Ms Emily Logan:

Before I have even started, the commission has already undertaken some research in the area of direct provision. These issues are well publicised. As Ombudsman for Children, I, in my first annual report, called for the inclusion of asylum seekers to offer redress as part of the existing mechanism. A good deal of research has been published on direct provision. The commission is concerned about it. We will publicly make a statement on this in November and publish some of the work that has been undertaken. What we are trying to do is to complement or offer something new to the debate. There appears to be growing consensus and political interest in the issue of direct provision.

My concern in regard to any of the comments that have been made in front of international committees that there is no evidence of what is happening in direct provision leads me on to the Deputy's second comment. The reason we do not have what is described as evidence is because there is no redress mechanism. There is no proper independent mechanism of inspection of what is going on. There is no proper mechanism of redress for either the children or the parents in direct provision. The evidential element is difficult. I do not think it is correct to say that there is no evidence. We have not put in place a framework to allow those families and children to tell us exactly what is happening in the way that any other parent or family would be afforded in Ireland. At a fundamental level, a mechanism of redress and at the very least inspection and redress through the Ombudsman is very important.