Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I am sharing time with Deputy Paul Murphy. If we run out of time, I will accept written answers from the Minister. Earlier I heard one of the Fianna Fáil Deputies say it is impossible to get everything right during a pandemic. Nobody doubts that, but I wish to talk again today about how wrong we got the care of our elderly. Yesterday showed me that the model of an overwhelmingly private care service for the elderly has utterly failed us. Where did that go wrong? It started with a political and policy decision of Fianna Fáil, supported by Mary Harney and with a tax break given by Charlie McCreevy, which was continually implemented by successive Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael Governments. A study by Julien Mercille shows that investors in the sector were attracted by the opportunity to avail of tax breaks rather than an interest in, or an understanding of, the dynamics of the care of older persons.

Multiple health Ministers, from Mary Harney to the Minister, Deputy Harris, have advocated and encouraged a regime where international investors were attracted to building and running private nursing homes. Ironically, it was a Deputy from the Minister's party who pointed out yesterday that this is a lucrative trade attracting the great and the good of the Irish wealthy and international investors with a keen eye for profit. I refer to companies like Bartra Capital, vulture funds etc., which have recently invested in this lucrative industry but how lucrative it is we do not know because many of them are registered offshore and do not have to publish their accounts. We do not see the profits they earn or the taxes they pay but we do know from international studies that where private care is given to the elderly, lower standards and poorer care emanate and the staffing levels are generally 20% or more lower in those settings. That said, I wish to compliment the staff in those settings and thank them very much for the care, extreme courtesy and compassion they showered on the people who lost their lives in those settings. The tax base and the largesse showered on these investors is not acceptable and, at the same time, this State has cut back the real supports that could have helped to keep people in their homes and their communities. All of that has been privatised and micromanaged to such a degree that it is impossible for the workers in that sector to look after elderly people in their homes. We have failed them at every hand's turn because we see elderly people and the provision of pensions as a burden. As we live longer we see that as a problem rather than something to celebrate but there is nothing surer than we are all going to get older and that we need to think in the future about the way we are delivering the care of the elderly, both in settings and in their homes.

The committee meeting yesterday showed that there was a very clear neglect of the need of those homes when the Department of Health was alerted that they lacked staffing, PPE and testing. We were very slow to deliver that. To pretend otherwise is a nonsense because as I said yesterday, we passed the parcel from one agency of the State to the other but, in reality, there was a total failure and the eye was taken off the ball. That is why I repeat the call I made for an independent public inquiry into what has gone on, not to look back in anger or examine who failed who, how and who is not telling the truth, but to learn. The Minister said here recently that he believes the entire system needs an overhaul. I doubt that if we sit down and discuss the kind of an overhaul he believes it needs we will agree. We need a national health service in this country, not a Sláintecare but a national health service that is publicly run and publicly funded from the cradle to the grave in order that every aspect of our healthcare is accountable and in the interests of the public and that no individual, vulture fund or set of investors profits from people's health.

I have a couple of questions for the Minister. First, will his expert panel examine how we can achieve that and begin that discussion as soon as possible? Second, what steps is he and his Department taking to ensure that the homes listed as the most vulnerable by HIQA will be properly staffed and equipped to deal with a possible second wave of Covid-19? Third, can the Minister confirm the exact date his Department received the list from HIQA of those homes thought to be vulnerable to Covid-19? It was not clear yesterday from the questions and answers and from the accusations, toing and froing, what exactly happened here. I am prepared to accept those answers from the Minister in writing.

See this speech in context