Labhrás Ó Murchú (Fianna Fail)

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I compliment him on the work done in the area of mental health. In many ways the Minister of State is the human face of corporate government. It is relevant to touch on that aspect of his portfolio today.

Over the years the issue of suicide has been raised several times on the Order of Business in this House. This generally reflected some experience some Member had in his or her community in the preceding days. Most of us have experienced suicide in our communities. We often ask whether people close to the person who died by suicide observed anything in the person's behaviour relevant to the suicide. In most cases we are told there was nothing, that the person, usually young males but sometimes females, was quite normal. We often ask ourselves whether something could have been done to help the young person. There is severe trauma for a family in that position whose members continually ask the same question over and over again.

Many speakers have dealt with fundamental issues such as the changes that have taken place in society and family structures, the difficulties facing young people, drugs and alcohol, etc. We welcome the national strategy, but as I am sure most people agree, it remains to be tested. While it is important we have a strategy, we must build a bridge between it and the changes taking place in society. We cannot deal with the issue in isolation or without looking at how community and society have changed.

Recently, Professor Puttnam, an adviser to former President Clinton, came here from Boston's Harvard University. He spoke about how communities had disintegrated in America and pointed out that the same thing was happening in Ireland and in most developed countries. We did not really need him to tell us this because there is nobody in this Chamber who has not thought the same at some stage, but we have felt particularly helpless about doing anything about it.

Two or three decades ago, at the start of what might be regarded as the "new liberated generation", people were particularly cautious about making any comment that might cast them as being out of touch or not politically correct. Having come through that so-called liberated period, many of that generation now comment on what they were deprived of in their lives. Most often they were deprived of an anchor at a time they needed it most. The title of this strategy, Reach Out, is significant in this regard. Often we acquiesce and do not examine what is happening in society, particularly with regard to the media, entertainment, education pressures and the various challenges facing people today. We should try to revisit what Tony Blair calls basics but what I would term fundamentals.

We can speak out now. I do not believe we will be castigated for asking ourselves to review the good progress we have made and, at the same time, what we have lost in the process. Senator Brady was right to say that we must provide particular amenities, sporting, artistic and cultural. In fairness, in our new found affluence most Governments have focused on doing something in this regard.

There is something else we must bear in mind and that is the terrible trauma that attaches to suicide. It was wrong to stigmatise suicide, because that added to a family's trauma. However, we must be careful that we do not glorify suicide. I know of situations where well-meaning people brought classmates together on the death of a young person through suicide and where almost a celebration took place. We must be particularly careful that we do not bring the wrong influence on young people in this regard. Young person dying by suicide are crying out for help, but they also seem to expect to be at their own funeral. They expect to experience the response to that cry. It is important, therefore, that we do not glorify suicide. We need to discuss this aspect of suicide openly through fundamental education so that young people are not drawn into the belief that by taking their life they will be celebrated later by their peer group. I was surprised when I heard of some of these gatherings, although I believe those who organised them were well-meaning.

The point I make now is not intended as a response to Senator Norris. In some way I am responding to a debate we had here this morning on the Order of Business. I will not go into the particular issues involved. We should not overlook that fact that over past decades the church — all churches — provided a positive service to young people. The more faith is diminished or diluted, the more we remove confidence and hope from young people at the time they need it most. I do not want to sound as if I am giving a sermon, but I believe this is relevant. Senators Ryan and Cummins touched on this same issue. If we do not give young people a basis for hope in this world and the next, we will take away a tool which can help them and which helped previous generations. I hope we do not castigate the agencies and groups which helped us in the past.

The strategy must interact with all the elements mentioned today and take cognisance of the broader issues. It highlights the fact that suicide is such a complex issue that one cannot focus exclusively on any one section or item. It is a starting point based on a positive rather than a pessimistic approach. It is for this reason that we must all welcome it but we must also understand it and try to play an active role.