Dáil Speech from FF Leader on COVID-19

Our first thought today must be with the 1,190 families who have lost a loved one during this pandemic. Their suffering and the struggles of the thousands more who have required urgent care are a reminder to us all that this pandemic has been every bit as serious as we feared.

This unique and terrible crisis has required an exceptional response, not just here, but also throughout most of the world. It is another proof of how much we rely on each other, locally, nationally and internationally.

Throughout the past two months every part of our society has played a role in the response to the pandemic and have felt its impact.

I believe that the resolve to do everything possible remains strong. No one believes that the threat is gone and no one expects a rapid reversal of every control measure.

However, there is a real and growing uncertainty – and for many a deep unease founded on the lack of clarity about what the next steps are.

The government should never forget that Dáil Éireann, much of the media and of course the Irish people have been willing to suspend much of the assertive oversight which a free democracy like ours insists on. This should not be taken as permission to limit debate and to expect that people will simply wait to be told what they may be allowed to know.

In fact, the only reasonable response to the controls which we have collectively accepted on our rights is for government to actually increase transparency and meaningful consultation.

Every significant study ever undertaken into the response to major emergencies has shown that trust depends on transparency – and effectiveness depends on allowing different voices into discussions.

As we continue to move away from initial and most severe phase of responding to the pandemic there are many hundreds of decisions to be taken which will impact on the health and livelihood of different sectors and communities. They must be given a proper role in discussions.

It simply is not good enough that announcements are made by an acting Minister for Children about the childcare without meaningful consultation with the childcare sector.

It is not good enough that the nursing home sector is not formally represented in key discussions. It is simply not acceptable that in area after area there are background briefings about what is expected to be decided but the relevant groups of employers, managers and workers have not been brought into the discussion to help shape the decisions.

No one is expecting a perfect response – and absolutely everyone accepts the pressures which key parts of the public service are working under. However, the spirit of common purpose is not being used enough and critical discussions simply have to be more systematically opened up to inclusive participation.

As things stand today there is widespread unease about the lack of clarity on the basis upon which decisions will be taken. This is not the same as a demand for certain decisions – simply a wish to be told in direct terms what the triggers are for certain key policy decisions. Such clarity has been provided by governments in many countries.

Last week the Taoiseach said in response to the Dáil asking for clarity that decisions on lifting restrictions would be taken in light of a small number of considerations: epidemiology, hospital /ICU capacity, number of Covid cases, and the ability to quickly test and trace.

Yesterday party leaders were told in unequivocal terms that testing is not an issue. The premature announcement of testing capacity in the past was acknowledged, but we were told that the capacity is in place to carry out more testing.

We were also told that while hospitals are operating well within capacity at the moment, and at a capacity which other countries have seen as providing for possible increases, there is a desire to be careful on this front.

Where there is no clarity is what the triggers will be in relation to epidemiology. The reproduction number has been below 1 for some weeks and the public information suggests that the main concern is hotspots rather than broader community spread.

We also need more information and more answers about the impact on other health issues of decisions taken in relation to the pandemic response.

In recent days doctors in many countries including Ireland have been drawing attention to the fact that we must understand that delayed diagnostics and treatment in other areas will lead to higher non-Covid mortality.

Most of the diagnostic capacity of our country is lying idle – so too is much of our national public and private capacity to treat other diseases. Doctors throughout the country are reporting how people are not presenting with diseases such as cancer which have not suddenly become less prevalent.

We need an urgent assessment of what is to be done to address this. Part of this has to be an answer to what is to be done in relation to the private hospitals – where the spending of many millions on empty wards cannot be justified.

It has been reported that tomorrow there will be a cabinet meeting after which the Taoiseach will announce a strategy for the period ahead. At a minimum, the Irish people need to be given clarity on the exact basis on which changes will be triggered. It can’t be more of the ‘we’ll tell you when we have decided’ approach.

The move away from a severe lockdown will only happen in gradual steps – but these need to be outlined and sectors need to be given the opportunity to propose actions which they can take to operate within health guidelines.

While the science is absolutely clear, the shaping of policies to respect this science requires debate.

Without a clear proposal from government on future steps, Dáil Éireann and the media will not be able to perform their core roles of oversight and debate – and we will be denied the opportunity to represent voices which currently feel marginalised in discussions.

In the coming weeks a proposed social protection Estimate will be brought before the Dáil. This Estimate is required by the unprecedented scale of the economic impact of the pandemic and policies to respond to it.

As we have said to the government privately, this vote requires proper scrutiny. It cannot just be presented as a measure to be nodded through. We will be insisting that there be a detailed review of the proposal such as it would receive if normal work were in place.

And as part of this we want a full and open assessment of the economic impact of the pandemic. At the moment we have macro-assessments but very little beyond this and we are concerned that there are many issues which have not emerged yet.

We want to hear a full assessment of the impact on the finances of public companies. For example, we are currently operating a public transport system which is receiving almost no revenue. What is to be done to fill this gap? We can see throughout Europe that governments are preparing bailouts of public companies and nationally critical enterprises – for example the German government is preparing an enormous funding package for Lufthansa. When will we be told at least the broad outline of the challenges.

What is the current state of local authority finances? What is the assessment of the hit taken by higher education institutions?

And there are many groups of workers who need us to consider their situation. Fixed term workers in research facilities are critical to the response – but they face heightened uncertainty about their status.

And frankly it is not acceptable that workers abandoned by Debenhams in what looks like an opportunistic timing of store closures are having their names taken by Gardai when they undertake responsible, socially-distanced demonstrations. They cannot be deprived of the right to draw attention to their situation.

In the NESC report on a just transition in relation to climate change it was emphasised that the digital transition also carries with it major social and economic challenges. If it is true that habits developed during the pandemic will lead to an acceleration of the digital transformation we will need an acceleration of measures to help those adversely impacted by it.

In relation to the specific issue of the use of face coverings the debate has really gone on for long enough. There appears to be no credible alternative to adopting their use at least on public transport. Other countries have assessed the role which face covering can play and have implemented rules which are designed to both prevent the spread in certain circumstances and, just as importantly, reinforce appropriate public behaviours.

People are willing to accept the message of “we’re not ready yet” – what they are increasingly impatient about is clarity on the specific conditions under which we will be ready to move to a new phase.

Thankfully we will begin restoring more oversight with the return of parliamentary questions next week – and the next phase of legislation or spending proposals will only pass if subject to proper oversight including the provision of much more information about the current situation.
This shared national effort has achieved much in the past two months. We all know it’s not over – but we need an inclusive approach to preparing for what we do next.