Liam Quaide
Cork East · Social Democrats · Ireland
“The Department is not funding the teams. That is the main issue. There is a stark double standard here. In mainstream CAMHS, multidisciplinary staffing is treated as basic good practice.”
“I already established, earlier this year, that the staffing levels of CAMHS-ID teams across the country are abysmal. These are children and teenagers with very complex needs. They experience major challenges across all aspects of their daily lives, including with communication and learning.”
“I ask about CAMHS-ID services, which are specialist teams for children and adolescents with a moderate to profound intellectual disability and coexisting mental health difficulties. According to the HSE, and by its own admission, no CAMHS-ID team nationally is staffed to the level recommended in its own model of care.”
“This is a particularly vulnerable cohort of young people, and the lack of investment is particularly stark. The Minister of State should not look at me with an expression of incredulity because we have seen this across primary care and in child, adult and older adult mental health services. This is all out in the public domain.”
“Their needs are often more complex than those of young people attending standard CAMHS. I am asking the Minister of State for a clear commitment. When will the Government move beyond small, incremental additions year by year and fully fund CAMHS-ID teams in every region? When will that happen?”
“Worried, anxious, fearful, angry, afraid, powerless, terrified, scared, overwhelmed, abandoned, hopeless. Words like these came up again and again in a survey the Social Democrats conducted in the run-up to this motion.”
The complete record
Every one of 623 lines we hold for Liam Quaide, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 9 of 13.
“I move amendment No. 60: In page 75, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following: “(4) Where a child is involuntarily admitted to a registered adult acute mental health centre pursuant to an involuntary admission order under section 66 that this period shall be no longer than 72 hours.”. The significant decrease in the number of admissions of children to adult psychiatric wards is very welcome. However, the absence of legislative safeguards in the Bill leaves children vulnerable to this practice becoming more widespread again in the future. Notably, concluding observations from the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child expressed serious concern about Ireland's practice of admitting children to adult psychiatric units. The Bill should explicitly prohibit the admission of children to adult units.”
“(7) A person who contravenes this section or a rule made under this section shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding €5,000.”.”
“(4) Chemical restraint should be used only in exceptional circumstances, where there is no safe alternative and for as limited a time as possible. (5) Each approved inpatient facility will keep a register of the use of chemical restraint, and each use of chemical restraint shall be recorded in the register, and on the person’s clinical file, in addition to any other information required by the Commission, as set out in the Commission’s rules made under subsection (3) . (6) In this section, a “person” includes involuntary persons, intermediate persons and persons detained in the Central Mental Hospital or in a designated centre (within the meaning of the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006) but does not include voluntary persons.”
“I move amendment No. 52: In page 69, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following: “Chemical restraint 57. (1) In this section, “chemical restraint” means the use of medication to control or modify a person’s behaviour when no medically identified condition is being treated, or where the treatment is not necessary for the condition or the intended effect of the drug is to sedate the person for convenience or disciplinary purposes. (2) A person shall not apply chemical means of bodily restraint to a person unless such restraint is determined, in accordance with the rules made under subsection (3) , to prevent the person from injuring himself or herself or others and unless the chemical restraint complies with such rules. (3) The Commission shall make rules providing for the application of chemical restraint on a person.”
“They can then be subjected to disproportionate rates of chemical restraint when compared to other groups of service users. That is something we really need to bear in mind when devising legislation on mental health. The heads of Bill included a comprehensive section on chemical restraint but all references to and protections against the use of chemical restraint were subsequently removed. It is worth noting that the Mental Health Commission and Mental Health Reform issued a very clear call as to the need to closely monitor and regulate the use of chemical restraint. The omission of this section is very troubling given that, as Deputy Clarke has said, it is not covered under existing codes of practice and is therefore not properly reviewed by the Mental Health Commission. It is really important that we reintroduce that section to the Bill.”
“I echo Deputy Clarke's concerns about this. The Bill provides no specific safeguards or statutory provisions governing the use of chemical restraint on persons who are subject to involuntary detention and treatment. It does not even really acknowledge the reality of chemical restraint. Chemical restraint happens quite often. It involves administering powerful sedatives to people who are in extreme states of mind. While the intentions may be good, there is a need for very clear safeguards. In the context of the human rights impact of the practice, it is worth bearing in mind that, where people with intellectual disabilities are admitted to a psychiatric ward, their behaviours and mental state can deteriorate because such wards are often not suitable for their needs.”
“I move amendment No. 40: In page 63, to delete lines 10 and 11 and substitute the following: “(iii) the life of the person, or that of another person, is at risk, or the health of the person, or that of another person, is at risk of immediate and serious harm,””
“A key omission from the Bill which makes the amendments around involuntary treatment all the more concerning is the continued absence of a commitment to an independent complaints process or a statutory right to independent advocacy for those who experience involuntary detention and treatment. I want to put on the record that to rule amendments on an independent complaints mechanism and independent advocacy out of order on the basis that they have a cost implication is not a defensible position. The Bill is meant to strengthen human rights' safeguards for people attending mental health services and the fact that this would come with some financial cost in terms of the resourcing involved is self evident.”
“However, extending that same "likely to benefit" criterion to justify involuntary treatment, particularly before a capacity assessment is even carried out, risks rendering nearly any involuntary intervention permissible once a person has been involuntarily detained. As such, a person subject to involuntary detention is likely to face a significantly broader and less accountable regime of involuntary treatment. Instead of the term "likely to benefit", there should be more specific language to ensure that the legislation reflects that involuntary treatment may only be administered in urgent circumstances where the delay or absence of such treatment would pose a serious risk to the health or safety of the person.”
“I move amendment No. 36: In page 60, to delete line 21. This amendment relates to the changes in respect of involuntary treatment. I have spoken already about my concerns about the doubling of the timeframe for that from 21 to 42 days at a very late stage of the legislative process. The expanded criteria for involuntary treatment is also very concerning. While detaining somebody on the basis that he or she is "likely to benefit" from treatment is problematic, it does at least allow for a continued respect for a person's capacity to consent to or refuse specific treatment, except in emergency circumstances where not having that treatment poses a risk to his or her well-being.”
“I am not sure there was any discussion of it actually because it came in under the radar based on my reading of the transcript from that day. I think it needs to be justified. What is the human rights rationale? What is the clinical rationale to go from 21 days to 42 days? We have had an expert group working on the Bill for years. We have had the Mental Health Commission working on it. That is quite an about-turn.”
“I clarify my remarks about the late-stage amendments. What I was referring to was over the time span of this Bill, which is a number of years, it was a late-stage amendment that was very dramatically impactful. It really altered much of this Bill. It took people by surprise and did not give sufficient time for consultation with interest groups outside of psychiatry. It is obvious that this came from lobbying by interest groups for psychiatry, as is their right, and I can see where they are coming from. At the same time, service users are an equally important if not more important interest group because they will be receiving the treatment. It came at a late stage just on the deadline for submissions on Committee Stage. I was not here for that; I was sick on that day.”
“I know the Minister of State said that capacity assessments happen regularly in psychiatric settings. However, from what she has said, it sounds like it is at the discretion of the psychiatrist. It is not mandated in law according to this provision. That is our concern. As we know, capacity is not fixed. It is fluid and it can change from day to day. Therefore, it is really important to have that safeguard implemented.”
“Along with my colleagues, I express my concern here about the late-stage doubling of the timeframe for involuntary treatment from 21 to 42 days in a Government amendment submitted on the deadline for Committee Stage amendments. At the moment we are discussing the necessity of a capacity assessment after 21 days. However, the 21 days itself is fundamentally problematic. The whole point of this Bill is to strengthen human rights safeguards and not to just have a doctor-knows-best approach to treating people in emergency care. The Government's Committee Stage amendment dramatically increases the risk of prolonged involuntary interventions. As my colleagues have said, it does not appear to mandate a new capacity assessment after the 21 days have elapsed.”
“I continue to advocate for the substitution of the term "mental health difficulties" for "mental disorder" in the legislation, in line with Sharing the Vision, our national mental health policy. It is also worth noting that people in secondary and emergency mental health services typically do not meet the criteria for just one so-called mental disorder. They tend to experience a range of mental health difficulties which overlap diagnostic categories. In this sense, the term "mental disorder" is also simplistic. "Mental health difficulties" is more reflective of the multifaceted nature of severe psychological states. "Mental disorder" suggests an outdated medical model of these states and personality patterns.”
“The use of the term "mental disorder" is archaic and pathologising. Language reflects reality but also shapes it, and the term "mental disorder" is reductive medicalising. It has the potential to objectify people with mental health difficulties. We have had a long history of that and stigmatisation. This is something we need to move away from, not only in our concrete actions but also in the language we use. It is also unnecessary in the Bill. Every instance of the term in this Bill is qualified by further comments on severity and impact, and that includes the sections on involuntary treatment. It is not as if "mental health difficulties" trivialises someone who might require involuntary admission or treatment because you can have severe mental health difficulties just as you have mild mental health difficulties.”
“Basic grocery items are not luxuries. Ensuring transparency around pricing is a small test of whether we are serious about economic justice and addressing the cost-of-living crisis. Grocery giants cannot conduct their accounting in the shadows while families fall deeper into stress in a cost-of-living crisis that is being allowed to continue unchecked by this Government.”
“We need the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission to be given stronger powers and the resources to conduct a full investigation into supermarket pricing and profit margins across the supply chain. The UK and France have done this and we must not be laggards. We propose mandatory financial reporting for all major grocery retailers operating in the State, both Irish-owned and international companies, with an annual turnover in excess of €10 million. This should include country-specific profit disclosures and margin breakdowns. We urge the Government to monitor and publish regular reports on the impact of the transparency initiative on grocery price inflation and competition in the retail sector. The agrifood regulator needs to be empowered to compel the provision of necessary price and market information from agrifood businesses.”
“In Ireland, we are left in the dark as to how much supermarkets are making up for their own rising energy and supply costs and how much of those sums may represent an increasing profit margin. Why is this? The reason is there is a lack of transparency on supermarket profits and pricing strategies. Aldi and Lidl, two of the biggest players, do not publish profit figures in Ireland. Dunnes Stores, which holds the largest market share, does not release any accounts. Tesco Ireland is obscured inside the wider UK group. This opacity undermines public trust. We cannot ask families to tighten their belts while billion euro retailers refuse to open their accounts. This is why the Social Democrats are calling for immediate measures to address this lack of transparency.”
“Tanya Ward of the Children's Rights Alliance has referred to the landslide effect of escalating costs on low-income families. Parents are skipping meals so their children can have enough of the basics. Pensioners are foregoing heating their homes. Students are choosing between food and rent. When this is contrasted with our economic prosperity, it is clear we are living in an upside-down world, politically speaking. Meanwhile, the response from the Government has been repeated references to the Covid pandemic and the war in Ukraine and vague reassurances that competition will sort itself out. Across Europe, regulators have expressed concern that major supermarket chains are not just passing on costs, but also padding their margins.”
“The cost-of-living crisis in Ireland can no longer be considered a transient hardship. For much of our population, it has become an entrenched form of social injustice with a vast array of adverse outcomes, both short-term and potentially far-reaching for the many people caught up in it. Nowhere is this crisis more obvious for hard-pressed families than in the weekly grocery shop, which has become a morbid ritual in witnessing ever-more stratospheric figures tot up at the counter for what is often a modest range of items. Over the past two years, grocery prices have soared by more than 20%, hitting lower- and middle-income households hardest. The basics of everyday meals - bread, milk, pasta and fruit - have become symbols of economic strain.”
“I support my colleagues Deputies Coppinger, O'Reilly and Wall in respect of amendment No. 1. I appeal to the Minister, in the spirit of meaningful collaboration on the Bill, to take on their very reasonable arguments, which have been very well articulated. If clear unfairness is identified in a Bill, it is very important that it is acknowledged and that there is not a default Government position of pushing it through without having a very reasoned response. I appeal to the Minister in that regard.”
“Our car dependency means our carbon emissions are increasing, our air pollution is worsening and it is also leading to more accidents and more fatalities. Returning the Youghal to Midleton line would be a challenging project in light of the greenway development. However, we have reopened closed lines before and we can do it again. The Limerick-Foynes line is already being reinstated. Let us bring this ambition to Youghal. When this service is eventually linked up with light rail in the city it will be transformative for the region.”
“We are not seeing the density of new housing development and associated population growth in Youghal, which would occur around a functioning train station. Our increasing population demands the return of the rail link. Despite the epic investment into Dunkettle interchange, journey times into Cork from Youghal and Midleton remain unpredictable in duration and are prone to significant delays. Some €215 million later we are probably seeing reduced traffic flow at peak times coming into the Dunkettle interchange. We have a crisis of traffic congestion on our roads in east Cork that is eroding away precious family time every day for people caught up in it. There is such a sense of futility about this.”
“There have been some exciting developments in east Cork rail over the past 16 years. The return of the Midleton to Cork line in 2009 has been hugely progressive for the region and the number of passengers is increasing year on year. Ten-minute frequencies from 2026 onwards will be a game changer as will the proposed new stations for Water Rock and Carrigtwohill west. Cobh, Carrigtwohill, Glounthaune and Midleton are all very well connected with the city by rail. However, Youghal has been totally left out of these advancements and is suffering in several key respects as a result. The quality of life of students and workers travelling to Cork city on what is a primitive bus service through congested roads is severely impacted by the lack of a train service.”
“The flood risk that is particular to Whitegate, Ballinacurra, Ladysbridge and Youghal needs to be addressed. It is vital that the Minister of State, Deputy Moran, visits all the settlements in east Cork as a matter of urgency for an in-depth engagement in order that we have a clear roadmap on all aspects of flood relief for the months ahead. It would also be good to see the Taoiseach there because this is a huge issue for east Cork.”
“As the Minister knows, many settlements in east Cork were devastated by flooding during Storm Babet in October 2023. I met with the Midleton and East Cork Flood Protection Group last Friday, alongside my colleague, Councillor Eamonn Horgan. There is growing concern and frustration within the community about the rate of progress of flood relief works. We have had major delays with the installation of floodgates on homes and businesses and there are questions about their quality. The Midleton flood relief scheme is making its way very slowly towards the planning phase. However, smaller scale projects that would protect villages such as Mogeely, Castlemartyr, Killeagh and Rathcormac appear to be in limbo. Their residents are increasingly worried for the future.”
“Instead, adult safeguarding relies on a patchwork of legislation, policy documents and fragmented departmental responsibilities. There does not appear to be an ideological barrier that I can identify to explain why the necessary legislation has not been pursued. The only conclusion I can draw is that successive Governments have neglected this area because they have not felt sufficient political heat on the matter. It is incumbent on all of us to ensure that it retains the focus it currently has.”
“I wouldn't put my mother here, even if it was my last breath. That exchange captured how basic empathy can gradually break down in a service that is under so much strain, where there are not enough staff to share the workload and where items for attending to the basic care needs of residents are not provided. We cannot let a sense of inevitability set in that this is just how it is now for elder care. The need for comprehensive adult safeguarding legislation has been repeatedly raised by the interest groups I mentioned. It has been highlighted in particular following the Leas Cross scandal 20 years ago, the Áras Attracta scandal in 2014 and the Brandon, Grace and Emily cases, and the Government has failed to act. Unlike with child protection, there is no single, comprehensive adult safeguarding law in Ireland.”
“These are yet more examples of how our care system is failing vulnerable adults and is subject to poor oversight, a lack of mandatory reporting structures and weak enforcement powers. While the content of the programme was shocking, many people were not surprised by these patterns of mistreatment. These patterns are likely not isolated to this particular nursing home provider. For me, a stand-out moment of the "RTÉ Investigates" programme was when the more experienced care assistant advised a colleague that she too had notions of a better system at the outset of her career. She said: I know you feel sorry and I feel sorry for everybody here. They do not go out, the activities are shit, all this system is shit, you understand, but this is how it is, you know. Ours is just to do our job and to go home.”
“The recent "RTÉ Investigates" programme, which brought adult safeguarding back into sharp focus, documented appalling standards of care at two nursing homes that form part of one of the largest private for-profit care providers in the State. It was chilling and terribly sad to witness the casual neglect of and repeated insults to the dignity of those nursing home residents. Profiteering and the care for some of our most vulnerable citizens do not go hand in hand. A major overhaul of our care system is needed. The "RTÉ Investigates" programme documented abject failures to respect the basic care needs and dignity of nursing home residents as an everyday occurrence.”
“It is worth mentioning that, following the Farrelly commission report, a lot of commentary reflected on the fact that the commission of inquiry was extremely expensive, did not produce clear recommendations and was very unsatisfactory in many ways. If we had a national safeguarding authority, it would greatly reduce, if not entirely eliminate, the need for these commissions and tribunals. It would have a safeguarding focus in how it conducts investigations. Safeguarding Ireland has highlighted that the Bill currently proposed by the Government in its legislative agenda is too narrow in scope and would be a missed opportunity if pursued. It is vital, therefore, that we go back to the Law Reform Commission's report.”
“I commend the Labour Party on its motion. We fully support it. It has been an honour to meet in recent weeks with Safeguarding Ireland, Care Champions, and the Irish Association of Social Workers to discuss adult safeguarding and systemic problems within our nursing home sector and other care facilities. I look forward to engaging with Inclusion Ireland, Sage Advocacy and others to this end in the coming weeks and months. There is consensus among the advocacy groups that the Law Reform Commission report into adult safeguarding, published last year, is the roadmap that we need to follow to implement comprehensive adult safeguarding legislation and to establish a national safeguarding authority.”
“He provided general investment figures to back that up, but there was no engagement with any of the detail of the proposals that the parents' group had discussed with him at the meeting in March, and had submitted to the Department. These parents are facing another summer of uncertainty. Some are looking ahead to several years down the line before their child is making that very challenging transition to secondary school. Some of the families feel that their children's needs are being met at primary level in their communities at the moment, but what lies ahead is very unsettling for them and, as we know, these years pass quickly. I ask the Minister of State to re-engage with that group.”
“This is entirely at odds with their interests and their rights, and is heaping chronic stress upon so many other challenges. It is also at odds with the UNCRPD. The parents' group in Youghal had an encouraging engagement with the Minister of State, Deputy Michael Moynihan, on 28 March. As a group, they could not be more constructive in their dealings with all public representatives and other stakeholders. They identified a possible site for a new school in Youghal. The need for such a school is very obvious and urgent. They also proposed an interim arrangement involving prefabricated buildings for the coming term while plans for a new school are being developed and progressed. The response from the Minister of State outlined the commitment of the Government to special education provision.”
“I have been working with a parents' campaign group in Youghal in recent months, which is seeking the establishment of a new secondary level special education school in east Cork for children whose needs cannot be met by the autism hub in the local secondary school. As we know, parents can be left in a deeply unsettling state of uncertainty in the lead-up to a decision on their school placement application. Many families in east Cork are facing the very grim prospect of commuting to Dungarvan, into Cork city or even Waterford city for their child's educational needs. This means families transporting their child very long distances on a daily basis for their basic schooling, dislocating that child, who is already contending with so many challenges by virtue of their disability, from their community.”
“In addition, many young people are being redirected from children's disability network teams to primary care without the necessary staff being recruited to see them. Families are being passed from one waiting list to another for services that are so out of reach that they may as well not exist. Will the Minister commit to a comprehensive recruitment drive for primary care child and adolescent services? We cannot continue with a Government ideology-----”
“The scale of the crisis in primary care services for young people is so serious that the HSE is avoiding parliamentary questions about it. Only after 11 weeks did I receive a response from the HSE Dublin and north-east region on its psychology waiting lists, and no wonder. The longest waiting time there involves a child who was initially referred to disability services an incredible nine years ago. I have not received any response yet from the HSE Dublin and midlands region 12 weeks after submitting a parliamentary question, despite repeated follow-up by me. Primary care services for young people were neglected by successive Governments, long before the current recruitment restrictions and long before the official embargo.”
“We must also benchmark our social protection system to the cost of a minimum essential standard of living to ensure that everyone has enough to sustain a decent quality of life. All future budgets must be poverty-proofed and set against the targets of the anti-poverty strategy. At a very basic level, we need a radical change in housing policy. One in four children lives in conditions of overcrowding and more than 4,700 children are living in emergency accommodation. This will require ideological change from the Minister and the Government. Not embracing that change will cause untold damage.”
“I acknowledge the supports the Minister mentioned, but we have not seen sufficiently ambitious targeted measures and strategic investment in recent budgets designed to break the cycle of intergenerational poverty. It is critical, therefore, that there is a focus in budget 2026 on breaking that cycle. The cumulative impact of continued rising costs of living has created a landslide effect for low-income families such that the very basics, such as nutritious food and keeping their homes warm, become increasingly difficult to achieve. We need to see a major scaling up of the Equal Start programme and an extension of DEIS Plus to address disadvantage at the early stage.”
“It is a scandalous indictment of successive Governments that our State coffers are overflowing, but at the same time we see child poverty soaring.”
“The stark and ever-worsening reality of child poverty is laid bare in the child poverty monitor and wider research. The Children's Rights Alliance has issued a stark warning that unless ambitious action is taken by the Government it will take Ireland four to five generations to break the cycle of poverty. The report found that the number of children living in consistent poverty rose by a staggering 45,107 in 2024 to almost 103,000 children. This reflects immense damage being inflicted on young lives with the potential to cause harm into adulthood. We know that adversity chain reacts across the lifespan. This is not inevitable. It is not a natural disaster. It has come about through political decision-making.”
“I would like to ask the Minister for his response to the recently published child poverty monitor report and his plans to address the rising number of children living in consistent poverty. The findings of that report make for very grim reading and should focus the minds of the Government on a major change in policymaking.”
“This is also, as Deputy Clarke mentioned, in line with the Sharing the Vision recommendations on shared governance. It is a progressive amendment and I urge the Minister of State to consider it.”
“This is an important amendment. It acknowledges the value of all disciplines in mental health for their capacity to lead mental health services. Leadership roles should be competency based and discipline non-specific, focusing on relevant clinical and organisational expertise, rather than privileging a single profession. It is custom and practice, based on a medical model of mental health service provision we need to be moving away from, that psychiatrists have automatically been clinical directors, but it is not inevitably the case and the wording of the Bill suggests it is inevitable. We have seen increasing openness internationally in countries such as the UK, Australia, Canada and New Zealand towards the distribution of leadership among other mental health professionals, rather than it automatically being psychiatrists.”
“It has been really regrettable that Sharing the Vision dispensed with that benchmarking, because with a Vision for Change, one could refer to those proposed staffing levels each year and see to what degree we were meeting those basic requirements - not even targets. If the Government were to cement it in law that services, in order to operate safely, as is in the proposed wording, had to have a minimum complement of staff, it would be a really basic and important provision to make. It would actually make life easier for the Minister of State. I encourage her to consider that. There is very good evidence internationally to extend the age of CAMHS to 25. The points made on the independent complaints mechanism were very well made as well.”
“I speak in support of amendments Nos. 211 and 212. Deputies McGuinness and Clarke made the point about having whole-time equivalent clinicians benchmarked and having that as a basic requirement that the Mental Health Commission adjudicates on for service provision. When the Mental Health Commission is doing an inspection and is writing a report, there is a whole litany of conditions that must be met by a service. Staff are extremely focused on meeting all of those requirements. More basic to all of that, however, is to have adequate staffing in place in the first instance. It was a real strength of A Vision for Change, a document that is nearly 20 years old now, that it set out the staffing levels that were required per care group per 100,000 population across all services.”
“It is important to say that while it is used in adult services, it is also very contentious in adult services. In some parts of the country it is unheard of. A joint document from the WHO and the UN recently concluded that ECT is “not recommended for children, and this should be prohibited through legislation”. It is important to bear in mind that young people’s brains are at a sensitive stage of development and we do not know the potential adverse impact of ECT on a developing brain. Therefore it is very welcome that we are withdrawing the section.”
“I welcome that the Minister of State is withdrawing the section and her words of caution around it. From my experience in working in mental health services, it is unheard of in recent times for ECT to be administered to young people. I received a reply to a parliamentary question in the past week which outlined its use in the past five years in Ireland. The youngest person who was administered ECT was 21. As far as I am aware and pretty much all my colleagues in mental health are aware, there is no clinical indication for ECT. My worry is that if we included it in the legislation, it would give a sense of legitimacy of that as a treatment option. The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence does not recommend ECT for under-18s.”
“I echo Deputy Clarke's points. The Minister of State said last week that it was important not to tie the hands of psychiatrists in this regard because they often have to make very difficult decisions at critical times and may not have a bed available in a CAMHS inpatient unit. This is a valid concern for a psychiatrist in that particular context. What we are doing here, however, is legislating for the continued under-resourcing of essential CAMHS inpatient beds. If we go ahead with this, we will be reinforcing a situation where we will be just accepting young people can be admitted inappropriately into adult placements. The very reason we are undertaking this legislation in the first place is to strengthen the rights of service users, including children. It would be very regrettable if this provision were to be included.”