Alex White (Dublin South, Labour) | Oireachtas source

The tone of the amendments proposed to this motion, if perhaps not the motion itself, suggests that the Government has been disproportionately unfair to older people. This charge does not stand up to any objective scrutiny. Of course it is possible for speakers to select particular reductions or cutbacks for special criticism. Given the scale of the fiscal correction that has been required in recent years, no group could be entirely insulated from the impact of adjustments. I accept that no group has been so insulated.

This Government recognises that Irish people have made huge sacrifices. However, we are now coming within sight of the point at which we can reclaim our economic sovereignty. This will be critical if we are to put control of Ireland's affairs back into Irish hands and again have the capacity to decide ourselves how our society is shaped. Having said this, we have prioritised the protection of older people as much as possible. I suggest that our record bears that out. In the short time available to me, I would like to mention a few areas in which this protection has applied.

The nursing home support scheme continues to be an extremely generous support for those who need long-term residential care. Even after the changes that were announced last year, the State is continuing to meet by far the greater part of the cost of care in the majority of cases, with nursing home residents making a much smaller contribution. The average weekly contribution by an individual under the scheme is less than €285, while the total weekly cost of care is approximately €1,500 in some nursing homes. In 2013, some 10.3 million hours of home help will be delivered to over 50,000 people, with an additional 10,870 people receiving home care packages. A review of the balance between residential and community care is taking place as we consider how more people might be better supported at home for longer, in line with the wishes expressed by older people themselves.

Even after the changes that were announced recently, well over 90% of those over the age of 70 will continue to hold medical card or GP visit cards. Any single person with an income of up to €26,000, or couple with an income of up to €47,000, will continue to hold a medical card and will therefore be unaffected by the recent change. I wish to confirm a figure in response to Deputy Calleary, who asked for clarification in this respect. Some 35,000 people will move from full medical cards to GP-only cards as a result of the eligibility changes for over 70s that were announced in last week's budget. People over the age of 70 who now qualify for GP visit cards rather than medical cards will continue to be entitled to make use of the drugs payment scheme. People in that age group who have weekly incomes of between €500 and €700 - between €900 and €1,400 in the case of a couple - will pay a maximum of €33.23 on medication each week.

The State pension, free travel, fuel allowance and free television licence schemes have all been protected. The tax treatment of the elderly remains unaltered, with no change in the net income of pensioners as a result of the budget. From a policy perspective, the national carer's strategy, which was published in 2012; the national positive aging strategy, which was published earlier this year; and the forthcoming national dementia strategy, which is currently being drafted, demonstrate our commitment to giving unprecedented priority, and rightly so, to older people in our communities. These commitments will have far-reaching effects into the future.

I would like to respond to one or two issues that have been raised since I joined the debate. Deputy Niall Collins mentioned an individual case that he raised the last time we had a debate of this nature in the Chamber. I do not propose to engage in any discussion on any individual case. During the course of the debate in question, after I gave an account of the manner in which the administration of the system is being affected, I invited colleagues to let me know about any cases that draw into question what I was saying about how the system is operating. The Deputy raised such an issue with me. I regret that I have not come back to him so far in relation to it. I will certainly follow it up after this debate and revert to him.

Decisions in relation to applications for medical cards are not matters for the Minister for Health. I am sure Deputy Niall Collins was not suggesting in his contribution that they were. Such matters are dealt with by the HSE in accordance with the relevant legislation. That is how it will continue. I reject outright the Deputy's suggestion that an effort is being made to make the criteria fit in some way to ensure a certain number of cards are withdrawn. People are either entitled to a card or they are not. There is absolutely no question of the Government or the HSE acting in a way that would ensure a certain target number of cards is taken out of the system every year. If we were to do so, we would be contravening what is provided for in the legislation, which is that people have an entitlement or do not have an entitlement.

Deputy Smith made a reasonable point about the need to be practical and sensible. I am open to anything colleagues might have to say in that respect. I would like to put a rhetorical question to the Deputy in response to what he said about the letters that are sent to people when reviews are taking place. Is he suggesting that cards should be open-ended in terms of their duration? It seems to me that if they were open-ended, that would represent a change in our system. We must have a means of ensuring people continue to be entitled. I do not know of a better way of doing this than writing to them at any given time to check on their circumstances. I am open to suggestions about how that might better be achieved.

See this speech in context