Jim Glennon (Dublin North, Fianna Fail)

I also welcome this legislation. In a country where the provision of health care is such an important issue for the vast majority of its people, any legislation which deals with the provision of health care services is to be welcomed. By the nature of health care, it is essential that there is adequate regulation of the provision of services. I will not rehearse most of the arguments that have been made previously. I came to the Chamber specifically to deal with the issue to which I believe every speaker has referred in this debate thus far. Like other Members, I have received representations from both sides of the therapy issue, if one might so describe it. I felt that I should contribute to the debate as a user, at times a frequent user, as both patient and employer, of the services of both professions.

My experience of both professions has been extremely positive, both as patient and as employer. I am speaking of my experience in the sporting arena, particularly during the past 15 years, when I was heavily involved with professional athletes who had a day-to-day requirement for the services provided by both physiotherapists and what are referred to as physical therapists. In general, my experience has been that as with any profession, the vast majority are expert practitioners and a few are not so expert. Obviously, the forthcoming regulation will affect the not so expert end of either sector. However, my impression was that the crucial factor for any patient of either arm of the profession is the confidence of the patient in the professional administering the service, particularly in the area of sports injury, to which my experience is confined. The confidence of the athlete in the ability of the professional to rehabilitate the injury and get the athlete back into the sporting arena at the earliest possible opportunity was a vital component in the choice by the patient of the type of treatment and the individual by whom they wished to be treated.

Unfortunately, sports injury and the recovery from such injuries are topical at present. However, the manner in which our attention has been focused on the issue in the past week by the unfortunate injury to Brian O'Driscoll in New Zealand tends to make us overlook the ordinary day-to-day bumps and bruises experienced and suffered by individual athletes in the daily practice of their craft and earning of their livelihoods. While such spectacular events receive wall-to-wall and angle-to-angle coverage across our television screens, for the athletes who train and engage in what by any standards is extremely rigorous physical activity, injury is part and parcel of their lives. It is an occupational hazard and the ability to recover quickly is a vital element of their day-to-day lives. In particular, the ability to recover more quickly than their opponents, or in this case the replacement, is vital. This ability can only be provided by a practitioner who is able to identify and treat the injury but also — this is particularly important — restore the individual's confidence that he or she is capable of returning to the arena and performing again to his or her maximum ability at the earliest possible opportunity. In my experience of both professions I found little if any difference. Probably the country's highest-profile practitioner in either craft in the sports area describes himself as a physical therapist. Jokingly he will describe himself as "therapist to the stars". I have no intention of mentioning names, which would breach confidentiality. However, the list of names represents a "who's who" across the Irish sporting spectrum, including footballers, hurlers, rugby players and athletes both male and female. They attend that practitioner because of their confidence in him to deliver the service and their confidence when returning to the sporting arena that they are not putting themselves at unnecessary risk of aggravating the injury and thereby putting themselves to even greater discomfort and risking reducing their earnings.

I understand from where the physiotherapists and the therapists are coming. In its letter dated 28 June, the Irish Society of Chartered Physiotherapists states:

This is why the ISCP is so passionate about protecting the titles of "physical therapist" and "physiotherapist" for those individuals who are eligible for membership of the ISCP and having completed a university degree course... The ISCP has no issue with those currently calling themselves "physical therapists" continuing to practise but the ISCP insists that if the public are to be protected and confusion to be avoided anyone using the title "physical therapist" must change their title to something that is less similar to the title "physiotherapist".

I agree with some of the earlier speakers who regard this as an unseemly spat between two groups of professionals. The first few paragraphs of the letter from the Irish Society of Chartered Physiotherapists does not do any service to the debate or to either group of professionals. Any efforts to try to bring the parties together to resolve matters would be worthwhile.

I believe a clear distinction exists and in due course that distinction would emerge in the eye of the public were the word "chartered" to be always used with the word "physiotherapist" resulting in a clear distinction between a "chartered physiotherapist" and a "physical therapist". From my understanding of both submissions one of the major difficulties is in the similarity of the names "physiotherapist" and a "physical therapist", particularly when they are spoken quickly. Using the word "chartered" would immediately remove the similarity and would draw a clear distinction between both. Its consideration is worth pursuing. It is somewhat ironic that the bottom of the letter from the Irish Society of Chartered Physiotherapists refers to that body being "Members of the World Confederation for Physical Therapy". On the one hand it wants to draw the distinction between its members and physical therapists and on the other it is happy to be a member of the World Confederation for Physical Therapy. I am slightly confused.

The word "chartered" is clearly important to chartered physiotherapists as it denotes a degree of qualification, which members of the other profession do not have. It emphasises to professionals and lay people alike that being a chartered physiotherapist requires a particular qualification, only achieved consequent on passing examinations of a particular standard and having attended a course of study of a particular standard, which makes it clearly distinct from physical therapy. I hope some light shines on both bodies allowing them to come together and resolve the issue. The ongoing dispute between both bodies does no service to either.

Overall I welcome the Bill, which is very worthwhile. The provision of health care services is very dear to all in the House. The regulation of health care services is a natural consequence of their provision. Anything that improves the provision and regulation of health care is to be welcomed.

See this speech in context