Mr. Ciaran Austin:

Since then, we have developed into a national organisation providing a variety of suicide postvention and prevention services, supports and resources, most importantly, including professional counselling and psychotherapy provided by fully qualified and accredited therapists from our centres in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway, Wexford, Tralee, Athlone and Mayo. We also operate Ireland's only 24-hour freephone suicide prevention and bereavement helpline, also manned by fully qualified and accredited therapists, supporting those in crisis, bereaved or supporting a loved one with suicidal ideation. In addition, in the past two years, we have taken ownership of the farm and rural stress helpline initiative which started in HSE South approximately two years ago. We also provide a wide range of information, training and education programmes and resources for communities, agencies, workplaces and professionals. Recent, we opened our first centre in the United Kingdom, in Westminster in London.

There are two points of note about the organisation relevant to Senator Gilroy's report. This year, we are introducing a new family Suicide bereavement liaison service, in counties Donegal, Galway, Sligo-Leitrim, Clare and Limerick-north Tipperary, in collaboration with HSE West. In 2012, Console published the National Quality Standards for the Provision of Suicide Bereavement Services, in collaboration with the HSE's National Office for Suicide Prevention, NOSP, in an effort to provide a robust framework and self-assessment tool for any organisation providing postvention support in Ireland, and that is available to download on the website for anyone who wants a copy.

I will touch on the five key areas in Senator Gilroy's report. Some of this may reiterate key messages that came out this morning.

On suicide and the recession, we are in broad agreement with the findings outlined in the report on the rise in suicide and self-harm rates during the time of economic recession. Increasingly, since 2008, our work has involved supporting individuals and families who are experiencing unemployment, financial pressure, reduced employment prospects and mortgage stress. These additional risk factors have greater potential for harm with those already vulnerable to mental ill-health.

Nonetheless, we are also of the view that, given the multifaceted nature of death by suicide and its varied risk factors and complexity, directly relating suicide to economic stress is not always helpful. The oversimplification of reasons behind suicide, in particular, from a media perspective, may be harmful to those in similar situations and hurtful to those who have already been bereaved by a suicide loss. That is something that comes to mind on recent media coverage of the publication of this report, even prior to the weekend.

On how we gather information about suicide and self-harm, there is no doubt that the number of deaths recorded as suicide or intentional self-harm under-represent the true numbers of such deaths in Ireland. This morning the committee heard from witnesses who talked about the lack of analytical evidence to suggest this but, from our evidence in working with bereaved families, there is definitely an under-representation.

In addition, given the current system, the probable time lapse between the death and registration with the CSO means that annual or monthly patterns are difficult to ascertain and are often skewed. The process of recording and registering such deaths is outdated and the provision of much more timely and accurate statistics on suicide is crucial, if services are to respond effectively to emerging trends, clusters or community crises. Console is of the view that the research standard noted in Senator Gilroy's report would go some way in addressing these deficits.

The inquest and coroners' courts are often traumatic and upsetting experiences for bereaved families - that might contradict a little of what the committee heard this morning. In our experience, unfortunately, it is a negative experience for bereaved families. In working with bereaved families for over 12 years, we have noticed a distinct lack of consistency across coroners' courts in Ireland, with extremely varied types of systems in place or levels of care afforded to bereaved families at such a traumatic time in their lives. Bearing in mind that some suicides may have been preceded by fractious family difficulties, relationship break-ups, etc., the need of a bereaved family for support, privacy and sensitivity after such a devastating loss should remain paramount. In Scotland, if all concerned parties form a consensus about a suicide death, a public inquest is not held. There must be a more compassionate way forward with this process in Ireland.

On the mapping of suicide deaths, Console also endorses the suggested development of the SaTScan programme, as noted in the report, in particular, its linking with first responders such as gardaí. If front-line service providers, such as Console, are to effectively mobilise services, address educational and awareness deficits in communities and respond to suicide in the most helpful way possible, the provision of accurate real-time information is crucial.

In addition, community agencies, such those present here, and front-line service providers are ideally placed to participate in new systems for provision of more timely regional data. We collaborated with the National Suicide Research Foundation on its Suicide Support and Information Systems, SSIS, project, which the committee heard about this morning, and there were extremely productive and proactive community responses as a result.

During this year, as I mentioned, we are developing a family suicide bereavement liaison service in five counties across the western seaboard. This service will provide a proactive approach to families after a suicide loss, promoting access to services and practical support for the bereaved. The service will see the development of county-specific protocols on responding to suicide, outlining collaborative roles for the first responders, service providers, coroners and health services. If extended nationwide, such projects provide ample opportunity for the development of new systems for registering and mapping deaths by suicide.

The area of the community and voluntary sector is particularly relevant to ourselves. Here, too, we are in broad agreement with the issues raised in Senator Gilroy's report. Our considerations include the following. First, while there are numerous agencies working in the fields of suicide awareness, prevention or postvention, and, often, it is quoted that there are too many, careful consideration should be given to the extremely varied types of services or supports offered. For those in immediate crisis, bereaved or concerned about suicide, there is rarely a sense from them that there is a wide variety of options open to them. Second, given that suicide is such a complex and multifaceted issue, the number of initiatives, services or programmes required to tackle it effectively is large. Without significant investment and restructuring, the required targeted and general population approaches to prevent suicide could not be realistically achieved by one agency or merely a few. Third, the issue of standardisation of work is most important. Quality frameworks are essential, if we are to ensure the safety and standard of individuals, groups or agencies working to prevent suicide. The National Quality Standards for the Provision of Suicide Bereavement Services of 2012 attempts to do this with regard to postvention services. The document relies on self-assessment and to be effective, tools like this would require significant external input to assess and ensure compliance. Still, it allows agencies of all sizes to ascertain their level of contribution to a wider nationwide postvention strategy and benchmarks their work by providing specific standards and recommendations relevant to their particular service levels.

Lastly, on the reconfiguration of policy formation and delivery, I suppose our only comment as a front-line service provider is we acknowledge the significant good work of the National Office for Suicide Prevention, in particular, the considerable impetus it has got in the past few years under some new directorship, but also note the enormity of the tasks asked of it. If it is to carry out its work more effectively, the NOSP requires greater sustenance and significant financial investment. With a new national strategy on suicide prevention due for development this year, agencies and policy makers need to support the NOSP in its difficult work and to help improve its constructive engagement with community and agencies across Ireland.