Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for not being here earlier. I had something else on and was unable to get out of in time.

As my party's spokesperson on health, if I ever visit a constituency or I am invited by another Deputy, I invariably end up in a section 39 organisation in some part of the country to see at first hand the wonderful work being done, the service being provided, the interaction between clients, staff and the broader community, the voluntary aspect, the level of fiduciary oversight and so on. They are not platitudes; it is the reality which indicates the importance of section 39 organisations which are embedded in communities in which they provide a service. To an extent, the State plays hardball with them, knowing that they are a soft target because of their commitment to provide a service. We see a strong bond between the organisation, the employees, the clients and the community. I have seen cases in which, for instance, HIQA which has an oversight role in adhering to standards and guidelines frequently visits organisations and might point to deficiencies in staffing numbers, which creates great stress for the organisations and their clients because they do not have the resources to comply with the guidelines and are not being supported sufficiently by the HSE. This happens to the point where there have to be voluntary efforts, fundraising and so on, not just to meet capital costs but also often current expenditure. This applies to organisations which are providing services which should be provided by the State.

For all of these reasons, it is distasteful that we have allowed ourselves to get to where we are. Look at what is being done in section 38 organisations and the challenges in trying to recruit or retain staff. If we do not get to a situation where there will be parity between the public service and section 38 and 39 organisations, there will only be short-term, transient staff who will come and move on again. That is wrong for the staff and, equally and critically, the service and those who depend on it. It relates to the HSE, but I cannot let the Government escape from its responsibility as it is primarily a Government decision that is needed to enable the HSE to start to unwind the cuts and restore parity.

The delgates have noted that there have been many Labour Court recommendations. The Department of Public Expenditure and Reform, the Department of Health and the HSE will refer to the complexities in analysing the unwinding of the pay cuts and state they are unsure what the cost will be. Will they expand on this and unwind the myth because in almost every document I have read from the Department of Health, the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the HSE it has been stated this is a key issue because of increments. Will they explain if that is because of requests for back pay or why is it being raised as an issue? Is it really an issue? If so, can we address it and, if not, why is it consistently being raised?

Representatives of HIQA has been before the committee on many occasions. HIQA has a very significant and important oversight role, but how can the State or we, as a Parliament, allow a situation to continue where there is a regulatory body which is charged with undertaking various responsibilities and outlines to section 38 or section 39 organisations that there are deficiencies in the service provided and the funder, namely, the HSE, turns a blind eye and states it is not its responsibility whatever? Section 39 organisations cannot pull the service from vulnerable persons and put them out on the road, but HIQA is forcing them into very difficult positions in terms of the level of fiduciary oversight. They are being forced to cut corners and try to get around standards because they are not being provided with the necessary funding. It comes back to my belief the HSE and the Department know that the people who work in these organisations will do extraordinary things to try to deliver a service to their clients. It is a huge breach. It is also happening in the home help service. Half an hour for a person living in a house on a mountainside in west Cork is not much good because the HSE knows that the home help will stay there for an hour. It is taking advantage of the strong empathy and bond between the service providers, the employees and the clients.

Has there been an assessment made of the cost of unwinding the pay cuts? Is an element of back pay included? What have the Labour Court's recommendations been in this context?

We are under a little bit of time pressure so the representatives from the HSE and from the Department will be here in a few minutes. We have ten to 15 minutes.