Higgins, Emer.
- Lahart, John.
- Lawless, James.
- Leddin, Brian.
- McAuliffe, Paul.
- McGrath, Mattie.
- McHugh, Joe.
- Nolan, Carol.
- O'Connor, James.
- O'Donnell, Kieran.
- O'Sullivan, Christopher.
- Ó Cathasaigh, Marc.
- Pringle, Thomas.
- Rabbitte, Anne.
- Richmond, Neale.
Níl
- Andrews, Chris.
- Barry, Mick.
- Brady, John.
- Cairns, Holly.
- Cullinane, David.
- Gannon, Gary.
- Gould, Thomas.
- Guirke, Johnny.
- Kelly, Alan.
- Kerrane, Claire.
- Mac Lochlainn, Pádraig.
- McDonald, Mary Lou.
- Naughten, Denis.
- Ó Murchú, Ruairí.
- Shanahan, Matt.
- Smith, Duncan.
- Tóibín, Peadar.
- Tully, Pauline.
Staon
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Brendan Griffin and Jack Chambers; Níl, Deputies Mick Barry and Pádraig Mac Lochlainn.
Question declared carried.
I want to raise the change the Government has made to the vaccination plan, as announced yesterday evening. This is both a huge and an astonishing decision that was made without prior notice and, it seems, without any consultation with the groups of front-line workers who will be affected by it. It has come as a great shock and has caused great anger for SNAs, childcare workers, teachers, gardaí and workers in retail that the Taoiseach has now decided they should not be afforded some level of priority in recognition of the real exposure and heightened risk they face in contracting this virus. It is abundantly clear that the Government has changed tack because the system it has in place is not fit for purpose. We have seen many instances of the flaws and fault lines in the Government's approach but this is the most astonishing admission of failure on its part. More importantly, it has caused huge anxiety among those front-line workers. I do not know how the Taoiseach can defend or explain away the removal of priority from those groups. It is wrong and it will cause unnecessary anxiety and real worry and fear among those workers. I ask the Taoiseach to reverse the decision in this regard.
It is incredible that the Deputy can stand up and speak in the manner in which she has done. This is exactly the scheme that was designed in the North, to which Sinn Féin was a party and which it implemented. The latter is a scheme based on age. We are taking medical and clinical advice in respect of this change. We want to vaccinate people as fast as we possibly can. We are in the middle of a pandemic. Higher volumes of vaccines are coming in. We want to make sure that the most vulnerable of all workers and key workers are vaccinated first. It must be remembered that the prioritisation of the different categories of key workers had not been identified. Such workers range right across the board, from childcare workers to bus drivers, to taxi drivers - you name it. The Deputy should not pretend that it is all simple and easy. It is more important to take the clinical advice which, on the basis of the reviews taken, is telling us that age is the most determinant factor in whether a person gets sick or severely ill or can die. We can get older childcare workers and older teachers, for example, vaccinated much faster in this way.
The news that 14 days after people are fully vaccinated they can meet indoors is both great and to be welcomed. I have seen directly the impact this news has had on elderly people. It does, however, raise issues about where we go from here because this circle of people will get wider. Where are we going regarding vaccination passports or certificates, green certificates or whatever they will be called? The UK is contemplating the introduction of these, as are Denmark, Iceland, Sweden, Greece and Cyprus, who are all rolling along with producing vaccination passports. What work has been done in Ireland in this regard? Where does the Government stand on this matter? There are obvious moral and ethical questions and legal issues involved. Where does the Government stand on vaccination passports and what work has been done to date in respect of them?
We have established a senior officials group under the stewardship of my Department to consider the policy implications of such certificates. On the technical side, we are progressing work to make sure that we develop a technical solution that would be interoperable with an EU-wide system for certification, once a person has received a vaccination. The EU is also talking about negative PCR test results and evidence as to whether a person has recovered from Covid. The policy implications are, as the Deputy stated, more significant and need to be teased out. Again, we would be happy to take any submissions from Members of the House or the various parties.
While I accept that a rationale was outlined yesterday, there was considerable moving of the goalposts in the context of our vaccination programme. That will have ramifications. Can the Taoiseach guarantee that all of our educators, SNAs, home school liaison staff and teachers, particularly those in primary schools who would be a younger cohort, will be vaccinated by September in order to ensure that we can fully reopen our schools safely?
That is a fair point in the context of the beginning of the next academic year. The target is to administer the first dose of the vaccine to 80% of adults by the end of June and that 70% will be fully vaccinated by the end of July. By July and August, therefore, we will be dealing with the latter end of the vaccination programme. With the supplies coming in we are in a good position to achieve that. The more important point is that those who are older or who may be vulnerable due to particular conditions - I refer here to teachers, childcare workers, bus drivers, factory workers, retail workers and a range of other key workers - had not yet been prioritised one over the other. There is a great deal of merit in saying that those who are most vulnerable in those key worker categories will be brought up the queue now and vaccinated earlier. This is one of the outcomes of this. This is the advice from NIAC.
Will the Taoiseach confirm that it is the Government's intention to let the blanket ban on evictions and rent increases fall just ten days after the 5 km restriction is lifted, in other words, on 22 April? Does the Taoiseach have any concerns about a tsunami of evictions this summer if the blanket ban is lifted on 22 April and the ban more generally is lifted three months later on 22 July? Given that rents rose nationally during a year when a ban on rent increases was in play, for example, 4.5% in our city of Cork, is the Taoiseach in any way concerned that lifting the ban on rent increases will result in very sharp rent hikes right across the State in the second half of this year?
To be fair to the Minister for Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy O'Brien, the protection of tenants has been a cornerstone of his policies so far. He has brought in very strong protective legislation, obviously, within the bounds of what the constitutional framework permits. We are obliged to operate within constitutional parameters in the context of what we do. The Minister has pushed matters to the limit in terms of the degree of protection he can provide and that he will continue to provide even in the aftermath of the 5 km restriction being lifted.
I want clarity on one point.
No, we do not have time.
A direct question was asked, namely, do the rent protections extend beyond 22 April.
The Deputy is not asking the question.
I asked a direct question and could not get a straight answer.
It was a direct question.
The Deputy is not asking the question. Will he resume his seat?
This is outrageous.
I call the Regional Group.
Outrageous.
Will the Deputy please respect his colleagues?
(Interruptions).
In 2016, the Taoiseach stood in the grounds of University Hospital Waterford and pledged that he and his party would deliver 24-7 cardiac care to the people of the south east. In recent days, he and his Minister for Health took a significant step in honouring that pledge by committing funding to a cardiac cath lab at University Hospital Waterford. I thank the Taoiseach for that step, which he and I have discussed many times. Now I ask that he finish the journey.
First, will he commit his office's oversight of and support for the immediate recruitment of the cardiology team required to open this second cath lab? Second, will he commit the HSE to expand funding to provide a 24-7 cardiac care service for the south east once that new laboratory is operational? In so doing, he will restore the faith of 500,000 people in a politician's promise, and in the promise of a Fianna Fáil Taoiseach.
I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. As he pointed out, the main construction contract was awarded and the second cath lab is included in the programme for Government and the resources provided. The current funding, in terms of the recruitment of staff and so on, will also be provided with regard to ensuring the successful operation of the cath lab and the vital diagnostic services it will provide. HSE estates has also confirmed that the equipment for the second cath lab will be of the same type as that in the newly upgraded existing cath lab and will have full interventional capabilities in the event that the existing cath lab is not available. It will mean a significantly increased level of interventional services that can be provided now-----
Thank you, Taoiseach. The time is up.
-----and into the future. We will continue to engage with all of the Deputies on the issue.
Hundreds of young and not so young farmers in the south east have invested hugely in agriculture by buying land, increasing the cow herd and investing in magnificent buildings for animal welfare. Glanbia, with a Dutch company, Royal A-ware, is investing in a factory to make Cheddar cheese. It has gone through the county council and An Bord Pleanála planning processes but now An Taisce is on its back like a monkey. It is in the High Court for judicial review and is threatening to go to the European court. It will be disastrous for hundreds of young farmers, the farming economy and the economies of the south east if that happens. Can we not do something to stop that frivolous behaviour by An Taisce? The system the farmers are using is best practice. This is simply a case of idealistic people in An Taisce acting the maggot, which is damaging our economy and causing devastation for young farmers.
On the same matter, I find this very serious. An Taisce is completely overstepping the mark. It is trying to dictate a Government agenda. It is also trying to dictate Government policy. Time and again, it has painted farmers as the scapegoats. That is not right. All of us here have spoken about the need for job creation in rural towns and villages. We cannot let this continue. We need strong intervention with An Taisce. Also, there must be collaboration between An Taisce, farmers and Glanbia. What is happening is wrong and I condemn the actions of An Taisce.
This plan to produce 50,000 tonnes of Gouda cheese would greatly reduce our dependence on the British Cheddar cheese market, which is exactly what we want to do post Brexit. It is extremely regrettable from that point of view. Farmers have made many commitments and it is extremely disappointing that An Taisce, following An Bord Pleanála's decision, can get a judicial review and delay this project for many years. That has the potential to make the project economically unviable. It will have huge repercussions for both the company itself and the milk producers supplying Glanbia.
I thank the three Deputies for raising the issue. Deputy Cahill has been speaking to me about this issue on an ongoing basis and articulating his concerns. There is a balance to be struck in terms of objecting to significant facilities. People have rights to object but on the other hand the increasing use of judicial review is something on which we, as a society, will have to reflect. There is an independent planning process. It is rigorous and it should be respected. There is a growing sense that the judicial review is becoming a new mechanism to frustrate and delay projects hoping that they may not develop. That is creating challenges on the investment side and in terms of the creation of jobs. That has to be acknowledged. What the Deputies are saying is problematic. We saw it in forestry in the past while where there were consistent interventions, which were designed to stop any licences from issuing, and we had to deal with that legislatively. There are significant issues as we prepare the national development plan, for example. We have reviewed this. The range of projects, be they infrastructural or production, that are held up now has to be a cause for concern overall.
I want to place something on the record. In the recent past, Ipsos MRBI carried out a poll on who people trust and of 27 professions, politicians are third last. Only 24% of people have trust in politicians. Even bankers are higher than us. I am a politician and I have to say that I had that same feeling yesterday as I listened to the Taoiseach's plan to open up the country. I want to place it on the record that I have lost all trust in the way we are dealing with the pandemic. I ask the Taoiseach to commit to having an item on the Dáil agenda every single month from now on to allow us look at how we are dealing with the pandemic in its totality-----
Hear, hear.
Hear, hear.
-----in respect of vaccinations, an overall policy, which should be zero Covid and control, and giving power back to the people. Talking about a passport for those who have been vaccinated or that I can eat indoors if I have been vaccinated but I cannot if I have not is extremely divisive. At this point, all I ask the Taoiseach to do is commit to having an ongoing item on the agenda every single month in this Dáil as part of the bargain in return for our support for draconian legislation.
Politicians have to be responsible for our actions. When the Taoiseach speaks to the nation, as he did yesterday, people look for leadership and hope. I refer to the last-minute announcement about the change in the vaccine roll-out. I am dealing with carers, teachers, child support workers, members of the Garda and bus drivers. A man told me on the train from Cork yesterday that one of the workers in Iarnród Éireann had died of Covid-19 and asked me where the roll-out was for them. The Taoiseach has to bring people with him. If the medical advice is the medical advice, we support that but he should have discussed that change with the unions and other representative bodies. There should have been inclusion, not an announcement out of nowhere.
I completely support Deputy Connolly in what she said. There is and continues to be a great deal of confusion among the public about many of the announcements that have been made. There is now a change to the vaccine roll-out. We are told that we can visit people if we have been vaccinated but we cannot if we have not been vaccinated. People are angered by that. The feedback on social media yesterday was to express anger, annoyance and frustration. Carers are ringing us asking if they have gone down the list in terms of getting the vaccine. Members of the Garda are seeking to be vaccinated. They have been on the front line for more than 12 months and have been completely forgotten. It is time for the Taoiseach to put proper action in place.
In respect of Deputy Connolly's remarks, I regard them as somewhat disingenuous. Politicians are elected in general elections. People elect politicians. I have been elected in quite a number of general elections. That is what I go by; nothing else. We are in a parliamentary democracy. People may not like us sometimes but that is acceptable. I salute and respect anybody who goes before the people in elections and gets elected because that is fundamental to what we are about as a society and has been since the foundation of the State.
It is also disingenuous of the Deputy to say that she wants me to commit to discussing Covid once a month. We have been discussing it every single day in this House since the pandemic began.
No. We are not.
Hear, hear.
We most certainly are discussing it. If she goes through the Order of Business for the past number of weeks she will see sessions on vaccinations, mental health and Covid, childcare and Covid and education and Covid. It is extremely disingenuous to suggest that once a month would be some sort of a commitment on Covid when the reality is we have been discussing Covid day in and day out in this House and at committees of the House also. That is the case.
I have met groups which represent the zero Covid philosophy and had a good exchange of views with them. I do not dismiss any perspectives that people have on Covid. On a regular basis we will continue, as we have been, discussing policies on Covid, aspects of Covid and different perspectives on Covid.
In response to Deputies Gould and Michael Collins, the evidence was based on clinical and medical advice, and on getting vaccines out as fast we possibly can in the middle of a global pandemic. That is what we are endeavouring to do.
That concludes questions on promised legislation. The 30 or so Deputies we have not reached will be given priority tomorrow.