Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this legislation. The contributions of previous speakers were very interesting. In particular, those of Senators White and Ryan provided much food for thought, on which we must reflect strongly.

Some of the Minister's colleagues at both senior and junior ministerial level are contemplating the possibility of a constitutional amendment dealing with the rights and protection of children, something I look forward to dealing with and will support. What would be the political ramifications if our Constitution contained a clause on the protection of the elderly, guaranteeing their rights and ensuring their entitlements and comfort? If we had such a constitutional provision to provide for services, entitlements and all the other needs of the elderly, much of the legislation with which we have dealt here from the Minister's Department, including the legislation before us, probably would be deemed unconstitutional. We must seriously reflect on where we are going and what we are trying to do from a policy perspective regarding the elderly.

Yesterday, the Minister for Finance made his Budget Statement. The Minister had responsibility to spend a huge amount of money, which is welcome not only from the Government's point of view but also from that of every citizen. The country is now officially very wealthy, with tens of billions of euro available to him to be distributed yesterday by way of the budget. In the context of our relatively new-found but abundant wealth we must put in place the services and financial commitments we are setting aside for the elderly in our community.

Senator White spoke of the relatively small percentage of the elderly or the ageing community who will rely on nursing home care at some stage. This Bill is about nursing home care and deals with approximately 6% or 7% of the population. I am somewhat concerned that when we debate ageing and services for the elderly in this House and elsewhere we concentrate too much on the nursing home aspect and do not consider the bigger picture. As I said last week when we discussed Leas Cross, along with all Members I want to ensure people in nursing homes have all their entitlements, that the home is of the highest standard, the accommodation is of the highest quality and that the supervision, medical assistance and inspectorate procedures are of top quality. Much needs to be done in that regard but that is only one side of the equation. The majority of our elderly and ageing population wish to remain in their homes in their communities. We must also examine services for those people.

Yesterday's budget gave the annual increase in the carer's allowance, which I welcome, but I raised last week during the nursing homes debate and earlier this year during the various social welfare debates with the Minister, Deputy Brennan, the possibility of removing the means test for the carer's allowance. The Minister presented the House with his estimate of the cost of doing this. I do not remember the figure but it was a modest sum. It is like the analysis put forward by Senator Ryan on the question of universal care for the elderly. The cost of removing the means test for the carer's allowance and of ensuring all people in need of full-time care receive it would be modest.

Provision in this respect should take account of the societal aspect and of giving people a choice of where they want live in their senior years — I do not like the phrase "in their final years". It is great that people are now living longer. We debated the concept of removing the title "old age pension" during the debate on the Social Welfare Bill last year in this House, a matter for which I take some credit. People aged 65 and over are not old. In fairness, the Minister, Deputy Brennan, reflected on that and introduced the phrase "State pension" rather than "old age pension". It is not a question of people in their final years but people who have aged who require the maximum possible support and services from the State to enable them to remain, where possible, in their homes and communities.

Senator Henry spoke about the issue of applications for disabled persons' grants in Cork. I gather from what she said that apparently we should almost be thankful that the waiting list for an occupational therapist report at Cork County Council level is 26 weeks, but that is 26 weeks too long. Where a person requires the provision of a bathroom, shower or some other lifestyle improvements, such a delay should not be countenanced. It adds not only to the misery of the person who must endure the inferior facilities but by the time the application is made, the grant processed, the occupational therapist report completed and the engineer has called out three or four times, it is probably 12 months from the date the application was submitted. By the time the application is approved the cost of carrying out the work has increased. Such delay costs the taxpayer and the applicant more and it causes much misery in the meantime. We need to ensure that small issues, which can be resolved easily, are dealt with. In this respect, councils should have sufficient staff to complete these reports, sufficient engineers to assess such jobs and the applications should be processed quickly. That should be easy to do in our new wealthy Ireland.

I welcome the slight improvement in the level of respite grants announced yesterday, but much more progress could be made in this area. The issue of stamp duty was discussed in the other House yesterday and we debated it in this House last week. A suggestion made, which is generally supported across the political spectrum, is that stamp duty exemption should be provided where elderly people wish to trade down, in other words, sell a large house and move to a smaller house. That issue needs to be re-examined.

One of the tax reliefs announced by the Minister during the Budget Statement yesterday is pathetically insulting to the elderly. I refer to the adult dependent allowance, which amounts not to thousands but to only hundreds of euro for an incapacitated relative. I am not referring to the allowance for employing a person to look after an elderly relative but the tax allowance or tax relief which a person receives for looking after an incapacitated relative in his or her house. It amounts to only a few euro per week. That is highly insulting and the allowance should be reviewed. While these issues are slightly removed from this Bill, they need to be reflected on in the broader debate on services for elderly.

When the nursing home subvention scheme 1993 was introduced by the then Minister, Deputy Howlin, in the then Fianna Fáil-Labour Government it appeared to be a forward-looking proposal. However, a subvention of €190 per week or thereabouts, which is the figure before an enhanced subvention might be given, does not go far towards paying for the cost of weekly care in an average private nursing home. The subvention is a modest amount and the bureaucracy, red tape and regulation surrounding the application for it is pathetic.

The political challenge facing us, particularly Members on this side of the House, was set down by Senator Ryan when he spoke strongly about what we do with the financial choices available to us. He asked us to reflect on the fact as we have decided that young people, be they at primary, secondary or third level, have universal entitlement to education and should elderly people not also have universal entitlement to care? If we had a constitutional amendment and constitutional protection for the entitlements of the elderly, in terms of their entitlement to care, security and accommodation, it would throw a lot of present regulations, legislation and rules out the window.

I hope that the Bill — which the Government will enact given its majority — when enacted and when other such debates on the elderly and our ageing population take place, we will show more vision and policy initiative towards using our unprecedented wealth and resources to give something real back to the people who built up this country, whether it be provision for the 5% of people who need nursing home care, referred to by Senator White, or for the 90% or 95% of people who live in their homes, with their families, in their communities or in community housing.

Much more needs to be done for these people. I hope we do not limit our ambitions for them. Budgetary increases in the old age pension, which I welcome and on which I commend the Minister of State and his colleagues, are not enough. A much greater level of service, provision and assistance is required. There is a huge political responsibility on all of us to have a broader vision of how we look after our ageing and elderly population. We all will aspire to reach that sector of society at some stage. We need to put much more resources and measures in place and we have a huge social, political and moral responsibility to do so.