Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I thank Mr. Tyndall for his presentation. I want to return to the question of how visits are conducted with regard to giving prior notice, setting up a time and with management knowing the Office of the Ombudsman is coming. I know it is not the remit of the Ombudsman but I have been reading the report published in May by the Ombudsman for Children's office on the same issue. It is interesting to hear what children say about prearranged visits by RIA. These visits are supposed to look after their interests but children told the Ombudsman for Children of their belief that if they make a complaint to centre management, it would have a negative impact on their living conditions in their accommodation. They also told the Ombudsman for Children that if they want to make a complaint against centre management to the Reception and Integration Agency, it was not clear to them how the complaint would be dealt with. Children also said they did not feel they were being listened to when they lodged complaints with centre managers. In this regard, several children said repairs would be made when centre inspections were expected and not until then. Children in other centres said facilities such as playrooms are often locked and unavailable to them except and until visits or inspections take place. If anything speaks to the need not to prearrange the visits to or studies of the centres, the children speak to it. It is proof that making arrangements in advance with these centres gives them the heads up to sort out everything and unlock the playroom and kitchen and let everybody have access. There is a community, particularly children but also, I imagine, their mothers, who are terrified to complain about this scenario because they will suffer penalties in the background and in the unseen areas this horrible system deals with.

In 2015, Mr. Justice Bryan McMahon said the people living in direct provision centres were like ghosts and that they were dehumanised and depressed. Four years later, after the recent visit by his office, does Mr. Tyndall concur in any way, sense or shape with this description? Will he comment on what I have said about the children?

I have a number of questions. My next one is on what the Ombudsman has requested the committee to do about extending his remit. I may have missed a bit at the beginning. Exactly what extension of his remit would he like to see? Would he like to see it with regard to the length of time for which people stay or the provisions on the right to work, which are very restrictive as people can only get jobs that pay them more than €30,000? Having restrictive provisions on the right to work is extremely unhelpful. I would say most people who do the grafting work in the Houses earn less than €30,000 per year. Is Mr. Tyndall seeking a remit with regard to these conditions? Perhaps he is seeking a remit with regard to the locations of the centres or access to medical facilities.