Jan O'Sullivan (Limerick East, Labour)

Why was it necessary to include Seanad amendment No. 4? I assume that if a debt is owed to anybody that he or she is free to go to court and have the debt paid in so far as it can be paid. In her initial contribution the Minister stated that it is the policy that loans be repaid; of course it is the policy that loans be repaid. However, it is also the policy in the banking sector that loans be repaid but many people are not repaying their loans at present and it is costing the taxpayer a fortune as a result. There should not be any need to include a stronger ability to get the money back in the case of elderly people in long-stay beds as than to get money back from people who borrowed from banks in any other way.

What is the effect of the words, "as a simple contract debt in any court of competent jurisdiction"? Does it mean that somehow or other the HSE has a prior claim on money to anybody else who might have a claim with regard to a deceased person? Perhaps I did not express it very well but that was one of the questions I asked in my initial contribution. There seems to be a stitching-in of the HSE getting its money before anybody else who may be as equally entitled or equally in need of the money when somebody is deceased. I am concerned that other people may have an equal right but a greater right is being conveyed on the HSE which, generally speaking, one cannot do with regard to property rights.

See this speech in context