Róisín Shortall (Dublin North West, Independent) | Oireachtas source

I support the thrust of the amendments. This measure demonstrates that, where the Government's health policy is concerned, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. On the one hand, the official health policy is that we are to move towards a system of universal health insurance. That will be exceptionally difficult to achieve without any change being made. However, when the Minister for Finance introduces the restriction on tax relief for so many people, it will make it virtually impossible. This highlights the lack of coherence in the direction of the Government's health policy.

The Minister stated on budget day that this measure would affect only gold-plated policies. I completely concur with Deputy Broughan's comment that this was so insulting to people who were struggling to maintain their health insurance policies. There are a couple of points we are entitled to know. I ask the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, to provide a full explanation for the thinking behind the Minister's comment. Either his phrase was included in the Budget Statement to deceive people – I do not believe he deliberately tried to mislead people – or the Department got its figures wrong and was using net instead of gross figures. We are entitled to an explanation and it is important that we hear it.

The fact of the matter is that a majority of policyholders will be affected by the reduction in tax relief. It will affect people with very modest policies such as families with two young children. Those on a basic plan B, for example, will lose €90 straight off as a result of the measure. What will really hurt will be an increase by the insurance company and we are seeing this happen. One company announced a 5% increase, but increases could be anywhere between 5% and 10%. The cumulative effect of the loss of tax relief and a premium increase is such that a family with average cover will lose €200 to €300. That is a clear tipping point for many families.

We know that approximately 6,000 families are leaving the health insurance market every month and this is before the making of the budgetary changes. With the making of the budgetary changes, there is no doubt that the rate of departure will accelerate, with the result being greater pressure on the public health service, increased costs and longer waiting lists. This makes absolutely no sense at all.

We were promised a system of universal health insurance by 2016. Part of the promise was that a lot of exploratory work would be done. The Department and the Minister for Health, we were told, needed to scope out what was entailed in moving towards a system of universal health insurance. We were promised a White Paper within the first year of government. There is still no sign of that paper two and a half years later. The proposal was very much predicated on switching the emphasis in the health service from the acute hospital sector to primary care. It was also predicated on reducing the cost base of the health service, but we have seen little or no progress in that regard. When we consider what has happened in the past two and a half years, including the loss of tax relief, the charging of the full rate for the use of public beds by private patients and the failure of the Minister for Health to introduce substantial moneys owed by the insurance sector, we realise it all adds up to a system of health insurance that is getting very close to the point of collapse.

Some days ago we heard the commitment that has been repeated in the past two years by the Minister for Health, namely, to bring in the money owed by insurance companies. Acute hospitals across the country are owed substantial amounts by insurance companies. In many ways, there is complicity in the delay because of the lack of a sign-off by consultants on many bills. A lot of the outstanding moneys should be in the system. There is a realisation that an attempt to bring the moneys into the system would put the health insurance industry in even more serious difficulty. All in all, this does not add up. There is no plan. As I stated, we are getting very close to the point of collapse in the health insurance sector. As a result of various measures announced in the budget, including the one under discussion, we will reach a point very soon in the coming months at which the centre will not hold in the health service.

If there is any attempt to take out the kind of savings proposed by the Department of Health, the system will come crashing down.

The cutting of this relief just does not make any sense whatsoever. We are supposed to be making health insurance more affordable. Cutting this relief makes it less affordable for the majority. Even at this late stage, will the Minister apply sense and logic and give some long-term thinking to where our health services and insurance system are going?

We deserve an explanation. Did the Minister deceive the House or did the Department of Finance get its figures wrong again?

See this speech in context