Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)

I second the amendment and fully support what I have heard from my colleague and leader, Senator Fitzgerald. Last week on Committee Stage I made the point to the Minister of State - whether she listened or heard I am not sure - that this Bill is a political challenge to her. She can decide just to process the Bill as hundreds of Ministers have processed thousands of Bills during the years in a bland administrative fashion or she can avail of the opportunity late in the processing of the Bill to make a significant lasting difference to elderly people. The amendments are not a party political challenge but a challenge to the Minister of State and her Department. They are also a challenge to the Houses of the Oireachtas to decide what future we deem suitable and necessary for elderly and maturing citizens. I fear the Bill may be a Trojan horse. It may not have been fully thought out and is simply being processed in the normal legislative fashion such that when it is passed, all these little anomalies will emerge.

I will be interested to hear the Minister of State's response to Senator Fitzgerald's question about what will be delivered to people in nursing homes for the 5%, 10% or 15% charge, which is a significant charge on their assets. When I was speaking to people at the weekend about our week in the Seanad, I explained that the debate on the Nursing Homes Support Scheme Bill had taken up a large proportion of our time. One or two people said they could not expect four star hotel treatment for €800 or €900 a week. My answer is that they should expect and demand it. If I offered any hotel a payment of €800, €900 or €1,000 a week, not just this week but also next week, next month and next year - perhaps for the next ten years - I would fully expect four or five star treatment. When the legislation is passed, I want us to be able to tell every senior and maturing citizen that we are providing not second or third class treatment and care but first-class care. That is why we need absolute clarification as to what is being provided for the fees which the taxpayer and the State and, more importantly, the elderly and their families will pay as opposed to what it might or might not be. I look forward to receiving that clarification.

I fully support what Senator Fitzgerald and others have proposed regarding the multidisciplinary team approach and structure, which is crucial. We had a substantial and worthwhile debate on the matter last week. I was impressed by the contribution of Senator Mullen who spoke at some length. He made the very interesting argument about society trying to tell people what was best for them. Let me paraphrase his comments; I believe he made the point that the nursing home solution could be presented as appropriate because a person would be safe and secure with no threat of robbery, attack etc. However, in many cases, the elderly person concerned - I am not being patronising as it is generally elderly people who are involved - might prefer to live alone in conditions which might not be marvellous but perhaps more appropriate.

It is important to have a multidisciplinary examination of every case to arrive at the correct economic social and holistic solution for the applicant for care. Anything other than a thorough multidisciplinary examination of the circumstances of the applicant and his or her family would be second rate. We have been waiting for and talking about this legislation for long enough. I certainly do not want it to be second-class legislation for second-class citizens and simply push away a problem in the belief out of sight is out of mind. We must demand first-class accommodation and care for the elderly, regardless of whether it is in the home, the community, a nursing home or district hospital. There have been so many platitudes about what society owes the people who built the country. What we owe is what we owe and what we will pay back is covered in the legislation. It is a big political challenge for the Minister of State who I appreciate is new to the job. I do not say this in a patronising fashion, but it is an opportunity for her to make a real mark by making it clear the legislation will be world-class for the people who built the country.

I ask the Minister of State to be generous in her response to our amendments which nobody could claim are party political. Last week very interesting contributions were made from the Government side of the House. I accept that when we divide and vote, people need to fly the party flag. I believe what has been proposed from this side is very constructive, positive and holistic and represents the best approach. We need further answers from the Minister of State. I would not like the Bill to be a Trojan horse in that, once it is passed, we will regard it as being grand and that we will shut the door only to start finding problems a few months and years later when we will not be able to do any repair work.