Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Social Democrats) | Oireachtas source

The Social Democrats supported the Act passed earlier in the year. In theory, we are happy to do so again, but it is very difficult to come to a definitive position on it given the lack of information. The proposals in the Act are very wide-ranging and have the potential to cause difficulties. It would have been helpful for some kind of assessment of the impact of the measures to date to have been carried out in order to ascertain whether there have been any issues raised or difficulties. It would have been reasonable to carry out some kind of review before coming back to the House seeking a further extension. I have not heard of any issues arising, but it would have been good to hear from the Mental Health Commission, for example, as to whether that is the case. To a large extent, the House is being asked to agree to the motion blind, without any information or advice regarding the impact of the Act to date. That is not a good way of doing business.

As previous speakers noted, when extending a sunset clause, there must have a date for that sunset. It is very difficult to understand why the Government has not set a new date before the House. I hope that it will, by the end of today, set a date for when the application of these measures will cease. That is a proper safeguard which should have been included by now.

All Deputies are very aware of the fact that there has been an explosion in problems associated with mental health. There were many pressing needs pre-Covid and an under-delivery of services. Members are aware that in recent years there has been an under-resourcing of mental health services to the point that at the start of the year there were very extensive waiting lists, particularly for young people. There were significant waiting lists for child and adolescent mental health services, CAMHS, psychology services and so on, and an under-provision of those services. In the seven or eight months since then, all the indications are that the demand for services has multiplied. For that reason, it is important that the view of mental health experts is taken into consideration in any decisions relating to restrictions arising from Covid. I am not aware whether any of the key decision makers in all of this, and certainly the nine or ten people who were involved in the deliberations last Saturday and came to the conclusion to move to level 5, have any expertise in psychology, behavioural science or anything of that nature. It is a real gap in the decision-making in the context of the House being asked to extend restrictions and the powers of the State to enforce those restrictions.

However, very little thought is being given to human nature, human needs and psychology. That is the other side of this. It is not always possible to take a law enforcement approach to these issues. We need to consider what people's needs are. People need to see that the restrictions, while severe, are reasonable at the same time. Many questions are being asked about those restrictions. Earlier in the week we were discussing social contact. People living alone should have been accommodated from the beginning and allowed some measure of social contact. It is unreasonable not to allow that.

Some of the measures introduced need to be explained. For example, many older people like to go out and play golf. It is a very healthy activity and is good for physical and mental health. It is very hard to understand why there is a ban on that now. We need to give consideration to human nature and human needs and allow for social contact. That is a real gap in the entire decision-making process.

See this speech in context