Dáil debates

Thursday, 11 December 2008

Health Bill 2008: Committee Stage

 

1:00 pm

Photo of James ReillyJames Reilly (Dublin North, Fine Gael)

I came into this House this afternoon for Committee Stage of the Bill which in my view is very rushed. This is very important legislation which will change the social fabric of our country. It proposes to change the principle of universal entitlement to a medical card for those aged over 70 years. The Minister referred to an article in which I was quoted. She said I have not corrected the record of the House with regard to this matter but I say that I have. I did so the last time this motion was before the House. I said then that this was brought in as a political stroke but it had transpired to be a major measure bringing marked social and public health gain to this group of people. I also said I am humble enough to put my hand up when I am wrong. I would further say that as somebody involved in evidence-based medicine, when new evidence comes to light, it is the practice to take it into consideration in context and change one's actions if that is what the new information demands.

The Minister has made some terrible decisions and done some dreadful damage to our health service but thank God she is not the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, because if she were, people would languish in jail long after it had been proven they were innocent of the crime for which a jury had found them guilty.

What really has incensed me today is the manner in which proceedings on this Stage are being conducted. We have submitted numerous amendments to the Bill. I was only in the Chamber for ten minutes when I received a letter from the Office of the Ceann Comhairle to inform me that my amendments Nos. 1a, 1b, 6a and 6b, have been ruled out of order on the grounds of being declaratory in nature and that amendments Nos. 3a, 3b, 3, 3d, 3e, 5b, 5c, 5d, 5e, 5f, 5g, 5h, 5i, 5j, 5k, and 5l, have been ruled out of order on grounds of being a potential charge to the Revenue. How many of the amendments submitted by Deputy Jan O'Sullivan and I are not out of order? This is nonsense about amendments being declaratory in nature. I cannot see how they are out of order in this regard. They do not run contrary to the Title of the Bill. They are aimed at people coming in after 1 January who will be over 70. I want to register my objections in the most strenuous possible fashion. I find this totally unacceptable. This is muzzling democracy, muzzling the Opposition to prevent us putting forward the case for people in this country who showed their anger outside the gates of this Dáil, when 15,000 people turned up in wheelchairs, zimmer frames and any other mode of conveyance they could get, to register their upset, abhorrence and annoyance at the unacceptability of this legislation.

As we pointed out in the past, for the measly sum of €16 million that was saved, is this then about depriving the elderly of their medicine? It seems we are not to be allowed table and discuss amendments which would allow some of the provisions in this Bill to at least be ameliorated. In my view the Government is going to persist with a Bill which will have a retrograde effect on our society and on what we stand for.

The Minister has spoken in the past about social solidarity across the generations for insured people but now she wants to take the medical card away from people in their 70s and at the end of their years. I utterly reject her contention that we cannot afford universal entitlement. I contend we should have it for all age groups. We will come to this House with the means of doing this in a way that the country will be able to afford and when the current wastage in the HSE, of which we all have heard so much, is dealt with. I find it objectionable that these amendments will not be discussed. As Deputy Shatter said, we will not be in a position to ask why a person who loses his or her spouse will also lose the medical card. Why can they not be left with their card? I must take advice on this matter but I am so exercised by this. What amendments are left to discuss? Will the Chair inform us?

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.