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

It is difficult to scrutinise figures that are mainly inherited from the Taoiseach's predecessor but I want to flag something from the record of the past for the future. On the €20 million Covid communications Estimate, it is perfectly understandable that communications during the pandemic would be substantial. However, we know from experience with the Taoiseach's predecessor that a considerable amount of taxpayers' money was put into the strategic communications unit, which came in for strong criticism during the time of Project Ireland 2040, the national planning framework. That episode remains a brazen misuse of State funds to paint the ruling party in government in a positive light. The Taoiseach will recall the public disquiet, and indeed a Dáil motion supported by his party, Fianna Fáil, that eventually saw the end of the spin unit. At the time, he spoke of "a huge danger of the blurring of the demarcation lines between bona fide departmental campaigns and full-blooded political campaigns." My plea to the Taoiseach is that we learn from the mistakes of the past and do not repeat them and that the communications budget should never again be used to present a Government or a party of the Government of the day in any sort of a glorious or positive light. It should be used to impart actual information to the public. I am asking the Taoiseach for a commitment from his Government that he will depart from that practice of the past and will not use the budget of communications to advance any Government party or even put the Government in a good light.

I have two other questions for the Taoiseach. One is on the budget for commissions of investigation and tribunals of inquiry, for which two figures totalling approximately €8.6 million were given. If I am not wrong, the Taoiseach mentioned three investigations but did not mention any budget for an independent inquiry into the death of Shane O'Farrell. I remember clearly his party campaigning for a motion, which was passed here and voted for by the Taoiseach's party, that there be an independent public inquiry into the death of that young man. What does the Taoiseach intend to do about this? Is he now turning his back on Lucia O'Farrell, whom his party met time and again, and the commitment he gave her in regard to an inquiry into her son's death?

While I have the floor, I will return to an issue which the State views as a complex and structural question but one which is, in fact, straightforward. I am referring to the views the Taoiseach expressed this morning in response to a question by Deputy McDonald on extending maternity leave and benefit. This is an issue of equality for mothers and for children. Those whose maternity leave was utterly disrupted and damaged by the Covid pandemic need to be looked after. I cannot understand the reason the Taoiseach and his predecessor seem to be determined to turn this into a most complex and difficult question to address. The previous Government addressed, and I am sure the Taoiseach's Government will continue to try to address, even more complex matters related to the pandemic, whether payments to businesses, workers or farmers or payments for health. Why has this become such a convoluted issue given that it is necessary? I put it to the Taoiseach that his answer to Deputy McDonald earlier was no different from the answers we were given previously by the Tánaiste, Deputy Leo Varadkar, when he was Taoiseach, the former Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, and the previous Ministers for Justice and Equality and Employment Affairs and Social Protection. We have been around the houses on this issue. I ask the Taoiseach not to do that again and to deliver instead some kind of an answer and show the sense of urgency this matter deserves because the clock is ticking for these mothers and their babies. It appears to us, to the women outside the gate this morning and to everybody else that the Taoiseach's regime seems to be unable to distinguish itself on this issue. Is the future of this Government to be that, on key questions, it is unable to distinguish itself from the past?

See this speech in context