Frank Fahey (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

The amendment I brought forward on Committee Stage in the Dáil to allow for a review of the operation of the Bill's provisions within five years of commission covers the amendments tabled. The five year timeframe links the timing of the review with the end date of the multi-annual investment programme of 2009. The Government amendment was in response to proposals made by the DLCG which sought a review within three years of enactment. On Committee Stage in this House last week, a further amendment was agreed to which placed that section in Part 1 of the Bill.

As I stated last week, the Bill, as amended in the Dáil, would allow the review to take place not later than five years from commencement of the legislation. A review within a shorter time is not ruled out if it becomes necessary. Indeed, I stated that it would be the intention that the review would be completed within five years and I believe this to be a very reasonable approach. I take on board the points made by Senator Terry but when one takes all matters in account, if it is found there are major issues of a negative nature in the first two years of the implementation of the legislation, one could take it that a review would start at that stage. It could be an ongoing review, which could take time, or a review which could take place very quickly if it was found that legislative change was necessary. However, I am confident that will not be necessary. The scope of the Bill is such that much of its implementation will be provided for in the regulations. It will be possible at any time to amend the regulations or to change standards if it is found necessary. We were very flexible in respect of the amendment we tabled in the Dáil and I understand people in the sector are satisfied with it.

I wish to respond to Senator Cox who spoke on behalf of Senator Dooley. On the last occasion Senator Henry said an enduring disability means that the underlying condition is enduring and not one that must have symptoms or signs of the condition at the time. I confirm that is the case, that is, that people so described by Senator Henry are included in the definition of the Bill and, consequently, multiple sclerosis is so included.