Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 14 Apr 2005

Vol. 600 No. 3

Adjournment Debate.

Services for People with Disabilities.

Mr. Wall

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing this Adjournment debate and thank the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, for attending. This matter arises from my frustration over trying to resolve the problems of the unfortunate person in question. He was involved in a separation and got his own local authority house in my home town of Athy. Unfortunately, he suffered from a stroke and is therefore not able to relate to family members or friends who visit. One can imagine the frustration this causes him.

The man has his own home and looks after it. He was really appreciative when the local authority provided the house. However, due to his health condition, he suffers from all the problems that result from a lack of communication with the outside world. I have tried through every means available to me to obtain for him some type of speech and language therapy, but without success. As the Minister of State will note from the further information with which I supplied him, the Health Service Executive, south-eastern area does not provide community speech and language therapy services for adults. The outpatient services which were available previously from Naas Hospital have ceased and only a minimal number of speech therapy sessions are available for inpatients. One could argue that the only course of action available to the man in question is to try to get readmitted to the hospital to obtain inpatient services. Given that only a minimal number of sessions are available, it would not be of much benefit to him.

There is no funding available for the man in question. He is a medical card holder and has retained the card through representations. He attended the National Rehabilitation Centre in Dún Laoghaire as part of his rehabilitation after his stroke. He has met a stone wall because the Health Service Executive is not in a position to provide the communication link between him and the outside world, including his friends and family. I hope the Minister of State will try to do something for this man.

It seems futile for a person to overcome so much and be thwarted in this way. He holds a medical card. Does this reply from the Health Service Executive imply that no one in the executive's south-western area will provide speech and language therapy for an adult? Will everyone who suffers a stroke be in the position that he or she must get private tuition, funded personally or by family members, or some other mechanism, or must these people suffer in a limbo of non-communication?

One can see this man's frustration. He cannot speak on the phone although he can call for help if he needs it. He is totally isolated. I hope the Minister of State's reply will offer him some solace and that the Health Service Executive, which receives so much funding from the Exchequer, will provide a service for him. This man contributed to the Exchequer, having worked all his life until he fell ill. He paid tax and social insurance contributions. I hope there will be some light at the end of the tunnel for him and that he will be able to communicate with the outside world.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Mr. B. Lenihan)

I am pleased to take this opportunity to clarify the matter relating to the provision of speech and language therapy for the person on whose behalf Deputy Wall has raised this matter. The Health Act 2004 provided for the Health Service Executive, which was established on 1 January 2005. Under the Act, the executive has responsibility to manage and deliver, or arrange to be delivered on its behalf, health and personal social services.

This includes responsibility for speech and language therapy services. However, my Department has inquired into this matter. The Health Service Executive, south-western area, confirms that this person was referred to it for speech and language therapy services following his discharge from a hospital in another area of the Health Service Executive. The Deputy had been previously informed by the Health Service Executive that a minimal number of speech therapy sessions are available at Naas Hospital which requires the provision of speech and language therapy services to adults to be limited to inpatients of that hospital. The executive also informed the Deputy that community speech and language therapy is not provided for adults.

A medical card issued by a Health Service Executive area enables the bearer to receive certain health services free of charge. However, where community-type services such as speech therapy are concerned, there is no statutory obligation that automatically entitles a person to such services although some Health Service Executive areas provide a level of these services. Demand for speech and language therapists was recognised in the Bacon report in 2002 which recommended that training places for speech and language therapists increase from 25 places per year to 105 places per year.

To address this shortfall in supply, three new schools of speech and language therapy were opened in 2003, in the National University of Ireland in Galway and Cork and in the University of Limerick. In addition, the number of training places in Trinity College Dublin was enhanced. The end of this academic year will see the first graduates of these new courses, those students who undertook an accelerated two year masters programme in University of Limerick and in 2007 graduates from the traditional degree programme from the universities in Cork and Galway.

To meet the demand for speech and language therapists we rely heavily on the return of students who have studied abroad and on an EU and non-EU workforce. It is estimated that 20% of the speech and language therapy workforce comes from abroad. In 2002 an additional grade of clinical specialist was introduced to speech and language therapy. This grade had many objectives including to ensure best practice and research in the profession. It is intended to review and develop this extremely beneficial grade soon. The Irish Association of Speech and Language Therapists has embraced the Sustaining Progress agenda and produced a position paper for the introduction of programme assistants to the profession. This skill mix will ensure the best use of scarce and valuable resources. The grade will be established and a training programme for such programme assistants initiated soon.

Despite the significant developments in speech and language therapy to date, it is widely accepted that there is further need to enhance the numbers employed in the health and education sectors. Long waiting lists for services must become a feature of the past. The recently announced investment in the disability sector is a first step in advancing to a service where those in need of this essential service receive it.

Child Abuse.

Mr. Stanton

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing me to raise this matter this evening and the Minister of State for coming into the House to reply. I am pleased the Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, is here because this is a medico-legal issue.

In the 1960s several children participated in a trial of a vaccine without any apparent consent. The previous Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, instigated a ministerial order in 2001 stating that this was the best guarantee against a cover-up or a whitewash. He added that he would do everything in his power to find out what happened.

The first problem arose when the Supreme Court told an eminent professor the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse had not dealt fairly with him and he would not have to give evidence. In 2004 the High Court said the Minister had acted outside his powers and that his order was ultra vires and the case was thrown out. Not much has happened since then.

What is the situation now? I have asked several times on the Order of Business whether legislation will be brought forward because it seems this is the only way to solve this problem. Mr. Justice Ó Cuív said in the High Court that other forms of inquiry might be possible. The Government raised the hopes of the people concerned with this order. They want to know what happened and the matter to be completed.

What does the Government intend to do? It is a year since the courts finalised this matter and the Government is sitting on it. I have raised it here and was led to believe that the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse (Amendment) Bill 2005, which was published recently, would deal with the issue. As of last week, however, it seems that will not be the case. I fear this issue is being pushed aside and forgotten about.

The Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children referred this morning to the issue of the age of witnesses. The issue is wider than that because the Government acted outside its powers in bringing forward this order. The Bill will not deal with the issue. Will the Minister of State say what the Government intends to do about this, if anything? If it is going to act, what is the timeframe? The people whose lives have been on hold because of this want answers and I hope the Minister of State will provide them.

Mr. B. Lenihan

I am replying on behalf of the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Harney.

On 19 June 2001, the Government conferred additional functions on the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse. This additional function was to inquire into three vaccine trials referred to by the Deputy which were reported on by the chief medical officer in his report on three clinical trials involving babies and children in institutional settings which took place between 1960 and 1961 and in 1970 and 1973 and was conferred by the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse Act 2000 (Additional Functions) Order 2001. An order was made under the 2000 Act conferring this additional function on the commission.

As a result of the extension of the commission's functions, an additional commissioner was assigned to the investigation committee and a division of the investigation committee was established to conduct the vaccine trials inquiry. The commission began its investigation with the first trial which took place in 1960-61. One of the co-authors of the report of this trial was contacted to give evidence. Following discussions with the legal representatives of the witness, the commission sought to compel him by order of the High Court to attend before them. The High Court compelled the witness to attend but the judgment of the High Court was appealed to the Supreme Court and the direction to attend was quashed.

In the course of the judgment of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court commented on the whole question of the legal validity of the statutory instrument. The issue was not expressly determined in the Supreme Court case but observations were made in the course of the judgment which cast some doubt on the legal validity of the statutory instrument. The Supreme Court judgment made clear that section 4 of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse Act 2000 provides for persons who are abused to recount their story to inquiry into the abuse and report on the matter. Under this section, additional powers may be conferred. However, the then Chief Justice in the course of his judgment stated that there is no indication in the report of the chief medical officer, which is recited as having led to invocation by the Government of its powers under this provision, of any abuse of children within the meaning of the Act. This comment raised the issue of a subsequent challenge.

On foot of the judgment, correspondence was received from legal representatives of another party involved in the conduct of the 1960-61 trial. This correspondence requested that the statutory instrument be revoked or appropriate legal action would be taken. A judicial review on the validity of the order was sought and the High Court found that the statutory instrument was invalid and ultra vires the conferring powers in the legislation. As a result, it is not possible to further investigate the matter using this legal route. The order will require revocation.

Procedures are being put in place to revoke the statutory instrument in line with the judgment of the courts. Under section 4(4) of the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse Act 2000, consultation between the Government and the Commission to Inquire into Child Abuse may take place before any order is amended or revoked. Discussions have taken place with the commission and other parties who have an interest in or are affected by these trials. Some of these discussions are still ongoing, and until they have been completed, I am not in a position to outline the course of action which the Government will take.

Community Employment Schemes.

Mr. Healy

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me an opportunity to raise this issue on the Adjournment. On 5 April, I received a letter from FÁS, the training and employment authority, in response to a representation I made to the authority regarding employment for a worker as a book-keeper. Part of the reply read as follows:

Furthermore, the FÁS budget for Community Employment has been reduced by approximately €1 million, resulting in cutbacks in the south east region with cuts of 22 to be achieved in Tipperary South by the end of April.

Over the next week or ten days, I was contacted by scheme sponsors, participants and supervisors on the scheme. The situation is significantly worse than indicated initially in the reply from FÁS. It transpires that 193 participants on community employment schemes will lose their employment by December this year, and a further 30%, or one in three, of the supervisors will also lose employment. This is as a result of the financial cutbacks but, more importantly, as a result of the three-year cap which the Minister introduced for participants in the scheme aged 40 to 55 years.

This reduction is almost 50% of the number of participants involved in schemes in Tipperary South. Approximately 500 participants are involved in schemes in the constituency. By the end of this year, that number will almost be halved. This will be a significant blow to local communities. It will decimate the schemes. It will mean that schemes will have to close, amalgamate and, over a period of two to three years if this capping is not reversed, we will see the demise of community employment schemes.

I would like to indicate the type of valuable work carried out by people involved in these schemes in just two towns in South Tipperary. In Cashel, for instance, there are a number of schemes. The first scheme is a Cashel Town Council scheme which is basically an environmental scheme. There is also a scheme in the town by South Tipperary County Council which is an environmental tidy towns scheme, a parish scheme which supports local social services and the local community radio in the town, a sports scheme which supports the local pitch and putt, tennis, GAA, soccer and rugby clubs, a Cashel town heritage scheme which supports heritage and development in the town, a Brú Ború scheme which supports Irish cultural events in Brú Ború in Cashel, a Brothers of Charity scheme and a Nagle centre scheme which supports children with disabilities in the town of Cashel.

Fifteen miles down the road in Tipperary town, there is a care of the elderly scheme, the Excel scheme which supports cultural activity in the Excel centre in the town, the Canon Hayes centre scheme which supports all sorts of community sporting activity in the town, a community centre scheme which includes social services, meals on wheels and so on, a Moorehaven scheme and a Knockanrawley resource centre scheme and an omnibus scheme which does excellent work in the Tipperary town. That is mirrored in every town and village throughout the county.

If this capping is not reversed, there will be significant loss of employment and significant decimation in the services provided by the schemes. The services are not being provided by another individual or agency. It is a very short-sighted proposal because the cost of with continuing these schemes is minimal. It costs approximately €20 a week per participant when one takes into account that unemployment benefit, or some other type of social welfare payment will have to be paid. Will the Minister seriously consider reversing this capping and the financial cutbacks in these schemes because otherwise significant damage will be done to the fabric of society in towns and villages throughout the county?

Mr. B. Lenihan

I am replying on behalf of the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin. I thank Deputy Healy for raising this matter on the Adjournment.

Community employment offers work experience and training opportunities for the long-term unemployed and other disadvantaged groups. The aim is to assist participants to progress to a job in the open labour market. The number of participants on community employment schemes increased during 2004. It stood at 19,848 in January 2004 and increased to 22,194 by the end of the year. There was an overall increase in the calendar year 2004 in the numbers of people on community employment. I stress that the FÁS employment programmes, which comprise community employment, social economy and the job initiative, will provide a total of 25,000 places in 2005.

A total of €351 million was allocated to FÁS employment programmes in 2004 which was similar to the budgeted amount provided in 2003. In the region of €369 million will be spent by FÁS administering the programmes during the current year.

Community employment is an active labour market programme. It aims to assist the long-term unemployed and other disadvantaged persons to progress into the labour market. A secondary objective of the programme, as Deputy Healy fairly pointed out, is to support service provision in local communities. The reduction in the level of places available during the years 1999 to 2003 reflected a refocusing of available resources towards training and other more appropriate supports and came as a result of the significant decline in long-term unemployment which stood at 8.9% in 1993 and decreased steadily from 1998 onwards to 1.4% in 2003.

On foot of a review of FÁS employment schemes, which included detailed consultations with the social partners, the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment introduced the following changes with effect from 10 November 2004. The three year cap was removed for persons aged 55 and older, and those over the age of 55 are now eligible to participate in community employment for a maximum of six years. In the case of persons advancing beyond the age of 55 during their normal period of service in community employment, participation can be extended for up to a maximum of six years.

This change is designed to address the particular difficulty of finding replacements to participate in community employment schemes in certain rural areas. It will also help secure the continuity of community services generally. Combined with the rural social scheme, under the aegis of the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, which has 2,500 places available, the existing community service support framework will be maintained.

Current ring-fencing and prioritisation procedures for the essential services of child care, health-related services and the drugs task force are being maintained.

Community employment will remain an active labour market programme with emphasis on progression to employment. For those under the age of 55, the normal service of up to three years maximum will continue to apply subject to the current flexibility guidelines administered by FÁS.

The continuation of ring-fencing and the extended participation in community employment by older workers will help secure the continuity of community services in general and will ensure that the existing community service support framework will be maintained.

In addition to the changes introduced in community employment, participants remaining on the job initiative, approximately 1,900, will have their contracts renewed on an annual basis. Participants who voluntarily leave the programme will be replaced by community employment participants to support the service being provided.

There will be no compulsory cessation of social economy programmes, which play a very valuable role in communities throughout the country. When an enterprise makes the decision to cease activity, affected employees will be assisted by FÁS in finding alternative employment.

I assure Deputy Healy and the House that there will be no large-scale closure of schemes during 2005 and that overall numbers will be maintained during the year. The Government will continue to support the positive role of community employment in meeting the needs of the long-term unemployed and in the provision of essential services within such communities according to the level of resources available.

Closed Circuit Television Systems.

Mr. O’Dowd

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this matter and welcome the Minister of State. Drogheda is now the largest town in Ireland, growing in population to outstrip any other town, including Dundalk. More than 31,000 people live in the town, but it has the same number of gardaí— 90 — as five years ago despite the significant increase in population. Similar to other town centres around the country, there are serious problems with anti-social behaviour late at night.

It is essential that Drogheda is added to the list of towns in receipt of CCTV cameras. There are 17 towns on the waiting list and I wish them all well, but Drogheda is not one of them. It demonstrates the political neglect of this administration, particularly Fianna Fáil, with regard to Drogheda by refusing to install CCTV cameras in the country's largest town.

The issue also relates to the sister town of Dundalk. Its superintendent was last week pictured in The Argus and the Dundalk Democrat in front of a fine array of approximately 20 screens. He spoke convincingly and clearly about the benefit of CCTV cameras in Dundalk, and we welcome that. He is now in a position to declare that he wants to extend their use and I support him in that regard. Drogheda has absolutely nothing.

This is an issue of immediacy and we cannot afford to wait until 2007. In a written response earlier this week, I was told by the Minister that the application currently on hand with the advisory committee will be finalised towards the end of 2006. This means that Drogheda cannot be considered or included in the list until 2007, which is totally unacceptable. We insist that the Government acts now and that the Minister fast-tracks Drogheda's application on the simple grounds that it is the largest town in Ireland and needs these cameras now.

Mr. B. Lenihan

I am replying on behalf of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and thank the Deputy for raising the matter. I hope to give him some information about this subject.

An application for a Garda CCTV system in Drogheda has been received by the CCTV advisory committee, which was established by the Garda Commissioner to advise on all matters relating to CCTV systems.

There are 17 CCTV schemes nationwide at installation, tender or planning stages. The locations were selected as priority based on policing requirements throughout the country. The Garda CCTV programme is being implemented on a phased basis. Phase one covered Bray, Dundalk, Dún Laoghaire, Finglas, Galway and Limerick, phase two will cover Athlone, Clondalkin, Tallaght and Waterford and phase three will cover Ballyfermot, Carlow, Castlebar, Clonmel, Ennis, Kilkenny and Sligo. While I appreciate the Deputy is anxious that the case for Drogheda be progressed, it is a tribute to the citizens of Drogheda that it does not appear on this list.

Mr. O’Dowd

The Minister should tell them that on a Friday night.

Mr. B. Lenihan

I am not denying the need. The installation of phase one systems in Bray, Dundalk, Dún Laoghaire and Limerick has been completed and these systems are now fully operational. Thirteen of the 18 cameras in Galway are also fully operational. It is proposed to install the final five cameras in tandem with major redevelopment works currently being undertaken by Galway City Council in the Eyre Square area.

The issue regarding the provision of suitable space to accommodate the monitoring of CCTV cameras in Finglas Garda station is currently being considered, in conjunction with the Office of Public Works, with regard to the overall accommodation needs of Finglas Garda station. It is hoped that work can proceed to completion in Finglas in 2005.

Installation of the CCTV systems is of necessity a detailed, complex and lengthy process and because of this Garda authorities are now giving careful consideration to a restructuring of the manner in which these systems go to tender.

The Minister is anxious to accelerate the implementation of the remainder of the Garda CCTV programme and reduce as much as possible the workload of the Garda Síochána in this regard. He believes that the proposed restructuring of the tender process provides an opportunity to outsource the installation of Garda CCTV systems to the greatest possible extent, making use not only of technical but also project management expertise in the private sector. In that regard, he has asked the Garda Commissioner to submit proposals for a revised tender document for the 11 locations in the remaining two phases, with a view to achieving implementation in priority locations by the end of 2006.

The inclusion of other town centre locations, including Drogheda, beyond the 17 already listed in the programme will be considered in the context of the Commissioner's proposals.

Regarding community-based CCTV cameras in Drogheda, the Deputy will appreciate it is not possible for the Garda Síochána to install CCTV systems in all areas that have sought them. Some applications received by the advisory committee relate to schemes which, while of importance to the local community, cannot be regarded as a national Garda priority.

The Deputy may be aware that in May 2002, the previous Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Donoghue, laid the ground work for a grant aid scheme to facilitate community-based groups who wished to press ahead with their local CCTV system.

It is the current Minister's intention to implement that scheme with clear details of the application process, terms and conditions, a timescale within which to apply in the first round and a clear commitment as to when funding will be available.

Under the terms of this scheme, grant assistance of up to €100,000 will, subject to the availability of funds, be obtainable from the Department towards the cost of such systems. It will be up to the community groups, in conjunction with the relevant local authority, to install, maintain and monitor community-based CCTV schemes.

The Minister is pleased that further to discussions between their respective Departments, his colleague, the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, Deputy Ó Cuív, has given a commitment to provide successful applications from RAPID areas with a further grant to a maximum of €100,000. This means that RAPID areas wishing to install their own CCTV system will be able to avail of an overall maximum grant of up to €200,000.

A decision has also been taken to engage Area Development Management Limited, ADM, to administer and project manage the scheme and evaluate applications received.

There is a demonstrated demand from local communities across Ireland for the provision of community CCTV systems and significant work has been done in developing proposals which will allow communities to quickly define their needs and submit high quality proposals for funding which have broad local support and high levels of sustainability.

The Minister intends to launch this scheme in the coming weeks. By the end of July 2005, the Department should be aware of the list of applications to be funded in the first round. By year end, these communities could be well on the way to having their CCTV systems in place.

CCTV plays an important role in modern policing and has demonstrated its benefits in those areas where it has been installed. The programme of installation is now being overhauled to ensure much faster implementation, and the town of Drogheda is among the areas under consideration for the next tranche of CCTV, once the existing programme has been implemented.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.20 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. on Tuesday, 19 April 2005.