Dan Boyle (Green Party)

I was first elected to a local authority in 1991, the first year of former President Mary Robinson's term of office. The platform on which President Robinson was elected included a promise to instigate sponsorship of an architect's scheme for accommodation for the travelling community. This marked one of the first occasions I was exposed, as an elected representative, to the issue of housing Travellers. While the scheme proved successful, unfortunately the targets set out at the time in Government policy were not reached either then or subsequently. Despite the efforts of successive Governments, we have failed to meet targets on accommodation. I remember Deputy Liz McManus, in her role as Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, introducing another accommodation scheme for Travellers which, unfortunately, did not attain the desired objectives.

When speaking about the role of the Traveller community in society we must acknowledge it has fewer basic services available to it than other sections of the community. For example, Travellers face problems in the areas of housing, life expectancy and educational attainment but society fails to recognise these problems because of prejudice and ignorance. I note the Order of Business featured a pre-emptive discussion about the role of local authority members as electors to the House and the importance of ensuring we do not upset them. Sometimes the House has a duty to speak out when local authority members step out of line and express sentiments based purely on ignorance and prejudice. Senators do not fulfil this duty often enough.

In acknowledging the increase in the resources made available to address problems in the Traveller community and improvements in the quality of Traveller housing, we must also accept that a considerable amount of work remains. While I am loth to admit it, the ignorance and prejudice surrounding this issue necessitate a bipartisan approach of the kind referred to by Senator Harris on the Order of Business. To do otherwise would invite those with small minds and narrow visions to dominate a debate on an issue for which we, as a society, have collective responsibility. While having statements in the House in a proper context could help in this regard, ultimately it is a matter of having the collective will and necessary resources to meet the targets we have failed to attain thus far. If we have any conscience, as members of an elected assembly, we would not allow these problems to persist.