Peadar Tóibín
Question:1. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Taoiseach the total number of times taoisigh have issued State apologies in the past decade. [30823/23]
Ceisteanna - Questions
Taoiseach's Communications
Peadar Tóibín
Question:2. Deputy Peadar Tóibín asked the Taoiseach if he will list the State apologies issued by his Department in each of the past ten years. [30866/23]
Mary Lou McDonald
Question:3. Deputy Mary Lou McDonald asked the Taoiseach the State apologies issued by taoisigh since 2013. [32197/23]
Bríd Smith
Question:4. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Taoiseach to list the total number of State apologies issued by his Department since 2011. [32546/23]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 4, inclusive, together.
In the past ten years, apologies have been issued in the Dáil, by the Taoiseach on behalf of the State.
In February 2013, the then Taoiseach, Mr. Enda Kenny, issued an apology on behalf of the Government in Dáil Éireann to women who were resident in Magdalen laundries for hurt done to them and any stigma suffered by reason of their residence in those institutions. The Magdalen ex gratia scheme, as recommended by Mr. Justice John Quirke, was established following the publication of the McAleese report in February 2013. The Government has honoured its commitments to the Magdalen women by ensuring that Mr. Justice Quirke’s report and the recommendations of the Ombudsman's report of November 2017 are fully implemented.
On 22 October 2019, I issued an apology in the Dáil on behalf of the State to the women and their loved ones affected by failings in the CervicalCheck screening programme. The apology came on foot of Dr. Gabriel Scally’s scoping inquiry into CervicalCheck.
Since then, the Government has committed to learning lessons and positive progress has been made in this regard. All 170 actions in the implementation plan arising from the scoping inquiry are now completed. The Government is aware that the issues in CervicalCheck in 2018 led to a loss of trust in our screening services and we are working to rebuild trust by working with patients and their advocates to improve and develop services in all our screening programmes.
On 13 January 2022, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence, Deputy Micheál Martin, the then Taoiseach, issued a formal apology for the hurt experienced by many former residents of mother and baby institutions and county homes. He apologised for the profound generational wrong visited on Irish mothers and their children who ended up in a mother and baby home or a county home and for the shame and stigma which they were subjected to. As part of that apology, it was acknowledged that the State had failed in its duty of care to the mothers and children who spent time in these institutions.
Since January 2021, work has been advanced by the Minister for Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth on the Action Plan for Survivors and Former Residents of Mother and Baby Homes and County Home Institutions. The action plan commits to 22 actions across eight main themes.
In addition, in June 2018, on the 25th anniversary of the decriminalisation of homosexuality, I moved an all-party motion in the Dáil. As part of this motion, a sincere apology was offered to those individuals affected by the criminalisation of homosexual acts in Ireland and the hurt and the harm caused by the legislation was acknowledged. The Government continues to advocate for the LGBTQ+ community in Ireland including through hate crime legislation, the forthcoming ban on conversion practices and improvements to sexual health services.
The Taoiseach's predecessor, the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence, Deputy Micheál Martin, gave a commitment to open disclosure in the health services at the end of last year. This policy must also apply to Thalidomide survivors, who have been waiting on an apology for over 61 years. They deserve a just and fair deal to address their complex needs. The survivors need an apology, access to healthcare services and financial supports.
There are five mothers still alive and all they and their families want is an apology that makes it clear that this was not their fault. They did not create or cause Thalidomide.
In order to put some closure on this issue, survivors and mothers need to hear an apology. The Taoiseach has met - certainly Deputy Micheál Martin has met - with survivors and that is important. However, it has not led to any real action and a commitment for some justice and a fair deal and financial compensation.
Survivors are not getting any younger and it is increasingly important that the State issues an apology. The State has failed Thalidomide survivors. Only 40 survivors of Thalidomide are still alive and they are exhausted campaigning. Can the Taoiseach give a commitment to give them an apology, an apology which they deserve?
In her evidence to the Joint Committee on Health on 31 May, Dr. Marie O'Shea, the author of the report of the review of the operation of the termination of pregnancy Act stated, "if nothing is done, it is only a question of time before we see a repeat of Mellet v. Ireland and Whelan v. Ireland and [a future] Taoiseach standing up in the Dáil to make an apology and pay a sum of money to people". I remind everyone that Mellet v. Ireland and Whelan v. Ireland were two cases taken to United Nations human rights bodies that involved women affected by fatal foetal anomalies, prior to appeal, who were denied access to abortion care in Ireland. In 2016 and 2017, the UN human rights committee found that the State subjected both women to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, discrimination and interference with their right to privacy. Dr. O'Shea believes that the State continues to be in violation of its obligations in this area because the provisions of the 2018 Act are so restrictive and many people in that situation, which is tragic, still find themselves forced to travel to England. The latest statistics show that.
Does the Taoiseach agree with Dr. O'Shea that there is a possibility a future Taoiseach will have to make a State apology to women who are in these very tragic circumstances? How long will the Government continue to bury its head in the sand and refuse to deal with this situation?
The more I reflect on the various State apologies issued, the more I become convinced that the Government does not mean a word of it. Tomorrow we debate the amendments to the mother and baby homes Bill. The Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, snuck in a number of amendments in the Seanad. In my reading, amendments Nos. 4, 5 and 6 would exclude countless women from the redress scheme who were sent to mother and baby homes to give birth, and had their babies there, but were not held in those mother and baby homes. We know of huge cohorts of those who were born in those homes who will be excluded from the scheme. However, we were promised no mother or child would be excluded from this scheme. This is shocking. These women had their babies and those babies were forcibly removed from their mothers. Those mothers and babies were not held in the homes subsequently but they suffered significant trauma. Is it the Government's intention to exclude these significant cohorts? If it is, does that not contradict the apologies the Government has committed to these people?
I extend my deepest sympathies and condolences to the families, friends and classmates of Max Wall and Andrew O'Donnell. I simply cannot imagine the unbearable sense of loss, tragedy and devastation being felt by their families and friends. I also extend all my sympathy to the St. Michael's school community who have to bear this terrible loss.
Does the Taoiseach think we owe a State apology to families who are homeless through no fault of their own, and children who are now homeless in record numbers and are living in emergency accommodation? These are children and infants who, in many cases, do not have the room to crawl, or cannot bring a friend over for a sleepover or bring home friends to play. Many are showing delays in their development or are embarrassed to tell their friends and classmates that they are living in emergency accommodation and are homeless. What we are doing to children in these circumstances is abuse and neglect by the State; is that not a fair comment? Do they deserve an apology and some sort of urgency on the part of the State? In many cases, these are people who for several years now, as I have told the Taoiseach, have been living in these conditions with absolutely no prospect of being given a place to live.
One of the areas where the State may be compelled to issue an apology in the future relates to decisions taken during the Covid crisis, in particular, the decisions to prioritise private profit over public health. I will raise the matter of a Covid inquiry, which the Taoiseach was reported as saying will be set up this year and for which the terms of reference are being worked on. Will those terms of reference include the issue of long Covid? Unfortunately, this will be a growing issue. Approximately 10% of all those who get Covid are then affected by long Covid. A recent medical paper suggested that 65 million people worldwide are now suffering from long Covid. It is devastating for some of those people, with incredible levels of fatigue, brain fog, heart problems and all sorts of quite horrendous symptoms. Unless the world begins to act quite differently, this has the potential to be a mass, disabling event. Will long Covid be included in the terms of reference for the Covid inquiry?
I thank the Deputies for their questions. On the mother and baby homes institutions and the payment scheme in that regard, the establishment of the mother and baby institutional payments scheme is an important commitment in the Government's response to the final report of the Commission of Investigation into Mother and Baby Homes and certain related matters. The scheme we have proposed goes beyond what was recommended both by the commission and the expert group. The payment schemes Bill was published on 17 October 2022, was passed by the Dáil in February, and is currently before the Seanad. We are very keen to get that legislation done as soon as possible in order to have the scheme up and running and to make sure that those entitled to payments receive them. Work is under way on the establishment of an executive office in the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth to progress the scheme. An implementation steering group has also been established to oversee all aspects of the programme plan.
We have not agreed the terms of reference for a Covid inquiry yet. It is designed to be about the State's response to Covid as regards public health actions taken, the economic response and other responses, to see what was done right and wrong, what could have been done better, and to learn for future pandemics. I do not know whether it would be appropriate to examine long Covid as part of that. It is a condition that is diagnosed as a post-viral syndrome but whether a commission of inquiry is the right way to look at that-----
But if you are assessing the overall in terms of what you did during Covid-----
-----I just do not know at this stage.
-----clearly it has a negative impact.
I just cannot say that at this stage. It certainly will not be ignored.
On the issue of abortion, we live in a democracy. Laws on abortion in Ireland are made by the people, either by the Dáil or by the public through a referendum. A very clear decision was made in 1983, a subsequent decision was made by the public in the 1990s, and a very clear decision was made in 2018 to liberalise our laws, although with certain safeguards that were explained to the public at the time.
But the law has the review enshrined in it.
No matter what our laws are going to be in Ireland, there will always be people who think they are too liberal or who think they are too restrictive. People may decide to travel overseas-----
The review is part of the law. The Taoiseach does not seem to get it.
-----to jurisdictions where the laws are more liberal. I accept the review is in the law. I wrote the legislation with the then Minister for Health, Deputy Harris, and his colleagues. I absolutely understand that the review is part of the law. There is no requirement in the law for the Government to implement everything that is in the review, or for Parliament, which will ultimately decide, to do so.
Is there a requirement to ignore it?
The purpose of the review is that recommendations are made. Those are then studied, you decide which ones to accept or not, and then act from there. That is how a review works and how it has always worked.
If you ignore the review, why have it in there?
The Deputy should be aware of that.
On the wider issue of homelessness, as I have often said, homelessness is a stain on our society. It is something I and others find deeply shameful. It happens for all sorts of reasons. Of course, a big part of the context is the housing shortage, which makes the situation so much worse. However, other factors are involved, for example, mental health issues and addiction. Family breakdown is one of the biggest causes of homelessness. Increasingly, homelessness is driven by migration. Approximately 40% of people who are homeless and in emergency accommodation are not Irish citizens. To say that the State is 100% to blame for all of that is too simplistic but, of course, the State is responsible for making the situation better in any way it can, by providing more housing, preventing people from falling into homelessness-----
Children first.
-----in the first place, and then getting them out of homelessness as quickly as we can.
However, it is a complex issue with lots of different issues to be teased out. I met a homeless family in my constituency only a week or two ago. I am doing my best to help them out. Homelessness can mean different things. They are in a two-bedroom apartment that is provided by the council. They do not have to pay any rent for it and they have turned down several offers of housing because they did not find it suitable. That is fair enough, maybe they are not suitable and I can understand why people would turn down offers. However, to say that the State is 100% to blame for everything to do with homelessness is too simplistic and I think the Deputy knows that. However, we are responsible for fixing it and for helping and that is exactly what we-----
There are a lot of people who are just trapped through no fault of their own.
-----are doing.
In relation to thalidomide survivors, there is a process of engagement currently under way with at least some of the survivors of thalidomide, although there are different groups and many different individuals involved. Progress has been made with respect to the provision of health and social care assistance to respond to the current and future needs of thalidomide survivors. The Government is committed to focusing on the needs of survivors now and into the future. I want to pick up on something Deputy Andrews said. I want to make it very clear that neither the mothers nor any of the survivors are in any way responsible for what happened to them. I think that is very clear and everyone understands that. The company is responsible for the medicine that was produced. It was not licensed by the State and medicines were not licensed by the State back then in the way that they are now. Compensation is paid by the company. It is an ongoing payment. Ex gratia payments are made by the State. Some have accepted that and some have not. There is a whole package of healthcare, medical and other assistance that is on offer. We encourage survivors to engage with the designated nurse to become aware of what is available to them in terms of healthcare and practical supports. Some have not done so, and I would hate to think that they are being discouraged from doing so in any way. I encourage any survivor to engage with a designated person to find out about all the additional healthcare and other supports that are already available, in addition to the financial compensation.
Certainly, when it comes to an apology, as I said before, I have made apologies in this House as Taoiseach. I have no difficulty making them, but I do know something about making an apology in this House. First, it has to be adequate; the people who receive the apology have to believe that it is adequate and sufficient. Also, it has to be sincere. You cannot apologise for things that did not happen, for example. Getting it right is very important.
Cabinet Committees
Neasa Hourigan
Question:5. Deputy Neasa Hourigan asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee that deals with drugs policy will next meet. [30915/23]
Bernard Durkan
Question:6. Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on health will meet next. [30964/23]
Mick Barry
Question:7. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on health will meet next. [32130/23]
Aindrias Moynihan
Question:8. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on health will meet next. [32450/23]
Pádraig O'Sullivan
Question:9. Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on health will meet next. [32451/23]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:10. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet Committee on health will next meet. [32540/23]
Bríd Smith
Question:11. Deputy Bríd Smith asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee that deals with health will next meet. [32547/23]
Gino Kenny
Question:12. Deputy Gino Kenny asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee on drugs policy will next meet. [32556/23]
Richard Boyd Barrett
Question:13. Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett asked the Taoiseach when the Cabinet committee that deals with disability will next meet [32550/23]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 5 to 13 together. The Cabinet committee on health last met on 19 June and is currently scheduled to meet next on 24 July. The Cabinet committee on health oversees the programme for Government commitments relating to health and receives detailed reports on identified policy areas. It considers the progress of health reforms including Sláintecare, the reform of disability services and the development of mental health services. The Cabinet committee also maintains an overview of public health, including the impact of Covid-19.
Drugs policy is multifaceted and involves work carried out by multiple Government Departments. The focus of a particular drug policy would inform which Cabinet committee considers it. In addition to the meetings of the full Cabinet and Cabinet committees, I meet with Ministers on an individual basis to focus on different issues. I meet regularly with the Minister for Health to discuss progress and challenges in the area of health, including the Sláintecare reform programme.
Sláintecare is happening with the support and oversight of the Department of the Taoiseach through the Cabinet committee on health, which I chair. It is about four main things: making healthcare more affordable, making it more accessible for our people, ensuring better outcomes for patients and reforming the way our health services operate. We are committed to expanding the core capacity of our acute hospitals with more health professionals and more acute hospital beds. Over the past three years, we have added nearly 1,000 hospital beds and 360 community beds, with further additional beds being planned for this year and next year. We have increased the total public health sector workforce by more than 20,000 since this Government was formed. That includes 6,500 extra nurses and midwives. We now have among the highest number of nurses and midwives per bed and per head in the world. There are 3,200 social care professionals and 2,000 doctors and dentists, bringing us to or slightly ahead of the OECD average.
There is a strong pipeline of capital projects, including several new hospitals and significant new facilities for existing hospitals. Just over €440 million is being provided to reduce waiting lists in 2023. Our multi-annual approach resulted in an overall reduction in the number of patients waiting more than ten to 12 weeks by 11% in 2022, with a target of a further reduction of approximately 10% for 2023. The funding includes €123 million on a recurrent basis for the HSE to introduce modernised care pathways and €80 million has been allocated to various primary care and community care initiatives.
The enhanced community care programme continues to improve healthcare at a more local level. This programme, which is investing €240 million in community health services, is easing pressure on hospitals and in more acute settings. The majority of community healthcare networks, community intervention teams and community support teams are now in place and are providing care closer to home. In the first full year post-implementation, it is projected that the community healthcare networks and community specialist teams will enable between 16,000 and 21,000 patients to avoid attendance at an emergency department.
Work is also ongoing on the reconfiguration of the HSE organisational structures into six new health regions and the establishment of elective care centres in Dublin, Cork and Galway, as well as surgical hubs in Dublin, Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford in the interim. We are also making healthcare more affordable at a time when the cost of living is affecting everyone. We have abolished inpatient hospital charges. We are widening eligibility for the GP card, which will allow hundreds of thousands more people to attend their GP without incurring fees. Deputies will be aware of the announcement that was made today that it will be extended to an extra 500,000 people by Christmas. The drug payment scheme threshold also was further reduced so that no individual or household will have to pay more than €80 a month for prescribed medicines.
There are eight contributors and they may speak for up to one minute each.
A constituent of mine recently received correspondence from Cork University Hospital informing him that he had been placed on a waiting list for cataract surgery. He rang the eye department at the hospital to ask what date he had been given for this surgery. The lady on the other end of the line gave him the date. She said it will be in July 2031. My constituent is 82 years of age. He said that that might be a bit of a problem. He said he would probably be in the departure lounge at that stage. The woman then asked him if he was planning on going on a holiday. My constituent laughed, a little bitterly, ended the telephone call and rang yours truly. We are here today to discuss that situation but, more broadly, as of April, there were 40,000 people on waiting lists for eye surgery in the State. What action does the Taoiseach intend to take to remedy this situation?
Does the Cabinet subcommittee on health have a focus on recruitment? It is a very significant issue that impacts community services right across the country. In my area of CHO 4, which is the area of Cork and Kerry, up to 20% of posts for home care assistants were left vacant. These are people who deliver services to people in their homes. This keeps them out of the hospital and allows them to more independently in their communities. It also gives backup to their carer. The Cope Foundation in Macroom, for example, was to have a seven-day service well over a year ago, but it struggled to recruit people. It has taken them until now to make headway on that. Similarly, we have looked abroad to make visas available to people to come into the EU and the country to work. Six months on, of those 1,000 visa applications, no more than 100 have been approved. There needs to be an urgency on recruiting people.
I was here two or three weeks ago and I asked the Taoiseach about an alleged underspend under the Primary Care Reimbursement Service, PCRS, for new drugs. We budgeted €30 million to be spent by the Minister in 2022, but I am being told that only €9.4 million of that has actually been drawn down. As a follow-up to that, I am still awaiting the Taoiseach's response. Yet, there seems to be a lot of secrecy around the national clinical programme, NCP, and the level of detail they are willing to give to me via a parliamentary question. I cannot find out if they are subject to audit, how often their performance is reviewed or how successful they are at doing their job. I am finding it very difficult to get straight answers to very simple questions, such as, for example, how many times the chief clinical officer has briefed the Minister for Health. That is another question to which I cannot get a direct response.
Can I get clarification on the money that was or was not drawn down? In the interests of transparency and so on, I just want to see if we are spending and allotting that money as budgeted for. If we are not doing so, can we not get the NCP to answer some basic questions?
With the publication of the summer economic statement today, the debate on what will happen in the budget is going to crank up. I want the Taoiseach to think about the fact that the cost of disability report suggests that people with disabilities have additional costs of €7,000 to €9,000 per year, but the disability allowance is €220 per week. In other words, the vast majority of people with disabilities in this country not only do not get the sort of support they need to deal with the additional costs of disability, but are left in poverty for life. To make matters worse, it is means tested and as a consequence some people are denied even that allowance, which to my mind flies directly in the face of the UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities. Can we expect in the budget that the Government will raise disability allowance, at least to the level that would take people on the disability allowance out of poverty and acknowledge the additional costs that people with disability have?
I want to raise again the question of Covid payments for front-line workers. We recently saw a protest by hospital cleaners, who were contract cleaners and who are being refused the €1,000 Covid payment, despite the fact that they work daily on the front line. Today it has come to my attention that section 39 workers who are personal care workers for people with disabilities have been refused the payment, and refused on appeal. I understand that this was a decision made by the Government because the workers do not fall into the criteria of any particular framework.
If you were not in this House and you were just out there doing your work and keeping your head down, you would think the Government did a great thing by giving all front-line workers a €1,000 general payment but there are cohorts being excluded even though they worked day in, day out on the front line. The particular cohort I want to ask the Taoiseach about, who have just been told about the loss of their appeal, are section 39 workers looking after people with severe disabilities day in, day out. They have been refused a mere €1,000 for working during Covid. The Government boasts about having a €6 billion surplus so how does it square that circle?
The Citizens' Assembly on Drugs Use is examining the issue of drug use and this is an important issue and assembly. Early indications are that the citizens in that assembly are moving towards a more progressive approach on drug use. That is welcome and it is a reflection of society but the big question is as follows: whatever the recommendations are, will this Government give a commitment to legislate on those recommendations during its lifetime? Without the law being changed, we will be back at square one, the way we are at the moment.
The programme for Government refers to the drug and alcohol task forces. It says that they "play a key role" in implementing the drug strategy; that the Government will continue to support them "in identifying local need in communities"; that it will "support targeted initiatives"; and that it will address "drug and alcohol misuse". The truth is there has been limited progress on this commitment to support those who are on the front line in dealing with the problems of drug abuse and addiction. The funding is dire. For example, the funding for the Tallaght Drug & Alcohol Task Force, of which I am a member, is still below what it was in 2010, despite the fact that the population has exploded, as have drug problems. One issue is that the Minister needs to engage with the task forces. We have a new Minister of State responsible for the drug strategy, Deputy Naughton. The Tallaght Drug & Alcohol Task Force wrote to the Minister of State seeking a meeting and was informed that the Minister of State was not available, with no alternative time being offered. At the very least, should she not be meeting the task forces?
I want to raise the issue of emergency call answering service, ECAS, operators in Navan. Emergency call answering services are critical services. This is a front-line health service. These operators deal professionally with people who are often in the worst crises of their lives. It is a stressful job of great importance. The ECAS workers in Meath have been involved in a longstanding dispute with the company that has the State contracts, namely British Telecom. Workers have made serious allegations of historic bullying and intimidation of 999 operators and the workers have been treated disgracefully. At the heart of the problem is the fact that the Government is awarding contracts to companies that refuse to recognise trade union membership. Will the Taoiseach direct the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to convince British Telecom of its responsibilities to engage with trade union representatives? Will the Government ensure that workers have a right to trade union membership and that this is always recognised in State contracts?
I would like to bring up the case of the Family Addiction Support Network in Dundalk. The Guerin report and the Drogheda implementation report spoke about the important work it does, particularly with families. It is sometimes the go-to body for those who are not necessarily comfortable with going to the Garda about drug debt, intimidation and the huge issues there are with those matters. Those involved have had numerous meetings with the HSE on funding, but it is not really cutting the mustard. They have even met an organisation that was provided funding and that asked it whether it could deal with some of its overflow. The Garda has carried out fundraising for this organisation because it sees it as necessary. The Minister for Justice has had many interactions with me before on this but we need to see some sort of sustainable funding for an organisation doing necessary work.
I will have to beg indulgence and forgiveness from colleagues as I was not able to take everything down as quickly as I was asked questions. My officials are keeping an eye on this and will come back to Deputies with written replies where I am unable to give a verbal reply.
In response to Deputy Barry's initial question, I am genuinely sorry to hear about his constituent's experience. The policy we have set out in Sláintecare is that nobody should have to wait more than ten to 12 weeks to see a specialist if they need to see one, or more than ten to 12 weeks to have an operation if they need it. We are unlike the vast majority of countries in the world in that we are getting closer to achieving that rather than moving further away. Waiting times in Ireland are considerably lower than they are in Britain, for example, or in Northern Ireland or many other places. However, we are a long way off where we need to be, with about 400,000 people still waiting more than ten to 12 weeks. I do not know about the individual circumstances of the case the Deputy raised but it is possible that the letter was an error. To get an appointment in eight years time would not be typical or anything near the normal waiting time for cataract treatment.
On what we are doing, we are expanding the additional public services, including in Cork. The Deputy will be familiar with the developments that are happening there with the new theatre. The National Treatment Purchase Fund is also an option. We regularly pay for people to go privately and have their operations done. Going cross-border is another option; people can travel to another EU country and the Government will reimburse them fully, not for their travel costs but for the cost of their consultations and operation. There is also an arrangement with Northern Ireland so there are many different options. We understand that people would like to have their operations done as close to home as possible.
Deputy Aindrias Moynihan mentioned the issue of recruitment, which is an enormous challenge and is discussed regularly at meetings of the Cabinet committee on health. There is a huge degree of turnover of staff in the health service. It is also an international labour market, with people coming and going from all parts of the world all of the time. However, we are succeeding, with 20,000 more people working in our health service than was the case three years ago, including 6,500 extra nurses and midwives. We have among the highest number of nurses and midwives per capita in the world. We have recruited 2,000 additional doctors and dentists, and hundreds more consultants, so we are going in the right direction. That is not in any way to deny the gaps that exist in many services and all over the country. It is a real challenge but one in which we are showing some results. We are seeing with the new consultant contract that there is increased interest from overseas. People are not just coming home but fully trained doctors from other countries are also seeing how attractive the consultant contract is in Ireland under the new Sláintecare contract.
Deputy Pádraig O'Sullivan raised the issue of the possible underspend on new drugs. I followed up on that at the time and I did not get a reply either. I thank the Deputy for reminding me and I will check up on it. I would be surprised if it is the case but if it is, I want to know.
We are always being told that we do not allocate enough for new medicines, so an underspend would be quite a surprise.
Deputy Boyd Barrett mentioned the cost of disability report. I am familiar with the report. I think it may have been commissioned by the Government, perhaps by the Minister, Deputy Humphreys. Of course there is a cost associated with disability, but it very much depends on the individual and the disability that they have, and therefore it is very hard to calculate. It could range from a small figure to a very high figure, depending on the person's individual circumstances. The disability allowance will be increased in the budget, but I cannot say at this stage by how much it will be increased. Of course, there are other things that we can do as well around service provision. There was a one-off payment last year as well.
On the payment of the Covid bonus to staff, we have always said that the Covid bonus was not for everyone. For example, gardaí did not get it. It was not for all front-line workers. The basic principle was that first, you should be a Government employee, and second, you should have been exposed to Covid patients on a daily basis. Essentially, that would involve people wearing gowns and gloves who were exposed to Covid patients on a daily basis before the vaccine was developed.
That is exactly what they were exposed to.
I do not know exactly what the individual circumstances are that the Deputy mentioned, but if she wants to send me the details I will certainly make further inquiries about them.
Deputy Gino Kenny raised the Citizens' Assembly on Drugs Use. When it makes its recommendations, they will be considered in good faith by the Government. As with the review that Deputy Bríd Smith mentioned, there is no obligation on the Government or the Oireachtas to accept every recommendation that is made. That would not be right. What we will do is to take seriously any recommendations that are made, consider them properly and in good faith, and then issue a reasoned response. There should not be any assumption or obligation on any democratically elected parliament or government to accept every recommendation that a body makes. That would not be right and would not make sense, in my view.
I will ask the Minister of State, Deputy Naughton, to come back to Deputy Paul Murphy directly on the Tallaght Drug & Alcohol Task Force.
Deputy Tóibín raised issues relating to our laws on trade unions. We are updating our laws on collective bargaining in line with European law. Our existing laws give people the right to join a trade union and protect them from victimisation, but they do not force employers to recognise trade unions. As one very senior former trade union official said to me, even if we could force employers to meet trade unions, we could not force them to come to an agreement. No government could impose an agreement on unions or on employers, unless it was done through the Labour Court system. That is a totally different system. That is a quasi-judicial system. It is not about negotiation. It is about hearing both sides of the argument and a recommendation being handed down. Government contracts reflect our laws, but we are in the process of updating our legislation around collective bargaining. Again, that basic principle needs to be widely understood. You could pass a law forcing employers to meet with unions, but could you ever pass a law that would force people to talk, negotiate or agree?
Let us take the first step first.
Indeed, the union side is very much against the idea of being forced to agree to something, because it wants to be able to have a ballot, etc. The same would apply to shareholders and a board. I did not quite catch Deputy Ó Murchú's question, but I will come back to him by correspondence.
Transport Policy
Neasa Hourigan
Question:14. Deputy Neasa Hourigan asked the Taoiseach the policy in his Department regarding the use of the Government jet. [30916/23]
Mick Barry
Question:15. Deputy Mick Barry asked the Taoiseach the policy in his Department regarding the use of the Government jet. [32131/23]
Paul Murphy
Question:16. Deputy Paul Murphy asked the Taoiseach the policy in his Department on use of the Government jet. [32543/23]
There are two speakers for these questions and we have run out of time. With Members' agreement, we will give 12 minutes to this slot.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 14 to 16, inclusive, together.
Requests for the use of the ministerial air transport service are made by Ministers' private secretaries to my office and are dealt with, in the first instance, by the staff of my office. Requests are examined by staff with regard to the need for and the purpose of travel, the destination, the availability and the suitability of other travel arrangements and other logistical details. Any necessary clarification or further information is then sought at this point. All operational matters are settled directly between the office of the Minister in question and the Department of Defence or the Air Corps.
I am slightly off topic here.
Get slightly on topic again, Deputy.
I will make a tangential connection. The group of people I am talking about here are not making a request for the use of the Government jet, but they deserve a bit of support from the State. I commend Jack Marley, who is the first Irish amateur boxer to qualify for the Olympic Games in the heavyweight division. He is from Monkstown Boxing Club in my local area. I also congratulate Seán Mari, who is from the same club. He did not qualify at the weekend but has a couple of other opportunities to do so. It is a tremendous achievement. The boxers are not looking to use the Government jet to get to the Olympics or some of the competitions they engage in. I attended the celebration in Sallynoggin last night, and was talking to Jack, Seán and their coaches. The thing that came across again and again, from the coaches and the boxers themselves, is that in order to reach a level where they are representing Ireland in the Olympics, they have to give up a huge amount of their time. Jack is 20 years old and there are lot of costs involved. The boxers have to give up time working and so on. Often, they are not offered great financial support to do that. In many cases, they have to train in very poor facilities. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council is finally moving towards giving them their own purpose-built facility, but many other amateur boxing clubs around the country do not have those sorts of facilities. I just think that as a tribute to the sort of success that Jack Marley has achieved, we should look at ways to support our young talent in boxing and other areas of sport who are reaching that very high level but often do not get the kind of financial support from the Government that allows them to continue at that level.
First of all, I join Deputy Boyd Barrett in congratulating Jack Marley, our first heavyweight boxer to qualify. I saw him on the news last night and was really impressed to see that so many of our athletes are qualifying at the moment. The rugby sevens men and women have qualified, and boxers and others have qualified too. We provide a significant amount of State funding for sport. We provide funding through national governing bodies. In the case of boxing, that is the Irish Athletic Boxing Association. That funding is for participation to encourage everyone to get involved in sport. There is also dedicated funding for high performance, particularly to help those elite athletes who can win medals for Ireland. Funding is provided through the sports capital programme as well. Billions have been invested in sporting facilities all over the country in the past ten years, including boxing facilities. There is also the National Sports Campus, which includes the Sport Ireland Institute and has some very good facilities for boxers which they use very effectively. I am very proud to have been involved in making that happen during my term as Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport in the 2011-14 period. There are also individual bursaries that are paid to athletes. It is not a huge amount of money, but it gives them some financial support, recognising that there are real costs associated with being a high-performance sportsperson, and also that there is loss of income because you cannot do the work you would like to do, or you have to put your career or your studies on the back foot for a period. Perhaps what we give them is not enough. The stipends are quite modest. I would certainly like to see them increase over the years and into the next Olympic cycle.