Ivana Bacik (Independent)

I thank Senator Quinn for sharing time and I welcome the Minister. I wish to tackle a topic to which other Members referred, namely, the principle of universality. Essentially, as the Minister and other Senators stated, this matter boils down to a single question as to why richer older people should receive free health care. The Minister for Education and Science framed the same question some time ago when he asked why the children of millionaires should not be obliged to pay university fees.

There is a certain superficial attraction to the argument that people should pay for public services if they can afford to do so. However, this masks a clear ideological commitment to a different way of providing public services. We should be honest about this matter. Those of us who defend the principle of universal access are not saying that richer older people or millionaires should obtain services free of charge. Rather, we are stating that we should adopt the European social model under which richer older people pay more for public services through a fair and progressive taxation system. Under this model, services are provided equally to all on the basis of need. There is evidence to show that this method of provision is fairer and more equitable and does not lead to the sort of two-tier access that currently exists in the Irish health service.

The health service is beset by many problems. However, the scope of this debate does not allow for us to discuss them today. The provision of medical cards, free of charge, to the over 70s was a start is the context of creating universal health care provision. I and others on this side of the House have argued that there should be universal access to health services in the same way that there is such access to primary education. We do not ask that millionaires should pay more if their children attend national schools. No one in the House would argue in favour of that. However, the principle is the same. We all accept that our primary education system, which is fair and equitable, allows the children of millionaires to attend school on the same basis as those whose parents are in receipt of social welfare payments or on low incomes.

The same principle should apply in respect of preschool care and the health care system. If it did, we would be on the road towards a more equitable society. Such societies exist in countries that have embraced the Nordic model to which I refer. The universal medical card for those over 70 years of age could have represented a move towards this model of provision. Unfortunately, however, we have moved away from that model and back towards one which involves means testing. It is also unfortunate that the Minister for Finance has indicated a more universal — if I might use that word — attack on the principle of universality by signalling that child benefit is likely to be means tested in the future. This is a regressive policy and it will lead to our moving towards a system under which public services will only be available on a means-tested basis. As a result, two-tier models will appear at all levels and in all areas of public service provision. That is fundamentally regressive because it will lead to the creation of a more unequal society.

Millionaires have their waste collected and have access to public transport on the same basis as everyone else. That is how it should be. However, they should pay more for these services by means of a progressive tax system. Senator Quinn and others asked those who support the principle of universality to indicate from where the money will come. It should come from higher taxes on the wealthy. I said this on previous occasions and I make no apologies for doing so again. Instead of a 1% or 2% levy on those on certain levels of income we should introduce a higher rate of taxation in respect of those who earn over €100,000, €150,000 and €200,000, respectively. That would have been a fairer way to fund universal access to public services.