Schools Building Projects.

Mr. M. Higgins

Gabhaim buíochas leat, a Cheann Comhairle, as seans a thabhairt dom an t-ábhar seo a chur os comhair na Dála.

Tá sé scannallach an chaoi ina bhfuil geallúntaí briste i leith an scoil seo i gceartlár Ghaeltacht na Gaillimhe i gCarna. Tógadh scoil an Aird Mhóir sa bhliain 1872 agus tá sí i bhfíor droch-stad. Tá sé ar liosta an INTO de scoileanna atá faoi bhun chaighdeán shásúil le blianta fada. Tá gá le córais nua séarachais agus uisce agus tá géar-gá le hath-chóiriú ar an scoil go hiomlán. Tá an scoil i bhfad ró-bheag don líon scoláirí atá ag freastal uirthi. Má thiteann báisteach bíonn an clós faoi uisce agus ní féidir leis na páistí dul amach. Táthar ag brath ar portakabins, rud nach bhfuil sásúil, i gcóir múinteoir feabhais agus eile. Tá buncheist sábháilte agus sláinte i gceist anseo chomh maith.

Cúig bliain ó shin d'éirigh le muintir na háite suíomh nua a aimsiú do scoil. Dhá bhliain ó shin dúirt inealltóirí ón Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta go raibh an suíomh sásúil. Ach d'imigh an scoil, gan aon mhíniú agus gan tásc ná tuairisc, ó liosta na scoileanna nua a bhí le tógáil. Níor tugadh aon mhíniú dos na tuismitheoirí, dos na muinteoirí nó do mhuintir na háite. Ní fios do mhuintir an Aird Mhóir cá seasann siad ag an bpointe seo. An bhfuil siad fós ar an liosta le haghaidh scoil nua, an bhfuil siad ar liosta eile le haghaidh feabhsúcháin práinneacha nó an bhfuil siad ar liosta ar chor ar bith? Go dtí seo níl freagra faighte acu agus níor éirigh leo aon fhreagra shásúil a fháil ón Roinn maidir leis an gceist.

Cuireann sé iontas agus uafás orm go bhfuil ball den Rialtas féin as an áit, go bhfuil Aire Stáit ann agus go bhfuil triúr de lucht tacaíochta an Rialtais sa dáilcheantar. Ba chóir go mbeadh suim acu-san i gcruachás na scoile seo.

Céard atá an Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta sásta a dhéanamh ag an bpointe seo? Ba mhaith liom freagra dearfa a fháil ar céard atá i ndán don scoil seo agus don áit seo. Cén fáth, mar shampla, nach bhfuil an scoil ag fáil príomhaireacht tógála? An bhfuil sé i gceist ag an Roinn tacú le scoil nua a thógáil nó nach bhfuil? Idir an dá linn, céard atá ar intinn ag an Roinn a cheadú? An bhfuil sé i gceist obair riachtanach cothabhálach a dhéanamh ar an tsean scoil? Cén liosta ar a bhfuil iarratas na dtuismitheoirí agus na múinteoirí ag an bpointe seo?

Tá leatrom uafásach agus scannalach á dhéanamh ar an bpobal seo ag an Roinn Oideachais agus Eolaíochta. Sin an fáth go bhfuil an t-ábhar seo á thógáil os comhair na Dála. Tá sé tábhachtach go gceartófar an fhadhb seo láithreach. Bheinn buíoch dá bhfaighinn freagra dearfa ón Aire nó ón Aire Stáit.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Science (Mr. B. Lenihan)

Ullmhaíodh an freagra dom i mBéarla ach déanfaidh mé iarracht é a aistriú.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an Teachta as an cheist seo a phlé os comhair na Dála. Tugann sé caoi dom straitéis na Ranna chun airgead a cheadú don scoil seo agus an scéal maidir le tógáil scoil nua an Aird Mhóir a mhíniú.

Bunscoil comh-oideachais is ea scoil náisiúnta an Aird Mhóir. Tháinig laghdú ar líon na ndaltaí le déanaí, ó 75 dalta i 1998-99 go dtí 53 dalta i mí Meán Fomhair na bliana seo caite. Cuireadh iarratas isteach ag bord bainistíochta na scoile chun foirgneamh nua a thógáil. Chun feabhas a chur ar ranganna na scoile cheadaigh an Roinn deontas i mbliain na míle aoise chun seomra sealadach a fháil ar chíos agus leanadh leis an tseift sin ó shin.

Leanfaidh mé ar aghaidh i mBéarla, más ceadmhach dom sin a dhéanamh. Following an assessment of the application it was agreed that the appropriate accommodation should be provided for a three-classroom school.

A technical report carried out by the Department indicated that the existing premises did not lend itself to modernisation and that the site was somewhat restricted. Consequently, the Office of Public Works, which acts on behalf of the Department in respect of procurement of sites, was asked to investigate and report on suitable sites for the proposed new school. However, due to financial constraints the site acquisition for the new school was not progressed at that time.

When publishing the 2004 school building programme, the Department of Education and Science outlined that its strategy for the future would be grounded in capital investment based on multi-annual allocations. Departmental officials are reviewing all projects, which were not authorised to proceed to construction as part of the 2004 school building programme, with a view to including them in a multi-annual school building programme from 2005. The Department expects to be in a position to make further announcements on this matter in the course of the year. The needs of Scoil Náisiúnta Aird Mhóir will be considered in this regard.

Arís, ba mhaith liom mo bhuíochas a ghabháil leis an Teachta as an cheist seo a thabhairt os comhair na Dála.

Hospital Services.

Mr. Morgan

I am raising this issue on the adjournment tonight because a very serious situation has arisen in Louth following the decision by the North Eastern Health Board to discontinue the provision of surgical services after 5 p.m. at Louth County Hospital in Dundalk. This decision has serious implications for the people of Dundalk and north Louth who will be denied proper access to health care services as a result. It also has implications for Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda to which patients are to be transferred from Louth County Hospital after 5 p.m. The overcrowding problems at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital will be exacerbated as a result of this decision.

The people of Dundalk and north Louth who have already seen the maternity unit, the paediatric unit and the gynaecological unit at Louth County Hospital go in recent years are justifiably angered by this latest development. The pace at which services at Louth County Hospital are being cut one after another has raised serious concerns for the future of the hospital. Does the Minister think the people of County Louth are not entitled to access a proper health service? Is this Fianna Fáil-PD coalition Government willing to sacrifice the health and safety of the people of Louth? This disgraceful annihilation of health care services in Louth simply will not be tolerated.

The implication of this decision in terms of health and safety is appalling. Lives will undoubtedly be put at risk. Patients in need of urgent surgical attention after 5 p.m. will be forced to endure an unnecessary ambulance journey to Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda where they will certainly be forced to wait for several hours to see a consultant. We need to be absolutely clear about what is happening. Louth County Hospital will lose a further critical service. If there are no surgical services, then there will be no anaesthetist. People need to know that this is a further domino destruction of our valued health services.

All major surgery will be affected by this decision. Surgeons will not risk performing major surgery in Louth County Hospital because of the risk of patients requiring consultant attention during the night. I ask the House to imagine the prospect of hauling patients from their sick beds in the dead of night for transfer to Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital. Major surgery will be completely transferred to Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital before long. How can this announcement represent an improvement of service as claimed by the chairman of the health board and some officials? Rather than patients receiving attention from a consultant in their own local hospital, they will receive treatment from effectively a junior doctor and a nurse before being forced to endure the pain and suffering of a further half-hour journey in an ambulance to Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital and then a lengthy queuing and waiting for the consultant.

The position of junior doctors offering 24-hour cover is completely outside of IMO guidelines. Even Hanly said there should be more consultants, which is in stark contrast to this proposed situation. Effectively this decision will take Louth off-call and this means a serious downgrading of the hospital. Why are patients and services being moved from a hospital that is a model of efficiency to a hospital that is racked by scandal and overcrowding problems? Louth County Hospital has consistently been the third best hospital in the country in terms of efficiency, according to figures published annually. This is nothing short of a scandalous abuse of people who are ill and in need of urgent care, heightened by the spectacle of the chairman of the NEHB on the "Loose Talk" programme on LMFM contradicting a very senior official of the health board about these events. Neither of them seems to know what the other is saying.

I ask the Minister to intervene to prevent the NEHB implementing its decision to discontinue the provision of surgical services after 5 p.m. at Louth County Hospital in Dundalk. I ask the Minister specifically to address this request in his reply. This revelation represents yet another election scam by a party which specialises in them.

Mr. B. Lenihan

I do not know to which scam the Deputy is referring but he comes from a bad stable if he is alleging election scams.

Mr. Morgan

I am referring to the €3 million scam announced with the closure of surgical services.

Mr. B. Lenihan

I hope the Deputy will give equal prominence to the reply I am about to give because it throws much light on the provision of hospital services in County Louth. This is an important subject and I thank the Deputy for raising it on the Adjournment. On behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, I welcome the opportunity to clarify the position in regard to the provision of surgical services at Louth County Hospital, Dundalk.

The Deputy is well aware that the provision of services at Louth County Hospital rests with the North Eastern Health Board. My Department has been advised by the board that surgical services within the Louth-Meath hospital group are being re-organised with effect from 1 July this year. A six person consultant surgical department will be created to provide services across both the Drogheda and Dundalk hospital sites. The Deputy will be aware of the major capital investment undertaken by the Government in ensuring efficient communication between these two substantial centres of population in County Louth.

The board has advised that there are two consultant surgeons at Dundalk and four at Drogheda. Under the new arrangements, all six consultant surgeons will provide services across both sites. Emergency on-call cover for the joint department will be provided by a Drogheda-based consultant surgeon with 24 hour on-call non-consultant hospital doctor support in both Dundalk and Drogheda hospitals. Far from being a downgrading of the service in Dundalk, this is an enhancement of the service and I hope the Deputy learns to acknowledge that.

Inter-hospital transfers based on patient need are a feature of acute hospital services. In this regard, my Department has been advised by the North Eastern Health Board that clear protocols are being established for the triage of all surgical admissions to Dundalk and their subsequent management. This will include protocols for the initial management and transfer of major general, surgical and emergency cases at Dundalk and their transfer to the Drogheda site.

The reorganisation of surgical services as announced by the health board is designed, inter alia, to facilitate a more appropriate training system in that junior doctors will rotate between the two hospitals during their employment, thus ensuring exposure to many different clinical experiences. I understand that the new service arrangements for the joint surgical department at Drogheda and Dundalk hospitals are supported by the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Comhairle na nOspidéal and the consultant surgeons within the hospital group. I place on record the gratitude of the Minister for the co-operation he has received from all the professions involved in implementing this proposal.

My Department has been advised by the North Eastern Health Board that there are no plans to downgrade Louth County Hospital and that the hospital is guaranteed an active role in the delivery of acute hospital services within the Louth-Meath hospital group. The health board is confident that the change in service delivery will facilitate the provision of high quality patient care. My Department is assured that the reorganisation of services will lead to a significant increase in the number of operations being carried out at Dundalk hospital.

Medical Inquiries.

Mr. O’Dowd

A great deal of good work has been done by everybody concerned in this case, particularly the women concerned, the North Eastern Health Board and the Minister for Health and Children, and it is in that spirit that I address my remarks. Everyone agrees that what happened in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, must never happen again, that the whole truth must come out and mothers must never go through similar experiences or the awful trauma, pain and suffering they endured as a result, none of which we can fully understand. Every possible action must be taken by the Government and the health board to ensure this is not repeated.

Confidence in Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital has increased since it was taken over by the health board and appropriate systems are now in place. I also understand the health board is efficient and effective and the staff, management and everybody else concerned are dedicated and excellent at their jobs. The sad aspect of this affair, however, is that while Patient Focus is very happy with the progress the Minister has made on the inquiry and with the competence, qualifications and professionalism of the judge assigned to chair the inquiry, it is deeply concerned about a flaw in the process. Rectifying this flaw will, I understand, require that the Health Act of 1970 be amended to compel any reluctant witnesses in this case to attend.

If truth, transparency and justice are to emerge and be publicly explained to all concerned in order that all lessons can be learned, changes must be made locally and nationally. To ensure this issue never arises again, Patient Focus and other concerned parties believe the Minister must take steps to amend the Act to compel every witness the judge decides should attend the inquiry to attend. That is the kernel of the problem. I wish to make clear, however, that those to whom I have spoken are happy that the process has been brought this far. This further step is required to put matters right and make the hearings acceptable to everybody.

I understand that Patient Focus has raised a small number of other issues with the Minister and he will be aware of the concern that other issues dating back to the 1970s be investigated. The Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, may not be aware of the position in this regard, but I ask that it be conveyed to me. While considerable progress has been made, the matter will not be brought to a conclusion if reluctant witnesses refuse to attend.

Mr. B. Lenihan

I thank Deputy O'Dowd for the spirit in which he raises this issue, which has been raised previously in the House. I welcome the opportunity to clarify the position regarding the inquiry established as a result of the report of the Medical Council into the practice of Dr. Michael Neary.

For the general information of the House, the report of the Medical Council fitness to practice committee into the professional conduct of Dr. Neary was published last year. The committee found that Dr. Neary was guilty of professional misconduct in his treatment of ten patients and the Medical Council subsequently erased his name from the register of medical practitioners. The Medical Council recommended that the serious issues raised in the report should be examined and the Minister had discussions with the council in this regard.

On the recommendation of the Minister, the Government decided that a further inquiry into the matters raised by the Medical Council was necessary. The inquiry is being chaired by Judge Maureen Harding Clark, a judge of the International Criminal Court. Terms of reference have recently been approved by the Government and Judge Clark has been asked to report to the Minister within a period of nine months. Premises have been secured and fitted out for the inquiry and Judge Clark and her legal team have already completed a detailed preliminary examination of relevant documentation.

The Minister understands from media reports that Patient Focus, an advocacy group representing a number of former patients of Dr. Neary to which Deputy O'Dowd referred, does not propose to co-operate with the inquiry at this time. This decision is to be regretted, although I understand that arrangements are being finalised by the Minister for an early meeting with the group to discuss its concerns. The Minister and his Department have had extensive discussions with Patient Focus over recent months on the terms of reference for the inquiry. In addition, members of Judge Clark's legal team have outlined to Patient Focus the approach the judge proposes to adopt in carrying out the inquiry.

The overall purpose of the inquiry is to establish why so many peripartum hysterectomies were performed at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda over such a long period and to ensure that all necessary measures are put in place to prevent any recurrence of these events within the hospital system. The terms of reference have been prepared and endorsed by Government with this principal objective in mind.

Specifically, the inquiry will examine the rate of peripartum hysterectomy at the Drogheda hospital and how this rate compared with the rate in other maternity units of similar status. The inquiry will seek to establish whether the practice was commented or acted upon by consultant or other medical and nursing staff, or by the management of the hospital. The inquiry will further seek to ascertain the system of recording at the hospital, whether such records still exist and, if not, what has become of them.

In addition, the inquiry will seek to establish whether review and consultation took place within the unit, and whether periodical clinical reports were prepared. It will examine the practices and protocols in place at the hospital, with a view to advising on whether additional protocols and systems of control should now be put in place.

I understand that Patient Focus has requested that the terms of reference for the inquiry be broadened to include women who believe they have been damaged in the maternity and gynaecology unit of the hospital since 1974. I presume this is the issue to which the Deputy referred in raising the matter. The group has also asked that witnesses be compelled to attend the inquiry.

With regard to the first concern, the Minister has advised Patient Focus that the competent statutory body to investigate medical practice is the Medical Council. Therefore, it is not the purpose of this inquiry, nor is it within the competence of Judge Clark, to make findings on clinical practice. Notwithstanding this, Judge Clark has confirmed that she is prepared to hear the testimony of any former patient of Dr. Neary who wishes to be heard, as well as all other persons who believe that they have relevant information to offer, to gain a better understanding of the events that occurred at the maternity unit in Drogheda. This position was previously communicated to Patient Focus.

On the question of compellability, the terms of reference provide that, in the event of the withholding or withdrawal of full co-operation from the inquiry by staff or former staff of the hospital, the North Eastern Health Board, its servants and agents, the former proprietors of the hospital or any State authority, the inquiry is to report that fact to the Minister. Should such circumstances arise, the Minister will revert to the Government.

It is evident that the terms of reference of the inquiry have been prepared with a view to facilitating Judge Clark in conducting a broad-based inquiry into events at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital. I very much hope that Patient Focus will support the judge in her work.

Social Welfare Benefits.

Mr. Finneran

It gives me no joy as a Government backbencher to bring this case to the floor of Dáil Éireann tonight. In conscience, I have no alternative but to do so. The person, whose name is available to the Minister, is 43 years old and has never held a regular job in his life, with the exception of involvement in FÁS and community employment schemes. Some of us might have been helpful in organising such involvement.

On 31 March an official of the Minister's Department decided that this person was no longer entitled to unemployment assistance on the basis that he was not genuinely seeking employment. I could let this case go as it is only one constituent, but I have no intention of doing that as I am sure that if this can happen to this man it can happen to others. I raise this issue because the Minister is a person with a genuine interest in the affairs of the underprivileged and those who are not as well off as some of us. I expect that the people who work under her would adopt a similar approach.

If someone aged 43 from a rural area, three miles from a village and seven miles from a town, with no public transport, who never held a regular job, produces evidence of looking for work, it is not true to state that he has not produced sufficient evidence. I have documentation supplied to the Minister's Department that in February 2004 two companies in Castlrea and Charlestown were in a position to supply employment to this man. The list in 2003 is a long one. How does someone living in a rural area, seven miles from the nearest town and with no public transport find a way to different places to seek employment? How can a State employee in a permanent position in the Minister's Department decide on 31 March 2004 that this man, living with his widowed mother, will not have the price of a loaf of bread or a packet of cigarettes?

I have been a member of the local authority for 25 years and have been a long time in my party, but I cannot accept that approach to this problem in modern Ireland. If we treat some unfortunate person with that background in this way, we need to look into our hearts and ask where we are going. I ask the Minister, who has a good understanding of the difficulties of living in a rural area and of the difficulties for someone who never got a regular job in his life, to understand the implications of this issue. It is unfortunate that this person is in this position. The last bit of dignity should not be taken away, the few bob for a packet of cigarettes or a loaf of bread should not be taken away.

Not one of the Minister's officials will give me information on guidelines for this case. How many jobs does this person have to look for? Two were documented in February. Can the officer in the Minister's Department who decided this case show me these guidelines? Does he have to apply for three or five or six jobs? The Minister should not tell me to let this person appeal and that the Department will look at it. That is not the way to proceed as it is a position of principle. I ask her to investigate this case as I believe this person has been wronged on this occasion.

Minister for Social and Family Affairs (Mary Coughlan)

In determining whether a person is genuinely seeking work, a deciding officer takes into account all evidence provided regarding the person's efforts to find work and all relevant circumstances, including the economic environment and employment opportunities available. The onus is on the customer, when asked by a deciding officer, to prove, to the satisfaction of the deciding officer, that he or she is available for and genuinely seeking work on a consistent and ongoing basis. This is done by the production of sufficient credible evidence by the customer.

Following a review of his entitlements, a deciding officer disallowed the unemployment assistance claim of the person concerned from 31 March 2004, on the grounds that he is not available for, or genuinely seeking, work. The deciding officer took the view that the person concerned had not provided sufficient evidence to show that he was available for or making consistent efforts to find work. One factor was the failure of the person concerned to attend an appointment under the employment action plan with a placement officer of FÁS.

A form for the purpose of appealing the decision in his case to the independent social welfare appeals office was issued to the person concerned on 30 March 2004. If he feels that the decision in his case is incorrect he should contact his local office with a view to submitting an appeal.

I will provide, for the Deputy's information, extracts from my Department's guidelines on the processing of unemployment claims. The complete guidelines are available on my Department's website at www.welfare.ie and information is available in the Department’s booklet SW4.

The Dáil adjourned at 9.20 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 6 May 2004.

Dáil Éireann debate - Wednesday, 5 May 2004