Ivana Bacik (Independent) | Oireachtas source

We will have a debate with him in this House on Thursday where we can raise these issues.

Senator D'Arcy commended Senator MacSharry's document and also paid tribute to Bishop Gerard Clifford.

Senator Cullinane raised the issue of IBRC employees, 800 of whom are awaiting a decision. We all hope they will be treated fairly. Senator Cullinane also asked for a debate with the Minister for Health on the HSE service plan. We have had a number of debates with the Minister on these issues, including a broad-ranging debate involving statements and a question-and-answer session on health on 27 October 2012. We can certainly look for a debate on the HSE service plan but the Government is committed to introducing the most comprehensive and radical reform of the health system since the foundation of the State. In that context, the HSE service plan is being rolled out with the goal of cutting the cost of services rather than the level or quality of the services, and to accelerate the pace of reform.

Impressive figures in respect of the reductions in waiting lists achieved by the HSE are already available. These have been highlighted in the House on previous occasions but it is worth reminding ourselves of what they entail. For example, the number of patients waiting more than a year for inpatient procedures is at its lowest level since records began. The position is the same with regard to the number of patients waiting more than a year for day-case surgery. Impressive work has been also done in reducing waiting times for children who are awaiting inpatient or day-case surgery. At the end of 2011, 1,759 children had been waiting more than 20 weeks for procedures but within a year this number had been reduced to 89. There have been already some striking outcomes from the structural reforms introduced in the health service.

Senator Hayden inquired about housing, repossessions and, in particular, mortgage arrears. I will ask the Leader to make time available for a debate on this issue which, in light of recent announcements relating to banking, is pressing in nature. We have engaged in a number of debates on this matter - in November 2011 and May and July 2012 - with the Minister, Deputy Noonan, and the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Hayes, but it is clearly time for another, especially in view of the initiatives which have been taken since July of last year. The Cabinet committee on mortgage arrears has already driven real change. The Government has made the most significant change in insolvency laws in over a century. It was long past time that we reformed those laws. The Government has established the insolvency service, it has strengthened protections for mortgage holders who are experiencing difficulties and is working with the Central Bank to ensure that banks put in place additional restructuring options for these individuals. I am of the view, however, that we should engage in a debate on this matter in order that we might interrogate Ministers on the practical impact of these measures for those who are struggling with mortgage arrears and who are experiencing difficulties.

Senator Leyden referred to the judgment on surrogacy handed down in the High Court earlier today by Mr. Justice Henry Abbott. This matter was also raised by Senators Mullen, Norris and Healy Eames. I have only seen the headlines and without having read it, I would not like to outline my personal view of the judgment. I understand the outcome of the judgment is that the genetic mother will be able to have her name recorded on the birth certificate. The couple involved in the case have succeeded in what they were attempting to do, although I believe I am correct in stating that the birth mother was supportive of their actions. The circumstances in this case were very particular but the decision handed down is undoubtedly extremely important.

Senator Norris correctly pointed out that former Senator Mary Henry consistently raised this issue during her time in this House. She produced legislation in respect of it. Whatever one's view of the judgment and regardless of whether it is appealed to the Supreme Court, this is undoubtedly an area in respect of which legislation is required. It is not appropriate that we should be regulating through decisions of the High Court and the Supreme Court.