Mr. Ger Deering:

It comes through the number and kinds of complaint we get, the depth and nature of them, and how many people we think they are going to affect. There is also information that would come to us through the research that we do. For example, even though we had had a number of complaints about HAP, the real impetus for doing the HAP investigation was running a workshop with a range of providers in the housing area, and it was they who raised HAP. One of the most difficult things about HAP is a delay in one's application. We all know how difficult it is to rent; it is almost impossible to get somewhere to rent. If one strikes gold and manages to find a property to rent, but if there is a delay in then accessing HAP, the landlord is very likely to say there are plenty of other people he or she can rent to. There was this kind of unfairness and the impact it was having on people.

The Deputy mentioned “In Sickness and in Debt”. We found that people were really badly affected by that, hence the title, because these people were sick. They got the illness part cured but then they were in debt because, as the committee probably knows, people went abroad under those schemes, had the treatment, came back and through no fault of their own and in good faith, made a claim to get that money back only to find that they fell at the final hurdle because of some bureaucratic element. That has been one of the most successful investigations we have done in terms of how it was implemented. It was implemented to the letter and spirit by the HSE, and that has made a significant difference.