Joan Collins (Dublin South Central, Independent) | Oireachtas source

This is one of the biggest operations in transferring from an old to a new system. The first question I wanted to ask has been asked by Deputy Brady. Was the new system trialled? For how long was it trialled and with whom was it trialled? After saying the Department had reached agreement with general practitioners on it, it does not seem like it did, or general practitioners did not know that they were changing to an e-certification process. I am not saying this just with hindsight. I have worked with An Post and know that things can go disastrously wrong when there are new systems, but they have to be trialled. It would have been practical to first find a cohort of general practitioners to introduce the system, after reaching agreement with the representative group, to see how it would go, move them to e-certificates to see if there were potential problems with the system such as the making of split payments. Issues could have been highlighted at that stage, but it seems as if a whole new system was introduced without looking at the possibility of problems arising from it.

I know that the officials have apologised profusely and take this on board; I am sure people will listen to it. However, at the end of the day, I am dealing with people who are borrowing money from their family to try to keep going and it is only because their family have the money to give them; otherwise, they would be absolutely lost. They are living in digs and rented accommodation. We have left vulnerable persons even more vulnerable. That has to be taken on board. I am very angry about it and know others are too. That is the key point.

The communications section seemed to be very slow in realising what was going on from August until mid-September. Then staff had to be trained because the Department could not have just had staff answering telephones without having the information; that would have made the position even worse. It seems that once the new system was introduced, there was no questioning or discussion or team evaluation to make sure that if something did happen, there would be staff available. It was a huge change in the system, yet 50% of general practitioners were not even linked with it, did not know or had not been informed about it. I know that the Department has set up something with the Revenue Commissioners to look at what happened in implementation. I am still receiving emails from people who did not receive payments on 3, 10, 17, 24 or 31 October or 7 November. They received a CWO payment of €196 in that period. CWOs should be instructed that if anybody has not received a payment after a week, they should be paid immediately, regardless of whether they have received a par payment. We should be getting the message out that people should go to their Intreo office to receive payment from the CWO. That instruction should be given to every CWO in the system.

I have also had to make representations on behalf of people who received overpayments. Obviously, they have not cashed the cheques but they are concerned that if an error is discovered they could be viewed as people who are fiddling the system. The system is still not working for people. We must immediately put in place a mechanism to ensure that if this happens again, people are at a minimum paid what they would be paid on production of a medical certificate.

Did the illness benefit section seek weekly certificates before this? I understand the witnesses cannot comment on individual cases but I am dealing with a case on behalf of a person who is in receipt of illness benefit and retired in October. This person is required to attend a doctor every week for a medical certificate, which costs €15, to be provided to the Intreo office. On Monday, I spoke to an official who advised me that there has been a change such that certification of an illness by a GP for up to six months will now be accepted by the illness benefit section. Will the witnesses point to where this is written so that people can bring it to the attention of their general practitioners?

The Department has let people down. The people it deals with are not customers. Rather, they are people who are reliant on our social welfare system when they get ill and cannot work.