Victor Boyhan
Agricultural Panel · Independent · Ireland
“It also mentions the agrifood sector and the importance of diversification in agriculture, the maritime sector, coastal communities and fishing communities in terms of rural policy.”
“I know from my engagement with both the Department and the Minister that over 900 submissions to the consultation process were received. No Member or parliamentarian will have had the opportunity to consider the anonymised version of these consultations, which contain many good suggestions in favour of the regulations and many concerns in…”
“I welcome the Minister and the official to the Seanad. This is particularly important Private Members' business. I thank Senators Collins and Tully for setting out the background and the rationale behind their Private Members' motion. I acknowledge the Minister's exceptional commitment to rural Ireland and his Ministry.”
“I am conscious of the Minister's public consultation, and I acknowledge it and thank them for it, in relation to the Our Rural Future work programme in 2025. In fairness to him, he did not stop at that. I received a further update when I requested it from his office very recently.”
“This will come about through that process. It is for the Minister to decide. Maybe he will do so tomorrow when the regulations are dealt with. However, when Senators are in this Chamber discussing these regulations tomorrow, they will have no sight of any constituent who made a submission. That is my first item.”
“I am pleased to see Senator Byrne in the Leader’s chair. I wish him well in that job. I also wish him well in his new position as Government Whip. There are three items I wish to discuss today. First is the exempt development regulations, which are being covered extensively in the media.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,616 lines we hold for Victor Boyhan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 14 of 33.
“It is a livelihood and a family. They have an intergenerational asset that they want to secure and within which they want to have a future. I have talked about the conditions that are there. Under this extension, there will, of course, be stricter mandated conditions for farmers in the coming years. That is an important point and is one that we need to prepare for. The Minister’s Department needs to prepare for it. It needs to resource and that is an important point. As for the increased compliance, the Minister is on the record as saying his Department will begin intensive in-house catchment-based assessments on environmental impacts. The Minister might touch on that as he concludes. This agreement is a significant body of work, and I genuinely mean that. I want to acknowledge the enormous work. It was not easy.”
“That is a challenge, however, and we are going to have to work on it. The Minister emphasised the scientific validation of the argument, which convinced people. He went to Europe and made a professional case. He got it over the line. I believe the scientific validation was really important, and particularly the emphasis on the sustainable grass-based outdoor production model that is unique to Ireland. He impressed the people on that. That was important. The deal, of course, addresses specific scientific and environmental conditions, including the catchment levels, but also acknowledges our responsibilities in relation to the habitats directive. Again, farmers are responsible. They are the custodians of the land. That cliche is thrown out every day, but they are. They have a vested interest. They have a huge interest.”
“It was hard fought for. It was not a walk or rollover. He had to make a science-based case for it. He had to talk about sustainability and a plan going forward over the next two or three years, running into 2028. He did that and he convinced people, and that is important. He secured the unanimous vote of the EU member states to extend Ireland's nitrates directive for a further three years but three years is not a long way away. It is important that we acknowledge that and the key success of it. It struck me as the Minister was talking at the time - he worked with us on the committee as well - about key issues like farm certainty. That was really important. That three-year extension provides a vital period for dairy livestock farmers to prevent cliff-edge reduction and to allow stocking rates.”
“I was then in Bunclody, and again, I could literally see the leaching. It just struck me that at this time of the year it would not have the same challenges but what if there were nutrients and if that was later on in the year? On the loss of nutrients, and effluent for that matter, that comes from heavy drenching of soil, it is a science and I do not think everyone quite understands that. That is important to say. Stricter protocols and earlier closing dates for the spreading of chemical fertiliser and slurry are critical in terms of management of this derogation. That is an important point. As for compliance and inspections, we cannot back off with them and no-one is suggesting we do. The Minister is not suggesting that either. My understanding is the Minister secured this nitrates directive derogation with conditions.”
“We are reducing stocking rates, which is important. We are also reducing the use of fertiliser and increasing buffer zones, as the Minister mentioned in his statement. There is also the manure and nutrient management scheme and enhanced requirements for nutrient management. That goes right across the scheme in terms of better education, knowledge transfer, better practices, derogation farms, increasing buffer zones, water courses and all that goes with that. There is a lot of knowledge in it. Farming is not some sort of a hobby for people. It is a science now. It is technical. I was down at the River Slaney coming through Enniscorthy the day before yesterday with the floods and what was interesting coming all the way down was the colour, the brown soil. The water was brown. It was dark.”
“I congratulate the Minister and the Government on their success on this matter to date. Ireland's success has been to secure the extension of the EU nitrates directive. Of course, this is subject to strict environmental conditions to combat water pollution, and rightly so. We never denied there were challenges. We realised there were issues and there were improvements but it was always going to be challenging and the Minister has acknowledged that. There is no point in painting over some of the issues in relation to our water and water pollution. However, water pollution comes in many forms and it does not only rest with agriculture. This is an important point that came out very clearly from our debate on these matters. The key conditions attached to the Irish nitrates derogation are worth going over at some level.”
“I welcome the Minister and his official to the Seanad and acknowledge the important work his fellow Ministers and Ministers of State and the departmental staff have done. I have no doubt an enormous amount of work went into it and it is an amazing achievement for the Minister. It is also an amazing political achievement. There were many critics and I sat and listened to many of them, and to other people who came to the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Agriculture and Food, of which a number of us here are members too. Now is not a time for complacency. It is a reprieve, to an extent. The year 2028 is not a long way away, and that is important. In his measured statement here today, the Minister has indicated that we have work to do. We have to embrace this opportunity and move forward.”
“That is not his intention, but I want to say that because it is easy to put a spin on anything. He knows that more than anyone else, so I would be interested to hear what he has to say.”
“They had not used the fire for two years, but they were trying to light it and heat the house. These are the families we cherish and talk about in terms of our rural communities. Let us keep it simple. If someone wants to go out and get a few twigs, a few logs or another bit of solid fuel to heat themselves, that is not unreasonable. If that simple message is lost in the complexities of the Minister of State's language or mine, then we are not communicating with the people we represent. It is that simple a message. He has the opportunity to give absolute clarity and maybe issue a circular or a memo on it. We need clarity. I do not want it out there that Timmy Dooley, "the big Minister up in the big office in Dublin," is now going to curtail all the little homestead fires.”
“This is Senator O'Reilly's amendment, and I am only seconding it, but I share her concerns. The Minister of State represents a rural and urban constituency. He will know about the floods and storm in the past few days. There were many people relying on solid fuel fires to light and heat their homes and to congregate around those simple homestead fires. My understanding of what Senator O'Reilly is talking about is the need for greater clarity. We need absolute clarity in relation to it. Let us keep this simple. This is not a science. We know there are many parts of the country that have no fireplaces. We know they were the places that had the storms. I know people just outside Loughrea in County Galway. They were 16 days without power. They were not getting kindling.”
“The groupthink that informed the opposing of and objections to the very genuine asks of these people, who were not treated very well by the State, was disappointing. The Taoiseach has indicated that he will give his formal response soon. He has indicated that he is still in ongoing discussions with the Attorney General, Rossa Fanning. I look forward to that but will guard my welcome until I hear the Taoiseach's speech and read the text of the public apology. It is a welcome move and I thank all involved. I thank Bertie Ahern, the former leader of Fianna Fáil and former Taoiseach, for his role in the early stages of working through a potential pathway for a solution. I thank the Government for at least, at this late stage, giving a commitment to make a public apology, which is long overdue.”
“I think we will need to have another opportunity to revisit the issue and discuss how we lost our way in relation to taking political leadership and championing the cause of the people who spent many weeks before Christmas on hunger strike outside our Parliament. Clearly, the hunger strike has been effective and that will be demonstrated in the public apology that the Taoiseach will issue to the Dáil. The Government has agreed a package of additional supports to be provided to the survivors of abuse of institutional schools. They include areas around health, education, housing and, indeed, other issues, which, again, the Taoiseach will set out to the Dáil. I believe it is important that when we are asked to champion and advocate for people, we need to seriously consider the response.”
“This morning it has been reported in the media that the Government is considering issuing a State apology, to be given by the Taoiseach, to the victims of industrial and reformatory schools. The Leader will recall that we had much debate on this matter in this House. He will recall that I proposed a number of amendments and one of them was that this group would receive the enhanced medical card. He will also recall and fully know the response by the Government and the Government Senators which meant my amendment was voted down. I am not at liberty to discuss the final detail of the agreement and the package that has been entered into. It is also for the Taoiseach to announce and not for me to announce but I am fully aware and happy to know about the agreement.”
“We know that in 2025, there were 57,612 cases sitting on the desks of Tailte Éireann and the applications still need to be processed. We know that within the last month, that is, January of this year, we have a further 2,839 cases. So the selling of property is challenging, difficult and complex. My colleague, who is sat on my right, and I commend him on bringing this Private Members' motion, is suggesting that we get started. The motion does not tie the hands of the Legislature, the Government or the Minister. It is saying, let us start a journey of engagement, get our act together and simplify these processes for all the parties involved. I commend this motion.”
“I note that the legislation states that it is open for a periodic critical review and, tonight, I call for a period critical review of Tailte Éireann. I will finish by thanking Deputy Carol Nolan, an Independent Deputy, for asking a parliamentary question last week in the Dáil which resulted in the following figures on the arrears and delays in processing by Tailte Éireann. I will reiterate these figures, which I outlined in this Chamber the other day. In 2024, there were 24,496 cases sitting on the desks of Tailte Éireann. Can Members imagine all the sellers that involves, be they looking for maps or first registration? We have a crisis in Tailte Éireann. Tailte Éireann is not fit for purpose. I repeat, it is not fit for purpose.”
“The objective of the Bill was that the Tailte Éireann Act 2022 would establish a State body called Tailte Éireann through the dissolution of the Property Registration Authority and Ordnance Survey Ireland, and provide for the transfer of their functions to Tailte Éireann. The Act sought to transfer, and did seek to transfer, the functions of the Commissioner of Valuation and the Boundary Surveyor to Tailte Éireann. They are another complexity of issues and problems that are impacting on the sale of property such as, for example, agricultural land in the constituency of the Minister of State, local authority property, State property, residential houses and commercial buildings. There is a range of complexities in relation to selling, which we need to address and streamline.”
“It is also important to note that many of the parties in the process, for example, financial lenders and local authorities, operate their own processes and protocols, which can result in misalignment of objectives and issues. It is important to note that there are many multiple sets of challenges. Every local authority in the county has a different system - and that is a problem - for requesting information. The Law Society has major issues with Tailte Éireann. There are major challenges and I want to spend my remaining two minutes talking about Tailte Éireann. I was involved in the pre-legislative scrutiny of the Tailte Éireann Bill 2022 that subsequently was enacted by these Houses.”
“It is crystal clear to solicitors that the current conveyancing system is long overdue systemic reform to reduce delays, costs and reduce stress on house buyers and sellers, be they commercial, residential, agricultural land, agricultural buildings or any property transactions. So that is clear. The conveyancing system involves 15 interdependent parties, ranging from lenders, estate agents, solicitors, local authorities, Tailte Éireann - and do not get me going about them - Revenue, Uisce Éireann, valuers and surveyors. This means a delay by any one of those parties has a significant knock-on impact on the parties, and can impact on a successful sale or otherwise.”
“Finally, the motion asks to "introduce a Bill or multiple Bills" - so a multiple of Bills, if necessary, so that it is possible to avail of the many benefits of the SLP proposal. That is simple. Let us keep it simple. There is no big ask. It does not need political manoeuvrings or to box clever and one versus the other. I know that with a coalition Government there will be challenges. I understand that. I can read that. I know what is going on. In my remaining minutes, I note the Law Society has consistently highlighted the antiquated, overly complicated and the lengthy nature of the conveyancing system.”
“The motion also mentions the concerns raised by "the Law Society of Ireland in their submissions". Next, the motion calls on the Government to "liaise with the IPAV regarding how a new updated version of the Seller’s Legal Pack could be made possible". I could not see that as a setback. That is not a setback. The provision calls for positive engagement with the IPAV, whose representatives are in this room here today. Of course I support that. Next, it proposes to "bring forward an updated version of the Bill". The provision does not say this is a Bill. This is a motion that calls on the Government to "bring forward" at any time. The motion does not stipulate today, tomorrow, next week or next month. The ask is a positive and the motion asks the Government to "bring forward".”
“There are five simple asks in this motion. None of them should be a problem for the Government, and we need to be clear on that. With all the jargon let us have clarity. I believe in clarity of function, clarity of purpose and clarity of mind. So it is my understanding that the motion has five key asks and calls on the Government to "address the issues outlined in the Report on Detailed Scrutiny of the Seller’s Legal Pack for Property Buyers Bill 2021" and "address the concerns about the conveyancing raised by the IPAV". I acknowledge and thank the IPAV for their advocacy and professionalism. I have always found them to be to the fore and very informative and have attended many of their briefings. I commend the IPAV as a leading agency and responsible for this area.”
“I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for coming to the House to deal with this. I note that he is a highly qualified financial accountant so will be keenly aware of business and financial transactions, which is a great thing to bring to the table. On these matters, I welcome the former Senator, Lorraine Higgins, and representatives of the IPAV. Indeed, I acknowledge the importance of the work done by the Incorporated Law Society of Ireland. I have heard the contributions about the debate but Senator Aubrey McCarthy, who is a member of the Seanad's Independent Group, that I so happen to lead, believes, and I firmly believe too, that you need to bring things forward. If nothing else, from all of this debate, we are having a debate and, yes, there are concerns and they need to be asked but let us cut to the chase.”
“We want to save rural towns all over this country that are dying on their feet for the lack of a driven, positive policy for the rejuvenation of those special communities and places.”
“Tailte Éireann is not fit for purpose and will very much be central to my contribution in the upcoming debate. On a positive note, I commend the Government for its vacant property refurbishment grants. Paying out 3,000 grants in 2025 is no mean achievement and is really positive. I appeal to the Leader and all Members of this House to put pressure on so that we will have new rural planning guidelines. The current guidelines are also not fit for purpose. They are there for years, despite all the promises made. Members who represent rural community know well what I am referring to because I have seen the correspondence many of them have got. It has been shared with me and others. We need to tackle rural housing and we need new rural housing guidelines. We also need diversification.”
“You both were fiercely determined, fiercely ambitious and did not apologise for that. That is a nice trait to have in anyone. I commend the Cathaoirleach and offer my sympathies to the people who supported Brian. I note the Order of the Business and the Supplementary Order Paper. I hope, and appeal to, Members to engage with Senator McCarthy's Private Member's business on the seller’s legal pack for property buyers because it is timely and we will have an opportunity to deal with it. I am on record many times in this House saying that Tailte Éireann is not fit for purpose. I will elaborate in greater detail on that this afternoon. I printed off three Commencement matters and parliamentary questions that have been asked in the past few months in this House to demonstrate that profound and bold statement.”
“He had great vision. He talked about independent mobility. Mobility is important, but the crucial element is that someone who is visually impaired or has another disability can have privacy. That was what he was talking about when he spoke about dignity. If you are visually impaired or blind, you cannot read your most personal details, matters that are private and pertinent to you, be they your legal or medical information. You cannot engage with your solicitor. Brian also shared his own experience with people who came to him and people naturally came to him for advocacy work. I commend him, but I also know he was a great personal friend of the Cathaoirleach's and the Cathaoirleach was a great personal friend of his. You supported one another and there were great similarities between you.”
“I join the Cathaoirleach in the moving tribute he paid to Brian Crowley, a remarkable man. I had many dealings with him through my work as a director of the Irish Guide Dogs for the Blind. When we were doing our corporate plan many years ago, I met him in the Metropole Hotel and he very kindly gave a few hours of his time. He said to me: "What encapsulates what you do should be the head of your strategic policy and your vision for that charity." A lot of people followed us because we had more interest in dogs than in visually impaired people. It is a strange charity, but he summed it all up when he said it is about independent dignity and independent mobility but both with respect. That was the key to his mission with disability issues. He, however, was far beyond that. His disability did not define him, as it does it with so many people.”
“I thank the Minister for coming to the House. I know she is busy. We really appreciate her giving us her time. It is always extra appreciated to have a Minister in the House. I thank the Senator for tabling this Commencement matter.”
“It was giving it a very high percentage in terms of the criteria itself. The Mental Health Commission is telling us in its annual report and has highlighted that the admission of a child or young person to an adult setting is "not acceptable and risks traumatising the young person further".”
“I was listening to Senators Ryan and Costello and the Minister of State. A spokesperson for the Mental Health Commission stated that the admission of a child or young person to an adult setting is "not acceptable and risks traumatising the young person further". That is from the Mental Health Commission. That is not me. I so happen to agree with it, and I think that is important. That is important to put on the record in terms of its work. I to acknowledge its significant work. Yes, there are shortcomings with it too. We will not go into that now. We highlighted it the other day. I do not want to repeat it. There is an investigation going on. I hope there will be a complete investigation into the Mental Health Commission as well as Bloomfield because they have a role.”
“As well all the legislation, it is a matter of ambition that we will have the facilities for young people. The Minster of State spoke briefly about what we can expect in the new national children's hospital. There may be a role in that and it might be no harm echoing that again for the people who are listening to the debate. There is an end to this and that is an important point to make.”
“She was passionate about it and worked closely with the Minister of State. That is one of the realities. The Bill is going through as primary legislation. At the end of the day we, can have the best policies and legislation in place but if we do not have a highly resourced CAMHS facility with beds, inpatient and outpatient, children and young people will find themselves in this unacceptable situation. With the best will in the world, this will be the case unless we have the resources. I know the Department has increased resources. I echo what the Minister of State said earlier. She is in an unenviable position but she has been so long at this, and features in various reports. Indeed, Senator Rabbitte was mentioned in a report indirectly in respect of all this, and in a very positive light in both cases. I think that is where it is at.”
“If I may come in, I will not repeat the same things I have been saying for the last three sessions. I have been asked to say this and people have raised it with me in a meeting earlier today. Due to the unavailability of CAMHS beds, which is a reality, children and young people in crisis may be left with the unacceptable choice of an adult inpatient unit. I am hearing that loud and clear. It is regrettable. It is the reality on the ground. That is what the Mental Health Commission and the public psychiatric services tell us, along with the private health services, GPs and psychiatrists. There is a new ambition to get the funding, get the CAMHS beds in place and all that. I also want to take the opportunity to acknowledge the very significant work that a former Senator, Joan Freeman, contributed to CAMHS.”
“For clarity, we are talking about an emergency order, an interim care order, a supervision order and a voluntary care arrangement. They are all covered in the Bill and the same treatment applies. The Minister might just clarify again the reporting back mechanisms.”
“Yes I will say it out again. Will the Minister of State briefly outline any differences in treatment between children under an emergency care order, an interim care order, a supervision order or a voluntary care arrangement? The Minister of State covered some of them in her speech. Perhaps not now, but maybe we could have a memo back before we meet again. I know that is complex. I did try to get a handle on it and I could not. Perhaps the Minister of State would drop it to us before the next debate. We can discuss it. I just want to try to understand that.”
“I thank the Minister of State. I think she herself would admit that this is quite complex to get our heads around. I appreciate that. Just following on, as the Minister of State has said, this is an important section in the Bill and this is a series of really important amendments. A question has arisen, and I have tried to seek clarification on this myself but I am having some difficulty in it. Perhaps the Minister of State is not fully in a position to do so today but this section or element is not going to hinge on my support one way or the other. I will pose the question. Will the Minister of State briefly outline any differences in treatment between children under an emergency care order, an interim care order, a supervision order or a voluntary care arrangement? I know that is a bit complex, so I am not expecting-----”
“I would also love to be able to say that we have new mental health legislation that is fit for purpose and that for the first time it will be made clear and explicit in primary legislation that no child will be forced into a mental healthcare setting meant for adults. This is to protect the both the individuals and all the other people involved. I again apologise for coming in at the end of the Minister of State's contribution. I was at a meeting elsewhere. I welcome what she set out. I am of the view that it is positive.”
“I said before that I have more hope now than I had when we started this process a few weeks ago. Having talked to the wonderful mental health advocates and to the staff of these facilities at all levels in the context of services and medical interventions, I am of the view that they are fully committed to voicing any concerns. We saw what happened with the whistleblower at Bloomfield, as we talked about the other day. In the context of the children that are found in these services, I would love to be able to say at the end of this process, and I believe the Minister of State would like to say it as well, that we will have explicitly outlawed certain things in primary legislation and in time. I hear what people say about time and the progress of it, and the numbers are decreasing radically, that much is clear.”
“Clearly, however, it has to be our ambition that no children, at any stage, will have to enter treatment in adult mental health facilities. We know, of course, that part of the reason for them having to go into such facilities is due to a lack of resources and staff. There are also issues in respect of beds and CAMHS. These are the realities of the situation, and there are challenges in respect of this matter. An organisation that has not really been mentioned - I touched base with it - is the Psychiatric Nurses Association, PNA, which has between 6,500 and 7,000 members. It is important that we acknowledge the work of psychiatric nurses. They do amazing work. They have a very effective trade union that regularly keeps in touch with Members of both Houses and that articulates their concerns, be it in respect of recruitment or resources.”
“I talked extensively about Bloomfield. I welcomed her commentary the other night and have spoken to a number of people about it yesterday and just a few minutes ago. I look forward to that progressing in whatever form. One of the most critical points relating to children - we will return to this on Report Stage - is that we have not been able to ban outright the situation regarding children in adult mental health units. I know that the new and exciting children’s hospital will be coming on stream. What people are asking is whether we can somehow articulate our ambition either now or in our later deliberations on the Bill. As the Minister of State says, it is not always necessary to produce primary legislation. There is also secondary legislation.”
“They emphasise the protection of children from violence, and emphasise the importance of autonomy and dignity. The recurring words are "autonomy", "choice", "dignity" and "advocacy". I am not saying that we have lost sight of them but they are the critical issues of concern in relation to this legislation. When we look at the proceedings in the Dáil, we can see these recurring themes. The Minister of State has either addressed or attempted to address them. In some cases, she has not accepted amendments that have been put forward. To be fair, she set out the rationale for not accepting them. These are key issues, however. If we look at the reports of the Mental Health Commission, we can see that it continues to raise concerns. The Minister of State is familiar with the criteria that the applies in the context of assessments.”
“The ethical development and implications of such interventions being administered to young people always have to be questioned, particularly in terms of those already in crisis. As I keep mentioning, this issue concerns all children, particularly children in crisis circumstances, so it warrants serious reflection. Clearly, the Minister of State has reflected on it. I am sorry, but I had to attend another meeting. I have just come back in. The issue of safeguarding should at all times not obscure the fundamental question of whether such practices should be permitted, especially given the potential for trauma, the violation of rights and long-term harm. Through all sections of this debate, I have cited the CRPD and the Committee on the Rights of the Child, CRC, extensively.”
“The numbers are perhaps less than what some of us might have thought, which was mentioned by the Minister of State, but they are concerning. The Mental Health Commission flagged a number of concerns. While it is important that we welcome any safeguards in terms of the legislation, it remains deeply concerning to Senators that the State is explicitly authorising the use and practice of mechanical restraint in certain circumstances, physical restraint and the seclusion of children. After I looked at this Bill and talked to all of the various advocates, that was one of the key concerns expressed. I do not want to be repetitive, but I want to keep impressing upon the Minister of State the issues around the practice of mechanical restraint, physical restraint, medication and seclusion of children. It is all very disturbing.”
“Apologies for coming in at the end of the Minister of State's contribution. I believe I am right in saying that she will be banning the use of ECT on children. That is an important measure. We will discuss sections 84 and 91 later and we will talk again about ECT because some of these issues overlap. The matter of safeguarding in relation to the use of restrictive practices on children is very concerning, so I am glad to hear the proposal made by the Minister of State. This debate has given me another opportunity to talk about the issue of children. It is a very sensitive issue. Having listened to the Minister of State in our last session, I read the Mental Health Commission's reports, which had some really interesting stuff about this matter.”
“Of course there is also then that need for that independent advocacy. I know the Minister of State has outlined how the Bill provides for the right to advocacy but where children are concerned, that is even more sensitive. Then when they are children in care there can be extraordinary situations and that also goes for people in our prisons. There are cohorts of real concern in certain areas. I do not believe we are losing sight of them, I think we are all aware of them but there are specially tailor-made responses for some of those areas.”
“Yes, it has expressed concerns and I do not intend to spend the afternoon reading a litany of what it is saying but it has highlighted a number of these. What is very interesting in this report, which I will share with the Minister in my debate here later on, is the concerns. This is the latest report and it highlights the concerns. I will set out by naming these institutions later on the record of this House. There are now very serious concerns, which touch on some of the issues that we have had. However, I know we are moving forward, we are moving on, we are going to be progressive and we have great plans ahead. It is important to say at this point that we must never lose sight - and I am not suggesting anyone in this room is - of the human rights, and of course the organisations there, and the advocacy groups that are there formally.”
“I will be very brief because Senator Black has covered it pretty well. The Mental Health Commission annual report has just been handed to me. The Mental Health Commission gives constant reminders in relation to human rights. The commission emphasises that human rights have to underpin our approach in everything we do and the services we provide and are obliged to regulate. All of us must not lose sight of that because that is critically important. It is not what is better for someone over that. At no cost can we compromise or infringe our citizens in terms of their human rights and that goes for children right up the whole gamut of people. When we look at that in terms of the Mental Health Commission's vision, right up to 2027, it is continuously repeating that.”
“It is built to the highest specifications for childcare but has sat empty for the last nine months. There was a suggestion that it might be hived off to a private childcare facility, but the Minister has stepped in and identified this purpose-built, state-of-the-art childcare facility in an area of demand and need in Shanganagh Castle. I want to be associated with that and to salute the Minister for her courage and ambition in developing the sector.”
“The State-led initiative is expected to provide thousands of places in the long term out to 2030 using the €135 million as an initial fund and tapping into funds from the national development plan. I understand the Minister has said she is in discussions with local authorities and State agencies. I would say to our sitting county councillors, though, because I am particularly keen on them and work with them, that they should be raising these issues with their chief executives now, not in six months’ time, to tell the latter to engage with the Minister to see if their local authorities have facilities they could offer. I thank the Minister for selecting one building in the Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown area at Shanganagh Castle. I am familiar with it.”
“We all know it is important that children have early interventions and supports, like childcare. On the argument of public versus private provision, I think there is potential for public provision, private provision and synergies between both. We have many community buildings in our local authorities that could possibly be used. The Minister has indicated that capital funding will be used to acquire or refit buildings, depending on their requirements. Reading between the lines, though, I think her preferred option is to go for tailor-made, purpose-built facilities. Initially, the announcement is that up to eight buildings will be selected for investment, not next year, but this year, with 100 places per building, which totals 800 places.”