Olwyn Enright (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)

I wish to share my time with Deputies Crawford, Perry and Sheahan. I ask the Acting Chairman to tell me when seven minutes are up.

I welcome this debate. It is important to have it, even if it is in the closing hours of this Dáil. Yesterday's lack of detail shows a mastery of timing and, despite this debate, I believe the real specifics will come to light in far more graphic detail in the coming weeks and months.

The Government's argument seems to be that these are not cuts, but savings, many of which arise because projects are not ready to proceed with. For example, the fair deal scheme which was announced first on 11 December 2006 was due to start on 1 January 2008. A full 18 months later, nothing has happened. Money has been taken away, the scheme has been delayed by at least another year and today we were told that the savings in respect of this scheme will be in the order of €85 million. We were told that the pause is because of legal difficulties and on the advice of the Attorney General. The Government does not seem to realise that this was its proposal, which was simply not properly thought out in the first place — another grand announcement with no follow-through.

A sum of €3 million that was to be spent by Professor Tom Keane to employ specialist cancer consultants will not now be spent. How exactly does this fit in with the Government's policy on cancer care? Whose job is it to ensure we can attract and employ much-needed experts to work in our designated specialist centres? We were told that one of the main reasons these centres were required was to attract top doctors to work here. The money is now being cut, or saved because these people, we are told, are not yet available.

A sum of €38 million was due to be spent on new developments in cancer care, disability care and services for the elderly. This is now also being cut, or not spent, depending on one's perspective. The Minister has promised no cuts to front-line services in health. I ask her to explain how cancer care, disability care and services for the elderly do not qualify as front-line services. The Government has taken money away from the people who need it most.

Still on the area of health, I wish to refer to the clear divergence between capital and current spending, of which there are numerous examples in my own constituency. The new state-of-the-art Midland Regional Hospital at Tullamore has been completed for a number of years now. Indeed, we had a lovely open day before the last general election so that everyone could be assured of its completion and see how wonderful it is. To date, a few departments have made the transition from the old hospital. However, the majority of the hospital remains unopened and is not functioning. The HSE has committed, in writing, that all remaining departments will make the transition between now and September but we have yet to see any evidence of this happening.

Since last September a 12-bed ward has been closed in the old hospital. The knock-on effect of this is that four orthopaedic surgeons are only being sanctioned to carry out between one and two operations, not per day, but per week, despite the fact that there are several elderly people living in severe pain. These surgeons still have to be paid at the end of the day, while their waiting lists continue to grow. The patients will be operated on eventually, either after years of agonising pain or after their families have done a whip-around to try to pay for surgery. Where is the economic sense in that kind of system?

Other capital projects lying idle include the new accident and emergency unit at the Midland Regional Hospital at Portlaoise and the dementia unit in Mountmellick, which is supposed to serve counties Laois and Offaly. Investing millions in such vital and long-awaited infrastructure and then leaving it idle or totally under-utilised is bad planning, bad management and bad Government.

I appreciate that because there is less money available, due to this Government's own flawed management, savings must be made. However, I am bitterly disappointed that no commitment has been given to retain front-line services, which are already being hit. A detailed plan of how the HSE will proceed should have been laid before this House before the Summer recess. I have no doubt there will be a drip-feed of information about cuts over the coming weeks.

I wish to turn now to the Department of Social and Family Affairs. The Government has referred to €25 million in savings from anti-fraud activities. I wish to see a clear outline of what exactly is meant by this, which was not included in the Minister's statement today, and of how she intends to address this issue. I find it amazing that a Minister can come into the House and baldly state that she will save money through anti-fraud measures when that is something that the Department should have been doing all along, in any event. Does it take a recession to make people wake up to the fact that we must have adequate anti-fraud measures in place?

I have questioned the current Minister for Social and Family Affairs, Deputy Hanafin, and her predecessor on this issue several times and have always detected complacency. The general Government line is that the amount of fraud is small compared to the overall budget for the Department but that is neither here nor there. The overall budget is the biggest of any Department so a supposedly small amount of fraud can add up to millions of euro. Even from a Government which can describe the waste of €180 million on PPARS as "small change", this is difficult to accept. If we can save €25 million now at the drop of a hat, then any reasonable person could ask how much more could have been saved in each of the past 11 years.

I asked the Taoiseach last week about the progress the Department of Social and Family Affairs has made in ensuring that landlords, who are the ultimate recipients of rent supplement payments from the Department, pay income tax on this money. The Comptroller and Auditor General raised this point at a recent meeting of the Committee of Public Accounts. There is a clear possibility of saving money in this area through ensuring that proper tax is paid on rental income yet, as in so many other areas, there is a lack of cohesive governance on the issue.

The State, through the Department of Social and Family Affairs, pays rent supplements to tenants, who pass it on to landlords. The latter are supposed to be registered with the Private Residential Tenancies Board, which includes supplying their PPS number. However, there is still no proper structure in place to ensure that this information reaches the Revenue Commissioners or that the community welfare officers can check if the landlord is registered.

The current Minister, Deputy Hanafin, made much of the fact that there would be no cutbacks in her Department when she was interviewed recently, as if it was something of a personal victory for her, rather than what one would normally expect at a time of rising unemployment. However, she was incorrect in her predictions. All we have heard from the Government in terms of where the money to address rising unemployment will come from is an expectation that savings can be made in the area of fraud, which has yet to be proven, and a few references to the cancelling of conferences and so forth. We still do not know where the €25 million saving will come from but it will have to come from somewhere.

I am also disappointed at the lack of foresight in yesterday's announcement in terms of the implications of rising unemployment for the Government's overall social welfare policy. The Government has failed to put sufficient, if any, emphasis on ensuring that work actually pays. There is insufficient concentration — despite the reference to activation, which to this Government is only a word and not a reality — on poverty-proofing. The Government must ensure that its policies do not result in people being forced to remain out of work because they would be worse off in employment. The potential loss of secondary benefits such as medical cards, rent supplements or family income supplements can have a serious effect on people's choices.

I was also disappointed that the Minister made no reference to the possible impact of yesterday's announcement on pensions. This is an issue which the Government appears to be happy to put on the long finger.

I have been supplied with figures which indicate that approximately 1,000 young people on FÁS apprenticeships are unable to complete their apprenticeships because of the downturn in the construction sector. Some of them have completed two years, while others have completed three. Effectively, they have lost their apprenticeships because their employers have let them go and there is no facility in place to ensure that they can complete their training. This means that vulnerable young people who have taken up a trade will be left with no qualifications. I call on the Government to think outside the box on this issue, get in touch with FÁS and the institutes of technology and find a way of ensuring that these young people can complete their apprenticeships.

Finally, I am gravely disappointed at the Government's decision on the regional gateway fund.

See this speech in context