2 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Health the reason he has decided to phase the implementation of the report of the Review Group on Mental Handicap Services over the period to the end of 1997 instead of the end of 1994 as recommended.
Under theProgramme for Economic and Social Progress, which was agreed with the social partners, the Government are committed to the development of services for people with mental handicap. The recommendations of the report of the Review Group on Mental Handicap Services have been accepted in full in the Programme for Economic and Social Progress. The programme provides for the implementation of the commitment to develop services for people with a mental handicap and other community health services over the seven-year period of the plan. Depending on the level of resources made available under the programme, it may be possible to implement the recommendations of the review group in a shorter period of time. I would like to assure the House of my commitment to implement the recommendations of the review group within the shortest possible period of time.
At this stage we are one-third of the way through the review group's period for dealing with the problems of mental handicap. Would the Minister not agree that for him to extend at this point the date for the residential and day places from 1994 to 1997 is equivalent to saying he will provide half of what is required each year for the mentally handicapped? How much longer must the mentally handicapped wait in queue?
I do not accept what the Deputy says. In 1990 the Government provided an extra £2 million in the budget especially for those suffering from mental handicap. As a result, 170 new residential places and 442 day care places were opened and respite care was provided for 200 persons with mental handicap. The Government have already been working on that. This year £2 million was again provided and a further £1 million to allow the opening of further places in the current year. The Government are continuing to make steady progress in providing for the needs of those with mental handicap.
Would the Minister not agree that the provision of £1 million this year is a drop in the ocean against the £27.5 million projected to be needed over the five-year programme? Does he not know that his provision even last year was less than that sought by the review group? They were looking for more residential and day places than the Minister provided. We have fallen behind in the first year and the Minister is planning that we will achieve only half the desired rate of progress in the remaining years. To the mentally handicapped and their carers, this is a sleight of hand by the Minister.
I would not accept that. Not alone has the extra money I have outlined been provided in two successive budgets but between 1986 and 1991 there was a 40 per cent increase in the allocation made to the main providers of services for the mentally handicapped. I am satisfied that the Government are meeting their commitments. I recognise that there are gaps in the service but those gaps will be filled. For the first time, the Government have outlined in theProgramme for Economic and Social Progress how they intend to deal with the needs of people in the development of a whole range of community services, for the mentally handicapped, the elderly, the physically disabled, the mentally ill and dental services. I reconstituted the co-ordinating committees in each health board to include representatives of the voluntary organisations and of my Department to draw up a plan within the PESP. We will implement their recommendations as rapidly as possible as resources allow.
At only half pace.
