Mr Ed Murphy:

The population of over 75s will double in 13 years. With regard to the current HSE home helps, there has been an embargo on recruitment for a few years. It is important to point out that although we provide home care privately, we are absolutely not opposed to the HSE providing home help as it is doing at present. However, unless the HSE opens the floodgates and hires all the home helps itself, it will not be able to cope with the significantly increasing demand. The HSE has been providing home help in recent years and the not-for-profit companies are doing so still. We started seven or eight years ago and have looked after 7,000 or 8,000 people that the HSE had not the capacity to look after. We are very much of the opinion that we need both State and private provision.

I am not quite sure whether my next point is against the thinking and logic of Deputy Peadar Tóibín. More than 50% of the people we look after approach us privately stating they do not want State provision and that they want to use us because of the services we provide. I spoke to a lady from the HSE, a home care package co-ordinator, and she said to me that it is great that we are looking after a couple of hundred people in this area and that these people and their families are prepared to pay for the service. The lady stated this means the HSE does not have to provide services to them. This is because they want something a little different or more complex, for example.

If one pays for the care of an incapacitated individual, one can receive tax relief of 41%. I compliment the Government on this. The relief subsidises a person who decides to look after his mother, father or family member. There are people seeking private care and the Government is prepared to give tax relief to people looking for it. The services for the average person for whom we provide private care are usually paid for by sons and daughters who are pooling together. I genuinely believe that public and private provision can exist together.

The concept of the break time is quite confusing. The HSE is struggling with the Organisation of Working Time Act. The Act specifies that one must be finished work for 11 hours before one can start again. With regard to live-in care, most staff finish work at approximately 9 p.m. Our staff have separate living quarters in the house where they can stay from 9 p.m. and they do not return to work until at least 8 a.m. in the morning. Therefore, there is a break of 11 hours. The private sector and HSE are doing this. It is not just a private sector issue but also a public sector issue. We give an 11 hour break and tend to give an on-call allowance to the member of staff just in case he or she gets a call during the night to take the individual in care to the toilet, for example. That is all. If we had to pay for 24 hour care, including during the 11 hours when the carer is in bed or watching television, it would make live-in care unaffordable.

If we have to charge families for 24 hour care for older people, we can forget about the sector. It will close down straight away. People cannot afford to pay for all 24 hours. There is no question about what will happen, as we saw how things operated previously. We have professionalised the service to observe the Organisation of Working Time Act and other regulations. We train, supervise and support staff. They are paid a wage, PRSI contributions are made and everything is done properly and professionally. If this stops for the HSE or ourselves, provision will go straight to the black market. There is no question about it. People will be paid cash by families. It is the only other way a service can be provided. I am not sure if that answers the question, but I use the opportunity to make the point.