Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

1. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the social policy and public service reform division of his Department. [5375/19]

Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

2. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the social policy and public service reform division of his Department. [6557/19]

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

3. To ask the Taoiseach if he will report on the work of the social policy and public service division of his Department. [7980/19]

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 3, inclusive, together.

The role of the social policy and public service reform division is to assist me as Taoiseach and the Government in delivering on the programme for Government objective of public policies and services which drive a socially inclusive and fair society and to assist in renewing and transforming the public service. The division assists the work of Cabinet committees B, E and G and the associated senior officials' groups. Cabinet committee B covers social policy and public services, including education, children, social inclusion, the Irish language, arts and culture and continued improvements and reform of public services. Cabinet committee E deals with issues related to health, including the delivery of health service reforms. Cabinet committee G provides for political oversight of developments in relation to justice and equality issues, including implementation of the Government's programme of reform in the areas of justice and policing.

The division also promotes the Civil Service renewal programme, including the Civil Service Management Board, and assists in the delivery of Our Public Service 2020 through membership of the Public Service Leadership Board and the public service management group. The division has departmental oversight of the National Economic and Social Council and advances Dublin's north east inner city initiative, including through its programme office, programme implementation board and oversight group. The division incorporates the programme for Government office monitoring the implementation of the commitments contained in the programme for Government across all Departments and ensures all departmental strategy statements reflect the programme commitments for which that Department is responsible.

In addition, a policing reform implementation programme office has recently been established within the division. The office will drive the implementation of the policing reform plan entitled, A Policing Service for the Future, which was approved and published by the Government in December 2018. The division also provides me with briefing and speech material on social policy and public service reform issues and participates in relevant interdepartmental committees and other groups.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Taoiseach for his reply. Among other things, the division handles health policy. I have a few particular questions in that regard. The Department of Health's acute policy unit was in communication with the division and the Taoiseach's officials on the national children's hospital contract from November 2018. The relevant emails have been released to us. Was it only after an awareness of escalating costs emerged in the public sphere that the unit asked for and received updates on cost overruns? Was there no monitoring or communication in advance of November 2018 on this major health and infrastructural project? The Taoiseach might explain to the House how the division monitors matters and ensures issues which should be brought to his attention and that of the Government are communicated.

2 o’clock

I also have a question on the general issue of Government and public service reform, which was an integral part of the agenda of the last Government of which both the Taoiseach and I were members. Is that running? The Taoiseach will recall the raft of legislation that was introduced, ranging from freedom of information updates to the registering of lobbying and everything that flowed from that. Is there still the same focus on reform?

Finally, has there been any advance in respect of Ireland's membership of the Open Government Partnership? Again, that was an important initiative undertaken under the previous Government. How is that process advancing?

Mary Lou McDonald (Dublin Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Last year the Government spent a staggering €695 million on rent subsidies to private landlords and property owners across four schemes administered by two Departments. The Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection spent €175 million on the rent supplement scheme and the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government spent €100 million on long-term leased properties, €143 million on four year rental accommodation scheme leases and €276 million through the housing assistance payment, HAP, scheme. One might argue that this demonstrates the need and demand and is a symptom of the Government's more general failure in the housing area, but spending these very large sums does not represent good value for the taxpayer. To put it in perspective, the total budget allocation to local authorities to build and buy new homes last year was just over €560 million. That is almost 20% less than the sum paid to private landlords, which hardly makes sense.

While subsidies for low income households are an important part of any stable housing system, they should be short-term and declining in number and cost. Instead, the figures highlight the Government's over-reliance on the private rental sector to meet long-term housing need while at the same time underinvesting in social housing. We should also note the very insecure nature of rental accommodation for people now, due to the Government's negligence. These policies must be urgently reviewed and a plan must be put in place to reduce the number of subsidised tenancies in the private rental sector. This will only be achieved through a significant increase in the capital budget for local authorities and approved housing bodies to build and buy permanent social housing.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In the debate later on the motion of no confidence in the Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, we will discuss the litany of failures in the area of health. However, the one I cannot understand and which the Government does not appear to wish to resolve given the casual indifference it is displaying is the series of strikes taking place in the national ambulance service. There was one last Friday and there will be others on 28 February and 1 March. It would not cost a penny to resolve this, but the Government appears to be totally uninterested. It is about union recognition and the right of hundreds of ambulance drivers to be in the union of their choice, in this case the National Ambulance Service Representative Association, NASRA, branch of the Psychiatric Nurses Association, PNA. Can the Taoiseach explain why he would not wish to act to resolve this by simply accepting people's right to be in a union of their choice and to be recognised in that union in the context of something as critical as the delivery of an ambulance service?

In addition, will the Taoiseach comment on Mr. Owen Keegan's comments in The Sunday Business Postabout homeless accommodation acting as a magnet for the homeless? They were staggering comments. Does that reflect the Government's thinking? Whatever debate we may have on the success or otherwise of the Government's housing policy surely the Taoiseach would accept that the State is failing people who are homeless or who are waiting ten or 15 years on housing lists. The State should be somewhat apologetic and show a little humility in the face of that failure, rather than victim blaming and suggesting that emergency accommodation for the homeless is an attractive option for people in desperate housing need.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Access to public services is still a major issue for many people across the country. Over half a million people are waiting for hospital appointments and there are 10,000 homeless people, but the waiting list for special needs assessments is particularly damaging for the children on that list. We know that early diagnosis can mean more effective early intervention particularly with therapies such as physiotherapy, occupational therapy, audiology and speech and language therapy, yet thousands of children are waiting for an early needs assessment and their rights are not being realised. I raised this in the context of the last budget to get additional posts appointed, but one wonders whether the division in the Taoiseach's Department has alerted him and the Government to the emergency in that area alone. It is simply unacceptable that parents of young children are at the end of their tethers trying to get an assessment, diagnosis and proper intervention. This has been going on for a long time and the lists have been growing to unacceptable levels over the last two to three years. Will the Taoiseach respond on the level of awareness in his Department, particularly in the social policy and public service reform division, of that issue alone?

Many commitments have been made with regard to the safe access Bill. This Bill would prevent any planned protests or interference with women who are trying to access termination services. Any reasonable person would agree that no woman should be intimidated if she attends a hospital or a GP surgery. Last December, the Minister for Health pledged to bring forward legislation to provide for exclusion or safe zones around premises that women would be attending. That is well intentioned but that approach ran into difficulties in the United Kingdom. Given that we do not have abortion-specific clinics here, are there legal issues in that regard? The United Kingdom tried to introduce a similar Bill but it encountered legal difficulties. Will that arise here? Can the Taoiseach give an indication of when the Bill will be published?

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On the initial question Deputy Howlin asked on health, I have not seen any of the emails he mentioned. I presume they are emails between officials rather than emails to which I was a party-----

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

-----so I am unable to comment on their content. However, the monitoring of the capital plan, the national development plan and the implementation and delivery of Project Ireland 2040 is done by both the line Department or agency that is responsible for a project and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, which has overall oversight of the delivery of the capital programme. It is not done by my Department. We have a system, however, whereby a Department can make me and my office aware of a problem. That is the early warning system which is carried out at Secretary General or Minister-to-Minister level. I often receive early warnings of things that may or may not happen through that system, but did not about the children's hospital.

I will have to get an update on the Open Government Partnership for Deputy Howlin. He was very enthusiastic about it when he was a Minister and we were making progress on it, but I am not up-to-date on it. When I get the update I will pass it on to him.

The Government's policy on housing is to increase the stock of social housing, and we are doing that. It is the best way to reduce reliance on rent supplements and HAP into the future. It has to be scaled up because for a long time very few houses were built by the State. That is changing. The figures produced today by the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government show that approximately 8,500 new homes were added to the social housing stock last year. Roughly half of those were built by local authorities and affordable housing bodies such as the Iveagh Trust, Clúid Housing Association and so forth.

The other half consisted of voids brought back into use, houses purchased by local authorities or affordable housing bodies and houses that were leased for the long term. This represents a very considerable increase in the social housing stock. I do not know when the last time was that the social housing stock was increased by 8,500. It could be a very long time ago. Of the 18,000 new houses and apartments built last year, roughly 4,500, or 20%, were built by the State. Again, I am not sure when the last time was that the State built 20% of the homes in the country but we need to be at that kind of level, going from 18,000 a year up to something closer to 35,000 and increasing our social housing stock by approximately 10,000 homes a year. Obviously, if the social housing stock is increased by 10,000 homes a year, it will be increased by 100,000 homes in a decade. This would be a considerable step change in the amount of social housing and public housing we have, and that is what we plan to do.

In talking about the budget mix, we always need to bear in mind the difference between capital and current. As a long-term investment, building or purchasing houses and adding them to the social housing stock makes more sense than HAP or rent supplement. On a very logical and micro basis, however, it must be borne in mind that it may cost €150,000 to build a new home from scratch for a family in need of social housing but that for the same amount of money one could rent ten houses. For the same amount of money spent in one year, therefore, one could house one family or ten. When one is faced with huge demand for housing and huge housing need, it often makes more sense to house the ten families rather than the one, even if one takes the 20-year view that it would be cheaper to house the one and not the ten, if that makes any sense.

Regarding Owen Keegan's comments the other day, I do not believe that anyone chooses to be homeless. Certainly, I do not think any children are homeless by choice. There are really two main causes of homelessness, in particular family homelessness: one is family breakdown, which I do not think is a choice; the other is a notice to quit being issued by a landlord who is renovating, moving back into or selling on the property. Again, that is not a choice made by the tenant in respect of whom the notice to quit has been issued. Therefore, if there are people who are making themselves homeless to skip the queue or to avail of services, I imagine they are very few and far between and are exceptional cases. I therefore do not agree with Mr. Keegan's comments. It was interesting, however, that in the debate that was held there was wide agreement from Owen Keegan to Mike Allen of Focus Ireland that homeless services had improved considerably in Ireland and in Dublin in recent years. This is happening through the development of the family hub programme. Hubs are much better for all kinds of reasons than shelter accommodation, bed and breakfast accommodation or hotels. I refer to the availability of the HAP place-finder, for example, and the additional social and other supports that are provided to people who find themselves homeless. It was good that while there was disagreement on what Owen Keegan had to say, there was widespread agreement, from NGOs to political parties, that homeless services had improved very considerably in Dublin in recent years. It was good to hear that acknowledged.