Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

I recognise the fact that waiting times have shortened, but five months is still a long time, especially if one has a case wrongly decided. Seven months is even longer and these are the average periods, as Deputy Noel Grealish said. I could cite for the Minister a number of cases with which I am dealing in which it is taking considerably longer than these waiting periods.

I am unconvinced by the Minister's response. She has advanced the same irrelevant argument as she did on Committee Stage, namely, that if a time limit was imposed and we were to make an exception for exceptional circumstances which we are trying to do in an effort to be reasonable, we would in some way import all of the inflexibility innherent in the British system. When I interrupted the Minister to say that that was not what I wanted, she said she would explain it to Deputy Noel Grealish because he was not present at the committee. This is peculiar to say the least. What is the point in repeating an irrelevant argument to him?

I agree with the current system with all of the flexibility it offers and which allows a person to submit the medical evidence whenever one receives it before an appeal is decided. I just want to bring some certainty to those who are waiting, many of whom have been waiting for longer than five months or even seven months. We should be in a position to tell them that if there is an appeal which could take several months to process, it must be decided within a certain number of months.

The Minister is saying we are very fortunate in having the current system in terms of the flexibility it offers, etc. That is like saying the longer it continues, the better it is because people will keep finding pieces of evidence, medical reports and further information that might suit them and that, therefore, we should have a never-ending process until eventually we find something in ten years time that will enable them to succeed and that we will not have a decision until then. I am pressing the amendment because I find the Minister's logic unconvincing to say the least.

See this speech in context