I welcome Minister of State at the Department of Children, Equality, Disability, Integration and Youth, Deputy Anne Rabbitte, to the House. I call on Senator Sherlock, who has four minutes.
Nithe i dtosach suíonna - Commencement Matters
Childcare Services
I thank the Minister of State for coming into the House. I will start by offering my support to all those providing an early years service in this country, and pay tribute to all the providers and staff who go in day in, day out to do their very best for the families that they look after.
Many services are distressed about the necessity and expense of requiring a chartered accountant. With regard to these new changes that have been introduced, many are frustrated about the way a day's absence is recorded and how they are penalised in the early years system, unlike in the primary and secondary school systems. There are huge issues with regard to the qualification requirements of AIM workers relative to SNAs in the primary or secondary systems. Even with those frustrations, they continue to go in day in, day out and do their very best by the children, by their staff and by the families.
Today I want to ask about the oversight procedures and the powers of investigation in place for those in receipt of core funding. Core funding is now very substantial, at €287 million. Is it enough? Absolutely not, but it is substantial nonetheless. Any organisation in receipt of core funding, whether in part or in full, has responsibilities towards fairness. I ask about this issue because I want to draw attention to what is sharp practice on the part of one early years provider that I have become aware of. In early May of this year, I came to learn that a number of families who had intended keeping their children in the childcare facility until the end of the summer were told their place would be terminated early, in June. The reason for that termination was because those families had decided not to send their children to the ECCE within that crèche, but to send them to an alternative ECCE from September. I have had contact with six families this happened to, but I am aware there are more.
Even more troubling is that the places of the older children are linked to the places of younger siblings. Specifically in one case, the family was asked if the child would be attending in September. When the parents said they were not sure, there was an impact for the younger sibling. The eight-month-old baby, who had just commenced their settling-in period in the crèche, had their settling in period put on hold until a decision was made about the older sibling. When the decision was made that the older sibling would not be continuing to the ECCE in September, the crèche rescinded the baby's place. Anyone with a small baby at the moment knows that trying to find a childcare place for a child under one is nearly impossible across the northside of Dublin and in many parts of the country. Because of that precise shortage, I know of another family who felt pressurised and forced to keep their older child in that crèche to preserve and keep the place of the younger sibling. I asked for the written documentation that was furnished to the parents, such as the handbook, the contract and the calendar, and none of those makes provision for the unilateral cancellation by the provider for the reasons set out above.
What protections or oversight procedures are in place for these practices? We know the sector is very tightly regulated in terms of physical infrastructure and staffing, and yet I see little or no guidance by way of what should be in place for an admissions policy and what are the grounds for termination. Furthermore, I note the national childcare scheme enters into a 12-month contract with providers, yet that same security is not afforded to parents. It appears there is nothing in the guidelines to ensure that once a child is enrolled, their place cannot be terminated by the provider at any time outside of the national childcare scheme eligibility requirements. Is it fair that a sibling’s place is tied to that of an older child? We have under the Education Acts very clear admissions policies and requirements for the primary and secondary school systems, but I am not sure those same requirements exist for the early years sector. I spoke at the start about the significant State funding that is now going into early years services. Obviously it does not wholly fund early years services, but there is a significant chunk of funding going in. The provider in question made a net profit of €1.3 million in 2022 and has €2 million in cash reserves. Of course, that is not all due to State support but it is part of it. The Department might say it has no responsibility over who a crèche decides to take on or dispense with, but that is not good enough.
The vast majority of crèches want to do right by families but I believe that these sharp practices are not good enough and should not be stood over by the Department.
Senator Sherlock will get the chance to come back in. I call the Minister of State.
I thank the Senator for raising this important issue and offering me the opportunity on behalf of the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, and the Department to respond to her. To participate in the national childcare scheme, there must be a funding agreement in force between the Department of children and the early learning and childcare provider. The policy guidelines set out the rules governing the scheme, reflecting both the primary and secondary legislation. These guidelines do not stipulate how a provider should manage their admission policies or the termination of a child’s place. This is because early learning and childcare providers are private entities and are currently free to set their own admissions policies, which are agreed with or offered to a parent through a private contract that exists between the two parties. Neither the Minister nor his Department intervenes in these private issues. Early learning and childcare services are regulated by Tusla, the independent statutory regulator, under the Child Care Act 1991. Under existing regulations for preschool services and school-age services, from 2016 and 2018 respectively, each provider is required to have a complaints policy in place, outlining how concerns or complaints will be managed. If parents have concerns about their early learning and childcare service, they can lodge a complaint through the service’s complaints policy and procedures. If there are concerns regarding the operation of a service or the welfare and safety of children who attend, these concerns can be reported to the Tusla early years inspectorate. Contact details of the inspectorate are available on its website, or alternatively, I can provide the Senator with them afterwards.
There is no current requirement under the regulations for services to have an admissions policy. Last May however, the Minister, Deputy O’Gorman, published Equal Start, a major new model of Government-funded supports to ensure children experiencing disadvantage can access and meaningfully participate in early learning and childcare. Under Equal Start, there is a commitment to provide guidance on admissions policies, and explore the possible introduction of regulatory requirements for early learning and childcare services to have an inclusive admissions policy. Equal Start delivers on a key commitment in the first five strategy and it is envisaged that full implementation of all 17 Equal Start actions, including the actions on admissions policies, will happen within the lifetime of this strategy by 2028.
I will continue speaking from the final script so it is in the round, if that is okay. As referred to in the opening statement, Equal Start commits to providing guidance on admissions policies and exploring the possible introduction of regulatory requirements for early learning and childcare services to have an inclusive admissions policy. Moreover, under Equal Start, consideration will be given to extending to early learning and childcare services the duties arising under section 42 of the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission Act 2014. Under section 42, public bodies as defined in that Act which can, subject to regulations, include organisations either wholly or partly funded out of public moneys, have a duty in the performance of their functions to eliminate discrimination, to promote equality of opportunity and to protect the human rights of its staff and the persons to whom they provide services.
Finally, an independent evaluation of the national childcare scheme will be commissioned this year. The issues raised by the Senator in her opening contribution can be further considered in the context of that evaluation. I have finished my scripts. It is unfortunate to hear the Senator raising on the floor of the Seanad today an example of where she says "sharp practice" is occurring. It brings into disrepute so many of the 4,200 really good childcare providers where sharp practice is not happening. The sharp practice in this instance arises when you are using the baby room but you are not taking on an ECCE space, and this leads to your exit very quickly after you came in. That sharp practice is not how mainstay providers operate, as the Senator and I know. It is unfortunate that she has had to raise such an incident today.
I am extremely conscious that when I talk about the powers of oversight and the powers of investigation that I do not want a chill effect to go out to the vast majority of providers that I said at the start of my statement who do exceptionally brilliant work. I think there is an issue and a gap here - a shortfall - in terms of the lack of requirement for a clear admissions policy.
I hear what the Minister of State said with regard to the requirement to have a complaints procedure. Of course, there is nowhere to go once that complaints procedure within the early years service is exhausted. I welcome what the Minister of State said with regard to the new equal start model. This is something we have been campaigning for for a long time to ensure children from disadvantaged backgrounds can access early years services.
There is a glaring gap here with regard to the lack of admissions policies. We need to see that requirement rolled out across all services. It should not be an additional bureaucratic burden. It should be a standard part of every early years service in terms of the paperwork it offers up every year. In particular, I do not believe the Department can cast a blind eye to the sharp practices I have conveyed to the Chamber.
There is nobody who would wish to cast an eye on it. The Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, has said that, when they are doing a review of the equal start later this year, there will be that opportunity to take it on. The other side of this is that there is a role for every one of the city and county childcare committees to ensure there is best practice, and that does not need to be regulated and legislated for. Best practice is ensuring we have open and transparent admissions policies, progress policies and how groups are actually supported and funded. To me, the big piece here is we have fantastic providers, and I hear clearly what the Senator is saying. She is not asking nor looking for extra powers to be put upon a bureaucratic system. What she is saying is there needs to be more openness and transparency. I do not believe in the complaints mechanism, because when a person enters a complaint, he or she is nearly out the door anyway because the goodwill and the trust have broken down. There has to be that admissions piece. There has to be a clear understanding. City and council childcare committees could play a role here.
Disability Services
The Minister of State is very welcome, as always. I am raising this Commencement matter on behalf of Fatima Groups United, which operates in the F2 Centre in Dublin 8. It has the most magnificent facility as part of the whole redevelopment of Fatima. In it, every room is chock-a-block with services to the community. It really lives up to what it does. The group ran a pilot programme for 32 children aged four to 18 that was very successful. It was for families in the Dublin 8 and 12 areas, principally families who were on a waiting list for the CDNT. The referral came from the CDNT, Tusla or local schools. The group ran a children's activity club where families could access a range of programmes. It was to do with socialising and giving supports to children who were waiting on treatment services, and they were really the group's public.
This is an area that experiences a high level of social deprivation and the group finds itself filling a gap because parents in these areas cannot afford any private services, so they are really reliant on this. The programme was run in a previous iteration of the strengthening disability services fund. The group made the application based on the pilot and on the outcomes. Parents said things such as:
Being here has saved me. My anxiety ... [went] through the roof. I am more relaxed, I understand him more and see his needs. I got so much information to help me cope. We do more things now because we aren't judged as much and because I know what works for him so I now know not to go to busy places and do things at pace. Our homelife is ... much better. We aren't as isolated anymore, my nerves aren't as bad.
This was an holistic approach of caring for both children with autism who are neurodiverse and their parents, and assisting that exchange between parent and child, along with other children in these activity clubs.
The group made an application and submitted it on 10 November in accordance with the deadlines for the strengthening disability services fund. The group was notified on 27 November that successful programmes would be advised. In February, the group sought an update because the pilot programme money was running out in June.
The group was told there was a large number of applicants and that it would hear back. It was the same in April when I got on board and started to seek moneys for the group. On 23 April, I got a letter from the HSE telling me there had been a reference from the Department to the HSE and that was where I should write for an update. I am there all the way on that. In June, finally, a further letter was received. The group followed up the email, as did I, only to receive word back that the application had been refused.
Here we have 32 children relying on this service, with a plan to increase the number to 60, and now we have a situation where it cannot go ahead because of the piecemeal funding. The group ran an extremely successful pilot of exactly the type of programme needed to empower parents and support children, and it was done in a holistic manner for the whole family in an area of social deprivation. In every way, therefore, the initiative hits all the things the Minister of State speaks passionately about here. It is an ideal programme of support yet it cannot continue now because the funding has been refused. What are the criteria in this regard and how and why did this group not succeed with its application?
I thank the Senator profusely for raising this issue on the floor of the Seanad. I wondered how long it would be before someone would submit a priority or oral question or raise it on the floor, so I am delighted to be here before the Senators to answer this question. I will give some background and this is important because it ensures I can return to the Department. We will, therefore, set out the background context first.
As Minister of State with special responsibility for disabilities, I believe it is important for me to be clear in saying that the development of any child with a disability to reach his or her full potential remains a priority for me. This Government and the HSE are committed to further developing and enhancing children’s disability services across the State. The children’s disability services grant fund was a new funding initiative open to organisations, including community groups and service providers, with the aim of supporting children on a waiting list for children’s disability network team, CDNT, services and adding value to existing HSE children's disability services. Additionally, as the Senator put it, this was about recognising that a lot of work goes on out there that might not have a service level agreement, SLA, in place or grant funding for but that does do a powerful lot of good for families in communities where parents cannot afford the €100 a week for therapy interventions. It is important to place this situation in that context.
There is an appetite among service providers across the country to support our children and, as a result, the grant fund saw a huge response from voluntary groups, community groups and private agencies. The HSE received more than 500 applications for the grant fund, ranging from proposals for several thousand euro to larger projects seeking millions of euro. The total funding sought was almost €45 million and there was a very high number of applications. In fact, there were 500 applicants.
The Senator also asked how the applications were assessed. A children’s disability services grant scheme evaluation panel was formed by the HSE to assess all applications based on the following criteria: the quality and coherence of the proposal; the contribution to the well-being of children and families; the potential lasting impact; the capacity and sustainability of providers to deliver person-centred services and comply with standards; and value for money. The primary objective of the panel was to set up a framework of service providers from which children’s disability network managers would draw down supports for waitlisted children awaiting services from their CDNTs. Satisfying this objective was the primary consideration of the evaluators. The evaluation panel also outlined that the initiative was also primarily for children awaiting services rather than ones already in receipt of them and that services would not have additional fees that families would have to pay.
The evaluation panel was pleased to see the diverse and innovative services and supports that local and national groups are providing for children with disabilities and was impressed with the range of opportunities they give for children with disabilities to participate in social and community life. The very high number of applications meant there was strong competition for finite funds and a shortlist had to be drawn up. I am sure that one of the questions the Senator asked me was where these funds were coming from. It was from time-related savings from staff I had not recruited. The CEO of the HSE was adamant that this funding would be used in this regard. It came from staff- and time-related savings that had not been used to populate the teams.
The projects were not shortlisted based on a number of factors, including: not being open to children on a CDNT waiting list; a requirement for parents to pay a fee for services; value for money; and a lack of governance.
In total, 52 of the 500 projects submitted were selected by the HSE. I am grateful to see the enthusiasm, but I am also conscious that it tells us what the State needs in order to be able to support the existing services. The State needs €45 million to support the community and voluntary actors. However, it is also important to recognise that our voluntary groups are volunteers and they are competing with groups that have a background staff of people who are paid to fill out applications.
The Minister of State made a good point.
I do a legal support clinic at the F2 Centre every fortnight and I am always amazed by the sheer use of it by the local community and the creativity of the support. People identify needs in the local community and then they do their best to professionally meet those needs. A professional was recruited there previously and paid a salary to provide a service to parents. It was a professional intervention. From a qualitative analysis, this programme would have stood up to any assessment. Naturally the group is disappointed.
The Minister of State mentioned that 52 of 500 projects were selected. There are many more in the 500. Bar the Minister of State going to negotiate for them in the budget, clearly we will have a massive need. I am at a bit of a loss as to where they go now, because there is nowhere for them to go and that worries me.
I am not at a loss as to where we go next.
There is an opportunity here. The HSE has a list of 438 fantastic projects that need support. They are predominantly from the community and voluntary sector. Those groups are plugging the gaps and where we have pilots, they should become part and parcel of the support mechanism for the CDNTs. They should be embedded in our communities. That would also give us the opportunity to grow and enhance the universal support we talk about all the time in respect of the progressing disability services, PDS, for children and young people programme.
Where do we go? We go back to the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform as it needs to sanction the funding. At the end of last year, the Department with responsibility for disability had run over budget and with the best will of the CEO there was only so much funding left in the pot at the end of year. He was not allowed to use what was unspent or the time-related savings because there was a deficit. There is a need for emergency funding to be granted to meet the shortfall needed by these community groups that are so valuable. That would enhance the camps we are talking about. I am pushing and pulling every lever and I have no doubt that with the Senator's support and that of the Minister, Deputy O'Donohoe, we could pull more levers.
Housing Provision
The Minister of State, Deputy Noonan, is welcome to the House.
I welcome the Minister of State. My Commencement matter asks him to confirm progress on a formal, standardised, independent appeals mechanism in respect of social housing decisions and that such an appeals process be set out as a statutory requirement. I am glad to see the Minister of State here as he is from the responsible Department.
One might ask what type of issues may be of concern and subject to an appeal. The issues in housing and local authorities range from allocations to transfers, loans, grants, repairs, rents, failure to provide Traveller accommodation, homelessness and access to housing lists. Somehow there are disputes but there is no successful remedy in most cases. The Minister of State may or may not know that people find themselves at loggerheads or in dispute with the deciding officers of the local authorities. The local authorities are police and controlling judge and jury in their own cause and it is simply not good enough. The Minister of State will be aware that a new general scheme has been proposed for legislation that relates to the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004 and some of this matter is covered in it.
I acknowledge the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission, IHREC, for the enormous work it has done in this particular area.
What are the advantages of an appeal, one might ask? An appeal enables the merits of a decision to be re-examined through an assessment of questions of fact, and the application of judgment for those facts, rather than just an assessment of the process by which the decision was made or arrived at, which may very well be examined at a later date in a judicial review. Given the nature of social housing provision, I do not believe that people should be seeking judicial reviews. I know there are mechanisms to refer things to the Ombudsman's office but it is a lengthy process. Again, I think we should be remedying and giving solutions on the ground in our local authorities, but we need uniformity. Before the Minister of State tells me that all 31 local authorities are doing different things, I will say that I do not want to hear that anymore. The politicians and Ministers are driving the legislation, and we clearly know there are problems.
There is a lack of an appeals mechanism. This has been identified by a number of advocacy groups in the area of housing. I note that there was no provision for an appeals mechanism in the general scheme of the housing (miscellaneous provisions) Bill 2024, to which I referred. This surprises me. This is the most current Bill on which the Department is working. This is unlike the area of social welfare. If issues arise in the area of social welfare, there are mechanisms for an independent review. People should not be forced to litigate in the courts because that is not how any of us want to see these things happen. There is a need for deciding officers and clear administrative accountability to minimise the rise in the number of persons being adversely affected by incorrect decisions or oversights by housing authorities. That is important.
I contacted Wayne Stanley. He is, of course, one of the chief advocates in the Simon Community. In his reply, he made three asks:
A commitment to a broad consultation and engagement to ensure that the much-needed independent appeals process is fit for purpose.
A commitment that the decisions of the appeals body would publish its decision (appropriately anonymised).
A commitment that in any legislative development on access to social housing the opportunity to confirm in legislation ‘for the avoidance of doubt’ that it has no bearing on the provision of emergency accommodation. Emergency accommodation is a critically important humanitarian response not an accommodation solution in any sense.
I will leave that with the Minister of State.
I thank the Senator for tabling this important Commencement matter. It is open to anyone to apply for social housing support. The qualification criteria are set out in section 20 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 and the social housing assessment regulations, as amended, and are applied by all local authorities in assessing individual households for support. Section 63(3) of the Local Government Act 2001 provides that, subject to law, a local authority is independent in the performance of its functions.
The oversight and practical arrangement of housing waiting lists, including the allocation and transfer of tenancies, is a matter for the relevant authority in accordance with the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 and associated regulations. The allocation of social housing support to qualified households is a matter for the local authority concerned in accordance with the allocation scheme made in accordance with section 22 of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2009 and the associated social housing allocation regulations 2011, as amended. This legislation requires all local authorities as a reserve function to make an allocation scheme which specifies, among other things, the manner and the order of priority for the allocation of dwellings to households and to the housing transfer list. Of course, the Senator is well aware of this.
The local authority assesses the housing applicants, taking into account factors such as the condition and affordability of existing accommodation, medical and compassionate grounds, etc. The authority can then prioritise the needs of approved applicants in accordance with its allocation scheme. Decisions on the allocation of social housing support are a matter solely for the local authority concerned. Each application must be considered on its own merits and individual circumstances must be taken into account.
Local authorities have their own internal appeals mechanism. If an individual is dissatisfied with the outcome of an appeal, it is open to them to raise their case with the Ombudsman. My Department recently received the report of the Joint Committee on Housing, Local Government and Heritage on the pre-legislative scrutiny of the general scheme of the housing (miscellaneous provisions) Bill 2024. One of the recommendations of the report is to include a robust and independent appeals mechanism in the legislation, as the Senator has stated.
My Department thanks the committee for this report. Officials are working closely with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel on the drafting of the Bill and will consult it specifically on this matter, which, I agree, is extremely important.
I do not know who read the Commencement matter. It asks the Minister to confirm the progress on a form of standardised independent means mechanism. The Minister of State dealt with none of that. It is a "teach your grandmother to suck eggs" lecture from someone telling us about the independence of local authorities to do what they like. We know that the Ombudsman has a massive number of complaints from these local authorities relating to Traveller accommodation, social housing, HAP and a range of other issues. We are the legislators. We make primary legislation. I sit on the housing committee, as the Minister of State said.
I know the Minister of State is committed, but it is simply not good enough to keep saying that local authorities are responsible. The Government is taking powers from local authorities all over the place. We will see it with the Planning and Development Bill this week. Powers are being removed in the context of a range of issues. We have a problem, as the Minister of State said here last week, with decentralising some of our powers and with transferring powers to local authorities.
I like the Minister of State. He is a decent person, a decent Minister of State and is committed. I respectfully ask him to bring one message back to the Department, namely that we support the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission's recommendations for a formal, standardised, independent appeals mechanism in respect of housing. That is what our committee did in the context of pre-legislative scrutiny and that is what is done in the report. It is a fair ask, an important ask and one we should try to progress through the legislation which we are now going to be dealing with, which is the general scheme of the housing (miscellaneous provisions) Bill 2024.
Again, I agree with the points the Senator makes. If this recommendation has come from the housing committee, it needs to be given serious consideration. I absolutely agree with that. I refer as well to the points made by Wayne Stanley about broad support for an appeals body. I know from my constituency office that not everybody feels there has been transparency about the decisions made on their allocations. I refer in particular to the issue of Traveller accommodation. We see inconsistency across the country. Our Department has worked with local authorities to ensure that Traveller accommodation budgets are spent and allocated for Traveller-specific accommodation. Generally, it is important that people feel that their cases have been heard in a transparent and open manner. Serious consideration should be given to this particular request from the Oireachtas joint committee in respect of the proposed new housing provisions Bill.
Housing Policy
The Minister of State, Deputy Collins, is very welcome.
I, too, welcome the Minister of State. I thank the Cathaoirleach for selecting this matter.
It is always important in debates such as this to put on the record the very proud history of St. Vincent's Hospital, Athy. It can trace its history back to the opening of the Athy workhouse on 9 January 1844, an event that came just in time to relieve some of the harshest effects of the Famine in and around the area of south Kildare. The Sisters of Mercy arrived there as nursing sisters in 1873. In 1898, the building became a county home.
As I have stated previously, St. Vincent's Hospital has a proud history in the care of older persons that is unrivalled among hospitals. The 175 or so staff who work in the hospital have a reputation for care that goes above and beyond their call of duty and is the number one reason there is always a waiting list of families hoping to obtain beds for their loved ones. Not a week passes when I do not get a call from someone or meet a family or individual who tells me of the extraordinary care a loved one is receiving or has received in the past in St. Vincent's. The hospital attracts patients from all over Kildare and neighbouring counties. It is a source of great pride for the people of Athy that the hospital is located in the town. That is why the people of Athy and the staff of the hospital are anxious as to the future of this great hospital, which has stood on the site for some 180 years.
On the timeline for the new hospital, it was in 2019 that I received confirmation that the HSE had appointed a design team. We were told that the new hospital would mark the arrival of a 21st century healthcare system. Despite continuous representations, it was not until early 2022 that the Minister, Deputy Donnelly, informed me that the project, a 92-bed community nursing unit on the grounds of St. Vincent's, would go to planning in quarter 3 of 2022. It was in September 2023 that planning permission for this new 92-bed unit was eventually granted. During a debate in this House in October of last year, I was informed that a design team had been approved to progress the 7,000 sq. m project and that it would be responsible for bringing the project through the detailed design and tender phases following the grant of permission.
As I have said, St. Vincent's Hospital in Athy has stood on the site since 1844. Today, it is a model of care with the best staff and management families could hope to have to look after their loved ones. I hope the Minister of State will give us some positive updates as to when construction will begin on the hospital and when it will open. Given the urgent need for older persons care, a new hospital in Athy is long overdue. This hospital's reputation spreads far and wide. I hope that, in the Minister of State's reply, the people of Athy and south Kildare will get the good news that construction will commence as quickly as possible on the hospital they have waited so long for.
I thank the Senator for giving us the opportunity to provide an update to the House on the replacement 92-bed community nursing unit at St. Vincent's Hospital in Athy, County Kildare. As the Senator has quite rightly said, the hospital was first built in 1844. It provides rehabilitation, respite and extended care to male and female residents, the majority of whom are over 65 years of age.
The standard of care delivered to residents in public units is generally very high. We recognise that many of our community hospitals are housed in buildings that are less than ideal in a modern context. However, without them, many older people would not have access to the care they need. It is therefore important that we upgrade our public bed stock. The purpose of the HIQA compliance community nursing unit replacement programme is to replace, upgrade and refurbish, as appropriate, these care facilities across the country.
The community nursing unit in St. Vincent's Hospital in Athy is part of this programme. A design team has been appointed to progress St. Vincent's Hospital, Athy. The proposed new facility will provide a total of over 7,000 sq. m of floor area. It will include single-storey dementia wards over a phased build and will see the demolition of the five single-storey prefab wings that are attached to the existing protected structure. This project will be completed in two phases with the 48-bed unit to the rear of the site to be delivered as part of the first construction phase. Phase 2 will entail 44 beds including two ten-bed dementia units and three associated courtyards over one and two storeys. The scope of this project will enable HSE older persons services to decant and vacate the protected structure.
Planning permission was granted for the phased construction of the 92-bed CNU in August 2023. The project is being progressed under the capital programme for 2024. The proposed new 92-bed CNU is now at stage 2C, detailed design and tender, in line with the HSE's capital projects manual and approval protocol. The approved capital budget for phase 1 of this project, the 48-bed unit, will be confirmed upon the completion of stage 2C, detailed design and tender. It is anticipated that the project could commence on site in quarter 1 of 2025, subject to the relevant approvals. All capital development proposals must progress through a number of approval stages in line with the public spending code, including detailed appraisal, planning, design and procurement, before a firm timeline or funding requirement can be established. The delivery of capital projects is a dynamic process that is subject to the successful completion of the various approval stages. The final decision to proceed with construction cannot be made until the tender process has been completed and the costings reviewed to ensure that the proposal delivers value for money and remains affordable and that sufficient funding is available to fund the project to completion. This includes equipping and commissioning costs.
I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. The middle of the reply tells us that it is anticipated that the project could commence on site in quarter one of 2025, which is the news that the people of south Kildare really wanted to hear. I note that this is dependent on the final decision and the review of the tender process, which is standard enough practice for all major construction projects that the Government may look at. The Minister of State might confirm that in his reply.
I stress the urgent need for this. As the Minister of State said in his reply, the hospital was built in 1844. Not alone does it provide the care that he outlined, it also has a day care centre that is very important to the people of south Kildare and it also provides a meals-on-wheels service that is also very important to the people of south Kildare. This project is so badly needed for the excellent staff and management. Planning permission has been received. We hear from the Minister of State's reply that it is anticipated that it will commence in quarter one of 2025 subject to tender but I stress to him and the Government that this project will benefit not just the people of Athy but the people of south Kildare and the surrounding districts.
I thank Senator Wall for raising this issue. The Government has delivered unprecedented levels of investment in our health services in recent years. There should be no doubt that the investment in health infrastructure is a substantial priority for Government. Work is progressing across the country under the HIQA compliance programme to replace, upgrade and refurbish our current stock of community nursing units in response to the introduction of HIQA's national residential care standards for older people.
The capital development at St. Vincent's Hospital in Athy will lead to the construction of 92 replacement community nursing unit beds with accommodation in line with the current HIQA standards. Strategic reform in the model of delivery of care for older people is underway in pursuit of the goal of supporting older people to remain living independently in their own homes and communities for longer. This will involve a shift in the provision of health and social care services from hospital to community settings in line with the Sláintecare goal of receiving the right care in the right place at the right time. However, for those who avail of long-term residential care, it is critical that public investment in this infrastructure is maintained at a level that enables the appropriate standards to be met and the public residential care capacity is increased in the coming years. The ongoing successful implementation of the HIQA community nursing unit programme, including the development at St. Vincent's Hospital in Athy will contribute to achieving that goal.
Cuireadh an Seanad ar fionraí ar 1.48 p.m. agus cuireadh tús leis arís ar 2 p.m.
Sitting suspended at 1.48 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m.