Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)

I support Deputy Ryan's case in regard to amendment No. 2. I concur with the argument he presented in this case. In trying to tease this out with the Minister of State, is he able to advise us as to his Department's assessment of the number of people it would require to oversee and conduct the processing of applications and the follow through work the whole procedure would entail? Do we know if that has been assessed? Can he tell us why it is believed it is not within the compass of the HSE or the Department to administer the scheme if that was an option? Has there already been an exploration of outside bodies to determine interest and availability of players from within the private sector? Can the Minister advise if any such explorative exercise has been employed?

I recall the various figures we all cited on Committee Stage and the Minister's information shared with us. Can he tell us the up to date position on the numbers of people who have come forward and registered their expected entitlement to repayment? Has there been any revision of the figures cited heretofore on the expected total number of applicants who will present? From my notes I see it was suggested that repayments would be due to some 20,000 people who are still alive and that a further 40,000 to 50,000 — these are significant, ballpark type figures; the gap between 40,000 and 50,000 is not small — would be a "guesstimate" of the estates that would benefit. Has there been any further revisitation of those figures and can the Minister share with us the up to date information? Is there a greater exactitude regarding same?

There is not only a principle involved here but this scheme will be a significant charge on the Exchequer in the first instance in terms of ensuring the repayment of moneys taken illegally from residents in long-term residential care institutions. The added cost of engaging private sector handlers and the overseeing of the repayments scheme will add additional cost, which one presumes will come out of the overall health budget. There is, therefore, genuine and well-founded concern on the part of Members that this would be wasteful and should be avoided. We would like to hear the Minister of State's arguments on why the Bill leaves this open to applicants in the private sector. I believe the simple mechanism presented by Deputy Seán Ryan and his Labour Party colleagues of substituting the word "including" for "being" achieves the required result. I commend the amendment and await the Minister of State's response to the various points we have raised.

See this speech in context