Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Rather than the Minister of the day, the Government of the day or the Oireachtas of the day, including Deputy Mattie McGrath, voting on a budget matter, we could run the risk of judges making decisions on how to allocate health resources. I am not saying I am fully convinced by all these arguments but I am putting them out to highlight the issues we need to tease through in any discussions we have. Any Government decision could easily be challenged in court. Our negotiating position on pricing with drugs companies could possibly be totally undermined with unknown resource implications. What other unforeseen repercussions could the Bill have for how we plan and deliver health services for people in Ireland?

We also need to adequately consider the complex issues that arise with the necessary revenue to provide for any ensuing expenditure. Any of the Deputies present could find himself or herself as Minister. Many Deputies have been Ministers in the past and others will be Ministers in the future. Of those present, I think only Deputy Kelly and I have been Ministers but I am looking into the future. This Bill would transfer to the Judiciary, which is unelected, the power to make decisions affecting the allocation of resources.

The proposed amendment creates the potential for significant diversions of resources into the handling of court cases, creating uncertainty about the state of the law while cases are processed. I believe our health service is better off when resources are allocated to essential health projects for the patients who rely on them.

I know Deputy Harty shares the view that a fundamental tenet of our democracy is that the people of Ireland have their voices heard on what their policy priorities are in each election, with our health service rightly being a key area of ongoing public attention. We remain accountable to the people. This amendment could compromise our power as elected officials to roll out health policy in a way that maximises the potential of the limited resources available.

In the interest of having an informed debate and moving this process forward, I want to put on record some of the views that could be articulated should this issue be taken further. We need to avoid any potential adverse and unintended consequences or rushing the Bill, which I know is not the Deputy's intention. We have seen this in the past. We do not want to put well-intentioned words into our Constitution only to find unintended consequences. Before embarking on any significant process of constitutional change, we need to tease out these issues.

Six months of hard work by my Department in the context of our Sláintecare implementation and our work on entitlement and eligibility, especially considering how this work dovetails with the good work of the Constitutional Convention in reporting to the Joint Committee on Health, would enable us to decide how best to proceed with this matter.

I acknowledge Deputy Harty's sincerity on this and the amount of work he and his team have done on it. I do not intend in any way to attempt to kill off this discussion tonight because it is a discussion our citizens want us to have. It is a very legitimate debate to have. However, I suggest we need to do some work to get this right and to report back to the Joint Committee on Health in six months. That is why I moved my reasoned amendment.

See this speech in context