Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)

Deputies Twomey and Kenny, for example, earlier this week issued a list of questions they said had to be answered by the report, even though they knew the report had been completed. What makes this even more breathtakingly cynical is that Mr. Travers asked Fine Gael, just like other Opposition parties, if it wished to make a submission. Fine Gael did not even respond to him. One of the biggest misrepresentations has been the attempt to confuse discussions on eligibility with discussions on the illegal charge enforced in 1976.

The House should be aware that eligibility criteria under health schemes are at the very heart of almost all discussions on health policy. Discussions on eligibility take place all the time and will have played a significant role in the work of every Minister since 1976. The fact of the illegal charge and its imposition since 1976 is an entirely different issue and the report is absolutely clear in stating that the discussion of one does not imply a discussion of the other. If the Opposition parties are credibly suggesting that all eligibility discussions must, of necessity, have involved a discussion of the illegal charge, they must now explain why they are trying to apply a different standard to the past two years to the standard that applied when they were in Government.

The root of this issue is to be found squarely in what the report calls the, "foundation decision" of the Regulation 7/76 signed by the Labour Party Minister for Health and Fine Gael Minister for Finance in 1976 and sent to the health boards. This regulation and the accompanying letter sent to the health boards ignored the High Court's decision in the McInerney case and instructed the boards that they were entitled to charge long-stay patients irrespective of whether they had full eligibility. From the point of this "foundation decision" the issue surfaced at different times and in different ways over 28 years and this is illustrated in Mr. Travers' report.

I will cite some examples from the report. In 1979 the Department's legal adviser reiterated concerns about the 1976 regulations. In January 1982 a specific review of the regulations stated they had no legal basis. In 1987 a legislative change was proposed but not proceeded with. In 1992 a review of long-stay charges was completed and legislative change advocated. In 1994 the health strategy stated that the legislative basis for charges was inadequate and promised legislative change.

In inquiring into the period during which I was Minister, Mr. Travers had full access to every document and every person involved in the issue.

See this speech in context