Victor Boyhan (Independent) | Oireachtas source

There is going to be a general election called within the next day or two. I have three asks: three reoccurring themes that I have worked on for many years in my time here in Seanad Éireann. The political parties are now going about their manifestos and making promises and commitments. Not all of them will enter into the new or eventual programme for Government. It has always been a source of disappointment to me that the majority of Members in this House could not see the way to supporting the inclusion of children who were farmed out from State institutions to farmlands, who had an awful ordeal. Many of them have come in to see us and talk to us. Only last week I was involved in a documentary that was filmed in my house. I was asked what were the great highs and lows of my time in the Seanad. I had to say that while I had many highs and am happy and looking forward to coming in here again, my lowest moment was the time when we could not see fit to unite together to bring in support for children below six months in terms of some fair redress. When I talk about redress, I mean social supports, health supports, counselling and housing. I am not talking about money. There has to be an acknowledgement. It is deeply sad for the individuals locked out of the system. We will have other opportunities and must move on and be pragmatic. I ask that parties seek to include that in their manifestos and eventually in the programme for Government.

The next issue is about honouring commitments. We know many people and parties committed to the abolition of the universal social charge, USC. We know that low-paid workers are suffering and having to pay what was a temporary tax. I took the time to google a number of political posters and campaign slogans today. Clearly I could see the faces of many politicians, many of whom are now gone but many of whom remain here. I ask that they make it another priority. I certainly intend canvassing for a number of candidates in this general election and I have already encouraged them to raise the issue at the doors and in the media.

Finally, I call for the establishment of a national forestry authority. Clearly we need one. I acknowledge the work of the Minister of State, Senator Hackett, but I believe we need a progressive forestry business model. We need to improve the scale of planting and the delivery for forestry. We need to eliminate disincentives and anomalies. We need to review the tax policies around forestry. We need to embrace the private and public sectors. That can only happen under a stand-alone national forestry authority. We need to address ash dieback. Let us look also at the current legislation which imposes replanting obligations which tie down landowners. We must be flexible in terms of our land use.

I will finish on those three asks. Can we work together to incorporate them into the manifestos? Can we endeavour to get them over the line for the programme for Government?