Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, Ms Frances Spillane and Ms Patsy Carr. The next item is engagement with the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, on the discontinued mobility allowance and motorised transport schemes.

Before we begin, I remind members, witnesses and persons in the Public Gallery to turn off their mobile phones. I welcome everyone and thank them for appearing before the committee. The Minister of State has been invited here today to discuss the proposed health (transport support) Bill and its impact on the discontinued mobility allowance and motorised transport grant schemes.

In accordance with procedure, I am required to read the following. By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside of the Houses or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. I remind our guests that the presentation should be no more than five to ten minutes in duration. The opening statement has been circulated to members in advance of the meeting.

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, and invite him to make his opening statement.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am delighted to be here to meet and to be made accountable to colleagues. This is a very important issue. I know there are broader issues and I commend the people here. I know them all individually and their track record for pushing for services for people with disabilities is commendable. I thank them for their support. I thank the Vice Chairman and the committee for its invitation to appear today to discuss the proposed health (transport support) Bill. I am pleased to have the opportunity to discuss this Bill with the committee and to go into details.

I am aware of the committee's continued interest in the issues which have arisen relating to the mobility allowance. I would like to update the committee on the progress under way in developing new legislative proposals. The committee is very familiar with the circumstances around the closure of the mobility allowance and the motorised transport schemes but, to put the matter in context, I want to provide a short summary of the background to the scheme to assist our discussion. I will also outline to the committee the developments currently under way and I will be happy to answer members' questions. The mobility allowance was established in 1979 as an administrative scheme by way of a departmental circular. The mobility allowance was payable by the Health Service Executive and previously the health boards, subject to a means test, to persons with a severe disability who were between 16 and 65 years old and unable to walk or use public transport. The full monthly rate of mobility allowance was €208.50. At the time the scheme was closed, it had 4,700 recipients at an annual cost of €9.3 million. Since the closure of the scheme, the Government has directed that the Health Service Executive should continue an equivalent monthly payment to those 4,700 individuals, pending the establishment of a new transport support scheme.

It is very important that people know that.

The motorised transport grant, established in 1968, was also an administrative scheme. It operated as a means-tested grant to assist a person with a severe disability with the purchase or adaptation of a car where that car was essential to retain employment. The maximum grant at that time was €5,020 payable once to an individual in any three-year period. In recent years, more than 300 people received a grant each year at an estimated cost of €1.3 million.

As the committee is aware, the Government decided to close the transport grant scheme in February 2013 and no further grants have been payable since this date. However, it is important to note that the disabled drivers and disabled passengers scheme that is operated by the Revenue Commissioners remains in place. The scheme provides vehicle registration tax, VRT and value-added tax, VAT, relief, an exemption from road tax and a fuel grant to drivers and passengers with a disability who qualify under the relevant criteria set out in the governing regulations made by the Minister for Finance. Specially adapted vehicles driven by disabled persons are also exempt from the payment of tolls on national toll roads and toll bridges. Transport Infrastructure Ireland has responsibility for the scheme.

In 2012, the then Ombudsman recommended that the Department of Health revise both schemes to make them compliant with the Equal Status Acts, by removing the upper age limit and using a broader definition of disability in respect of eligibility for both schemes. These recommendations raised significant issues of a legal, financial and practical nature, particularly as regards extending eligibility to a significantly wider cohort. With continuing pressure on public expenditure, including the health budget, the Government reached the conclusion that such an extension of either scheme would have implications for the protection of front-line health services and would be unsustainable. A review group on transport supports for people with disabilities and an interdepartmental group, which was chaired by the Department of An Taoiseach, were established. On foot of the interdepartmental group's work the Government decided that the detailed preparatory work required for a new transport support scheme and associated statutory provisions should be progressed by the Minister for Health, in consultation with other relevant Ministers. In making the decision to establish a new scheme, the Government's focus has been on those in most need who have the least resources available to them. In line with the Government's decision, the Department of Health has been working to develop legislative proposals for a new transport scheme. Members will be aware that the Programme for a Partnership Government acknowledges the ongoing drafting of primary legislation for a new transport support scheme to assist those with a disability to meet their mobility costs.

The Government's legislative programme for 2017 includes the Health (Transport Support) Bill. The legislative proposals for the scheme seek to ensure the following: There is a firm statutory basis to the scheme's operation; there is transparency and equity in the eligibility criteria attaching to the scheme; that resources are targeted at those with the greatest needs; and the scheme is capable of being costed and it is affordable on its introduction and on an ongoing basis.

The general scheme and heads of Bill has now been completed in draft form and has been subject to detailed legal examination. This detailed examination was a very important stage given the complex legal issues that have arisen in the operation of previous arrangements. The draft general scheme and heads of Bill were then circulated to other Departments in December last. They were subjected to consultation between officials in the Department of Health and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. Members will appreciate that it has been necessary to establish both the numbers likely to qualify for payment and the likely overall cost of the proposals.

The clear instruction from Government is that eligibility criteria for the transport support scheme must focus on those with the greatest need who have the least resources available to them. The position, as articulated in the Ombudsman's reports about the inequitable nature of the abolished schemes, remains valid and must be addressed under any new arrangements. However, to make the eligibility criteria for the scheme very broad, opening up newer categories of eligibility, the effects of which are difficult to estimate, would carry major budgetary implications. Competing demands within the disability budget and elsewhere must be considered. I refer to issues such as therapies for children, day services for young adults leaving school, and the need to improve other supports for people with a disability. Therefore, the focus in the Department of Health has been very much on the identification of appropriate criteria that will benefit those facing the greatest challenges, while taking account of the group who have continued to receive the payment and who, it must be acknowledged, have come to rely on that payment. These considerations continue to be at the centre of the Department's efforts to find a solution which is fair, financially affordable and, very important, legally sound.

The very real needs in this area are recognised. Let us take, for example, the case of an individual who uses a large customised wheelchair that cannot be accommodated on public transport. If that individual is not in a position to easily transfer to a standard seat in a car, then there is a real issue of cost attaching to their transport. Additionally, if this individual is in receipt of a very low income, such costs could restrict his or her access to transport and participation in important activities.

An added issue to be addressed is the treatment of the 4,700 people who are currently in receipt of the payment under the previous mobility scheme. As mentioned, payments continue to be made to this group, on an interim basis, in order to prevent hardship and allow time to deal with the complex issues that have arisen through no fault of the recipients. This is important in alleviating stress, anxiety and uncertainty among a vulnerable group in society, pending the introduction of a statutory scheme.

Whatever the criteria for the new scheme, we will also seek to address the needs of current recipients. Again, this adds complexity to the definition of eligibility criteria from a legal and drafting perspective but the proposals to be put to Government will seek to take account of this group. The proposals will also provide for a transparent and objective appeals process that deals fairly and sensitively with applicants.

When the consultation with the other relevant Departments has been completed, and the draft general scheme is submitted to Government, it will be a matter for Government to determine the precise policy that should underpin the general scheme. The committee will appreciate that I cannot pre-empt the outcome of the Government's considerations. While I am limited in how precise I can be on the nature of the final proposals in advance of their determination by Government, I want to assure the committee of the priority attaching to this issue.

In summary, officials have continued to work to develop a solution that will meet the aim of contributing towards the transport or mobility needs of those in greatest need and with the least resources, within whatever funding level is available. There is an unusual degree of complexity attaching to the issues.

I fully acknowledge and accept, because many colleagues have raised the matter with me before, that there has been a protracted period since the problems with the mobility scheme were first highlighted. However, significant progress continues to be made. I hope to be in a position to bring proposals to Government in the near future once consultation with the relevant Departments, particularly the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, has been completed. The process of Oireachtas scrutiny can then commence.

I welcome any questions or comments from the committee members. I thank the Chairman for the opportunity to meet the committee today. I reaffirm my commitment, as Minister, both to the committee and the disability community generally, to introduce this new Bill.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for his presentation. Deputy Dara Murphy has indicated and he will be followed by Deputy Cassells.

Dara Murphy (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Vice Chairman. I did not realise that I would be first to comment.

I am pleased to be a member of this committee. This is my first meeting and I look forward to working with all of the members.

We all remember this from four or five years ago. Is the ruling of the Ombudsman disputed in any way? The Minister of State mentioned the question of front-line services and pressure on the public purse and the argument about resources still seems to be coming from him on this matter. However, the Ombudsman's ruling regarding the Equal Status Act is quite clear. Does the Minister of State feel that in order to fully comply, the Equal Status Act may need to be reformed or repealed?

When the Minister of State says "significantly wider", does he have a quantum of people and of money with respect to how many people it will affect? I have no doubt that the Ombudsman will adjudicate on this again. Is the Minister of State consulting with the Office of the Ombudsman to ensure that what is proposed will satisfy its current requirements?

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I invite the Minister of State to respond.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Dara Murphy for his questions. There is no question of me disputing the ruling of the Ombudsman. I am very supportive and understanding of this issue.

The resources argument is a big argument for us all. What I have found in recent discussions on the Estimates, as Deputy Murphy will know as a former Minister of State, is that when there is a certain amount of money coming into the pot, one is very conscious of what the priority issues might be. That is something that happens every day, and every day I see crises in emergency residential care in the HSE and across different sections in the disability services. The resolution of those problems can be very costly. Resources will always be a problem.

As for my personal views, of course I want to move the legislation forward and I am doing it behind the scenes, but I must also make the point that other issues arose at times which were very high priority and I had to make a decision about funding them. There are currently 4,700 people in receipt of mobility allowances to keep them going until we resolve this issue. If it is expanded, what numbers are we talking about? Some have suggested that the figures could be much more than that, up to 8,000 or 9,000 people. My view is that if we have a certain amount of resources, we should target them at the most needy and the poorest in society. In this case, my focus will be on anyone with a disability who is isolated and does not have much money in their pocket. That is my decision.

On the numbers and money, the Deputy will probably have seen in the budget yesterday that the health area budget was allocated €1.763 billion for 2018. That compares with €1.688 billion allocated for the national service plan for 2017. That is not enough, but when I went into negotiations seeking an extra €100 million, there was €50 million on the table and we managed to agree on €75 million. The game is not over and I am constantly pushing for resources. I will not go into the details of individual cases, but, as an example, there was an emergency case recently where a family had to be given 90 hours a week of home supports and respite services which involved huge costs. The HSE and I have to deal with those crisis situations every day. Sometimes one has to sit down and select categories and priorities. More broadly, I am very supportive of this Bill. I accept the ruling of the Ombudsman and I regularly work closely with the Ombudsman on those issues.

Dara Murphy (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My last question was whether the Minister of State is consulting with the Ombudsman.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes, I am always consulting and in direct contact with the Ombudsman.

Shane Cassells (Meath West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State and acknowledge the positive work he is doing.

The Minister of State used the phrase "those with the greatest needs" a number of times in his statement. He said there was a clear instruction from Government that eligibility was to focus on those with the greatest needs. The Minister of State also said, however, that to make the criteria for the scheme very broad would open up new categories of eligibility and he was worried about the effects of that cost. Is it the case that from a situation where one is trying to help people, the result would be to narrow the parameters of those who would be helped because of the over-reaching arm and influence of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in this area? If I am correct in reading between the lines of what the Minister of State has said, this would mean that those who require help would end up on the outside due to a fear that the scheme will spiral out of control. Naturally, the Minister of State's role includes issues of cost. The rationale is to allow people to participate fully in the workforce and socially facilitate them leading a full life. Is there an over-reaching arm that would restrict the capacity of the scheme to achieve what the Ombudsman seeks, and what all public representatives are seeking on people's behalf?

The Minister of State spoke about estimating the number of recipients. Currently 4,700 people are receiving interim payments. How are the numbers of those likely to be eligible being calculated in the context of finalising the criteria? What is the final number likely to be? Is it being determined in terms of a cap on moneys available?

The Minister of State referred to helping those with the greatest need. Can he quantify that for the committee? I am especially worried about that and the number of people it might help, and what the Department of Public Expenditure's influence might be in that regard.

In outlining the rationale for this scheme, the Minister of State referred to people using public transport. He cited the example of people who are unable to use public transport. Even among those who can use public transport and who use it to get into the city, not every public transport vehicle can facilitate them, for instance, if they are using a wheelchair. It is hit and miss as to what kind of bus pulls up, especially on provincial routes to the city. That is unacceptable. The Minister of State and the Minister, Deputy Shane Ross, have a role to play with Bus Éireann in ensuring people have this service. People are expected to ring ahead in advance of making journeys. We have a problem because of a semi-industrial relations issue with Bus Éireann where buses are not turning up, full stop, but if someone needs a particular type of bus in order to be able to travel to his or her job, too often he or she is unable to get on a bus because it lacks the means needed to board it.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There were questions relating to impact, numbers, and the most in need.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Cassells for raising these important issues. On his point about greatest need, 4,700 people are already in receipt of the payment. Some people are proposing that we broaden the scheme where we might be looking at as many as 20,000 people in receipt of this payment.

While this legislation is being finalised, it is important to remember that 4,700 people are getting the €208.50 monthly, which is an annual cost of €9.3 million. That is what is happening now. My preference is to target those most in need and then broaden it out to people who have broader needs and who have serious disability and mobility problems. That is my vision for the legislation.

Deputy Cassells mentioned numbers.

I emphasise to Deputy Cassells that these are estimate numbers. From my experience, having spoken to colleagues in the Seanad and the Dáil, and also having spoken to disability groups, one could go from 4,700 up to a possible maximum of 20,000.

On the funding questions he raised, there is always a debate about funding limitations and where money should be spent. We are talking about spending public money. I had many ideas and proposals during the talks and the Estimate when I went to speak with the Minister for Finance, Deputy Donohoe and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, DPER. I might have asked for ten things and ended up with four or five. That is part of negotiating. We are trying to rebuild and invest in disability services. Transport support is part of that and I am taking a step by step approach, which is very important. There will always be funding limitations, and I totally agree that is a concern. There is no point in saying that it is not a concern. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform makes people go through the hoops to convince it that proposals are credible and that costings work. There are all sorts of figures bandied about concerning the costs of the legislation, but that will not be finalised for another while.

The issue of accessibility was mentioned. It is a very important issue. I know that Deputy Cassells is best buddies with the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Ross, and I have raised those issues with him. We launched a national disability inclusion strategy in July. We had our first meeting a month ago, and every Department has been asked to come up with concrete proposals to assist people with disabilities. Every Minister has been told to do the same thing. I have asked that by Christmas they provide me with a couple of things that they can do in their respective Departments to assist persons with disabilities. Accessibility is really up there with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport. In fairness to Dublin Bus and Luas, they have improved over the past number of years, but there are many other organisations that have not improved. I launched a campaign recently to highlight that disabled spaces on buses should not be blocked up by buggies and bags to ensure that a person with a disability has access. I give a commitment that the accessibility issue will be dealt with very strongly in the national inclusion strategy. We are having our next meeting on 8 December, where the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport will be reporting back to me on the progress made on those issues. It is unacceptable that people with a physical disability or with major mobility issues are still having to ring up the night before to get access to public transport.

We also cannot exclude private transporters. They will also be included in this strategy. If we are talking about equality or the rights of persons with a disability, we must acknowledge that access is a very important part of it. I will report back to the Deputy when more progress has been made on that issue.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Cassells had a question on the sense of the greatest need. Is he clear about the answer to that, and also the numbers estimates?

Shane Cassells (Meath West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I appreciate that the Minister of State is perhaps not going to disclose the overall number, but he gave us an upper figure of 20,000. There are 4,700 at the moment.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

20,000 is an estimate.

Shane Cassells (Meath West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Within that there must have been preliminary work done on what he thinks the full scope will be. Has the Minister of State been told what the limit of funding available? Is it the case that he now has to frame the legislation to ensure that the scope does not allow it to go beyond that? Is he going to end up framing this?

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The honest answer is "No", because the talks are still going on with DPER. I do not know at this stage. I know what I want to do, but how I get there is a different debate. The bottom line is that I want to ensure that the Bill will cover the maximum number of people. I have a caveat that the most needy people have to be prioritised. If it comes to a decision between getting this legislation in place for a particular amount, or succeeding and getting a little bit or half of it, I will have to make that decision. No one is closing me down yet on the debate. I am pushing for the maximum. I know the maximum figure and I will negotiate with that in mind. When that is finalised we will have some sort of idea. I am not holding back on the figures. I am pushing for the maximum, and I am hoping for a reasonable accommodation. Many Deputies and Senators in the room want to support me for the maximum because they have their own ideas about helping people with disabilities.

Jerry Buttimer (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, to the committee and commend him on the work he has undertaken.

Like Deputy Cassells, I want to begin with the critical issue of accessibility. If we analyse the people who we engage with in our offices and in our communities, the issue of isolation and connectivity arises regularly. I am a bit confused by the Minister of State, Deputy McGrath's presentation. On page 2, it states: "Since the closure of the scheme the Government has directed that the HSE should continue to pay an equivalent monthly payment to these 4,700 individuals." Is that continuing?

Am I correct that the motorised transportation grant is a once off payment of €5,200? Is it correct that the purchase or adaptation of a car is not affected for a person who may need to have their car converted? The Minister of State referred to VAT, VRT, diesel and tags. Can he clarify that please?

The Minister of State also spoke about the whole issue of ideas. I do not want it to seem as if Deputy Cassells and I are joined at the hip, but this is about full participation by people in society. This is something we have to do a huge amount of work on in the area of disability, and I know the Minister of State is prioritising that aspect. Equally as important and linked to that is the issue of respite care beds and emergency respite care. I am digressing from what we are talking about today, but we need to have a real conversation about the issue of respite care and emergency respite care beds. I referred to the issue of the Ombudsman and HIQA at the last meeting. Has there been any engagement with HIQA about how we can have a common sense approach to emergency respite care? We all want to see good standards and have people living in pristine quality conditions, in many cases in their homes, but is there a half way house where we could reach an accommodation on respite care? It is an issue that is not going away. It is growing, and the demands are high in many parts of the country.

Are the savings that have been made in this scheme being spent in any particular area, or to where are they being directed?

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The issue of respite care has come up again, but it is probably not a matter for this committee, unfortunately.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a link.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know where I would stand on it.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I know the Vice Chairman's position quite well. I thank Senator Buttimer for his comments and support. The issue of accessibility and isolation is huge and I totally agree with him. If we dig deeper within the disability community, particularly those with physical disabilities but also the visually impaired or deaf - I have spent time with the deaf community over the past number of months - the sense of isolation is absolutely terrible. Broader society does not seem to get it. I have spent my life trying to bring people, in both Houses and the Cabinet, to get it. The issue of isolation is extremely important. If we talk about improving people's lives, we have to ensure that issue is addressed.

I can guarantee that there will be a strong dimension from the Department of Health in the national disability inclusion strategy, as well as from the Minister of State, Deputy Jim Daly, with regard to mental health issues. The 4,700 people mentioned will continue to get €208.50 per month.

In response to Senator Buttimer's question, the motorised transport scheme has been gone since 2013. I know that the Chair does not want me to spend too much time talking about full participation and the respite issue mentioned by the Senator. The problem I face here is that I have to make choices. If I were offered €15 million to make some sort of progress on the motorised transport scheme, or else €15 million for emergency residential places, or else €10 million or even €6 million, then I would have to make choices. These are choices that we regularly have to make. We have this debate in the Department every single week. In fact, I had one such discussion just before I came down to this meeting when I had the HSE and the Department of Health in to talk about funding. This is a matter of making choices, and as I mentioned to Deputy Cassells, there are financial limitations and I find myself in very difficult situations. I generally come down on the side of whoever I consider to be the most needy, which family is in a crisis, and which service needs support. Respite services and emergency residential places need support.

I cannot get into any broader debate about HIQA, although I totally accept the HIQA standards ruling. It is independent of the Minister, as the committee knows. There is a broader debate about this in society. I meet HIQA representatives regularly and remain in close contact with the authority, just as I meet HSE and Department of Health officials. There is regular contact between all of us and we are listening to the points raised by the committee. We need to ensure that common sense prevails in the management and development of services. I live with a daughter who has an intellectual disability and I am always very conscious when I go home that we do not have big red signs marking special fire doors and handles and so forth. Ours is a private home, but I am very conscious of this. I visit services throughout the country that are trying to operate according to the ethos of bringing people out of institutions and into smaller settings which are as homely as possible and have a maximum of four or five people per residential unit. That answers that question.

In response to the question about savings, there have been no savings because we continue to pay €9.3 million out annually to the 4,700 people mentioned.

In response to the final question, I am not aware of any scheme for the conversion of cars.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We could have a very lengthy discussion about a range of disability issues but our focus today is on transport.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will be in again soon.

Brendan Ryan (Dublin Fingal, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for attending the committee meeting and addressing our concerns on this matter. If someone were to have asked me before this meeting today when the replacement scheme would be put in place, I could have told them that I was on my way into a meeting with the Minister of State and would be able to give them an answer after this meeting. In his contribution the Minister of State talked about significant progress, the complexity of the issue, officials continuing to work hard on it, and the attaching of priority to it. The reason he is before us today is that the committee has concerns about all these matters, with particular regard to delay. The one answer I would like to get from this meeting is to the following question. When are we going to see progress? The Minister of State's contributions suggested that this all boils down to resources. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform would appear to be denying the Minister of State the money. This could be going around the houses forever, and we might find ourselves here in six, nine or 12 months still talking about complexity and the like. It is obvious that there is a need for resources. In recent days we have been dealing with budget 2018. Have any resources been allocated in that budget to bring this matter forward at all? If not, we might as well postpone our discussion until the budget this time next year. If it all boils down to resources, then everything that the Minister of State said about priority, hard work and significant progress is meaningless. Before we leave today, I would like to hear from the Minister of State when we are going to see progress, when we are going to move this health transport support Bill forward, and when it will move to the next stage. I would like to see this happening in the near future.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are three questions: when, what and how much is in the budget? I ask the Minister of State to be precise in his answers to these questions.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Ryan for his support. I know from working with him on the northside of Dublin that he is very much involved with disability issues and with supporting the families of children with disabilities. I also apologise to Deputy Ryan for the delay. There are times when it gets very frustrating. Before giving detailed answers to the questions, I would like to say that significant progress has been made. The draft memorandum on the general scheme of the Bill was circulated on eCabinet to Departments in the middle of December 2016, and the intention was that this matter would be on the agenda of a Cabinet meeting by the end of January 2017. Observations at official level were received from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform last February raising concerns over resource implications. This ties up with earlier comments made here today. The allocation of resources has been the subject of discussion in the 2018 Estimates process, both with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and at ministerial level. The Bill is on the Government's list of priority legislation for publication in the autumn session, and the Department of Health is awaiting the approval of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in order that a memo on the draft general scheme can be submitted to the Cabinet. This is exactly where we are with this and that is the straight answer to Deputy Ryan's question. We are waiting for the approval of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform in order that the memo can come to Government and the general scheme can be submitted to Cabinet. As soon as we get the disability social care plan sorted out over the next few weeks, I will make direct contact with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and with the Minister, Deputy Donohoe. I cannot give the Deputy deadlines or timelines because discussions are ongoing.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What of the allocation in the budget? Has the Minister of State had any indication if anything has been earmarked for this particular scheme or for its replacement?

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No. There was discussion about the 2018 Estimates with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and at ministerial level. That is where we are with that. We will keep funding the 4,700 people in the meantime. On a personal level, I want to get this resolved because there could be others beyond that 4,700 who would also like to be included in this. I would like this issue moved forward myself.

I apologise to Deputy Cassells because in my answer to him earlier, I gave a figure of 20,000 people. That figure could actually be as high as 40,000. I want to correct that. I will come back with individual answers to individual questions in order that we do not make any mistakes.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It might be worth writing to the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform for a timetable, given that the Bill is currently with it. That could be a useful thing for us to do.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will answer some more of the members' questions. I want to get Government approval for the drafting because the costing issue around the Bill will arise when it is enacted. I need to get Government support for the drafting first.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are three issues there: the drafting, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, and the money required.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. I have approximate figures from the negotiations with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform but I cannot give them out today as that might damage future negotiations.

I will come back to the committee with details on every single thing that I have mentioned or if I have left out something.

Denise Mitchell (Dublin Bay North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Minister of State for attending and for his presentation. We all know how important transport is to people with physical disabilities. It helps with their independence, holding down a job and socialising. However, I am very disappointed listening to the response. It is four and a half years since the original scheme was abolished, the Minister of State is saying we discussed it in January and February last and we are still nowhere near getting a resolution to such an important issue that affects so many people. At the time when the original scheme was abolished, the Taoiseach said that the money allocated for it would be ring-fenced. He hoped that a new scheme would be devised within months. We are four and a half years on, which is many months, and nothing has happened.

I have concerns about the funding. We talk every year about there being an estimated cost of €1.3 million. Between 2013 and 2015, there was a total of €6.5 million. Where was that money spent within the Department itself?

When the Minister of State talks about need, are we talking about concentrating on the people who can least afford it or are we looking at people who are most isolated because there is no public transport?

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputy Mitchell, who, as I know from my locality, has been very supportive on the issues of disabilities and the rights of people with disabilities. The Deputy is 100% right on the issue of accessibility, something Senator Buttimer raised as well. It is not acceptable. It is very difficult for those with a physical disability. Many with an intellectual rather than a physical disability have the bus pass and use services every day right across the city.

I disagree with Deputy Mitchell that we are nowhere near getting this resolved, because we have moved on. That said, I agree with her that we have not moved far enough. I agree also and can understand the frustration about this being slow. However, we have moved on, the Bill is ready to roll and we now have to finalise this with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. That is the stage we are at.

The other issue the Deputy raised, which is a very important one, is ring-fencing. That €9.3 million is ring-fenced and it will cover the 4,700 people with mobility needs. That is a very important sum of money that is left in the pot while we get the legislation over the line. This is in the programme for Government, and the Deputy is right to point that out. I will be saying this during talks and I am going to be upfront about it with my colleagues. It is in the programme for Government so why are we not moving strongly enough on this issue? While progress has been made, I accept my colleagues' frustration that it has not been fast enough. I know many individual cases between Mayo, Galway and Donegal that are in a really bad situation and they are not even getting part of the €9.3 million. Colleagues have mentioned that to me. I give a commitment that we will do our best to move it forward over the next couple of weeks and see if we can get a bit further.

Denise Mitchell (Dublin Bay North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister of State address the term "need" for us?

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The priority in this case has to be the health need. I am a little biased myself. While I have spoken to people individually and poverty and isolation have been mentioned, priority has to be given to the health need.

John Dolan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is hard to know where to start. I was at the eye of that storm when it broke on 26 and 27 February 2013. I remember having a conversation with the Minister of State's predecessor at the time, the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch. I know where I was when she phoned me, and I know I did not say very much to her other than to say that I was as sour as I had ever been in my whole life. I will explain the reason for that.

This programme, as has been mentioned by Minister of State, Deputy McGrath, goes back to 1979. Would the Minister of State agree that while we had no language in 1979 such as "money follows the person" or "person-centred services", this scheme was the simplest, most effective and most efficient way of putting some money into some people's pockets that they could use in a variety of ways to make themselves more mobile? They could give their brother money to pay the car tax and insurance, they could get hackneys, or they could do various things. It was an absolute model of money following the person and person-centredness. Then came the day when the whole pack of cards came tumbling down as a result of a decision by the Government that it needed to be abolished for, of all things, equality reasons.

I should say I was a member of the review group that was set up. Deputy Mitchell referred to the time that has elapsed since. I am very clear that we were press-ganged to get on with that work and get it done within, if not in weeks, then a number of months. That happened. That review group was chaired by a former senior civil servant, Ms Sylda Langford, who had worked in the equality side of things. She was woman with a very strong reputation and, if I am not mistaken, was involved in the development of the Equal Status Acts. That group did its work in a number of months and was under pressure to have it ready for the interdepartmental group that was, as referred to in the Minister of State's note, chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach. Give or take a month or so, in the autumn of 2013 that matter passed to an interdepartmental working group chaired by the Department of the Taoiseach. We are here still. In fairness to the Minister of State's responses to other members, he is not in a position to give us comfort that we will not be here for some time to come.

I have a number of particular questions that I want to put to the Minister of State. Before I do that, Deputy Cassells mentioned current issues around public transport in the Meath area. I am thinking of the 109 route that goes from Cavan to Dublin and back. I know one young woman of 20 years of age who, three times within the past month, despite having done all that she was required to do, such as ringing up whoever she had to ring, giving notice, and this, that and the other, could not get the bus from a town in Cavan down to Busaras and back, even though it is an accessible fleet of buses and the two stations at both ends of the journey are accessible. This is a really interesting issue for a petitions committee. That young woman is going to third level, and there is a more general point in this in that, to put it in economic terms, this is somebody in whose education the State has invested, and rightly so. She has been able to go to mainstream primary and secondary school, and she has been supported to go to third level. Now she is in her final year and is striking out to do interviews, make pitches and progress her career. With her hand on her heart, she cannot say she will be in a specific office or location for a meeting or interview.

There is a real edge to this. The Minister of State spoke about the most needy who are in crisis. In sporting terms, I would regard that as the ambition of a manager who just does not want to lose by an awful lot. The Minister of State mentioned the most needy, those in crisis and those with health requirements. People have mobility issues in the context of attending health appointments. The Minister of State is correct - Ministers and officials never tire of telling us how much is being spent on disability. The issue is the value of the spend to those with disabilities. Services such as transport impact on education, training, employment, social participation and - an issue raised by other members - social isolation.

When was the Department of Health first advised - verbally and then in writing - about the issues with the mobility allowance and the motorised transport scheme by the ombudsman? Sin an chéad cheist.

We are told that there were 4,700 people on the schemes and that the officials are working on the figures for the numbers availing of the current iteration of the scheme. How many people who would have been eligible under the previous terms relating to the scheme are now in limbo because they have not been have not been able to join the current iteration of the scheme since February 2013? Whether the number is ten, 300 or 1,000, these people are losing out because the scheme has been put on hold. It is fair to say that those who availed of the scheme remained in it. People had submitted applications, but they were not met. Other people would have applied since. Do the officials have a guesstimate of how many new applicants would be availing of the scheme if it had continued? I know some people would have died and would no longer be in the scheme.

Did the Department investigate the options available under the Equality Act to deal with the issues arising in respect of the scheme? Did the officials look at the opportunities the Equality Act would have afforded them to deal with the issue? Could the Department of Health have legislated for the scheme, to take it from the rules applying to administrative schemes? My understanding is that legislation would have allowed the issues to be dealt with adequately. Did the Department seek advice from the Office of the Ombudsman. Did that office offer any advice as to how the matter might be dealt with or how the Department could get further advice on dealing with it?

This Bill is on the legislative programme. For how long was it on the legislative programme prior to the current session?

My next point is tangential but it goes to the heart of the issue about the lack of accessible public transport. Recent changes in the notice period that wheelchair users must give to Bus Éireann means that 3 p.m. on a Friday afternoon is now the cut off time for a person who wishes to travel on Saturday, Sunday or Monday. Bus Éireann has extended the time notice of 24 hours to 48 hours for those who use the service Monday to Friday. No announcement of this change was made either in public or through the disability organisations. It is possible that the Minister of State will not be able to respond to this immediately but it shows how the service is related to other provisions for the disabled.

I have heard rumours of the minimum and maximum cost of the new scheme. I will not mention them. The Minister of State made a point of noting how this could impact on negotiations. In the context of the amount the Minister of State is seeking - which is possibly contested by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform - how would that translate in terms of the scope of the scheme and the numbers would could avail of it. What criteria would apply to the scheme if the Minister of State were to get what he is seeking, particularly in the context of the number of people with disabilities who would be able to avail of it.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator has significant experience and history so I think it was important to give him that time. The Minister of State has many questions to answer.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I sure do. I have worked with Senator Dolan in the past. We have crossed swords but I know the issues he is highlighting are very important. I totally commend his work on disabilities and also his work with the Disability Federation of Ireland.

The motorised transport scheme was abolished in February 2013 by the former Minister of State, Kathleen Lynch, who was at the helm during that difficult period. The scheme was discontinued in response to the Ombudsman's report. Concerns were raised that some of the schemes could discriminate against people with intellectual disabilities.

Senator Dolan raised the question of accessibility and the difficulties experienced by a young student. It is unacceptable that any Irish citizen might have such an experience. I will raise this case with the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport and Bus Éireann. What happened was not acceptable. I will also raise the notice period and the 3 p.m. cut-off time on Friday for those who wish to travel on Saturday, Sunday or Monday. I will raise this issue with the Department, with Bus Éireann and with the travel companies as well.

The Senator commented on Ministers and officials jumping up and down about the money we get for disabilities. I want much more money spent on services for those with disabilities. I totally accept that a great deal more work needs to be done. Spending on disability services in the region of €1.763 billion was announced in the 2018 Estimates and Senator Dolan is correct in referring to the value of the spend and the social participation of persons with disabilities. Part of my job, and that of the Senator, is to ensure that the money goes to the most needy and to persons with disabilities.

The Senator stated that the people who do not qualify for the new scheme are in limbo. I cannot give him a response in that regard but I will undertake to come back him with more direct answers.

Rolling out the provisions of the Equality Act involved significant cost implications. Age was also an issue.

In a report published in 2011, the Ombudsman stated that the mobility allowance scheme was incompatible with the Equal Status Acts and recommended that the scheme should be revised so as to make it compliant with those Acts by removing the upper age limit and using a broader definition of disability in respect of eligibility for both schemes. These recommendations raise significant losses of a legal, financial and practical nature, particularly as regards extending the eligibility to a significantly wider cohort. I will come back to Senator Dolan in greater detail on the issues he raised. The Department is in regular contact with the Ombudsman. I will raise the question of the cut-off time for people travelling on public transport with the Department of Transport and Bus Éireann.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When the Minister of State has the information requested by Senator Dolan, I ask him to respond to the committee.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will certainly do that.

John O'Mahony (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am not a member of the committee so I appreciate being able to speak on this issue. I have been following the issue since I was a Deputy in the previous Dáil. I have also raised it on a number of occasions in the Seanad. We are talking about signing up to the European disability legislation but this is something disabled people had that was taken away from them. I accept the bona fides of the Minister of State but I have raised this on every platform possible. While the Taoiseach said it is to be prioritised, it has been going on for too long and there has to be a final score at some stage. I have a particular case concerning the motorised transport grant, which I imagine the Minister of State knows by heart at this stage. It involves isolation and there is no transport available at the moment. The family in the relevant case is saving money for the State by looking after its ill family member at home so there is an urgent need to bring it to a conclusion. I do not have a question.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The question is "When?"

John O'Mahony (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The question is "When?" and the answer must be "Soon."

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Senator is close to this issue because he has constituents who are affected.

Brendan Ryan (Dublin Fingal, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister of State said that, whatever the criteria that are settled on for the new scheme, he would also seek to address the needs of current recipients. This adds to the complexity of the definition of "eligibility criteria" from a legal and drafting perspective. It suggests that, in the current thinking about the proposed Bill, some people in the 4,700 cohort might not be eligible under the new criteria. Can the Minister of State confirm whether that is the case? Does the Minister of State agree that there is no funding in budget 2018 for this and that the next, and only, opportunity for funding will be budget 2019?

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask Senator Dolan to be brief.

John Dolan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is telling that the Department does not have any sense of how many people would have been able to use the scheme in the year so far. I asked when the Department was first advised, both verbally and in writing, by the Ombudsman.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a note to respond to the Senator on that question.

John Dolan (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I asked if the Department investigated the options under the Equality Act so that it could regularise the scheme as it stood. This is different from the advice the Department got from the Ombudsman in 2011 about how to widen the scheme. Could the Department have put a legislative underpinning onto the scheme as a stopgap before anything else was done? I asked if the Department had sought any advice from the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman offered advice in the 2011 letter but my understanding is that engagement between the Department and the office of the Ombudsman significantly preceded 2011. This issue had been fermenting for a quite a number of years without being dealt with until it blew up in February 2013.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am trying to answer all questions but I will come back to the committee with answers to any I cannot answer. Whenever I see Senator O'Mahony in the corridor I become embarrassed because he always asks me about this issue. I agree that it is now time for us to proceed with this legislation. The health (transport supports) Bill is very important. When we finalise our discussions with the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, we will then need the nod from the entire Government to get it over the line. I will tell Cabinet that I want it done. There will be issues and various people will come up with different ideas, especially in the area of costs. Some of the costs that have been mentioned are extraordinarily high, although others are reasonable. I will not go into detail on which are in which category today because I want to keep my powder dry.

Deputy Brendan Ryan asked if some who qualify at present might be ineligible for the new scheme. We are aiming to continue to pay the existing 4,700 who qualify but there are legal issues attaching to doing so and we are trying to deal with them. Could some people lose out in the future? That would be a concern if a certain piece of legislation went through. If somebody is needier than the 4,700 who qualify at present and we were to take it from the latter cohort to pay the new group, world war three would break out and, in any event, it would be wrong to do it.

In answer to Senator Dolan, the Department was first informed in 2011. I do not have direct answers to his other questions but I will come back to him on them.

Brendan Ryan (Dublin Fingal, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is budget 2019 the next and only opportunity for funding this?

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes. It will take a year to organise the legislation.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We need to go into private session so I will attempt to summarise. If the Minister of State needs support from his colleagues in the Oireachtas, he has it here in this committee. There is consensus that this issue is long overdue and a matter of urgency for those who are missing out on the scheme and for those who would have qualified since it was discontinued. The importance of transport for people, to enable them to live a good, independent life, needs to be stressed. We are concerned about the fact that we have not received as much clarity as we would have liked around the eligibility criteria, and about who are the most in need. There is also a lack of clarity on the numbers and the estimates and there are a lot of unanswered questions. Transport is a major issue in terms of quality of life for people with a disability.

How would the Minister of State rate, out of ten, the state of transport for people with disabilities?

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a good question. We produced a detailed report over the summer. I might send it on to the Vice Chairman. I got one of my disability advisers - who has a physical disability - to produce the report over the summer. Dublin Bus and Luas had a really good record on accessibility. Right across the State, some companies are good and some are very bad. How would I rate them at present? If I were to give a general figure, I would give five out of ten. However, I am aiming for nine or ten. I want to reward good practice.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When the Minister of State is negotiating with the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and all the others, he should indicate that the score is five out of ten and that we must do better.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Correct.

Colette Kelleher (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We must do better with the specifics of this scheme. There is a clear message from the Committee on Public Petitions - cross-party and of no party - to that end. We wish the Minister of State well in his endeavours.

Finian McGrath (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the members for their co-operation and for their questions. We will come back to them with any questions to which we could not provide answers.