Micheál Martin (Cork South-Central, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

There are a number of questions there. Deputy McAuliffe started on the model that has been developed in the north east, and there is something similar in Ballymun. I have asked my officials to look at broadening that model out to certain areas, as we had before. In previous times, under the former Minister, Pat Carey, or Noel Ahern and others, going back to Pat Rabbitte’s time, the drug task forces were established in about 12 areas across the country. I have seen at first hand the impact of the north east inner city initiatives. They have been quite impactful and effective. I would be interested in progressing through the work in the Department of An Taoiseach and the sustainability of those models. They do not yield results immediately. When we establish these models we should be clear they are there for the long haul as a constant intervention. That is very important.

Deputy Connolly raised the specifics of family homelessness. Family homelessness is a very significant issue in terms of child poverty. It is something we need to focus on very keenly over the coming months, which we will do. I will look at the Galway situation because those figures are quite high. The objective is to get people out of emergency accommodation as quickly as we can. There were about 8,500 more social houses built last year and, on top of that, a couple of thousand more leased or acquired. We have had a higher number of social housing units coming on stream in the past three to four years than we have had since the 1970s. There is an issue, then, with regard to what is happening. The dynamic is changing. There is a complexity to the composition of homelessness today that was not there five or ten years ago - certainly ten years ago. If you look at the raw data at the moment, it does not say anything. Some 50% of those homeless now are either EU or non-EU citizens. There needs to be a greater analysis of why that is happening. I was talking to homeless organisations during the week. There is a need for greater analysis of the trends that are creating a lot of pressures in the homelessness area. No one should be there for two years. They should be exited much quicker than two years.

Deputy Paul Murphy raised an issue which we dealt with during Leaders’ Questions. I believe what happened was fundamentally wrong. I do not believe a public inquiry is the way to do it. I have looked back over the years since 1997. If you look at all the inquiries that have been conducted across the board in different areas, €500 million has been spent on inquiries. The House needs to think about that. People get very annoyed, and rightly so, about individual projects that might cost €1 million of an overrun and they talk about value for money, yet we willingly come in here every week and we say we want an inquiry into different areas. Inevitably, these inquiries last years. They do not give you closure and they do not give victims the closure they want. They cost millions of euro. I do not mean this in any negative way towards the legal profession but there are huge fees involved. We need to ask ourselves honestly the question of whether a public inquiry is now the first course of resort as opposed to being one of last resort. I think HIQA is doing a good job here. Maybe HIQA is the vehicle if there are further issues. We have two other reports to come and we should then look at those three reports in their entirety. We have to look at other mechanisms to get the basic facts surrounding any given situation. It does not necessarily mean a public inquiry that will last years, and, believe me, it will last years. Look at Siteserv. I think Deputy Murphy was in the House at the time. He will recall how there was meant to be ten modules and it took us years to get one. We had Project Eagle. It cost millions. It came out of this House. What did it come up with? It did not see anything untoward at the end after all of that. The institutions that we set up to investigate things must be better and must do their job. Otherwise, what is the point of having GSOC, HIQA, the Health and Safety Authority and various other bodies if we bypass all of them and say we are going for the inquiry or a commission of investigation? At the moment there could be six or seven issues on the agenda in respect of which a Government Minister will be asked to hold an inquiry. I understand where people are coming from – they want answers – but sometimes they are led to believe that the inquiry is the preferred route to an answer. It is not the preferred route, I think, having experienced so many of them leading to such disappointment when they are published and at such enormous cost. There is also an ethical question of whether a lot of those resources should be allocated to the children in need today. Tusla needs more resources. Children with special needs today need resources. Children in poverty need resources. These are fundamental questions that we, as politicians, should take on the responsibility of asking. The funding will not be there for everything. There is prioritisation involved here. There may be an inquiry in 20 years time about the neglect of certain kids under the care of Tusla – I just picked that out; there may not be – or it could be on other matters. These are legitimate. That is all I would say. HIQA, for example, did the report into CervicalCheck, or Dr. Scally did, and did a good job there. It is a good illustration of how there might be other ways of getting to the truth faster and with the victims in mind.

On Deputy Gannon’s question, the Minister for Justice has brought that through Cabinet, Valerie’s law. I hope that with the co-operation of the House we can get that progressed as quickly as possible. I cannot give a timeline on that.

I join with Deputy Ó Murchú in sending best wishes, as I did earlier, to Deputy Boyd Barrett. This is certainly a platform that he enjoyed utilising quite a lot, effectively and with impact, and we wish him well.

Deputy Ó Murchú raised the issue of child poverty, as did others, including Deputy McGreehan.

I would hope that the budget becomes the focal point for dealing with child poverty and children with special needs in terms of income-related decisions. That will mean the targeting of funding to those who need it most. The SILC data is not good in that consistent poverty went up from 4% to 8%, although the overall deprivation index came down a small bit. We have to be prepared to target resources through social protection to children in poverty and children with special needs. As Taoiseach, I am responsible for this unit and intend to co-ordinate that with the Departments of Social Protection, Education and Health to make sure we target our resources, so we make a definitive impact on children in poverty and children with special needs.

Deputy Lahart's was a very good idea on the well-being side. On DEIS Plus, at the moment there are about 1,200 schools under DEIS, covering about 260,000 students. About €180 million of targeted support is allocated annually to the DEIS programme. There is a need to target that more to DEIS Plus in respect of intergenerational trauma and intergenerational poverty, which was spoken about, and the idea of predictability.

In the north-east inner city good work has been done in the early years on multidisciplinary therapy provision, which has helped children enormously in terms of reducing anxiety. As was said, they are then prepared to learn and are in a position to learn once they go into the classroom. That is something we are very keen to do.

Deputy Bacik raised the issue of homelessness. I have dealt with that generally.

See this speech in context