Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry South, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I warmly welcome the Minister and Minister of State and all of the heavy hitters from the Department and the HSE. This is a unique occasion. The one thing I see wrong with the matter is that every day the people must comply with different regulations. I listened to the Minister of State's views on the subject. She was a bit cross and said we do not have the money. I appreciate and respect her position and the difficulties in which she and the Minister find themselves. We must think, however, of the people who must comply with all types of regulations, such as the farming and business communities. What if a farmer said he could not fully comply with regulations because he did not have the money to erect a slatted tank? What if he apologised for not complying but that he must operate illegally? He cannot do that. Since 2000, and long before it was in the Minister's gift, the Department operated illegally. What sort of message are we giving hard-pressed people whom we want to be compliant with rules and regulations? The message from today's meeting is that Ministers past and present have operated for years under the watch of a Department - the heavy hitters and permanent government - which knew about the problem and allowed it to go on. That is wrong - very wrong.

I am not being political about the matter and I am not pointing my finger at the Minister and Minister of State present. I am talking about past Administrations as well. I am also talking about the permanent government which oversaw the matter for many years. How can it be explained to the public? How can one get it across to the public that it is okay for the Department of Health to operate a scheme illegally but the rest of the population must be compliant no matter what sector they belong to? If one is in the PAYE sector, one must pay taxes. Farmers must comply with everything. God knows, farmers have their hands tied behind their backs from when they get up in the morning until they go to bed at night complying with EU regulations and Irish departmental regulations. They will hear this story being broadcast loud and clear that the Minister and Minister of State told us here today that they knew it happened, knew it was illegal and do not dispute what the Ombudsman has said. They know they are operating illegally but the reason given is they do not have the money. On the next day that somebody arrives at my clinic because they are in trouble, I will agree with them that they are in trouble but tell them they are okay because they have no money. That is some message to give people. I am shocked. The matter came to the attention of the committee and the Minister of State told the committee that they do not have the money. That is not good enough.

We must find a solution and I am more than willing to put my shoulder to the wheel to help. I shall return again to the Minister of State saying they do not have the money. Where do we go from here? We must be clear. We cannot say to the people who are already in the scheme that they must leave it in order to cater for others. One option is to divide up the money thus ensuring everyone receives a smaller amount but it is spread further. Another option is to follow Deputy Boyd Barrett's suggestion to remove the constraint of working within a certain pot of money and enlarge the budget.

How easy will it be to do that? The Minister will have to approach the Minister for Public Enterprise and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, and the Minister for Finance, Deputy Michael Noonan, and they will not be too welcoming. What has the Minister said about this at Cabinet level? What does the Taoiseach think of the Department where the Minister is the head honcho? Does he agree with this illegal method of operating under his watch? What has the Minister for Finance said about it? Does he think that because the Minister is operating illegally a change should be made in the budgetary constraints and that more money should be made available so the scheme can be operated properly, fairly and equally, which obviously must be done?

There are four or five options for getting around this. The one thing I must return to, and I do not like to be too political about everything, is the permanent government. How did its members let this happen for so long without admitting that this is wrong? It should not have been the Ombudsman pointing this out. The permanent government should have pointed it out. When the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch-----