Seanad debates

Friday, 17 December 2004

Health (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2004: Second Stage.

 

1:00 pm

Photo of Joanna TuffyJoanna Tuffy (Labour)

The point is that, proportionally, the Government has not done so. The Government had more resources than any other but when the ESRI analysed past budgets, it found that Fianna Fáil did more when in Government with the Labour Party following the 1992 elections in terms of distributing resources to the less well-off in society.

Others have referred to the potential unconstitutionality of the Bill. One of the matters that makes it obvious is the fact that subsections are being inserted to try to address this unconstitutionality. In addressing the House earlier, the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, said it was intended:

to insert a new subsection (6) that the retrospective regularisation provision of the new subsection (5) does not apply in the case of a charge which is the subject of civil proceedings instituted on or before 14 December 2004 for the recovery of the relevant charge; [and] to insert a new subsection (7) to provide that the provisions of the new subsection (5) do not affect any other ground which may be raised in civil proceedings to debar the recovery of the relevant charge.

These are attempts to try to make the legislation constitutional but I do not think they will work. Like Senator Brian Hayes, I hope there will be a successful legal challenge to the legislation. There is a presumption that everything we do in the House is constitutional but we have a duty to ensure that we do not pass legislation that is unconstitutional. I think this Bill is unconstitutional and, as such, it would be wrong for us to enact it.

In his speech, the Minister of State referred to Government policy. He said this legislation is being introduced "to avoid needless litigation". It is not needless litigation, however, and it is wrong to call it thus. When people initiate litigation on a matter such as this, it is in order to assert their rights. The view from the Government benches is that people who resort to the courts to assert their rights are engaging in needless litigation. That is the wrong way to regard people who are trying to establish their rights through the courts. Every time someone mentions it here I will challenge that view. I know I have an interest in the matter in that I am a solicitor but I am not working as a solicitor any more.

There must be a better way of dealing with this matter. No other sector of society is treated in the way that older people are treated. The Government is giving pensions with one hand, while taking the money away from elderly people with the other. No other section of society is having money deducted in this way. If an elderly person attends a hospital for treatment, the money is not deducted from his or her pension.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.