Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 26 November 2020
72. Deputy Neasa Hourigan asked the Minister for Finance the status of the legal issues that have arisen following a court case in respect of primary medical certificates; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37826/20]
View answer74. Deputy Michael Moynihan asked the Minister for Finance when changes to the disabled drivers and passengers scheme will come into effect; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39214/20]
View answer103. Deputy Alan Dillon asked the Minister for Finance when the HSE will be in a position to resume issuing primary medical certificates in the context of the disabled drivers tax concession scheme, which was halted in 2020 as a result of a Supreme Court ruling; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38317/20]
View answer124. Deputy Mark Ward asked the Minister for Finance when the issue with regard to disabled drivers and passengers obtaining a primary medical certificate will be resolved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [33171/20]
View answer151. Deputy Niamh Smyth asked the Minister for Finance the progress being made in ensuring that persons can once again access a primary medical certificate to access the disabled drivers and passengers scheme; when the amendment is likely to be passed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37717/20]
View answer195. Deputy Denis Naughten asked the Minister for Finance his plans to amend the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [36130/20]
View answer205. Deputy Paul Kehoe asked the Minister for Finance the position on the review being carried out of the primary medical certificate; when it will be completed; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [39279/20]
View answerI propose to take Questions Nos. 72, 74, 103, 124, 151, 195 and 205 together.
The Disabled Drivers & Disabled Passengers Scheme provides relief from VRT and VAT on the purchase and use of an adapted car, as well as an exemption from motor tax and an annual fuel grant. The cost of the scheme in 2019, excluding motor tax, was €72m.
The Scheme is open to severely and permanently disabled persons as a driver or as a passenger and also to certain organisations. In order to qualify for relief an organisation must be entered in the register of charitable organisations under Part 3 of the Charities Act 2009, be engaged in the transport of disabled persons and whose purpose is to provide services to persons with disabilities.
In order to qualify for relief the applicant must hold a Primary Medical Certificate (PMC) issued by the relevant Senior Area Medical Officer (SAMO) or a Board Medical Certificate (BMC) issued by the Disabled Driver Medical Board of Appeal. Certain other criteria apply in relation to the vehicle and its use, including that the vehicle must be specially constructed or adapted for use by the applicant.
The terms of the Disabled Drivers and Disabled Passengers (Tax Concessions) Regulations 1994 set out the medical criteria, and that one or more of these criteria is required to be satisfied in order to obtain a PMC.
A Supreme Court decision of 18th June found in favour of two appellants against the Disabled Drivers Medical Board of Appeal's refusal to grant them a PMC. The judgement found that the medical criteria set out in the Regulations did not align with the regulation making mandate given in the primary legislation to further define criteria for ‘severely and permanently disabled’ persons.
On foot of the legal advice received, it became clear that it was appropriate to revisit the six medical criteria set out in Regulation 3 of Statutory Instrument 353 of 1994 for these assessments. In such circumstances, PMC assessments were discontinued until a revised basis for such assessments could be established. The medical officers who are responsible for conducting PMC assessments need to have assurance that the decisions they make are based on clear criteria set out in legislation. While Regulation 3 of Statutory Instrument No. 353 of 1994 was not deemed to be invalid, nevertheless it was found to be inconsistent with the mandate provided in Section 92 of the Finance Act 1989.
In order to allow for the PMC assessments to recommence I brought forward a committee stage amendment to the Finance Bill to provide for the existing medical criteria in primary legislation. When the Bill is enacted, this will allow for assessments to recommence in circumstances where the legal basis for such assessments is clarified.
I consider this to be an interim solution only. While I am very aware of the importance of this scheme to those who benefit from it, I am also aware of the disquiet expressed by members of this house and others in respect of the difficulties around access to the scheme. With this in mind I have asked my officials to undertake a comprehensive review of the scheme, to include a broader review of mobility supports for persons with disabilities, and on foot of that review to bring forward proposals for consideration.
