Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 27 Feb 2018

Vol. 966 No. 1

Topical Issue Debate

School Patronage

I thank the Minister for coming in. The programme for Government states "We need a dynamic and innovative education system that reflects the diversity of Twenty First Century Ireland." It also speaks of a "roadmap" for a phased transfer of Catholic schools to new patrons. The problem, of course, is that the Minister has not delivered and is not delivering on that commitment. In spite of the worthy aspirations to diversity in the programme for Government, there has been an abject failure to follow through on the so-called patronage divestment process.

As the Minister knows, this matter goes back to 2012 and the recommendations of the forum on patronage and pluralism in primary schools. We know that through surveys it was established that there was evidence of parental demand for change in a number of areas of stable population, and that this would happen by the Catholic Church divesting patronage of existing schools. The Department gave approval for Educate Together to proceed with opening a number of new multidenominational schools under this process. Included in these were Trim, Tuam, Tramore, New Ross and Castlebar Educate Together schools. Educate Together is adamant that at no stage in this process did it agree that these would remain as half-stream schools. It indicates that principals and boards were appointed on the basis of these schools being allowed to develop and grow. This is and always has been the basis on which Educate Together agrees to open new schools.

All five schools are thriving and intended to take in full junior infant classes this September. In spite of this, the Department has stepped in to stymie their development by severely limiting their intake to a half-stream of 13 children this September. Parents in each of these areas are very upset and disappointed that their wishes and entitlement to send their children to a school with a patron of their choice has been completely disregarded and shown disrespect. When this matter was highlighted in the media, the Department issued a factually incorrect statement. It stated the level of potential pupil intake indicated a long-term projected size of up to half a single stream school, and this statement is erroneous. In the majority of the five schools, the recommendation was for at least a half-stream school. More important, the surveys of all five schools stated, "Taking account of ... long-term requirements, accommodation options for a full stream of provision should be considered."

The purpose of this process is that the Catholic Church is to reconfigure its own schools to free up existing accommodation for a new Educate Together school in each area. The surveys for all five of these schools stated, "The main patron (Catholic Archbishop) should now be asked to consider reconfiguration options that would provide accommodation for an Educate Together school in the area." Did the Minister ask the main patron to do this and, if so, what was his reply? Will the Minister now withdraw the Department's instruction to these five schools to limit their intake and allow these schools to develop and thrive in accordance with the wishes of local families?

I thank Deputy Shortall. The matter was raised last week but she did not get a chance to be here on that occasion. I am delighted to be able to respond today.

The background to this is the 2012 report of the advisory group to the forum on patronage and pluralism in the primary sector, which recommended that demand for patronage diversity should be met in areas of stable population by divesting patronage of existing schools where there is evidence of parental demand for change. In this context, in 2012 and 2013, my Department undertook surveys of parental preferences in 43 areas of stable population to establish the level of demand for a wider choice in the patronage of primary schools. These areas were all stable in terms of population growth, so no new school places were required.

The establishment and size of the schools indicated by the Deputy have origins in the report on the pilot surveys regarding parental preferences on primary school patronage and the report on the surveys regarding parental preferences on primary school patronage, which indicated a size of at least half a single-stream school, comprising four classrooms, being required to accommodate parental demand in the case of Tramore, Trim and Castlebar, and up to four classrooms in the case of New Ross and Tuam.

Under the patronage divesting process, a school could be opened where a school building became, or was due to become, available as a result of an amalgamation or closure of an existing school. In some areas, in responding to demand for diversity, where existing patrons were unable to make school properties available, my Department included an examination of properties held in public ownership.

All schools irrespective of their location have to operate within their available accommodation and manage annual pupil intake accordingly. The initial establishment of the indicated schools as four classroom schools, and the need to be cognisant of managing the available accommodation, has been reflected in my Department's engagement with the patron body of these schools, Educate Together. When one of the schools raised the issue of expanding its enrolment my Department invited Educate Together to submit a case to it in this regard. The case has been submitted by Educate Together to further expand five schools under its patronage that opened under the patronage divesting process.

These are Educate Together national schools in Castlebar, New Ross, Tramore, Trim and Tuam. A case for each of these schools is current under consideration. My Department is carrying out nationwide demographic exercises at primary and post-primary levels to identify areas of demographic growth and determine where additional school accommodation is needed in order to plan for school provision nationwide. This work is almost complete.

In this context the outcome of the nationwide demographic exercises will have an input into the consideration of the case submitted by Educate Together. In addition, I have announced a new patronage reconfiguration process which will accelerate the delivery of multidenominational and non-denominational schools to reach 400 such schools by 2030. There have been previous efforts at transferring patronage but we must be honest and admit they have not worked. Only ten schools transferred to multidenominational patronage as a result of the previous process set up by the former Minister, Mr. Ruairí Quinn, in 2012.

The figure is lower than was hoped for. The new process is designed to build on lessons learned from the previous process and deliver more multidenominational and non-denominational schools. That is what we believe it will do. Unlike the previous process, this plan will focus on live transfers so that a school that transfers under the new process will not be reliant on temporary accommodation.

The Minister is admitting divestment has not worked. He needs to take a different approach. For example, there are ten Catholic schools in Tuam, 11 Catholic schools in Castlebar, five Catholic schools in Tramore, six Catholic schools and one Church of Ireland school in Trim and eight Catholic schools in New Ross. The Minister is not prepared to support a full stream Educate Together school in any of those towns.

That is a huge breach of faith on the Minister's part. He is operating a policy of protectionism in respect of these schools. In a letter that recently went out to one of these schools, the Minister's Department claimed the intention of the divestment programme is that the establishment of a divested school does not adversely affect existing primary schools in the area. Does the person who wrote the letter not get it? The whole point of divestment is that Catholic schools would reconfigure, free up existing accommodation and make that available to the Educate Together schools.

The Minister has admitted the system has not worked so far. I asked him if he had asked the patrons to reconfigure and to make schools available. If so, what was their reply? Can he answer that question now? He is accepting divestment has failed. Will the Minister come up with an urgent response to the needs of those five schools? The parents are expecting to send their children there this September. The schools are expecting to be fully functioning viable schools that will take in a full junior infants class in September. Will the Minister give a new instruction to those five schools to enable them to continue to grow and thrive and ensure the rights of parents are upheld? For goodness sake, parents have a right to send their children to a tax-funded local school that is of the patronage that respects their wishes and-----

The Minister has two minutes to respond.

-----their views. The Minister has a duty to uphold those rights.

The Deputy is great at throwing around accusations, which she is entitled to do. I have heard it many a time in this Department. I know the Deputy would like me to be able to say that every parent has a right to get the school precisely of his or her choice. Unfortunately, the State has never been able to offer that. We have always had a situation that if one school is particularly popular and is growing and another school is empty, we do not just build on the popular schools. That has never been-----

Answer the question that I asked.

-----the policy of the Department. It was not under my predecessors either. The reason is that we just do not have the capital funds to build precisely the schools that each parent wants. That is the difficulty. The former Minister, Mr. Ruairí Quinn's attempt was a genuine one to, as Deputy Shortall rightly said, get a school to close and amalgamate and to get a building released and for that become a new school. Unfortunately, as the Deputy can see, the church schools, not even the ten that were opened here, were not always opened in church schools volunteering their buildings. They did not emerge that way. Other public buildings had to be used to supplement what was coming through from the church in those instances. When those buildings were made available, they were made available and the school had a building within which it could expand. They have made an application to my Department to see if we would consider allowing them go beyond the building in which they are operating in or the capacity that they have been assigned under that process and expand. We are examining that process.

As to whether we can do better, I believe we can do better. We are now instituting a process under the education training boards, ETBs, which are local bodies in each community, to identify areas where it is believed there is a demand and to do a survey of preschool children to establish a level of demand. I refer to approaching this in a different way-----

The Minister is not answering the question about these five schools.

-----and not looking for amalgamations and closures but moving-----

I thank the Minister, Deputy Bruton. He has exceeded his time.

-----to a situation where we would get live transfers - in other words, the school would close under one patron and open simultaneously or further on under a different one.

Schools Building Projects Status

The next Topical Issue is in the names of Deputies Ó Broin and Curran. Deputy Ó Broin has two minutes.

Last September, myself, Deputy Curran and a number of other Deputies raised the issue of the urgent need for a new school building for Scoil Mochua in Clondalkin, a special needs school for children with multiple and severe disabilities. One of the significant things about that Topical Issue was we were not coming as a group of constituency Members lobbying for our own constituency.

This school serves a very wide catchment area, not just central and west Dublin but also the counties of Meath, Kildare and elsewhere. The school has 74 pupils. Having been to the school on a number of occasions with Deputy Curran and others on a cross-party basis, the children and the parents in the schools are truly remarkable. The children are not remarkable because of their disabilities but because of the way in which they are able to overcome the enormous obstacles put in their way by our society and by the education system.

The building is simply unsuitable for any basic educational needs. It is not just that it is overcrowded or that some of these children are in prefabs. In one part of the school, it is not possible to close the toilet door. The toilet facility opens onto a corridor which has an old fashioned screen. The child, and possibly the assistant to the child, has to use this facility while other children, teachers, sometimes parents and Deputies, as was the case when we visited, walk down the corridor.

We asked the Minister to prioritise the capital investment to allow this school building to go ahead. He replied that information was being waited on from the school. That information has now been provided. We are looking for two things from the Minister. The first is an update. The answer to the parliamentary question the Minister gave last week was pretty poor in terms of additional information. We are looking for an update on what is happening with this vital capital project. However, we are also looking for the Minister to commit to prioritising this project so that this happens within the next number of years and not over the coming six-year period, as he indicated in his answer last week.

The Minister will recall the debate last September when we set out the conditions in the school which the 74 pupils are enduring. All these pupils have a range of disabilities. The school structure is simply not adequate to meet their needs. I refer to their movements around the school, the size of the corridors, the classrooms and the toilet facilities.

All of these children require mobility aids of one form or another, but mainly wheelchairs, and it is simply not possible to move around the school. We specifically asked the Minister to consider favourably fast-tracking this development and he indicated in his response that he would consider it. He also said at the time that there were outstanding issues. Deputy Ó Broin and I are advised by the school that all the outstanding issues have been forwarded to the Department. It is extraordinary to see the pupils and teachers surviving and thriving in this environment. It is not an appropriate place where the most vulnerable in our society should be expected to go for an education.

Incidentally, when we asked the Minister to consider favourably fast-tracking this we had no wish to jump a queue. That was not the point. As I pointed out on the last occasion, the whole school evaluation report, which was conducted eight years ago on 4 March 2010, highlighted all the issues we are bringing to the Minister's attention today. Eight years ago the Department determined that the school was not fit for purpose. We need assistance in bringing it up to date so it does not languish in some procedural black hole in the Department. Frankly, we were concerned by the reply when we raised this issue, which simply stated that it is now in the six year construction programme. That is not satisfactory. The school has already spent eight years trying to get onto a programme. Now it is told it is on a programme, but there is no plan or detail. I hope the Minister can enlighten us and outline what practical steps can be taken to ensure the vulnerable pupils in that school are looked after in a timely fashion.

I thank the Deputies for raising this again. This school site includes a therapy building and the Central Remedial Clinic, CRC, which is the patron, owns the building and intends to replace it. In that context, my Department had been engaging with the CRC seeking clarity on its plans for the therapy building. The CRC, in the latter part of January last, confirmed to the Department that it is not proceeding with its plans for a new therapy building at present. Now that this clarification has been received the Department is proceeding with the preparation of the project brief for the school building project. This forms part of the preparatory work required to facilitate the progression of the project into the architectural planning process. The Department will continue to engage with the patron and the school authority on the progression of the project.

Being on the six year list is just an indication that this has been recognised as a priority. It does not mean it is at the end of the list. There is now a significant move in its progress and my Department will work with the school to bring it through the various architectural stages as quickly as possible. I realise that this is a very important priority for a group of students who, as the Deputies said, are thriving in education under very difficult personal conditions and with defects in the facilities they are currently using.

When we raised this with the Minister last year he said he would be sympathetic to the proposal that this should be fast-tracked if possible. He went on to say that he had been seeking in the previous two years to prioritise children with special educational needs. I urge the Minister to visit the school. I accept there are huge demands on the Minister's time and on the limited resources of the Department, and every group of politicians and parents who are seeking a capital project will invite the Minister to visit the school in question. However, if the Minister takes the time to visit Scoil Mochua he will be genuinely shocked by the Dickensian conditions there.

I note that when we asked the Minister about this last year the timescale was up to 2021. Now we are being told about a six year timescale. The concern of the parents, children and teachers, as well as the local representatives, is at what point in that six year period it will be. Perhaps the Minister will outline in detail what happens next, when this school can expect to get approval and when the building will finally be built so the children can get the education they deserve.

As Deputy Ó Broin said, the Minister said on the last occasion that he would be sympathetic to the proposal that it should be fast-tracked if possible, in light of the particular circumstances of the school and the conditions. The physical structure is grossly inadequate to meet the daily needs of this group of 74 pupils. I agree with Deputy Ó Broin that the Minister should visit it if he has the opportunity. It is rare that we would come to the House to advocate for a particular school over another, because all schools have pressures. However, this is considerably different. I believe it requires the Minister's direct intervention to ensure it is not treated within the Department as just another school building project. It is for a group of pupils who have significant physical disabilities. The unit they are working in currently is not fit for purpose. I urge the Minister to acknowledge that he previously said he would be favourably disposed to fast-tracking it and that he will take a personal interest in delivering this school in a timely fashion.

To clarify, the six years refer to 2015 to 2021, the period during which the schools where we need to make investment were identified and this was prioritised. There is a new demographic operation taking place and some new schools will be identified from that. That will be the next piece. The next steps are the project brief, design, planning permission and so forth. There are also detailed architectural design approval processes before that. Then it goes to tender and to build. There are different ways to build. Depending on the suitability of the project it could be rapid build, which is one model, or there are other ways of building it. I will ask if there is a way in which the choice of the build could speed this up, but there is no way I can short circuit the steps. They must be gone through individually. I cannot make a commitment that one phase will take two months and another will take six months because I would only be misleading the Deputies if something unforeseen cropped up during the process. However, my Department recognises the priority of a school of this nature. I will seek to ensure that no time is lost at any point in the schedule as it proceeds.

Mental Health Policy

This issue relates to a blueprint borne from a study carried out in the mid-west in 2013 and 2014 on trying to address co-occurring disorders. According to the report, treatment for people with co-occurring disorders is complicated from a clinical service provision point of view due to the difficulty in ascertaining which diagnosis is primary, who takes responsibility, who holds the risk and who takes the lead in their care. It cites case studies that were done in this regard when people were accessing services. In one case study, the person would frequently be told by the mental health service that he would have to address his addiction issues before anything else could be addressed, yet community drug and alcohol services were not willing to see him due to his mental health symptoms and presentations. The community mental health services did not have access to an addiction councillor in its team, and his non-attendance and disengagement with the mental health service further complicated management of his chances for recovery.

The result of this is a blueprint, called "No Wrong Door". The aspiration of "No Wrong Door" is to work with individuals in truly integrated ways. Rather than care being provided by differing disciplines according to diagnostic groups this service meets the person where the person is, with dual expertise in order to assist in a positive change according to the blended problem presentation. Obviously, that is the complexity here. "No Wrong Door" will provide a variety of services across a continuum from minimum engagement to intense therapeutic engagement. There are a number of facets relating to a person's problem and the person's current position with it, and this is a system of integration whereby the person can interact with any part of it, be it high up or low down, at one or another side of the spectrum. There is always a door by which the person can access it and the person is not turned away. That is the kernel of this proposal.

It arose from a study that took place in the mid-west and north Tipperary during 2013 and 2014.

The project included screening, triaging, assessment, motivational and a recovery-based group programme led by a counsellor and registrar, as well as psychiatric reviews, group evaluations and a peer support aftercare group.

Waiting lists for addiction counselling were significantly reduced. Access to and engagement in treatment improved. Further integration of mental health and addiction treatment was established with positive results. Service users got involved in planning and decision-making. Good outcomes were identified in areas such as motivation to change, alcohol and drug use or both, overall well-being, self-esteem and confidence, social isolation and anxiety, sense of purpose and managing difficult emotions.

Respondents informed the report's authors that the best parts of the group programme were meeting new people without having a drink and being able to talk to people experiencing the same difficulties. They also spoke about openness, feeling of safety, a sense of it being non-judgmental and good people in the group, which made them look forward to it every week. They also said the doctor and addiction counsellor were easy to talk to and it made them happy. This social interaction and social integration helped. Service provision can be at a social level where people might want to dip in and out of the service. Patients spoke about how it made them feel normal, they deserved to be there and how the other group members helped their confidence and self-esteem.

This model, recognising the myriad difficulties experienced by people, allowed them to integrate at whatever level they required.

I thank Deputy Neville for raising this important issue. I also want to use the opportunity to commend his work on mental illness and substance misuse.

The HSE has recognised the need for a clinical programme for dual diagnosis to respond to people with concurrent mental illness and substance misuse issues. Budget 2018 allocated an additional €35 million to develop mental health services in 2018, which has helped facilitate programmes such as the clinical programme for dual diagnosis. The aim of this programme is to develop a standardised evidence-based approach to the identification, assessment and treatment of co-morbid mental illness and substance misuse. This includes increasing awareness of the frequent co-existence of mental illness and substance misuse; ensuring there is a clear clinical pathway for management of people with such a dual diagnosis, including when they present to emergency departments; ensuring a standardised service is provided throughout the country; and ensuring adolescents are also included within the scope of this clinical programme.

Work has already taken place to progress this aim. This includes the appointment of a programme manager and national clinical lead, the commencement of a literature review and clinical service mapping exercise and the establishment of a national working group. The purpose of the national working group is to develop a national model of care for specialist dual diagnosis services for adults and adolescents which is person-centred, ensuring people get easier access to the right treatment at the right time and in the appropriate setting. Towards this end, the group has initiated a work plan to develop a model of care based on a programmatic approach to service improvement and development. The working group held its first meeting on 19 October 2017 and has met each month since.

The national working group recognises the need to hear from other service providers and support organisations on the needs of this particular client group. The group plans to host a forum to link in with this aspect, as well as discussion on possible care pathways during the development of the model of care. An integral part of the dual diagnosis programme will be to devise a model of care that will ensure all adolescents and adults suspected of having a moderate to severe mental illness, co-existing with significant substance misuse, have access to a timely mental health service nationally. This is to be delivered on a community health care organisation, CHO, basis. The service will be provided in an integrated manner across the primary care division and the mental health service. This will ensure there are close working relationships with the relevant specialties in the acute hospital groups which would deal with any medical co-morbidities which may occur, particularly in those with alcohol misuse.

I welcome the Minister of State's statement. There is already a blueprint and work done which will be extremely beneficial to the group. Based on what I highlighted from the report, timelines must be put in place for the delivery of the services in question. It is fine for us to speak about these issues and research them. I understand this needs to be done because we want to get this right when we implement it. However, specific timelines and objectives for these groups must be put in place.

I sit on the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Future of Mental Health Care. I welcome the Government setting it up because it gives mental health the priority and profile it requires. We need the timelines to hold these service providers to account. Without timelines, we cannot and it will simply be kicked down the road.

I welcome the fact the Government has done much for mental health with the 300 hours of well-being for schools, as well as the focus on PE and creative arts in schools. There has been a move towards the regulation of counsellors and psychotherapists. Suicide figures have started to decrease, which is encouraging. Obviously, we need more research into that. We must continue addressing the stigma of mental illness which is what the "No Wrong Door" group is trying to do by allowing people to integrate into the service and move with them, while focusing on the softer side of them, as opposed to the acute.

I forgot earlier to convey the apologies of the Minister of State, Deputy Jim Daly, who was unable to take this matter. I will take the Deputy’s relevant points on these services back to him. We have many similar issues in the disability sector. I agree we need to pin down and focus on specific timelines, as well as particular deadlines. The service providers must be held to account on these issues. The Deputy raised the broader societal point about the stigma of mental illness. I commend the work of the "No Wrong Door" service in addressing this issue. We all have a role to play in this.

Budget 2018 allocated an additional €35 million to develop mental health services in 2018. The Minister for Health has committed an additional €55 million funding for 2019, delivering an overall €105 million for the implementation of A Vision for Change over the three-year period between 2017 and 2019. In 2012, mental health services spend was €711 million. In 2018, it will be €910 million. The budget increase will facilitate more staffing in child and adolescent, adult and later life psychiatry services. A seven-day a week response will be enhanced to move towards provision of 24-7 mental health services. In addition, further resources will be provided through programmes for eating disorders, dual diagnosis, homeless people, perinatal mental health, prisoner outreach services, intellectual disability services and service-user participation. The work is being done and the investments are being made. The plan is there in A Vision for Change. We must ensure, however, all the service providers have specific deadlines and they are accountable to Members of the Oireachtas. That is the strong message which I will bring back to the Minister of State.

Foreign Conflicts

Is the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade not here?

He is in Europe today. I will take the matter on his behalf.

Some of the reports coming out of eastern Ghouta are horrific. Over the past nine days, 600 people have been killed, including 150 children. The reports are literally unbelievable - a massacre of civilians. It seems like the suffering of the ordinary Syrian people is never-ending. Many people who watch the news feel a sense of hopelessness. I certainly do when I see the horrendous situation in Syria.

There is something that the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade can do. He is not helpless. He should immediately call the Russian ambassador and ask why the latter's country is bombing eastern Ghouta, where 150 children and 600 people overall have been killed. He should ask how the ambassador can justify the indiscriminate bombing of hospitals and schools and the slaughter of people while the world watches on.

In Deputy Bruton's capacity as a Minister, he should immediately have the Russian ambassador to Ireland called to justify the war crimes with which the latter's Government is assisting the murderous Assad regime.

I echo that call. What is being done by the dictator Assad is horrific. His brutal and vicious attempt to crush what was a genuine popular uprising by the people of Syria against his dictatorship has been cruel in the extreme and backed by the military might of Russia, unleashing carnage on the people of Ghouta. Thousands of people who need to be medically evacuated cannot get out. Promises of humanitarian pauses come to nothing. The people are being pounded by Assad with the assistance of Russia.

I do not believe in external military interference in this situation. That has made it worse. The Saudis and United States have also backed militias. Turkey is invading parts of northern Syria to try to crush the Kurds because of its internal politics. The Iranians, who are trying to get involved, have a major case to answer for disgracefully backing Assad in his horrific attacks. It is ironic that Iran can rightly talk about the need for solidarity with the Palestinian people and yet support the dictator Assad in the vicious assault that he is waging against the people of eastern Ghouta in a war that has led to 11 million people, half of the population of Syria, being displaced. Most of that number is the responsibility of Assad and his key ally, Russia, but plenty of others also have responsibility and blood on their hands. The least we can do is exercise moral pressure, call in the Russian ambassador and ask him to justify the horrific actions that his Government is responsible for in Syria.

I thank the Deputies for raising this matter. I share their despondency with the situation in eastern Ghouta. The pictures that we are seeing are horrifying even by the standards of this conflict, which has been appalling throughout. On behalf of the Government, I condemn in the strongest terms the continued attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure, including homes, hospitals and schools.

Regarding the Government's response, the Tánaiste attended the UN Security Council briefing on this issue in New York last week, where the UN Secretary General, Mr. António Guterres, appealed for an immediate suspension of violence in eastern Ghouta to allow for the delivery of humanitarian aid and for evacuations. Ireland strongly endorsed that call.

Ireland welcomes the adoption of a Security Council resolution on Saturday that called for an immediate ceasefire and unimpeded humanitarian access to besieged populations in Syria. However, the bombardment of eastern Ghouta has continued in defiance of this resolution. This morning, there were reports of continued attacks even during what was meant to be a five-hour pause. I am also concerned by the reports of chemical attacks in recent days. The Foreign Affairs Council of the EU met yesterday. Ireland added its voice to calls for the immediate and full implementation of the ceasefire demanded by the UN Security Council.

As to intervening with Russian authorities, I understand the Tánaiste previously met the Russian deputy foreign Minister, Mr. Vladimir Titov, and communicated directly our concerns to the Russian authorities about their support for the prolonged suffering of the Syrian people. Numerous times, he has relayed to the Russian ambassador Ireland's concern with the situation. I will convey to him the Deputies' call that further steps should be taken along this road.

It is a difficult situation. It is hard to continue hoping that political solutions can be found, but I understand that the UN special envoy, Mr. Staffan de Mistura, is continuing his efforts. Forlorn as they may seem at this stage, we are determined to support those efforts. As the Deputies know, there has been a policy of supporting sanctions and we support measures to ensure legal accountability for all of the war crimes that are being committed against humanity in Syria. Ireland takes the strongest possible view of this situation and welcomes the Deputies' support for our position.

I will restate what I said - it is imperative that the Russian ambassador be called to account for the war crimes that his country is committing. That discussion should not be a past or passing thing. The ambassador should be brought before the Tánaiste and asked directly how his country can justify killing hundreds of people, not only in Ghouta, but also in Aleppo and other cities across Syria. He should be demanded to appear. That is the least the Government can do, not only for the poor suffering people of Syria, but also for the people of this country and the Syrians residing in Dublin who are asking what is happening in Syria. People are being slaughtered. He should be made accountable for the crimes of his country. Will the Minister, Deputy Bruton, give a commitment that the Russian ambassador will be summoned immediately to be questioned by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade?

I echo the Deputy's comments. What Russia is doing is horrific. At the very least, it should be forced by our Government and every other country to justify the unjustifiable publicly. What Russia is doing to kids and innocent people cannot be justified - the devastation of eastern Ghouta, the slaughter of hundreds of people, the destruction of hospitals and schools etc.

Beyond that, we should continue pushing for the most generous support and acceptance of Syrian refugees fleeing from this horror into Europe. Europe's response to those refugees has not been great. It has essentially used Turkey as a buffer to keep many of these desperate Syrians out. Turkey is also implicated in this, given that it has invaded northern Syrian to serve its cynical desire to crush the Kurdish movement. We should be consistent across the entire region and call out, for example, the Saudi regime, which is backing militias in the area, and other external powers like the US that are inflaming a disaster in Syria for their own cynical interests, but let us start with the Russian ambassador by calling him in.

I assure the Deputy the Russian authorities are in no doubt of Ireland's position but I will pass on his suggestion to the Minister. I share the Deputy's dismay. Over 13 million people have required humanitarian assistance in Syria alone and 5.5 million have fled to neighbouring countries. To be fair to the EU, to date it has mobilised more than €10.4 billion for humanitarian stabilisation and resilience assistance in Syria and neighbouring countries. It has hosted a donor conference with pledges of €5.6 billion in April 2017 and plans to host another conference in April 2018. It has also supported sanctions and so on. It is a really serious situation. Our calls are very small in comparison to the scale of what is happening. I absolutely share the condemnation the Deputies have expressed.

Barr
Roinn