Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 21 Apr 2015

Vol. 239 No. 8

Commencement Matters

Mental Health Services Provision

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Michael Ring. While I have great respect for the Minister of State, there is something fundamentally wrong when we table a Commencement matter directed at the Minister for Health only for it to be taken by a different Minister who may not be familiar with the issues involved. We should change the way in which Commencement matters are selected to allow Senators to defer a Commencement matter if the relevant Minister is not available.

There are serious concerns about the future and direction of mental health service in County Roscommon. Morale among psychiatric nurses in the county is at an all-time low. One of the causes for concern is staffing at Knockroe House, which is a high support unit for patients with challenging psychiatric behavioural issues. The unit is only staffed by one nurse and one care worker during the day or at night, whereas previously it was operated by four specialist psychiatric nurses. Two serious incidents occurred in the unit in recent times, both of which were of a sexual nature. The first incident involved two patients and the second involved a patient and a member of staff. These incidents were not reported to the Garda but they were investigated by the HSE. I do not agree with the practice of the HSE investigating itself. The Mental Health Commission is now investigating the incidents, which I welcome.

The main reason I tabled this Commencement matter is to discuss a plan by the HSE to close the Rosalie unit in Castlerea, County Roscommon, which houses 25 long stay psychiatric patients. In the 1980s, mental health service policy was based on a document called Planning for the Future. Under the policy, we established day care centres for psychiatric patients, supervised hostels and unsupervised hostels. As these options were not suitable for certain categories of patients, we also established a long stay unit to provide for their needs. The Rosalie unit fits the criteria under A Vision for Change to would allow it to remain in operation because it contributes to the 50 long stay beds available to a population of 300,000 between counties Roscommon and Galway. However, the HSE has vetted the 25 patients at the unit with a view to discharging them to private nursing homes. If they were wrongfully placed in the unit in the first place, can they now sue the HSE 25 years after their admission? I recently observed a patient with dementia who was staying in a private nursing home. She was uncontrollable and was attacking staff in the unit. I do not believe that a private nursing home is the appropriate place for these patients.

Staff in County Roscommon are highlighting areas of concern. They are like whistle blowers but the HSE is not listening to them. The same thing happened in Aras Attracta after a patient died but it was only when the HSE finally investigated the issues arising that the staff members who raised the issue were vindicated. A further 34 staff have since been appointed to Aras Attracta but HIQA has indicated this increased staffing level is not sufficient in itself.

It would be wrong to close the Rosalie unit in Castlerea. It has been a family home for between 20 and 25 patients for the past 25 years. All of the patients are elderly. I will not allow them to be discommoded because that would be grossly unfair.

Will the Minister of State convey my concerns in the strongest possible terms to the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch? This is an issue of grave concern for me and many others in County Roscommon.

I thank the Senator for raising this issue for discussion. I am taking it on behalf of the Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, who is in Latvia on Government business today. She has asked me to convey her apologies to the Senator and the House.

Recent years have seen the Health Service Executive's mental health services nationally tackle the challenges of reorientating from a hospital and bed-based focus to developing the structures and processes required for enhanced community-based provision in line with national policy under A Vision for Change which recommends that integrated care be provided for service users in their local community and delivered primarily through community mental health teams, each of which would typically cater for a population of approximately 50,000 to be effective.

Galway-Roscommon mental health services are committed to full implementation of A Vision for Change. As such, their guiding principles are patient centeredness, equality, access to quality care that is focused on recovery, and integration with other mental health and mainstream health services. Recognising the need to reconfigure services in line with A Vision for Change, the HSE in Galway-Roscommon appointed an expert group to review local community mental health services. The report of the expert group was published in June 2014, with a focus on residential care settings and resources across both counties. The key goal of the report was to make recommendations that would ensure service users maximised their full potential and saw improvements in the quality of their lives.

The HSE in Galway-Roscommon provides an inpatient and community mental health service for a population of 314,000. It is at an advanced stage in the implementation of A Vision for Change and has moved into population sectors of 50,000, appointed team co­ordinators and developed an overarching clinical governance model. There are six general adult team sectors which are clinically led by two consultant psychiatrists and a multidisciplinary team, as highlighted in A Vision for Change. Each sector has its own unique service needs, based on identified population, age groups, culture, etc. There are 12 consultant general adult psychiatrists across the two counties which, again, is in line with A Vision for Change. Recent initiatives include the development of a psychiatry of later life team, the provision of an intensive home treatment team for the Roscommon area, the opening of an adolescent day hospital and the provision of a 20-bed child and adolescent inpatient unit with a 24-hours admissions policy.

In addition, Galway-Roscommon mental health services were successful in securing 58 additional new staff posts through development funding since 2012, of which 45 are in place. The remaining 13 posts are at various stages of recruitment. The make-up of these posts includes additional consultants in the areas of general adult community mental health teams, psychiatry of later life teams and rehabilitation and recovery teams, as well as occupational therapists, community mental health nurses, social workers and psychologists.

In the light of the above and consistent with the approach of reconfiguring services across all areas, it is not proposed to undertake the type of review suggested by the Senator. However, if he has any specific issue he wishes to pursue, he should contact either Galway-Roscommon mental health services or the office of the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch.

The word "reconfigure" has been bandied about by the HSE for some years. It was bandied about during the term of the last Government and we are still hearing it. Of course, the reality of reconfiguration in County Roscommon was that we lost an emergency department.

The Minister of State has referred to investment made in mental health services and the additional staff appointed in County Roscommon. It is my understanding there has been no investment in community mental health teams in the county.

The Minister of State also referred to the quality of life of patients. The people about whom I am talking do not want to be moved into the private nursing home sector. That is the quality of life preference they are indicating. In that context, I reiterate my call for an independent assessment of the running of the mental health service in County Roscommon.

In respect of the figures, 45 positions new positions were created. To be fair, much is happening in the mental health services and there have been many changes. The Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, has worked hard at Government level to get the funding needed for these services. I will convey the Senator's very strong feelings on the issue to her. I note he would wish she was present to debate the issue. However, she has made an offer that the Senator may contact her office or the service itself which I am sure he will take up. I will ask her officials to bring the debate to her attention to ensure she responds. If the Senator has anything further to add, he may do so through the Minister of State or the officials in the HSE.

Hospital Waiting Lists

I have tabled this motion on the back of a parliamentary question my party colleague, Deputy Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin, tabled last week on hospital waiting times at University Hospital Waterford. Every time I table parliamentary questions, which I have done since 2011, the waiting times are getting worse. I will not judge the Government on my standards or Sinn Féin standards but on the standard the Government and the Minister for Health have set themselves, which is that no patient should be waiting longer than 12 months to see a consultant, yet the figures for University Hospital Waterford show that 24,274 patients are on waiting lists. Of these 8,478 are waiting for longer than 12 months. In the specialty areas, 835 are waiting for dermatology, 722 for general surgery, 736 for ophthalmology, 2,375 for orthopaedics and 1,939 for ear nose and throat services.

The reason for this - I have had this argument over and again with the Minister for Health and the previous Minister for Health - is that since 2009, University Hospital Waterford has lost more than 300 staff, 130 of whom were nurses. It also lost two surgical theatres, a ward, critical bed places and generally capacity has been reduced. Year on year the funding has been cut. The reduction in capacity from staff, beds and surgical space has meant that the hospital is not in a position to meet the needs of patients. In addition, many hospital consultant posts l have not been filled. A number of cancer specialists have been very critical of the lack of consultants in the dermatology unit. Orthopaedic surgeons who work in Waterford regional hospital or University Hospital Waterford are critical of the lack of orthopaedic consultants. It is clear that there is a serious lack of capacity in the hospital that needs to be filled as is clear from the figures. It is unacceptable that nearly 8,500 patients are waiting for longer than 12 months to see a consultant. Will the Minister explain to me and the people of Waterford and the south east why they have to wait for longer than 12 months to see a consultant? Why do patients have to wait for so long? Will he acknowledge that it is current Government policy that all patients should be seen within 12 months? Will he outline what extra resources will be put in place, the consultant posts that need to be filled and when these vacant consultant posts will be filled.

I thank the Senator for raising the issue which has been raised on many occasions, including during my recent visit to Waterford.

Improving waiting lists for scheduled care is a key priority for the Government.

Under Future Health, significant structural changes are envisaged for the acute hospital sector, with the formation of hospital groups and the reorganisation of services to improve both quality and access. These structural changes are under way but will take some time to fully implement. In the meantime, operating pressures remain on acute hospitals. The House will be aware that an additional €74 million was announced earlier this month to tackle delayed discharges and emergency department overcrowding. This was on top of additional funding of €25 million provided at the start of the year and an additional €3 million provided in late 2014.

As regards waiting lists, I understand the HSE has put in place specific measures to address waiting times. These measures include observation of the national waiting list protocol, adherence to the relevant HSE national clinical programme guidelines and prioritising day of surgery admission, where this is clinically appropriate.

I note that the special delivery unit indicates that there is still significant potential to improve performance in hospitals. It is important, therefore, that hospital performance is closely monitored. The House will recall that a revised accountability framework for the HSE was published as part of the 2015 service plan. The framework requires a formal performance management framework for hospitals to include access, quality, outcomes and financial performance. I am assured that waiting list performance will be assessed within the revised framework.

It is also important that we know the true extent of the waiting lists to facilitate better planning and management. In that regard, an exercise to validate inpatient waiting lists to establish more precise information on the volume of people awaiting care has commenced. In addition, the HSE has started to publish waiting lists at consultant and specialty level; therefore, it will be clear to all where the bottlenecks are.

Taking into account current pressures on acute hospital services, the Minister for Health has put in place a target that by mid-year nobody will wait more than 18 months for inpatient and day case treatment or an outpatient appointment. By the end of the year the target will be revised to a waiting time of no more than 15 months. The HSE is working on an implementation plan to achieve these targets.

I understand University Hospital Waterford has worked on a local plan to tackle its waiting lists which is being considered within the south-south west hospital group.

With regard to consultant appointments, I am advised that two consultant urologists are expected to take up posts in the coming months and that progress is being made in the recruitment of two consultant dermatologists. The hospital is also in the process of recruiting a temporary part-time ENT consultant to assist with the management of the waiting list.

The Minister has confirmed that his Department will continue to work with the HSE to ensure issues relating to hospital waiting lists are addressed.

With all due respect to the Minister of State, he did not write that script. It was obviously written for him by a civil servant in the Department of Health. It is clearly an inadequate response to the questions I have asked. It talks about reassuring people that waiting list performance will be assessed. It then talks about performance evaluation and the significant potential of the special delivery unit. Bizarrely, it goes on to indicate that the 12-month time period - the Government's own stated promise - is a moveable feast. It is now 18 months and might be 15 months before the year is out.

The Minister of State said two consultant posts would be filled. In addition, he referred to bottlenecks, but they are already included in the Minister for Health's figures. The specialties of dermatology, ophthalmology, ENT and general surgery all have high waiting lists. Some 6,000 patients have been waiting for longer than 18 months. Senator Colm Burke is passing information to him, but it is the Minister of State who is sitting in the ministerial seat. If the Senator wants to be a Minister, he will have to wait until he is appointed. I am sure the Minister of State is well able to answer my questions.

Does the Senator have a question for the Minister of State?

What is the Government going to do to reduce waiting times? All the Minister of State has said is that the position will be assessed and reassessed.

Four consultants have been appointed.

That response is simply not good enough. If that is what the Government is going to do, it will not reduce waiting times at University Hospital Waterford.

The Senator should not play politics with the issue.

In 12 months time I can guarantee that, if resources are not provided, the Minister will not have met the 18-month and 15-month targets.

First, four consultants have been appointed.

As I indicated, earlier this month the Government announced an additional €74 million to tackle overcrowding. This allocation is additional to the €25 million in extra funding provided at the start of the year and a further €3 million provided at the end of last year.

Having inherited a very serious problem, the Government is bringing order to the nation's finances. If we were to adopt the policies of the Senator's party, we would not be able to tax anyone or generate revenue. Sinn Féin does not want to pay hospital consultants more than €150,000 per annum, yet we are already experiencing great difficulties in attracting consultants to work in the health system because they can earn more abroad. We want to solve the problem of overcrowding in hospitals. The Minister for Health is committed to doing so and has worked hard at Government level to deliver the funding needed to address the problem.

Alcohol Sales Legislation

I welcome the Minister of State. The issue I raise is the failure to commence section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008 which provides that premises selling alcohol and other goods must establish a separate area for the sale of alcohol, including a separate entrance inside the premises. The section has not been commenced.

High levels of alcohol consumption are causing significant health problems. For example, a recent report noted an increase in liver disease among young people. Health problems associated with alcohol consumption will increase unless we tackle the issue of excessive alcohol consumption. One measure would be to provide for a clearly defined and segregated alcohol section in retail units that sell alcohol and other goods. I ask the Minister of State to clarify the reasons section 9 of the Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008 has not been commenced.

I thank the Senator for raising this issue. It is appropriate that we are discussing alcohol control measures during Action on Alcohol Week. As the Senator may be aware, events and conferences are being held this week, facilitated by the Alcohol Forum, to raise awareness of the problems caused by alcohol and advance debate and mobilise communities to reduce Ireland's alcohol harm. Initiatives such as Action on Alcohol Week are crucial in raising awareness of the damage caused by the misuse of alcohol, changing our attitudes to alcohol and reducing our levels of harmful drinking. The Government supports this initiative and the Minister for Health will speak at the Alcohol Forum national conference tomorrow.

Most Irish adults drink too much and many drink dangerously. This has a significant impact on society and the economy through greater illness and higher health costs, public order and violent offences, road traffic collisions, injuries and absences from work. It is also associated with many suicides and instances of rape, domestic violence and child abuse.

Our alcohol problem is serious and decisive and innovative action is required to address it. In February the Government approved and published the general scheme of the public health (alcohol) Bill. This legislation forms part of a comprehensive suite of measures to reduce excessive patterns of alcohol consumption, as set out in the steering group's report on a national substance misuse strategy. The aim is to reduce alcohol consumption in Ireland to 9.1 litres per person per annum by 2020 and reduce the harm associated with alcohol. This legislation is the most far-reaching proposed by any Government, with alcohol misuse being addressed for the first time as a public health measure.

Structural separation for alcohol products in mixed trading outlets is provided for in section 9 of Intoxicating Liquor Act 2008 which comes within the remit of the Department of Justice and Equality. This section provides that all alcohol products sold in supermarkets, convenience stores and similar outlets must be displayed and sold in a structurally separated part of the premises.

It has not been commenced to date. The Departments of Health and Justice and Equality are examining the best way to implement the provision on the separation of alcohol products from other products in mixed trading premises. As alcohol is no ordinary commodity, this should be reflected in the provisions for its availability and visibility in shops. The general availability of alcohol is an important indicator when assessing alcohol-related harm. The aim is to ensure alcohol products cannot be displayed like ordinary grocery products but will be subject to strict merchandising requirements. It is intended that the policy aims of the section will be achieved. The Department of Health is continuing to work on the drafting the Bill and it is expected that it will be published during this Dáil session.

I thank the Minister of State for a very comprehensive reply. The legislation was enacted in 2008, but seven years later no regulation has been put in place to implement it. I acknowledge that the Minister and the Government are working on the best way forward, but it might be helpful if the timeline was clarified. It is one thing to publish the Bill, but there is a need for a timeline for its enactment. I, therefore, ask the Minister of State to indicate if section 9 or similar legislation will be implemented by the end of the year.

The Government is very committed to implementing the legislation. I recently attended a Cabinet meeting for a discussion on the abuse of alcohol. The Minister for Health, Deputy Leo Varadkar is committed to tackling this issue. Tomorrow he will speak at a conference in Dublin when I hope he will outline the Government's plans for the future. We all know that there is very serious abuse of alcohol. People accept that there is a need for it to be regarded with the same level of seriousness as drink driving or the smoking ban in order that it would not be seen to be acceptable for people to drink in the way they do. Excessive drinking creates problems in the home, for society and the health of individuals, while there is also a cost to the State. The Government is serious about tackling the problem and will bring forward legislation in the very near future. Knowing the Minister, once the legislation is published, he will bring it quickly to the Dáil and this House. I hope that will happen soon and will bring the Senator's concerns to his attention. I will also ask his officials to take note of what has been said in this debate and respond to the Senator directly.

Local Government Reform

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Ann Phelan.

I also welcome the Minister of State and thank the Cathaoirleach for scheduling this important and sensitive topic for discussion.

What we are talking about is the low rate of representational payment to city and county councillors. I began the discussion last week when I raised with the Minister for Social Protection the important issue of councillors' PRSI contributions. Councillors receive a representational payment of €16,950, from which the Government deducts PRSI for which councillors receive no benefit, a pension levy for which councillors receive no pension and USC, although the payment is not considered to be a salary. To add insult to injury, the representational payment made to councillors no longer compensates them for the responsibility they take on and the extent of the work they do.

Taking the average payment made to councillors, to say we are treating local elected representatives in a shabby way is an understatement. I am a trade unionist and have always sought fair play for those I represent. In this House I represent city and county councillors. The Local Government Reform Act 2014 was described by the then Minister, former Deputy Phil Hogan, as representing the most radical reform of local government in over 100 years.

It introduced sweeping changes to Irish local government. In one year the landscape of local government has undergone historic change with the amalgamation of some city and county councils, the creation of new municipal districts, new regional assemblies, the setting up of local community development committees and the creation of enterprise and development strategic policy committees, SPCs, in all councils. Constituencies are now very large with fewer councillors to do the work. The pace of change has been fast and effective. Speaking in January, the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly, hailed local government as the engine behind recovery and said that by the end of 2015 local economic and community plans would have been formulated by all 31 local authorities. If local government is the engine behind recovery who are the real drivers of this engine? Who does the Minister of State believe translated this ambitious legislation into a working reality?

The local government administrative structure is well resourced and well staffed, with some very highly paid senior positions and we commend its work. The elected members, however, have been the real drivers of change as that was what the legislation envisaged. The former Minister, Phil Hogan, said, "The strength of the new municipalities will be founded not on corporate status, but on the role of their elected members." All over Ireland city and county councillors have embraced the immense challenges of reform with hard work, energy and commitment but how have they been treated in return?

To establish the exact position, as I am not given to hearsay and speculation, I undertook an empirical survey of every councillor in the country and here is a little of what they had to say: One councillor said:

I work 50 hours a week as a newly-elected councillor. This includes attending events. I receive €600 a month net after deductions.

Another said:

I have to take a significant amount of time off work for meetings which are all held in the morning. This means that I have had to take 12 days' special leave from my annual holidays. In addition I have had to take unpaid leave to make up 24 to 30 meetings a month. It is simply unsustainable; I am lucky with my employer [but] how many employers would be so patient? I believe that we are closing out working class people from challenging for public office.

Another said:

If Government is serious about attracting more women and particularly younger women who want to represent their communities as councillors then Government needs to start paying a living wage and ensure that councillors are entitled to a contributory pension. I have a BA an LLB and a first in an MA hence I'm well educated and I am sure that if I wanted to I [could] get paid more in the private sector.

Another woman said, "As a woman in politics I have to fund my child care cost from council salary." This is something that we in the trade union movement fund for women who are members of the national executive.

One councillor said:

I am struggling to find enough hours to do everything. I cannot afford not to work in a full-time job as I have a mortgage and three young children. If the council remuneration is not increased to a decent, fair level the council chambers will fill with those people who can afford not to work or those with pensions. Representation will not be balanced, in a time of gender quotas, Government are ensuring that the squeezed middle, as the Government likes to call us, will not be represented going into the future. A lot of my fellow councillors are thinking about resigning.

Another said, "Councillors work seven days a week 52 weeks of the year including Christmas day and are taken for granted also the general public think that we get a pension and that we are on a very large salary." Another said, "I'm a full time County Councillor and I hold 40 clinics a month." One said, "I work At least 70 hours a week to serve my constituents in a very large municipal district of west Mayo." The Cathaoirleach will I am sure have some sympathy with that councillor. Another said:

The public is totally unaware that we are paid close to or below the minimum wage for weeks averaging in excess of 45 hours. We have no secretarial support, no research support.

The statistics are stark. Some 26% of the respondents were female; 25% had only part-time work and 34% had no work at all; 37% had no income outside their council income; and 45% had no pay related social insurance, PRSI, other than class K, which means, in effect, that after up to 40 years service some will retire with absolutely nothing to show for their work.

Some 62% do not have a contributory pension arrangement and 66% of them have no private pension. It is absolutely scandalous that some 47% of them, members of local authorities who must travel all over their constituencies, have no permanent health insurance. In the event of an accident or disablement, they have nothing to look forward to.

I am coming to an end now and ask the Cathaoirleach to indulge me . Some 33% of councillors said they work more than 40 hours per week and 64% claim to work between 11 and 40 hours. Some 2% had over 30 years service and 67% had less than ten years. More then 50% of those surveyed had less than €10,000 to show for their service. The greatest insult of all is when they get their telephone bill and separate their personal calls from their council calls. Surely to God we could fund their telephone calls.

The Senator is way over time.

I will finish on this point. Will the Minister of State commit today to assembling a group to review the pay, terms and conditions of councillors and to review in particular the PRSI tax? It is time for change and for fair play for local representatives. I know other Members of this House already made the position clear some time ago.

I thank the Senator for raising this important issue and assure him that Senators John Kelly, John Whelan and Denis Landy, and some Fine Gael Senators have raised this issue previously, not only with me but also with the Minister of State at the Department of Social Protection, Deputy Kevin Humphreys, and the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government, Deputy Alan Kelly.

Our discussion follows the debate last week in this House on the issue of PRSI contributions by councillors and the lack of benefits accruing to them. In response in the House, the Minister of State at the Department of Social Protection, Deputy Kevin Humphreys, indicated he will work with interested parties to see if a fair resolution can be reached in this area. Perhaps it is to that the Senator is referring when he suggests he would like to see a working group set up. The Minister of State has indicated he is willing to work with all interested people. I understand very well the issue the Senator is referring to because I came up through the local authority system.

On the issue of salaries, Senators are already aware of the extraordinary number of hours elected councillors contribute in carrying out their wide range of functions in order to provide the optimum level of service possible to the public. Being an elected member of a local authority is not a job of limited hours. Councillors are continually called on by their constituents. The ending of the dual mandate had an additional impact, increasing pressure to provide services to constituents on local authority issues. Indeed, elected councillors may be financially disadvantaged in representing citizens, particularly where this necessitates them taking time off from their full-time employment.

A range of financial supports is in place to assist councillors in their work. These supports include the annual representational payment of over €16,000 which is set at 25% of a Senator's salary. Annual expense allowances, retirement gratuity, mobile phone allowance and an allowance for chairmen are also provided. The representational payment represents a recognition of the work councillors choose to undertake when they stand for election and, subsequently, serve their community. This payment is not and never was meant to be a salary. Elected councillors have a commitment to their role that extends beyond the financial; councillors know that the annual representational payment is not fully commensurate with their workload, yet they continue to undertake their functions with an admirable degree of dedication.

The House is aware that significant changes have recently been made to local government structures by the provisions of the Local Government Reform Act 2014. My colleague, the Minister, has indicated that he intends to have a review carried out on the operation of the new structures and arrangements generally. This appraisal will be undertaken by a broadly representative advisory group and a working group for engagement with the Association of Irish Local Government.

The review will provide a sound evidence base on which to consider any further changes to the operation of the local government system in Ireland. The ultimate objective of that system must be to improve the quality of life of individuals and the welfare of local communities while delivering the best possible value for money. To this end, it is of primary importance to ensure that the new systems in place, such as the provisions for enhanced policy making and stronger oversight powers for the elected council as a whole, are being operated effectively and as intended.

I have no doubt that the workload of local authority members in the context of the new structures and the associated financial arrangements will arise for consideration in the course of the review. Full account will be taken of all views expressed on this and other matters as the work proceeds. I again thank the Senator for raising these very important issues. We are well aware of the matter which will be considered in the review of local government reforms in the round.

I thank the Minister of State for her reply. She has mentioned that the representational allowance is not a salary but why are we charging PRSI, a pension levy and a universal social charge on it? If it is not a salary and there is no master-servant relationship, why is it not a straightforward allowance without any attachments? I appreciate where the Minister of State is coming from with respect to oversight powers of councillors but I have some serious doubts about it. We have disempowered our councillors and we are taking more away from them.

I have asked the following question before and a simple "Yes" or "No" response will do. Will the Minister of State consider putting together a working group to address this issue? The PRSI group is being dealt with by the Department of Social Protection. I am referring to wages, salary, representational allowance or whatever we want to call it. Will she put together a working group that will examine this issue and produce a reasonable standard of payment for these councillors? They deserve the right to live and they should not have to fund their work from their own pockets.

In the course of the review, full account will be taken of all the views expressed on the matter. The Minister of State, Deputy Kevin Humphreys, has indicated that he will work with all interested parties. Local government has its representative bodies and we should work with them. In line with the review of local government, Putting People First, it is not about setting up new structures. I suggest Senators work with the representative bodies.

Will the Minister meet them?

I will ask him to meet them. It is a very important issue. As the review is taking place and that is where the issue should be raised.

I thank the Leader for his intervention. The representatives in the Local Authority Members Association want to meet the Minister.

I will make that suggestion and perhaps the Minister might reply to the House about it.

That could be done through the Leader.

That is appreciated.

Sitting suspended at 3.20 p.m. and resumed at 3.35 p.m.
Top
Share