James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)

This Bill is undoubtedly long overdue but whether it has been worth waiting for is debatable. I welcome any initiative that will support the elderly and their families. However, I am concerned that there seems to be a general acceptance of the premise that the elderly should contribute towards their care if they are adjudged capable of affording it, without due regard for what that means. This is the problem with the Bill. Ensuring there are equitable procedures in regard to who can afford to pay and who cannot and what they can or should contribute is a delicate balancing act.

Adjudging individuals as being capable of affording something and the ability of those persons to make payment without causing harm to themselves and their families are two entirely different matters. Assessing the elderly and imposing charges on the extent of their income and wealth is not only to impose charges on them but on their children and grandchildren. How is account taken of years of work and payment of taxes during the employment lives of these people? The elderly contributed greatly to this State for many years through their hard work. They made it what it is today, or what it was until recent years, before Fianna Fáil paralysed the economy and blew the boom.

Our elderly have a right to pass on the fruits of their labour, including their family homes, to their children and grandchildren. Where an elderly person signs over his or her home to a son or daughter, the latter is then the legal owner of the property. However, the State will insist on taking its cut when the elderly person dies in order to cover the cost of care in his or her latter years. Why should the new owner have to pay 15% of the value of the property under this so-called fair deal given that 80% of the patient's income was already allocated for his or her care?

In anticipation of properties being transferred into new ownership in this manner, the Bill contains an anti-avoidance provision, whereby assets and income transferred within a five-year period prior to an application for State support are to be taken into account in the financial assessment. This, as I said, is a direct attack on the sons and daughters of the elderly who are entitled to inherit their family home which, in many cases, they have worked hard to maintain. It is unfair that the children of the elderly are being financially penalised due to their lack of ability or qualification to give their parents the care they need and deserve. The parents in turn are left demoralised and upset by the pressure they are putting on their sons and daughters and the loss of their savings, which they had hoped to pass on to their children. It has been customary in this State for generations to pass on what was earned in one's lifetime to one's family.

Government policy as outlined in Towards 2016 is to support people to live in dignity and independence in their own homes for as long as possible and, when that is no longer possible, to support access to quality long-term residential care. In the fair deal scheme published late last year, the Minister promised to make nursing home care "accessible, affordable and anxiety free". However, the budget effectively put paid to such grand aspirations by reducing tax relief on medical expenses from 41% to 20%, in direct contradiction of the fine words "accessibility" and "affordability".

Under the proposals to fund long-term nursing home care, older people could be left with nothing because of the charges that will be levied and the inequitable cap on funding. The deferred contribution based on the family home will be capped at 15% of the value of the property, but the charges on other assets will apply for the duration of care. This is blatant robbery and extortion, holding the elderly who are reliant on care to ransom. It puts a whole new spin on the Robin Hood story. The Government is robbing the elderly and infirm to balance the books of an Exchequer emptied by its own squandering and mismanagement. Elderly people displayed the fury they felt at their shabby treatment when they protested outside Leinster House shortly after the budget. Government Members should hang their heads in shame for the ovation they gave to the Minister for Finance on budget day.

To expect full acceptance of this Bill with all its grey areas is to expect too much from the Opposition. If there is an acceptance of valid points on Committee Stage, perhaps some justice may be achieved for the elderly. The Minister appears to regard the elderly as a soft touch. The appalling measures proposed in budget 2009 in regard to medical cards for the over 70s suggest that, in her innocence, she assumed the elderly would accept anything. That was not the case. Elderly people are well tuned into what is happening and they came out in their thousands to protest. They should be applauded. I hope they will persist in their campaign on behalf of senior citizens. We will all be in that category some day. The Minister of State was wrong about that and she is also wrong about the finer details of this Bill.

Even talking about payment for care of the elderly is unthinkable when one considers the disgusting state of our nursing homes, which are supposed to be elderly friendly. There are very good nursing homes throughout the country but some are in a deplorable state. At a time when the Government is promoting a so-called fair deal for those needing nursing home care, the condition of many homes throughout the country is disgusting. One in three complaints against nursing homes has been upheld, a shocking statistic outlined in various reports. In my constituency, Longford-Westmeath, I have made repeated representations in respect of the upgrading of the external and internal built environment at St. Mary's Care Centre, Mullingar. The situation at the centre is undoubtedly one of perspective. On the one hand people are crying out for action to upgrade some undeniably basic conditions, and on the other there is a concerted effort to deny any deficiencies exist and to brush the matter under the carpet. While the reality lies somewhere in the middle, the fact that the cash-strapped HSE has said that a new centre is being planned to replace the current structure at St. Mary's in 2011, is indicative of the recognition of existing problems.

Any mid-century building, let alone one that was built as a workhouse and not as a hospital or care centre, is certainly in need of urgent upgrading to bring it to 21st century standards for the care of our elderly. However, for patients in St. Mary's, who are caught in the middle of the debate on its merits or demerits, the care they received from the very dedicated staff, within the restrictions of Government cutbacks imposed on them, is first class. Those who work in the hospital — doctors, nurses and staff — give excellent care in a dreadful environment of dilapidated buildings. This was highlighted in recent media reports. The actor Gabriel Byrne spoke of the right of all our people to have a degree of respect and dignity in their final years. That is also the aim of politicians.

It would be extremely blinkered to deny that some of the facilities at St. Mary's are in an appalling condition and I have photos to prove this. I have also seen the evidence that restorative and remedial work needs to be carried out at St. Mary's, with certain areas in the built environment presenting serious health and safety issues. The centre also came in for criticism in the recent investigative report by the Ombudsman into the care of a patient. The report highlighted the deterioration of the patient in a short space of time. The response by the HSE to the complaint by the patient's daughter was extremely badly handled and unacceptable. The bottom line is that overworked and under-resourced staff members are fighting an uphill struggle to provide necessary care for elderly infirm patients, while being very much at the mercy of HSE cutbacks. This should be a wake-up call for the Minister of State and the Government. I invite the Minister of State, Deputy Hoctor, to visit the dilapidated buildings in the midlands and to put her shoulder to the wheel to ensure they are upgraded. This is in the interests of patients, relatives and staff. Nothing is as demoralising for staff as a substandard building.

For too many elderly people, remaining in their own homes is not an option as social workers and other heath professionals are just not available to provide the care they need. This creates a desperate situation for relatives when they cannot access community care. Deputy Cregan referred to the lack of beds for elderly patients in Limerick. That is not a problem in Longford, where there is a fine facility in St. Joseph's on the Dublin Road. When will the Minister of State provide funding to allow the newly-constructed 20 bed unit at St. Joseph's, Dublin Road, Longford, which has been idle for the two a half years, to open? I was there when Ministers visited the hospital and praised the fine facilities but this Government has failed to provide funding for the staffing of the building. I ask the Minister of State to do so because it is badly needed to cope with the demand for the elderly throughout the region.

One person in 20 in this country is elderly and these people are being asked to bear the burden of the Government mismanagement of our finances. At a time when they should be enjoying care-free retirement, the Government is doing all it can to fleece them of their savings and entitlements. The inescapable fact is that the number of people aged over 65 has increased by 7.3% since 2002. It is set to increase to more than 800,000 by 2025 and will have tripled by 2050. Add to this the fact that Government spending per head on older people is among the lowest in the OECD countries at 0.67% of GDP, compared to an OECD average of just 1%, and we have a picture of a Government with its head in the sand on the issue. Life expectancy in Ireland now exceeds the EU average and the requirements associated with such an increased life span will not go away and should be provided for.

Nursing home care, medical cards and pensions are all under attack from this uncaring Government. It is despicable that the elderly and very young have become the perceived soft option target of choice for this Government's savage cutbacks, which are necessitated by their own inadequacies and incompetence. We have evidence of this on a daily basis in the media and in the performance by Ministers in this Chamber. They seem jaded and resemble prisoners in a dungeon or people who have been shipwrecked. They are not performing on behalf of the citizens who elected them. It is disgusting that the Government has forgotten the elderly, who have paid their way all their lives and earned the right to adequate provision by the State for their later years. Can the Minister of State reassure us that elderly and vulnerable people will not be thrown out into the streets if they cannot afford charges? Some people in society are very vulnerable, will not be able to pay and will suffer. Some provision should be made for them.

I await the response of the Minister of State to the issues raised in this important debate. If God spares us long enough we will all be elderly one day and it is important that we have facilities for people in their retirement years, including those who suffer from disabilities, who cannot cope with life, who suffer from Alzheimer's disease and other age ailments.

There is a need for an Alzheimer's unit in County Longford. Elderly people must travel up to 50 miles outside the county to avail of those facilities. It is not fair to take people out of the environment they are used to. Perhaps the Minister will concede and do something to provide a unit for patients with Alzheimer's disease in County Longford.

See this speech in context