Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 2 Jul 2013

Vol. 809 No. 2

Topical Issue Debate

Undocumented Irish in the USA

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this Topical Issue regarding the immigration reform legislation which is before Congress in the United States. The Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act 2013 was recently passed by the United States Senate by a margin of 68 to 32. The legislation will make it possible for many undocumented people to gain legal status and, eventually, US citizenship through various means. It advances the ideas of talent-based specifically targeted immigration. The new points-based immigration system, which is similar to that in other countries, will allow acceptance of immigrants according to a merit-based system based on professional skills, family relations and work history in the US. The legislation also proposes to remove green card quotas and will create a new W visa category for low skilled temporary workers.

The specific point I wish to raise with regard to the legislation is how J1 visa holders such as Irish students will be affected. In its early stages the legislation contained proposals which would have imposed a levy of $500 on employers, sponsors or the students themselves. This has been changed after lobbying to $100 on all J1 visa holders. It is my understanding that at present no such fee exists, which allows Irish students compete on a level playing field for employment opportunities during the summer. This situation may be at risk. There is also concern the legislation may mean Irish students would have to secure employment in the US before leaving Ireland and this is the key point. If this were to be part and parcel of the conditions it would be very restrictive. When most students travel to the United States they do so in the expectation and hope of getting employment and almost all do so through contacts, family friends, relations and the network of Irish Americans.

The Minister of State is aware the J1 visa has been hugely popular among students. It allows them an opportunity to live and work in the United States for up to four months over the summer holidays. While the Bill addresses the problem of illegal immigration in the United States it would be a pity to see the J1 programme being targeted as a consequence. In 2009, 6,700 students spent the summer in the United States. In 2012 almost 10,500 Irish students availed of the scheme, which is an increase of 54%. When I was young masses of Irish people went to the United States and many of them ended up staying as undocumented. At least two Cabinet Ministers have stated they spent time in the United States under the scheme.

I ask that the $100 charge be reconsidered and I ask the Minister of State to clarify whether work must be guaranteed before a student is able to travel. If this is the case it will have serious consequences for many students.

I also availed of the J1 visa when I was a student and I found it very useful and valuable. We would certainly like to protect it and it should not be undermined in any way.

The Government fully supports the valuable opportunity the Jl summer work and travel programme provides for Irish students who wish to work and travel in the United States during the summer period. The participation of tens of thousands of young Irish people in the programme has made an important contribution to the development of our bilateral relationship. The issue of possible changes to the Jl programme forms part of the broader context of immigration reform in the United States.

As the Deputy will be aware, the welfare of the Irish abroad has been a top priority for successive Governments. In particular, the plight of the undocumented Irish in the United States has been a cause of concern for many years and this Government has been committed to a resolution of their situation. In this regard, the Government has actively pursued our interests in the ongoing debate on immigration reform.

I very much welcome the vote last week by the United States Senate to approve a Bill that provides for comprehensive reform of the American immigration system. That is a very positive development that takes us another step closer to addressing the problems faced by undocumented Irish emigrants in the United States. I strongly welcome the provisions in the Bill passed by the Senate to address the concerns of undocumented Irish emigrants and the specific E3 provisions for Ireland that provide a legal pathway for the future.

(Interruptions).

The Minister of State's telephone could be interfering with the sound system.

They are bugging the Minister of State's telephone.

There is a buzz about the place.

I do not think it is my telephone.

Earlier versions of the Bill and some amendments sought to make changes to the Jl summer programme. These changes would have included the classification of Jl summer participants as "foreign labourers", thereby imposing heavy additional obligations on their employers and the sponsoring organisations who operate the programme. There was also a proposal for each sponsoring organisation to pay a fee of $500 per participant. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade listened closely to the concerns of the operators in Ireland and the United States, who feared that this fee would render the programme financially unsustainable and force them to withdraw from it. The Tánaiste wrote to the Secretary of State, Mr. Kerry, to express his deeply-held concerns on this issue. The Tánaiste also spoke directly to Senator Patrick Leahy, chair of the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, to explain the impact the measures would have on the many Irish students who benefit each year. Following interventions by the Tánaiste as well as intensive lobbying by the embassy, Jl operators and student groups, I am pleased that the Bill as passed by the Senate includes provisions that will allow for continuation of the summer Jl visa programme that has meant so much to successive generations of young Irish people. Jl participants are no longer classified as "foreign labourers" and the proposed additional fee has been reduced to $100, payable by either the sponsoring organisation or the student. I look forward to the continued successful operation of the programme in future years. The legislative process in the United States remains ongoing and we will continue to monitor developments and seek suitable opportunities to highlight our interest and improve the scheme.

I compliment the Tánaiste and embassy staff on the work they have done to secure a reduction in the fee. It is regrettable that there is a fee at all but $100 is much more affordable than $500. On the conclusion of the previous business, tribute was paid to staff in the various diplomatic missions across Europe on the work they did during the Presidency. I wish to commend the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Coveney, and his team and to put on record my appreciation for what they did with the CAP, and also to embassy staff with regard to this matter.

Is it the case that if J1 participants are not classified as foreign labourers they will not need to secure employment before departing to the United States? If that is possible then the Bill as passed by the Senate will be acceptable.

My understanding is that J1 visas will operate on the same basis, namely, that no employment is required prior to departure to the United States. Furthermore, the Bill now moves on to the House of Representatives and the Government will continue to seek to influence the stakeholders there. The Tánaiste will visit Washington next week and he will meet with key players on Capitol Hill in regard to this and other matters, in particular areas of immigration reform, resolution of the problem of the undocumented where progress is clearly being made, the provision of further legal migration from this country via the E3 scheme and the accessibility of the J1 summer programme. All of those matters are on the agenda. The best work is done on a person-to-person basis, in particular in our bilateral relations with the United States. That will continue very strongly. The matter of J1 visas, as raised by the Deputy, was largely resolved on a one-to-one basis by the Taoiseach and the work that was done in the embassies as well.

We wish to resolve the situation for undocumented Irish emigrants and to ensure that through the resolution there is no negative effect on J1 summer visas, in particular for students travelling to the United States. We will continue to monitor the situation.

Abortion Services

I am pleased the Minister of State is present to respond to the Topical Issue matter I raise.

The recent revelations published by a major German magazine showing that the United States engaged in surveillance at European Union offices at key locations is a most disappointing development. The allegation that telephone lines and computer networks of European Union offices in Brussels were tapped by the American National Security Agency under its so-called PRISM surveillance programme must be investigated. There is no other way of viewing the collection of up to 500,000 e-mails, telephone calls and text messages each month in Germany alone other than as a gross breach of trust between the United States and European Union nations. This has, without question, the potential to damage the vital European Union-United States relationship on which so much relies at a particularly sensitive time in the negotiations on the transatlantic trade agreement. It also undermines the credibility of the United States in taking a strong stand against cyber-espionage, particularly from China.

These revelations, if true, show that the United States has engaged in actions which are most unacceptable and certainly not good diplomacy. These actions have provoked a feeling of justifiable hurt on this side of the Atlantic as Europeans are being targeted by unwarranted surveillance for unknown objectives. As allies and supporters of the United States, European countries and the institutions of the European Union deserve more respect than that. We understand that in an increasingly complex world where there is a continuing need to be vigilant against international terrorism, surveillance is a necessary element of national security policy. I cannot see how the actions of the United States in this instance could protect national security in any way. After all, our embassies and EU offices are hardly any threat to the security of the United States. This raises the question of whether the United States has been using surveillance to advance its own economic and political interests to the detriment of the interests of the European Union.

If true, this would be an unforgivable abuse of power. If it is not the case, we must seek clarification as to why this occurred.

The alleged use of the NATO headquarters in Brussels to spy on the European Council building, also in Brussels, is disturbing, given the latter's central and sensitive role in deciding EU policy. Has the Tánaiste been in contact with his EU colleagues to discuss how best to approach these revelations and have these matters dealt with without delay?

The allegations referred to by the Deputy, if true, are naturally of concern to all EU member states. The European External Action Service, EEAS, of the EU has sought clarification of the situation in Washington and Brussels. The Government also expressed its concerns to the US Embassy in Dublin at a senior official level and looks forward to clarification being provided in response to the EU's request. Ireland is not one of the member states identified in the media reports to date. I understand that the High Representative, Baroness Catherine Ashton, has also discussed this matter directly with Secretary of State Kerry in a meeting in Brunei.

At a press conference in Tanzania yesterday, President Obama emphasised the importance of the US's relationship with Europe and gave a firm undertaking to examine these allegations and to provide "all the information that our allies want". I welcome this clear statement and undertaking.

The House will appreciate that it is not the practice to comment in detail on surveillance and security issues and that the Minister for Justice and Equality has primary responsibility in this area. There is a comprehensive legal regime in place to deal with these matters in this jurisdiction. Under the Communications (Retention of Data) Act 2011, access may only be granted following a request to the particular mobile telephone company or Internet provider in connection with the prevention, detection, investigation or prosecution of a serious offence, the safeguarding of the security of the State or the saving of human life. Access to call content is governed by the Interception of Postal Packets and Telecommunications Messages (Regulation) Act 1993 and may only take place under ministerial warrant. The operation of this is subject to judicial oversight. There are also procedures in place under mutual assistance legislation to cover requests to and from other countries for this type of information.

The relationship between the US and Europe continues to be of vital strategic, political and economic importance. We share a common strong commitment to fundamental human rights, democracy and the rule of law and work closely together to promote these values in a global context. It is within this broad context that matters such as the recent media reports of alleged US surveillance of EU premises must be assessed. It is equally true that close partners must be direct and transparent in their dealings with each other.

Together, the EU and US account for almost half of global GDP and 30% of global trade. Important progress was made during Ireland's Presidency of the European Union towards the achievement of greater levels of free trade between the EU and the US through the launch of negotiations on a transatlantic trade and investment partnership. If successfully concluded, these negotiations could result in the creation of up 15 million additional jobs.

Ireland continues to enjoy a close bilateral political and economic relationship with the US, underpinned by the extensive connections between our two peoples. Today, some 500 US companies employ more than 100,000 people in this country with a similar number of people employed by Irish companies in the US. President Obama's address to students in Belfast on 17 June was a timely and welcome reminder of the vital role the US played and continues to play in building peace and reconciliation on this island.

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I welcome that he put on record the fact that Irish companies provide a significant amount of employment in the US. The employment provided by US companies in our country is also welcome.

I am glad the High Representative has raised this matter with the Secretary of State. A timeline should be set for her to revert to each member state of the EU with a reply. At EU level, the system is often slow to respond, but this issue should not be allowed to drift.

The Minister of State mentioned that the Government had expressed its concerns to the US Embassy at a senior official level. Have these concerns been conveyed by our officials, the Tánaiste or a Minister of State? It should be done at political level, pending the appointment of a new ambassador.

The Minister of State rightly referred to the potential for a US-EU trade agreement. From an Irish and EU point of view, this involves sensitive issues, given the agrifood sector and the need to protect the livestock industry. In any trade negotiation, each member state and trade bloc must carry out a great deal of policy work and strategising. The talks will continue for a considerable time. It is important that a clear message be sent, namely, that surveillance is not acceptable. All 28 EU member states deserve a clear reply from the US to the effect that there will be no breach of confidence in the long-standing and good working relationship shared by our two major trading blocs. Many EU member states have a large number of emigrants in the US. We have had a cordial and important economic relationship.

I agree with the Deputy's remarks in that respect. The Government and the EU responded rapidly to the allegations. I welcome the fact the High Representative immediately sought clarification and that President Obama has stated on record that he will provide "all the information that our allies want". I agree with the Deputy regarding a timeline, in that the sooner this situation is resolved and information is made available to us, the better. The EU and US are about to embark on negotiations on a new trade agreement. We share strong values. The US is a friendly entity towards the EU and its member states. Anything that would undermine this relationship is serious. It is important that we get results as quickly as possible.

As I mentioned when replying on the subject of J1 visas, the Tánaiste will be in Washington next week. I do not doubt that this issue will be on the agenda when he meets various representatives on Capitol Hill.

Primary Care Centres Provision

I thank the Chair for the opportunity to speak on the urgent need to ring-fence funding for the stalled primary care centre planned for Mellowes Road in Finglas, Dublin. To provide some background, the centre is in the capital expenditure plan and funding has been granted to get the project started. I warmly welcome this project, which Finglas needs badly. The site that the HSE identified as the best overall location is a Dublin City Council property on Mellowes Road in west Finglas. In order for the sale of land to go ahead, a vote was taken at the north west area committee meeting of local councillors the week before last. Unfortunately, apart from two Labour Party councillors who were in attendance, everyone else voted against the site's sale.

While councillors might have voted against the land's sale for various reasons, the main opposition revolved around the belief that the centre should be located in Finglas village. I respect people's right to decide based on where they believe it should be located. However, a site was already planned as an ideal location which had been decided by the HSE after much consideration. Essentially, this has resulted in the indefinite stalling of a badly needed primary care facility in Finglas. It could also seriously threaten the funding to build this state-of-the-art primary care centre in future.

At the moment there are not enough GPs located in Finglas west or south to serve a population of approximately 18,000. It is recommended that there should be one GP for every 1,500 people but there are insufficient GPs in the Finglas west and south areas. This location is also recognised as an area of high deprivation. It has acute health care needs that have been identified by the HSE and would be best met in the locality. The HSE has told all public representatives in the area that there is no alternative site that meets its needs in Finglas for this primary care centre to go ahead. The HSE has said that GPs have signed up for this project. The HSE has also told us that it has plans for it but does not have the site to build the primary care centre.

If the HSE does not meet its deadlines for the project, the funding for it may be in danger. That is my major concern. I am very worried that if the proposals fall down at this stage the residents of Finglas will not get the primary care centre they badly need and deserve.

Can the Minister of State with responsibility for primary care ring-fence the funding for the proposed primary care centre in Finglas, irrespective of what happens with the purchase of the Mellowes Road site? Can some flexibility concerning deadlines be given to the HSE's project team? Any time extension on the decision to withdraw funding would give the HSE project team and local representatives the possibility of coming up with a solution that will still meet the need that the people of Finglas deserve, which is a primary care centre there. I would greatly appreciate it if the Minister of State could respond to those questions.

I am taking this Topical Issue matter on behalf of the Minister for Health. The debate offers an opportunity to provide the House with a report on the delivery of a much needed primary care centre for Finglas, as Deputy Lyons has indicated. Finglas has been identified as a high priority location for the development of a primary care centre. Approval for a HSE direct-build primary care centre was made in 2012 in the context of the HSE's multi-annual capital plan.

Following the review of a number of sites in the area, the HSE identified a Dublin City Council-owned property on Mellowes Road, Finglas as the preferred site for the construction of the proposed new Finglas primary care centre. Subject to planning permission, the commercial terms for the sale were agreed with officials of Dublin City Council and approved by the HSE. This site was selected because it is centrally located in the catchment area which it is intended to serve; it has very good accessibility and is well served by bus routes; it is a generous green-field site, has future expansion capacity and there would be no impact on current services during the construction period; it would complement the HSE day care centre on Kildonan Road; it facilitates the establishment of GP services in this area; and local GPs have expressed significant interest, in discussions with the HSE, in being a part of this development in this specific location.

The HSE now advises that the north-west committee, which is a local area committee of Dublin City Council, has rejected the proposed sale of the Mellowes Road site to the HSE for use as a health care facility. A final decision is awaited from Dublin City Council. This is a very disappointing outcome for one of the most socially deprived areas in the country. The HSE remains committed to the development of this primary care centre and has appointed a design team which has commenced a preliminary design. The design is now on hold pending completion of the purchase. It was intended to submit the planning application once the site acquisition had been finalised.

An important feature of the HSE's construction programme is that it recognises the construction dynamic - that construction projects can develop at different paces - and as a consequence it is multi-annual. Ring-fencing this project's estimated construction costs - Deputy Lyons has specifically raised this issue - would cut across the multi-annual concept and be counter-productive, as funds ring-fenced but not spent in a given year must be surrendered to the Exchequer at year end. That is clearly a difficulty but I note the question that Deputy Lyons has raised and I will ensure that the Minister for Health and the Minister of State with responsibility for primary care are made aware of it.

This project's progress and its estimated costs, as is the case for all other projects, are reviewed and revised as appropriate at each stage of development. Primary care is central to the Government's policy objective to deliver an integrated and cost-effective health care system. The primary care strategy states that primary care is the appropriate setting to meet 90% to 95% of all health and personal social service needs.

Improving equity of access has the potential to improve health by ensuring that people know what services they are entitled to, how to get those services and that there are no barriers, financial or otherwise, to receiving the services they need. Finglas has many urgent needs and the provision of a 21st century heath care facility will underpin and support our efforts to improve health and well-being in Finglas.

The current position is very disappointing but the Minister has urged a speedy resolution. This primary care centre is a priority health care facility which the HSE and the Department of Health are committed to delivering.

As regards the Deputy's other point on flexibility, I will bring that to the attention of both Ministers also.

I welcome the response that has been given by the Department of Health on this matter. It reiterates many of our concerns locally on the issue. I am glad to see that the response highlights it is disappointing to see that local politics has played a part in what could lead to local people not getting what they are entitled to, deserve and ultimately need.

As the Minister of State said, the particular location for this site is the best one on all grounds. I have also heard that from the HSE. In addition, her reply highlighted the fact that this is in an area of huge social deprivation. Those who need the service most would benefit from it because it would be on their doorsteps. It would also be accessible for people from all around the area by other modes of transport, including buses.

I thank the Minister of State for her positive response which recognises the need for this centre in its current location. I will continue to support this project at local level. I have spoken to the Minister of State with responsibility for primary care, Deputy Alex White, about this matter and he is aware of the situation. He is very concerned about the decision not to move to building on this particular site.

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, for taking on my concerns. I look forward to hopefully having a positive outcome. When we take politics out of this, the only winners at the end of the day should be the people of Finglas and nobody else.

As I said, I will certainly bring the matter to the attention of the Minister for Health and the Minister of State. It is important for people to recognise how funding operates and it is important to spend money that is allocated. If there is flexibility we will ensure that it is exercised. Speed is an issue here, however, and decisions will obviously have to be made regarding the site. The most important priority is that Finglas needs to get a primary care centre.

Housing Adaptation Grant Applications

The next Topical Issue is in the names of Deputies Seán Crowe and Dessie Ellis. Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh was originally included but is no longer available. Both Deputies have four minutes in total to make their initial statements.

Is the Minister of State aware of the difficulties that are facing such families? I am hoping that in her reply, she will outline what she will do about this matter. These grants can have the potential to transform people's lives, but there is a long wait involved. In some cases in my constituency, people can wait for up to three years for such grants. I am aware that some local authorities have suspended these grants, so some counties are hit harder than others.

I wish to outline two cases in my constituency. One concerns Daniel who lives in Rossfield in Tallaght. He is on dialysis and his life revolves around getting his dialysis treatment. He needs a sterile room and downstairs toilet. There is a chair lift in the house but he often does not make it.

It would transform the life of this man and that of his wife, Pauline, and their children if he could have his dialysis treatment in his own home. Despite that three years have passed his application for an extension has still not be approved.

I know of another woman in the area called Tracey, who is 20 stone in weight and has multiple cancers in respect of which she is being treated with steroids. This is affecting her bones and has led to the collapse of a couple of vertebrae in her back and her being unable to exercise, hence the weight gain. The difficulty Tracey has is that the stair lift in her home is not strong enough to support her weight, which means she has difficulty washing or using the toilet. Tracey relies on her children and elderly father to care for her and has been also waiting three years for a life-changing house adaptation.

How many families are in a similar situation? I have given two examples, which I am sure are repeated across the country.

There are roughly 3,500 people on the housing waiting list who are elderly or have a disability, which is approximately 3.5% of those waiting for social housing in this State. Many people placed on waiting lists will be able to obtain rent allowance. While an offer of unstable housing is no solution and seeks only to perpetuate the poverty trap, it is something at a time when little housing is available. Unfortunately for older people and for those with a disability this is not an option. These people require secure and suitable housing which meets their specific needs.

Grants are made available to make housing more suitable to specific needs and in recognition of the priority which people with special needs must take in the housing system. As in the case of all other forms of public services, it is the people who need the most that are catered for by the State as the market is unwilling to do so. For this reason, the 40% cut to adaptation grants announced in March this year is devastating. This is the only option for many people who require specific tailored housing to meet their needs. These people cannot go elsewhere and this cut is a door slamming in their faces.

I recently spoke to a young mother of two children, Victoria Gonzales, who was badly hurt in an accident. She spent a long time away from her family recovering in hospital. Following painstaking rehabilitation Victoria was ready to return to some form of independent living and to care for her children despite her paralysis. Her courage and dedication facing down her misfortune was rewarded with no support from the State and she was forced to live in a cramped room in Beaumont Hospital for almost two years. The Taoiseach personally promised her a home but nothing came of that August 2012 meeting. Until last week, Victoria had been 21 months in hospital away from her family and without any hope of change in her circumstances. However, following an article in The Sun, she has now been promised a home. Not every person in Victoria's circumstances will have their plight reported in an article in a national newspaper or have a chance meeting with a Taoiseach. Some people do not have the strength or courage which Victoria had to push forward and claim her rights.

Housing need has never been so high or severe. At one point, a medical priority was a good signifier of a person being housed soon. In some areas, this is now relatively meaningless. I deal with priority cases all of the time, many of which involve people who cannot go on in their current circumstances but somehow manage to scrape through their days. This is not discretionary spending; it is essential spending. It is not a pot that should be limited by over-zealous accounts but a fund to ensure those who need the most get the least they deserve, a secure home.

I thank Deputies Crowe and Ellis for raising this matter.

As Minister with responsibility for housing, I am keenly aware of the challenges we face in providing housing supports to a range of vulnerable groups. The problems facing the State's finances, which necessitate reducing public expenditure to sustainable levels, are impacting on capital programmes across the entire public service. My Department's housing capital programme is no exception. Regrettably, these steps are necessary to bring stability to the public finances. As a result, capital spending on housing programmes in 2013 is down on last year.

Within these constraints, I am determined to make the best use of the limited budget and to target those most in need. Accordingly, the social housing supply initiatives funded from the housing capital programme are now almost entirely focused on meeting the particular housing needs of the elderly, people with a disability and the homeless. Approximately €120 million is being dedicated to this important programme in 2013. New social housing supply is now largely delivered through the leasing of properties to augment the smaller numbers coming from the traditional capital funded construction programmes. I expect some 5,000 will be provided through this route in 2013.

I am also focusing on improving the quality and standard of the 130,000 social rented units. This will be done through a range of measures including regeneration, estate-wide remedial works and energy retrofitting of older houses and apartments. This year, I brought in a new measure, with funding of €10 million, which will specifically target older properties and involves the insulation of attics and walls, draught-proofing of windows and doors and the fitting of heating controls. Last month, as part of the Government's investment in infrastructure and jobs, I announced a €50 million insulation programme, which will target the 25,000 least energy efficient local authority houses and bring tangible benefits to these homeowners, in terms of fuel savings and comfort levels.

I am conscious that substantial grant funding was provided for improving and adapting private houses in recent times. During the past two years, almost 22,000 householders benefitted under the schemes. This year, I allocated 12.4% of the housing budget, some €34.2 million, to the grant schemes as compared with 13.2% in 2012. That said, there is no denying the fact that the actual financial allocation has decreased in line with a reducing capital budget. Allocations across all 34 city and county councils were made in as transparent and fair a way as possible. Between them, at the start of the year local authorities had contractual commitments in respect of approved grants totalling €18 million. Historically, local authorities have been encouraged to maintain continuity in terms of approving and paying grants. Commitments carried forward into the new financial year have always had first call on the available funding. This year, each authority was allocated the full amount of its contractual commitments and the balance of the available funding was allocated on the basis of each authority's share of the new applications on hand in January 2013. As such, it was a completely fair and transparent system. I believe this to be an equitable way of apportioning the funding, although I appreciate this approach has resulted in lower than expected allocations for some authorities.

I accept that particular difficulties are arising in some local authorities and I am taking steps to address this. I have set aside a small contingency to deal with these and I approved additional allocations totalling €1.2 million for 13 local authorities. Dublin City Council and South Dublin County Council applied for additional funding from this reserve and were notified of supplementary allocations of €118,063 and €126,111, respectively, on 22 April 2013, bringing the councils' overall allocation for 2013 to €5,050,383 and €1,340,098, respectively.

Through active management of my Department's overall housing budget for 2013, I am now in a position to allocate additional funding to two priority areas. First, there is a pressing need to augment the supply of special needs housing to meet the needs of people with a disability. Together with my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, I have published an implementation framework for the national strategy for people with disabilities. As a sign of my commitment to that implementation policy, I am allocating additional funding to support a call for proposals from local authorities, aimed at the acquisition of additional units of accommodation for persons with a disability. My Department asked local authorities to submit proposals in this regard by 16 July and I intend to announce a list of approved projects as soon as possible afterwards.

Second, I agree with the Deputies that additional funding is needed to address urgently needed adaptations and fittings that can facilitate people to remain in their own homes. I will be allocating additional funding to the grants measure. I hope to be in a position to notify local authorities of their increased allocations by the end of the month. I have managed to secure some additional funding, which I hope will help to address the specific cases raised by the Deputies and others throughout the country.

I welcome that the Minister of State has secured additional funding for this area. It would be useful if the Minister of State could at some stage provide the House with information on waiting lists for adaptation grants in each of the local authorities. I know from other Deputies that in some areas none is being provided. It would be terrible if a person with a serious illness had to move from one county to another to obtain a better outcome, in particular a person in need of dialysis who must have his or her treatment in hospital rather than at home. What is being done in this area, in terms of the cost of caring for a person in hospital versus adaptation of his or her home, is not cost effective.

Funding home adaptations could act as a stimulus in the sense that these are shovel-ready projects which could begin tomorrow, thus creating employment and generating money for the economy.

There is a crisis and I ask the Minister of State to produce some solutions. In my local authority area people are waiting for up to three years, and they may be waiting longer in other local authority areas. Those affected are in poor health and these delays are having negative psychological and physical effects on them and their families. While I welcome the additional funding provided, we must wait and see the extent to which it will transform the difficult circumstances in which many families find themselves.

I too welcome the additional funding to which the Minister of State referred. It is clear that small but essential adaptations, such as the installation of ramps and hand rails and the widening of doorways, have been placed on a lower priority list by Dublin City Council. In a number of cases, people are refusing to allow relatives to leave rehabilitation care or hospitals because they cannot have ramps installed or doorways widened to enable them to access their homes. While larger works to adapt homes will not be done in the current economic climate, people should at least be able to access their homes. Rather than having adaptations carried out, people are being told they will be placed on a transfer list and may secure a place elsewhere when one becomes available. This pulls people out of their communities and away from their families and neighbours who have helped and stood by them. This approach is to be deplored. We must not go down that road. It should be possible to look after people leaving hospital - for example, those who are on dialysis or who are grossly overweight. The current position is unacceptable.

Dublin City Council has indicated it has spent all the funding available for adaptation grants in 2013, primarily on priority cases. The council already has another list prepared for next year. It is not possible that this list of works will be completed, given the large number of priority cases. I ask the Minister of State to press local authorities to carry out minor works that would allow people to leave hospital, access their homes and enjoy some quality of life.

As I stated previously, I am reviewing the scheme to ensure the limits are correct and it is being used in the best way possible. While maximum spending limits apply in the schemes - the limit is up to €30,000 in one of the schemes - the average cost of works is much lower than the maximum limits. This indicates that local authorities are showing a good deal of flexibility. We have asked the local authorities not to suspend the processing of applications in case urgent cases arise. We want them to have a rolling system for processing applications rather than stopping schemes when they begin to run out of money. We also asked them to do this at the end of last year because there will always be cases that must be prioritised.

As I indicated, we have some additional moneys that can be allocated this year. As the Deputy noted, there are two funding streams, one for local authority houses and the other for private houses. I accept Deputy Crowe's point on the need to get a handle on whether the system is fair across local authorities and whether some local authorities have larger waiting lists than others. We hope the review will provide more information in that regard.

Top
Share