Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)

I support the other speakers on this amendment, without which the legislation is weak, faulty and flawed. The strength of any legislation or system which deals directly with the public, and where a decision can affect their lives to the extent to which this legislation can, is an appeal system. The integrity of the entire system, not just the appeal system, is determined by the degree to which the appeal system is independent. If the system is not independent it becomes a self-serving exercise. What else can happen but a repeat of the original decision? In this situation many people are vulnerable, under stress and pressure. They have worked all their lives and given their best to the country and society. At the end of that, the best we can come up with is an appeal system whereby, if the person is lucky and the appeals officer is in a good mood on the particular day, a favourable decision might be reached. On the basis of the decision originally coming from the same Department, what is likely to happen in the event of an appeal? Will that appeals officer overturn that decision? Will he or she overturn 50% of the decisions? There is no chance of that. Will he or she overturn all the decisions? There is absolutely no chance of that. If that could happen we would have different legislation in the first place and a different provision in the Bill.

There is an urgent necessity to take on board this amendment, which will give the Bill some kind of integrity and an appearance of fairness to all, particularly those people with whom we have all dealt. Over the years, like every Member of this House, the Minister has dealt with families in stressful situations faced with the type of scenario anticipated in this legislation, under which they will not have a compassionate response and institution to go to in the event of a decision being made. We have all seen decisions that have put individual households in virtual penury almost at the end of their days. There is so much money floating around this country. There is virtually money to burn, and in some parts of the country it has been burned. An abundance of money is coming in at such a rate that even the Department of Finance was unable to count it in the last few days until the last minute. How have we arrived at the situation whereby although the Government has that kind of money in its pocket, there are people who are vulnerable and under stress, who have one eye on the clock and the other on the bank account, wondering whether the decision will go against them? If the decision goes against them, they wonder what will happen to their appeal, who the appeals officer will be and to what extent they can depend on that appeals officer returning a decision in accord with their circumstances.

See this speech in context