Maureen O'Sullivan (Dublin Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Chairman and the clerk for allowing this debate to take place. It vital that we keep recovery as the optimum aim for people in addiction. Harm reduction measures certainly have a role to play but they cannot be at the expense of full recovery for individuals. It is only when we see people in recovery that we realise the difference it makes to their lives. Although harm reduction measures are important, sometimes it is almost like throwing in the towel when it comes to addiction. We can give a person a needle exchange or methadone and do this, that and the other, but the person continues in their addiction.

Professor Barry mentioned the north inner city drugs task force. I acknowledge it was the very first to include a person from the user's forum, UISCE. They were listening to the voices of the users right from the very beginning in talking about this issue.

Back when heroin hit the north inner city, it gradually became a one-size-fits-all approach to recovery, and not even recovery, given the use of methadone. I have no doubt methadone has saved lives but, because of what we have seen in terms of the increase and the variety of drugs, it is not the answer in many cases now. What Mr. McAleenan has outlined today is very heartening. It is only when we go to Soilse and the other projects I know in the north inner city and we see people in recovery that we can know the difference it makes to them, their families and their communities. It is really important that recovery is with the Committee on Health and Children and it is to be hoped it is going to be central.

I am glad the fellowships and the 12-step programmes were mentioned because I do not think they get the credit they deserve. They do not cost anything, except perhaps putting a euro in a bag at the end of the meeting, but they continue to do amazing work, as they have done through the years. They have saved lives.

Accommodation is a major issue. It became a crisis because of the other issues with homelessness. I know we have a problem with accommodation, but when a person is in recovery, that should not be jeopardised by bringing people who are using and who have chaotic lives into the same accommodation. I know about supported temporary accommodation. If a person is in recovery, however, we cannot put a limit on how long they can stay in that accommodation. For some people it might be three months, but for others it could be nine or ten months. It must be based on the individual. I know the difficulties with housing accommodation, but given the price people pay to get into recovery, we cannot jeopardise that. While great work is being done with prisoners, if a person has become clean in prison by getting into a programme and going to a fellowship, only for them to be released and go back into homelessness, it is a recipe for disaster.

I ask that the committee would ensure that recovery would be part of whatever submission it makes or paper it sends to the national drugs strategy, and I ask that recovery would be at the heart of that strategy. My own private focus at the moment is on prevention and education, which are undoubtedly the Cinderella of the national drugs strategy. Perhaps that might be a debate for another day. I thank the committee for allowing me to speak.