Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Tá áthas orm go bhfuil deis agam labhairt ar an ábhar seo anocht. The first thing I must refer to is the statement made by the Government that we froze the amount of money we gave to the service providers for the scheme, which was quite correct. However, we did not in any way impact on the scheme for those who used it, which was the important thing. In other words, we did what the Government says we should have done, namely, get better value for money for an investment in this scheme. We did the same thing with RTE and rightly so in my view. It is amazing how this Government always gives out about how the previous Government threw money around like snuff at a wake and then when it suits it, it turns around and says that the previous Government was very parsimonious with the money, demanded performance for the money it gave and demanded a little bit more for a little bit less so that we got performance. We should remember that public transport services are heavily subsidised by the Department of Transport and, therefore, it was our view that the funding of €77 million was sufficient to provide the service.

The second issue I wish to address is fraud. When we were in government, we planned to introduce the public services card. The idea was to integrate that with the ticketing service so there would be an actual record of all the people who used the free travel service so that we would have some idea of what the correct amount of money was. If the new card was properly backed up with technology on the ground, there would be a very high level of security and a very low level of fraud. I must say that I was surprised when I became Minister to find that the cards in Dublin had a picture while the cards down the country did not have one. We set about immediately driving forward the project in respect of the universal card that had the picture and also had other security measures on it.

I always watch the small print with this Government - how it says that it has not cut headline rates, whatever a headline rate is. At the end of the day, headline rates mean nothing to anybody if the Government is taking the money out of the other pocket. What has the Government done to old people? What is extraordinary is that when we look at its record on older people, we can see that the first thing it did was to cut the fuel allowance from 32 weeks to 26 weeks, which took €120 per annum out of older people's pockets. The Government then reduced the free electricity from 2,400 units to 1,800 units. That is 600 units out of 2,400 units, which is a 25% cut. The Government then got really clever. It changed it into cash. The reason why changing it into cash was a very clever but sneaky cut is that when one gets the payment in cash, when the price of a unit of electricity goes up, which it inevitably will over a period time, the Government will not increase the cash and, therefore, people will be getting fewer and fewer units all the time but it will not be so apparent that the Government has cut them another step. In the old days when we gave the units, when the price of electricity went up, the number of units stayed the same and, therefore, the amount of the benefit actually increased in cash value all the time. The Government then took another €20 per month by abolishing the free telephone rental and 12 times 20 is €240. The Government cut the respite care grant and not happy with taking money off pensioners, literally followed them to the grave by taking away the bereavement grant of €350 yet it did not touch headline rates. This is what the record of the Government is like. It takes it and then boasts that it has not taken it. It would be more honest if it just took it and said that it has taken it and that it has made every pensioner worse off in the past few years.

The Government has produced three budgets and every year inflation eats into pensioners' pensions. I looked at the amendment to the motion. In it, I thought I would see a straight statement that the Government intends maintaining the free travel scheme as it is, that is, available to pensioners and other people with medical conditions, invalidity pension, disability allowance and so on. What do I find in the wording? I am always interested in the wording with this Government. One must read the wording very carefully and ask oneself what it really means. The amendment states that the Government has protected the free travel scheme despite increasing numbers becoming eligible and a freeze in the funding imposed by the previous Government and is fully committed to fully supporting and retaining the free travel scheme as a universal benefit for elderly people but it does not say what my colleague was alluding to. It does not state that the Government has set up a review group that will try to curtail this benefit in some way or other.

Deputy O'Dea mentioned some of the ways in which the Government could take the good out of the scheme, for example, if people have to watch the clock when they go to take the train or the bus at a time when we have introduced the Leap card system whereby people can jump from the Luas on to the train, from the train on to the bus and from the bus on to suburban rail. The idea was that it was meant to be an integrated public transport service. Some genius came up with the idea that one can jump on the train but must pull out one's purse when one gets on to the bus or vice versa. Another idea that was dreamed up in the system and which I know about because I was approached by the rail company is that one would have to pre-book tickets so that if one wanted to go to Westport, which many older people do, one could not just walk down to Heuston Station, get on the train and go to Westport. One would have to pre-book the ticket. One of the beauties of free travel is that many people's lives are lived on a whim. A person decides to visit a family member at the far end of the country on the day and does not need to go in and book because they have their free ticket. Let us be honest about it. More and more people are being required to book online, which poses huge challenges for all of us but even bigger challenges for many older people who do not have access to computers and do not feel comfortable booking online even though they might look at personal stuff on the computer.

The Tánaiste is not here tonight. I congratulate her and hope she brings a bit of humanity to the hall of Government. I will be watching with interest. In her absence, I hope the Minister of State will be able to say here tonight that there will be no change to the free travel scheme and that it will continue to be a universal free travel scheme available to all of the people who have been eligible up to now. I hope he will say there will be no restrictions on it, that it will not be confined to one mode of transport and that people will not have to pay a nominal charge to get on the train or bus, time their clock to it or pre-book. If he says that, he will put many people's minds at rest. If that is the way it is, he should say so but if that is not the way it is, he should tell us that this is not the way it is going to be. In most cases, when people start carrying out reviews in the public service, the talk is that change is on the way. The talk then is that we were advised to do it. To put everybody's mind at rest, the Minister of State should tell them go bhfanfaidh sé seo mar atá sé, nach dtiocfaidh aon athrú air agus go mbeidh an saorthaisteal ar fáil mar a bhí riamh do phobal na tíre seo. Mura mbeidh sé ar fáil, seo an rud is mó a chuirfidh seandaoine in aghaidh an Rialtais agus inseoidh siad in am tráth dó céard é a meas ar Rialtas a dhéanfadh gearradh ar bith ar an liúntas seo.

See this speech in context