Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

I do not have difficulties with some of the technical amendments in this group but I have concerns about amendments Nos. 2 and 4. The time to debate this legislation is limited and we spent a great deal of time engaging with the Minister on the earlier Stages in the Dáil but this is our first opportunity to discuss these amendments from the Seanad.

The Minister said that these further amendments have been tabled at the suggestion of the Property Registration Authority. What legal advice has she received on them? I presume she sought and received legal advice because they raise tricky legal and constitutional issues particularly in respect of amendment No. 4. It states that the HSE "may" but the implication is that any court of competent jurisdiction can, in accordance with the legislation, award money to the HSE in respect of ancillary State support for properties which are subject to a mortgage.

I am not a legal expert - none of us here is - but that appears very complicated in respect of property rights and the Constitution. It is even more complicated for a family farm. On Committee Stage many members of the Oireachtas Select Committee on Health and Children raised concerns about the family farm and this legislation. The problem also affects the family home and property in general because property involves complicated family relationships. If one family member must go into long-stay care, whether in a public or private bed, it appears that this ancillary State support gets first call on any money available. I may not be interpreting this correctly but the legislation seems to intend that this money will be paid before anything else is paid or settled or anybody else receives his or her share of the property, or the mortgage is paid.

I am also concerned about amendment No. 2 because it states that no ancillary State support will be paid out until such time until the property has been lodged as security for the charges. I am not sure what legal and constitutional issues arise but generally speaking when there is a problem about property after a death people have equal rights to whatever money is available. This amendment seems to intend that the ancillary State support grant will have a greater right than others to recoup money.

We have expressed our general concerns about the Bill on its various Stages. We are particularly concerned about the cap on resources. What happens for example, if somebody qualifies for nursing home support who has also applied for ancillary State support and the process of claiming rights on the property commences but the money in the general part of the scheme has run out for that year? The person may not be able to exercise his or her right because it is curtailed by the lack of money.

What is the general policy on long-stay beds? There is a greater dependence on the private sector and a growing number of private nursing homes, many of which benefit from tax breaks. When the Select Committee on Health and Children dealt with the Estimates it learned that the 2008 target for long-stay public beds had not been reached. Under this legislation there will be a greater dependence on the private sector and I have a fundamental difficulty with that move. I would like an assurance that public policy on health care will be to maintain and grow the number of public long-stay beds in accordance with the 2001 strategy document, part of which commits to increasing not only acute hospital beds but also long-stay beds.

I share Deputy Reilly's concerns about assessing the value of the property and ensuring that it is fair. Property values go up and down and have varied widely in the past year. Will the Minister clarify how that will affect the ancillary State support grant when it comes back from the property?

These are our main concerns about these amendments but we have more general concerns about the Bill which we have already expressed. I would be slow to pass amendments such as these without being certain that those legal difficulties do not exist and that we are protecting the rights of the person who needs the long-stay beds and of all the family members who have an interest in the family property. I too am particularly concerned about amendment No. 4.

See this speech in context