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

Last Friday, the community in Finglas came together for Grace Lynch's funeral, to mourn her, to remember her, to stand by her devastated family, and to say clearly that the days of their neighbourhood being terrorised are over. It is hard to describe the convulsion of grief in Finglas that day - a family utterly bereft and the sobs of young people.

Finglas is just one of the communities that have been terrified, harassed and intimidated for years now by those using scramblers for antisocial behaviour and criminal activity. Finglas is just one of the neighbourhoods that have, literally, been terrorised by people on scramblers threatening residents and feeling they could do what they want when they want. Stories of gardaí being taunted by hoods on scramblers are all too common. It happens because they know that the gardaí have their hands tied behind their backs, powerless to stop and apprehend scramblers even as they pose such a threat and danger to people.

Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael in government have failed to act, failed to get a grip on what was a very evident and worsening problem for our communities across Dublin and beyond. It is unforgivable that it took the death of Grace Lynch for the Government to sign the regulation to give the Garda the power to get scramblers off our streets and out of our communities. In fact, it sat there gathering dust for more than two years, even as communities continued to endure the scourge of scramblers. The Tánaiste himself has admitted that he cannot give a satisfactory explanation as to why this happened. I wonder whether the Taoiseach can.

I really hope the new regulation brought to Cabinet today will be some small comfort to Grace's heartbroken parents and to her community. I sincerely hope that today genuinely marks the start of the change that is so desperately required. I hope this is the start of the Government getting its act together and really taking the fight to those who are using scramblers to make life a misery for so many. However, law and regulations on their own will mean nothing if they are not backed up by enforcement. It is all well and good having laws and regulations and making promises, but if gardaí on the ground do not have the tools they need to get the job, then we are at nothing. Speaking this morning, the Minister of State, Deputy Canney, was very unclear as to how all of this would be enforced. He was unable to answer or clarify even the most basic of matters. He was unable to articulate what difference these laws and regulations will make.

We need this clarity now from the Taoiseach today on the floor of the Dáil.

Will he specifically outline what additional resources, equipment and specialist training the Garda will be given to enforce the law and get these scramblers off our streets? Will he specifically answer what new powers the Garda will be given to successfully pursue and apprehend scramblers? What new power will the Garda have to seize and destroy scramblers? When will the urgently needed code of practice be in place to allow the Garda to use drones in the fight against scramblers? The public and communities need answers. A law without enforcement and resources will not work. We know the real test of these laws will not be found in announcements and promises but in the difference they make on our streets, in our communities and in the lives of those who have been plagued by scramblers.

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

Without question, the criminal and antisocial behaviour of many in certain communities in our capital city and certain other locations is absolutely unacceptable. Every single resource will be made available to An Garda Síochána to deal with those who are breaking the law on an ongoing basis. Gardaí have the powers and do not have their hands tied behind their backs, actually. They have significant powers. The Garda Commissioner has confirmed with the Minister for justice his intention to take intensive action in specific locations where there have been repeated breaches of the law and dangerous use of scramblers.

There is already a body of legislation in respect of scramblers and other vehicles. The majority of scramblers are illegal in terms of their use on public roads, particularly those that are not taxed and do not have a licence. The Garda has powers to dispose of a seized vehicle six weeks after the date of detention. However, the 2023 Act was introduced because a number of Deputies, particularly Deputies McAuliffe and Lahart on the Government side, asked us to bring in further measures. As a result of the 2023 Act, and the sections that were commenced in that Act, it became an offence to drive dangerously in any location, not just in public places, which had been the case prior to the 2023 Act. The Garda has the power as a result of the 2023 Act to seize vehicles being driven dangerously. The third aspect is that the Minister for Transport can make regulations to restrict certain vehicles or classes of vehicles in particular locations. The Minister has today brought a memorandum to Government and received sanction to bring in regulations that would give effect to that measure, irrespective of whether the vehicles are licensed or not, or whatever status they have. They will simply be banned. That will significantly enhance the Garda capacity to take these out of operation both in public parks and on public roads.

Fundamentally, these off-the-road scramblers are no longer just illegal for use in public places. It is illegal to drive them anywhere dangerously, even on private land. The Garda has full powers to seize a scrambler being driven dangerously. The Minister is going to give additional powers to not just seize and confiscate but also to destroy seized scramblers, to reduce the number of seized vehicles that could potentially end up back on our roads. This is a singular, focused approach to the commencement of these regulations. It is important that we give every power possible to the Garda to deal with this scourge that is particularly manifest in certain locations and communities by certain individuals. The Government will spare no effort in that. In addition, the Government will bring in regulations in respect of e-scooters, e-bicycles and so on to ensure there is greater protection. These will be preliminary measures in respect of e-scooters, potentially looking at further regulations thereafter.

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

Deputy Ellis first raised this in 2011 or 2012.

It was a problem then and, in the years that have followed, it has gotten worse and worse. I do not know whether the Taoiseach has any exposure to scramblers and this happening in his community and neighbourhood, but I do. It happens in Cabra and in the inner city, too. It is terrifying.

It is now too late for Grace Lynch, aged 16. Her life is gone. Unless there is enforcement - aggressive, rigorous enforcement - we run the serious risk of losing more lives, and that simply cannot happen. I asked the Taoiseach to specify what additional resources and capacity to pursue these offenders, such as any training or the use of drones, will be put in place. These are some of the essential elements. I ask the Taoiseach to please reassure people that he understands that enforcement has not been adequate and that he needs to fix that.

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

It is too late for Grace Lynch. It is absolutely shocking and extremely traumatic for the family and friends of Grace that what happened last week happened in the manner that it happened. What is essential is that every possible dimension of law is brought into being to prevent this insofar as we can in terms of human behaviour. The reckless use of scramblers by people in public parks and on public roads is something we simply have to stamp out.

The significant additional power is not the power to seize, which already exists, but to destroy scramblers that are seized.

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

How are they going to-----

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

There is also a very clear message, irrespective of whether a person has a licence. We must remember that the bulk of scramblers that are driven in this particular manner are illegal because they do not have any regulatory governance or licences. The drivers do not bother taking out tax. Those scramblers are illegal.

With regard to hot pursuit, that is a Garda policy issue but the Commissioner is clear that there will be very intensive action on that front.

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

That is not good enough.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On 4 October 2023, more than two years ago, I stood here and raised the disgraceful revelations that the HSE was sitting on a massive portfolio of vacant properties. Over 200 HSE-owned buildings and sites lay idle while the housing crisis tightened its grip on families. Back then, nearly 4,000 children were homeless and average rents for new tenancies stood at €1,590. Today, two years on, more than 5,000 children are without a home and rents for new tenancies have shot up to more than €1,700, and that is before the Government's so-called rent reforms come in. In the two years since the HSE was caught sitting on sites that could be turned into homes, Ireland's housing crisis has become ever more dire.

What did we learn just two days ago? In Monday's edition of the Irish Independent, it was reported the HSE still owns nearly 200 vacant properties, more than half of which are officially marked as surplus to requirement. These buildings were supposed to be converted into homes for people and families under the Government's last failed housing plan. Why has so little happened? The housing crisis is at emergency levels. Thousands of children are doing their homework in emergency accommodation. Our streets today are peppered with drenched sleeping bags, abandoned by people sleeping rough who have had to flee from the rain. People on good wages, like the man my office has been helping recently, are giving up hope of ever buying a home. He tells me he saw the one-bedroom apartment he viewed for sale reappear months later on daft.ie for rent, having been snapped up by institutional investors. That is a pattern we are seeing.

Yet, the HSE continues to give a bureaucratic shrug in the face of this national crisis. This cavalier approach, and it is not just the HSE, reflects something deeper, a Government dodging delivery. I looked back at the Taoiseach's response to me in 2023 on this question. In his reply, he told me to "get on to Dublin City Council". What a dismissive attitude to the issue of State-owned properties gathering dust while people are sleeping in doorways.

In my constituency, Dublin Bay South, just a few hundred metres from here, the Baggot Street hospital still lies empty, an eyesore reminding us of the continued vacancy and dereliction crisis ravaging Irish towns and cities. Over the past four years, I have called for it to be used as accommodation for refugees or healthcare workers or, indeed, for it to be converted into homes by the Land Development Agency, LDA.

However, the LDA tells me it has not even been offered the site by the HSE and now the HSE is putting a portion of it on the private market, with apparently no consideration of the public good.

It is not just the HSE, as I say. Across the State, public bodies are sitting on properties that could be transformed into safe and secure accommodation and homes. There is a human cost to vacancy. When will the Taoiseach confront the epidemic of vacancy and dereliction, particularly in State-owned properties? When will he lead a co-ordinated national effort to deliver the homes people need?

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

This is an important issue. I would just make the point that significant progress is being made on the housing front. There were 36,000 completions in 2025. That is a significant figure when we compare it with 2019 and 2020, when we were building just about 20,000 per annum. Then Covid-19 intervened for a good two years after that. The measures we have taken in the last 12 months are having an impact, and the feedback on the market side, in terms of potentially increased private sector investment, is positive.

On the rent reform measures, and the Housing Commission-recommended reform of rent pressure zones, RPZs, it is interesting that the Labour Party shares the opposition of some large developers and so on who do not want this legislation to come through. I read The Irish Times last week. Certain leading developers and landlords felt that this measure was encroaching on their property. It shows the level of polemic, spin and shallow commentary in the absence of any substantive and decent debate on these issues.

Gerald Nash (Louth, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We disagree.

Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is it the Opposition's fault that the Government cannot build houses?

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

On one level, developers are saying that the RPZ reform is an encroachment on their constitutional rights, while the Labour Party is saying that reform is trampling on rights.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is.

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

It is not.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not what we have said.

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

It is, and the Labour Party has been saying it consistently.

Conor Sheehan (Limerick City, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is going to put rents up.

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

Let us come to the HSE. It has about 190 vacant properties. We have been effective with the LDA in getting a lot of State property for significant housing developments already, and that work continues. The HSE has about 4,300 buildings at the moment in about 2,500 locations across the country. It is one of the largest property owners in the State and it has a very large portfolio. Of course, the properties range from small health centres in rural locations to very large acute hospitals. Some of them are pre-18th century buildings and others are modern, purpose-built facilities. That said, we have made it clear to the HSE that any properties that are surplus to requirement must be sold and the LDA has first call in respect of those.

About 168 of the properties are in disposal. They are surplus to the HSE's requirements and are in various stages of disposal. If a property is to be disposed of, a disposal strategy for the property is determined by the HSE on a case-by-case basis. Properties are disposed of on the open market and most have been disposed of via public auction. Twenty-two of the properties are vacant and under review. Those currently under review are being considered for retention and reuse by healthcare services.

The Deputy is complaining about the building on Baggot Street. It is being sold.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is being sold on the private market. That is the point.

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

What is wrong with that?

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I know they say attack is the best form of defence, so it is no surprise the Taoiseach chose to go on the attack and to mount an attack on the Labour Party, because he knows that Government policy on vacancy and dereliction is indefensible. He simply has no defence. It has patently failed. It is not just about publicly owned buildings. The Taoiseach and the Government have effectively conceded that the current system, including the derelict sites levy and the derelict sites register, is ineffective. I am looking at the Government's own up-to-date website, which promises to introduce a new derelict property tax. That is an initiative we supported. What are we seeing on the Government's own website? "A preliminary national register of derelict properties will be published in 2027, with the tax starting soon after." That is all the Government can commit to on its own website. The Government has flagged this many times as the key measure it is introducing to tackle vacancy and dereliction.

I think the Taoiseach agrees this is a scourge across the community. It is particularly a scourge where the buildings and sites are publicly owned - that is indefensible - but on the Government's own measures, there is no sense of urgency to bringing them in.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you, Deputy Bacik.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When will we see new derelict property tax? Will the Taoiseach tell us that?

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you, Deputy.

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

The most effective thing we did in terms of dereliction was the grants for restoring properties and houses that are derelict or vacant. Thousands of young families have benefited from those very generous grants we introduced and there was no great enthusiasm from the Deputy's side in respect of those grants. It does not even reference them.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We supported them.

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

That is positive. It is a proactive way of dealing with dereliction in rural and urban Ireland. The Derelict Sites Act is still in place. Limerick has been the best example. It demonstrated what can be done in terms of the derelict sites levy. Other local authorities were not as good as Limerick. The Government is saying we are putting Revenue in charge-----

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When?

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

-----but Revenue has to do a proper detailed mapping exercise with local authorities to get all of the properties properly identified and documented so that the levy can be applied correctly in an appropriate regulatory way.

Ivana Bacik (Dublin Bay South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no timeline.

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

Already, people are conscious of this.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

A Thaoiseach, time is up. I call Deputy Paul Murphy.

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

People are very conscious that Revenue is coming onto the scene. We are getting action already in advance of it.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In November 2012, Elon Musk wrote to Jeffrey Epstein: "What day/night will be the wildest party on your island?" Epstein was already at that point a convicted child abuser and Musk was looking for an invitation to the island where horrific child abuse by ultra-rich paedophiles took place. Musk has turned Twitter into a machine for the mass production of child sexual abuse imagery and image-based sexual abuse of women. We know the horrific, traumatising impact this abuse has on victims. It is why image-based sexual abuse, including through the use of deepfakes, was made criminal offence six years ago but the Government's approach to big tech appears to be see no evil, hear no evil.

When Deputy Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach if those in X responsible for enabling Grok to produce sexual abuse imagery would be arrested, he scoffed at the idea. He suggested that to do so would be like 1984. Yesterday, French prosecutors raided the offices of X in Paris as part of their investigation into its creation of child sexual abuse images and image-based sexual abuse of women. They have also summoned Elon Musk personally for questioning. Is it 1984 in Paris?

Last week, I questioned the Minister of State with responsibility for artificial intelligence about her engagement with X since this scandal broke. After she met X representatives, she put out a press release repeating X's claim that "Grok, as integrated on the X platform, has been disabled from removing or reducing clothing on individuals worldwide." I asked the Minister of State whether she had checked whether that was true. It turned out she had not checked and it was not true. X lied to the Minister of State and to the Government. Now, they are giving two fingers to this Parliament by refusing to attend a committee meeting today.

Right now, anyone in Ireland can still create sexual abuse imagery through X using a VPN. The Minister of State also told me that the Garda is criminally investigating private individuals who use Grok to create sexual abuse imagery but she said she did not know if any criminal investigations were under way into X itself. Is there a criminal investigation into X or is the State simply kicking the can to the European Commission instead of launching criminal investigations against the app it could under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 and the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2000? Both of those laws are crystal clear about the criminal liability of directors and officers of corporate bodies that distribute sexual abuse imagery. The Government is also failing to act to protect people from the torrent of toxic content coming at them from social media algorithms, including the promotion of misogyny, self-harm and eating disorders.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you, Deputy.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The only thing they care about is maximising profits by selling more ads online. That is why they have these toxic algorithms. Opinion polls show 68% of people want these toxic algorithms turned off.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you, Deputy.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Taoiseach support People Before Profit's Bill to do so?

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

I take offence at the Deputy's very dishonest portrayal of the Government's position in respect of this and his deliberate conflation of a different series of events to give the impression that the Government somehow condones the behaviour of X, Grok or Elon Musk. That is reprehensible political behaviour by him but it is par for the course all the time to distort the actual truth.

The French prosecutors are prosecuting. Our prosecutors are pursuing.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

X?

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

That is the point. The Garda has indicated there are up to 200 complaints and lines of inquiry. We do not interfere with prosecutors in this jurisdiction. We do not interfere with the Garda.

The Deputy has used another phrase, "kicking the can to" Europe. It is another dishonest betrayal of the reality. He knows the legislative framework as well as anybody else. The European Commission is responsible for the very large platforms, including X. It has opened an investigation in collaboration with, and working with, national regulators, in this context Coimisiún na Meán. When we met last week, Coimisiún na Meán gave us a comprehensive presentation on the work it has been doing on this and the degree to which it was co-operating and working with the European Commission, which I believe is essential. This is not about kicking the can.

We all have an obligation in here to lay out for the public the legal frameworks by which we can go after large platforms. There is no toleration of child abuse materials on any platform. There is no attempt by any Government to protect such proliferation of abuse material. After all, it was this House and the then Government in 1998 that brought in very far-seeing legislation in respect of the issue of the generation and dissemination of child abuse material. The 2020 Act is also very comprehensive in its coverage. The Attorney General is quite positive in terms of the depth and breadth of the 2020 Act regarding what it can deal with and what the prosecuting authorities can pursue in respect of that Act pursuant to the sharing of adult material generated on any platform, particularly and specifically the X platform here.

The Minister for Culture, Communications and Sport is meeting his French counterparts today in respect of this issue and will also introduce an age verification tool. Significant work is being done on that, initially on a pilot basis, to inform how we would do that on a nationwide basis. All potential measures are under review in terms of how we deal with social media-----

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Thank you Taoiseach. I call Deputy Murphy.

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

-----because we understand fully the very negative impact social media can have, and is having, on many children the length and breadth of the country.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Let me be clear: I am not saying the Government condones the production of sexual abuse material. I am saying it does not want to do anything about it because it does not want to annoy or harm its relationship with big tech and big tech investment here is more important to the Government than standing up to these people. That is what I am saying.

I want to ask a precise question. The State can, under the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 and the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020, take criminal action against X. We do not have to wait for the European Commission; we can take criminal action, as is happening in France.

Are the Garda investigations into X as opposed to people who may have used Grok to produce those images? Those people may well be liable for prosecution and should be prosecuted, which is fine. Is the investigation into X itself, which is the machinery that is being used to produce these images? We should return to a point where we turn off the toxic algorithms. Spain is taking action on the toxic algorithms. Will the Government agree with our Bill to turn them off by default for everybody and turn them off for all children?

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

The Deputy just made a reprehensible assertion at the commencement of his last comment. The idea that we would give priority to not standing up to big tech over the generation and sharing of child abuse material is an absolutely shocking and reprehensible assertion. How dare you?

Deputies:

Hear, hear.

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

Who the hell do you think you are? Do you have some moral superiority over everybody else? You do not have moral superiority over anybody else in this House. Everybody in this House is at one in terms of going after anybody who would generate and disseminate child abuse material, and the legislation is there to do that. The State does not get involved in a Garda investigation.

Politicians do not bring in the Garda and ask, "What are you doing in that investigation?" The Garda, under the law, is pursuing all aspects of the 1998 legislation where it is breached and the 2020 legislation, but particularly the 1998 legislation, to make sure there is absolutely full accountability before the law and before our courts in respect of this issue. I am thinking both domestically, in terms of our national laws, and-----

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

What about the algorithms?

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

-----in terms of the European Commission. It is important that the European Commission, on behalf of everybody within Europe, pursues X and the platform in respect of this.

Richard O'Donoghue (Limerick County, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Last week I spoke in this House about Jessica Sheedy, who died in University Hospital Limerick, UHL, and the case of Dr. Lal, who admitted to 13 counts of misconduct. That has been dealt with on its own. I see the Minister for justice is here as well. I also need his help on this. Today I want to talk to the Taoiseach and the Minister about the hospital management, who used non-disclosure agreements, NDAs, to silence people and to avoid accountability. I am aware of people in UHL who came forward with concerns well prior to Jessica Sheedy's operation. Those people were victimised, their careers would not excel and they might have to look for references. They were used to sign non-disclosure agreements. This is wrong.

Under the Maternity Protection, Employment Equality and Preservation of Certain Records Act 2024, NDAs are void when victimisation occurs, including harassment, sexual harassment or discrimination in relation to employment. Are those people who came forward in whatever hospital around this country protected under the 2024 Act where patients and the public were put at risk and NDAs were used to withhold information from inquiries and investigations? Why were the public and patients put at risk under people who were not competent to do their job? I have full respect for people in all parts of the medical profession who are competent at doing their job. Sometimes a mistake happens, but you learn from the mistake; you do not cover it up. Eight years it took to get the information out, for somebody to admit guilt - eight years. How many more non-disclosure agreements have been signed to prevent the course of justice? That is what I want to know. Will these people be fully protected under this Act if they come forward now? I do not want to hear, like others say, "You are 100% protected". We have heard that before where whistleblowers were involved. This time I need to know from the Government and I need an official response.

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

I thank the Deputy for raising the issue. Without question, there should be no cover-up in respect of any medical misadventure, any error or any wrongdoing. Hospitals and the medical community should own up immediately. That is good practice. It is unacceptable that for decades many families have had to go long periods endeavouring to find out the full truth in respect of what happened to their loved ones.

The Patient Safety (Notifiable Incidents and Open Disclosure) Act 2023, landmark patient safety legislation, was commenced in September 2024. It provides a legislative framework for a number of important patient safety issues, including the mandatory open disclosure of a list of specified serious patient safety incidents that must be disclosed to the patient and to their family. It was passed by both Houses and signed by the President in May 2023. It is to ensure that families and patients have access to comprehensive and timely information.

It is achieved by an open disclosure mechanism in the Act. It contributes to embedding a culture whereby clinicians in the health service as a whole engage openly, transparently and compassionately with patients and their families. The requirements apply to all healthcare bodies, including the HSE, all section 38 and section 39 organisations, private hospitals and private health and social care providers, such as GPs, dentists and pharmacists. The Act contains a provision by which the Minister can add to this list via regulation. Patients and their families must have access, as I have said, to comprehensive and timely information, including an apology where appropriate.

We have seen good examples recently from the chief executive officer, Bernard Gloster, who in a number of cases has changed the culture, it would appear to me, come forward, identified clear faults, and apologised himself publicly on behalf of the HSE in respect of significant wrongdoing and errors that have been made. The HSE has updated its national open disclosure policy. The Department and the HSE, in consultation with stakeholders, are currently finalising a revised HSE incident management framework that sets out how serious incidents are reviewed and learned from.

I am told that the Act was commenced, other than section 68. I do not have the specifics around that section with me, but that is what I have been told and the information I have here. The implementation of the Clarke report into the tragic death of Aoife Johnston at University Hospital Limerick also brought forward a number of significant improvements, supporting the implementation of key initiatives, such as the framework for safe nurse staffing and skill mix, the emergency medicine early warning system, updated sepsis guidelines and a new national quality improvement framework for emergency department triage and local escalation plans.

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Taoiseach. He can come back in. I call Deputy O’Donoghue.

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

Disciplinary action was also initiated in respect of that.

Richard O'Donoghue (Limerick County, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Management actions caused serious bodily harm and, in some cases, caused death. If there has been eight years of withholding information here, how many other cases like this have there been? The Taoiseach mentioned Aoife Johnston, God rest her soul. We have Jessica Sheedy as well. Management withheld information, had non-disclosure agreements signed and spent eight years with one case alone. That is obstructing the course of justice. This is my problem. They obstructed the course of justice. People and patients were put in harm’s way, and some people died.

If this was outside the remit of the health service, the Minister, Deputy Jim O’Callaghan, would have me up the steps and have me in prison now for obstruction of justice and serious bodily harm. You would be put in prison if you had done this. We have management that are still in place in this hospital-----

Verona Murphy (Wexford, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Deputy. I call the Taoiseach.

Richard O'Donoghue (Limerick County, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

-----who have covered up information that could have helped the learning in the hospital and saved lives, rather than covering it up. That is what I need to try to make sure of.

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

Historically, it is fair to say the cultural norm in medicine was not to disclose openly. Over time, that has changed, to be honest to all involved, but we still have a distance to go. We learn through error and medicine is not failure-proof, although the more you create a systemic approach to medicine, the less error you have. The cult of the miracle worker or of the brilliant person was always a challenge and a cultural challenge within health. It is a system-wide approach that reduces adverse incidents, bad practice and poor practice. We must have a systemic approach and the culture has to be all about that. In most of the training colleges now, it is all about that, with multidisciplinary teams working together and every person on that team being an important cog in the wheel to make sure the surgery or treatment of a condition goes properly. Open disclosure is the key to that. Non-disclosure agreements have no part in that.