Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

Exactly. Too much information was made available and people became too well-informed about their entitlements. As a result a change had to be made. Now, it looks as if another change must be made.

I congratulate my constituent, Mr. Chris Glennon, on his appointment to the board. I have no doubt he will be extremely helpful and knowledgeable in that area. I am sad to see he is the latest victim to be sucked into Government propaganda in the approach to the next general election. I wish him well and hope he does well. I know he will because he is deeply committed. Apart from that, both he and the organisation appear to have become victims of a greater and grander plan.

I will speak about the definition of entitlements, particularly regarding the Departments of Social and Family Affairs, Health and Children and Education and Science. One technique to be employed at all times on determination of social welfare entitlements is that the definition of an entitlement must be received from the right person. That does not always happen, even if one puts down a parliamentary question with the best intentions. Incidentally, one is supposed to receive an absolutely accurate reply to a parliamentary question. A reply in the House must be capable of standing up in court at any time. We do not always obtain such information. In certain cases, one must go back down the line and remind people what is the law.

The issues raised are how to get information, where to access it and what information to pass on as a result. How many times have we as public representatives dealt with cases where people were given wrong information, acted on it and deprived themselves of an entitlement? Why do we always have catch-22 situations whereby some little trick exists in the calculation of entitlements based on contributions? A thorn or barb pops up along the line to suddenly deprive a most deserving case for a simple payment. We should address that now and not wait until after the next general election.

I will consider schools and the entitlement of children with special needs. Long before I came to this House it considered the needs of children, who in most cases attend mainstream education, where there are constant requests for extra services, such as speech and language therapy services, which are important in formative years, or other special needs services. These services are necessary but what do we get? We get a bland reply which tells us the Government has spent so much money on these services in recent years and now spends more than ever. We did not expect that it would spend less. It would seem odd if it was only spending what was spent ten years ago. The Government should give itself no plaudits for coming up with the grand notion it is spending more. Of course it is spending more, but it is not spending enough and is not addressing the issue, which is that countless parents are trying to cope while waiting for assistance to which they know they are entitled but which they will not get.

Let me turn to the issues of advocacy and information. Information is power. The more information at one's disposal, the greater the chances not necessarily of achieving one's entitlements, but of at least knowing whom to go to in order to get them. With regard to health matters, on which legislation is currently before the House, how often have we dealt with situations involving an elderly person in hospital? As an example, such an elderly person may have two or three family members and other commitments. He or she may own a house, which, if it is an average council house, may be worth €200,000 to €300,000 — such a house would be valued at €250,000 to €320,000 in my constituency, due to the Government's much vaunted high wage policy which makes it difficult for people to buy houses, although it is fine if one is selling.

The applicant must go through a strenuous examination of his or her circumstances to determine whether a subvention will be paid. This situation has continued for some time and, while I accept that legislation must cover this area, the regulations are very restrictive. If any way can be found to achieve it, the family will be forced to contribute or sell the house. At the end of the day, a subvention will be paid when all the resources the unfortunate person has worked and paid taxes to accumulate throughout his or her life have been dissipated. If that person does not sell the house and becomes destitute, he or she will not get attention. What a cruel, harsh society we have become — the so-called caring society of the Celtic tiger. I am annoyed when I see this kind of situation.

Let us assume that information is power. Is it not then ironic that immediately after the last general election, one of the first things the Government did was to prevent information being made available under the Freedom of Information Act? This was an extraordinary decision given that it is supposed to be an open system and the whole purpose of the exercise allegedly is to provide people with more information. Nonetheless, the Government introduced amendments to the Act to prevent information being made available to the public through the media and the Opposition. It was an appalling backward step. This Bill, which we are proposing to bring through the House, will allegedly help citizens with disabilities. That will be fun if it happens.

I remember a time when an Opposition Member could ask a question in the House on any subject and it was then a matter for the Taoiseach or Minister to reply. If they were not capable of replying, it was embarrassing. It was alleged this was not provided for in Standing Orders but that was not sufficient for the Opposition Members of the time, who wanted more. They did not want an answer to a question; they wanted a debate every morning, as my colleague, Deputy Michael D. Higgins, will remember, on every subject, at their choosing. It was then that Standing Orders were changed. Now, we have a very much set piece, with very select admission of information and a narrow interpretation of what information should be made available to Members of the Opposition. It is a long way from the situation of a few short years ago.

Information is beneficial and the right to it should be guarded. The right of the individual to give or access information in so far as his or her entitlements are concerned should be strongly defended and guarded. I do not accept we are making any proposal, through this legislation or otherwise, to improve the flow of information to the public or, in this case, to people with disabilities.

The citizens information services have done a good job. They were often the meat in the sandwich and had to strive for information and to confirm its accuracy, as the rest of us had to do. Sometimes they got that information and sometimes they did not but at least they tried, and they provided a service to the people in their home localities. They gave the process a flavour of authenticity which even Departments had to recognise and respect. I do not know if the Bill will benefit the people or whether it will empower citizens or people with disabilities, and I do not know whether it will inform them as to their entitlements. It is new and has all the trappings of preparations for a general election. I hope it is capable of lasting somewhat longer than some of the general election promises that have come and gone in the past.

Many volunteers were involved at the beginning of the citizens information service. One of the things we are now statutorily replacing throughout the country is volunteering. The concept of volunteering will go eventually and we will have to build a huge bureaucracy to replace it because it is very difficult to replace a volunteer. The volunteering service went right across the social spectrum, from the health services to local social services, housing, the Society of St. Vincent de Paul and other groups too numerous to mention, all driven with a commitment that was local, based on local knowledge and born out of a willingness and an anxiety to help. That concept needs to be guarded in the future. If we discourage, by any means, that concept of volunteering, the country will be much the poorer.

I hope the Minister when replying will address some of the issues I have raised. I hope there will be a greater emphasis not on giving the information to which people are entitled, but on giving them what they are entitled to and removing some of the barriers which prevent them from getting them.

See this speech in context