Skip to main content
Normal View

JOINT COMMITTEE ON HEALTH AND CHILDREN debate -
Thursday, 14 Jun 2012

Update on Health Issues: Discussion.

I remind members, witnesses and those in the public gallery that their mobile phones should be switched off fully. Apologies have been received from Senator Marc MacSharry and Deputy Michael Colreavy.

I welcome to this meeting the Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, the Minister of State, Deputy Róisín Shortall, Mr. Cathal Magee and representatives and officials from the Department of Health and the HSE who are here today for the quarterly meeting on health issues. We also propose to discuss the forthcoming EU Council of Ministers meeting in Brussels next week. If the Minister is agreeable, I propose we deal first with the briefing regarding the forthcoming EU Council meeting and then move on to the standard format of our quarterly meetings.

I remind witnesses of the position on privilege in respect of the evidence they give to the committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence on a particular matter and they continue to do so, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. They are directed that only evidence related to the considered matter should be given and are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable. Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice and ruling of the Chair to the effect that members should not comment on, criticise nor make charges against either a person outside the House or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

I welcome the Minister and the Minister of State and invite the Minister to make his opening remarks.

I thank the Chairman for the invitation here today to go through the normal range of questions. I have been asked to do a very short briefing on the forthcoming Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council, EPSCO. New scrutiny guidelines to be agreed under the 2011 programme for Government state that Ministers should be available on request to offer an oral briefing in advance of sectoral EU Council meetings in order to set out the Government's broad approach. I am happy to do that.

The Council meeting will be a two-day meeting over 21 and 22 June. This is the first time the Joint Committee on Health and Children has invited me, as Minister, to discuss the EPSCO council. Employment and social policy issues are to be covered on day one and health related issues will be covered on day two of the meeting. The meeting will be chaired by Ms Astrid Krag Kristensen, the Danish Minister for Health. The agenda will deal with legislative deliberations on the health for growth programme, a partial general approach; a proposed decision on serious cross-border threats to health; Council conclusions on antimicrobial resistance to be adopted; and other issues that arose in the field of health during the Danish Presidency and information from that Presidency.

In the informal meeting of Ministers in Denmark some months ago, our main focus was on the issue of chronic illnesses and patient empowerment, both issues very much of concern to our Government also. We are very much on the same page as most of Europe in our belief and understanding that we need to move as much care from hospitals, which are an expensive setting, to primary care where care can be more cost effective and far more convenient for patients. There is a unanimity of approach in that regard and a firm belief that this is where the future of our health services lie, because the current model, as we all know and as is known throughout Europe, is not sustainable, even without the serious fiscal crisis to deal with. Without delaying the meeting further, I will make a note of whatever questions members wish to raise on this issue.

If there are no questions on the EU meeting, we will move to the Minister's statement on the quarterly meeting.

With my colleagues, the Ministers of State, Deputies Kathleen Lynch and Shortall, I look forward to responding to members' questions and having a valuable discussion on the health services. As ever, I am sure that there will be good exchanges that will help to inform those members of the public who can view these meetings on the web. The Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, is in the Dáil Chamber and will join us at approximately noon.

As members are well aware, the health service and health policy has particular relevance for every citizen, be that citizen adult or child, male or female and wherever and in whatever circumstances he or she lives. Therefore, it is no surprise that the Government is fully committed not just to more efficient ways of delivering services, but to a fundamental reform of the health service. This was never going to be an easy task. The Government is implementing major reforms and introducing initiatives to improve the quality of the service at a time when our nation is the most economically challenged it has ever been. Since I took up office, €1.75 billion has needed to be taken from the health budget and 6,000 staff have left it. The health budget has been reduced by €2.5 billion during the past three years.

Unfortunately, we are still far from out of the woods in a financial sense. The health services will be expected to make further substantial reductions to help to bring the national finances under control. We cannot stand still in the face of increasing demands for services when at the same time resources must be severely curtailed. The health sector is facing significant financial challenges in 2012 and 2013, which I am sure Mr. Magee will address. The HSE's national service plan was prepared in the context of the challenges faced by the health services this year in terms of reduced staffing levels and budgets, combined with an increasing demand for services. It also took account of additional funding being invested this year in areas such as mental health services, primary care, the national clinical care programmes and children's services.

Along with the structural changes being implemented, the budget reductions are posing a serious financial challenge to the HSE and the executive is reporting a deficit in Vote terms of €169 million at the end of May. Based on the current rate of cash drawdown on the Vote, it is projected that there will be a deficit of between €450 million and €500 million in 2012. The HSE has set out a number of measures to address this emerging financial situation. These include requiring hospitals to bring activity levels back in line with targets set out in the national service plan, reducing the use of agency staff and implementing reforms under the Croke Park agreement to achieve the most cost effective use of human resources. In addition, my Department is assessing a range of cost containment proposals recently submitted by the HSE.

During the next few years, the Government will re-organise the health system to provide access based on need rather than income, underpinned by a strengthened primary care sector, a restructured hospital sector and a more transparent "money follows the patient" system of funding. We have already made good progress in the past year in driving change. The special delivery unity, SDU, which was established this time last year, is focusing on throughput of patients, reducing length of stay to international norms and having as many procedures as possible carried out as day cases. It has also ensured that we have same day data on trolley wait times, which enables problems to be identified early and immediate interventions to be applied. This is crucial. It is a question of having timely information to make decisions. Previously, we used information that was months or sometimes years out of date and not of much value. We need real-time information. I have informed the committee of problems in the past. Since a trolley count is now done at 8 a.m., 2 p.m. and 4 p.m., we are able to take action to avoid large numbers of people needing to wait on trolleys. Mr. Tony O'Brien has a chart that shows the number of people on trolleys in emergency departments for the first five months of this year as compared with the same period last year. Real, measurable progress is evident.

Despite the 6,000 people who have left the service since March 2011 and the money that has been removed from the health service, we have not only managed to maintain services, but to improve them as well. However, this is just progress and there remains a long way to go. It may seem daunting. I wish to thank every person in the SDU, in the clinical programmes and, in particular, on the front line for their great work, flexibility and innovation. This effort has not just enabled us to maintain a safe service, but to improve it. Large challenges remain and we do not doubt the ongoing need to work on ways of addressing them. Even if we were not in this financial situation, we would need to change the way in which we deliver care. Health consumes every cent and euro that we raise in income tax. We have a duty of care to the taxpayer as well as to the service's users.

The development of the clinical care programmes is defining the ideal care for patients that can then be implemented across the country, focusing on solutions that will improve the quality of patient care, improve access and save money. Other pressures intensify the scale of the challenges facing us. In the area of health determinants, lifestyle factors such as smoking, drinking and obesity continue to be issues of growing concern and have the potential to jeopardise many of the health gains achieved in recent years. The demands for high quality, accessible health care will not diminish in the years to come. The increasingly ageing population, with all that it implies in terms of health and social care needs, and the cost of provision make this a certainty, not a prediction.

Health requirements will increase to unsustainable levels unless urgent action is taken to address chronic disease. The new programmes will provide structured and integrated care for patients with long-term chronic conditions. This will mean treating patients at the lowest level of complexity and providing quality services at the lowest possible cost. Up to 95% of day-to-day health and social care needs can be met in the primary care setting. During the lifetime of the programme for Government, there will be a significant strengthening of the primary care sector, which will ultimately deliver universal primary care, with the removal of cost as a barrier to access. In parallel, work is advancing on the radical reform of the acute hospital sector through initiatives such as the SDU, the introduction of what is termed a "money follows the patient" funding model and the creation of independent not-for-profit hospital trusts.

We must stop paying lip-service to prevention and start paying for it. This is a societal issue, not just a health one. It involves the Departments of Education and Skills and Children and Youth Affairs. The three Departments involved have appointed a principal officer to address this issue. This issue also involves the Department of Justice and Equality in terms of having a safe environment in which to take exercise and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government in terms of providing safe, well-lit places in which to take exercise or public transport as opposed to relying on cars. A great deal of work must be done across the Departments. We are keen on seeing coherent, joined-up government during this Government's lifetime. We must address what is becoming an obesity and diabetic epidemic. If we do not take action, we may be the first generation to bury the generation following us. It is a horrible thought.

Other moves towards the implementation of universal health insurance will see important reforms in private health insurance, including the establishment of a new risk equalisation scheme, the restructuring of the private health insurance market and the implementation of changes to VHI as a result of the judgment by the European Court of Justice. We must keep the health insurance market as competitive and affordable as possible as we move towards a new system of universal health insurance.

We are attempting to achieve significant health service reforms at a time when overall resources are decreasing. To meet unavoidable pressures and Government commitments, maximum compliance with and flexibility under the terms of the Croke Park agreement must be achieved. At the end of last year, the Government published its comprehensive expenditure report for 2012 to 2014. In the report, the Government indicated that further savings of €1 billion in current health expenditure would be required. These targets include €350 million in nominal savings and approximately €500 million to fund unavoidable pressures, particularly in the area of community drugs schemes, additional superannuation costs and the fair deal nursing home scheme. A further €270 million in savings were identified to provide for investment to meet commitments in the programme for Government to develop services in the areas of mental health and primary care.

New and creative ways of working, the elimination of waste and optimal streamlining of our systems and processes will all be needed alongside the planned major structural reform of our health system. Significant work is being done to plan the pace and sequencing of the extensive changes required and to clarify the shape of the system that will result when the programme of change is delivered.

Our health services are essential to the functioning of our society. Our citizens expect and demand a modern, high quality, safe single-tier health service which guarantees access to care based on need, not on ability to pay. Our citizens expect a health service that is continually evolving and improving and delivering services more efficiently, more effectively and with fewer staff. It is the intention of the Government to provide such a health service for current and future generations.

I would like to inform the committee that the Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer Affairs Council will meet on 21 and 22 June. There are a number of important issues on the agenda and I have dealt with those.

We have talked about the situation with regard to health insurance. What insurers looking at our market want is certainty. By developing the risk equalisation scheme we published and which will be introduced in a Bill and legislated for in the autumn, we have given them that certainty. Consequently, we have the interest of a fourth participant in that market. I believe with that level of competition-----

A vote has been called in the Dáil. The Minister may conclude his opening remarks and then we will suspend proceedings and resume after the vote in the Dáil.

I am just about finished. I thank the members for their forbearance and time and I look forward to answering their questions. The point I was making is that by giving certainty in the market, we have attracted another insurer into the market and that must be to the benefit of consumers. I am given to understand that this insurer will be extremely competitive and I welcome that.

I propose to suspend proceedings until after the vote in the Dáil.

Sitting suspended at 11.55 a.m. and resumed at 12.15 p.m.

I apologise to our witnesses for the interruption to the meeting because of a vote in the Dáil. Democracy comes at a price.

I apologise for being one of the last people back to the committee room but it is difficult to get through the corridors unobstructed. I did not make any mention of my colleague, the new Secretary General, Dr. Ambrose McLoughlin. I welcome him before the committee and he is breaking with tradition, as Secretaries General did not come to the committee meetings in the past. He is making himself available. I also welcome Mr. Magee and his team from the HSE.

I confirm to the committee - although it is probably widely publicised already - that we have received the report on the national paediatric hospital review group headed by Dr. Frank Dolphin. It is a comprehensive report and many submissions were made. The terms of reference asked to outline the strengths and weakness of each of the proposals considered, including those for greenfield sites. I must now digest the report and I am engaging the services of one of the members of the review group, an architect and a quantity surveyor to validate many of the figures put forward by the various proposers and check planning considerations in more detail. This is a very important project for the Government and the country, and we want to expedite the process and build as quickly as possible. However, we do not want another false start so we will not rush it.

Is there a timeline?

We will bring this to the Government for a final decision either just before or immediately after the summer break.

On behalf of the committee I welcome Dr. McLoughlin before the committee and thank him for being here today. I acknowledge receipt of a copy of the Department's strategic plan for 2011 to 2014, and we look forward to having Dr. McLoughlin before the committee again to discuss that document. I thank Mr. Magee for being here and ask him to make his opening remarks.

Mr. Cathal Magee

I thank the committee for the invitation. I am joined by a number of my colleagues. They are Ms Laverne McGuinness, the national director for integrated services; Dr. Phillip Crowley, the national director for quality and patient safety; Mr. Liam Woods, national director of finance; and Mr. Barry O'Brien, national director of human resources.

Our health services are facing challenges on a scale not experienced before. The fallout from Ireland's economic downturn has hit our health services hard and as the Minister stated, over the past two years, total budget reductions in the HSE of €1.75 billion have been implemented. The total cost reduction target in 2012 is a further €750 million. Staff levels have been reduced by over 9,000 since peak employment levels in 2007 and the cost reductions in the HSE to date have been delivered while maintaining and growing the service levels to patients and clients for our major service areas.

This contraction of resources is taking place at a time of accelerating demand for the provision of health and social care services. Demand for health services continues to grow as a result of population increases, demographic changes, economic changes and medical advancements. Our population has grown by 17% since 2002 and we have the highest birth rate in the EU. The numbers of older people will increase by about 300,000 people or 60% in the next 13 years, and the number of adults with chronic conditions will increase by 40% or 290,000 people by 2020. These are all contributing to increased demand for our services, which is evident in our activity levels in 2012.

The rate of unemployment has risen to 14.2% in April 2012 and over 1.76 million individuals, or 37% of the population, are now eligible for the range of health services covered by medical cards. This is a 50% increase since 2005 and is the highest number of people ever recorded in receipt of a medical card. The economic environment has significant impact on the numbers of people who previously were in a position to contribute towards the cost of their health care but are no longer in that position.

Service activity continues to grow, particularly across the majority of acute hospitals, placing considerable demand on resources. As of April 2012, compared to the same period in 2011, emergency admissions to acute hospitals are 5.9% above targets set out in the national service plan target and 1.4% higher than the same period last year. Elective admissions are 5.1% ahead of the level in the same period in 2011, with inpatient discharges 7.4% above the national service plan 2012 target. Day case rates are 4.3% above the targets in the plan and almost 2% higher than the same period last year. At the end of April 2012, the number of beds closed for both inpatient and day case beds had decreased nationally when compared to the same period last year by 141 inpatient beds, or 16%, and 32 day case beds. I have set out in the circulated documents the position on GP out-of-hours contracts, average length of stay and medical cards up to 1 April. For medical cards, in April alone almost 19,000 medical cards were added. That trend continues to grow.

The April performance report of the HSE shows a deficit of €197.3 million, which is 4.7%. Hospitals represent €106 million of the deficit, with community services, including child care, at €54 million and primary care reimbursement schemes at €45 million. There are small off-setting surpluses in the corporate area. The budget deficit at the end of April in a number of large acute hospitals includes Limerick regional hospital group at €9 million, Galway University Hospital at €7 million, Beaumont Hospital at €8 million, Tallaght hospital at €7.5 million, Our Lady of Lourdes, Drogheda and St. Vincent's University Hospital at €6 million each and Mater Misericordiae Hospital and Cork University Hospital at €5 million each.

It is interesting to put those numbers in context. Taking the trend lines and costs on a year-on-year basis rather than against budget, isolating some of the additional lump sum costs associated with the retirements at the end of last February, additional medical cards and some of the costs associated with the fair deal scheme, the underlying trend shows a reduction of €105 million or 2.5% over the period in 2011. The point is that significant cost reductions are taking place but they are not sufficient to meet the budgetary targets, particularly when we deal with the extra developments also being funded. I should put on the record that although hospitals are showing significant deficits, on a year-on-year basis they are spending less money than they did last year. Stripping out the lump sum costs included in some of the voluntary hospitals, the figure is almost 2.7% below the previous year. We are seeing significant cost reduction and pressure on new developments and levels of activity, although budget targets are not being met.

The service plan for 2012 was based upon delivering upon certain cost reductions and reduced service activity levels. The main areas of cost reduction included drug costs and pricing at €124 million, pay costs of €183 million and procurement at €50 million, as well as a requirement to deliver increased income targets in terms of both collections and billings at €125 million. The total required reductions in the service plan were €750 million, in addition to the delivery of very significant reductions in each of the past three years.

The experience in the year to date, as outlined above, is that service activity in acute hospitals is significantly over the national service plan targets, which is leading to increased staff and treatment costs. Additionally, hospitals brought forward a deficit of €130 million as part of the overall challenge. The required drug cost savings are not emerging yet and the negotiations on price reductions with the Irish Pharmaceutical Healthcare Association, IPHA, are ongoing. They are proving to be protracted. While income is slightly behind target at the end of April, the additional target of €125 million is not profiled for receipt until later in the year.

Each region is implementing challenging cost containment plans to address the budgetary deficits and the HSE is engaged in ongoing dialogue with the Department of Health relating to further measures required at this stage. A revised health sector action plan 2012 under the Croke Park agreement has been developed to support the delivery of the HSE national service plan by facilitating the fast tracking measures required to deliver essential health and personal social services across the country within the context of reduced funding and staff numbers. I echo the comments of the Minister in complimenting the manner in which the staff in our service are responding.

Implementation of the national clinical programmes is driving a re-engineering of traditional models of care and service delivery. This relates to condition-specific programmes, such as heart failure, stroke and diabetes, and process-driven programmes such as emergency medicine and acute medicine. All of these are being designed and implemented by clinically led multidisciplinary teams, working in collaboration with the special delivery unit of the Department of Health.

We continue to maximise services through fast tracking new and more efficient ways of doing business, including how we deliver health care, improve productivity, develop more streamlined patient pathways and make our processes simpler and easier for patients to access and use our services. The delivery of health and social care services is labour intensive, with pay costs ranging from 70% to 90% of total unit operating costs. In view of the increased demand trends of recent years and the realities of the financial and funding constraints, new working paradigms will be required in the health system to sustain our current portfolio of services.

On my behalf and on behalf of the members, I thank the staff of the HSE, who are working hard providing a service to our patients and those who need it. There have been significant changes to work practices as a result of the Croke Park implementation agreement. I thank the staff for that. I welcome the Ministers of State at the Department of Health, Deputies Kathleen Lynch and Róisín Shortall.

I welcome the Minister, the Ministers of State and the representatives of the HSE. I wish Dr. Ambrose McLoughlin the very best in his appointment as Secretary General of the Department of Health at a challenging time.

Mr. Magee was trying to point out that cost overruns are significant but not insurmountable. If we continue at this pace, we will have great difficulty in August or September and there will be a potential budget overrun of €500 million by the end of the year. What measures are being taken to address the issue? Year after year, we have this difficulty. By the time the problems are addressed, it is late in the year and fire brigade action leads to the closure of wards and theatres. Can Mr. Magee give us a commitment that, in addressing the budget deficits in hospital and community sectors, decisions will be made sooner rather than later to address the budget deficit? I find it amazing that it is June and we are already talking about massive overruns. There has been a reduction in its budget but the HSE is obligated to live within its budget and has been told to do so by the Minister. The organisation is far from being within its budget. Where do the savings come from?

Does Mr. Magee genuinely believe the Croke Park agreement is functioning to full effect and implementing the changes required in respect of rostering, relocation of staff and increased efficiency and productivity? I concur with the comment of the Chairman on the professionalism of those delivering health care in this country. Everyone says that on a regular basis. When they are crying out for help and pointing out compromises of patient safety, difficult work practices and what they are forced to do in difficult circumstances to deliver health care, we should listen to them. The conditions staff had to work under was highlighted by the HIQA report into Tallaght hospital.

With regard to home help and home care, the Minister said the special delivery unit is reducing the trolley count. We cannot adjudicate success as reducing trolley counts if we have problems elsewhere. We cannot judge the health service by the reduction in trolley counts. There is a major issue in respect of bed days being lost because people are not discharged in a timely fashion. I submitted a parliamentary question to the Minister and the reply stated that 93,000 bed days were lost because of late discharge since 1 January. Such people are deemed to be medically fit for discharge, fit for home with additional support or awaiting transfer to off-site rehabilitation or non-acute residential care settings. The figures do not necessarily reflect patients who have been assessed as suitable for nursing homes. Even more bed days may have been lost through late discharge.

The Minister and the HSE will say the home help service will deliver the number of hours but it will not. The situation on the ground is different to what is being described in the boardroom of the HSE. There is a major reduction in home help hours and home care packages are far behind the profile of the budget intention to provide the same number of hours as 2011. That is clearly not happening. We also have a reduction in the number of long-stay community nursing home beds. With the emphasis on the trolley count, where do people go when we want to get them out of the acute hospital? That is a major problem in trying to deliver throughput in the acute hospital system. The Minister and the HSE should revisit the issue of home help and home care packages at the very least. It is unacceptable that there was a suggestion of reducing it to an hour to 45 minutes in some places. It is bizarre that the HSE puts so many obstacles in their way to get home when its policy is to get people out of hospitals.

The Minister spoke about universal primary health care at the end of the lifetime of this Government. Has a cost analysis been done in view of budget pressures? The Minister said he is setting up a group to assess the costs and implementation of universal primary care. There will be a major cost and there has so far been no negotiation with the primary providers, GPs, and no formal discussion on how they will deliver universal primary care. This is a contractual issue. GPs will have to be consulted and a formal contract will have to be drafted with individual GPs to implement universal primary care if it comes about. There will be a major cost because this is not free. We have yet to be told where the money will come from. It will be free at the point of going to the GP surgeries but someone must pay for it. Will additional funding be made available over and above what is currently allocated to the HSE through the Department? Some 16 months have passed since the last election and the Minister has a mandate. Only three and a half years remain in the lifetime of this Government. What areas will suffer in the event of universal primary health care? There does not seem to be a budget available to it.

Regarding universal health insurance and universal primary care, must these issues be put to the troika for discussion? Was there a discussion with the troika on the implementation of universal primary care and the policy of universal health insurance? The high-tech drugs scheme is an issue which needs to be revisited. The Minister said IPI was being made available but my reports are that this is not the case as yet. Other high-tech innovative drugs are not being made available and I am a little concerned there may be budgetary pressures and this is slowing up the process of assessing and formally making these drugs available to patients. I refer to gilenya which is made by Novartis and several other drugs used in the treatment of bipolar disorder. These drugs have been recommended to be made available yet there is a major delay. Is it a HSE policy to delay making these drugs available?

The Minister has stated he will implement universal health insurance over a longer period. He stressed the importance of competition in the market place by having a number of health insurance companies. I refer to a hospital situated in the Chairman's constituency in Cork and which is standing idle. The VHI has refused to provide cover for this hospital. This goes against the grain of the policy of competition not only in terms of the number of insurers but also in the number of health providers. I would have assumed that more hospitals tendering for work and making places available would drive down costs. It seems bizarre that a new hospital is effectively mothballed. It contains four state-of-the-art theatres and 70 beds. It is a wonderful facility which I know the Chairman has visited although I am not sure if the Minister has seen it yet. The VHI has decided that there are sufficient hospital beds available. I would have thought that with the advent of universal health insurance, the first result would be competition in the health insurance market and competition among the providers of services. It goes against the Minister's policy that the VHI has refused to cover that hospital. If this is the case in Cork, it will discourage many others from investing in the delivery of health care.

I have received correspondence from Older and Bolder and other advocacy groups with regard to the national strategy on positive ageing. These groups are very concerned at the delays in the delivery of that strategy. I ask the Minister to explain the delay in this commitment.

I wish to join with the Cathaoirleach in extending a warm welcome to the new Secretary General of the Department of Health, Dr. Ambrose McLoughlin. Tá fáilte romhat.

We know that we are in the midst of a deep economic recession and that the health services are challenged seriously by that reality. Despite the fact that sincere efforts have been made within the HSE to cope with and contend with the situation and the efforts of both the Minister and the chief executive officer to talk up - I mean no disrespect to them - some of what has been achieved and I acknowledge there have been achievements, nevertheless, the picture that comes across is a bleak one. We are looking at a situation where, in the Minister's own contribution he has acknowledged that €2.5 billion has been taken out of the health budget over the past three years. We know this has impacted on front line care of patients and it was acknowledged in the HSE's 2012 service plan that this would be the case.

I ask the Minister to say what further cuts in the health budget are planned. The Department of Health statement of strategy 2011 to 2014 states that,

"Total current expenditure for the public health service has been reduced by nearly €1.1 billion in nominal terms over the period 2011 to 2014, under the national recovery plan. However, in order to meet unavoidable pressures and Government commitments, in excess of €2 billion will have to be taken out of the health budget over the same period."

I ask the Minister to clarify these figures. He has stated that €2.5 billion was taken out over the past three years and the strategy refers to €1.1 billion in nominal terms over the period 2011 to 2014, and in excess of €2 billion over the same period. What will this mean for the period 2013 and 2014? I ask the Minister to provide the committee with a sense of what he and his Department are anticipating. What further billions will have to be taken out over those years? I use the phrase, "will have to be", quite uncomfortably. I would take a very different approach but the Minister is on course as part of current Government strategy and I ask what he anticipates in this context.

The Minister has repeatedly spoken of maximising the use of resources, including skills, etc. The chief executive officer in his presentation on maximising services referred to improving productivity, making processes simpler and making it easier for patients to access and use services. How can this be put in the context of some of the decisions that are being taken about service delivery in the different health areas? I have raised the example of my home base, Cavan General Hospital, with the Minister and the HSE. It is proposed to run the operating theatre on a week on, week off, basis for all but emergency procedures. Staff believe that this will not assist in reaching targeted savings because it will mean more work done out of hours in the weeks the theatre will be in full employ. It will obviously increase waiting lists. This does not dovetail with simpler and easier patient access rather it will contribute to ever-lengthening waiting lists and significant discomfort. It is not necessarily the case that people on elective lists are not in pain or suffering or discommoded significantly in their lives. I appeal to the Minister to intervene to prevent this cut and I appeal to the chief executive officer to also take it on board.

In the very limited time at my disposal, I wish to pose some questions, the first of which is about symphysiotomy. At the outset, I wish to acknowledge the all-party approach and to state that members of all parties and political opinion in this House share a very sincere concern and a collective anxiety to see this matter satisfactorily addressed for the remaining 180 to 200 women of a cohort in excess of 1,500. It must be noted that 85% of the women who were subjected to that barbaric procedure, as I view it, are now dead; they have passed on. There is an urgency and great concern about the report to be published today by Professor Una Walsh and the absence of any engagement. I acknowledge that a consultative process is under way and I ask the Minister to elaborate on how extensive this will be. I ask the Minister for an assurance that a decision on his part will be informed not only by the final report but by all of the other facts that are already established in respect of this matter and his personal expressed concern which is on the record of the House. We have to give these women hope that what is unfolding is not something which will be an obstacle to a final resolution of this matter for them and to closure for them to some extent. We have to show that we are working collectively as political voices towards fair and reasonable acknowledgement in every respect.

I refer to my second question, No. 17, on dignity for patients and the Minister's reply. In this instance, a cohort of men are victims of abuse within a hospital. These were young boys and men. To sit in a room with those victims is absolutely harrowing, to hear what they have experienced and what it has meant in their life's experience. I make no apology for referring to each of these instances because these are the real sore points that need to be addressed and the Minister already has a very good record of acknowledgement of the need to bring these matters to finality in a just and fair way with which I believe all political opinion must be in agreement.

I also refer to the PIP situation. On 29 March the chief medical officer came before the committee and spoke of a willingness on the part of the Department to facilitate, in a generous and humane way, the needs of these women in respect of removal of implants. While he may not have discussed their replacement, that is the course many will want to take. There has been a fall-down in communication. This is what has been advised to me as recently as this morning from several of the women who, mindful of the meeting today, have urged me to reflect their views to the Minister. The Minister has responded to Question No. 18 on the matter. I again use this opportunity to appeal to the Minister and to point out that we should be generous. We should look at these clinics which have implanted industrial level material in the bodies of these young women. We need to follow them subsequently and not the reverse. The women need to be treated first. Then, if there is any absence of willingness to properly face up to the responsibilities on the part of the clinics let us pursue them in the fullness of time.

A serious matter in respect of Cregg House in Sligo must be addressed. The Order of the Daughters of Wisdom maintains it cannot bridge the €1.3 million gap in funding which is a result of Government cutbacks. At issue is a facility that provides care, education and support for more than 200 people with an intellectual disability. I use the limited moments the Chair is signalling for me to appeal to the Minister to intervene in this matter. We should not allow the Cregg House situation to continue. The statement from the Daughters of Wisdom indicates that we will see the Cregg House facility and its support no longer in being. This is likely to be the end result. I use this opportunity on the record to ask the Minister to offer not only hope but certainty for the future of that facility.

I welcome the witnesses. In particular I welcome Mr. McLoughlin and I wish him the best of luck in his new role. I refer to the trolley analysis. The difficulty is that the trolley count is not reflecting the crisis taking place in hospitals at the moment. I have received a report from Sligo General Hospital, one of our local hospitals, of patients being moved around simply to avoid being counted as part of the trolley count. I was informed that an individual could have been delayed for up to three hours with a heart attack or acute myocardial infarction, AMI, before getting access to the coronary care unit, CCU, beds because they were being filled by medical patients to get them off the corridors and into hospital beds. This should not be happening in an acute hospital in this country. It is something Senator Henry, sitting beside me, has raised in the past in respect of the cardiac services in the north west. I hope such practices are not implemented to try to cover over issues in respect of trolley numbers.

I realise the special delivery unit, SDU, has done tremendous work to try to deal with the bottlenecks and to use the funds available to try to specifically address the associated problems. It was brought to my attention yesterday that, bizarrely, the SDU fund for delayed discharges does not include paediatric beds. I cannot understand why they are not included. It does not make the headlines as much as issues that arise in respect of the release of patients from paediatric beds who cannot get back into the community or who cannot get to a step-down facility. Surely, the fund should be made available for young people just as for older people.

A considerable part of the problem is access to home help. Getting a new allocation of home help seems to be an isolated rather than common practice. As I stated the last time the Minister was before the committee, in one primary, community and continuing care, PCCC, area the allocation is one minute per 250 persons of a population on a monthly basis. Such a scale of new allocation of hours is totally unacceptable. I understand that consideration is being given to breaking down the allocation to 15 minute slots rather than a one hour allocation to patients. We should not go down that road. We need to keep people in their homes and communities as much as possible.

Question No. 6 relates to a no-fault compensation scheme for the vaccine damaged children. This refers to a recommendation 11 years ago from the predecessor of this committee. A report was presented to the Minister's predecessor in September 2009. The report made a recommendation to introduce a no-fault compensation scheme. It is now the middle of 2012 and we are still considering the issue. Can the Minister provide some certainty for the families involved? They have been waiting for 40 years for some acknowledgement from the State that their children were damaged by vaccination programmes. They are now elderly individuals and are concerned about what will happen when they pass away. Surely, at this stage there must be some recognition of the issue and some certainty in respect of the care of their sons or daughters when they are no longer around.

The other question I asked relates to the ambulance services. I note from the response that more than half of echo calls, that is, life-threatening emergency calls relating to cardiac or respiratory arrest, were missed within eight minutes. This fails to meet the HIQA target. Most concerning is the 10% fall-off in respect of the response times when one compares the figures for February of this year to those of last year. In fact, a little more than 50% of calls were responded to within eight minutes last year but the number has gone under the 50% threshold by comparison with the figures for February this year. Why have we seen a 10% fall-off in respect of the response to serious emergency calls for ambulances?

I acknowledge the establishment of the new pilot emergency aeromedical service in Athlone. This is a welcome development. I seek clarification in respect of the role of the Irish Coast Guard. I understand the HSE pays funding to the Irish Coast Guard to provide a backup service. I realise the Irish Coast Guard is gaining the capability this year to provide such an aeromedical service. I seek clarification on how the Irish Coast Guard service dovetails with the service now operating out of Athlone.

We know there have been industrial relations issues at the new national aeromedical co-ordination centre relating to staffing. A commitment has been given and the response we received today is that six additional staff will be appointed by 2 July. When will these people be fully operational? They must go through a training process. What will the complement of staff be once they take up their posts? Will this fulfil the full complement of staff as recommended by HIQA? We have no wish to return to the situation which gave rise to what happened to Maedhbh McGivern. The family is very keen to ensure that is not replicated. Now that the centre has taken over the responsibility of the co-ordination of the air ambulance service, it is imperative that the resources and time and staff are put in place.

My final question relates to school-leavers with an intellectual disability. Deputy Ó Caoláin referred to the issue of Cregg House, Sligo. I would be grateful if the Minister would clarify the position. There is considerable concern among the parents. Is there an intention by the Department of Health to ensure that another provider will provide the service? The capacity remains within the facility to do so rather than to move up to 200 people out of the facility. Will the Minister clarify the intention? A crisis will arise in the coming weeks given that up to 700 young people will leave the education system this summer. They will need a place next September. I understand work has progressed in this regard and that the cases of many of those who would be availing of training places will be addressed by September, if they are not already addressed.

The big concern is in regard to those other supported placements that are not specifically training placements. There are additional specific costs involved and the families are extremely concerned. There is a need for a transitional process moving from the education setting into the new setting, whatever that may be. The families have heard nothing back from the service providers, which is unfair. It is the middle of June and those young people are finishing up in the next couple of weeks yet the parents have no idea what will happen next September.

The whole objective behind establishing an intellectual disability database was to ensure there would be planning and that crisis decisions would not have to be taken. I hope this issue can be addressed in the immediate future and that parents will be individually contacted regarding what plans will be put in place for their son or daughter from next September, rather than having to live in limbo in the coming months.

I will go through the various questions and direct them to where they may be best answered. I will let Mr. Magee deal with the potential budget overrun, although I point out there is an €800 million bill for overtime allowances and premium pay, with some €280 million for overtime alone. We cannot address our budgetary overrun without looking at that area and there is a new group looking across the finances of all our hospitals and services.

A number of speakers commented on trolley counts but this does not reflect the improvement overall. Some rather serious allegations were made by Deputy Naughten about people moving patients around in a very cynical fashion in order to achieve a trolley count. That is not something I would have any interest in and is something I would disapprove of. I am interested in reality, not perception. This is something that would be investigated. However, Mr. O'Brien might be in a better position than I to answer that question and he might also answer the Deputy's question around the paediatric situation. I will come back to the rest of Deputy Naughten's questions shortly.

I do not agree that trolley counts do not reflect improvement overall. One of the core points I have made since I became involved in politics, and something I have realised for a long time as a doctor involved in the health service, is that no part of the health service is an island unto itself. If one tries to fix the emergency department without fixing the inpatient problem, the outpatient problem, the community problem in terms of long-term care and the inflow into hospitals by not fixing primary care, on which I will defer to the Minister of State, Deputy Shortall, then one cannot fix any one part of it. We have to fix the entire service. Our approach has been to look at the entire health service system, to wit, there are new programmes coming in the clinical care area in regard to the care of older people, intermediate care, acute medicine and emergency medicine. We have already brought in a clinical programme in regard to stroke medicine which will hugely improve not alone the outcome for patients with stroke and save lives but also save a considerable amount of money.

The issue of delayed discharge will be addressed very much by the clinical care programmes, but I will allow Mr. Magee to address that issue in a more comprehensive fashion. Universal primary care was raised by Deputy Kelleher, who was rightly concerned. While there will be a need for some contractual changes, I will not go into any great detail on that and will allow the Minister of State, Deputy Shortall, to address it.

With regard to universal health insurance and the primary care extension of free GP care, neither of those is an issue for the troika per se but they must be achieved within budget. The troika is hugely supportive, however, of the concept of primary care being available and understands, as we do, that it makes no sense to have a financial barrier to that which is most cost effective and most convenient while there is no cost barrier to what is quite expensive and often very inconvenient, namely, hospital care.

The Deputy referred to the drug ipilimumab, the fact there are other new drugs and the fact the drug has not been available even though it has been passed. I will allow Mr. Magee to address that issue.

The Deputy also referred to the VHI's refusal to cover Mahon. As he knows, a court case in this regard began earlier this week. Although I will not comment on anything that is sub judice, I will make a more general comment about the role of the VHI. It is the role of the VHI to look after its customers and get the best return for its shareholder, namely me, representing the taxpayer. It is not the role of the VHI to determine the market, and I have made that very clear to it.

Deputy Ó Caoláin asked what further cuts will be made. At the start of the year, when we accepted the national service plan, we said it would come up for review again, particularly in light of the grace period and the implications this would have. The Deputy raised specific issues around the theatre at Cavan and so on. I will ask Mr. Magee to address those points.

The Deputy also raised the very serious issue of symphisiotomy and I appreciate his comments. We have had an all-party approach and nobody has tried to politicise this. We all have as our priority the well-being of the women concerned. I, as Minister, am acutely aware of many women who are advancing in years and who seek to have this resolved as soon as possible, which is my intention. The report which we have to date is only the first phase. It has gone for consultation, as the Deputy rightly points out, and we will then have a final report. We will act on that and, at that point, I want to review the legal advice available to me.

The Deputy referred to another case involving people who suffered abuse at Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital. There are cases pending and I have been advised by the Attorney General not to make any public statement on that directly as it could undermine the successful prosecution. In a more general sense, I know that funding has been sought to run an office for an individual who has been to the fore in representing people who have suffered at the hospital. We are considering that.

The question of counselling services is also crucial.

The Dignity 4 Patients service is a very valued service and we will certainly support it through lotto funding as best we can, and I have to consider that. However, I do not accept for one minute the contention by people who were not even qualified as counsellors when these abuses took place that the services offered by the HSE in regard to counselling is not as good as or equal to any other counselling available. I do not accept the contention that they are to be contaminated and have their professionalism and reputation tainted in any way by any suggestion that they are not fit and proper people to provide counselling. I reject that utterly.

With regard to PIP implants, my chief medical officer, Dr. Tony Holohan, has handled this issue in a very sensitive and proactive fashion. Two of the three providers of those implants have behaved in a proper professional fashion. There is one which had come up to the plate and then stepped back from it, and we are pursuing it. We want to have a service delivered to the women who had these implants put in place. If the original service that performed these procedures is not prepared to do that, we will have take over and pursue it for the cost of this into the future. There is no way private operators can come into this country, perform procedures and then abdicate their responsibilities. That will not be tolerated. We will not just pursue them here, we will pursue them into the UK and across Europe, wherever we have to go.

The issue around Cregg House, which was also raised by Deputy Naughten, will be addressed by the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch. Deputy Naughten raised other issues. I have mentioned the issue of moving people around the hospital, which is not something I would tolerate or remotely approve of. I would discipline people if I found that to be the case and we will investigate it.

Is the investigation commenced? We hear anecdotally of people being moved if someone is coming to visit or if a count is being done, or of people being hidden in another room when something is happening. In some cases, we are told about this by staff at the front line.

In fairness, I have to say two things about this. When I was in opposition, I visited a certain hospital not too far from Deputy Ó Caoláin's area, and I was told that a similar thing had happened. On the other hand, however, I must say that there is due process involved. It is very easy for people to make allegations. I do not doubt the bona fides of the Deputies who have raised these concerns for one minute, but we must verify that what we are talking about is the truth and not somebody's agenda being met.

I want to put on the record of the committee that this is not something I will tolerate. I am not interested in perception, I want real change. I will not collude in any way with people who engage in this sort of carry-on. I will ask Mr. O'Brien to address that in a more comprehensive fashion.

To be fair to the Minister, he has accepted that there is to be one figure for the trolley count, which is a commendable decision.

Exactly. We agreed with the Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation that we would accept their count, as we both validated it at the same time at 8 o'clock in the morning. As I said in my opening remarks, we also do a count at 2 p.m. and at 4 p.m. because we want to know what is happening and when to take action. We did have an incident earlier in the year when we were able to take action and avoid a serious crisis developing. That is the first time we have had that sort of information.

I compliment the special delivery unit and its director, Dr. Martin Connor, for analysing data which have challenged some of our long-held precepts and concepts. One of them was that the winter flu comes every January and that is why we have had a crisis every January for the last six years. It transpired, however, that was not the case. The reality is that when people return from holidays they roll up their sleeves and are ready to do a whole load of elective work; that is what floods the hospitals. A more concerted approach - reducing the amount of elective surgery, increasing out-patients, and doing more elective surgery later in the year - has resolved that problem. There is no doubt, however, that is only a small part of it.

We are currently analysing other information on which I will have more details before the next meeting of this committee. It indicates that we have a serious problem with our budgets. We now have measures of outcomes in hospital, but not measures of outcomes in community and primary care. I commend GPs for the fact that one can see a general practitioner within 48 hours in this country, which one cannot do in the UK. It is a great thing and it leads to better outcomes for patients, but I want to be able to prove that. I also want to be able to prove that what social workers, speech and language therapists, and public health nurses do actually results in improved outcomes. We have to be able to validate what we are doing and prove that it delivers the outcomes we seek. In the past we have not done that. We operated on the basis that it must do so but perhaps it does not in all cases. That is the point we must examine. This is not a sleight on any of those professionals; it is about helping them to do their work in a more directed fashion that will yield better results for their patients and give them better job satisfaction.

It is irrelevant to use a statistic that talks about one minute across a whole load of people in home care. What is relevant is that those who need it have the hours available to them. I do not believe that bringing up a statistic like that helps or informs the situation at all. That is not to have a go at anyone but, in a general sense, I do not believe that is useful.

We should bring any cases to the Minister's attention.

That is fine. As I have said before, in a difficult budgetary situation we must prioritise. Do we prioritise home help over home care? The home care packages have not been affected and they are the care packages that keep people out of hospital, not home help. Home help makes life a bit easier at home with someone coming in to make a meal or help to clean. There is a big difference between that and someone who comes in to help a person get out of bed, bathe and dress them, and help them with their toilet function. That is an entirely different level, which is what we are focused on.

We need to be more focused on that.

I did not interrupt Deputy Naughten.

Several speakers are waiting to come in.

The information here indicates that the number of people receiving this service has dropped from 51,000 to 50,000. While that is not what we want to see, it is not a big percentage fall. An estimated 15,800 people are receiving home care packages this year, with no reduction. Meanwhile, an estimated 50,000 will receive mainstream home help hours this year, which is down from 51,000 last year. Let us keep things in perspective. I would much prefer if we could increase that figure but we are dealing with an extraordinary situation, as was outlined by Mr. Magee, concerning what we have to deal with.

The diagram that Mr. O'Brien has made available to us shows, of itself, that we have made real progress. This has been done against a backdrop of €2.5 billion out of the budget since 2010, and the departure of 6,000 staff since 2011. There are now 1.8 million medical card holders, which is more than ever before, and 120,000 GP visit cards. There has been an increase of almost 6% in admissions to emergency departments and a 7.1% increase in discharges. The system has upped its game and is doing far more work with far less money and far fewer staff. We continue to innovate and make further improvements, although there is no doubt that we will have huge challenges ahead.

At the end of the day, however, I cannot ignore the elephant in the room which is the figure of €800 million in overtime, allowances and premium pay. As Minister for Health, I cannot ignore that figure and cut services to patients.

As regards the remainder of the questions, I am still very much committed to vaccine damage no-fault compensation. It is a difficult situation and the legal advices are complex, but I have not given up on making some inroads into that matter.

I was asked why there is a 10% fall off in ambulance response times as well as the co-ordination role of the coastguard with the air medical service. I will leave those questions for Mr. Magee.

We have already said that the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, will deal with the question concerning school leavers. I will now hand over to my colleagues.

I will now call the Ministers of State, Deputy Shortall and Deputy Lynch, followed by Mr. Magee.

Deputy Kelleher asked about the Government's commitment to introduce free GP care at the point of access during the Government's first term. He asked if we can afford that, but we cannot afford not to do it. At the moment, our health service is far too hospital centered. People are accessing care at too late a stage and in the most expensive location. We need to change that and are determined to switch the focus to primary care so that people can access services locally. In that way, there is much better concentration on early detection, intervention and management of chronic illness. We will thus achieve much better health outcomes, in addition to providing much better value for money. It makes sense therefore to do that on every front.

Currently, 60% of people have to pay full GP fees in Ireland, which is alone in Europe in that regard. In most European countries everybody can have free GP care at the point of access. Research, particularly in recent years as budgets have become tight, indicates that user fees are a significant barrier to people accessing care. We want people to access care as early as possible in the life of their condition. Too often, people put off going to their GP because they cannot afford the €55 or €60 it costs. They often end up with a more serious condition as a result, and have to attend an accident and emergency unit or be admitted to hospital. That does not make sense on any front, so this is the approach we are taking.

User fees for GPs only constitute 2% of the overall health budget, which is a very small element. We strongly believe, however, that it is the key to unlocking the important reforms we need in terms of the manner in which we deliver health services. That is why we are determined to introduce free GP care within the lifetime of this Government. In line with that, we are also determined to strengthen primary care so that it is not just about providing free access. It is also about providing stronger primary care services. There is a commitment to do that. That commitment is being given effect this year through the provision of an additional €20 million to recruit an additional 300 primary care staff. Those staff will be allocated to those areas wherein there is greatest need. This will happen during the coming weeks and will greatly strengthen the level of services locally available to people.

Reference was made to the serious problems in Tallaght hospital, the reason for which is, among other things, that primary care services are extremely weak within the Tallaght area. All too often people, because they cannot access primary care services, go to the accident and emergency department. They also often delay having their condition dealt with because of the inability to access services. This makes sense on many different fronts.

On the budget, provision for this year is €15 million. This will allow us to take in a particular cohort of people with defined illnesses. The sum of €16 million has been earmarked for extension of this next year. The commitment in the third year is to the provision of subsidised care across the population, in respect of which €132 million has been earmarked.

We have had preliminary discussions with the IMO. General practitioners are generally supportive of the approach we are taking, in particular those who have worked abroad. Those who have worked in the UK, where there is universal access, accept the sense of this and are supportive of it. We will be having further discussions. We are currently establishing the extent to which we can engage in discussions with the IMO but will be doing so when the legislation is produced. While production of the legislation through the Department is, for various reasons, taking longer than I had hoped, I am hopeful it will be published and passed through the Houses prior to the summer recess to allow us to commence the first phase.

Deputy Kelleher asked about the positive ageing strategy. The positive ageing strategy was promised for 2012. Given we are only half way through the year I do not accept there has been a delay in that regard. I was also asked at a late stage to produce a carer's strategy. It is almost complete and will be sent to Cabinet soon. Most of the work on the positive ageing strategy has been done. It is now only a matter of staff concentrating on pulling it together. We are confident it will be possible to publish it by October. I am anxious that this not be done any later than that because of the year that is in it. It would be important to publish it this year and we are confident we will be able to do so in October.

Deputy Ó Caoláin asked about Cregg House. The Deputy will be aware there have been difficulties in relation to the service delivered by the Daughters of Wisdom for some years. In terms of delivery of service, they reached crisis point at the start of this year, following which the HSE commenced negotiating with and assisting the service in addressing some areas that needed modernisation and others from which they might consider withdrawing. This does not help the situation. However, because the HSE was involved from an early stage, there is now a transition team in negotiations with the Daughters of Wisdom. They will meet over the next few days. The Daughters of Wisdom order is waiting for a member - I am not sure if this person is a member of the order or another person who may be assisting it with its discussions - to return from abroad. It is essential those negotiations take place. More important, there must be a guarantee that services will not be interrupted. This is important to the families involved, among whom there is much confusion in terms of their having received letters from the service provider stating it is withdrawing from delivery of service. The service will continue. We have options. Those delivering the service, the employees, have always been paid by the State and there will be continuity in this regard. We need to reassure the people whose loved ones are availing of this service that there will be no break in service. We are hopeful that the service will continue in the same setting. I believe that is possible. We also have other options. As I stated, the people already delivering the service will continue to do so. There may be other possibilities as well. Providing reassurance to the people availing of the service is vitally important. The Daughters of Wisdom will be doing so during the next few days.

Deputy Naughten asked about school-leavers. We knew at the beginning of the year that there would be 700 people in need of an additional service once they had left second level education. That number has greatly reduced. However, there are people with whom we still need to work in order to achieve a reasonable accommodation in terms of their needs come September. I am sure that public representatives here and in other places will be constantly hearing that this is the first year that there is not additional money in relation to school-leavers, which is true. I credit the previous Government in terms of the money it allocated to this particular issue in terms of demography. However, there was no plan or planning for the future of this service. That is what we are doing now. We are putting in place various groups to plan. We know what number of people we will have to cater for in the future and how the service will be delivered.

As the Deputy pointed out, while there are a range of services available, including SOLAS, previously FÁS, education, health, day training centres and day services it is important that the service people get is suited to their needs. There is also a group of people who will be leaving education who have complex needs. They are the people in respect of whom we need to be extraordinarily careful. That is what we are working on. While much work has been done, it is not yet complete. We also need to have a plan. We cannot have a situation every May or June whereby we have nowhere to put the 700 people who will be coming out of education. We know what is going to come at us and should be planning for this. I am disappointed that despite all of the money that has been put into this service, no thought was given to what type of framework should be put in place to meet this need into the future. However, it is being worked on.

Will there be some reassurance for families soon?

Mr. Cathal Magee

I will try to address Deputy Kelleher's question in regard to the financials. A couple of the issues in the plan, which are structural, are a real challenge at the half year point. First, we are committed to delivery of a €124 million reduction in the cost of drugs. In Ireland - the OECD reported on this in 2011 - 17% of our health spend goes on pharmaceuticals. In the UK the percentage is 9.5% and in the Netherlands it is approximately 9%. We have a significant issue in terms of negotiations with the industry around two issues, namely, reducing the cost of drugs and the pricing of drugs, and reducing costs in a way that creates an opportunity to fund the innovative drugs coming through in the market. We have an important industry in Ireland. It is huge in terms of investment and employment and it needs to be supported. Ireland has always been an early adopter of innovative drugs. Our argument with the industry is that it needs to create a funding space for us to continue this approach of early adoption of innovative drugs. This means the baseline costs for drugs must be reduced and be more in line with the lower quartiles that exist throughout Europe. This is proving to be very difficult because the pharmaceutical industry is under significant pressure worldwide particularly with regard to products going off patent. The €124 million reduction is a huge part. There are also issues with regard to prescribing and reference pricing.

Approximately €125 million is dependent on collecting income due and further charges for patients who are private with regard to the consultant but public with regard to the hospital. Some proposals have been made with regard to charges. This is a structural issue in the plan and if the money does not come in we will have a significant gap.

The third funding issue is with regard to exits. More than 4,500 employees left at the end of the grace period in February. The assumption in the plan was that 3,000 would leave, therefore there is an additional cost for lump sums which the Department of Health and the Department of Finance recognise as something which was not in the plan. It amounts to €46 million. This means there is a total of €300 million in costs tied up with income, the cost of drugs and funding the exit scheme. We need to separate these from the operational impact on the system because the operational health system could not take the default of these not being delivered. This is an issue on which I have had fairly detailed discussions with the new Secretary General of the Department and there is recognition that these are on the structural agenda.

On the operational side of the services, in all of our community, mental health and primary care services, leaving aside the primary care reimbursement service, we can come in on plan and deliver recovery plans within budget. The one area in which we will struggle is with regard to acute hospitals. There is no doubt, and it is recognised, they took a disproportionate cut in the current planning cycle largely as a consequence of funding other developments. There was also an assumption that we would have a reduction in activity of only 3%. These assumptions are no longer valid. For the second half of the year we have some choices to make. Do we hold back on the levels of activity, the numbers of patients and the levels of treatment in acute hospitals? There are individual plans at hospital and regional level and we have put together a detailed review at national level which is the subject of discussions with the Department.

The order of magnitude is that we are facing a challenge of €150 million. I do not think this can be dealt with in a single year and we may have to consider a multi-annual solution to some of these issues. A significant proportion of this deficit is in voluntary hospitals which also run overdrafts. In the first part of the year even given the approach with regard to closed beds we have tried to meet service demand and the priorities of the special delivery unit in trying to improve performance, reduce waiting times and deal with some of the backlogs and waiting lists. To continue to do this with the current envelope will be extremely challenging.

Leaving aside structural issues, it will come down to the funding of acute hospitals. Plans are in place to take out agency costs, deal with overtime, get flexibility and try to make the system more efficient. Some hospitals are doing extremely well and some are struggling. Broadly speaking, we need a structured approach to reducing this deficit. We can do much better in the second half of the year than we did in the first half. However, it will not be feasible to deal with this in a single year and we will be examining multi-annual solutions for hospitals to get back to the run rate we want. It is beginning to happen in Tallaght and Galway but other hospitals such as Limerick and Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda face real challenges.

Individual hospital plans exist and I am confident, based on the dialogue we have with the Department, that we will come up with sensible solutions, which perhaps will involve the curtailment of some services but will at least put the hospital system on a sensible footing as we approach the end of the year. Longer term, as the Minister mentioned, there are structural issues in the cost of our hospital and health systems which we need to examine. Staff costs account for 70% of hospital costs and 75% of these staff costs is made up of professional nursing, medical and paramedical staff costs. We have significant overtime premium costs and agency costs in the system. All of these issues must be examined structurally to come up with a more reduced labour unit cost in the systems.

There is a choice facing the health system. If we are to protect the delivery of services and not have the significant reductions in funding impact fully on them we must come up with new solutions not yet on the table to improve productivity and get a better return on the resources we have. This is the structural challenge in the health system that must be faced over the next one to three years.

Can the Croke Park agreement deliver these structural changes?

Mr. Cathal Magee

The Minister has made comments on costs on previous occasions. The Croke Park agreement has delivered a huge amount to the health system and as the Chairman stated the report on what has been delivered shows it is exemplary. A huge amount of structural change has taken place in Cork with 4,500 people redeployed. Outsource solutions have been used in a number of areas and we have also responded to the end of the grace period in February when 4,500 people left. There are pockets where it is not delivering at the pace one would want and perhaps it is not all perfect, but broadly speaking the health system has benefited hugely from the Croke Park agreement. In the next phase of the Croke Park agreement we must make structural choices on whether services will be directly and significantly impacted by the funding issue or whether we can come up with new solutions to deal with labour unit costs and the capacity we have in the system.

The standardisation of working hours throughout the health system could be of huge benefit if we could standardise the working week in all disciplines, including medical, nursing, paramedical, administrative and management. There is a variety of working hour arrangements. If we had a standardised model and people came up to the higher level it would create significant extra capacity in primary care, mental health and hospital systems. The Secretary General and the Minister are of the same view. The next phase of the Croke Park agreement must stretch some of the current assumptions.

Does this stretching of the agreement include what the Minister refers to when he speaks about the €800 million elephant in the room and the €280 million in overtime? What is the HSE's strategy on this?

Mr. Cathal Magee

Overtime accounts for approximately 4% of health costs and amounts to approximately €250 million. A significant part of this is with regard to junior hospital doctors. Issues arise with regard to structured overtime, the European working time directive and resourcing. We have a big structural issue with regard to medical manpower. However, there is also other structured overtime. Dealing with the working hours issue would also affect this. Issues also arise with regard to premium payments which account for 10%. Of the health system's total costs, basic pay and employer's PRSI account for 83%. This is not disproportionate for a 24 hours a day seven days a week service. However, if one wants to protect basic earnings one must examine the add-on costs and I believe this is to what the Minister refers. The issue is one of capacity and how we increase resource capacity in the system without increasing costs and numbers. This is the challenge we face in the next phase.

Mr. Tony O’Brien

I will address the questions on trolleys. The documentation circulated has charts on one side and data on the other to emphasise the data is directly provided by the Irish Nurses and Midwives Organisation, INMO; it is not HSE or management data. This can be verified by reference to "Trolley Watch" on the INMO's website. We have graphed it in a particular way to show the 30-day moving average because if we did this on a daily basis the graph would look something like a heartbeat - it would be so volatile it would not be possible to see the trends. This is a direct trend graph which shows the effects of a number of measures such as seven-day ward rounds, senior decision-makers in emergency departments and the HSE's implementation of the acute medicine programme on an increasing number of sites. There are changes in practice in hospitals which make this type of improvement possible. It is not the SDU that has achieved this but the hospitals themselves working in teams.

It was suggested that at one hospital there may be some manipulation. If we become aware - we will take the information the member has provided today - we will investigate it. Hospitals are subject to visitation by SDU personnel without notice. The count is carried out not by management in the hospital but by nursing representatives. I would hope and expect that the potential for such manipulation is very small and I do not believe it is having any significant impact on the trends we are seeing. In the case the member described I would expect that where patients are being moved to beds at whatever time, it is done in accordance with clinical priority. If that is not the case then in consultation with our colleagues in quality and patient safety in the HSE we would wish to address that. If any member becomes aware of patients who feel they are the subject of manipulation in order to achieve certain data outcomes he or she should contact us and we will investigate.

Mr. Barry O’Brien

I wish to comment on the issue the Minister raised on the €800 million in allowances. The choice for the wider public sector is about how we go about our costing of care. It is a matter that needs to be re-examined now and it will become a choice between sustaining the current levels or continuing to shrink the level of care having regard to what we are paying in the pay bill. It is a wider public sector choice, but it is a choice that is facing us now.

Ms Laverne McGuinness

Deputy Kelleher asked about the delayed discharges from hospitals. The numbers on 28 May were 664, which is down from 679 in April. His question was about those availing of and looking for community support, in other words home-care packages. Some 42 are waiting for home-care packages but 29 of them are already approved and in progress and 13 are awaiting funding decisions. Overall €340 million is being spent on home help and home-care packages, so it is a very small number that have not been addressed. Those numbers are not awaiting clearance for the fair deal because we have no waiting list for clearance for fair deal - they are up to date. Some 22,809 people are supported by fair deal.

Deputy Kelleher also asked why the ipilimumab drug was not made available within days of the Minister's announcement. Dr. Susan O'Reilly and I circulated a memorandum to the hospitals stating that the drug is available. There were a number of queries by consultants, but they have been addressed. The drug is available.

In some cases Ms McGuinness's letter was not followed up on because many of us received representations. The Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, and the Minister, Deputy Reilly, were both very proactive. Somewhere in the chain of command the patient was forgotten. I will not name anybody and I am sure Deputy Kelleher will not either. However, despite Ms McGuinness's letter, a particular patient was refused access to the drug and the buck was passed from A to B to C, which is not good enough. We can give details of the people involved. Someone was playing games and it was not the politicians. Someone in the chain of command was playing a game with the life of a person. I am not disputing that Ms McGuinness's letter was sent. However, a patient was denied access to a drug and someone played games. I use those words deliberately because a game was being played, which is not good enough.

Ms Laverne McGuinness

The Chairman is correct. I was in Cork on the day the call came through from his office. We resolved the issue. There was a call from a consultant who said he did not have the clearance, but that has been resolved so the drug is available.

I appreciate Ms McGuinness's letter went out - I do not dispute that, but in modern day Ireland it should not require political intervention for a patient to get access to treatment that was needed.

Ms Laverne McGuinness

The Chairman is correct. All the hospitals were aware of it, but based on the Chairman's information following the call we got from his office, the consultant-----

That should not have to happen.

Ms Laverne McGuinness

Absolutely.

What would happen to Mr. Murphy or Mrs. Murphy who did not have access to somebody? Somebody is playing a game and it is not good enough. The message from this meeting must be that the lives of critically ill or terminally ill patients should not be caught in the circus of a command chain.

Ms Laverne McGuinness

We will take that back.

Deputy Naughten asked about the ambulance service and the first responders. There are two separate issues. We are dependent on the voluntary bodies to come back to us with the information on the first responders. We do not have the ICT system to support it. We are working to try to improve that, but we are not capturing all the data on the first responders, who are voluntary and are not the ambulance service itself. The ambulance response time for ECHO calls is 18 minutes 59 seconds. That is the target that is being set. We have a pick-up target of 80% and are achieving 72.69%. We have made improvements in ten out of the past 12 months, but are continually trying to strive to improve on that.

He also asked whether we have arrangements in place with the Irish Coast Guard. We have a formal service level arrangement in place with the Irish Coast Guard to provide a range of services regarding back-up transport and also regarding the aeromedical service and supporting us out of Dublin, Waterford and Sligo when it is available and it provides full backup to our UK services in the Air Corps. He also asked about the staff in the centre. Six new staff will come on board with effect from 2 July. The duration of training will be six weeks and that will complete the cohort of staff required.

Deputy Ó Caoláin asked about the closure of the operation theatres in Cavan General Hospital. That hospital has a very significant budgetary challenge this year - it is €9.9 million. It is considering a range of measures, including the reduction or elimination of overtime and agency workers. That is one of a number of measures being considered - it has not yet been finalised. However, it is ahead of its activity in that regard. I can come back to the Deputy with a fuller response.

I may only hope it will not be approved.

Ms Laverne McGuinness

Regarding disability services for school-leavers, the families will be notified on 10 July of the places available. We have made significant progress on that.

I call Deputy Maloney. I remind members that ten people have indicated their intention to speak. I ask them to ask only supplementary questions to the questions they submitted. I am conscious that it is now 1.40 p.m.

I will not need seven minutes.

The Deputy will not be getting seven minutes.

I welcome the commitment of the Minister, Deputy Reilly, to roll out primary care. I agree entirely with the Minister of State, Deputy Shortall, that primary care will transform the health system. Many other changes are needed but it is one of the principal ones to which the Government has committed. All of us and in particular the hard-pressed taxpayer would welcome that.

First, I know the Minister, Deputy Reilly, had to react in response to An Bord Pleanála's decision on the proposed national children's hospital at the site of the Mater Hospital. I understand he has the report of the review body he established. Given that An Bord Pleanála's decision was based on its judgment of overdevelopment at that site, he may have initiated this himself but if he has not I ask that he considers it. In order that we would not have a repeat of this unfortunate outcome for the Mater hospital site, is it possible, as I believe it is under Irish planning law, for the Minister to be informed about the sites prior to making a final announcement on the location? We should not find ourselves in six months or a year with a repeat of how An Bord Pleanála adjudicated on the Mater site. I am not pre-empting anything but if there is a shortlist of sites, be it the Mater, Tallaght or St. James's, the Minister should have that knowledge before making a final decision.

Second, with regard to the national paediatric hospital, I have no particular interest in Cabinet confidentiality and so forth, nor would the Minister entertain it. However, could he briefly tell us what the procedure is? I presume the Minister makes the final decision, subject to Cabinet agreement. Is it decided on a particular day or, given that it is such a big project, does the Minister brief the Cabinet before a final decision is made?

My final question is for Mr. Magee and relates to St. Brigid's Nursing Home in Crooksling. There was good news this week when Mr. Magee extended its life. When will the proposed review start and finish?

Did I use up my seven minutes?

You had three minutes and you just made it.

I have finished now. It will give time to other speakers.

I wish to make a point on the Minister's opening statement about duty of care.

We are dealing with supplementary questions to your written questions.

I understand that and you can stop me after three minutes. You have taken at least 30 seconds.

The Minister spoke about a duty of care regarding smoking, drinking and obesity. I do not know if the Minister heard a radio programme a few days ago about a maternity hospital in which patients were asked why they were smoking. Will anything be done by the Minister or by the hospitals to stop young pregnant women in maternity hospitals smoking within the grounds of the hospital? Something must be done about that immediately.

I will refer quickly to my three questions. Yesterday, we received a presentation by the LauraLynn Children's Hospice, which was very well made. My last question was about medical cards for sick children and I am delighted that the GP card will be extended to people with long-term illness. We heard harrowing stories yesterday about a young couple who had to fight tooth and nail to get a GP card for their child who had a long-term illness. I welcome the fact that this is being considered, but how long will it take?

With regard to the fair deal scheme, which was the subject of my second question, I welcome the fact that there will be a review of the system. It is long overdue. There are many obstacles within the fair deal scheme which must be dealt with. A case I am dealing with at present involves a young woman who got married and whose husband ended up in hospital within six months of the marriage and he will be there for the rest of his life. The unfairness of what she is being asked to produce to keep him in the hospital must be dealt with.

My first question was about autism services. I welcome the funding of €1 million for 2013 and 2014. Will it be sustainable in the long run? I still receive many queries from people coming into the system who cannot get the general autism services people need when their children are born, such as speech and language therapy. They are struggling daily to get them. It was in very bad taste, and I realise this was not the Minister's Department, that letters were sent to people on a day they were attending an event in the Mansion House for autism day. When they got home the letters informed them that their domiciliary allowance had been withdrawn. I was anxious to make that point, even if it is not the Minister's responsibility. I am not a medical professional but when children have autism how are they categorised to decide who needs more help than another? The Minister might not be able to answer that question, but I am anxious to know how it is tiered.

I have a question about question No. 33, which relates to the need to build an oncology and palliative care unit at Waterford Regional Hospital. I thank the Minister for his written response, which states that HSE South has recommended that the specialist palliative care 20-bed inpatient unit be the main priority for construction at the hospital by the HSE. Mr. Magee with be aware of the fact that this is a revised priority. The priority up to now was to build a proper oncology unit, namely, an integrated unit that would include full cancer treatment, radiotherapy, surgery and chemotherapy, with all modalities on one site. Now it is a scaled down option of a single palliative care unit. I welcome that but the wording of the Minister's reply worries me. It uses the phrase "if a modest development can be approved". Does the word "if" relate to the progression through the planning process or to securing the funding? Waterford Hospice Movement will provide €6 million of the €13.7 million cost of the project. That is almost matching funding, so one hopes there can be a genuine partnership in this case between the hospice movement and the HSE. Can the Minister and Mr. Magee give a commitment that the funding can be secured and that this much needed palliative care unit can be delivered for the people of Waterford and the south east?

The Minister and Mr. Magee can respond to the questions of those three members together before we move on to the next three speakers.

Chairman, I have to be somewhere else at 2 p.m.

There are only three more members to speak.

Deputy Maloney asked about An Bord Pleanála and me being informed about various sites to avoid what happened previously. Sadly, that is not practicable. An Bord Pleanála cannot tell one anything until a submission has been made. It can tell us about submissions that have been made. There is a letter from An Bord Pleanála in the report vis-à-vis one of them which gives us a clear understanding of its thoughts. However, before asking about other sites, one would have to put a proposal to the board relating to whether it is ten, 15 or five storeys. What the Deputy says makes good sense, namely, that the next time there should be plenty of preplanning interaction. The way around that would be to have the local authority where the hospital is to be built interact with An Bord Pleanála. It is of such a size that it will automatically go to strategic planning and An Bord Pleanála.

With regard to the process I outlined earlier, what will happen now is that one of the members of the review group, who is an architect, will engage with a quantity surveyor to validate many of the figures that were put forward by the various people who made submissions and to get greater clarity about some of the planning issues and the contentions there. I will then have to review, digest and analyse that. After that I will bring it to the Cabinet for its decision.

Deputy Byrne asked about the initiative to stop smoking in hospital grounds. All hospital campuses are intended to be smoke free in the next couple of years. The Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, will respond to the LauraLynn Hospice and fair deal questions.

The autism service is quite close to my heart, even though it is more properly Deputy Lynch's area, so I will reply. The services are sustainable. As to whether the budget is available to do everything we would like to do, it possibly is not but it has improved. What I am deeply unhappy about, and I have discussed this with the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch, is the fact that there is not an even spread of that budget across the areas. Some people are getting a Rolls Royce service while others are getting none. That is simply intolerable. A report was sent to me but it is insufficient so I intend to have an outside report carried out, utilising and being informed by the internal reports that have been produced to date. Deputy Lynch and I are discussing who should provide that report. They will certainly be people who are experienced in the area of autism and the organisation of services for people with autism.

The Deputy asked how people with autism are tiered. They are tiered clinically. Autism spectrum, as everybody who is involved understands, is exactly what it says on the tin. It is a spectrum ranging from being so severe that the only future is institutional care to being so mild that it is not picked up until people are in their 20s, having passed right through the educational system, and all degrees in between. Consequently, it is a clinical decision made by medical officers in conjunction with the Department of Social Protection as to who does or does not receive that domiciliary care. Obviously, when children are younger, it is terribly important that they get the intervention as soon as possible in order that they realise their greatest potential. There are different levels and this debate continues. I acknowledge it is very difficult for parents. I have been that person in the past and it is pretty much a belt out of the blue when the diagnosis is given and one always thinks of the worst-case scenario. I always am pleased to tell people that even though things can look grim at the outset, there often can be a bright future and the one thing to do is to not allow anyone set a limit on one's child's horizon.

Senator Cullinane asked about the palliative care unit in Waterford and again, this issue will be considered in the capital plan. There is a specialist 20-bed palliative care inpatient unit, which is the major priority. I must state that in cases in which communities are prepared to put their hands in their pockets to support such initiatives, one must consider them extremely positively. However, the capital budget is extremely limited and it is not always possible to do everything one would like to do as quickly as one would like to do it. Nevertheless, it certainly is under consideration.

The issue of the children's hospice is one with which one cannot possibly disagree. If one's child has a condition that is life limiting, it is a very difficult situation with which to deal for the parents of that child in particular. This particular hospice was built, is now open and by all accounts is doing an excellent job. The difficulty is that it was done without any prior arrangement with either the HSE or the Department of Health. A positive point in this regard is the HSE and the people behind the foundation are engaged in discussions to ascertain what possible level of service can be agreed. Another difficulty relates to the recommendation in the report of the national advisory committee on palliative care in respect of children. While I am sure such arguments move and change all the time, the report recommended the best possible place for a child in such circumstances is at home with professional support and backup. While one must recognise this does not always happen, I reiterate that ongoing negotiations are taking place and I will be anxious to find out where they will lead. However, no additional money is available at present for something like this facility. Although the budget for palliative care this year is €78 million, it relates to the already established organisations, which in the main are in the private sector, that provide palliative care and end-of-life services to people. However, this issue is under consideration.

I will respond briefly to Deputy Catherine Byrne's question about medical cards and children with lifelong medical conditions. The intention with the free GP care initiative is to start, as soon as the legislation is enacted, to include people on the basis of defined illnesses within the overall budget that is available this year and next. However, I point out to the Deputy that when a mother has a medical card, the baby automatically is entitled to a medical card. In this context, the Department now has added a functionality to GPs, which enables them to put babies on a medical card straight away, thereby avoiding an application process, and this is working very well. Another issue that often is raised with me concerns those who have lifelong conditions. The practice has been for the primary care reimbursement service, PCRS, to write to people on a periodic basis asking them to confirm their condition has not changed. Many people find this to be quite objectionable and this scenario will be dealt with through a new application form. At present, the information is not available to the PCRS to identify those who have lifelong conditions because they were not asked to supply that information on the original application form. However, a new and improved application form is being produced, which will be informed by the National Adult Literacy Agency and which will allow for the retention of such information, which will mean the PCRS will not be writing in future and causing such upset.

Briefly, another issue raised concerned the fair deal scheme. Advertisements appeared in today's newspapers pertaining to the review of the fair deal scheme and details also may be found on the Department's website. This offers another opportunity to ask people to make a comment or a contribution on how they perceive the scheme moving forward. The obvious point is that serious consideration must be given to whether the fair deal scheme can be used in respect of community-based services. Consideration must be given to whether this would be a good or a bad thing and how would it work but it definitely offers an opportunity to make people aware that a process now is under way to which the Department would like them to contribute. Ms Laverne McGuinness already has outlined to members a remarkable achievement, when compared with the position that obtained last year, in that at present, no one is on a waiting list in respect of the fair deal scheme.

Mr. Cathal Magee

In response to Deputy Maloney's question on St. Brigid's community hospital, in the light of the pressure on public beds and given the need to use the new 50 long-term bed unit in Inchicore, St. Brigid's nursing home will remain open in the short term with a maximum capacity of 67 beds and the remedial works in respect of fire regulations have been completed. The viability study is under way and we obviously will have discussions with the Department on the outcome thereof, as well as on the outcome of the fair deal scheme strategy in the future. As such decisions should be taken ahead of the drawing up of the 2013 service plan, I think that towards the end of this year, the HSE will come to decisions on the structure of the nursing bed complement in Dublin. However, as various members noted earlier, there is considerable pressure on the public acute system in Dublin that requires capacity over and above what might have been expected.

Was one of Deputy Kelleher's questions missed?

Before the Minister leaves, I have a question on audiology and waiting lists. A number of weeks ago, Deputy Harrington raised the case of a 92-year-old who has been waiting for four years for audiology services. While I do not know whether this question should be directed towards the Minister of State, Deputy Shortall, I note a proposal has been put forward by the Irish Society of Hearing Aid Audiologists. Can this issue be addressed? More than 8,000 people are waiting for some form of service and I understand a proposal has been made to the Minister or to one of the Ministers of State. Perhaps the special delivery unit's funding may be able to assist with this backlog because it is quite unacceptable for a 92-year-old woman to wait for four years to be assessed for a hearing aid.

My supplementary question pertains to question No. 12. When I first came into this role, I was very surprised to learn there are no independent inspections of residential services for people with disabilities, particularly for children, given what is known about the past and about institutional abuse. This has astounded me and I have been trying to pursue this question. However, the position is unclear in the answer I have received. The reply stated HIQA is engaging in this process of unifying the draft standards and I seek confirmation of what this means. In the first instance, does this mean HIQA is unifying the national quality standards for care services for children and young people with the national quality standards for residential services for people with disabilities, in which case adults with disabilities will be included with all children and not just children with disabilities? Alternatively, does it mean the category of children with disabilities will be taken out of the national quality standards for care services for children and young people, in which case the new unified standards referred to in the Minister's replies will only relate to children and adults with disabilities? What is the timeframe for this process? When pursuing this question, I constantly am being referred between the Minister for Health and the Minister for Children and Youth Affairs and basically, children are falling between the gaps.

Second, in respect of mental health, I refer to the reply I have received on the interim review of the Mental Health Act. Can the Minister confirm there will be sufficient interplay between the new mental capacity law and the Mental Health Act? It would be unacceptable if there were any discrimination or exclusion of people detained or treated under the 2001 Mental Health Act.

I am finding it difficult to identify how the €35 million is allocated to the promised projects. Further to the RTE news report of 6 June, will the Minister confirm that the €24 million from this figure that is designated to strengthen community mental health themes in both adult and children's mental health services will ensure that at least one of each mental health professional discipline is represented, that the 404 posts designated for adult community mental health teams and child and adult mental health teams will be in place by the end of 2012, and that the staffing of the community mental health themes will be ring-fenced so that the staff resource cannot be withdrawn to be used elsewhere in mental health services?

In regard to my question on the national dementia strategy, I very much welcome the confirmation that the consultation process will begin shortly and will include key stakeholders. More specifically, will consideration be given in this process to developing a strategy to focus also on the needs of the estimated 5,000 citizens under 65 years of age with early onset Alzheimer's disease, and their families?

I refer to question No. 36 on junior doctors. In July we will again face the recruitment of new junior doctors. The question I posed deals in particular with the terms of the contract for junior doctors. I asked how many junior doctors are employed who have more than a 12-month or a two year contract. It is frightening. A report was produced by the HSE in March this year in respect of the review of junior doctors who worked as interns from July 2010 to June 2011. It showed that a large percentage, 63%, intended staying in the Irish health system when they had finished their intern year but in fact when they finished fewer than 50% stayed on. The answer does not deal with the way to keep junior doctors, which is about certainty. Are we going to review the current policy whereby junior doctors are employed for six or 12 months, when there is no reason we cannot co-ordinate two and three year contracts between hospitals? That is exactly what they get in the United Kingdom and when they go to Australia or Canada. There is lack of certainty here and then we worry about it. I have a study coming out next week in regard to the attitude of this year's final-year medical graduates and their attitude to the Irish health system. It is not good reading from the point of long-term planning in respect of employing junior doctors in the Irish health system. When are we going to review the existing system of terms of contracts for junior doctors when they finish their intern year?

The second issue I wished to raise concerns the fair deal scheme and follows on from Deputy Kelleher's question. My understanding, from the Irish Nursing Homes Organisation, is there has been a slowing in dealing with the fair deal scheme. The Minister has given a response to this but the organisation has given me different information, stating there has been a slow-down in giving decisions on applications for the fair deal. One thing we need is to ensure we free up hospital beds and a way to do that is to ensure we can get people into home care packages or into whatever appropriate care they may need.

My final point relates to absenteeism. There is an enormous variation, as I laid out in question No. 35. Absenteeism for medical personnel is, on average, 1.26% whereas for general support staff it is 5.77%. How are we going to deal with that? It needs to be tackled because there is a considerable cost to the health service. There are varying figures, with up to €500 million mentioned in regard to the cost in the whole area.

I thank all the delegates for their contributions throughout the morning and afternoon. I am disappointed by the response I received from the Minister on question No. 4, about the special advisory group looking at the "X" case. He answered to the effect that women who are faced with travelling when there is a diagnosis of a fatal foetal abnormality will not be included in the review. I welcome that he will meet with the women concerned but why is this the case? My reading of this is that under the "ABC" case, these women could be included. The Minister might answer that point for me.

My second question, No. 5, concerned psychological services and the talking therapies, and the €35 million. There has been some indication that 254 posts have been identified in adult services and 150 new posts in child and adolescent teams. The numbers to date show that the south has the second lowest provision in the country of psychological services. I know at first hand about trying to prevent people from being hospitalised or a young person from experiencing a very serious episode and having to come into care, with all the expense and costs involved. If we can provide services early enough we may be able to prevent these cases escalating, which is hugely important. In addition, does the Minister have any comment on how counselling services are currently being delivered by family resource centres and how we might use the resources now in place in a joined-up way with primary care or mental health facilities? These services are embedded in communities and have been offering a very good service to families in recent years.

My final question relates to a point raised by Senator Cullinane about palliative care in Waterford Regional Hospital. In the 2007 election, the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, flaunted a letter before the people of Waterford, promising us that such a facility would be built. Here we are in 2012, with a Grade 4 hospital that has no palliative care services for the people of the south east. That is a disgrace. As I understand it, the capital budget in the HSE has been untouched. This must be a priority. It is one of the areas that has not seen a significant reduction and the community is willing to pay €6 million towards it. In terms of Government priorities, the south east has been neglected in many other fields and we cannot allow this to continue. A palliative care unit must be delivered for WRH and the people of the south east.

We have four more questions from speakers so I will ask the Minister, Deputy Reilly, or the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch, to respond.

I will respond to the questions that relate to me and will then hand over to the Minister of State because many relate to her area of responsibility, namely, Senator van Turnhout's questions in their entirety.

Senator Burke asked when we were going to review the conditions for junior doctors. We are actively engaged in changing this career path and are negotiating, discussing and consulting with non-consultant hospital doctors, or NCHDs, the colleges and the Medical Council on this very issue. We want to create a clear career path for people.

The Senator is right that absenteeism is a serious issue and I will ask Mr. Magee to deal with that point. I know the issue is going to be referred shortly to the Labour Court.

Deputy Conway asked about the four ladies. I am meeting them this evening. They are not in the original terms of reference; that is the reality. That is not to say we will not try to do something in that regard and in regard to Mr. Justice Ryan's group when it finally reports but that is a matter for Government.

Psychological services are the responsibility of the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch. The Deputy is very much misinformed if she believes the capital budget has not been touched. Most of it is already committed due to commitments made last year that carry through. Many projects start and take 18 months to build. There is a process of planning design beforehand. The south east is important and we want to have availability of palliative care services throughout the country. The Deputy should not think her region is unique, however. There are no such services in counties Mayo and Roscommon, just two I can recall, but there are other areas too. It does not make it proper or right that others are in the same situation but I offer that for the fullness of information.

I hand over to the Minister of State, Deputy Lynch.

I will start with the posts in regard to-----

Members should be aware there is a vote at 2.45 p.m.

This should have been finished at 2 p.m.

I, too, was hoping we would be gone by 2 p.m.

I refer to the posts that come under the €35 million provision. Up to this point, when money was available for any service, it was divvied up and sent to the regional directors of operations. This could probably be most clearly seen in our mental health services. I assure the committee that the regional directors of operations in this instance - to a man because they are all men - are an exceptionally fine group of people. They are responsible for determining the level of need in each area.

I hope they are listening to the Minister of State.

In this instance, we asked them to submit a plan setting out the gaps in the service to be provided. We did not release the money until they did that. Each profession will have one representative on the community mental health teams. That is not provided for in A Vision for Change, which states that in some instances a team should consist of three psychiatrists and two psychologists, for example. We do not have enough money for that in the first year. We are hoping the three-year plan will deliver it. That is what has happened with the money.

Some €26 million will be provided for child and adolescent services as well. I have received representations from those involved. They are happy with the allocation. That is the case in each area that has received its allocation. That is why the allocations are different. Each area did not get exactly the same allocation because the need was not the same in each area. Areas with a well-proportioned service needed a small amount of additional funding only. That is why the additional allocation is different in each area. I think that is the way to go forward. That has happened. There are glaringly obvious omissions. We have spoken to the people involved. Old age psychiatry, for example, will have to be dealt with next year. Those involved in that area will be quite happy if it gets the level of recognition next year that other services got this year. Intellectual disability is another area that will have to be dealt with next year.

Senator van Turnhout asked about the standards for people with disabilities. She probably heard in the Seanad that a priority list has been drawn up. I am not certain that anyone can disagree with the priority list. That is the difficulty with such lists. As a result of all the various reports, it was decided that children should comprise the first category on the list. The next category consists of children in foster care and the next category after that consists of people in institutions who have intellectual or physical disabilities. Along with the Health Information and Quality Authority, I have been dealing with that for the last four months. The authority will get back to me next month. We will have a definite date then. It will not be too far in the future.

I was asked whether the review of the Mental Health Acts will dovetail with the proposed mental capacity legislation. It will. We are very conscious of the need for a substantial human rights element to be driven into that legislation. We are also considering whether aspects of A Vision for Change need to be put into legislation. It is not a simple review. We will put what we currently have on the Internet shortly. We hope that will open the discussion. It is probably not what we would like to end up with. It needs to be more open. I hope to get more inputs after the discussion piece goes up on the Internet. I know some people have a huge interest in it. I have set out what we hope to do in both of these areas. It is hoped that the review will dovetail with the mental capacity legislation. We will also focus on human rights and examine the aspects of A Vision for Change that need to be included in legislation.

I call the Minister of State, Deputy Shortall.

I asked about the national dementia strategy.

On the national dementia strategy, we take the view that dementia is the condition and-----

I call the Minister of State.

Deputy Kelleher asked about audiology services. Traditionally, those services have been under-developed and under-resourced. After the HSE audiology review group produced a strategy last year, some €3.7 million was provided for its implementation. There is no doubt that the long waiting lists in this area are unacceptable. The Deputy mentioned that I met representatives of the Irish Society of Hearing Aid Audiologists in recent months. They made a proposal to assist in the clearing of those waiting lists. I asked them to write it up as a business case. They submitted such a case recently. It is under consideration in the Department at the moment.

Mr. Cathal Magee

Senator Burke asked about the fair deal scheme. The standard is that all applications are processed within four weeks. Some 22,809 applicants are being supported in the current year. If members know of individual cases in which there have been delays, we would like to have a look at the details of those cases. As the Minister said earlier, there has been no backlog.

The current rate of absenteeism in the health system is 4.94%. That represents a reduction on the equivalent figure some years ago. There has been a big programme of absenteeism management. The rate is still too high. Our minimum target is 3.5%. A number of programmes are under way to that end. It was mentioned that the rate is higher among support staff. We have introduced a benchmarking exercise across all of our hospital systems. We are looking at the individual cost of a meal, laundry, cleaning and security. We can make an exact cost comparison. We have said to the unions that if the benchmarkings are not in line with private market prices, we will consider outsourcing. That will bring the whole productivity and performance element into play. That data will be made publicly available in the middle of the year. Negotiations on the overall sick pay schemes are taking place at Government and central levels. I understand that is with the Labour Court, as the Minister said. It is one of the solutions that will help us to create more capacity in our system.

The next three speakers will be Deputies McConalogue and Fitzpatrick and Senator Crown.

I wish to speak about the reinstatement of cardiac pacemakers at Letterkenny General Hospital. The HSE undertook to review the matter after I raised it at the last quarterly meeting. I welcome the decision to reinstate the pacemaker service at the hospital in the next few days. I commend the HSE on this sensible move. In recent times, a great deal of work has gone into the development of cardiac services in Letterkenny. It was very important for that move to be made. I congratulate the HSE on that.

I note the HSE's statement that the medical assessment unit at Letterkenny General Hospital will reopen in September. It is a very positive development at the hospital. It will be of great benefit.

I have been informed in response to my question about NowDoc services in County Donegal that general practitioners have proposed that red-eye services currently provided from the centres in Carndonagh and Doirí Beaga should be provided through Letterkenny. I am greatly concerned about that proposal. It would be a red-line issue for people within the county. It would take two hours to travel from some parts of the county that are served by the Carndonagh centre to some parts of the county that are served by the Doirí Beaga centre. It would not be acceptable for people to have to make such a journey to see a general practitioner. I ask the HSE and the Minister to ensure negotiations take place between the HSE and the general practitioners to ensure the red-eye service is not diluted. General practitioners should continue to be available to treat people at the centres where such services are currently provided.

I would like to ask the Minister about hospitals that treat people who are not directly within their catchment areas. I know the Minister has said he will examine and address the issues that are continuing to create problems in this regard. I ask him to follow through on that.

I would like to ask a question about estate management. What is the HSE's current policy on the signing of agreements in relation to community health centres? The community development associations in Malin Head and Glengad have completed fine turnkey premises. Agreement had been reached that the HSE would move in to those centres, but the agreements have not yet been signed off on. In one case, it was agreed that the premises would be provided at a cost of €1 a year to the HSE. What is the current policy with regard to signing off on such agreements? Is it possible for them to be signed off on as soon as possible?

The Louth County Hospital in Dundalk opened in 1959. The hospital no longer functions as an acute hospital. Louth County Hospital is now just a minor injuries unit which opens from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m. seven days a week . The attendance fee is €100 but patients referred by their GP or those who have a medical card are exempt from the charge. The hospital treats adults and children over the age of 14 years and treats cases of suspected broken bones of the leg from knee to toe, suspected broken bones of the arm from collar bone to finger tips, all sprains and strains, facial and eye injuries, minor burns and scabs, wounds, bites, cuts and scabs, including splinters and fishhooks, foreign bodies in eyes, ears and noses and minor chest injuries. I believe they are proposing to close the Louth hospital from 9 p.m. to 8 a.m. Monday to Friday and to close it completely at the weekends. This is at a cost of €230,000.

Our accident and emergency department was closed in 2010. This was wrong. We need to at least keep an accident and emergency service open. Let me recount my experience last weekend. My 85 year old mother suffered a bad fall and we took her to the Louth County Hospital where she was examined by a doctor and two nurses and received fantastic treatment. Following her X-ray she was transferred by ambulance to Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, Drogheda, where they fixed her kneecap and she received 43 stitches. I believe, and the surgeon confirmed, that if she had not been treated at the MIU hospital and transferred to Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda she would have lost her leg.

Dundalk hosts a number of multinational companies and has a large catchment area. The Minister for Health, Deputy James Reilly, visited the hospital two weeks ago and could see the great work that it is doing. My request is that the hospital should not close from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. and that it should remain open at the weekend. I am sure that if we could work together we could resolve the difficulties, even if it means that the people of Dundalk and surrounding area would contribute to the cost of the hospital. We should keep the minor injuries unit open from 9 a.m. to 8 p.m.

In regard to what appears to be new policies in the provision of new cancer drugs and new expensive drugs more generally, I acknowledge the fact that I believe it was the Minister's personal intervention, which I think came from his experience of being a doctor, that cut through a lot of bureaucracy arising at the time of the fiasco of the ipilimumab story that emerged some time ago.

In our society we like to talk about the needs of the most vulnerable. Surely nobody is more vulnerable than somebody who is facing into the last few weeks of his or her life, possibly with treatments available that might prolong it. We have historically had a liberal regime for the provision of new drugs, and that is the reason that I was reacting to what Mr. Cathal Magee said earlier, compared with other countries. Internationally, the UK, as one of the major countries, is seen as having a particularly brutal and heartless regime for the approval of new drugs. All kinds of drugs that became available in much smaller and poorer countries than the UK were denied to British cancer patients and are still denied to British cancer patients because of the very extremist vision they have of the health economics of anti-cancer drugs and of other medications in particular. The country at the top of the league table is New Zealand. Companies no longer go to New Zealand with new cancer drugs because they know, with the rarest of exceptions, the drugs will not be approved. I heard the head of the Health Information and Quality Authority state recently at this committee that it does not model its policies on the UK but looks at policies in Australia. To put the matter in perspective, the Australian equivalent of that agency has systematically refused to pay for a drug called Herceptin for many years and the only reason that Herceptin became available to Australian patients was because a decision was made at federal Government level to put a special fund in place to pay for it, such was the level of extremism which was being demonstrated by the entity upon which we are now going to model ourselves.

This is not a problem caused by the recession, but a long-standing problem of culture. Among the permanent officials of the Department of Health and the HSE, there appears to be unease with our liberal regime. Even when we were awash with money, efforts were being made to restrain our access to new drugs. Some of the efforts were made in a dishonest fashion. I do not believe we live, work or practise in an economic vacuum. I am not naïve. I know that every penny or €1,000 I spend on my patients is money that cannot be used for children who are waiting four years for hearing tests, or for the people who are waiting six months to get into the National Rehabilitation Hospital. For some people that represents a substantial chunk of their life expectancy. We must exercise a degree of responsibility and be aware of the context in which we spend money. The tools which are being developed right now by the national cancer control programme and the National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics are flawed, as they lack nuance, understanding and expertise. When we use no measure other than the cost per year of the average life saved for a new treatment, in a situation where we may have treatments that give a smaller number of patients the prospect for a big pay off, we have to take that into account.

I will respond to Senator Crown first, as the points he raised are fresh in my mind. I do not agree with the points raised by Senator Crown about the national cancer control programme using health economics of the technology assessment of the pharmacoeconomics unit which does a health technology assessment on a drug. That is only part of the assessment. If that were the case, ipilimumab would not have been approved. They use other criteria as well and it is reviewed by a HSE group.

The Senator however is absolutely correct on one point. He has pointed out that if we spend substantial sums of money on a limited number of drugs, that may sometimes be of very little benefit to patients, it deprives many other patients of drugs that can improve the quality of their life. We have a responsibility as both politicians and clinicians in this regard. I know Senator Crown would agree with me that we must take a broader view, that we must have a new way of assessing our processes that is more transparent and more fair and that involves clinicians and the people who must pay the bill. That is what is happening in the Department. The chief medical officer is exploring with the HSE the adoption of a new decision making system in relation to new drugs. We must strike a balance, which I know the Senator is acutely aware of and many people are becoming aware of how we pay for new drugs and still pay for all the old drugs.

One of the things that strikes me is that society must face up to the fact that we have a pot of money, that if we are to make money available for new drugs, some of the old drugs must move sideways to make room for them. Sideways does not mean out. The pharmaceutical industry must take responsibility for this too, in terms of the moneys it demands for both new drugs and for existing brand drugs. I have been very disappointed with the approach of the organisation to the negotiations we have had to date. The pharmaceutical industry has a much bigger game to play in Ireland in terms of the drugs that are for sale in Ireland and which are available on the European market and elsewhere. We deeply appreciate the role of the industry and the important role it plays in our economy, but it behoves us to look beyond the people involved in this country and talk to those who are in charge of the global operations of the companies that are located in Ireland. They seem to be consumed with the bottom line in Ireland, to the detriment of the bottom line of the multinational parent companies. This will be controversial, but I am not afraid to say it, but equally I must bring clinicians into the equation and insist that they too take responsibility and understand the implications of the decisions they make. They too must be part of the process. I know that when I practised as a physician years ago, I took the view that I was treating the patient in front of me and would prescribe without due regard to anything else what I thought was the correct thing and that cost implications was none of my business. It is the right thing to do, but it cannot be done in isolation and without considering how it affects all the other patients of all the other doctors around the different specialties, not just oncology. I hear the point Senator Crown is making. It is a valid point to raise at this committee and I am happy to say the chief medical officer is addressing it and will be engaging with clinicians, including Senator Crown.

As I said at the outset, and I cannot remember for sure whether it was John Donne who said "No man is an island", but no part of the health service is an island either and no part of this is onto itself. It must all be considered in the round. A lot of us have a lot of "fessing up" to do in terms of being honest about the impact and implications for everybody that uses the health service.

Deputy Peter Fitzpatrick mentioned retaining the current operating hours for the Louth minor injuries unit and the matter is under review. A cost-benefit analysis needs to be done to justify whether they should be maintained. Deputy McConalogue addressed most of his issues towards Mr. Magee who answered him in positive terms. For example, a pacemaker service is back in operation. We continue to monitor the catchment area issue. Hospitals cannot have it both ways. They were quite happy to take patients before and they will be happy to do so in the future as we introduce a policy of "the money follows the patient". We have already implemented the policy in some areas and we intend to roll it out over the next couple of years. I will leave the estate management issue to Mr. Magee to answer.

Mr. Cathal Magee

I thank all of the members for their comments. With regard to Letterkenny Hospital, very clear directions have been sent out on the catchment area and it arose from an issue emerging across a number of hospitals in Dublin. The direction was signed by a number of executives so it is clear that we are not happy with any change in the catchment area referral policies that were extant. A very detailed commentary was sent out.

With regard to the estate item, we will review it and get back to the Deputy. With regard to the issue on Dundalk raised by Deputy Fitzpatrick, the matter is under review and we will see where we are on it.

What about Donegal?

Deputy Ó Caoláin, closing remarks please.

I thank the Minister and his colleagues and Mr. Magee and his colleagues. We have had a very long meeting but they have shared a lot of information with us and we are grateful to them.

I call on Deputy McConalogue to make his closing remarks on behalf of Fianna Fáil. I should have called him first and I apologise.

I thank everyone for taking the time to come here today. We had a useful debate and I appreciate their efforts.

I call on the Minister to make his closing remarks.

I will be brief too because I am over half an hour late for a meeting. I thank everybody. We have had a long meeting but it was informative. I thank my ministerial colleagues for coming here and I thank Mr. Magee and the HSE for being here. I also thank my Secretary General and departmental officials for attending. Most of all we all need to take our hats off to the front-line staff who have held our service together through extremely difficult and challenging times.

Members

Hear, hear.

On behalf of the members of the committee, I thank the Minister, the Secretary General at his Department, the Ministers of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch and Deputy Róisín Shortall, and Mr. Cathal Magee and his staff. Mr. Ray Mitchell, parliamentary affairs department, HSE, has also been helpful to the committee. It is important that at this committee answers are given and there is accountability. The HSE and the Department of Health have spent the past three hours engaging with us and I thank them. At our next meeting we will deal with the Children First Bill, the Irish Medical Organisation and the Irish Association of Social Workers.

The joint committee adjourned at 2.35 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 19 June 2012.
Top
Share