I press the amendment. We have already spoken to it.

Amendments Nos. 314a and 314b have been ruled out of order because there is a potential charge on the Exchequer. Senator Boyhan may speak on the section.

I thank the Minister of State and her staff for coming to the House. She has given this a lot of time and I want to acknowledge that. It is important. I received a letter and communication from An Cathaoirleach informing me with regret that amendments Nos. 314a and 314b have been disallowed on account of a potential cost to the Exchequer. I will not get into the process of that today other than to say it is disappointing. It highlights significantly what is the importance of the commission.

Section 128 states that the functions of the chief inspector shall be to visit and inspect every registered acute mental health centre at least once in each registration period of three years and every registered community mental health centre at least once in each registration period of five years. All I was attempting to do was move that from once to twice. I do not think that was an unreasonable request but the Minister of State's hands are tied in that it is not a live amendment on the floor and I respect that. I just wanted to flag that to her in light of the various inspectorates' reports and their concerns.

This morning, I had another look at the Mental Health Commission and I do not want to spend too much time on this. Nevertheless, I want to check that a statement in the Mental Health Commission Annual Report 2024 is consistent with the Minster of State's understanding. Page 49 of that report states:

The Inspector of Mental Health Services visits and inspects every approved centre at least once each year. The Inspector prepares a report on their findings following the inspection. Each approved centre is given an opportunity to review and comment on any content or findings prior to publication.

In a funny way, I am scratching my head about that. If that is the case, that is good, but will that continue to be the case? Sometimes, we draw a distinction between primary legislation and secondary legislation to suit our own agenda. That is not necessarily to say the Minister of State is doing that. However, this is primary legislation and the body of all our debates here has concerned this issue of protecting the people and securing appropriate care for the people involved in the services. Is that still the Minister of State's understanding? Can we have that assurance that the inspector will do it every year? He is doing it every year now, or at least he has the ability to do it. He might not always have the capacity and he may to decide to carry out an inspection after 14 months. I understand that. No one in the approved centres should necessarily know the movements of the inspector. He can come unannounced or when he thinks it is appropriate. That is a good thing.

While my proposal was for twice a year, if the statement I quoted is correct, that gives me reassurance. I am not sure if that has changed or whether the Minister of State has received assurances on that.

I thank the Acting Chairperson for being in the Chair today. I understand the Senator's amendments have been ruled out of order but, as he said, that decision was not made by me or my officials. I received these amendments earlier this week and asked my officials to correspond with the Mental Health Commission for its view on them. While the Bill as presented states that the inspector will inspect every inpatient service at least once within the registration period, I understand the commission plans to inspect each service at least twice per registration period, of which I am fully supportive. I understand this also how the commission will inspect the community residences, that is, twice a year. I have already provided resources for more staff than ever before and when the Bill is enacted, more staff will have to be provided because they are 66 approved centres across the country at the moment, but when all 81 CAMHS teams are included in that, they will need a lot more support.

The commission plans to inspect each service at least twice per registration period. The current wording provides the right level of flexibility for the commission to prioritise its inspection resources and home in on services that have issues with compliance. I will not go into it but I will touch on it briefly. When I was made aware of the situation in Bloomfield along with my Department and my officials, within two hours of the commission being informed of the situation in Bloomfield it was on site. I could not ask for more than that. It was informed at 5 o'clock and was on site at 7 o'clock. The commission is still finalising the report, which I expect to receive very soon. I have full confidence in it from that perspective.

This also relates to something I did in relation to HIQA. Every nursing home is inspected at least once in a calendar year and 95% of all inspections are unannounced. Unannounced inspections are a significant part. I tried to write that into the HIQA legislation but I could not do so because the follow-up inspections would not normally be unannounced, given that inspectors want to meet individual people and, therefore, have to announce it. As a result, it could not be written into the legislation. A total of 95% inspections by HIQA are unannounced and the majority of inspections by the Mental Health Commission are unannounced. As far as I am concerned, the more unannounced inspections, the better.

I thank the Minister of State for that and for taking the initiative to refer the amendments to the Mental Health Commission. I take it from that she is supportive of the sentiment.

Yes, I am 100% supportive.

Therefore, is it not an awful pity we cannot find some creative, imaginative way through the parliamentary process and legislation to put in what I put forward, which the Minister of State supports? I believe it is a good idea and I have spoken to others who believe it is a good idea. Is it not an awful shame that here we are, making primary legislation in the Seanad, the Upper House, and somehow we are currently precluded from making that proposal? That shows a weakness and anomaly in the parliamentary process.

I do not know if this is the case, but the Minister of State might outline whether it is open to her to consider that such that when she comes back on Report Stage, there would be some way of putting this in? She is in agreement and it makes sense. The commission refers in its report to inspections happening every year, although the report is from 2024, which is its most recently published report. Inspections every year would be fantastic, but I recognise that can present difficulty given the number of approved centres.

Can I leave it with the Minister of State to see if there is any way that we can do this in primary legislation? It is only twice in every three-year registration period. It is only twice - I do not think it is too much to ask. It would be great if we could put it in primary legislation or some other form of regulation. It would give comfort to people. The Minister of State agrees with it. I think it is a pity we are not able to put that into legislation when the Minister of State agrees, the commission is supportive and, I suggest, everyone in the House is supportive of the concept. I thank the Minister of State for her engagement.

I will not come back on Report Stage with this. I am not going to pretend I will. However, I am fully supportive of the sentiment and will certainly look at it in secondary legislation. I think it is important that there is clarity here. Some centres do not get three-year registrations. Some get two years and some get one year - it depends - but I think it is important that every centre is visited in every calendar year.

I thank the Minister of State for her frankness and her honesty. She is not misleading anybody. I take it that there will not be any further discussion on this.

Not now.

Nor on the next Stage.

Nor on the next Stage, no.

That will be a consideration for me in terms of support for the Bill. I want to flag that.

I move amendment No. 319:

In page 124, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following:

“ “community mental health services” means a mental health service which provides either urgent or routine care and treatment in a place other than a registered acute mental health centre or registered community mental health centre, including such services as crisis intervention teams.”.

This amendment clarifies the definition of "community mental health services" so that it explicitly includes services providing "urgent or routine care and treatment" outside the registered acute mental health centres, including crisis intervention teams. The way we define services in legislation determines how they are funded, structured and prioritised. If a community mental health service is defined narrowly, it is treated as an add-on. If it is defined clearly and expansively, it is a core pillar of the system. This amendment recognises that mental healthcare does not just happen in hospitals - it happens in homes, communities, crisis hubs, primary care centres, outreach services and mobile crisis teams and this is where people need most support. Crisis intervention teams are one of the most effective ways to prevent hospital admissions, de-escalate distress, support people in their own environments and reduce pressure on emergency departments yet too often these teams are treated as pilot projects rather than essential services. By explicitly including crisis intervention teams in the statutory definition of "community mental health services", this amendment embeds them into law, strengthens their standing and supports their expansion. It sends a clear message that crisis care belongs in the community and not just behind hospital doors. People in mental health crisis do not need to be automatically transported into an acute unit. Often they need immediate support, skilled assessment, practical intervention and follow-up care. Community-based services allow people to receive care in familiar surroundings close to family and supports. Internationally, mental health systems are moving away from institutionalised models and towards home-based care, community outreach, early intervention and multidisciplinary teams. This amendment aligns Irish law in that direction.

I will be brief. It is not that I disagree. I agree with the Senator’s sentiment but I cannot support amendment No. 319 as it is unnecessary. Community mental health services are already defined in section 2 of the Bill and so accepting this amendment would cause issues of duplication. I have no problem at all with the thrust of what the Senator said but it would be duplication as it is already there. I thank her for that and for her explanation.

Amendments Nos. 320 to 329, inclusive, and amendments Nos. 332 to 336, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Most of the amendments in this grouping relate to Government amendments and are being introduced to correct section references or typographical errors. For example, amendment No. 320 changes the section reference from section 128 to section 152, as section 152 is the appropriate section for conditions to be attached under. A lot of tidying up is going on in the Bill now because we have had so many amendments.

Amendment No. 325 is necessary following amendments to Part 3, Chapter 3 to reflect the role of the registered proprietor of a service in being responsible for making applications to the Circuit Court in certain circumstances.

I do not support Opposition amendment No. 336, tabled by Senator Black, because I do not believe it is appropriate to primary legislation. Furthermore, I do not believe that a review of complaints procedures should take place after the commencement of this Bill. If such a review is required, it should take place before the commencement of the Bill. As soon as we are finished here on the Bill, my team in the Department will move to the enactment stage. Review and a complaints mechanism will all be looked at. I give the Senator a guarantee on that. The HSE is currently looking at Your Service, Your Say in relation to a complaints mechanism because we all have had queries in relation to it and how it works. Again, the intention is not to write it into primary legislation but to deal with it by means of secondary legislation. I think a complaints procedure is really important.

As I said, I met patient advocacy services yesterday morning with Georgina. We are moving very quickly to commence patient advocacy services. We will commence as soon as the Bill is enacted. I want to start with community residences because this is an area that has not governance whereas approved centres have a huge amount of governance already under the Mental Health Commission. I want to get that done as quickly as possible.

Part of the work will be examining the existing complaints structures and reviewing how best to regulate complaints structures in mental health services. As the Bill progresses towards enactment, work has commenced in my Department to look at creating a programme of work ahead of commencement. All existing regulations, including the regulation on complaints procedures, will be examined in due course prior to commencement. I am happy to engage with the Senator on that and to engage with any of the Senators who have concerns in relation to parts that will not be in primary legislation. My door will be open.

I just wanted to put that on the record.

I thank the Minister of State very much. It is great. I really do appreciate her engagement. It does mean a lot. I want to speak to the amendment if that is okay because it is important to put on the record.

While I covered a lot of the points already during my discussion on the other amendment on the need for an independent complaints mechanism, I want to re-emphasise how important I believe an independent complaints mechanism to be. As I often do, I want to return to the lived experience voice because those are the voices that should be heard. In actual fact, that is probably why I became a legislator. To hear and be able to represent those voices is very important, and they should be heard today in this Chamber as we look at the Bill. I will come back to the audiovisual room presentation on the Bill. Breda O'Toole spoke powerfully about the difference an independent complaints mechanism could have made for her. If the Minister of State does not mind, I will quote what she said:

If an independent Complaints Mechanism had existed during the 23 years I spent under psychiatric care, I would not have lost the pivotal, most productive period of my life. Such a mechanism would have provided me with a way to voice my concerns—not only about the treatment I received, but also about the distressing mistreatment and abuse I witnessed among other patients

Similarly, Nicola Clare, another of our experts by experience at the audiovisual room briefing, spoke about her experience of actually attempting to make a complaint about her care using the existing mechanisms. She described it as "exhausting, isolating, traumatising and impossibly hard". She said:

I felt I didn’t stand a chance against an institution hell bent on protecting itself. I often wonder how different it might have been had I an advocate to support me or if an independent complaints procedure existed. I wonder how many more of me there are. Would an independent service start seeing patterns? Would it allow for open dialogue and possible changes? I don’t know, but it is certainly worth considering.

These are comments from those who have had distressing lived experiences. Again, it is really important that I note them. I really want to highlight the many incredible mental health professionals and services we have in this country who do incredibly difficult and important work. I have to pay tribute to them all because it is very difficult. I also want to say that as in all walks of life, there will always be a few bad apples or people who are not as great. There is probably a majority who are brilliant but there are one or two who are not so good, and we have to highlight that. When we are dealing with people who have a huge amount of power and other people in very vulnerable circumstances, it is absolutely essential that there is a mechanism to weed out bad practices. That is really what we are trying to do here. That mechanism also protects all the wonderful staff who are doing their best because it means they do not get tarred with the same brush. It is also important that we consider that any one of our loved ones could be accessing mental health services tomorrow. There are so many people we all know. We all have somebody in our family; there is no doubt about it. We have to consider that it could be any one of our loved ones accessing mental health services tomorrow. Would we not want to have those safeguards in place for our complaints to be independently and appropriately investigated and dealt with?

I am glad to hear this is something the Minister of State is looking at for secondary legislation. I would love to know a little bit more about what she is thinking around the timeline because she obviously feels that is very important. There are certain issues she feels cannot be put into this legislation, which she thinks are likely to go into others. Could she say a little bit about the secondary legislation and if there is a timeline and what her thoughts are around that?

I understand exactly where the Senator is coming from. I want to acknowledge that lady who shared her lived experience and spoke about her 23 years in services and the challenges she had. I speak to a lot of people, too, who have had good experiences, and the Senator has acknowledged that, but we have come a long way over 23 years when we think of the Bill in 2001, which the current Taoiseach brought through the Houses. We have spoken about it many times and here I am now in 2026 with a Bill that started its journey through the Houses 17 months ago. There has been a huge amount of work in collaboration with the Department of justice and the Department of children.

It is essential that when any person is receiving healthcare supports, whether for his or her mental or physical health, he or she should have access to supports he or she needs to make a complaint if they are not happy with his or her care. It is just a given that this has to happen. The Bill already strengthens the requirement that people receiving treatment in a registered acute mental health centre be given information in relation to the complaints procedure in the centre. That is true for either involuntary or voluntary detention. It might have been lost at times in the involuntary detention piece where people are not in a position to do that. In relation to the care plans we spoke about yesterday and the nominated person who can support people now in their care journey, that is really important.

The 2006 approved centre regulations include a regulation related to complaints procedures. These regulations will be replaced under the new enactment, and I expect that significantly more detail in relation to complaints procedures will be included in the new regulations. As I said, I met yesterday with the patient advocacy service and got an idea of what is happening. There are 44 people currently working in patient advocacy services - not the national advocacy services, but in patient advocacy service. This information is impossible because it is happening the length and breadth of the country. The first question I asked was whether we have full geographical coverage, and we do. In order for them to ramp up into mental health services, however, there is a scoping exercise going on. It is not quite as straightforward as just going into an acute hospital setting when somebody has a mental disorder and is very clearly unwell with mental illness. There is scoping work going on there at the moment on how it would look for them. At the same time, I have asked them to move as quickly as possible. I want to compliment my special adviser, Ian, on all the work he has done in supporting me with this Stage of the Bill. He is going to engage with national advocacy services and the patient advocacy service next week to see how quickly we can stand it up.

As I said, I am aware of all the governance that is available from the Mental Health Commission in our approved centres. However, I specifically want to focus immediately on the many people who are living in community houses the length and breadth of the country with enduring mental health conditions. That is the first part of the legislation I want to enact. They are probably very well looked after, but I do not know. I do not know what kind of premises they are living in. There is a lot of information that we do not know. All of the regional executive officers, REOs, are doing an audit across the entire country. In the main, I expect that these people are looked after extremely well because a lot of them have families. At the same time, however, they have to have access to make a complaint if they want to. The complaint could be that somebody might like to attend the men's shed for a half day a week and is not allowed to do it. It could be something as simple as that so that they can live the best life they possibly can.

I am with the Senator 100% on this. I cannot tell her how much I am with her on this. That is why I had the meeting yesterday morning during a really busy day. It was so I can get a complete understanding of how quickly we can make this happen. I will keep the Senator informed on the progress in that regard. As I said, another meeting is going to happen next week. I have asked them to come back to me with guidelines as to how many staff they need, the cost and how fast they can ramp it up because it is not happening quick enough for me at the moment. In fairness, I want to thank Georgina from the patient advocacy services. She gave me a lot of information yesterday. She actually gave me an indication of the types of complaints that are being made. Complaints can be made in relation to the type of food a person is getting. A lot of complaints, believe it or not, are about how someone's own clothes might go to the laundry, and they might not get their own clothes back. There might be a mix of somebody else's. She went through the types of complaints. Sometimes, people might not have a good working relationship with the clinical lead on the team, for example. There are some complaints in relation to that. In the main, however, they are complaints we can work with and resolve. That is why I was happy to get a context of the types of complaints they get at the moment. They are in the disability sector and the nursing home sector. They are already seeing about 10% of those with mental health issues through the disability sector as well. I am very anxious to progress this. As I said, I have form here. I have done it across the nursing home sector, and I will certainly do it across this sector. I want to get it done as soon as I possibly can, however. It is really important.

I thank the Minister of State very much. I totally agree with her. I remember there was an older woman whose teeth went missing and then she was given somebody else's false teeth. It is awful.

Is there any idea about the timeline for the secondary legislation? Does the Minister of State have an idea about when or how it will progress?

We hope the President will sign the Bill over the Easter period. That is our plan and timeline at the moment. They will move immediately then. For all the secondary legislation we are looking at a period of between 12 and 18 months. Other issues can run in parallel to that. Some of them will be statutory instruments that I will simply sign and that will not have to come before the Houses. They will be laid before the Houses but they will not have to be discussed in the Houses.

As the Senators are aware, I am open to coming in to discuss anything at any time, even if it is only statements to provide an update. I will come in and do that. My point is there is no reason why other things cannot happen in parallel. The patient advocacy services part is the one I want to get done first.

I thank the Minister of State for her engagement.

I move amendment No. 330:

In page 139, line 36, to delete “a consultant psychiatrist” and substitute “a qualified mental health professional”.

I move amendment No. 331:

In page 140, line 1, to delete “a consultant psychiatrist” and substitute “a qualified mental health professional”.

I move amendment No. 336:

In page 149, between lines 2 and 3, to insert the following:

“Review of procedures dealing with complaints in registered mental health services

176. (1) The Minister shall, within 12 months of the commencement of this Act, conduct a review of existing procedures dealing with complaints that are available to persons accessing registered mental health services.

(2) The review shall—

(a) examine the accessibility, independence, transparency and effectiveness of current procedures dealing with complaints,

(b) consider the feasibility of establishing an independent mechanism for receiving and addressing complaints relating to mental health services, and

(c) identify any legislative or administrative reforms that may enhance the independence and responsiveness of procedures dealing with complaints.

(3) The review shall be conducted using existing resources within the Department of Health and should include consultation with:

(a) individuals with lived experiences, service users and advocacy groups;

(b) mental health professionals and service providers;

(c) the Mental Health Commission;

(d) any other persons or bodies the Minister considers appropriate.

(4) A report on the findings of the review shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas within 24 months of the commencement of this Act.”.

I want to follow on from what Senator Black was saying. This was a very important amendment and this is a very important section. It deals with the regulations and registration, operation and management of mental health services. The section deals with a very important area. We have talked about complaints but there are also observations and investigations into the non-compliance rate.

It will take a few minutes for me to illustrate my point. If we look at the Mental Health Commission report, I came in here today with the intention of naming the seven organisations that have very serious cases against them, which relate to issues of non-compliance, including critical issues. Then I thought about it. There are two categories and they amount to seven organisations in the mental health sector. I reached out to two of them. In fairness, it is not appropriate for me to name them because a lot of good work goes on in these organisations. There is also a lot of failure, however. We cannot rely on complaints; we must be vigilant.

We have the Mental Health Commission. I will not go back over all the failures of the Mental Health Commission. I put on record my support generally for the Mental Health Commission. It does really good work. Its responsibilities are regulation, inspection, compliance, monitoring and enforcement. That is central to supporting the service users and the people who work in the service. That is an important role. It is part of the regulatory process. It also has an obligation under its vision, mission and value statement, which it publishes on its website. That has been a recurring theme of our debates in recent weeks in the sessions where we have been dealing with the Mental Health Bill. It must be person-centred, human-rights based, fundamentally 100% about quality, independence and accountability, dignity and respect, and of course at all times applying expertise. That is an important point to make.

There are serious shortcomings in service providers. It is not good enough to suggest that we are all whistleblowers who are going to complain about the client services. I have spoken to a number of staff. I again give a call-out to the psychiatric nurses and all the allied professions and service providers in the mental health sector who do tremendous work. The more I speak to them, the more confidence I have, not in the legislation, but in their ability to use the whistleblower legislation or to pick up the phone to any TD or Senator. I would encourage anyone listening here today to do so if there is any form of abuse or question about the quality of care. They must reach out to the people involved. I want to put that on the record. We will be concluding our debate at 2 o'clock. That is important.

This area deals with the regulation of the registration. There are also corporate governance policies in place for these providers of services. It is important that we somehow have a facility to capture the shortcomings. The Minister of State has powers in this legislation herself. This is why I brought it up. As she considers the annual report every year, which I am sure she does in detail, if things are flagged I want to be able to track them. The 2025 report will be out this year and I want to be able to come back in here and ask the Minister of State what she is doing about a report that was being prepared as we were speaking. That is about vigilance. That is our job and function. I do not want to be negative about this legislation in a year's time and say we pointed all this out, but like the two inspection staff, we suddenly could not find a legislative way of overcoming issues. If something happens in six months' time and we are told, sure we only have to do it every three years, that is not good for the patients that were intimidated and threatened in a particular service.

What did we do about it? Not very much. We proposed something but we did not get support from the Minister or the Government if that was the case. The Minister of State was sympathetic but sympathetic is no good. She will move on, I will move on and we all move on. If we could enshrine it in the legislation, there would be some comfort that people could rely on the primary legislation and this is our primary function here today. Where the commission highlights serious shortcomings, as it has in its report on these seven organisations, some of which are not too far away from where we are standing, we have to have a system and the Minister of State and her officials have to fully exercise their powers to follow up and track them. Pointing them out is one thing but doing them is another.

I have spoken to three of these seven institutions and have discovered there are still issues. We await the next report. What I am trying to say is that the Minister of State has huge powers and she needs to use those powers. Many of these are classified as being of critical concern. Each of them has critical concerns so there are two flags against each of these.

I welcome Councillor John Crowe, neighbours and guests of Deputy Joe Cooney in the Gallery today. They are all very welcome to Seanad Éireann. I thank them for coming in to see democracy in action.

They are all very welcome.

I am concerned that the Senator's last contribution might give the wrong impression to people over breaches that have been found by HIQA or the Mental Health Commission. I have been Minister of State with responsibility for mental health and older people since 2020. Unfortunately, my Wednesday nights when we are waiting to vote are normally spent reading HIQA and Mental Health Commission reports. I read them every week. They are flagged to me all the time. When non-compliance is identified, the services must submit an implementation corrective and preventive activation plan. The Senator can go home this evening and log on to any one of those seven facilities found in breach. At the very end of that he will see very clearly that they have to submit a plan to make sure that everything is order and if it is not in order they may not be registered.

With the new Bill, the Mental Health Commission will be given substantially enhanced powers to deal with issues of non-compliance by services on top of what it already has. The Mental Health Commission must take all reasonable steps to protect the rights and interests of persons detained in registered acute mental health centres. I am not here to defend the Mental Health Commission or HIQA for that matter because there is a crossover, but they are the regulators. They are both independent of the Senator, independent of me and independent of the Government. They have a difficult job to do and I believe they do it very well.

The Mental Health Commission had to respond to issues in Bloomfield before Christmas. It was the first time ever at the Mental Health Commission had to go into an approved centre in relation to mental health. Unfortunately, I had to deal with it about 20 times as Minister of State with responsibility for older people in relation nursing homes where HIQA had to go in. For anybody who might have a loved one in any of these facilities I would hate the impression to be given that if there is a breach such that a facility is not compliant or not substantially compliant, we wait for the mental health report once a year. That is completely inaccurate and false. That is why I was not able to legislate for having all unannounced inspections because as soon as there is a breach there are follow-up meetings, of which there could be two, three, four or maybe five meetings. There is follow-through the whole time to make sure that they are substantially compliant or compliant in relation to issues that have been there.

Sometimes it can relate to buildings or fire safety measures. It might relate to older buildings that might be listed buildings. We have a plan in place to replace many of the approved centres because they may not be compliant in their buildings. Most non-compliance cases relate to buildings or fire escapes. I am not worried about a bit of a scuff on a skirting board. However, if it relates to care plans, nutrition or the care being provided to these people, that is when I get worried.

I keep a close eye on every one of those reports. They are there for the public to see. Every time somebody comes into my office to speak about their loved one who may have to take the next step and go into a nursing home, I always ask if they have read the HIQA report. They often put their mum's or dad's name down for three nursing homes in their area hoping to get in. I always suggest they go off and read the HIQA report. That is my line every time. Reading the HIQA report is not scaremongering. It provides an inside view of what an unannounced inspection found on a day, which is really important. All this work goes on every day of the week. Officials from the Mental Health Commission today could be in a non-compliant facility working with it to make sure it becomes compliant. When a facility seeks a registration if it is not compliant, it is in trouble.

I thank the Minister of State for her comments. There is no problem with that and these reports are up. I acknowledge the amazing work of the Mental Health Commission. I have learned more than anyone from the Mental Health Commission in the last four to six weeks, as I did from Mental Health Reform and other organisations. I want to acknowledge that too. The point is some of these are classified as non-compliant and others relate to critical on the second inspection. Each of those seven was covered. We are talking about the 2004 report and progress, so they are a safeguard - one of many safeguards we have. I commend them and I salute them. I looked at the profile of each of them last night and they are very eminent, suitable people. There is a very successful chairman and a chief executive there who makes a very comprehensive report. These people are critical to covering the areas that we have discussed here.

Under section 176, the Minister of State has huge powers to direct them. She will not use them excessively, but she will use them appropriately as she did in the case of Bloomfield. I acknowledge that and I was delighted to hear progress on that the other day again. I will finish on that because I am conscious the Minister of State is anxious get this Bill through, as I am. I would like to think that we will have further opportunities on the next Stage and that the Minister of State will come back with some glimmers of hope following our lengthy contributions in this House. I will not delay the process any further.

I commend Senator Boyhan who in his caring nature has been very clear with regard to this Bill and making sure that facilities are properly monitored. I commend the Minister of State because unannounced visits are very important. I have learned something in this discussion. I would have been right behind the idea of unannounced visits. When people do not know when they are going to be inspected, they work to a standard and we cannot let it slip. I did not think through the follow-up where they are working together. That is me not knowing something; every day is a school day. I do not think any of us is under any illusion as to the importance of monitoring and keeping an eye on how things are going. The Minister of State has said she reviews these reports all the time and keeps on top of it. I am glad that we are all on the same page in this regard.

I have the pleasure of welcoming teachers and pupils from Castlegar National School, not too far from me in County Galway, to the Gallery. They are all very welcome. As long as they take it handy on Kilnadeema-Leitrim the next time they play them in the hurling, I have the privilege to allow them the week off homework.

They still get two nights off. They are all very welcome. It is great to see students coming into the Gallery to witness democracy in action. It is really important that they engage in politics throughout their lives. Gabhaim buíochas leo as ucht teacht isteach.

Amendments Nos. 337 to 339, inclusive, 341, 343, 346 and 348 to 351, inclusive are related.

Amendments Nos. 349 and 350 are physical alternatives to amendment No. 348. Therefore, Amendments Nos. 337 to 339, inclusive, 341, 343, 346 and 348 to 351, inclusive, may be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I move amendment No. 337:

In page 149, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following:

"5-year sharing the vision funding and implementation strategy

177.(1) The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, publish a five-year funding and implementation strategy for mental health services.

(2) The strategy referenced in subsection (1) shall be reviewed annually by the Mental Health Commission.

(3) The strategy shall place an emphasis on shifting care to community-based services as and where appropriate.".

This amendment relates to the five-year funding and implementation strategy. For a long time, we have had procedures, strategies, action plans, instances of independent oversight and implementation timelines, but we have not had a binding and transparent multi-year implementation and funding strategy written into law. This amendment seeks to change that. It requires the Minister, within 12 months of the passing of the Act, to publish a five-year funding and implementation strategy for mental health services. Failure in regard to mental health services reform is not due to a lack of ideas. Everybody in this House has fantastic ideas and the Minister of State has done fantastic work. Reform fails because of a lack of delivery and slow implementation. Mental health services cannot just be built on annual budget cycles and one-off funding announcements. Our system sometimes operates on pilot projects, temporary streams, short-term allocations and stop-start reforms in different areas. This amendment seeks to move away from that chaos and put in place a planned and properly structured system.

Amendment No. 348 is concerned with enhancing the Minister of State's work. For a long time, mental health policy in the State has been built on partial information, fragmented reporting and an inability to say with clarity how many people need care, what care they need, where the gaps are and what it would cost to fix the system. We all know about the gaps in mental health services in our own areas. We hear about them all the time from people who come to us when they cannot access services or find it really difficult to do so for a variety of reasons. I acknowledge the work the Minister of State has done in getting the system from where it was to where it is now. However, without statistics and numbers, I imagine it is very hard to do her job. This amendment places a clear statutory duty on the HSE to keep and maintain records for the purpose of identifying people receiving mental health supports, identifying the services being provided and by whom, specifying the needs identified by the services and identifying those who are not receiving services or are not receiving them in full. That is exactly what a modern public health system should be doing as standard. One of the most damaging features of the current system is that the unmet need is largely invisible. We can only work to what we can see but there is a whole cohort of people who cannot be reached for various reasons and suffer in silence. We all hear the anecdotes about the caseload and the families in crisis but we do not have a picture of what that looks like nationally. This amendment seeks to change that.

I thank the Senator for her amendments. I did not support amendment No. 337 when it was proposed in the Dáil and I am not minded to support it today. When I came into my role as Minister of State with responsibility for mental health services in July 2020, the first document I was handed was Sharing the Vision, which became my bible. It is a mental health policy that puts the service user first and centre. It is cross-departmental, which is really important because mental health does not only sit within the Department of Health but crosses different Departments.

I was really pleased that, for the first time ever, there was a recognition in Sharing the Vision of dual diagnosis. However, the game-changer for me was the national implementation and monitoring committee, NIMC. I do not mean to be condescending but there are a lot of new Senators who may not realise that committee is in place. Establishing it, which I achieved by Christmas 2020, was one of the first things I did in my role as Minister of State. I understand Sharing the Vision is one of the only Government policies that has a national implementation and monitoring committee. I work closely with the committee, which is now in its second iteration, chaired by Ms Catherine Brogan. It has a steering group, an HSE implementation group, a reference group and associated specialist groups. One of those specialist groups, for example, did a review of bed capacity. We also did a review of the transition between CAMHS and general adult mental services, which the Senator mentioned yesterday. Dr. Mark Smyth, a clinical psychologist, led on that and did a huge amount of work. We have also set up a committee on the Traveller community, which is having its very first meeting today. I am really pleased about that.

I get asked very few questions about NIMC because it works so well. Anybody can log onto the website and see the work it does. It presents a report every quarter. I meet regularly with the chairperson and will meet with her again soon. What she has done, which is great, is bring the NIMC meetings to the regions. The most recent one I attended was down in Limerick. People delivering mental health services in the community there came in, made presentations and showed me the type of work they are doing. This includes the integrated care programme for older people, ICPOP, partnering with psychiatry in later life. They also showed me the work they are doing in relation to social prescribing. For the first time ever, we have a CAMHS team in Limerick doing social farming. The new programme will be setting up in March and I look forward to going down to see it.

Arising from the NIMC structures, we have short-, medium- and long-term goals. I am constantly presented with reports on where we are going and setting out the progress on those goals. Sharing the Vision is one of the only policies I have encountered where there is anything like NIMC. It holds the Government, the Cabinet, the Minister and me to account. We did not have that oversight previously. Putting it in place is why we have made so much progress on mental health over the past five years, notwithstanding all the challenges we face, the pent-up demand after the Covid period and the fact our population has increased by 750,000 in the past eight years. We have to factor all of that into maintaining services. As I have outlined, the work of NIMC means I am not in a position to support amendment No. 337.

I cannot support amendment No. 348. I am not sure whether Senator Ryan realises that this Sinn Féin amendment would delete the section on care plans and replace it with a section relating to HSE performance oversight. Care plans are very important to me. The HSE already collects a wealth of data on performance and there are monthly performance review meetings between my Department and the executive. Another factor to note is that we now have in the HSE what we never had previously. In fairness to the former chief executive, Mr. Paul Reid, one of the last things I managed to squeeze out of him before he left was the establishment of a dedicated youth mental health office within the HSE specifically dealing with patients aged under 18.

I had a performance meeting at 9.30 this morning, which I do every single month, to see where we are on recruitment of the staff I secured for mental health services under last year's budget. There were 200 whole-time equivalent staff last year and we are already looking at reaching the 300 whole-time equivalent staff I secured under budget 2026. I monitor that on a monthly basis, as does my team in the Department, to see where we are on recruiting staff. Recruitment can be difficult because, at times, we are all, whether public, private or voluntary, dipping into the same pot in looking for advanced nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, educational psychologists, counselling psychologists, social workers, etc. It sometimes happens that when a person from one particular area is recruited, there is a space there and we are looking at back-filling, which can cause problems.

I deal with these kinds of issues every day of the week but I hardly ever get the opportunity to speak about it. That meeting took place at 9.30 this morning to see how recruitment of those whole-time equivalent staff in mental health services, for whom I break my back every year to secure additional funding, is progressing. The fact NIMC is there, sitting above me the whole time, keeps me focused.

I cannot remove the care plans to have HSE performance oversight. It is probably a play on words. I would not say that it was meant. It is just a wording issue. I thank the Senator for the constructive way she has dealt with these amendments.

I am not in any way, shape or form discrediting the work the Minister of State is doing-----

I know.

-----and the work she has done. It is very difficult to go back to my constituency and the likes of Charleville, which has had so many deaths due to suicide in the past two to three years, and sit with the grandparents of the person who has been lost and say we have lots of funding, we just do not have services in the area for people and, unfortunately, the public transport that we have is not up to scratch for them to access the services in the city or Mallow. People often say to me that we have the Mallow primary healthcare centre and that it is fantastic. It is fantastic for the people around the area, but now we have accessibility issues. There are older people who may not be able to get there and timetabled transport services do not run. There is a myriad of issues. That is not just the Minister of State's remit. It is the remit of other Departments as well.

This is when there is no service, especially in rural areas where people are isolated. For example, older people used to go to the Cork College of FET Millstreet Centre to sing but the funding for that was cut. It was a beautiful mental health support. It was not accredited and people did not get a certificate, but 30 of them showed up every week from across the constituency to sing. When people are talking to me about these kinds of thing in my constituency, it is hard for me to say that there is this much funding here but we are probably not going to see those services in our area because they are just not accessible to us. That is the point I am trying to get across, but I totally understand. I thank the Minister of State for her contribution.

That is inaccurate. At 9.30 a.m., for example, I looked at how many suicide crisis assessment nurses, SCANs, we had in the country. I secured another 12 for this year and we have 22 in place. There are four SCANs in Cork. They are suicide reduction nurses who work with GPs. It is the only area in the country that has four SCANs. Dublin does not even have four SCANs. I visited the Mallow primary care centre and the CAMHS team there. There are 17 and half whole-time equivalents in the CAMHS team in Mallow. It has the most whole-time equivalents in any CAMHS team in the country. The thing about it is, I get out on the ground. I am good at figures and remembering things. That particular team I visited does not have the biggest catchment area in the country. They have the most staff in the country, but their waiting list is one of the longest. I went down there to visit that team to see what the hell was going on. That is the type of work I do every day of the week. I wear my heart on my sleeve in relation to mental health. Whatever job I do, whether it is Chief Whip, Minister of State with responsibility for mental health or a TD from Waterford, I work hard. I know what services are available all over the country. The Senator has social prescribing in her area, which is really important and does a huge amount of work.

I cannot be responsible for an organisation that is not accredited. If an organisation is not accredited, there is something wrong. The governance is not right. The clinical governance is not right. The organisation is not right. There is a reason that somebody is not funded. A total of €107 million will be spent out of the mental health budget this year for non-governmental organisations, NGOs, that provide services all over the country. Jigsaw will receive €15.8 million of the budget this year. Pieta will receive €4 million of the budget. It is simply not true to say that the funding does not filter down. If the Senator looks at the funding going into Cork, I guarantee her the funding is filtering down. There were no cuts. The first day I stood in this job, the budget for mental health was €995 million. The budget this year is €1.6 billion. I have increased the budget year on year by 60%. The other thing I have done is to know every single whole-time equivalent post that I have secured this year. I will make sure that every one of them is hired and goes in and provided the services. I simply cannot listen about funding cuts because there is no truth in it. There are no funding cuts.

Sometimes, people will not avail of supports. Unfortunately, we have that situation in relation to men, who will not always reach out for supports. I got a very good briefing this morning - I was up early - in relation to the new free counselling supports that I introduced last September for men. It was the first time ever that any man in the country could access free counselling supports. From 1 September 2025 to 27 January, 300 men reached out for free counselling supports for the first time. That is 300 men in four months. I am really delighted about that. I secured that as recurring funding - €1 million in recurring funding - to provide free counselling supports. This is Connect Counselling. Connect Counselling dealt with 68 cases. Seven cases it had to escalate up to counselling in primary care, CIPC. Those seven people were seen immediately because I was able to specifically fund it.

I find it hard to listen to comments like that. Sometimes, not everybody is aware of where the services are and how to access them. If the Senator has any specific cases, I ask her to please send them on to me and I will try to help her with them.

When Senator Ryan referenced a lack of funding for certain organisations, maybe they have not gone about getting the funding or applying for funding in the manner it is supposed to be applied for. Sometimes, I get queries from people saying that their organisations are not get any funding, and when I ask if they have applied for it, they might not have. I ask if they have a bank account, and they reply that they do not because theirs is only an informal group. If we were handing out money informally, we would be held to account for that.

It is taxpayers' money.

It has to be done the right way. I liked the Senator's story about people going to sing, but maybe if they reached out to the Minister of State and the Departments, they could be talked through how to acquire funding. Unless they were refused funding, then we could look at why they were refused funding.

I commend the amount of money being put into Jigsaw. Yesterday, Jigsaw appeared before us at the health committee. What an organisation. There are very short waiting times to get an appointment with Jigsaw. When I was a local councillor and people came to me, Jigsaw became the default organisation that I would send them to. There were people whose children were in dire straits. Jigsaw would have somebody ready to talk with them, definitely within the two-week mark. Through Covid, it was doing that online. It is great to see funding going into an organisation like that. We can see the work. I do not think anyone would disagree with me when I say that Jigsaw is doing a great job.

I acknowledge the Minister, Deputy O'Brien, and his guests in the Public Gallery. I hope they enjoy their visit to Leinster House.

I heard the Minister of State getting up early in the morning and having a great brief. That is great. Leo was the last person who talked about getting up early in the morning. My next comment will not be a reference to the Minister of State. Rather, this is in a lighter mode because we do laugh, smile and get on with each other. I would not like anyone to think that all of us do not. I said to Leo that it was one thing getting up early in the morning, but it was about staying up all day. He took the point. I am not at the end of the Minister of State's whip. Am I not glad?

The Minister of State might share with us the briefing she got on the free counselling service and supports for men at some stage. That would be interesting. A lot of people come to me and say they cannot get services.

I spent part of last night down with Senator McCarthy's organisation down on Pearse Street. Our wonderful former Clerk of the Seanad was there playing music. One of the heartbreaking and recurring things I heard from people I shared a bit of food and a cup of tea with, and listened to the music with, was the alarming impact in terms of mental health. The saddest thing that everyone had to do last night was to close the door and push them all back out onto the street. That was really sad. A real live community was going on there.

The recurring theme among new arrivals into our country who had hoped they would have a welcome - some of them have had a welcome - was that, due to addiction and other pressures that were interconnected in many cases, and although they were crying out for help, the hardest thing was to push open the door to go into a strange place to seek shelter and ask for help. The women I spoke to seemed to be much more driven and dynamic in seeking out help than the men.

The recurring themes among those people were their nerves, their health and their confidence, and how they felt with water filling their boots and people literally spitting at them on the street. However, I saw vibrancy and a community response. Last night, there were volunteers from EY and AIB. Every night, there are volunteers from two corporate bodies who act as volunteers and stewards. What a fantastic, collaborative community response. Mental health was one of the key themes and concerns raised by nearly everyone I spoke to.

To clarify, the cuts in funding do not relate to the Minister of State’s Department because they relate to the ETB. The further education and training centre is registered and it gives out certificates. However, the first things cut were all the activities not associated with accreditation but related to mental health in the rural community, such as singing, dancing and knitting. Since no certificate was given for these, they were cut. This was the saddest thing to see because many people in the rural community just attend to meet friends. Later, they might go on to receive accreditation for various little courses. I was there to give out their certificates at Christmas and they were just so proud. It was so lovely to see older people finding new life, educating themselves and learning something new. The only reason for the cut was that we have a small catchment area. However, the number of people who get accredited there is the highest in Cork county. Are there funds for people who do not get the funding through the ETB?

I am really delighted to hear that the Minister of State is happy to work with me on people’s cases. I reached out to her office before Christmas. I realise she is really busy but I will reach out again just to highlight a few of the cases to see what can be done about them. I appreciate the Minister of State’s engagement and thank her.

Let me take this opportunity to refer again to supports. The supports were launched on 1 September. The website yourmentalhealth.ie is our website for all mental health supports and services across the board, and yourmentalhealth.ie/men is for men’s services.

Fifty per cent of the 300 who followed up came through their GPs. I thank the Irish College of General Practitioners. The GPs meet online every month. In September, 1,200 of them met online. My team explained the new counselling supports to them. It explained to them that one can be referred or self-refer for supports. We were told that about 45% of people actually proceeded on the basis of the advertisement we ran on free counselling.

There are a few different ways to obtain the free counselling. One of these is through a GP. I partnered with Exchange House, which looks after the Traveller community in the Dublin area and has an outreach service, on its 24–7 line, which provides counselling. I partnered with veterans through the Organisation of National Ex-Service Personnel, ONE, based in Dublin. It does phenomenal work. It also has a line set up to support people. The majority are men, but I said to the group that if any female rings the helpline, the staff should not say the Minister of State, Deputy Butler, said only men may be listened to.

The Connect Counselling piece is going down really well. From 5 o’clock in the evening until 9 o’clock at night, any man anywhere in Ireland, whether in his bedroom or sitting at the kitchen table eating his dinner, can pick up the phone and self-refer. He does not have to be referred by a GP. He can make the call and have up to six counselling calls. If after that he still needs supports, he will be facilitated. Of all those who made calls, seven needed support to go face to face with CIPC, and that has happened.

The other organisation to which I wish to give a shout-out is MyMind, with which we also partnered. It is a great organisation and I am very fond of it. It provides counselling support in 20 different languages. Many people who come here on permits to work on farms might not be competent in Irish and English and may need supports.

In all my life, I have never stretched any €2 million as much as the €2 million in question. I also work with the Irish Farmers Association on the supports. I tailor them as much as possible and there is recurring funding. I am just buzzing that 300 men who might not have reached out for support previously have done so now because it is free of charge. I ask Members to spread the word about yourmentalhealth.ie/men.

I move amendment No. 348:

In page 153, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following:

“181. (1) The Executive shall keep and maintain records for the purposes of—

(a) identifying persons to whom mental health services are being provided,

(b) identifying those services and the persons providing the services pursuant to this Part,

(c) specifying the aggregate needs identified by the services,

(d) specifying the number of persons to whom services are not being provided or to whom they are not being provided in full, and

(e) planning the provision of such services to persons.

(2) The Executive shall, within 6 months after the end of each year, submit a report in writing to the Minister in relation to the aggregate needs identified by services on the basis of information collected in accordance with subsection (1) including an indication of the periods of time ideally required for the provision of the services, the sequence of such provision and an estimate of the cost of such provision.

(3) A report under this section shall include such other information in such form and regarding such matters as the Minister may direct and shall be published by the Executive within one month of the date of its submission to the Minister.”.

Amendment No. 352 has been ruled out of order. Senator Harmon may not speak to it.

Amendments Nos. 353, 360, 367, 368, and 370 to 373, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together, by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.

I will be very brief. These amendments are all technical or smaller in nature, while others fix typographical errors that need to be fixed. They arise because we have amended the Bill substantially with so many amendments. I will give an example. Amendments Nos. 353 and 360 correct the reference to “section” in both instances with “Act”, and amendment No. 370 replaces the plural “sections” with the singular “section”. The amendments are all typographical.

I take this opportunity to thank the Minister of State for all her work on this and her engagement here. It is a substantial Bill and there are a large number of amendments.

Amendment No. 352 on advocacy services was ruled out of order. Could it be read into the record why it was deemed to be out of order?

Amendment No. 352 in the names of Senators Harmon and Cosgrove would insert a new section providing for a statutory right to independent advocacy services for every person receiving mental health services. This would entail potentially significant costs for the Exchequer in funding such services. The amendment must be ruled out of order in accordance with Standing Order 42 as it has the potential to impose a charge on the Exchequer.

I understand the thrust of what the Senator was trying to achieve. We spent a lot of time yesterday and today speaking about patient advocacy services and national advocacy services and they will happen. I am at one with the Senator in wanting to make sure people in mental health facilities have access to advocacy services and can make a complaint if they wish to do so. That will follow when this part of the Bill has been enacted and I have already started the work on it.

Amendments Nos. 374 to 383, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together by agreement. Is that agreed? Agreed.

Amendments Nos. 374 to 383, inclusive, have been grouped. These amendments are placed in Parts 8 and 9 of the Bill and relate exclusively to references to the Mental Health Act in other enactments. As the Mental Health Act 2001 will be repealed in due course with the full commencement of this enactment, it was necessary to ensure that all references to the Mental Health Act are updated.

One of the key amendments in this grouping is amendment No. 374. This amendment allows a registered proprietor of a registered acute mental health centre to make a direct application to the Circuit Court for the purposes of applying for a substitute decision-maker of an involuntarily admitted person lacking capacity. We spoke about this yesterday. Where a person did not have a family member or decision-maker, no one at all was available to them. This is just to allow for a substitute decision-maker to be provided by the court. This amendment will mean that only one court appearance and application is required, reducing the cost and administrative burden and speeding up how quickly applications are heard by the court. Previously, where someone turned up for court, they might not have someone there for support and would have to come back another day. This is to try to tidy up different things.

As this is the final grouping, I flag that I will move a number of amendments on Report Stage, as discussed. We spoke about the term "other place" yesterday. Senator Ryan may remember. Amendment No. 267 inserts a new section to provide for the transfer of a child who has been admitted involuntarily to a hospital or other place. The wording of this amendment tracks with the wording in section 37 of the Bill, which relates to adults. It also tracks with the existing wording of section 22 of the Mental Health Act 2001. There have never been unintended consequences relating to section 22 in the 20 years of operation of the 2001 Act.

This morning, my officials consulted Dr. Amir Niazi, chief clinical lead for mental health for young people in the HSE, about the wording. Dr. Niazi confirmed that this section is only ever used sparingly to transfer a person who has a medical need that cannot be met in the approved centre, for example if they had a medical challenge at the same time, such as a broken leg. That person would have to be transferred. This includes transfers to the emergency department, for example if someone was having a heart attack or other emergency medical issue. That is extreme, but it is what I mean. It might also include the transfer of people to a health facility or clinic other than a hospital for treatment such as a day service or for a co-morbidity such as addiction or intellectual disability. Another example is if an adult was on dialysis. That is what is covered.

The transfer legally must always be for the purpose of treatment. There is no other reason a person may be transferred to another hospital or place. Furthermore, the person legally must be immediately transferred back to the approved centre when the treatment finishes. This provision has not been and cannot be used to transfer people out of the country. It is simply not possible to do that.

I was glad to get the clarification. I was thinking about it yesterday evening. We got that clarification this morning and I wanted to put it on the record because it is important. I thank Senator Ryan for raising it.

I might speak briefly on this amendment, as it is the last opportunity I have to thank everyone who has sat here for close to 19 hours, maybe 19 and a half hours, over six sessions. This landmark legislation will update and modernise our mental health laws. The enactment of this Bill has been a long-standing priority for me and for Government, and I look forward to bringing the Bill to Report Stage shortly.

In particular, I thank Senator Costello for attending each and every session and speaking to many of the amendments. I also thank Senator Black, who has left now, and Senator Boyhan. He put me through my paces on more than one day but it was great to have the debate. I also thank Senators Ryan, Harmon and Cosgrove, who is not here today, as well as all the various Senators and my two colleagues here from Fine Gael. They have been here several times.

I also thank the Cathaoirligh who have been here, especially the Leas-Chathaoirleach, Senator Byrne, who really drove on the Bill. I thank her for all the work she has done. That is all I want to say today. It is a pleasure to be here in the Seanad. Much more discussion went on in the Seanad than in the Dáil. I did ten hours in the Dáil and close to 19 hours here with everyone. Any opportunity I get to discuss mental health is a good day's work.

I will be back on 18 March, the day after St. Patrick's Day, for Report Stage. Hopefully, we will have the Bill enacted before Easter.

I thank the Minister of State and her officials who have also had to listen to us. We have had to talk but they have had to listen.

I particularly thank the people in the audience who came, some of whom followed every bit of this debate and others who tuned in. Clearly, from the interactions of our emails and telephone calls, people were listening and were involved. That is very important.

I want to single out the Leas-Chathaoirleach, Senator Byrne. As the Minister of State said, she certainly gave it impetus and drew it along. At certain points, I do not think she asked anybody, she just pursued them and no one opposed it. That kept up the smoothness. When you are pleasant, it pushes things along. She has an abundance in that regard and I thank her for doing that.

We had 384 amendments and 22 sections, so it was a comprehensive Bill. I also want to call out and say a big thank you to the people who work in the service and to everybody who works in mental health services. Pick up the phone and tell people if there is a problem. If you see anything, talk to families. Families also need to talk and be guardians of their loved ones in care. I salute the practitioners, workers, volunteers and all the other add-ons. Mental health affects all of us at some point in our lives and we never know when it is going to affect us.

This is important legislation. We are the Upper House, and I remind every Minister of that. We have a function in revising legislation; that is our principle and primary function in Seanad Éireann. The Minister of State had a lot to dwell and think on. I have to say that she has always been respectful and I hope I have been respectful to her. We have had robust engagement but this helps the process and I thank the Minister of State for acknowledging the level of debate in these Houses because that is very important. There is always a high level of engagement. What is also nice about here is we have the freedom within this House to, dare I say it, cut across each other, to cross-engage in a very close proximity of the Chamber itself. It makes it more meaningful. Of course, there is an ante room to this Chamber where we also have opportunities before we come in and when we go out to talk to the Minister of State and she is always very receptive to that engagement. I thank her and her officials.

I particularly want to thank the Bills Office. Sometimes we forget about it. I would not want to be working in the Bills Office doing all these stats.

I would not either.

I thank our sound people. More importantly, people forget our stenographers and our recorders who record the proceedings which we rely on so much. I will certainly be looking at them in a few days time and seeing what we did and did not say or what the Minister of State said. They give a full and accurate account. I particularly ask the note takers and stenographers, and the person representing them here now, to take that back to the team. They do an amazing job and it helps. It puts on the archive and on the record our verbal engagement in these Houses. I thank all involved.

I wish to acknowledge Deputy Cahill from Kerry and his guests in the audience. I hope they enjoy their visit here to Leinster House today.

It has been said that we have spent about 19 hours discussing this, and I think it was hours well spent. It was not a hardship for me, being honest. I have learned a lot about the other Senators in the room. I do not think we are too different. We want the best for people in Ireland because mental health is everybody's health. It is good to get to where we are today and we will be back in March.

I cannot top Senator Boyhan. I do not think he omitted anyone from his acknowledgments and thanks, so I echo whom he has thanked and acknowledged. It has been great to have such robust discussions. I have certainly learned a lot from this and I also thank everyone involved.

I echo the sentiments from colleagues. I thank the Minister of State and her officials for all their work on this legislation. We look forward to Report Stage and further discussion there.

It is clear that this is an issue we care about and one that people care about. I thank the organisations that have contacted me about this, particularly Mental Health Reform which is present here today, and others.

It is important we get this right. When you put those 19 and a half hours into that context, it has been a long discussion so far but it absolutely warranted all that discussion. There is still a lot of concerns relating to it, and we will come back to it on Report Stage. Certainly, it has been great to have an input on legislation that is so complex and comprehensive. In my first year as a Senator, it has been really good to engage with colleagues on that.

I thank the Minister of State for her time.

I will not take up much of the Minister of State's time. I know we are all looking to wrap this up. I thank her and her officials, as well as all the Senators for their contributions. This debate has been very respectful. All our debates are usually respectful. I do not think we have ever had one that was not. However, when you are talking about something so sensitive as mental health and people's well-being and mental well-being, it is very important we debate it in a respectful way. We are talking about real people, people every single day who are struggling, and some people today who may not make it to tomorrow. It is very important for us to have that debate.

Equally, and I echo Senator Costello, the complexity and size of this Bill has taught me how to read Bills properly as a first-time Senator. It has been a phenomenal experience for me to keep up with everything. It has been a fantastic learning opportunity, but equally, it has been a fantastic debate. I do not know how the Leas-Chathaoirleach did it, having to beat through all those amendments and sections, but she did an amazing job.

I thank the Minister of State. We look forward to coming back on Report Stage to continue this further and get it over the line eventually.

On behalf of Fine Gael, I echo the sentiments of other Senators. The debate has been very engaging. A collaborative approach has been taken. That was made all the more easier by the Minister of State's approach. I thank everybody who put in such huge work into it and working together. The emphasis that is on mental health now is an awful lot more significant and far better than it was when I was growing up in the eighties and nineties and the country is all the better for that. Long may that continue. Any additional resources that can be put into additional supports or additional counselling, as the Minister of State is striving toward, is welcome. Like others, I welcome the spirit in which the debate was conducted. I thank everybody involved in the Chamber and behind the scenes because 19 hours of debate is not easy. I acknowledge that much and thank everybody for all of their work.

I acknowledge the people who have sat patiently for the past number of debates on the Bill and my colleagues who have covered for me, because I am the health spokesperson, but I have ended up in the Chair a bit. I thank all my colleagues who covered for me on a rotation basis.

I thank James and Lorraine, who are sitting behind me. They are not finished yet, so I was not going to thank them at this stage. I want to say one thing, and he will kill me. James Kelly has been working on this Bill for six years. He has given six years to this Bill from start to finish. That is some dedication. I have worked with James and Lorraine for five years on the Bill. I thank them for that. I acknowledge Andrea and representatives of the College of Psychiatry and Mental Health Reform who have been here. They have sat through almost every hour. That is appreciated and it is not easy. I also thank the Office of Parliamentary Counsel. I met with its staff yesterday regarding the Bill and the next four weeks and the stages in relation to that. I thank the Bills Office and all the work it does. If I could, on a personal note, with the indulgence of the Leas-Chathaoirleach, I wish the new Clerk of the Seanad, Martin Hughes, all the best in his new role. When I chaired the Oireachtas committee for Business, Enterprise and Innovation in 2016, Martin was the clerk to me. We had a lovely working relationship. The Seanad is lucky to have Martin.

Hear, hear.

I thank the Minister of State. We are not finished yet.

Pursuant to Standing Order 165, it is reported to the Seanad that the Title has been amended.

When is it proposed to take the next Stage?

Next Tuesday.

Is that agreed? Agreed.

When is it proposed to sit again?

Next Wednesday at 2 p.m.