Adjournment Debate.

Medical Cards.

Deputy Jan O’Sullivan

I welcome the opportunity to raise this issue which has pretty much occupied the minds of everybody in this country for the past 24 hours. With all due respect to the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, I am disappointed that the Minister for Health and Children is not in the House to respond to this issue. We have seen panic measures throughout the country concerning the Government's response. The HSE's website has changed its position three times in the course of the day in terms of what the income limits might be. While it may change again tomorrow, the latest position is that they have now raised the limit for single people by approximately €40 and by a little bit more for a married couple. It is clearly a panic measure in response to the outrage of elderly people throughout the country who have been phoning us all day and speaking on the airwaves. These people have given their life's work to the country and have paid their taxes when taxes were high. They were given medical cards in 2001 prior to the 2002 general election, which was clearly a ploy to win that election, but they now learn that their cards will be withdrawn. Those people do not need any lectures on patriotism from anyone in the Government, including the Minister for Finance. They know what it is to be patriotic. They were told that the weak would not have to pay for the problems the Government has led us into. Clearly, however, the weak have paid. The very people who devoted their lives to this country and who now require medical care in their later years, will have their medical cards taken away.

In last night's debate, I pointed out that the income threshold for a couple — where one was under 70 and the other over 70 — had been halved by the stroke of a pen in this budget. The threshold has been slightly raised today as a result of the furore it caused. I urge the Government to go back to the drawing board on this measure. It is not over by any means. There may be a feeling in Government circles that because this panic measure was taken it will appease people somehow or other, but it will not. Many people remain outside the limits and will suffer hardship as they will not be able to pay for their medical needs. As a result they will be in poorer health.

Studies have shown that the removal of the means test improved circumstances for a considerable number of people, as well as improving health outcomes. It provided access to flu vaccinations and community-based therapies. A doctor-only medical card will not provide the kind of holistic care elderly people require if they are to remain in the community. It is meant to be Government policy to encourage people to stay in the community, rather than going into institutional care or hospital. This measure will turn the situation around completely, however.

I strongly urge the Government to re-examine this matter. It should renegotiate the issue with the Irish Medical Organisation because doctors were paid a hugely inflated amount of money. The decision was announced before negotiations were completed, purely to win the votes of those who, as the Government knew at the time, are the kind of people who actually go out to vote. Those people are outraged and feel let down. They feel they have not been respected or cared for. They will not accept this measure which is a mealy-mouthed effort to appease them.

Many items in the budget have caused concern by inflicting damage on the poor, particularly the working poor. However, of all the budgetary measures, this one concerning medical cards is truly the harshest and most uncaring. It simply needs to be withdrawn. While he is not directly responsible, I urge the Minister of State and his colleagues in the three Government parties to go back to the drawing board. The Minister for Social and Family Affairs, who is a constituency colleague of the Minister of State, will have to amend the Social Welfare Bill. It will not require the Minister for Health and Children to amend the Health (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2001, but does concern the Social Welfare Bill. There will be major opposition to this measure, which is unfair because it attacks those whom we should protect. They have devoted their lives to the country and are particularly outraged by the call to patriotism, which was made on the same day at this blow was struck against them.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy Barry Andrews)

I thank Deputy Jan O'Sullivan for raising this Adjournment matter, which I take on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Mary Harney.

In the budget, the Government decided to end the automatic entitlement to a medical card for persons aged 70 and over, with effect from 1 January 2009. This was done to ensure that public health funding is used to help those most in need. Some people have a medical card as a result of a means test, while others received a medical card automatically, without a means test, when they turned 70.

I wish to clarify the following points. Any person with a medical card as a result of a means test is not affected by this decision, irrespective of age, what means test the person did or when they did it. Their medical card benefits are not affected. They will not now be asked to do a new means test, nor will they be written to by the HSE as a result of the budget decision.

For any person aged 70 or over who got a medical card without a means test, the budget decision is important because their present medical card will expire on 31 December this year. The HSE will write to them between 31 October and 14 November asking them to complete a simple means test to decide the benefits they may receive. They will be asked to return this form to the HSE within two weeks. On that basis, the HSE will be able to complete all assessments by 31 December this year.

Depending on the means test, a person may qualify for a medical card, or a GP visit card, or the new health support payment of €400 for a single person, or €800 for a couple. I will now deal with the issue of the means test. The weekly income limit for a medical card will be €240.30 for a single person or €480.60 for a couple. This is the same as the highest amount of a State contributory pension following the increase in the budget. If a person's sole weekly income is €240.30 for a single person or €480.60 for a couple, or less, they will qualify for a medical card. Other social welfare payments like the fuel allowance or the living alone allowance are not counted in the means test.

If a person has a weekly income of more than €240.30 for a single person or €480.60 for a couple, they will be asked for some additional information. The means test income amount is income after expenses. Full account is taken of real expenses a person has, or can expect to have, next year. These are, for example, rent or mortgage, GP costs, medicines costs, medical appliances, nursing home fees, maintenance payments made, and any income tax or PRSI paid.

Any savings up to €36,000 for a single person or €72,000 for a couple will not be counted in the means test. The family home will not be counted in the means test.

The GP visit card entitles a person to free visits to their GP without limit. The weekly income limit will be €360.45 for a single person or €720.90 for a couple. This is 50% higher than the income limit for the medical card. If a person's sole weekly income is €360.45 for a single person or €720.90 for a couple, or less, they will qualify for a GP visit card.

Other social welfare payments like the fuel allowance or the living alone allowance are not counted in the means test. This income limit is also income after expenses. The same allowances and exemptions will apply as for the medical card means test.

A person who does not qualify for a GP visit card can still qualify for the new health support payment if their gross weekly income is less than €650 for a single person or €1,300 for a couple. The HSE will use the same means test form to assess this. There will be no need to fill in another form. The health support payment is €400 for a single person or €800 for a couple. It will be paid annually, will not require medical receipts and will not be taxable.

Medical cards and GP visit cards may still be granted by the HSE to those not qualifying on a means test on particular hardship grounds. The health levy will not be payable by people aged 70 and over. I am glad of this opportunity to be able to clarify the Government's decision on this important matter.

Planning Issues.

Deputy Michael Creed

I thank the Ceann Comhairle's office for the opportunity to raise this matter and to express my disappointment that I do not have the Minister or a Minister of State from the Environment, Heritage and Local Government to take the issue — no reflection on the Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews. I would appreciate it if the issue was brought to the attention of the relevant Ministers responsible.

Having been a member of a local authority for more than 20 years, I believe in the integrity of the planning process. However, I believe, as the old maxim states, that justice delayed is justice denied. I equally believe that a planning application not adjudicated upon within a defined period leads the planning process into disrepute. I raise this issue because of a specific instance, but I am also aware anecdotally of extraordinary delays in An Bord Pleanála which, in fact, were confirmed to me in a parliamentary question which I raised on 1 July last. The reply confirmed that the average delay in An Bord Pleanála in 2008 has been almost six months.

I have a case in my town of Macroom. I will not name the individuals involved but I will give the reference number for the Minister of State to take back to his ministerial colleagues. It is PL69226787. This relates to a fairly significant development in Macroom town which is integral to the decentralisation programme that the Government, as of Tuesday last, has suspended. This process would have been signed, sealed and delivered if An Bord Pleanála had made the decision because the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food was prepared to sign contracts if planning was produced. There was a third party appeal, and while I defend third parties' rights to appeal, the point I raise is that such an application, which was appealed on 4 December 2007 to An Bord Pleanála, would be undecided in mid-October 2008.

I will outline the sequence of events for the record. It was appealed originally by a third party on 4 December last and, as I stated, I uphold and defend third party' right to do so. On 13 April last, a decision was due and it was deferred on that day. It was indicated that decisions would have been reached on 13 May, on 13 June and on 20 June, but it was not reached and was further deferred. On 20 June, the board refused to give a future date by which time a decision would be reached. In early July, An Bord Pleanála wrote seeking extra information, which was replied to on 20 July, and a new date was determined for 20 August by An Bord Pleanála. It was deferred on 20 August until 27 August. On 27 August, it was further deferred and no indicative date was set for a decision to be reached. In early September, An Bord Pleanála wrote again seeking further information. This was submitted on 28 September and a date has been indicated for 30 October.

The unfortunate reality is that this project was part of the planned decentralisation of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to Macroom, which has now gone by the wayside. It is indicative of the delays, and I am sure this is but one of many projects throughout the country that were delayed in An Bord Pleanála. The town of Macroom will pay a considerable price, even if that outcome were to be successful in An Bord Pleanála, because the Department has now pulled the plug on the decentralisation programme. It leads one to suspect, and to be suspicious of, the motivation for the delay. I say that having given much consideration to it. The entire sequence of delays is unjustifiable by any other analysis. Under section 126 of the Planning and Development Act 2000, An Bord Pleanála has a statutory objective to determine appeals within 18 weeks. That is a reasonable timeframe in which to make a decision. In this case, it has been going on over ten months. That is entirely unforgivable.

When one considers the state of the construction industry, this is a project, as I would imagine are many of the other projects before An Bord Pleanála, where construction would commence as soon as planning could be resolved, and yet there are unforgivable delays. I implore the Minister at this late stage to be cognisant of the specific and the general issues involved and to bring them to the attention of his Government colleagues.

Deputy Barry Andrews

I will take this matter on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. An Bord Pleanála has a key role as an independent planning appeals body in ensuring physical development and major infrastructure projects respect the principles of sustainable development and are planned in an efficient, fair and open manner. In recent years, the board has operated in a challenging environment that saw sustained record levels of appeals and the implementation of the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006. Any examination of the performance of the board in the disposal of cases must be viewed in the context of the record levels of case intake over successive years, from 2004 to 2007, and the assumption of significant new functions under the 2006 Act.

During 2007, An Bord Pleanála received 6,664 new cases, an increase of 12% on 2006, and determined 6,163, which represented a 10% increase on the number determined in the previous year. The high intake of new appeal cases in 2007 coupled with the high level of strategic infrastructure cases received resulted in a significant rise in the workload in hand at the board by the end of 2007 and I am aware that there has been deterioration in appeal disposals within the normal 18-week statutory objective period in 2008.

For its part, the Government has given the board practical support in these challenging times. In 2007, approval was given for a considerable increase in the board's staffing resources and the total authorised staff complement increased by 35.5 to 172. At that time, the board membership also increased from ten to 11 on a temporary basis.

I am advised that with the predicted lower intake of cases in future, the increased resources made available, greater experience with the operation of the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006 and other measures to improve throughput, progress will be made over the coming months towards reducing the turnaround time for cases so that a greater percentage are determined within the statutory objective period.

Let me say a bit more about the Planning and Development (Strategic Infrastructure) Act 2006 as it is important in considering the employment issue raised by the Deputy. The key policy objective of the Act is to provide for a streamlined, single-stage consent process for certain classes of infrastructural development of national importance by statutory bodies and private promoters. In addition to motorways and local authority projects, which were already handled by An Bord Pleanála, this now includes heavy and light rail and metro, other infrastructure requiring environmental impact assessments such as significant airport or port developments, waste infrastructure, and major energy infrastructure such as electricity transmission lines, strategic upstream and downstream gas pipelines, liquefied natural gas facilities, oil refineries and large onshore wind farms.

Since January 2007, the board, which now has a strategic infrastructure division, has received 97 requests for pre-application consultations and arranged 144 meetings, with the promoters in these cases, and concluded 63 pre-application consultation cases and received 16 formal strategic infrastructure applications under the new process. To date, six formal applications have been decided by the board under the Act to which I referred and these have been decided within the statutory period of 26 weeks. All these were the subject of an oral hearing. In view of the size and complexity of projects determined such as the Citywest Luas extension, the natural gas Powergen plant at Toomes, the liquefied natural gas import storage terminal at Tarbert, or the railway line between Clonsilla and Pace, achieving decisions within 26 weeks while ensuring all environmental and public participation considerations are taken into account is a major step forward. It is also an important development from the perspective of employment provision as these types of major projects lead to major employment opportunities in their construction and operation.

Deputy Michael Creed

Will the Minister of State take up the specific case?

Deputy Barry Andrews

I have taken a note of it.

Schools Building Projects.

Deputy James Bannon

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for affording me the opportunity to speak on this important matter, namely, the need for the Minister for Education and Science to provide an update on the commencement date for building the new school building for Forgney national school, County Longford, which is urgently required to replace the school's 40 year old wooden structure. The new school building was approved two years ago, in November 2006, in an announcement by the then Minister for Education and Science of a new building programme under which 72 primary schools nationwide were allocated funding.

Forgney national school has gone from the heights of elation to the depths of despair in the past two years. There was elation in November 2006, almost two years ago, with the announcement that after a 40-year wait the school was given the go-ahead by the Department for a new school building. However, as time passed with no follow through, this has turned to despair. The Minister might be unable to imagine such despair but I can assure him it is extreme. It is the culmination of raised hopes that have been dashed and the reality of hard work by pupils, teachers and parents coming to nothing.

Forgney national school has been accommodated for an unbelievable 42 years in an old wooden, flat-roofed army-type building which is very near collapse. It is well past its sell-by date. This is a huge health and safety risk for children and teachers. As I asked recently in this House when speaking about the conditions in another school, would the Minister and his Government colleagues be happy to work in accommodation that has deteriorated to such an extent? I am sure they would not and that the Office of Public Works would be called in immediately to upgrade facilities. Government spin, particularly with regard to school building projects, is also well past its sell-by date. Communities with schools such as that in Forgney are sick and tired of having the wool pulled over their eyes and promise after promise without action.

Forgney national school is a small two-teacher school at the heart of the community in Forgney, County Longford. Although the postal address is County Westmeath, this is a Longford school which is under the capable direction of its principal, Mr. Adrian Coughlan. If anything should happen to the temporary structure, the school would be forced to copy the hedge schools of old as no other accommodation is available in the area. The pupils would be at the mercy of the elements. Forgney is a developing catchment area on the outskirts of Ballymahon. The school is the only primary school in the parish and as such it is a focal point of parish activities.

While the area has not been over-developed in recent years, it is beginning to attract some development. Although it is a small school, zoning for housing in the area will lead to an increase in the number of school-going children in coming years. A recently completed building scheme situated on the border of Forgney and Ballymahon will lead to a significant increase in the school-going population. The school has a projected enrolment of more than 30 pupils by 2010. The local people have worked tirelessly and have vigorously campaigned for a new school building to replace the difficult physical conditions in which Forgney national school has provided an excellent education for the children of the area for many years.

Currently, the principal assumes the building project has reached the design stage and it is accepted that it will not now go to tender in the first six months of 2009. I urge the Minister to give an assurance, without clouding the issue, that it will be certain to go to tender in the second half of next year.

Minister of State at the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government (Deputy Michael Finneran)

I am responding on behalf of my colleague, the Minister for Education and Science. I thank the Deputy for raising this matter as it provides me with the opportunity to outline the position with regard to the application for large-scale capital funding from Forgney national school. The school has a staffing of a principal, one mainstream teacher and a shared resource teacher. The school's enrolment at 30 September 2007 was 22 pupils.

The school authority has applied to the Department of Education and Science for capital funding for a new school building. In the context of this application, the local inspector has confirmed that the school is expected to maintain its current enrolment and staffing level. It is not, therefore, experiencing the rapid increase in enrolments that has occurred in other schools throughout the country.

The Deputy will appreciate that modernising facilities in 3,200 primary and 750 post-primary schools is not an easy task given the decades of underinvestment in this area as well as the need to respond to emerging needs in areas of rapid population growth. The Government has a sincere determination, however, to ensure that all children are educated in appropriate facilities to enable the implementation of a broad and balanced curriculum. This is evidenced by the scale of funding made available under the former and the current national development plans and the capital funding for school buildings announced in the budget this week.

The Department of Education and Science must prioritise how it spends its capital funding to ensure that it is targeted at areas and schools most in need. That is the reason prioritisation criteria were introduced and published. These criteria show how projects are categorised and how they are selected for inclusion in a capital programme. Under the criteria, the proposed project for Forgney national school has been assigned a band two rating reflecting the fact that the standard of its existing accommodation is such that it needs to be replaced by a new building.

Thousands of building projects were carried out under the last national development plan to provide new and modernised educational infrastructure and thousands more will be carried out under the new plan. However, there must be order in how this happens and a realisation that not all building projects can proceed together. The extent of the demand on the capital budget is enormous. That budget is providing accommodation for new communities together with accommodation for the unprecedented number of extra teachers the Government has put into the system. The Department of Education and Science also must modernise much of the existing stock as a result of the historic underinvestment in that stock.

All this work will not be achieved overnight. However, the Department has made huge inroads and will continue to build on the success of the last national development plan, when the Department delivered 7,800 building projects. As the Minister, Deputy Batt O'Keeffe, said, this must be done in an orderly and planned manner and on the basis of the most pressing need. Projects will be advanced incrementally through the system, over time, consistent with the priority attaching to them which is reflected in the band rating assigned to them. Individual projects will be allowed to proceed, in order of priority as and when the funding situation permits. The school building project for Forgney national school will be considered for progression in this context.

I again thank the Deputy for raising this matter. The Department's planning and building unit will be in contact with the school authority as further progress is made on its project.

The Dáil adjourned at 7.55 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Friday, 17 October 2008.

Dáil Éireann debate - Thursday, 16 Oct 2008