Skip to main content
Normal View

Committee on Public Petitions debate -
Wednesday, 26 Sep 2018

Nursing Home Casebook (Resumed): Minister of State at the Department of Health

At a previous meeting, we considered the issue of the Ombudsman's Nursing Home Casebook. To help us to consider this matter further, I am pleased to welcome the Minister of State with special responsibility for mental health and older people at the Department of Health, Deputy Jim Daly. I advise any witnesses present to turn off their mobile phones as they interfere with the sound system and will interfere with the broadcasting of the meeting.

I draw the attention of witnesses to the fact that by virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to the committee. However, if they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise or make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable. The opening statement and any other documents submitted to the committee may be published on the committee website after this meeting.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the House or an official either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. It is perhaps ironic that I am reading this to somebody who is also a Member of the House but we must abide by the rules. I welcome the Minister of State. Perhaps he could give us a five-minute overview of his submission followed by a quick question-and-answer session and we can take it from there.

I thank the committee for its invitation to appear today. I will be very brief because I appreciate that questions and answers are probably more constructive and I have already submitted a prepared script for the members' attention.

As members are aware, public funding is provided to nursing homes under the nursing homes support scheme, NHSS, which is a system of financial support covering long-term residential care for older people. In November 2017, the Ombudsman, Peter Tyndall, published a casebook on nursing homes and the Ombudsman's experience of nursing home complaints. This casebook arose from his recently assumed role in examining complaints relating to administrative actions of private nursing homes receiving public funding and his previously assumed role in examining complaints about public nursing homes. Members may be familiar with the NHSS and the many people afforded access to long-term residential care through this scheme. Through both the review of the scheme, which was published in 2015, and the observations of the Ombudsman, issues in the administration of long-term residential care in public and private nursing homes have arisen.

The main issues identified by the Ombudsman in his casebook relate to contracts of care, security of tenure and additional charges. The Ombudsman also notes the important role that alternate care models play in meeting the changing needs of older people.

As Minister of State with special responsibility for mental health and older people, I have engaged on this issue with Nursing Homes Ireland, a representative organisation for the private and voluntary nursing homes sector. It has been my long-held view that contracts of care should be made available at the earliest opportunity and that all aspects of the contract should be transparent. I requested that NHI engage with its members to ensure that contracts are provided to prospective residents at the time of inquiry rather than on admission and that the terms of contracts have greater transparency and clarity. My Department's regulations on the care and welfare of residents require that the registered provider of the nursing home agree a contract in writing with each resident on his or her admission to the nursing home. This contract must include details of the services to be provided to the resident and the fees charged. Residents should never be charged fees which are not set out in the contract.

The provision of contracts of care to prospective and current nursing home residents is included in the regulations on care and welfare of residents. In particular, discharge of a resident from a nursing home is subject to these regulations. They require that discharge of a resident is discussed, planned for and agreed with the resident and, where appropriate, with his or her family or carer, in line with the terms and conditions of the contract agreed on entry to the nursing home.

An interdepartmental working group was established to examine the recommendations of the 2015 review of the nursing homes support scheme. I requested that the issue of additional charges also be examined as part of this group's work. A project team consisting of staff from my Department and the HSE has been actively engaged in this issue, visiting both public and private nursing homes to consider the practice of levying additional charges. I expect a report on their preliminary findings to be delivered to the interdepartmental working group in the coming months for further consideration and next steps. I have met again with Nursing Homes Ireland and Age Action to discuss additional charges following media reports on the matter. I have asked Nursing Homes Ireland to request its members to make proposed contracts of care - containing their additional fees - available to potential nursing home residents, again at inquiry stage rather than admission stage, to improve transparency. Nursing Homes Ireland has circulated guidance for members on this issue which, among other things, includes commitments on openness and transparency and making fees information available to prospective residents at an early stage. The main priority in respect of additional charges is to ensure that nursing homes continue to provide an engaging range of activities for their residents.

I think I can leave it at that. I am happy to take any questions. That was an abridged-----

I thank the Minister.

I will be very brief. I thank the Minister of State for taking the time to be present at the committee meeting and for engaging on this issue. We have gone through this on numerous occasions at the petitions committee and I have raised it with the Minister of State in the Dáil. I wish to touch on the issue of the additional charges. I note what the Minister of State said in his speech about the reports coming before him and that he hopes to examine them. Will he issue specific instructions as opposed to just looking for transparency as to how this will actually be invoked? Another matter I discussed with him previously is that representatives of Nursing Homes Ireland came before us at the Committee of Public Accounts as well and they claim they are under financial strain and that many of their members and smaller operations are being forced out of business due to the operating margins. On the one hand, therefore, we are here as parliamentarians asking the Minister of State about transparency on additional charges while, on the other, these representatives are coming before us at other committees saying they are under extreme financial strain and that they are going to go out of business. Then we see reports on bed capacity in certain counties over the coming years. I would like to hear the Minister of State's thoughts on these issues.

Shall I go ahead and-----

Please do.

I thank Deputy Cassells for his questions. The issue with the additional charges is that there is a disparity among different homes. They are private entities. I do not think it is within my gift to instruct them on a prescriptive method, that they should charge no more than this or no less than that or whatever else. As for the best way to deal with additional charges, the biggest bugbear for people is that they are not aware of them, that they are being snuck in or in some way added on such that people have not been aware of them and the next thing they are landed with them weekly. This was probably one of the more constructive proposals we came up with, that when the fair deal is granted to a person to put his or her loved one into a nursing home, he or she can go around and make inquiries with the different nursing homes. It does not matter. It is not like long ago, when public and private nursing homes were separate; they are all the same now such that at inquiry stage it is made abundantly clear that the cost is so much a week but there are additional charges of €100 a month. Once people are in full possession of the facts and know exactly what they will face, they do not seem to have a difficulty.

There is the difficulty that I must tread a fine line in not getting too prescriptive. I do not want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. What is really key in all this is that nursing homes put on a range of additional engaging activities. I do not want to go into nursing homes and see older people sitting on their chairs, their heads turned sideways, staring into the great abyss or out the window. None of us wants to see that. We want to see them being active, engaged, participating and so on. One can be very prescriptive with a version modelled on paper. For example, for mass on a Sunday morning the priest might get a stipend, but will only those who attend mass be charged? I have no difficulty with a universal collection for a priest to come in. Perhaps not everyone will avail of that mass. They might not be of that religion. Similarly, not everyone might like the music, the dance, the drama, the cooking or whatever else, but I want to ensure we do not set limits - in other words, that there is no disincentive. I want people to be incentivised. I have said ad nauseam that we have been very successful as a county in adding years to life but that the real challenge is to add life to those years. Nursing homes will play a key part in this, provided we work in partnership. I do not want to be heavy-handed or prescriptive. To be fair to Nursing Homes Ireland, it has been very proactive, has engaged with me extensively on this and has been very quick to write to its members to tell them this is an issue, with its suggestions as to how to resolve it, looking for openness and transparency, following guidance and so on. On this issue, I am satisfied for the most part. We are doing a bit of work on it. Mr. Karl Duff, who is here with me, is an assistant principal in the Department of Health. He and an official from the HSE are visiting a number of nursing homes and ascertaining the levels of charges. They are doing so randomly, announcing their arrival on the instruction of the Minister, telling the nursing homes they would just like to know what their situation is and what they are doing, engaging with the residents and seeing the range of activities taking place. To be fair, we are finding very good co-operation from the nursing homes sector on this as well.

On issues of capacity, nursing homes and their profitability and so on, this debate with nursing homes will always be there. They have made their case to me on numerous occasions. I am at an arm's removal because it is the NTPF that is tasked with negotiating with each nursing home and it does so individually. It is obviously commercially sensitive, commercially appropriate and commercially difficult to negotiate with each individual nursing home and look at its range of costs and an acceptable rate of payment, so the Minister of State has no role in this regard, and rightly so. I should not be dictating what any nursing home would get. I do, however, think we can do more. I am concerned that there might be an overly hands-off approach to private nursing homes because they are private. With a view to this, I have promised NHI that I would be very open to having an open forum with its members, the stakeholders from the Department, the HSE and whoever else to air any particular issues because there are things on which we could work collectively and address collaboratively. As I said, I find NHI very good on that level.

I hope that answers the Deputy's questions.

I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for being here. It is refreshing that we have a Minister of State who is coming in with an open mind and being proactive in his brief and does not come in saying it is his way or the highway. To be fair to him, he has brought innovative change. I welcome his proposition that he would have an open forum with Nursing Homes Ireland because, anecdotally, from talking to and meeting members of Nursing Homes Ireland or people who have their own private nursing homes, I understand there are issues of staff retention, rates of pay, attrition of staff and, obviously, the demands put in place by HIQA in tandem with what is expected by all of us. The issue the Ombudsman highlighted with additional charges and the disparity is one that has caused angst for many people. Notwithstanding the Minister of State's remarks that some nursing homes are private businesses, I hope we might be able to put a kind of overarching philosophy or policy around this because it is important to give people certainty.

Regarding the Minister of State's comments about adding life to years, it is important we plan for the future. We hear there will be a shortage of nursing home beds. The cost is escalating, and I know the review of fair deal is ongoing, but it is important we give certainty, a roadmap is put in place and the Minister of State embarks upon the open forum. It should be a very sensible and very good decision.

Would the Minister of State like to respond?

The Senator has not asked a question. I appreciate that the capacity issue is a challenge for us. As part of the Project 2040 plan, it is planned that 2,600 additional beds will be put into the system. As a policymaker, I am focusing on alternative models of care so that we that we do not end up relying on nursing homes as the only alternative to the home. I have taken many strides to develop new supported independent living models. We are looking at developing demonstrator sites around the country as part of the move towards new futuristic models of care of the elderly. There might be a mix of tenancies at such a site, or there might be a crèche there to bring a bit of life into it. That would ensure old people are not just facing other old people. Practical supports are needed.

As I have mentioned previously, I visited Kilmaley, County Clare, at an early stage in my time in this portfolio. There are 30 elderly people living in 30 units in this tiny rural village. There is a primary care centre and a meals on wheels centre in the middle of it. The day I visited, a mother and baby or toddler group was meeting there. There was a lot of life on-site. There is somebody on duty 24 hours a day to provide assistance at a lighter level of intervention to the 30 people living there. I was interested to hear that in the 20 years or so that this premises has been operating, nobody has ever left to go into a nursing home. The lives of residents have ended on-site or in acute hospitals. We can develop and enhance models with the use of technology and a bit of creativity as a means of supporting people to live independently and fully on their own up to the end of their lives. That is the ambition we must have, while also providing nursing home beds.

I thank the Minister of State. I have a few questions for him. He has spoken about future planning. As the population ages, housing solutions will need to have greater complexity. I am sure he will agree that the modus operandi will need to involve facilitating independent living as near as possible to the end of life. I wonder whether the space exists in the current housing crisis to think through the challenges we are facing with regard to the zoning of land, the housing policy of local authorities and the mapping of Government policy. I would like to get his perspective on that.

My second question relates to residents of nursing homes whose houses are vacant. There has been some public discussion on the possibility of facilitating occupancy of those houses while people are in nursing homes. How stands that possibility? It could do a lot to help to solve the current housing supply crisis.

The third issue I would like to raise relates to public nursing homes. There are some vacant beds in Fermoy Community Hospital. If hospital management personnel are seeking to hold beds for a greater level of acuity, I can understand that. The effect, in real terms, of HIQA bed management rules relating to the operational space for each bed has been to restrict the number of beds in wards that had a greater number of beds up to now. Has consideration been given to the capacity of nursing homes - particularly in the public sphere, where there is a shortage of beds at present - to provide a greater number of beds where there is serious demand?

I thank the Chairman. We face many challenges in housing policy. One of the first issues I noted when I took up my current position was that when public representatives ask local community organisations or housing bodies like Respond or Clúid to develop housing projects for the elderly in places such as Bishopstown or Mallow, the organisation or body in question will get 95% funding from the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government to build those houses. The difficulty I have with such projects is that there is no future planning for the elderly, there are no on-site supports, there is no mix of tenure and there is no technology, etc. Ideally, a planning application for the construction of nine or 12 houses for the elderly would be submitted to the HSE for comment, input and suggestion. I have been seeking to drive that agenda since I was appointed to the Department of Health. I have been trying to bring the Departments of Housing, Planning and Local Government and Health together to work together. I am trying to bring an end to the arrangement whereby 95% funding is provided to organisations and bodies that provide nothing other than bricks and mortar. A more holistic approach is needed. We are making good headway. The two Departments are discussing the matter and are actively engaging on a committee that has been established. It is hoped that the Minister of State, Deputy English, and I will lead a conference before the end of the year that will consider how our Departments can look jointly at how this type of housing can best be developed. We are conscious of the challenges that exist. We are also active in the work that is being done to come up with an alternative approach. As I have mentioned, demonstrator sites are being rolled out by local authorities in specific areas so that future housing models can be assessed. Some academics and medical people will come in with all the best guidance regarding end-of-life care, etc.

The Chairman also asked about houses that are left vacant while people are availing of the fair deal scheme. This issue is the subject of ongoing consideration ahead of next month's budget. I do not want to commit overly to it on this side of the budget. It is being examined by the two Departments. At the moment, the difficulty is that 80% of the income of someone who is participating in the fair deal scheme goes to the State to help to meet the cost of his or her care. If that person has a house, there is a huge disincentive to rent it because 80% of the rental income would be given back to the State. I do not many how many of the 23,500 people who are availing of the scheme have houses that are idle because there was no one else living in them before they started to participate in the scheme. I can guess that there are thousands of such houses. It has been guesstimated that the number of idle houses in these circumstances is probably between 4,000 and 5,000.

That is significant.

Consideration is being given to whether 5,000 homes could be brought onto the market if the 80% requirement were removed. The additional issue that must be borne in mind is whether a person whose mother or father is in a nursing home wants the family house, with all of its private belongings and possessions, to be rented out to someone else. We need to be careful about this sensitive aspect of the matter as well. Many people believe that going into a nursing home is a temporary arrangement and that they will get home again sometime. Selling the home is traumatic in those circumstances. We are certainly not in a position to put anything in place to incentivise or encourage. We have to respect that the family takes supremacy. It is still the individual's home and he or she is entitled to have his or her home. We are looking at arrangements that can be put in place in scenarios in which it is accepted that the person who has gone into a nursing home is not going to return home and his or her family is anxious to rent the house to limit the exposure of that family to the requirement to give 80% of the rental income to the State. That is being considered by the Departments of Finance, Health and Housing, Planning and Local Government.

How close are the Departments to making a decision?

I suspect that the budget would be-----

The budget is coming into close focus. There is pressure on housing and the budget is approaching. The matter is being actively considered. Meetings are happening as we speak. There will be meetings between the Departments on this issue in the coming weeks. I will not go any further than that. I do not want to pre-empt where this process will conclude. It is difficult to get the balance right.

The third issue raised by the Chairman was the capacity of nursing homes. Currently, 80% of capacity is in private nursing homes and 20% of capacity is in public nursing homes. I would not like to see the proportion of private nursing homes go any higher than 80%. I would not like to see it reach 90% because the private industry would have a hold on the HSE. I am anxious for the HSE develop capacity. New ways are needed as well. It is too simple to say we need to double nursing home capacity to cater for the increasing number of older people. I would prefer a greater focus on alternative models of accommodation, rather than relying on the traditional nursing home model. We would emphasise at all times that we do not want the 80% figure to go any higher than that because if it does, the industry will be able to hold-----

My point related specifically to the HIQA bed management recommendations. As a result of new restrictions that have been put in place, a previous 16-bed ward in a community nursing home is now a 12-bed ward. I use those figures for the sake of argument. I note that Senators will have to leave because there is a vote in the Seanad. I thank Senators Buttimer and Wilson. I am not sure whether the HIQA recommendations I have mentioned are governed by statutory instruments.

I wonder whether there is flexibility. If demand increases, can we allow for greater flexibility within the current arrangements without going into large-scale capital expenditure for new beds and wards? Can we make use of current facilities and still allow for the dignity of the person and all of that to be preserved? Can we facilitate greater scope through bed management within the existing hospital structures or community hospital structures?

It is a constant challenge. HIQA provides a challenge. Any independent objective analysis would conclude that what HIQA has achieved is extraordinary and benefits the older person who is cared for in a nursing home. To be fair, HIQA has dragged us kicking and screaming into the 21st century in the area of care for the elderly. HIQA continues to challenge us on a daily basis.

The Chairman referred to capacity where numbers have been reduced. HIQA officials talk a good deal about the lived experience and making it more like a home. There is nothing homely about having one bed on top of another bed and a locker in between and so on. HIQA wants space for dignity and privacy and so on and we support that. The Department accepts that this is the future and we are happy to reduce the bed numbers accordingly. My predecessor, Ms Kathleen Lynch, a party colleague of the Chairman, announced a major refurbishment programme of works covering the length and breadth of the country for all community nursing units in public hands. Those responsible are taking into account these matters. Many have the capacity to move back into the same space they were in. Some will experience a reduction in beds while others do not have the physical space but where we have the physical space to extend, we are extending and trying to maintain the capacity in numbers. There is a challenge based on each home. We are not fighting HIQA on this or saying we need to keep eight beds in a room because there were always eight beds in that room. We accept that four beds is the optimum if that is what HIQA is saying. We are happy to go along with that and try to build around it as opposed to fighting it.

I have one final question regarding additional charges. I acknowledge the Minister of State is expecting the report from the interdepartmental working group. Can he be more specific on the timeframe for that?

I can and I cannot. The officials will have the work done in gathering the data by the end of November. That process feeds into the interdepartmental working group. Then it is up to me to get a report from the interdepartmental working group. I am saying it will be by year-end, but with an opt-out clause.

It comes with a health warning.

That is a good way of putting it. I am keen to have it by year-end but I cannot guarantee it.

I thank the Minister of State for attending and for engaging on the nursing home casebook. We are to meet with the various ombudsman offices shortly. We might allow for a further engagement as needs be if the Minister of State is willing further down the line.

There is one more point on the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission. The committee may be aware of the involvement of the commission. It is dealing with the nursing homes on contractual issues. The commission is examining the issue but I am unsure whether it would be prepared to become involved. I understand the commission will issue guidelines to the nursing homes. The involvement of the commission is something for the committee to be aware of.

That relates to the contractual arrangements.

It relates to security of tenure. It means a resident in a nursing home one day cannot be thrown out three days later. The idea is that nothing adverse like that could happen. The committee should be aware of that as well.

I thank the Minister of State.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.15 p.m. until 1.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 10 October 2018.
Top
Share