Timmy Dooley (Clare, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to this debate. I thank my colleague, Deputy O'Dea, for tabling the motion. One would be forgiven for believing that this crisis situation was created by Fianna Fáil, but the opposite is the case. It is a fact that the Government, including the new Labour Party leader and Tánaiste and Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Burton, initiated a review of this scheme. Stakeholders were contacted. Together with her colleagues of both Government parties, the Tánaiste has over the past couple of days suggested that this crisis was created by Fianna Fáil and one of the advocacy groups. A Labour Party colleague of the Minister of State, Deputy White, had the audacity to say on the floor of this House last night that this was a criminal endeavour between Age Action Ireland and Fianna Fáil. That was not retracted. The Deputy concerned used the phrase "Age Action Ireland and its partners in crime, Fianna Fáil". I reject out of hand the accusation that there is any effort to misguide or mislead anyone.

Deputy O'Dea and I had an opportunity to meet this evening with members of Age Action Ireland, who needless to say were appalled on behalf of the people that they represent that a member of the Labour Party or any Member of this House would take such a low swipe at a time when people are under pressure. The fact is that the Department of Social Protection engaged with stakeholders on a review basis and set out the criteria and areas for consideration, including the possible introduction of a charge for access to the free travel scheme, the possibility of restricting the hours during which the service would be used and the possibility of the service not being the same for a future cohort of pensioners.

The Minister of State said at the end of his contribution that beneficiaries would not be affected. However, he was speaking in that regard of current beneficiaries. Perhaps the Minister of State will confirm before the conclusion of this debate that the Tánaiste has no intention of changing the scheme in any way as it applies to people who are current or future users of it. The Government is playing with words. It should clarify where it stands on this scheme into the future. Fianna Fáil did not create the storm around this issue. We are addressing not only a palpable fear in the minds of those currently accessing the scheme but also the fears of people now in their late 50s and early 60s who know the benefits of this scheme when they reach a particular age and the importance of it in terms of their being about to get about in their daily lives.

It is important that we address the issue of charges, including the manner in which they are transferred to the State companies.

If the review ultimately states CIE and other operators are expected to do the same volume of work for less money, it will have an impact in the longer term on those who avail of the scheme.

I want the Minister of State to clarify in the clearest possible terms before the end of this debate why he keeps suggesting there is no basis whatsoever to the charges we are putting forward, and why his colleagues are attempting to detract from the core issue? Will he make it clear to the House that there will be no charges introduced to the scheme, no limitation on the time for which the scheme will be available and applicable, and no future changes for those about to reach the threshold age, including those who are about to reach it in the not-too-distant future? If he does so, he will confirm to the House that the review is a waste of time and that there was no need for it in the first instance.

The Minister referred to the fact that the proposals have something to do with eliminating fraud. The introduction of the new card deals with that. If there was a desire only to eliminate fraud, why, at the initial stakeholders' presentation, were issues such as charges, limitations on usage and the characteristics of the future package introduced? Let us have a bit of fairness and straight talking from the Government side.

See this speech in context