Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Members participating in the meeting remotely are required to do so from within the precincts of Leinster House only. I ask members and witnesses to please turn off their mobile phones or ensure they are on silent mode. I advise members of the committee who are participating in the meeting remotely to use the raise hand function on Microsoft Teams if they wish to contribute.

This meeting is to consider the progress of the targets for the sustainable development goals, SDGs, with representatives of Coalition 2030, Comhdháil Oileáin na hÉireann and Social Justice Ireland. The progress of the SDGs is an integral part of the work of the committee. Under Standing Order 100(4), this aspect is now included in the committee's annual work programme and orders of reference. There are five strategic objectives in the National Implementation Plan for the Sustainable Development Goals 2022-2024. The first of these is "To embed the SDG framework into the work of Government Departments to achieve greater policy coherence for sustainable development."

As the work of this committee shadows that of the Departments of Social Protection and Rural and Community Development, which is responsible for the islands, we are engaging with some interested groups to see how they feel these Departments are progressing with the relevant SDG targets. Agenda 2030 acknowledges the essential role of national parliaments in ensuring accountability for effective implementation of our SDG commitments. The committee has appointed the Leas-Chathaoirleach, Deputy Ó Cathasaigh, as rapporteur on this report and hopes, through its championing of the topic, to deliver a report that includes productive recommendations for these Departments to take on board.

Groups that are at-risk and that have the most to gain from the SDGs, as identified in the January SDG national stakeholder forum, include children and young people; disabled people; people living with long-term health issues; older people; the Travelling community; refugees, internally displaced people and migrants; people who are homeless; people with mental health issues or those affected by addiction or both; people living in rural Ireland; the LGBTQI+ community; people who are socially or economically disadvantaged or both; the working poor and those living below the poverty line; ethnic minorities; disconnected communities; single-parent families and carers; and victims of human trafficking. These are groups that, through the lenses of the Departments of Social Protection and Rural and Community Development, this committee hopes to bring about positive change for by progressing the delivery of the sustainable development goals.

I welcome to the meeting representatives of Coalition 2030, Meaghan Carmody, co-ordinator, Johnny Sheehan, membership and regional manager of The Wheel, Paul Ginnell, director of the European Anti-Poverty Network Ireland and, online, my neighbour, Louise Lennon, policy and media officer with Irish Rural Link. From Comhdháil Oileáin na hÉireann, I welcome Aisling Moran, chair and development worker for Sherkin, Long and Hare Islands and John Walsh, board member and co-ordinator of Bere Island Project Group and chair of the European Small Islands Federation. We were in their company yesterday at a productive meeting with Senator Paddy Burke on Clare Island. The clerk to the committee was also there. Also from Comhdháil Oileáin na hÉireann, we have Ms Tuuli Rantala, board member and community development officer on Inishbofin and Simon Murray, board member. From Social Justice Ireland, I welcome Susanne Rogers, research and policy analyst, and Colette Bennett, economic and social analyst. They are all very welcome.

Before we start, I wish to explain some limitations to parliamentary privilege and the practice of the Houses as regards references witnesses may make to other persons in their evidence. The evidence of witnesses physically present or who give evidence from within the parliamentary precincts is protected pursuant to both the Constitution and statute by absolute privilege. Witnesses are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of the person or entity.

Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in respect of an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative they comply with any such direction.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect they should not comment on, criticise nor make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I call on Ms Carmody to make her opening statement.

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

Coalition 2030 is grateful for the invitation to address the committee on matters relating to the sustainable development goals, SDGs. In 2015, all UN member states signed up to Agenda 2030, and committed to progressing its 17 goals, 169 targets and more than 230 indicators. Agenda 2030 is aimed at ending poverty in all its forms. It is grounded in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, and international human rights treaties, and emphasises the responsibilities of all states to respect, protect and promote human rights. Two underlying principles of Agenda 2030 are to leave no one behind and to reach the furthest behind first.

We are halfway through the Agenda 2030 implementation period, and urgent action from all Departments is required in order to achieve the SDGs. On 19 July Ireland will present its SDG progress to the UN for peer review, via the voluntary national review, VNR, process. We are, along with Qatar, co-facilitating the development of an SDG political declaration, which will be agreed this summer and unveiled at the SDG summit in September, under the auspices of the UN General Assembly. This has been described by the UN Secretary General as the rescue plan for the SDGs, as only 12% of targets are on track to be met globally. Ireland has made significant strides in terms of national SDG governance, in particular the 2022 policy map, which names lead Departments for the achievement of specific SDG targets. However, we have identified three issues in particular, which are relevant to the Departments under the purview of this committee.

First, the availability of appropriate data to adequately enable accountability hinders the effectiveness of the policy map. Disaggregated data is required at the indicator level to ascertain progress. We encourage this committee to seek indicator data from its respective Departments, as well as evidence conveying the trend in progress. Merely noting the existence of policies is, crucially, not sufficient to assess progress. Second, the policy map is too narrow in how it ascribes responsibilities to the Department of Social Protection under goal 8. The Department should have more responsibility for achieving target 8.5, as it is responsible for the roll-out of the Pathways to Work strategy, strand 4 of which is "Working for All - Leaving No One Behind." Third, we have identified a serious communication error relevant to this committee, which if not addressed, risks misrepresenting our SDG progress. In Ireland’s VNR it is stated that we are achieving SDG 1 - no poverty. This may be true if we are using indicator 1.1.1, the "proportion of the population living below the international poverty line of $1.25." However, there is broad agreement that this measure is meaningless for people living in Ireland. Nevertheless, in our VNR summary report, the Central Statistics Office, CSO, conveyed our progress based on this indicator. In addition, the $1.25 figure is outdated and was updated to $2.15 by the World Bank in 2022. The claim that we are achieving no poverty also implies that Ireland is achieving the other SDG 1 targets, which we encourage the committee to investigate.

Of course, Ireland is not achieving no poverty, and the furthest behind are not being reached. Overall, the percentage of people at risk of poverty increased from 11.6% in 2021 to 13.2% in 2022. Some 17.7% of Ireland's population is in deprivation, which is an increase from 13.8% in 2021, and the levels of people in consistent poverty are 5.3%, up from 4%. This is far from the Government's target for consistent poverty to be 2% or less by 2025. One in five persons unable to work due to long-standing health problems is living in consistent poverty. Renters are more likely to be in poverty than owner-occupiers, and while fewer than 30% of the population are living in rented or rent-free accommodation, they make up more than 70% of those living in consistent poverty. The at risk of poverty rate in persons aged 65 and over increased from 11.9% in 2021 to 19.0% in 2022. Almost one in four one-parent families are at risk of poverty, compared with 13.1% of persons living in two adult households with between one and three children. The deprivation rate for this cohort is almost 45%. Almost half of those who are unemployed experience deprivation, and almost one in five is in consistent poverty. Official statistics do not reflect poverty levels among Travellers, Roma and people who are homeless. Income inadequacy is higher for people in rural areas, especially for those in receipt of core social welfare payments and in low-paid or minimum wage employment. Inflation is higher for lower income, older and rural households, largely because of transport and energy dependencies. The lack of a decent public transport system in rural areas disproportionately negatively affects older people and disabled people, who are more often reliant on a car. Rural households are more at risk of energy poverty due to limited opportunities to switch to cheaper fuels. In addition, 42% of the rural building stock is relatively old, and so is less energy efficient and has higher fuel bills than modern homes. The State depends on the community and voluntary sector to deliver essential services and reach the furthest behind in many areas. However, a lack of adequate funding creates challenges for service delivery and staff retention. Funding must, in particular, be increased for supporting basic digital skills programmes; the lack of which disproportionately affects those furthest behind.

In our report, we make the case that the State has so far failed to effectively embed the SDGs across Government and provide the necessary political leadership for their achievement. As a result, rather than reaching the furthest behind first, the State has instead left many people behind. The State must do the following in order to address SDG governance issues and enable all Departments to reach the furthest behind first. First, it must move overall responsibility for SDG implementation to the Department of the Taoiseach. Second, it must integrate the SDGs into the budget, with every budget line linked to an SDG target, investing at least €15 million in the 2024 budget for disaggregated data collection. Third, the State must create a national SDG policy impact measurement framework, and enable the enable the public participation networks, PPN, and communities to be true partners in policy design and SDG implementation. Fourth, it must measure what matters, by resourcing the CSO to collect relevant, disaggregated, and timely data, which would inform policies to reach the furthest behind. Finally. it must establish the position of future generations commissioner, on a statutory footing, whose mandate will be to ensure that no actions today undermine the sustainable future of generations to come.

Given the VNR is an international peer review process, honesty is paramount. We, therefore, encourage this committee to scrutinise claims relating to its Departments’ progress and how efforts to date are communicated to the Irish public and internationally. We suggest that Departments ensure that nationally relevant data is employed in our national SDG assessments. There now exists an opportunity for this, as the CSO is currently working with the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications to look at targets in an Irish context. We encourage the committee to ensure the Departments actively engage with this process. We must measure what matters, and employ more useful data in order to reach the furthest behind first. Without shifts in our approach to measurement, as well as other elements of governance, the State will continue struggling to reach the furthest behind first, rendering delivery on the SDGs categorically unachievable. We are living through the last best chance to achieve the SDGs, and this committee has a crucial role to play. My colleagues and I welcome questions and comments.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Carmody for her opening comments. We will now hear from Ms Rantala from Comhdáil Oileáin na hÉireann.

Ms Tuuli Rantala:

The board of Comhdáil Oileáin na hÉireann expresses thanks to the Chair and members of the joint committee for the opportunity to discuss how the sustainable development goals can be, and are being, achieved on the offshore islands.

To provide an overview of the key issues that can be emphasized concerning the SDG goals, we have categorised them into four different areas. These can be seen in the document circulated to the committee beforehand. Some goals highlight the gaps and challenges that affect our daily lives on the islands. Other goals relate to barriers faced in sustaining island communities, such as availability of affordable housing. Goals are also highlighted that demonstrate how islands and islanders can actively contribute to addressing environmental issues. Certain goals further showcase the valuable role that islands play as part of a positive change.

Among the factors that impact our daily lives, such as lack of child care, elder care, or access to clean water, we draw the committee's attention to the issue of higher living costs. Poverty, as well as social inequity and lack of inclusivity, can often be hidden in rural areas and communities like the islands. Bringing the cost of, and access to, basic commodities such as food, energy, housing, education and healthcare to the national level would stimulate island economies, improve livelihoods and enhance the overall well-being and stability of island communities.

Practical measures should include a ferry and freight subsidy system to keep costs as low as possible, reducing the additional financial expenses of islanders. Under the current system, costs to islanders for freight can be more than 250% higher than to those on the mainland.

Several sustainable development goals, SDGs, relate to the barriers to the sustainability and growth of island communities, such as inadequate infrastructure and facilities, limited access to basic services and uncertainties related to education. In the current housing crisis, islands are not an exception. To highlight just one barrier to growth, we urgently need more affordable and suitable housing options. Updated laws on planning policy limit islanders from building on their own islands. The demand for second home ownership has driven the price of island housing beyond the reach of islanders. We currently have island residents unable to find suitable housing, young people unable to establish their own households and island descendants who are not able to return to their home island. It is not a lack of islanders but rather a lack of affordable suitable housing that poses a challenge. The outcomes of the offshore islands housing study, carried out and currently being analysed by University College Cork, will provide recommendations regarding the offshore islands. The vacant property refurbishment grant and the top-up for the islands are welcomed, especially as turning an old stone cottage into a modern energy-efficient home is not without substantial costs and challenges.

The SDGs can show where the challenges are but, in the case of the islands, they also show where there is great potential. For instance, sustainable fishing practices and food production on islands showcase best practices for coexistence between people and their surroundings both on land and in the surrounding waters. Islands have both the potential and the will to act as forerunners in climate action. On an offshore island, you experience nature at first hand through the storms and rough seas, which can disrupt all plans for travel. This is what truly separates us from our mainland counterparts. We will also experience the impacts of climate change through droughts and rising sea levels. The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI, home retrofit scheme is welcomed but, unfortunately, it will not translate due to higher construction costs and set requirements for contractors. With the committee's support, we want to take on these challenges. Islands are ideal test beds for climate action and showcasing sustainable solutions.

We hope the committee recognises the offshore islands as part of the solutions and of positive change. There are great possibilities for sustainable growth on the islands. We welcome the instruments enabling the creation of remote working facilities. The provision of vital fibre optic cable connections will attract both emigrant islanders and new residents to the islands. The blue economy is at the heart of the European Green Deal and the recovery plan for Europe. The offshore islands are already working with these and welcome the planning support offered through, for example, the clean energy for EU islands secretariat and the support for energy master plans through the SEAI. Besides renewable energy, this sector means contributing through sustainable food production and tourism as well as emerging fields such as seaweed farming and marine biotechnology. We aim for best practice examples of supporting the circular economy through modern waste recycling facilities on the offshore islands. These initiatives are not only seen by the islands, but by the tens of thousands of visitors who get to experience them on the offshore islands. However, in order for the offshore islands to persevere, live and thrive, we want to highlight that real financial support for infrastructure projects, lifeline services and capital works is needed. A consistent and properly funded island capital budget programme and ring-fenced funding for island projects are critical to the long-term sustainability of the offshore islands.

An overview of the SDGs in the context of the offshore islands showcases how the SDGs are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. It shows how positive progress on one goal will have ripple effects. On the other hand, failing to address some could prevent any progress on others. Our Living Islands, the new islands policy, which was just launched two weeks ago, states, “The aim is to ensure that sustainable, vibrant communities can continue to live – and thrive – on the offshore islands for many years to come.” We hope the new islands policy will translate into real support and funding for the offshore islands and success stories as to how the SDG goals can be achieved through cross-sectoral collaboration and inter-departmental efforts. We thank the committee for its time and are happy to answer any questions members might have.

Ms Colette Bennett:

We wish to thank the committee for the opportunity to speak with it today on the subject of the sustainable development goals and the progress of individual Departments. This is obviously a very timely meeting in light of the voluntary national review and preparations for budget 2024. As the committee is no doubt aware, Social Justice Ireland publishes a sustainable progress index every year ranking Ireland’s progress towards the SDGs against our now EU14 peers. In this year’s edition, Ireland’s overall ranking was ninth out of 14. We also have sub-indices on Ireland’s performance on the economy, society and the environment, where we rank ninth, sixth and ninth, respectively.

Our index concludes with a series of policy recommendations at local and national level to help improve Ireland’s rankings. While we are aware of the remit of this committee and the relevant Department, as the Chair and the committee are undoubtedly aware, the SDGs are a policy framework for all Government Departments and policy and all Departments have a role to play in achieving them.

To address the first SDG, "No Poverty", we know that poverty is increasing in Ireland. There are 671,000 people in poverty, more than 188,600 of whom are children. This will make achieving the 2030 target very challenging. All of our recommendations in this context aim to enhance the standard of living of people who are most marginalised. We also urge the Department to fund research on the impact of recent cost-of-living increases on low-income households. This could begin with clients of the Money Advice & Budgeting Service, MABS, which falls under and is funded by the Department of Social Protection and which has a wealth of information on household budgets over time. That would be a really good place to start.

With regard to the second SDG, "Zero Hunger", we use indicators that are more relevant to poor nutrition and food security. Policies in this area include expanding the hot school meals programme, particularly for schools and preschools in disadvantaged areas and those with a high concentration of homeless children or children living in direct provision who do not have their own cooking facilities.

The third SDG is "Good Health". Policies in this area include ensuring that announced budgetary allocations are valid, realistic and transparent and that they take existing commitments into account. In 2019, the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council, IFAC, published the figure of €900 million just to stand still and maintain existing levels of service, taking into account demographic change. Any increase in the health budget therefore has to include that amount. We also must improve the process of planning and investment so that the healthcare system can cope with the increase and diversity in population and the ageing of the population projected for the next few decades.

While Ireland scores very highly on the fourth goal, "Good Education", overall, it remains important to address educational disadvantage. We must work to improve educational outcomes for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds and disadvantaged communities alongside the development of an integrated skills strategy with a focus in lifelong learning.

On the fifth SDG, "Gender Equality", we need to introduce a universal State social welfare pension, which is something for which we have been calling for quite some time. We must meet our Istanbul Convention obligations and provide sufficient resources to combat what the programme for Government called the epidemic of domestic abuse. Essentially, we must support high-quality community childcare, particularly in areas of socioeconomic disadvantage.

Our policy recommendations on the sixth SDG, "Clean Water and Sanitation", include continuing to provide support and advice to farmers to improve water quality under the agricultural sustainability support and advice programme and the development of a drinking water safety plan, following EPA guidelines, for each public water supply.

On the seventh SDG, "Renewable Energy", we need to upgrade the national grid and invest in the infrastructure necessary to support the transition to renewable energy.

One of our requests for budget 2024 is the investment of €1 billion of the surplus in infrastructure for wind energy. We need to invest in research into and development of the use of renewable energy and our public transport systems.

Our policy proposals on SDG 8, good jobs and economic growth, include launching a major investment programme focused on prioritising initiatives that strengthen social infrastructure. This programme will include a comprehensive schools building programme, a much larger social housing programme and supporting the adoption of a real living wage at €13.85 per hour.

On SDG 9, industry, innovation and infrastructure, our policy recommendations centre on the need for greater investment in social infrastructure and readiness for digitalisation.

SDG 10 relates to reduced inequalities. As Ms Carmody stated, there was an increase in inequality and poverty between 2021 and 2022. The latest Oxfam report refers to the growing number of millionaires and billionaires at a time when more than 671,000 people are living below the poverty line. Some policy recommendations here include the elimination of barriers faced by people with disabilities in: accessing basic services such as housing, healthcare, and education; fully implementing the recommendations of the Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination and the 2019 Trafficking in Persons Report.

On SDG 11, sustainable cities and communities, we propose setting a target of 20% of all housing stock to be social housing by 2030, resourcing the enforcement of legislation targeting short-term lettings and beginning the process of reducing the reliance of the rental sector on housing subsidies.

Our policy proposals on SDG 12, responsible consumption, include introducing a circular economy package for Ireland across all areas of economic activity, introducing a levy on single-use plastics, taxing air travel, reintroducing the windfall gains tax at 80% and exploring new initiatives to promote behavioural change through the tax system.

On SDG 13, climate action, we recommend establishing a just transition and adaptation dialogue to ensure that rural areas are not disproportionately impacted by low-carbon policies and are supported to meet the challenges posed by the future of work.

On SDG 14, life below water, our policy proposals include fully implementing the national integrated maritime plan, regulating harvesting, ending overfishing and implementing policies to restore fishing stocks to sustainable levels.

On SDG 15, life on land, our policy proposals include increasing afforestation of native trees, ensuring that sustainable agriculture policy and sustainable land management form the basis of future agricultural policy, investing in programmes to rewet the boglands and implementing the nature programmes set out in the climate action plan.

On SDG 16, peace and justice, our policy proposals include ensuring the national economic and social dialogue of partnership includes all five pillars, restoring funding to the community and voluntary pillar, ensuring adequate funding for civil legal aid and greater transparency of lobbying activities and establishing dialogue forums in every local authority area that will involve local authorities and the public participation networks, PPNs.

On SDG 17, partnerships for the goals, our policy proposals include: increasing official development assistance, ODA, to move towards the UN target of 0.7 % of national income; adopting targets and a reporting system for the SDGs; tagging all Government policies and policy proposals with the relevant goals; adopting targets and a reporting system for each of the SDGs; developing a new national index of progress, ensuring social and environmental issues are incorporated into our national accounts; including in the commission for regulating lobbying’s annual reports, policy areas with the greatest lobbying activity, the lobbying organisations and the designated public officials engaged to highlight to the general public those influencing the political decision-making process.

It is important to note the SDGs provide a policy framework for governments to progress towards a more sustainable society and economy overall. Our index also proposes that the SDGs be used to underpin a new social contract to ensure the well-being of all in Ireland and to promote both local and national social dialogue to ensure all people have a say in the decisions being made that affect their everyday lives. We welcome questions.

Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank everyone who presented. It is helpful. As the Chair alluded to, what we are discussing is provided for in the Standing Orders for committees. This is the first time the committee has had a good run at nailing down the areas we and the Departments we are shadowing are responsible for. Social protection is an interesting case study in that is it probably the headline issue and the point at which most of the SDGs the Department is asked to track come into play. However, we also have rural and community development and, crucially, the islands.

I will start with the islands. They are an interesting case study of the central notion that we should try to reach the furthest behind first. Clearly, the islands are geographically more distant from the rest of us than many places are. When I was looking through the SDGs I thought might be relevant, I realised that education and childcare come up repeatedly. I know from visiting John and people on Bere Island that childcare is a real issue. One thing that jumped out at me relates to equality and the use of enabling technology, particularly information and communications technology, to promote the empowerment of women. We heard many stories about one person in a couple having to take a step back from work when children are young because there are not adequate childcare facilities on the islands. For people who are looking to do remote and blended work, there is often one broadband connection point on an island. This is an interesting study in how the SDGs do not apply in a universal or homogenous way across society. There is a specific role for applying the SDGs to people on the islands and people from minority communities such as Travellers and ensuring we are doing the central piece of reaching the furthest behind first.

Social Justice Ireland and Coalition 2030 have both done valuable work in this space. The Social Justice Ireland year-on-year report is important to keeping awareness of the SDGs front and centre in people's minds. I hope they will not mind if some of my questions are slightly challenging. I want to dig down into the specifics.

My first question is to Ms Carmody of Coalition 2030. I want to look at the idea of the availability of disaggregated data as it is pivotal for making decisions. I have been looking through the section of the Central Statistics Office, CSO, website on the SDGs which is comprehensive. Much of the CSO data is front and centre in the voluntary national review, VNR. It is the linchpin we hang the VNR on. Coalition 2030 made a submission to the VNR as did the all-party Oireachtas group. The CSO website is quite detailed. I clicked into the section on SDG 1 data. Each of the sub-goals and sub-targets is provided for across regions and across the year. Looking at the amount of data available on the CSO website, what disaggregated data would Coalition 2030 like to see more of? Is it for example a breakdown by gender? Where does it see the deficiencies in data?

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

We see the deficiencies in it as being twofold. The CSO already has a lot of data as the Deputy pointed out. It is largely based on the usual categories of age and geographical location, but we need to be looking at disaggregated data based on the international dimensions of discrimination, for example gender - as the Deputy pointed out - children, refugees, migrants and all the categories the Chair mentioned earlier. We understand it is a tall order. We know from our engagement with the CSO that it is does not have the resources to do that level of disaggregated data collection. Without that baseline measurement of where we are and who we are reaching, it is difficult to ascertain what targets should be and show progress and trends.

Disability is another one. There are various other categories we point out in our report. That is what we need to do. We know it is challenging, but the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, can also help with this. It also needs significant resourcing to be able to align its human rights' data collection with the SDGs in order that we are not reinventing the wheel. There are two very strong institutions at our disposal, but they are currently not aligned for the collection of SDG-relevant disaggregated data. That is the first point.

The second point is about the communication of these data. The Deputy alluded to the fact that is quite a complex website. The CSO website on the SDGs is very layered. You need to do a lot of digging to get basic answers regarding how we are doing on specific SDG targets. This is not clear and it is not all in one place. Infographics are developed every few years, but some of the data are very old. There is a figure from 2012 in one of the infographics. We have a question about where this is being publicised to the public. How is it getting out there to people? How do people know about how we are doing on these SDG targets and, importantly, about what progress is being made in terms of the trends? There is a second website that is often cited by the CSO, which is geohive.ie. It is often cited to us as a very useful SDG resource. Yet, it has been described as being for high-level people, for people who are essentially statisticians, it is very difficult to navigate. You cannot find answers to simple questions, such as how we are doing on each SDG target. Those are the two main issues with the CSO at the moment.

Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will turn to Ms Bennett. The report Social Justice Ireland does each year is a really important and powerful waymarker in terms of making sure that attention is drawn to progress on the sustainable development goals. There are a few ways of looking at it. I note that Social Justice Ireland respected that we placed ninth overall out of 14. On the positive side of it, I note Ireland's current SDG dashboard within the report. There is too much red on that dashboard, which relate to places where we have major challenges. Obviously, areas such as climate action stand out for me. However, at least the arrows are pointing in the right direction.

I want to ask a question about whether we are comparing like with like in Social Justice Ireland's assessment. I am looking at the assessment from the CSO in the voluntary national review, VNR, report, for example, on SDG goal 1, which is to end poverty in all its forms. According to the CSO, data have been sourced for all of those targets within that goal. As well as that, all targets are being achieved. It is therefore a clean slate, as far as the CSO is concerned. However, Social Justice Ireland's assessment is quite different and I want to make sure we are comparing like with like. Ms Bennett referenced that target 1.1, which is a $1.25 per day. Of course, you could not apply that target in a meaningful way to a developed economy. On the other hand, one could do so by saying we got there and managed to clear the bar of $1.25. Yet, there are other sub-targets within that goal. I could run through them if I had another screen, but I have maxed out the number of screens I currently have in front of me. Could the representatives explain their assessment to me? Let us take the example of zero poverty, which bears on the work of this committee. How is their assessment at such a variance to the assessment by the CSO that we have seen in the VNR report?

Ms Colette Bennett:

I thank the Deputy for the question. Our assessment is a comparative report which compares Ireland with our EU-14 peers. Because of that, we needed to gather data that are comparable across the EU-14. Page 79 of our report contains the appendix, which goes through each of the indicators that are used, as well as the source of those indicators. As the Deputy said, some of the indicators that might come under the area of zero poverty, for example, just do not apply to a developed economy like ours. Similarly, our indicators around world hunger are not about under-nutrition and starvation, but relate more to obesity indicators and food quality. In terms of SDG 1, for the poverty rate after taxes and transfers, we have a poverty line of 50%, and that data are sourced from the OECD. We can compare that across the EU-14. There are people living in households with low work intensity and there is the share of severely deprived people. They are the indicators we use to measure the progress in comparison to our European peers.

Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It does make it a little difficult. It is a very valuable analysis, but the goalposts have moved a little. We need to be fully clear when we are looking at the report by Social Justice Ireland which, as I said, is a really useful report. Yet, we are not necessarily looking at the actual sub-targets that were in the SDGs; we are looking at a set of targets that have been modified to take account of the fact that we are developed economy.

Ms Colette Bennett:

If I may, there are reasons for that also. First, because it is a comparative report, we need to be able to use the same data as the other EU-14 countries. Second, and this is very similar to Ms Carmody's point, much of the data just are not available, or up-to-date data are not available. Back in 2018, we wrote to the then Minister about data gaps and we looked for additional resources to be provided to the CSO to bridge those gaps and to make sure that we had more robust data on which we could base our index.

Marc Ó Cathasaigh (Waterford, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The CSO has done a fantastic job of filling in a lot of gaps. It is my hope, now that they have that initial framework in place, that they would be able to look at that disaggregated data piece and people through that a little more.

I will come back to Ms Carmody. As she knows, this topic is another hobby-horse of mine. I see that she has included in her opening statement the idea of a future generations commissioner. The Welsh are probably leading in this area. Could she speak about how she sees the potential of that role in an Irish context, particularly within the frame of the sustainable development goals?

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

Yes. It goes back to the original definition of sustainable development, which was defined in the Brundtland commission's report in 1987 as "development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs". We emphasise that this role of a future generations commissioner would need to be on a statutory footing. It would need to last between governments and must not solely be a role that would exist only for one particular government. It needs to be a long-lasting role. This person would not necessarily have the teeth to create policy but to generate an opinion and have a space to share how certain policies do or do not align with this definition of sustainable development.

Deputy Ó Cathasaigh cited Wales as an example. The former future generations commissioner for Wales, Sophie Howe, was able to give input on a plan for developing more road infrastructure for the Welsh Government. Because that specific plan did not align with their Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act, the project was scrapped. The role is therefore one person who is challenged with identifying issues to do with policy coherence, both today and into the future. In addition to the future generations commissioner, there are many positive examples from around the world, such as ministries for the future, committees for the future and ombudsmen for the future. There are many different things we could do. Ireland is in a positive space to be able to do that. We have led on many highly innovative policies in the past number of years. Very few countries have a future generations commissioner and we could be part of that vanguard. I am happy to send some follow-up information to the committee and more specific detail on that role as a project, as well as the role of this commissioner.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Carmody for that. Before I bring Deputy Paul Donnelly in, I note that some devices are not on silent. I ask that people please put them on silent.

Paul Donnelly (Dublin West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the witnesses for their presentations. I recognise some of their faces from the islands. We were there last year.

In relation to the islands piece, there was one point that struck me. Childcare was a big issue, but the housing issue struck me as particularly difficult. When we look at the area of tourism, we must ensure that in the summer there is the lifeblood of money coming in and that there is the capacity to get people in. Yet, how does that affect people who are living in on the islands? I was struck when I saw a lot of properties there that had been sold. People had been saying that they were pretty much empty once the summer season is over.

These were built by people on the islands who then sold them off to people from outside the islands who used them as a second income. How can it be ensured that if affordable housing is built on the islands, it does not fall into the hands of those from outside who will simply use it as a summer property and leave it empty for the winter? How does that help with sustainable growth? There is a big issue with that.

I was struck by a number of issues relating to the SDGs. During Covid, we really noticed digital poverty and the divide created by digital disadvantage. We were getting reports of young people, especially, when the schools were closed who were doing their homework on mobile phones, if they had access to a mobile phone or the Internet. That was a big problem. Some partnerships such as ours, Empower in Dublin 15, set up projects and got funding from the Department to try to bridge that gap. It is a significant issue where people in our communities do not have access to a laptop or, if there are three children in a home, they do not have three laptops.

We had a presentation yesterday from the Irish Heart Foundation. It raised the issues relating to access to medical cards and the cost of medication for people who were previously in well-paid jobs who were doing quite well and then suddenly they had a condition and could not work. Their income falls through the floor at the same time as they need the medication but it is slightly above the threshold – perhaps their partner is working – so they are not eligible for a medical card. That is a really significant problem. It also identifies the area of health, which also fits into the other strategic goal. I was very interested in the proposal to put warnings on highly processed foods and how complex this is because some highly processed foods are quite good for you. There is a real challenge of poverty and access to healthy foods. Most of healthy foods are more expensive than the highly processed foods such as burgers and sausages. It is a big challenge and it goes back to the first goal of how we create a more level playing field around income so that people can access these things.

On equality in education has been raised in my area, certainly, around DEIS plus. We have DEIS but there are schools in areas, which I will not name, which experience huge difficulties, disadvantage, poverty and problems around access to mental health services, SNAs and other additional needs services. These are all things that create huge problems and difficulties for schools in ensuring that every child in the school has a level playing field that they can obtain the best level of education they can.

Finally, on waste management, there is a growing move around remunicipalisation of waste management. We all know dumping, especially in Dublin and other cities, is a huge problem affecting our communities. There are three or four different waste management companies in Dublin. I was going through the city last night and it seems like rubbish is everywhere. Businesses are putting their rubbish out on the street in plastic bags, which are getting ripped apart by seagulls and birds, and the place looks really bad. That is because there is no coherent waste management strategy. The sector has been privatised and there are three or four different companies. Another issue about privatisation that has become apparent is that there is not really competition. We were told that competition in the market would reduce prices and we would have a wonderful system but that is not happening. There are many parts of Dublin, and certainly in my constituency, where only one company goes in and collects the rubbish while there are other areas where there might be three or four different companies. I will not call it a cartel but there might be an agreement between companies so that only one company goes in and the other company will not do business on a particular estate. The prices for waste collection are going off the scale. It really bugs me is that we were told we would only pay for what we throw away but that is not the truth; we are paying for everything - the green, black and brown bins – and it is an ever-increasing price. That is fine for someone in a good job who can pay but for many people it is a real struggle. People are refusing to use the brown bin and finding other inventive ways of getting rid of their recycling, which is putting pressure on recycling centres. Some of those are free and the council is now looking to charge for them. I thank Deputy Ward for some of the questions he has put.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a broad range of questions. We might start with the peripheral and work up to the witnesses. I will begin with the Comhdháil Oileáin na hÉireann team and Ms Moran as there were some specific questions there on the broader issues that impact on island communities. I ask Ms Lennon to come in with a rural perspective on those and then we will come to the witnesses in the committee room.

Ms Aisling Moran:

I wonder whether Ms Rantala or Mr. Murray wish to come in on the first question on access to education. That might be for them.

Ms Tuuli Rantala:

A big challenge, especially for some, is the lack of second-level education on the islands. Children aged over 12 cannot live on their home island. They need to move to the mainland to access to second-level education. This has a lot of affects on the families, which need to maintain two households. The support grant, which is approximately €4,000 a year, is only available for households where the parents do not live with the children on the mainland. Five out of ten of the islands have second-level education at the moment. It is something that could be easily solved through satellite education, the digital technology available at the moment and collaboration between schools.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will Ms Rantala answer one question for me? She specifically mentioned satellite education. Five of the islands have second-level schools, every one of which has high-speed broadband. In fairness, the then-Minister, Pat Rabbitte delivered that and started with the islands first. How has use of broadband developed the range of subjects in those five schools? She may not be able to answer that now and I am not putting her to the pin of her collar today but it would be interesting if Comhdháil Oileáin na hÉireann could come back to us so we can see how broadband has changed the delivery of the subject range for students on those five islands in order that we could look at replicating that. It is a significant element. I may be corrected, but a number of island schools come under the ETBs, which means it is their responsibility to provide that broad range and not only for islands.

I represent a part of the country in east Galway where we have a lot of small second level schools with a limited subject range. We are not using the broadband capacity in some of the ETBs that are covering a number of island communities as well as my part of east Galway. I ask Ms Rantala to come back to the committee on that specific issue, not necessarily today but at a later date. I apologise for cutting across her.

Ms Tuuli Rantala:

No problem. There is a lot of potential with shared resources and broadband connectivity, especially when we have fibre cable on the islands. There are many good examples of this all around the world already. There are schools currently operating entirely online. The way ahead is a combination of local resources and shared resources across different rural communities and the islands for the special subjects.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask anyone coming in remotely to introduce themselves because it might not be clear who is speaking. It makes it easier for the transcribers.

Ms Aisling Moran:

I am the chair of Comhdháil Oileáin na hÉireann. I thank the committee for having us here today and for reviewing the SDGs. It is really important for all of us. Housing is one of the biggest issues and I am grateful that it has been raised. The first thing to address with housing is to recognise that we have an issue with housing for islanders, as Ms Rantala said. I appreciate the question that Deputy Ó Cathasaigh asked. If we have affordable housing schemes how do we stop the money going into holiday homes? How do we stop that all over the country? We have looked at this time and again. It is a difficult question. We cannot be the judges or the people to decide that someone cannot sell their house. If that is to be the case, it has to happen at the level of national policy. We need to solve the problem of housing first. That would be my answer. The issue has to be addressed on different levels with social housing, affordable housing, planning and gateway housing, which is a new initiative. We talk about affordable housing, and that is a system we know about, but we do not talk about gateway housing. This might be housing within a community that is supported to let people live within a community for a couple of years and then, if the planning laws are in place, they could build on their own. We have a long way to come with the SDGs around house planning. We can look over those aspects around housing with the SDGs. We have another national housing report by University College Cork, UCC, coming out soon. We also have the national islands policy. I hope that over the next couple of years many more of the SDGs will be hit by implementation of some of the recommendations of those two reports. Financial support is needed for all of this, as is a process of constant review. Perhaps some of my colleagues want to comment on these matters or answer any of the questions that were posed by Deputy Ó Cathasaigh.

Mr. John Walsh:

I agree with Ms Moran. It is difficult to control the selling of houses. Various actions are needed to solve the housing crisis on the islands. The islands policy will help in this regard. If we say to people that they cannot sell their house to a certain person, that will have huge implications for island communities. When we looked at the SDGs as we were developing our own strategic plan for Bere Island, Whiddy Island and Dursey Island, two main things came into into view for us. SDG 6 is for clean water and sanitation. In the last month I have visited three islands: Whiddy Island, Inis Oírr and Clare Island just yesterday. None of the three have drinkable water, which is a shocking thing to say in this day and age.

Regarding infrastructure, on my way to Clare Island yesterday I was shocked at the state of Roonagh Pier. It is disgraceful that there is not a proper facility for people coming from Inishturk or Clare Island to land on. It goes to show that since 2015 the SDGs do not take the islands into account. I was on Inis Oírr pier a few weeks ago. It is probably the busiest pier in Ireland. My colleague Paddy Crowe spent many years trying to get the pier done. Chloe O'Malley is working on it at the moment and hopefully there will be news soon.

SDG 5 is to do with gender equality. On the islands we do not have access to services like family resource centres. I live on Bere Island, which is the only island with any service on this nature. We work with Beara west family resource centre. I do not think any other island gets family support worker services. The social inclusion and community activation programme, SICAP, is supposed to be for every resident of the State. West Cork islanders can avail of that programme because Cork County Council made a lot of the islands. When it was being tendered out, Comhdháil Oileáin na hÉireann was able to apply for it. Many of the other islands do not have that service. Therefore, the State is remiss in its services to the islands under social inclusion. It is important to make that point.

Mr. Simon Murray:

One thing that is underneath the surface in all conversations about the islands is the cost of living on an island. We operate a subsidised system in this country, and rightly so, in order to try to keep the islands and their communities alive. We do this because of the benefits they give back through tourism and many other avenues. For those who are not familiar with it, our subsidised system for freight increases the cost of living on the islands. This is a bizarre statement, but it is the truth. A subsidised system should not be increasing the cost of living on an island. Other speakers have touched on the question of housing. As a result of the subsidised system that is in place, in order to build or renovate a house, or do any works on a house, there is a 30% increase on the cost of building. This is just not good enough. The policy document on the islands was launched a couple of weeks ago. If we are being serious about the continuation of life on our islands, something needs to be done. We have lost many islands over the years, and we are now left with a very small number of people. We do not have the population to make an argument. That is the key principle of rural living, full stop. If all considerations are going to be based on population, that will not work for us. We have to be to look at islands in the context of us wanting island life to survive off our coasts. As an island nation, one would think that would be obvious, but that has to be met with in every Department, county council and government structure of the country. If we are still arguing at this stage in 2023, I am not sure how much progress has been made.

When we are talking about housing, health and everything else, if the system that is in place, which is run by the State, is putting up the cost of living on an island, it has to be addressed. I would ask the committee, if it is within its remit, to consider that someone needs to do a root-and-branch review of the subsidised system for the islands because it is a little bit out of control. It is killing productivity on the islands. If we are hoping to house people, and hoping for a future for the islands, we need to address the costs we can address. This is one that could be done immediately. A review could be carried out. The tendering process could be changed, with a new tender document put in place, and the cost of living would come down on the islands. A simple thing like that would make a huge difference.

Ms Louise Lennon:

I thank the committee for inviting us to attend this meeting. I am involved with Irish Rural Link, but I am attending today with Coalition 2030. The Department of Rural and Community Development is the main Department we deal when it comes to progress on the SDGs.

With regard to its progress on the SDGs and its overall policy and strategy, Our Rural Future, many of the actions are on sustainable communities and decent work, but there seems to be a lack of emphasis on poverty and equality. The Department's next five-year strategy, which it is starting to think about, needs to include these. Members will have heard from my colleagues that rural areas have higher income inadequacy and homes that are harder to heat. That needs to be addressed across government.

Let me pick up on some of Deputy Paul Donnelly's questions on education, digital technology, broadband and the difficulties during Covid. We have called for high-speed broadband for a long time. That it is being rolled out is welcome but there are still parts of the country and homes without broadband. This is still causing difficulty for householders, including those trying to work from home. It is mostly about having equipment for lower-income and poorer households that do not have the laptop or other computer and have to share one piece of equipment among three or four children, which can cause difficulties.

It is also a matter of older people having digital skills. As we move to e-tech and e-health, we must remember that we have an ageing population. Access to GPs has become more difficult for older people in rural areas. When GPs retire, it is difficult to replace them in rural areas. If patients do not have access to a car, travel can become more difficult. In this regard, there is a need for enhancements and lifelong skills. The whole life cycle has to be covered so people will have the necessary skills and equipment to use technology, including technology to help them to remain in their homes as they get older.

Deputy Paul Donnelly also mentioned waste management. In rural areas, it is not just a question of cost because it is also more difficult to manage waste. All the companies delivering waste management services, including recycling, are private. Many rural areas do not even have these facilities, and many do not have the brown bin as an option. A large part of the argument made is that if you contact your waste management service, you are told there are not enough people in the area using the service. There could be three or four bin lorries out per week but all from different companies. Not having the service available to people increases the cost because food waste goes into the black bin or general waste bin.

Transport still remains a major issue for people in rural areas. Access to public transport is an issue. If we are serious about meeting the SDGs and reducing poverty, we must consider this. Transport for people in rural areas represents a major cost, so there needs to be proper investment in rural transport and ensuring it can be adapted to community and local needs.

We must communicate the SDGs more to people in rural areas. We must ensure that they are brought in through the public participation networks, PPNs, and that the latter are aware of them and have up-to-date knowledge on them. Town teams are now being developed, so we must ensure that they have access to the relevant information and that it can be accessed easily and in plain language. Many people on PPNs and town teams are volunteers from the local communities. It will be important to ensure that the language used is accessible to everyone.

Mr. Paul Ginnell:

I thank Deputy Paul Donnelly for the points he raised. I want to come back to one of the key issues. It is linked to the affordability of quality or healthy food and also the affordability of education and other services people need access to. A key point for us is related to income inadequacy being the basis of the unaffordability of healthy food and issues concerning access to education and transport that affect many families across the country. I do not know whether members are aware of the minimum essential standard of living. Research in this regard was carried out by the Vincentian Partnership for Social Justice and now within the Society of St. Vincent de Paul. The data for 2022, published recently, show that of the 214 household types that depend on social welfare, 127 will experience deep income inadequacy in terms of affording a minimum essential standard of living, 60 will have an inadequate income and 27 will just about have an adequate income, based on the criteria associated with the minimum essential standard of living. That takes into account the costs of goods and services. As they become more affordable and accessible, it impacts upon the minimum essential standard of living. It is relevant for this committee in a wider context, not just in terms of the SDGs, to note that social welfare levels must be adequate so people can have a minimum essential standard of living. Based on the research, organisations across the sector are calling for a social welfare rate increase of €27.50. It is a big ask but this is just for people to stand still given the impact of inflation over the past year or so. It is not even about moving towards a minimum essential standard of living. It impacts households and access to a range of services and supports. It is extremely important to make this point in respect of the Government's targets or how it is meeting the SDGs.

The other point I want to make concerns the overall achievement of targets, which was raised by Deputy Ó Cathasaigh. While it may be reported that the Government is meeting its overall poverty targets concerning the SDGs, we know poverty levels are rising more generally, as mentioned by colleagues. It is extremely important to note, in the context mentioned by the Chair in the introduction, that it is about how the SDGs deliver for all groups across society. Even within the overall targets, there is the overall objective of leaving no one behind and reaching those furthest behind first. That is why we must consider not only overall targets but also how they are delivering for the subgroups. This is why disaggregated data are extremely important.

We know there are gaps. We know there are high poverty levels and high levels of unemployment among certain groups, which is relevant to SDG 8. These are aggregated data. There are gaps, for example, in respect of ethnic identifiers for some groups. Traveller organisations and others have called for greater use of ethnic identifiers. We know what the gaps are around, for example, access to health services for particular groups. The latest data on employment levels for people with disabilities depend on the census. The data must be more up to date than that. They are not adequate.

The survey of income and living conditions misses out on certain groups in society, such as Travellers, Roma, homeless people and so on. While it is important that we achieve the targets for the overall population, the Government must set an ambition for every group in society so that we leave no one behind. Coalition 2030 has published the report to draw attention to the fact that while it is important to achieve the overall targets, we cannot leave anyone behind. Disaggregated data are important to ensure we are not leaving anyone behind in terms of our ambition and how we measure our progress.

Ms Colette Bennett:

I may pass to my colleague in a moment. Deputy Paul Donnelly mentioned the digital divide. I live quite near Ms Lennon in rural Ireland and during the pandemic, we could not move for the broadband trucks moving up country roads. It was a real sticking point because we suddenly realised just how bad things were. While things have certainly improved, there are households which are still struggling in that regard, particularly when we disaggregate the data and look at the ages of those concerned. We are seeing very basic or low levels of digital literacy among our adult population. We now have an e-health strategy and are looking at e-public services. The people who cannot keep up are going to miss out on essential and critical services. Our education system is becoming more digitised. It starts there. It starts young. There were great moves, which we very much welcomed, on the subsidisation of primary school books in budget 2023. However, there needs to be more to satisfy the digital needs of students and older people. We need more targeted supports in that regard.

There are two elements to the consideration of access to medical cards. We have for a long time been calling for the individualisation of welfare support so that it is not based on household income but on what an individual needs. We know, for example, that not every household is happy and homogenous, works together and shares everything. We know there are difficulties and those difficulties need to be addressed. Based on studies at an international level, we are the only country that does not have universal access to primary care. We have been calling for some time for what are now community healthcare networks and primary care networks. We welcomed the 2016 publication of Sláintecare but we have only seen the infrastructure investment once, which was during the Covid-19 pandemic when the €500 million that was committed to every year for six years was allocated. That needs to be ramped up. Those numbers are out of date and that needs to be addressed. We need access across the board so there are no dips or areas we all know of where someone can be a fiver over his or her assessment.

On the quality education side and DEIS+, there are still issues in DEIS schools in terms of competing with peers in non-DEIS schools. Particularly since the massive increases in inflation, we are seeing much more disadvantage in what were mainstream schools. We are seeing kids coming to school with inadequate lunches and unable to concentrate. There has been an explosion in child mental health issues. We welcomed a recent announcement that there would be an increase for psychological supports at primary level. However, that needs to happen immediately because we know there are inadequate special needs assistant, SNA, hours. We know there are children who are not getting full hours in school because they are on short days. That is not addressing the problem of leaving people behind. Those people are our most vulnerable and they are being completely left behind. We certainly need additional supports at a mainstream level to ensure that people with additional needs are getting them so they can thrive.

Waste management brings a much bigger issue into focus. The Deputy was present when we launched our socioeconomic review, SER, in the audiovisual room recently. The issue of privatisation came up again and again. This is part of that. When it was a municipal offering and service that was provided as a public good, people got on with it. They did their jobs with pride. However, once you start tendering for it and privatising it, the role you privatise for becomes what was contained in your tender. Anything that was not contained in that is left behind. That is why you have these disparities and areas that are not getting their green or brown bins collected, or do not have brown bins at all. I do not think I have a brown bin. In that way, you start to constrict what you can actually get and that leaves gaps. I walked from Heuston Station this morning and there are bins left, right and centre in Dublin city centre. That has a knock-on impact on everything else. That is just one area of privatisation. This is a far more systemic problem.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome all the groups and thank them for their submissions. I am not going to be going over the same questions that have been raised by my colleagues.

The international poverty line was considered to be $1.15 per day. The World Bank put that up to $2.15 per day. What would the Irish line be? How much would it be per day?

Ms Colette Bennett:

The Irish line is just over €318 per week. That is the poverty line.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The line is €318.

Ms Colette Bennett:

That is correct.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Anybody earning less than that is below the poverty line.

Ms Colette Bennett:

The figure is €318.53.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does that take into account money that is paid by local authorities for housing? Does it take everything into consideration?

Ms Colette Bennett:

That is based on the survey on income and living conditions, SILC. It is an income and living conditions survey. It is based on 60% of the median income. If we were to line everyone up in order from the lowest to the highest income, the person who is bang in the middle would be the median. We take 60% of that person's earnings and that is the poverty line. For a single adult, the weekly poverty line is €318.50.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There was some report stating we are ninth out of 16 in the world or in Europe. Is that right?

Ms Colette Bennett:

That is our sustainable progress index. Compared to our EU 14 peers, we are ninth.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Which country is at the top?

Ms Colette Bennett:

No one ever asks that. I will have to come back to the Senator. I will have that information in a moment.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are considered to have a very good social welfare system. Ukrainians seem to be coming here because of the social welfare system, in some cases. However, we are still only ninth out of 16. Our poverty line is €318 per week. I wonder what is the equivalent figure for the country in the No. 1 spot. Of course, the survey takes healthcare and everything into consideration.

Ms Colette Bennett:

Income is just one aspect of it. The ranking is based on the SDGs as a whole. Denmark is the first ranked country, by the way. SILC looks at more than just income and poverty rates. It looks at education, our healthcare system, transparency in our Government system and our official development assistance, ODA. It is looking at all of that in the round across the 17 goals. That is where those numbers for Ireland are coming from.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Coalition 2030 states that all of this area should be moved to the Department of the Taoiseach.

One cannot go any higher than the Department of the Taoiseach. On the other hand, the witness is saying that there should be a future generations commissioner, who would not have any power in the area of developing policy. What would the future generations commissioner do? It is another office that will be fully staffed, I presume, and it would cost a good few million euro a year to run it. That office, whether it is the commissioner who would be in control of it, would, I presume, identify and highlight poverty traps.

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

Yes. We are advocating for these two items. First, we are advocating for the overall delivery and implementation of the sustainable development goals, SDGs, to be moved to the Office of the Taoiseach. At the moment, it is in the Department of the Environment, Climate and Communications. We feel that it needs leadership from the very top in order to facilitate that interdepartmental working and ambition for the SDGs, which to date, we have not seen at the scale or urgency that is required. To date, we have not received an adequate response as to why it is not in the Department of the Taoiseach. This is further entrenching the idea that the SDGs are an environmental agenda, when I think we have clearly articulated that they are far more than that. They are about a society and an economy that works for everybody. There are a number of other units that are in the remit of the Department of the Taoiseach. There is the well-being initiative, and the child poverty unit. They are in the Department of the Taoiseach as well, and one can see the resourcing that is put behind these initiatives when they are in there. We have found that resourcing, and the lack of adequate resourcing, is a key issue consistently since Agenda 2030 was agreed by all UN member states.

Second, there is the future generations commissioner. Their role would be to be a set of eyes on policy coherence. This is an idea within SDG 17, policy coherence for sustainable development, PCSD. As alluded to earlier, the SDGs can have positive ripple effects, if integrated. One example is if we have climate initiatives that could positively impact health in terms of reducing air pollution. It can also have the opposite effect; there can be trade-offs. For example, our national tax policies might have negative implications for SDG delivery and achievement around the world. The future generations commissioner would be a commissioner tasked with keeping an eye on, for want of a better term, this policy coherence, and drawing attention to those trade-offs. At the moment, we do not have somebody who is responsible for that. We are seeing trade-offs happening between Departments.

There is an interdepartmental working group set up. The last time I checked, the last updated minutes for that were from 2019. It is now halfway through 2023, and the minutes have not been updated. That is not good enough. The senior officials group we know is chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach but we are not having the impact that we need. For example, regarding the two Departments under this committee's purview, the most recent annual reports suggest that the Departments are not reporting at target level, again and again. It is not the only Department, by a long stretch, but this has to happen, as per the national implementation plan, and we do not have a clear outline on how the Departments are doing on each of the targets they are responsible for as per the policy map.

There are a lot of things that are not being done. If it was in the Department of the Taoiseach, we feel this would have a lot more impetus and urgency, and we would not be facing a lot of the trade-offs that we see in Irish society. I am happy to send on more information to the Senator.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would the future generations commissioner be responsible for trading off, whether it was tax or whatever?

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

The commissioner would be responsible for identifying trade-offs and making opinion. Importantly, they would not be part of any political party. They would outlive the shortlived political and economic cycles, and would make recommendations. They would draw attention to potential trade-offs.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would all of the SDGs feed into the future generation commissioner's office? Would that be the case?

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

Yes. They would have an overarching and bird's eye view of how the country is doing on all of its SDGs and, because it is a policy framework, this takes into account all of our policies. It would be a significant job. They would identify if we had a fisheries policy, for example, that perhaps is not-----

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It could be another line of bureaucracy as well, could it not?

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

It depends on how it is managed. We are not advocating for another commission or commissioner that does not have a very specific goal. We are not advocating for anything that is not necessary, and this is absolutely necessary. It has been shown to have had real impact in Wales.

Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

So Ms Carmody is looking for an office with teeth.

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

An office with teeth, exactly.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the issue of the Department of the Taoiseach, the reality is that the measurement takes place there. The Central Statistics Office, CSO, has been mandated to provide the data and measurement with regard to the sustainable development goals. That is not just here in Ireland, it is being used as a template globally. That is directly under the Department of the Taoiseach. We are measuring it under the Department of the Taoiseach and it would make sense that the reporting would be to the Department of the Taoiseach.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh na finnéithe. It is very important that we have this opportunity to talk about sustainable development goals. I used to teach about them in schools for many years, and do workshops to introduce the concepts, because the vocabulary around them is quite interesting. It is not the best vocabulary I would use for getting things across the line, and for people understanding it, but I think they are really important.

For somebody who is a Green Party Senator and former county councillor, and an environmental education officer for many years with Green Schools, I wonder how the witnesses see the roles of the local authorities in all of this. There is some minor support for Green Schools in the local authorities but, beyond that, I am not sure I would see it as being vital that our local authorities have a very strong role to play in implementing our sustainable development goals. It should be across all the departments in the local authorities. What I have learned as a Senator is that even when a Department has a recommendation, it does not always necessarily come down to the local authorities; the grassroots has always been where change has come.

I know there is now a biodiversity officer in most places thanks to the Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Malcolm Noonan. There are now climate teams. However, if it is nobody's job to implement the sustainable development goals, it will be everybody's job and nobody's job. That is a huge issue I have worries about. We have biannual meetings, as national representatives in Clare, with our directors of service and CEO, and nobody has ever mentioned sustainable development goals except me. It has never been brought up with us. I have huge concerns about it actually filtering down on some local level, or it being shoved into "yes, that is in the whole climate thing". Our biodiversity sits in one directorate, separate to climate, which is also quite bizarre. If we are serious about it, I wonder if the witnesses had any plans to come up with ways of forcing us to make local authorities take the sustainable development goals seriously. I know the environmental awareness officer herself does a lot of good work on it, but I feel like she is doing it in a silo as opposed to it being a whole-council initiative.

I would like to talk about something that came up earlier. I had to go to the Seanad to talk about water quality with the Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, Deputy Kieran O'Donnell, for a Commencement matter. I was in Inisheer recently, and I know that a lot of the islands suffer from water quality issues, and not having access to water, but Irish Water has zero plans to do any rainwater harvesting, for example. I do not know why this is not happening, and we are definitely missing a trick there, because water comes into the sustainable development goals. Rainwater can be used for so many things and, if treated with ultraviolet, UV light, it can be used for everything. I also saw a great digital hub in Inisheer, which I think is something that should be mandatory if we want people to have some way of getting access to broadband. I think one of the Deputies said it earlier. I know in Inisheer, the community officers there have done great work in getting a very successful digital hub that I am planning to use myself this summer.

The main thing, for me, is the local authorities. We talk about the islands and ask why there is not community composting, or why there is not community rainwater harvesting. On waste management, some of the ferry companies are not giving a single penny to the islands, and they are making millions out of bringing people to the islands. Should we be looking at a policy where a mandatory percentage of profits would be given back to the islanders? I was talking to a businessman on one of the islands, and the community approached the ferry company, which said that it was up to the local authorities. That is an issue as well, because we know when we have thousands of people coming to the islands, it is not "leave no trace", it is "leave everything behind you".

It is the opposite to leaving no trace. There is no policy about people bringing all their rubbish home with them. The ferry companies charge everybody loads of money to take them to the islands but are not responsible in any way for the footprint of this. This is something we have to look at if we are speaking about-----

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fairness the fees paid by the ferry companies to local authorities-----

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It depends on the local authority. Some of them deliver to islands not in their local authority area. This is where we have an issue. It is an issue I want to raise. If they are paying the local authority, does the money go directly to the island? It does not.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is an issue we need to take up with the Local Government Management Agency and not with the ferry companies.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is part of the SDGs. If we want the islands to be able to sustain themselves, they will need extra financial support. Perhaps we should examine this coming from the ferry companies that might be making money from getting people there but not taking any responsibility for their footprint.

There will be more vulnerabilities for rural dwellers and islanders because of the climate change challenges we face. Rural transport has an important part to play. It is something we cannot underestimate. I would love to see my rural colleagues and Independent Deputies going on about rural transport as much as I do. They are missing a trick in dealing with rural isolation, affordability and less dependence on fossil fuels to get around. Of course, people can drive their cars, we are not saying that they cannot but we have to bring choices to rural Ireland. We have done a lot on Local Link but we have a lot more to do.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Some of us have made very detailed submissions to the NTA on these issues.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, as have I. It is good to air here the importance of rural transport if we are speaking about SDGs and justice. It is a just transition, I suppose.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

At the start of the meeting I laid out very clearly that people cannot make accusations. The Senator has tread very close to the line on a number of occasions this morning. I ask her to direct questions specifically to the witnesses.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, I started with a question, and I am backing it up, with regard to how they see the role of-----

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are limited with time. We have other business to get through before the deadline of noon.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have accommodated the Senator because I know she was in the Seanad.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have never really addressed the sustainable development goals at the committee and they are supposed to be addressed by every committee. It is important. The point I am trying to make is on where this sits with local authorities. I would love the advice and guidance of the witnesses on this. If we do not take it seriously at local authority level I do not know what we will do.

Mr. Johnny Sheehan:

I work with The Wheel and I am part of Coalition 2030. With regard to local authorities, and more broadly the role at local level, we have local authorities, community organisations and community development programmes. The mission of all of them is to deliver on one or more of the SDGs. This is important to note. Ms Lennon mentioned the Department of Rural and Community Development's Our Rural Future strategy. There is also the Sustainable, Inclusive and Empowered Communities five-year strategy for the community and voluntary sector. It mentions strengthening and building understanding and capacity to support the implementation of the national implementation plan for the SDGs. It makes a number of commitments, including developing programmes to implement and raise awareness of the goals among local community development committees, local authorities and Departments. It discusses supporting capacity for the goals at local level and providing supports, including funding, to all sectors to implement them.

It is not clear how much progress is involved. For example, organisations are asked to map what they do with regard to the sustainable development goals but it does not go further than this. They map it but that is it. They now know about the SDGs and the job is done. More needs to be done. Perhaps there is a role for the committee to examine to what end this is being done. To what extent is awareness being raised? More than this, are we working with community and voluntary organisations and local authorities to implement the goals?

There are a number of commitments in the policy map that Ms Carmody mentioned. For example, Goal 17 deals with partnerships and collaboration and working with community organisations. Yesterday, I met an organisation involved in recycling and upcycling. It does up old bicycles and provides them to the DEIS schools and migrant groups. It is about ensuring that all of these groups are supported and through their work we achieving the SDGs. There needs to be adequate resourcing for these community groups.

Local authorities have public participation networks in every local authority area in the country. These are networks of local community and voluntary organisations, environmental organisations and organisations working on social inclusion that directly address the delivery of the goals. The role of the public participation networks needs to be adequately resourced and supported to implement the goals at local level.

The Department of Rural and Community Development has guidance on the values and principles for partnership and collaboration with the community and voluntary sector. It is great this is being done but producing guidance is not enough. It needs to be brought to local authorities and everyone else with regard to delivery so it will be used to improve the way in which this operates.

We saw in the Covid crisis the realisation that we need a partnership and collaboration approach between the State and local groups throughout the country and we see now in Ukraine crisis that we need it to support Ukrainian refugees and international protection applicants adequately throughout the country and counter negative publicity and media. It is very important that we recognise what has been done and, equally, identify to what end it is being done.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Before Ms Rogers contributes I want to make it quite clear and put on the record that the ferry companies meet their licensing requirements as set down by statute by local authorities. In many cases they are tendered by the Department and it is under our competency. I recall listening to Dr. Marion Broderick, the retired GP on Inis Mór, making the point that the ferry companies themselves were very responsive to the issues regarding Covid-19 with regard to trying to protect island communities.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fairness to Senator Garvey, that is virtually true for almost every Ireland with the exception of Inis Oírr, Inis Mór and Inis Meáin, particularly Inis Oírr and Inis Mór where commercial companies operate side by side with the-----

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, there-----

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The fares charged by the contracted companies are fixed by the Department. I believe it is a maximum fare of €10 for an adult and there is a limit on the profits they can make.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The point I am making here is-----

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, the Cathaoirleach is right.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----that all of the operators that are servicing our island communities are licensed. They meet the requirements of the licence. We are a legislative assembly. If we have any issue with those licences, the responsibility is on us to provide the statutory footing to amend those licences. I want to make it quite clear that as far as the committee is concerned those licences are being complied with. I do not want to open up the discussion any further.

Ms Susanne Rogers:

With regard to local authorities, it is about subsidiarity and where decisions are made. We are very centralised. The sustainable development goals are a policy for all people. They are like the movie "Everything Everywhere All At Once". This is what is important. It goes back to the siloed approach and policy coherence that my colleagues have touched on. The difficulty from the point of view of local authorities is the types of decisions that are made at local authority level, where they sit with the types of policy decisions made at national level and where they interact.

Digital disadvantage has been mentioned. Broadband is a national roll-out and the local authorities have limited room for manoeuvring. Internet connectivity throughout the country is at 94% but it is 92% in Dublin, 86% in the mid-east region, 77% in the Border region and 79% in the midlands.

As one moves across the country, there is a disparity in delivery of services. That is the difficulty. Then again, it ties into this whole issue of tying it all together on a national level. Even services such as waste management-----

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In fairness to the Chair when he was Minister, a decision was made to make a physical roll-out of fibre into every house and business in the country. The Government adopted that and it has been rolled out. There is a physical roll-out time. It is a bit frustrating, but the way they are building the network is, by definition, from nodes outwards. I am fortunate to live in one of those areas. The outside areas will get it last. One cannot build the outwards area first because it is a brand new system; it is not part of the Eir. They are using poles but they are not using cable without building them outwards. I do not know why we are spending so much time here on something that is effectively done and will be done by 2026.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

As a committee-----

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Ó Cuív can come in whenever he wants but I cannot.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Without interruption, Senator Garvey.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Ó Cuív just comes in when he wants.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was not aimed at Senator Garvey. Without interruption, we will hear from Ms Rogers. The committee will seek an update regarding the delivery of the national broadband plan from NBI. Ms Rogers can complete her evidence.

Ms Susanne Rogers:

It was just a discussion of the digital disadvantage and the policy coherence piece. As was said, there is a big push to get us all online, a big push to get everybody and every child a tablet and there was a big push for older people to get online throughout Covid. However, that requires data centres. It requires for all of that stuff to be held somewhere and that is somebody else’s Department to do that. The impact of that is brownouts and on our climate action goals. Those three things are linked. Three separate Departments are doing a great job getting us all online, bringing in foreign direct investment and then trying to meet our climate action goals but they are in tension with each other. That would be a national policy and I do not know where that can fit in at local level.

On waste management, there was a piece of research done by Fingal County Council – again at local level – I think in 2017. It showed it would be cheaper to go back to remunicipalisation of waste collection services in Fingal because the council was spending so much cleaning up from fly-tipping. That has not gone anywhere at a local or national level. Dublin City Council is now trying hard to make the move back to doing a local council waste collection. It is coming up against barriers in what it can do within the free market and private market in respect of competition. There is a real struggle between the types of decisions that are made. It is about weaving all of this into every policy decision and having oversight. For example, it is about asking where that sits in with our SDGs. It is about embedding into local government probably but I do not know whether that has to come from national down or, as was said, from the public participation networks, PPNs, up. There is a limit sometimes as to what sort of decisions can be made at local authority.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I call Deputy Ó Cuív.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Can I just reply-----

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. We are under pressure for time and we have a lot of work in front of us. Senator Garvey may ask a brief question but not reference any material she referenced earlier.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I was not asking about fibre broadband. It came up as an issue that the digihub in Inis Oírr has been a solution to that issue, so perhaps that is something that can be looked at in resect of the islands.

The other thing about the ferries is that I was just saying they could donate. I was not questioning-----

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have asked the Senator not to reference that issue again.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

But I was not questioning their licensing at all.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Please desist, Senator.

Róisín Garvey (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

But the Chair put it on the record as if I was accusing them of something.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Please desist. Deputy Ó Cuív, without interruption.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Fáilte romhaibh ó na hoileáin. I welcome everyone from the islands. It is good to see them.

I have always found that the big policy issues are relatively easy. Delivery is always our problem.

I wish to reference some of the issues raised. Housing is a big issue on the islands. There is no question or doubt about that. We need a bank of land on each island for social, affordable and other permanent housing. There are people moving to the islands who cannot get a site and, if they do, they cannot get planning permission. We have to tackle that issue nationally. I was disappointed it was not tackled more comprehensively in the islands plan. Second, Croí Cónaithe is positive. The Croí Cónaithe means that if there is a derelict house and a person does it up for permanent dwelling – it cannot be done up as a holiday home – there is up to €90,000 available, plus the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI grants. We should note that because that is a step in the right direction. It stops them all being sold off, as they are at the moment, as holiday homes or at least it gives people a competitive advantage on the market. As a matter of interest, if people get planning permission in Galway for a house on a family-need basis or a housing-need basis, an inurement is put on that for seven years that they must have resided in that house for seven years. If they sell it, they have to have resided in it for seven years before they can sell it on the open market. People cannot build a house and then say, "I did not really want this for a house.” That is positive and I have always supported that policy.

On sanitation, my belief on the islands is, as I think all my island friends know, that the island fund should make a contribution towards this. If we wait for Irish Water to do it on the basis of population, they will always be at the bottom of the queue because of the dispersed, small populations, inaccessibility and costs-prices. Therefore, we need to bump up the island fund and get the Department with responsibility for the islands to negotiate to deliver on water and sanitation. We can talk about all the policies we want. The question is how the Government will deliver.

Mr. Murray and Ms Rantala are absolutely right that there should be facility for second-level education. I think we know the problem we are hitting up against. It should be linked to the local school. We have to get a synergy between the local school and the island because students have to grow up and will want to be able to access some things in the local school with the facilities they have and so on. On the other hand, they should get other parts of their education on their island. It could be all hybrid; it could be two or three days a week, summer term or winter term. Different things can be done in different places. In summer, it would be distance education. However, the distance education should be to the local, nearest school possible so they could attend in person. For example, if students are doing physics, they can do all the theory online but they would have to do the practicals in the laboratories. I find that in many of these things, the big policy is right but we need to get all the players locally to buy in.

On the freight issue, I am aware of the problem. The freight prices should be negotiated when the contract comes up. The islanders should insist on getting it totally revised from A through Z. We have discussed that issue but it needs to happen. What actually happened was that on Inis Mór, the freight prices were brought down two thirds from what they used to be historically, so they were very happy. There are anomalies in the price list and they need to be tackled. They are "tackleable" because when the new contract is coming up, the Department should accede that the freight prices give the islanders the benefit of the subsidy.

On rural Ireland and the SDGs, this is particularly relevant to islands but it is also relevant to the mainland. There are two ways of trying to solve our problem. One is to move all the people into cities but we know the problem that gives us and, anyway, there will be a residual population in the country so all electric cables and so on will still have to be run and the services will still have to be provided. Much more rational, of course, is to keep viable rural communities and decarbonise the community. As somebody living in a rural area, I already have solar panels for my water but my intention is put them in for my electricity, so not only will I produce my own but I will export any surplus. In time, when they become a reasonable value, I will get an electric vehicle, EV, car. At this stage, we are beginning to run thin on the arguments against it except many people do not like rural houses but that is their tough luck. As far as I am concerned, that is a democratic debate we must have for those who are for and those who are against. However, sustainability is not necessarily the issue because, in other ways, social sustainability in rural communities is extraordinarily good. Achievement of young people growing up tends to be very high and, therefore, if we are talking about total sustainability, we have to consider issues other than just pure carbon because carbon is eliminated by technology.

I am a great believer in technology.

On broadband, this goes back to technology coming to the people rather than the people going to the technology. My guess is these digital hubs will be relatively little used within five years, except by those who visit our areas. The vast majority of people will have digital access, as I do at home. I am lucky to have 60 Mbps fibre to the box. There is a massive digital divide within most rural communities. Among my neighbours, 100 houses have fibre, about 20 are like me and have fibre to the box and about 200 are dependent on mobile systems. It will be great to get the uptake. There has been a little bit of slippage but by 2026, give or take, everybody will have it and we will not change how that will happen except to keep the skids under them. We will not change fundamentally how we deliver this. Nobody wants to go back on the policy. I commend the Chair on the work he did on that and for delivering fibre rather than 30 Mbps, which was a major victory against the naysayers.

On rural transport, the theory is fine. They gave us three new BusConnects serving the Connemara region, one going from An Cheathrú Rua to Claremorris, one from An Cheathrú Rua to Clifden and another going from Clifden to Westport. Yippee, we got three services each way. We will take that as a start. Not too bad, except there is one problem. I come from Dublin where bus stops are a few hundred yards apart. I asked them how far apart these bus stops were. Some of them are over 14 km apart. Older people will not cycle there and are unlikely to walk there. That is once you get to the main road. You might be a further distance down a bóithrín. We have a great ability to have great policy but I have spent my life on delivery, delivery, delivery.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ms Lennon can tell the Deputy that is not just happening in rural areas, but in the town of Athlone, which has been designated to grow as a city and which has different hubs for different connections.

Ms Colette Bennett:

In relation to housing, the Deputy referenced Croí Cónaithe. It is welcome for those for whom it works but there are issues with the implementation of it. There are upfront costs and a lack of bridging finance to access it because you need to have the property to be able to do it up and then get the rebate. A review is necessary on the implementation of that to make it more effective and broaden its remit.

On energy, I am sure my colleagues will talk about fuel poverty. For those who can afford to put in solar and to retrofit, there are valuable SEAI grants; for those who do not fit within the narrow eligibility criteria of the social homes one, there are upfront costs that can be €35,000 to €50,000, which many cannot afford. It is back to implementation. There needs to be a review of how to make that more accessible to people who desperately need it.

On rural transport, Ms Lennon will probably say there are many things to discuss. My colleague came on the bus this morning while I came on the train because the time of this committee was right. I have attended committees that sat in the afternoon or evening and have had to drive from Athlone because there is not a train that will get me back after 7.20 p.m and there is not a bus until 10 p.m. It is about implementation, building on what has been done and making sure it is accessible, that people are not being left behind because of the gaps in what is there and that there is a broader spread.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have been arguing that one for 30 years. I remember one night being on Vincent Browne's programme and he asked me why I did not take the train. I said there was no train to Corr na Móna. Why did I not take the bus? I said there was no bus to Corr na Móna. Game, set, match. Another reason among many I never took the train was that after 7 p.m. I do not think there is any train to Galway, so forget it. These are all practical issues. That is exactly what I am talking about regarding most of the snags we as politicians hit. We have lots of high-level goals. I said to the Secretary General of the Department who came in, when we were starting at the same time, that it would be found the devil is in the detail all the time. The high-level stuff is awful easy.

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

I thank the Deputy for his contribution. Zooming out to that high-level perspective, on looking at the strategies of the Department of Social Protection and the Department of Rural and Community Development, there is no evidence the SDGs have been used from the outset to address the various issues the policies raised have been designed to address. If it was asked at the outset how somebody who is disabled will cope with a 14 km gap between bus stops, that might be ameliorated. After the fact, it is too late. If you look at both of the strategies-----

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Common sense would have told you. Come on. We do not need massive sustainable guidelines to tell us. Any amadán on the street will tell you.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have a number of witnesses who want to get in and have other business to get through before 12 noon. Ms Carmody, without interruption.

Ms Meaghan Carmody:

We are advocating for the SDGs to be used as a policy framework so people do not fall through the gaps and are not left further behind. If we do not do that, we will continue having these frustrating conversations which are practical in their nature but could have been remedied by that perspective from the outset. The SDGs are not another add-on, strategy or policy; they are the overarching umbrella that needs to inform all policies from now on.

Ms Louise Lennon:

I thank Deputy Ó Cuív for his comments. I will come in on some of the transport points. As Ms Carmody said, the SDGs should be used as that overarching framework for policy design.

On the work being done on Connecting Ireland, we welcome the roll-out of the Local Link services and the increase but our CEO was in this committee a few weeks ago with two Local Link providers. Many of the issues they have raised are around bridging the gap between where a service ends and another one begins and connecting, literally, the services together.

We are doing a piece of work with Social Justice Ireland around just transition and well-being in rural communities. Transport has come up and continues to be the main barrier to accessing many other services. A factor that could increase access would be having that last-mile piece of transport, which could be delivered at a more local level through community car schemes or Uber-style, to get that person from their home to the bus stop or train station, whichever is closest to them, or to the Local Link bus stop if it is not a door-to-door service.

On many days the park and ride facilities in train stations are not big enough to cater for people who want to use the train. That is another issue that disincentives people from using the public transport service available to them.

Local Link facilities are needed. If Connecting Ireland is going to connect, it has to connect people and ensure the people left furthest behind, older people or people with disabilities who cannot make the journey to the bus stop by walking or by bicycle, have a choice and an option to use the transport available to them.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will Mr. John Walsh update the committee on the second iteration of the University College Cork, UCC, housing report? The committee would be very anxious to receive a copy of the report and a briefing on it as soon as it is complete. Mr. John Walsh is next. The final contributor will be Ms Tuuli Rantala, who will have the last word.

Mr. John Walsh:

I agree with Deputy Ó Cuív about the land banks on the islands. At the moment, we are looking at a farm that has come up for sale on Bere Island and the community is on board with that. If we could buy it, we could use it for a number of things. We need a community centre and childcare, as stated earlier. We could also have social and affordable housing and sites for people to purchase, as it is very difficult to buy a single site. I approached the council and while I received a very nice email from back from it, it just showed all of the problems. Sometimes the local authority needs to show leadership and instigate these things. Much of the time it waits for islanders to do it and then roadblocks are put in our way, which is very frustrating.

Road transport is the other side of it. I am on the board of Cork Local Link. While the National Transport Authority is a great organisation and provides a lot of resources, it has too much say and too much authority in the delivery of local services. The board of any Local Link should be in a much better position to say where stops and where routes should be. We are one of four Local Link services which provide our own buses. We create employment for people on community employment, CE, schemes and rural social schemes, RSS, as bus drivers. It makes the service very adaptable but it looks like that is not really favoured. The National Transport Authority seems to want to go down the route of subcontracted out services or tendered services which we do not agree with.

The last thing is fibre to islands. I spoke to the Chair on Clare Island yesterday and we discussed this issue. He said that when rural electrification came in, a socket and a light were put into each house and that was it. They then discovered down the line that they could cook food, wash clothes and have outside lighting with electricity. They then brought that in. This is the same. If we do not get fibre into every house in Ireland, which should be the case, we will always be up against it. I dealt with Eircom over the years and did a deal with Eircom to upgrade the exchange on Bere Island from dial-up to broadband. That lasted for approximately three years but the speed was no longer good enough. I tried to do a deal with it again to lay cable but because the national broadband plan was coming in, it was not able to deal with us because we were one of the 300 houses in that deal. Fibre to the islands has to happen. Yesterday on Clare Island, we saw what was possible with the different technologies for e-health. There is a big world out there but we need to have proper connectivity for all of rural Ireland, but especially the islands.

Ms Tuuli Rantala:

I will quickly give a practical example. I totally agree with some of the comments made. The sustainable development goals, SDGs, are not just environmental. There are also social and economic aspects to them. They are interconnected and, therefore, collaboration between the different silos is required.

I am originally from Finland and one example from my previous life is where we did research benchmarking cities and city planning and development. There was an example from the Netherlands where they had to changed the whole organisation, with roads, housing, education and services being area-specific with representation from each sector, which they said was very painful but very fruitful. Maybe that is something to consider.

I will give an example of how progress on all of these goals is needed, especially for offshore islands. If I was lucky enough that I could buy a property on an island, despite the current holiday home prices, and I could get a grant to refurbish a derelict house, I would also be in the situation where if I had children or wanted to start a family on the island, I would not have full-time childcare, so I would need to decide whether I or my partner would stay at home. That obviously impacts the income level of the family. I would do this knowing that when my children reach 12 years of age, I would need to leave the island, because there is no secondary school education on the island, or I would need to pay €100 per week to a stranger to take care of my child on the mainland and get a grant, or establish a whole other household on the mainland and have two places for one family.

As for transport, I do not have a car. We do not have a public transport service on Inisbofin, for example, because it is way too expensive and non-viable from the insurance perspective as the tourism season is limited. Thankfully, I have good neighbours who help me out but every time I need to go to do the so-called "big shop" in Clifden, I pay a total of €50 to get there and back by ferry and taxi.

All of these things are linked but hopefully with collaboration some of the things mentioned by Deputy Ó Cuív, for example, could be solved in the future.

Denis Naughten (Roscommon-Galway, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Ms Rantala who gave us a lot of food for thought in her final contribution. One of the issues the committee is looking at is performance indicators within the Department of Social Protection. The committee feels the current performance indicators do not accurately reflect the objectives the Government has or the things that should be measured by the Department. If the witnesses have any thoughts or suggestions on how those performance indicators could reflect one or two of the key indicators of the sustainable development goals, the committee would be very interested in hearing from them regarding that. The committee does not want an off-the-cuff comment on it, it would like some thought put into it because this has major implications for delivery within the Department. It is a work stream the committee is working on, so the witnesses might come back to the committee on that.

That concludes our public session. I thank all of the witnesses for their evidence and written submissions and for their patience in terms of us getting around to all of the contributors. I thank them for taking the time to inform the committee and provide evidence.

The committee will go into private session to consider other business.