Mr. Nick Henderson:

I can come back in on that. In the Business Posta couple of weeks ago, officials from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform stated that the time target, that is, 2024, and the amount of money allocated, were underestimated. I do not disagree with either of those points necessarily but without being slightly trite, if we disagree with them, what will it cost? As I said, we would expect all Departments to input positively into this process. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the Department of Finance are really crucial actors in this in terms of the budget that will be required to go to a new system of accommodation.

In terms of budget, to be very brief on it, we have spent almost a quite obscene amount of money on this system of accommodation, which has accommodated people. I think something like 60,000 people have been through direct provision over 20 years. There is nothing there for the taxpayer, however. There is nothing there for Government in terms of any buildings or properties or use. When we talk, therefore, about an alternative to direct provision, sure, there will be the creation of a new budget line. With the two systems in parallel, that is, the existing one, which is being wound down and the new system, which is being created, there may be two budget lines. If done properly, however, we believe that in the long term, this is better for the public. That would include the public from the perspective of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform as well.

I can come in on the short-term points to that question and then I might hand back to Mr. Lannon. The advisory group on direct provision and the protection process, chaired by Dr. Catherine Day, published its report in October. That made various recommendations and has a list of issues that could be immediately implemented. The White Paper picked up on some of those things but some still have not been implemented. It is frustrating, not least for people in the process, that some things, which should take no time or a little time to implement or change, are slow. One example is drivers' licences. It remains the case that somebody would have difficulty or just could not apply for a driver's licence, which would allow for some sort of independence. There is still no provision for that as far as I understand. I can come back on another couple of points, for example, deaths in direct provision. I will hand back to Mr. Lannon.