Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

With reference the earlier mention of time, I am not precious about my time in this instance and I will not be using my full allocation. Having gone through each of the Stages of the Health (General Practitioner Service) Bill 2014, I view this motion as most unsatisfactory. The Minister of State is introducing matters that are wholly unconnected to the address and purpose of this legislation at a very late stage, with the grafting on of two totally unrelated amendments to this Bill, and we did not receive due notice of that intent, nor of what alternative methods could have been employed to facilitate the address of the matters that the Minister of State believes are of such an emergency nature. The amendments relating to the Opticians Act 1956 are straightforward and I have no difficulty with them.

1 o’clock

Regarding the amendment to the Nursing Homes Support Scheme Act 2009, the Minister of State has given us little information on its full implications. Perhaps he will indicate if the situations which the amendment seeks to preclude have occurred? Is it the case that there have been incidents of people making the case that assets are not assessable because were transferred post the date of application? If so, how many? We are entitled to the information that has given rise to the amendments or to know if it is the case that legal opinion has flagged a deficiency in the legislation? If it is the case that this arises from experience, of which I have requested the details, what is the amount of money involved? Does the Minister of State have figures for the excluded accrued assets in whatever number of cases are involved under the fair deal scheme?

The motion presents us with an opportunity to address some long-standing questions about the Nursing Homes Support Scheme Act 2009, including how its financial elements have since worked in practice. I recall that a review of the so-called fair deal scheme was commenced in 2012 and, according to my notes, it was to be completed in 2013. I do not recall if it was completed. In the short time available between notification of the taking of the motion and it being addressed with related matters I could find no record of a published report post-conclusion of the review. I may have overlooked or failed to take proper notes on the matter. Perhaps the Minister of State might enlighten me on the current status of the 2012 review and the report promised on the conclusion of its work.

The so-called fair deal scheme is, as I described during the debate on the original Bill, flawed. It is long past time that there was a renewed Government and public focus on the care of older people, with older people being centrally involved in the process this time. The Minister of State may recall in the context of publication in 2008 of the Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill that organisations representing older people were kept out of the process. There was no consultation or engagement with them, in respect of which understandable anger was expressed by the various representative organisations to which I have referred. This must not happen again.

I take the opportunity to urge a renewed focus and re-evaluation of not only this identified deficiency but the Bill in its entirety, as originally drafted. I would appreciate receiving the information in response to the questions I have posed.

See this speech in context