Séamus Healy (Tipperary South, Independent)

I will not delay the House too long. I wish to contribute in particular to the question of the family home. We should remember who we are dealing with on the issue of subvention for nursing homes. We are dealing with elderly people who over the past 20 to 60 years have contributed to what we now enjoy. They have contributed to the building of the Celtic tiger, and in their old age are entitled to a fair crack of the whip.

In very many cases these people are medical card holders who are effectively being forced from our hospitals into private nursing homes because there are not enough public beds in our system. The vast majority of people in private nursing homes are not there by choice. They would rather either to remain at home or go to a public facility. The fact remains that these people, in very many cases medical card holders, are deprived of the opportunity either to remain in their own homes or avail of publicly-funded facilities because there are not enough beds available.

We are also considering the most vulnerable people at a vulnerable and pressurised stage in their lives. It is a time when their families are under severe pressure of all kinds. I deal with people on a daily basis, as I am sure every other Deputy does, where relatives inform us they have to take their relative, mother or father out of the local hospital and there is no bed available in the geriatric facility. These people are faced with paying huge sums in private nursing homes. The vulnerable people are not just the individuals themselves, but their families.

The family should be completely excluded from this legislation. There are clear precedents. The whole social welfare system excludes the family home on any assessment of financial needs. The medical card system itself excludes the family home from any financial assessment. It is only right, just, fair and decent that the family home be excluded from the subvention issue.

What is contained in this Bill worsens the issue in regard to the family home. Currently, the Health Service Executive has discretion to exclude the family home. To be fair, it does so in many cases, having regard to the circumstances. If this legislation is passed in the current form, it will exclude this discretion.

As Deputy Twomey has stated, we would then be dealing with legislation which must be implemented. Officials from the Health Service Executive will have no discretion whatever in excluding the family home. Those circumstances will mean family homes will have to be sold, as there will be no discretion. In numerous cases the homes will have to be sold to fund elderly people in nursing homes.

With regard to the exclusions, I am currently dealing with a case where a son over the age of 21 is living in a family home. This man is in a low-paid job and is barely getting the minimum wage. He will be excluded under these regulations, and he will effectively have to pay, despite being on a very low income and living in the family home where he was born and raised. There is also the situation raised by Deputy Wall, which involves a single parent, a carer, or somebody on a community employment scheme being excluded under the details of this Bill.

In very many cases, the family home may have fallen into disrepair over a long number of years. In some cases, to get over the problem of a family home being vacant, the owner — the elderly person — may be in a position to rent it. In many cases, homes that have a significant value because of location or size, for example, may be in a state of disrepair and so cannot be rented. Currently, Health Service Executive officials have discretion to exclude the family home, but that will not be the case if this Bill goes through in its current form. I appeal to the Minister of State to exclude the family home from the legislation and, accordingly, to accept Deputy McManus's amendment No. 6. It is most unjust to elderly people, who built up this country over the years and of whom many are medical card holders forced into private nursing homes because of the lack of public facilities.

See this speech in context