Ruth Coppinger (Dublin West, Socialist Party) | Oireachtas source

I am very unclear about what the words “general practitioner medical and surgical services” actually mean. There was considerable clarity in Mr. Justice Quirke's recommendation. Everybody knew what the HAA card meant and there was a full list of services. Other Deputies have said there seems to be approximately six discrepancies between the HAA card and that laid out in this Bill.

A few general points need to be made first. It is absolutely galling that we come in here to have a serious debate about one of the most serious social issues that has arisen in this country, namely the mistreatment of the women in the Magdalen laundries and the need to secure restorative justice for them, and practically all the amendments we have tabled have been ruled out of order on the spurious grounds that they involve an additional financial cost to the State. How could there not be a financial cost to the State when we are trying to get for the women the financial health benefits they were promised by the Government? If the Government backtracks significantly on a promise it made and the Opposition says the Government should honour its promise, the latter can be ruled out of order. This is an absolute sham.

We have just had a debate on fatal foetal abnormalities, which can only happen to women. The legislation thereon has been voted down by what is very much a male-dominated older Parliament. Certainly, it poorly represents public opinion and, in fact, it is in inverse proportion to it. Everybody saw the tears the Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, shed two years ago in 2013 when he promised the women he would deal with this issue. However, one must really draw the conclusion they were crocodile tears if he is now backtracking. I realise the Government does not take too much note of anything the Opposition says but the National Women's Council of Ireland, which the Minister used to chair, has condemned the Government's backtracking on the pension and health issues. Practically all the advocacy groups for the Magdalen women have done so also. Why is this happening? How much money are we really talking about? What is occurring is just penny-pinching for no particularly apparent reason. There are not that many Magdalen women.

There is a big difference between alternative therapies and complementary therapies. "Alternative" suggests something that has not been backed up by medical science, or something that is a bit spurious. I believe angel healing was mentioned in this regard in the previous debate. We are not talking about therapies such as that but about therapies that have well-founded benefits for people, including massage and acupuncture. I am not clear on whether these are in the Minister's promised package. It does not sound like "general practitioner medical and surgical services" would include those services.

The Minister cannot come in here and say she will bring in something separately. We must vote on what we see in front of us. That is what we are here to do.

On the general point of the amendments being ruled out until they mean nothing, how can that be stood over? If the Government back-tracks on something, how are we meant to restore it?

See this speech in context