Pat Buckley (Cork East, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was waiting for one or two more speakers to come in, although I will probably take my place on the list.

It is amazing to have all the witnesses here, so diverse but so firm and so honest, which is great.

I have made a number of notes. The assessments of need and the additional waiting lists kept coming up. Ambition was mentioned, specifically the ambition to try to get people to pull together and to do the right thing. When we were talking off camera a while ago I said that probably the two most difficult things to do in this country, even as legislators, are telling the truth and helping people because we will always find that we will meet resistance one way or the other. We passed the summer programme just last week in the Dáil. The Bills Office and so on are looking at that and already we are meeting resistance because of money messages. I say to them: "But we have the plan." Again, I said off the record earlier that this is like making an apple tart. We put the flour, the sugar, the butter and the eggs into the bowl. We do not have apples yet. We will see if it will turn out to be an apple tart. If you do not plan properly, it will not work.

The optional protocol is a huge issue. I cannot understand why we still do not have the desire to ratify it. I fear that the reason is on the same basis as with the assessment of need, that is, that the fear is that the Government will be sued or taken to court over something again.

There was mention of engaging with all service users. Dr. McDonagh, I think, spoke about listening to all the people. The witnesses are the experts. Going back a long time, when I sat on my town council, I remember we brought in and listened to all the service users regarding a streetscape. Believe it or not, this is going back 15 years now. The piece of the streetscape the council did won a European mobility award, but there is still resistance to finishing the footpaths 14 years on. That is the biggest problem we have in trying to move stuff along.

The one beautiful thing about this committee is that it is apolitical. Nobody scores points in here. We all try to work together and we tag very well together. That is great. I am grateful that the witnesses are so open to engaging with us. This has to be a two-way system. As we say here, there is no such thing as a stupid question, only a stupid reply. We should be able to work together and push things forward.

The Sláintecare report was mentioned. I was lucky enough to sit on that committee or was I lucky? I do not know. It was very tough. All parties and none were represented on that committee. There was mention of a long-term plan. I asked at the time, when the Sláintecare stuff was signed off on, if there was any legal way of ensuring a ten-year strategy whereby, no matter who is in power, it is the plan for the next ten years.

We have tried to push things forward but, again, we meet with resistance. We are told it might be unconstitutional or we cannot do it because there are too many legal wranglings. If, however, we are here as legislators, we are here for the betterment of the people outside these Houses. That is what we are supposed to do. We are supposed to make proper laws. I cannot believe that even after the short six or seven years I have been here, we are still talking about CAMHS, mental health services, disability services, autism services and school services. Have we learned anything in the past five, six, seven or ten years? It just feels that this is like a talking shop, and it is very unfortunate.

There are amazing people, including volunteers, out there. I have seen that over the years with summer camps and so on. It is about getting on a level playing ground and treating everybody equally. You spoke a while ago, Dr. McDonagh, about the toilets. I cannot believe that in 2023 the psychological thinking of the ordinary Joe Soap out there is such that he cannot accept that accessible toilets are there for specific reasons and those reasons only. They are there for the assistance of people who are less abled. They are not store rooms. They are not to be neglected. I just find that mind-boggling.

Reference was made to minorities, the Disability Act and Covid. Covid has been a fabulous excuse - that is what I call it - across the board. We will not even go there. I have tabled parliamentary questions, PQs, and have received replies stating that there was Covid back in 2016. We did not have Covid in 2016 or 2017, but the Departments still blamed Covid.

Dr. Muldoon did two reports on mental health services for children. We are sitting here today in February 2023 and we are still talking about those services. We had the HSE before a different committee last week. The one thing I find here is that there is no oversight, no accountability and no responsibility. Do the witnesses' respective entities - they are State bodies - feel they need more power to take things further? The reason I ask that is the fact that we could be debating this for months and years and we would come up with the same stories and would get the same excuses, yet if you or I were in a different job and did not do it to the best of our ability or did not flag things properly, we would be sacked, or we would definitely get a rap on the knuckles. Is there a way of making any of the witnesses' entities stronger enough, or is there something we as legislators can do to turn things around within the health service such that there is a plan and resources? There has to be honesty too.

There was mention of communication. There are CHOs that do not talk to other CHOs, never mind Departments. Can we legislate in some way for a new rule book? Sláintecare was a couple of years ago. It has not really progressed. It is great to talk about it, but who is responsible for driving it? Is nobody responsible? Who will be accountable to find out why it is not going forward? Would it be beneficial for the witnesses to get more powers? Is there any way we can, through legislation or some other way, come up with a new plan? I fear we can come up with all the best ideas here, have the best witnesses before us, find out all the problems and have the solutions but not implement them because we use the excuse of not having ratified A, B and C. As I said, the optional protocol is the one that has been driving me mad because it is a very simple rights issue. However, I feel that the Government now and past Governments have felt they have not had the capability and fear there will be major repercussions. It is simple. We flagged this a number of years ago at my local council in the context of a simple footpath repair. We asked that it not be put back up six inches and said it had to be made wheelchair-accessible. These are all small but very important changes. That is my take on the optional protocol.

Do the witnesses' entities need more power? Can we in any way make changes so we can make those who are supposed to be responsible accountable?

There is a lot in that, but I spoke slowly. Nobody wishes to speak. I think the witnesses are all afraid, are they?