Deputy Micheál Martin - speech from 07 May 2020

In just over two months, 1,375 people in our country have lost their lives during this pandemic. Our first thoughts must continue to be with their families and loved ones, and indeed with those who are today fighting with the virus. There is no question that our absolute priority must be to continue to limit the spread and fatal impact of COVID-19, and that this work will continue for some time. During this session there will be many hard questions asked concerning the government's actions, and this is exactly as it should be. Particularly as we join other countries in moving out of the most restrictive phases of the response, there are many issues where there is no simple answer and different approaches are possible. Last Friday's publication was welcome, but it has raised almost as many questions as it answered. It is a framework for reaching decisions. It does not provide the level of clarity which could have been expected. The five tests by which different elements of the restrictions can be raised are reasonable, and they have been on the record for some time. However, we have absolutely no clarity about what these specific triggers are for lifting, retaining, or re-imposing restrictions. In the absence of a clear assessment of the current status and future requirements, the tests provide no clarity. For example, the critical issue of increased mortality from non-COVID cases has now been identified as a consideration. What is the current assessment of the extent of these deaths? How will it be monitored? At what level will this factor come into play? It is a very serious issue in terms of the non-COVID stream in our health services, and in terms of both primary care and acute care, and the absence of people coming forward, and so forth. In contrast, other countries have been far clearer in saying exactly what they mean when considering pressure on hospital capacity, the replication of the virus in the community, the availability of testing, and other factors. As we have been pointing out for many weeks, in key areas, Ireland has taken a quite limited approach to the publication of real-time data and the quantification of problems. Following the publication of the framework last Friday, we need to move on and to take a more open and rapid approach to the publication of all data relevant to the five tests. Different sectors of our society and economy need to be enabled to come forward with specific proposals for how to lift restrictions while respecting public health advice. Given the amount of time and effort which was put into preparing for last week's announcement, and the fact that it was withheld until a wide range of advertising and other publicity activities were ready, it is surprising how many specific issues are not addressed in the document. The failure to consult with the Northern Executive is inexplicable. Hopefully, the Taoiseach will clarify that this was an oversight, which will not happen again. This is not an area where high secrecy is required. In fact, the absence of enough consultation is clear in parts of the document. The situation in relation to the Leaving Certificate is unacceptable. Every single government in Europe has been confronted with how to complete school leaving exams and prepare for a new higher education year. Nowhere has there been such a lack of clarity and confusion. The fact that the reopening document published last week failed to address it is remarkable. We are now beyond the stage where clarity must be provided, and the government must be honest about the ability to complete the Leaving Cert in the coming months. On Easter Monday, our spokesperson sought a briefing on the public health advice in relation to exam classes and exam sittings. He has never received this, and it is our understanding that the exams advisory group has also not received such a briefing or such public health advice. How is it, then, that arbitrary dates can be bandied about without providing information about the public health limitations for what can and cannot be done? Why have members of government talked about starting dates for exams without any detail on how this can be accomplished? There is no way of addressing the concerns and preferences of every student, but there are basic principles of equity which must be addressed. In recent days, I have heard from teachers and principals in many parts of the country about how certain students simply are not able to match others in terms of home-based learning. One principal in a desk school told me that his best student has nothing more than a small smartphone to rely on. Other students have family members testing positive, with obvious implications for their capacity to study, given the need for parents to self-isolate. Policy cannot be set based on assuming that every student has a laptop, a room where they can learn alone, and a school which has the resources to teach online. I'm genuinely surprised that there has been nothing published so far with the government assessing what the teaching and learning environment has been for Leaving Certificate Students in the past two months. operations and the first time of the class of the person has a mini-level breaking and having any difficulties in society that has been allowed to survive. Thank you very much, Mr Sirlein and the first person in the past, Mr Sirlein, was there only in the past two of the students who have worked. As we were in the past few years, Mr Sirlein on the past two weeks. The students who have lived in the past three weeks has been on the past two weeks after the story and the first few weeks raised in the past 12 years. But you could be there with the facility, and you could possibly have a place in the past two weeks, and on the past three weeks. It was a bit RESPECED They have been in the past two weeks as well. But it was 4.5. When the road map was released, there was one word for an artist. It was a good time to go to Europe and it was a good time. It was a good time, but it was a good time. It was a good time when it was an artist and it was a good time to get to the general of an island for an island. and it's a new roadmap. It's a new roadmap. In the future, it's a new roadmap and a new plan for the future. And as well as bringing some finality to what is to be done about completing the leaving, there is a need to urgently give guidance and support to the higher education sector. The financial crisis caused by underfunding in recent years has now been followed by a financial meltdown. The broad dimensions of this are getting clearer as overseas enrolments for next year have effectively disappeared. One constructive step which could be taken immediately would be to agree to expand the number of places in third level available for leaving certificate students this autumn. This would help reduce the impact of the points race and potential disputes concerning grades in the event of an alternative emerging. In many cases, this would also ensure that we would not see a decline in places in important faculties because of the decline in overseas enrolments, where there's already an excess of qualified candidates applying for places like medicine, finance, computing and other areas. The failure, I think, to show leadership in relation to what is happening with the leaving certain higher education must end. The consultations which were held yesterday need to be maintained on an intensive basis with hands-on ministerial engagement and with the view to a concrete proposal being agreed and emerging. On Saturday, Minister Donoghue announced a range of economic measures and repeated the fact that we are facing a series of economic employment and budgetary shocks which are unprecedented. There are today over one million people receiving some form of emergency payment. This is the highest level of state support ever recorded and anyone who suggests that policy responses should set a new normal is being both misleading and cynical. No one has suggested that we begin a fiscal retrenchment in order to restore access to lending, but to claim that there are no budgetary concerns whatsoever is empty politics. The critical challenge we face is how to restore as much demand and employment as possible, and to do so as quickly as possible while respecting public health limits. As I have said during all of our recent sessions, the treatment of Debenham workers is outrageous and unacceptable. I hope we will hear more detail today about what has been done to make sure that some companies do not exploit the pandemic to deny workers and creditors their rights. Equally, I hope we will have a greater acknowledgement today of the vast majority of businesses which are desperate to hold on to their staff and to get back to work as soon as possible. My party has heard from businesses throughout the country, which are doing everything they can to keep their staff and are developing detailed protocols for how to restart and respect health guidelines. Unfortunately, we have still not received any information about the impact of the pandemic on state companies and local authorities. What is the current scale of the financial hit which they have taken, and how are they to be protected? Public transport is critical to our society and economy, yet we have heard nothing about how public transport companies are to be helped and what limits they will face before full reopening. The evidence from throughout Europe is that masks are a critical part of a widespread return to using public transport, and this needs to be addressed here. There is more than enough public health evidence of the benefit of face coverings, and there is no evidence that the supply of PPE will be undermined by introducing a requirement for face coverings in at least certain public situations. This has been under consideration for long enough. I think it is time for a decision. This week we begin to restore important parts of parliamentary accountability and oversights. The national will to fight and overcome the pandemic is as strong as ever. What we need now is greater clarity and openness in deciding on future steps. Thank you.