Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 7 Feb 2007

Vol. 185 No. 21

Adjournment Matters.

Domiciliary Care Allowance.

I raise the matter of the payment of domiciliary care allowances in County Westmeath. Perhaps this pertains to many other counties but I am dealing with the problems in County Westmeath. Apparently, the position is that domiciliary care allowance claims received in the latter part of 2005 are being assessed and the waiting time for a decision is at least 18 months. Nobody can understand why it is taking so many months for a decision.

Many people are waiting for this payment, principally mothers with children who require particular care — that is the reason for the domiciliary care allowance. It is a very useful payment because often a mother must get somebody into the home if she has to go somewhere or special materials must be provided. It is scandalous that people must wait a year and half to be assessed as to their suitability to be granted the domiciliary care allowance. I am not blaming the Minister of State but the system. That is the nub of the problem.

A medical assessment must take place but surely it should not take 18 months to decide if a child is eligible and for the parent or guardian to be given the domiciliary care allowance. I told those with whom I spoke that I would raise this issue in the House because I was quite gobsmacked, to put it mildly, that it should take 18 months for a decision.

I thank Senator O'Rourke for raising this matter on the Adjournment which I am taking on behalf of the Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney, and for outlining the position in regard to the domiciliary care allowance.

The domiciliary care allowance is a monthly allowance administered by the Health Service Executive and may be paid in respect of eligible children from birth to the age of 16 who have a severe disability requiring continual or continuous care and attention which is substantially in excess of that normally required by a child of the same age. The condition must be likely to last for at least one year. Where medical confirmation is supplied which pre-dates the actual date of application and the Health Service Executive's senior area medical officer is satisfied that the child required continual or continuous care and attention, substantially in excess of that normally required by a child of the same age, then payment may be made from the date the senior area medical officer is satisfied that such additional care and attention was required.

Eligibility for domiciliary care allowance is determined primarily by reference to the degree of additional care and attention required by the child rather than to the type of disability involved, subject to the means test. It is a matter for the HSE medical officer in the relevant community care area to decide whether or not a child qualifies for domiciliary care allowance on medical grounds.

The current rate of payment for domiciliary care allowance which came into effect on 1 January 2007 is €281.30 per month.

People cannot get it.

This is an increase of 12.1% on the rate of payment since June 2006. Recipients of domiciliary care allowance also receive a respite care grant payment during the first week of June each year. The rate of payment for 2007 will be €1,500. This is an increase of 25% on the rate of payment since 2006.

In regard to the current situation in the Longford-Westmeath local health office area, I understand that the post of principal medical officer was vacant for some time and this resulted in a considerable backlog of applications for domiciliary care allowance. I have been informed that this post has now been filled and the principal medical officer is endeavouring to clear this backlog as quickly as possible.

At present the area medical staff providing services in the Longford-Westmeath local health office area are also involved in dealing with the provision of immunisation services, nursing home inspections and child health assessments. The Health Service Executive is currently engaged in a recruitment process for two additional senior medical officers for the Longford-Westmeath area to ensure adequate service provision in the local health office area and to deal with outstanding applications for allowances and other services.

I appreciate the problems raised by Senator O'Rourke. The position is certainly not satisfactory. I will try to ensure the senior medical officer is appointed as quickly as possible. I understand the allowance can be backdated following examination of the application. I know that answer is not satisfactory for the parents whom Senator O'Rourke represents but it is an administrative problem.

With the Acting Chairman's permission, I wish to ask a supplementary question. The Minister of State stated that the position of principal medical officer has been filled. Is that correct?

That is correct.

I am aware the Minister of State may be unable to give me the details this evening. However, can his office inform me tomorrow as to when it is anticipated the 18-month backlog will be cleared? The Minister of State has stated he understands this can be backdated. If parents or guardians are found to be eligible for domiciliary care, will it be backdated to the date of application for the domiciliary care allowance?

My main request is to be supplied with this information tomorrow as I will attend a meeting of the parents in question tomorrow night. I wish to know by tomorrow when the principal medical officer believes he will have the backlog cleared. Can the Minister of State let my office know by tomorrow?

I will try to get the information for the Senator tomorrow.

Genetically Modified Organisms.

I thank the Minister of State for attending the House this evening. I am trying to consider the issue regarding genetically modified food, crops and so forth from an economic point of view. While I am sure the Department also considers it, I wonder whether it does so sufficiently seriously. There is an increasing demand for food that is either organic or what members of the public would consider to be healthy, traditional and so forth. I do not consider GM foods are likely to make me ill or to cause other people illness. Unfortunately, we have had some issues in the past that have caused great lack of confidence among the public in respect of food. I refer in particular to the development of bovine spongiform encephalopathy, BSE, in cattle due to bonemeal being fed to the animals and the subsequent development of new variant Creuzfeld-Jakob disease in humans who ate that meat.

People have become highly suspicious of the assertions given to them that food is safe. This is unfortunate because although the majority of food produced in Ireland is safe, it takes a long time to reassure people after something like that happens. I had never heard of prions before the BSE scare or the development of the disease. Interesting however, in the early 1970s, a vet in Trinity College suggested that these were possible vectors of disease. He appreciated that even though they lacked nuclei. However, I do not believe much attention was paid to his findings.

While I do not believe I will contract a terrible disease by eating genetically modified foods, there are those who are really put off by the idea of eating such foods. As one person put it, while it is all well and good to assert that it is all right, one does not want to eat dog, as they do in China. I do not believe it does them any harm. Moreover, in west Africa, people eat agouti, a large rodent and people there have tried to feed it to me, claiming it tastes like a cross between chicken and rabbit. I have declined, stating that I would manage myself. While I am sure it would not do any harm, I do not necessarily wish to eat it. Consequently, we must ensure people have the choice of what they wish to eat.

The most recent complaint I received in this regard followed questions regarding animal feed put to the Minister for Agriculture and Food by Members of the Green Party on 1 December. The lady who complained to me stated that apparently 75% of the corn imported to Ireland for animal feed is genetically modified. She stated that she wanted choice as to the kind of feed consumed by the animals she was eating and she has a point in this respect.

The former Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Walsh, used to agree with me that the fatty acids produced in grass-fed cattle are far more healthy for humans than the fatty acids produced in corn-fed animals. I repeatedly told him — he agreed with me — that we should make selling points of such issues in Ireland and that it was economically important. My complainant told me she wanted to have choice in respect of the food consumed by the animals. However, being familiar with the findings regarding fatty acids, I could not tell her she was necessarily wrong, regardless of whether the corn was genetically modified. While this subject may be rather esoteric, people are becoming increasingly careful about what they eat.

I believe we should promote Irish food as health food and I am sure the Minister of State and all at the Department of Agriculture and Food would agree. However, I wonder whether the Department has considered the economics of this issue sufficiently carefully. I do not refer to the health aspects, which have been covered adequately, but to the economics of it. Cheap food policies have driven the production of food since the close of the Second World War. The proportion of people's income devoted to putting food on the table is now much less than was the case 20, 30 or 40 years ago. While this is good, it does not mean necessarily that our nutrition is better. As Members are aware, Ireland has experienced an explosion in obesity and type-2 diabetes.

The outbreak of avian flu in the turkey farm in England, in which people have seen the battery farms that house poultry numbering in the hundreds of thousands and that are confined to a small area is also significant in making people think about what is going on in this regard. One issue that concerns me greatly is that in such battery farms, the feed contains what are described as growth promoters, which are in fact antibiotics. While they are not antibiotics eaten by the Minister of State, the Acting Chairman or me, they remain antibiotics. As evident from the soaring sales of organic or traditionally reared chicken, many people consider the feeding of such growth promoters to poultry to be a serious problem. Some people do not wish to eat them and people should be given choice. Why can we not capitalise on this market?

Apart from the fact that apparently nut allergies can pass through genetically modified corn, I am not particularly worried by its health implications. However, I am seriously concerned about the fact that cross-pollination with organic and traditional crops in Ireland may be easier than we had realised.

I am aware the EU legislation does not allow us to ban such items. However, Austria, Germany, France and some other member states have cordoned off areas in respect of what can be grown there. I wonder whether the economics of the increased demand for traditional or organic foods have been investigated thoroughly. Ireland is a small island nation with a great agricultural tradition and I wonder whether this niche market has been properly investigated.

I thank Senator Henry for raising this important matter in the House and I propose to address the topic in three distinct parts. The first relates to the question of excluding GM crops from Irish agriculture, the second to cross-pollination between GM and non-GM crops and the third pertains to the issue of the economic value in respect of the GM crops.

Before doing so, as the Senator referred to animal feed, I will clarify the figures in that regard for her friend. While GM crops are not grown in Ireland, it imports a considerable amount of GM maize, soya and rapeseed for incorporation into animal feed. I refer to import statistics from 2005. A total of 464,000 tonnes of GM maize were imported, which constituted 95% of total imports. The figure for GM soya was 204,000 tonnes, which also constituted 95% of total imports. The figure for GM rapeseed was 4,300 tonnes, or 3% of total imports. The aforementioned figures in respect of these GM foods might be even greater than Senator Henry thought. While I do not know whether that is any consolation, I wanted to provide her with the figures as they are.

As the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Coughlan, has stated in this House on a number of previous occasions, the rules governing the production and the use of GM crops within the European Union are set out in EU legislation. The Senator also referred to this point. The legislation has been jointly adopted by the European Parliament and the Council and is binding on all member states. This legislation does not provide for the unilateral declaration of a GM free country or region as Senator Henry stated. In effect, this means it is illegal for any competent authority to prohibit the cultivation of GM crops authorised under the stringent EU authorisation procedures and listed on the EU Common Catalogue of Agriculture Plant Varieties, should a farmer wish to cultivate such crops. However, it should be noted that at present only one GM crop is authorised for cultivation within the EU and that is a GM maize variety only suitable for growing conditions in southern Europe, particularly Spain.

Notwithstanding that, options are available within member states and regions to restrict the growing of GM crops. One option is the concept of voluntarily developed GM free regions, where a voluntary agreement is reached among all growers in a region not to grow GM crops. Another option is to seek a derogation from the European Commission that, on the basis of sound scientific evidence, co-existence of GM crops with non-GM crops is not possible in certain regions in respect of certain named crops. The cultivation of these crops can then be legitimately prohibited if the case made is accepted by the Commission.

The second issue I wish to address is the question of GM crops cross-pollinating with non-GM crops. The Senator may be aware that an interdepartmental working group established by the Department presented a report and recommendations on how best authorised GM crops could co-exist with non-GM crops should the Irish farming community decide to cultivate such crops. We are considering the measures proposed by the working group in conjunction with observations I received in a public consultation process held early last year on the recommendations made.

The proposed co-existence measures will focus on creating conditions during the cultivation, harvest, transport and storage of crops that will make it possible for conventional and organic growers to keep the adventitious presence of GMOs in their crops below the labelling thresholds established in community law. Measures are also proposed to provide redress to an organic farmer who suffers verifiable economic loss as a result of admixture of GM crops with non-GM crops.

At the request of the Minister for Agriculture and food, Deputy Coughlan, Teagasc carried out an evaluation of the possible national economic implications for the agrifood industry from the use of GMOs in crop and livestock production. Teagasc based its study on the economic implications of allowing the importation into Ireland of certified GM-free soyabean and maize livestock feed ingredients only and the economic implications of GM-free crop cultivation in Ireland.

In the first scenario, the study showed substantial additional costs would be placed on the livestock sector, particularly on specialist dairy and beef farmers, if they were to use certified GM-free soya and maize only in feedingstuffs. In the second scenario, the study examined five hypothetical GM crops which could be grown here, including herbicide tolerant sugar beet, septoria resistant winter wheat, fusarium resistant winter wheat, rhyncosporium resistant spring barley and blight resistant potatoes. This evaluation showed increased profits could be generated for growers of these GM crops compared to their conventional equivalent. However, the evaluation also showed a significant cost would be incurred with regard to identity preservation for conventional growers in a co-existence arrangement.

In a report prepared by the Irish Council for Bioethics in November 2005, Genetically Modified Crops and Food: Threat or Opportunity for Ireland? Opinion, the question of Ireland losing its "clean green" image if GM crops were grown in this country was addressed and it concluded, "...fears over the loss of Ireland's ‘clean green' image, solely on the basis of the introduction of GM crops, would appear to be somewhat misplaced." The need for further evaluations on the production and use of GM crops will continue to be monitored.

I thank the Minister of State for her reply which I find extremely encouraging. I hope we will not focus on short-term profits. If she sees the former Minister, Deputy Walsh, in the corridors of power she might discuss with him the livestock sector, particularly fatty acids in beef. A major selling point is that grass-fed beef is better for one than corn-fed beef.

The Seanad adjourned at 9.05 p.m. until10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 8 February 2007.
Top
Share