Michael Moynihan (Cork North West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I compliment Deputy Kelleher on putting down this motion and I thank him for the opportunity to speak on it.

There is a number of issues in this regard. First, before I go into the motion itself, there are anomalies in the system. As public representatives, we meet people who come to us who would have had paid up membership of VHI or other insurers who, because of one application or one day in respite, the two-week respite would not be granted under the cover. Also, recently there was a difficulty with the contents of a policy where a person under the age of 30 had been diagnosed with a serious cancer and, because of specific rules and regulations, was put outside of the insurance cover and was not able to benefit from it even though the person had paid it and the person's family had paid it right through from the time the person had been a young child.

The thrust of the motion relates to affordability of VHI cover and the situation families face who are making decisions on a daily basis as to whether they can continue with private health cover. The Government has flagged many policies on universal health cover but it remains the case that families throughout the country are making decisions on whether they will be able to continue with private health insurance. Those making that decision are predominantly within a certain age group. I refer to young families, those who have mortgage difficulties and those couples who would have lost one or more jobs and maybe have a significant mortgage commitment and have all the other add-on costs of children going to school, perhaps children going to college, etc. The families that are making these decisions are of the younger age group and are under considerable pressure.

There does not seem to be any urgency from Government on this issue. This affects entire sectors of the population, not only in the commuter belt but across the country. In my constituency, there are many families making these decisions for purely economic reasons in that they do not have the money to continue with the health insurance cover that they probably have had since they were born. The statistics on the numbers dropping out of the private health insurance market were quoted earlier. Throughout the past years the Government parties were telling us that they would have a detailed plan in place and that almost at the touch of a button there would be a solution to the issue.

The insurance companies, in particular, VHI, are preparing for more increases. As one of my colleagues stated, the numbers availing of VHI cover has decreased dramatically and the number of those working within that organisation has increased dramatically. There is no logic to it. The company has never been able to explain properly how this correlates. If the company operated in any other sector, it could not add up.

Some of the private health insurance companies have told us that they have achieved savings by negotiating with consultants and others but the bottom line is that when the renewal letter comes in through the post for ordinary families with children the premium has increased and they are faced with a difficult decision. This affects those families in terms of whether they can continue with health insurance cover.

I came from such a family which would have had private health insurance up to a point and had to discontinue it in the mid-1980s. That had significant repercussions down the line. I do not want to dwell too much on my family situation but merely wish to state that I would have experience in this area. If matters improve in ten or 15 years' time and it happens that the parents of those families will be in a position to get back into the private health insurance market, they will be penalised. It behoves the Minister and the Government to look at this in a logical and sensible way to ensure that there is a reasonable decision made on it.

The fact that families that have withdrawn from private health insurance is having a detrimental effect on others who want to continue in it in that there is a corresponding increase in the cost of cover. Nowhere over the past two years have we seen a robust defence of what will be done except what was outlined in the programme for Government. At this point, we need a clear indication that this will be tackled for the many families discussing their finances and looking at what they must cut back to continue providing for the children going to school, the extra-curricular activities and all the other associated costs. Such costs are not excessive because the vast majority are looking at them in a realistic fashion. What will the Government do from this point on? If the roles were reversed, outside the doors of the House and elsewhere there would be passionate pleas regarding what we were doing wrong. The reality is that there is nothing being done for the many thousands of people who are withdrawing from private insurance. It is having a detrimental effect on those who are remaining in private health insurance.

In ten or 15 years' time, this will have a bigger effect on the health service of this country.

We have seen what is likely to change in the demographics, but if we are not able to maintain the people in middle Ireland, who are working to sustain families, in the private health insurance market in the immediate term or in the next four, five or ten years when they will come to rejoin it, it will have a huge effect on it. If they cannot rejoin, it will have serious consequences for the public purse and public policy. Not alone for the families who are leaving now but for the people in ten, 15 or 20 years' time, and for society as a whole this is a most fundamental decision to make. I appeal to the Minister to respond to the motion and outline what will be done in the short term to rectify the situation. I commend the motion to the House.

See this speech in context