Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 1 Jun 2010

Vol. 711 No. 1

Adjournment Debate

Health Services

Deputy Brian O’Shea

St. Joseph's School, Parnell Street, Waterford, which caters for children with a mild learning disability, and St. Martin's Special School, Ballytruckle, Waterford, which caters for children with a moderate learning disability, effectively have had no speech and language therapy service since May 2009. The schools had been sharing a speech and language therapist who spent two days in St. Joseph's, two days in St. Martin's and one day on administration. I understand that the therapist who had been supplying the service has been on sick leave since May of last year, but the HSE has failed to provide a replacement service for the pupils of both schools. This means that the children with mild and moderate learning disability attending these schools are deprived of this essential service. Individual crisis cases can be referred to the speech and language therapy service at Waterford Regional Hospital, but this is of little use because the children need regular weekly therapy services.

Some pupils attending St. Joseph's School who needing speech and language therapy can come from some distance away, making it all the more essential that a regular service be provided in their school. The children of St. Joseph's and St. Martin's are not receiving the quality of education to which they are entitled and their ability to achieve their learning potential is being seriously compromised.

It shows the hollowness of the undertakings given by this Government to protect the most vulnerable sections of society when those with a learning disability are so shamefully neglected.

Children are now being enrolled in these schools for September 2010. New pupils requiring speech and language therapy will need to be screened by the speech and language therapist in order that appropriate programmes can be put in place. I call on the Minister to ensure the deprivation of these children in this essential service is put right forthwith. The effect of not providing this therapy is that the overall educational service provided for these children will continue to deteriorate, and the net effect of not having badly needed speech and language therapy will be to compound the difficulties of these vulnerable children who need every possible support and assistance in aspiring to the optimum quality of life. It is a measure of how uncaring the HSE, the Department of Health and Children and the Department of Education and Skills have become if they can live with a situation where the vital needs of these children are being so shamefully abandoned.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Deputy John Moloney)

I will be taking this Adjournment matter on behalf the Minister for Health and Children. I thank Deputy O'Shea for raising this matter and I am pleased to have the opportunity to outline the position on the speech and language therapy service at St. Joseph's special school, Parnell Street, Waterford, and St. Martin's special school, Kilcohan, Waterford. The Health Service Executive has advised the Minister for Health and Children that the speech and language therapy service for St. Joseph's and St. Martin's schools in Waterford have been provided directly as a school-based intervention programme for several years, totalling one whole-time equivalent staff member. The service to both schools caters for all children in the two schools, with 94 children currently identified as requiring intervention, varying from high priority direct intervention to low priority review with school support intervention programmes.

The speech and language therapy service was suspended in 2009 owing to staffing issues. School support intervention programmes have continued and a speech and language therapy service to a limited number of children has been offered within existing staffing resources. The HSE has been endeavouring to address the issue and is now developing a revised approach over the coming months that will create a structure of integrated therapy to schools in the Waterford area. St. Joseph's special school will be considered within this primary care development. Depending on the individual child's needs, it is likely that therapy provision could be delivered through continuing therapy in the community-based clinics or, where appropriate, in a school-based therapy programme.

Owing to the specialist nature of the St. Martin's school caseload, the HSE is recommending a resumption of therapy sessions within the school for these children. It is hoped to resume services within the school when staffing allows. In the interim, a temporary allocation will be provided through primary care for high priority cases.

Service continuity can be affected by staffing issues arising, including resignations, maternity leave, career breaks and so on. The maintenance and development of speech and language therapy services remains a priority for the HSE locally, with three new additional posts appointed in the past two years in primary care, disability services and child psychiatry. Children who continue to meet the criteria for other specialist HSE services will continue to receive their intervention through these multidisciplinary teams, including early intervention for all children under six years, autism spectrum disorders where the intervention of the ASD team is indicated, child and adolescent mental health service teams following diagnosis of mental health disorder, and a central remedial clinic service in Waterford where children present with primary physical disability and where continued multidisciplinary team intervention is recommended.

I re-affirm the Government's commitment to the national disability strategy and to its long-term goals and objectives which we will continue to pursue in the coming years in partnership with all the stakeholders. Our commitment in the areas of disability and mental health is consistent. Approximately €1.6 billion is spent annually by the health services on disability programmes, including residential, day care, respite, assessment and rehabilitation services.

Care of the Elderly

Deputy John O’Mahony

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this very important issue on the Adjournment debate. Áras Attracta in Swinford, County Mayo, was set up 22 years ago and has 116 residents. Over the years the staff have been dedicated and caring and have provided a wonderful service to their clients. This has always been reassuring to their families and loved ones, but developments and cutbacks in recent years have caused concern and changed the picture.

The residents live in bungalows in Áras Attracta — up to ten in each bungalow. This has increased from seven or eight in the past. This means that the set of standards of the Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, of having an individual bedroom for each client is being breached. In March 2009, bungalow No. 10 closed which increased the numbers to a maximum of ten in four of the other bungalows. Now it is proposed to close bungalow No. 8 in Áras Attracta which will cause further upset and discommode the residents who cannot speak up for themselves. We are talking about residents who find it very difficult to cope with a new setting in their lives. They have become comfortable and secure with their friends over the years. It is very unfair to upset their routine and the care to which they have become accustomed and with which they are comfortable.

The HIQA standards state the individual should have an area of personal space that comprises his or her own personal possessions, thoughts and feelings upon which no other person intrudes without his or express permission. If this bungalow closes, leading to an increased number in the other bungalows, then it will be impossible to maintain that standard.

As well as the increase in numbers in each bungalow, leading to more residents with shared bedrooms, there are further impacts to this decision. Clients with behavioural problems will now live with clients with challenging behavioural problems. Clients with mild disabilities will live with those who have profound disabilities. The same number of clients will be cared for with fewer staff and overcrowded day rooms will increase. Client activities, recreation and stimulation will decrease as staff will not be able to manage increased numbers. There will be increased demand for a decreasing level of bath, shower and toilet facilities because of the closure of the bungalow.

Everyone accepts savings must be made where possible, but theseshould not impact on the safety, security or care of the most vulnerable in our society. It will be very difficult under the new arrangement to maintain the quality of service that has existed until now. Another worrying aspect of this proposed closure is that HIQA's own standards and regulations are being breached, but there has never been an inspection of an intellectual disability service in Ireland. The standards are set but are not implemented nor the facilities to which they apply inspected. This has led to horrendous consequences elsewhere in the health service and the same mistakes should not continue to be made here.

I have an e-mail in my possession from a staff nurse who is currently off work because of an assault that took place because she was working with staff shortages. If the closure of this bungalow goes ahead, it will have serious consequences for the residents and for the safety of the staff. I appeal to the Minister and the HSE to reverse this decision immediately.

Deputy John Moloney

I will be taking this matter on the Adjournment matter on behalf of the Minister for Health and Children. I thank Deputy O'Mahony for raising this matter and I am pleased to take this opportunity to outline the position on the proposed closure of a ten bed bungalow at Áras Attracta in Swinford.

The Health Service Executive has advised the Minister for Health and Children that Áras Attracta is a residential and day care service for people with intellectual disabilities in Swinford, and the service provides for 116 residential clients and 17 day care clients. It is a modern, purpose-built campus with residential bungalows and facilities for clients, including a workshop, gym and swimming pool. Each bungalow is in excess of 3,000 sq. ft. and is designed for ten residents.

As part of the Mayo primary community and continuing care cost containment measures for 2010, management at Áras Attracta is re-organising services to keep the service within budget while also ensuring the high quality of care for clients continues.

Management has engaged with staff and their representatives to seek proposals on how the service can remain within budget this year. These proposals have been considered and cost saving measures, including renegotiation of suppliers' contracts and efficiencies in the use of heating, are being implemented.

The option of closing one bungalow is being considered and will be brought to a Labour Relations Commission review on Thursday. Áras Attracta is a large site with a number of residential bungalows, and clients may move from one bungalow to another following consultation with the clients and their families and clinical and risk assessment. The movement of the clients to other bungalows within the campus is possible due to the reduction in the number of clients at Áras Attracta. The HSE would like to reassure clients, their families and friends that Áras Attracta will continue to deliver a high quality service to meet the needs of its clients.

I would like to take this opportunity to re-affirm the Government's commitment to the national disability strategy and to its long-term goals and objectives, which we will continue to pursue in the coming years in partnership with all the stakeholders. Our commitment in the areas of disability and mental health is consistent. Approximately €1.6 billion is spent annually by the health services on disability programmes.

Turbary Rights

Deputy Paul Connaughton

I wish to share time with Deputy Phil Hogan.

Deputy John O’Donoghue

It sounds like a meitheal.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Michael Kennedy)

Will the Deputy get time to go out and cut a few this week?

Deputy Paul Connaughton

It always took two, three or more to do it.

I am sorry I must return to this issue due to the Government decision taken last week, which appears to steamroll thousands of bog owners off their properties from this week onwards. It has been carried out in a terribly ham-fisted way. I have put on the record before and I will do so again tonight that I happen to be one of those bog owners and bog harvesters, and unashamedly so I can assure the House.

The bog owners were very shabbily treated because nobody received an individual letter to explain the reason for the confiscation of their bogs, and that is what this is. It was announced in a news bulletin after the Government made its decision. An interdepartmental committee had been sitting on this since last August but we never heard what it came up with as its findings were never published. It met all the stakeholders and as far as we are concerned it was camouflage to allow the Minister enough time to do what he did last week.

People involved in this are the most law-abiding individuals one would meet on a day's walk. There are shades of the rod licence dispute about this and I want to state this in the House so nobody is under any illusions. People who have inherited bogs through generations and cut their domestic supply of turf from their bogs are substituting for very expensive imported oil. It will be extraordinarily difficult for them to walk off the bog.

The Taoiseach finally stated to me today that €1 million was made available——

Acting Chairman (Deputy Michael Kennedy)

Is the Deputy sharing time?

Deputy Paul Connaughton

Yes.

That €1 million is amazing, given that several hundred bog owners sold their bogs to the Department in the past four years and did not receive a penny. I do not know where the €1 million came from or to whom it was given. Whatever flexibility is in the system should be used to go back and discuss it further. I have no doubt that there is a way out of it but it is not through the steamrolling done by the Government last week.

Deputy Phil Hogan

I thank Deputy Connaughton for sharing time.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Michael Kennedy)

Will Deputy Hogan give him a hand later in the year?

Deputy Phil Hogan

This is a very serious issue as people in the midlands and on the west coast where there is bogland have discovered that they will be prevented from non-commercial turf cutting, which they have been used to for generations. It is not something we should throw out without proper consultation, or stakeholders being involved in the solution rather than having a diktat from the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government.

No derogation was given to Ireland under the EU habitats directive because a blind eye was turned to it for political reasons. In the meantime there was no proper consultation to seek a solution to include people who are the custodians of the environment, particularly those involved in agriculture, the land or turf cutting. They are the people who have nurtured the environment over the years and they do not need the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government or the Minister to sanction by diktat 32 boglands, as he did last Saturday under the EU habitats directive, to make them conform.

We need meaningful consultation and engagement. Perhaps we could have a pilot scheme on one bog where stakeholders could come to an agreement on a model for conservation that could be used on other boglands to comply with the outcome of negotiations on the EU habitats directive, and mediation if necessary. Down through the years, these people have been involved in turf cutting for non-commercial domestic fuel. We do not hear anything about the blanket banning of Bord na Móna from bogs as a conservation measure. Under the EU habitats directive, small householders traditionally involved in turf cutting are being blamed for the lack of conservation.

I call on the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, through the Minister of State, Deputy Moloney, to get meaningful negotiations under way, and ensure we have a pilot programme rather than the blanket ban, which is coming down the tracks and which was started last Friday by the Minister.

Deputy John Moloney

I am glad to provide the House with an update on the need for restrictions on turf cutting in a small number of designated raised bogs, and the arrangements that are being made to assist those who are affected. Ireland's raised bogs are very rare natural features and valuable ecosystems. Over time, Ireland has lost most of its raised bog area to land reclamation and peat exploitation. Once lost, our bogs cannot be replaced. The challenge for this generation is to strike a balance to protect the very best of our bogs so that future generations can enjoy them, while at the same time allowing the current generation to continue traditional practices like turf-cutting on non-designated bogs.

The Government and the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government have been working hard to strike that balance. For this reason only, the best of our remaining raised bogs were designated as special areas of conservation, SAC, or natural heritage areas, NHA. The Government is legally obliged to protect these sites under EU and national law. To this end, commercial turf extraction was ended on these sites many years ago but a derogation has allowed continued cutting for personal domestic fuel supply for a period of ten years.

The available evidence is that even this limited turf-cutting, and the drainage required to facilitate it, has caused asignificant loss of protected habitat. It does this in two ways: the drainage lowers the high water level necessary for peat formation to occur; and, more obviously, the turf-cutting removes part of the bog itself. If the drainage and the turf-cutting continue the bog will stop functioning as a bog, stop forming peat, and will ultimately disappear.

The ten-year derogation period for the 32 raised bog sites designated as special areas of conservation between 1997 and 1999 has now ended and no more turf cutting is permitted in these sites without the express consent of the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government. The derogation comes to an end for a further 24 SAC bog sites at the end of 2011 and on 75 NHA sites at the end of 2013. In total, these sites constitute less that 5% of Ireland's bogland where turf extraction is feasible. Turf-cutting can continue as before on more than 95% of Ireland's bogland.

The Government recognises that the end of the derogations will affect a number of land and turbary right owners, who normally source their fuel from these bogs, and is putting in place measures to address their needs. The shape of afinal scheme addressing their interests will be decided over the coming months but interim arrangements have been put in place.

The Minister, Deputy John Gormley, will provide interim funding to address the immediate needs of those who have been relying on these bogs to source their fuel. It is estimated that approximately 750 cutters will be affected this year out of the tens of thousands who still have access to turf banks. Those eligible can apply for a grant of €1,000 towards their fuel needs for the coming winter.

The Government has also announced that it will not, for the time being, accept new applications to the voluntary bog purchase scheme but confirmed that applications already received will be processed. In the coming days, the Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will be writing to people who may be affected this year by the end of the derogation. Details of the interim compensation scheme will be provided. At the same time, work is continuing to identify how best to address the long-term needs of those affected by the restrictions that are required on these sites. These include, but are not limited to, the provision of suitable turbary rights on undesignated bogs, where appropriate and available. The Minister, Deputy Gormley, and his Department will continue to engage with interested parties before any final decisions are taken in this regard.

Television Broadcasting Rights

Deputy John O’Donoghue

I wish to preface my remarks by stating that I fully accept the bona fides of the Minister, Deputy Ryan, in seeking a public debate on whether the RBS Six Nations championships and the Heineken Cup should be on a free-to-air television basis. I thank the Acting Chairman for affording me the opportunity to contribute to this important public debate.

Everybody will accept that the growth of the game of rugby is directly correlated to the amount of money invested in the game and the consequential success of our teams. In effect, this means that there is a balance required between revenue and television exposure. I am concerned that a move to free-to-air would swing the pendulum all the way towards television exposure and upset the balance which currently exists. I say this because while various commentators have expressed doubts about the potential loss of between €10 million and €12 million to the IRFU, they fail to recognise the net beneficiary of their membership of the Six Nations and the Heineken Cup collectives which own the broadcast rights to these tournaments and which sell the rights centrally.

European rugby is structured in a very well organised way, whereby it can maximise the revenue potential, distribute the moneys in an equitable fashion and thereby ensure a vibrant set of well-resourced teams making up the competitions. Irish rugby is a net beneficiary of this structure with Irish broadcasters committing some €5 million to the central pools and the IRFU receiving back some €16 million from television pools. To upset the balance and structure of these collective selling organisations would be potentially disastrous for Irish rugby given the volatility, commercial tensions and different agendas of the partners in these collectives.

The other key issue is that the broadcast markets in the United Kingdom and Ireland are inextricably linked and are almost inseparable through overspill of signal, further complicated by the fact that Irish rugby spans both broadcast jurisdictions in the Republic of Ireland and the North of Ireland. If decisions are taken to ring-fence these competitions for free-to-air in the Republic of Ireland, in effect, it excludes Sky and ESPN from the market place not only in the Republic of Ireland but also potentially in the United Kingdom. Sky bought the rights to the European Rugby Cup in the United Kingdom and Ireland on the basis of driving sales in Irelandand Wales. If ESPN and Sky are not bidding for rights the IRFU is, in effect, left to the mercy of the State broadcasters in Ireland and the United Kingdom, as ITV and Channel 4 have insufficient funds to purchase rugby rights, who have shown time and again that they will use a monopoly position to their commercial advantage and drive down revenues.

I am very much afraid that if the Minister's proposal is put in place we will see a spiral of decline in the professional game which, in turn, will undermine the club and schools game in Ireland. The loss of revenue of between €10 million and €12 million per annum to the IRFU, in the order of up to 20% of its annual income — some would argue it is up to 24% — will lead to the loss of Irish rugby's finest players to foreign teams; a probable reduction in the number of Irish professional rugby teams; the inability of Ireland's international and provincial teams to compete at the highest levels in the World Cup, the RBS Six Nations championship, the Heineken Cup, the Magners League and the Amlin Cup; and a significant reduction in the levels of financial support for club and schools rugby.

It has to be remembered that Irish rugby's position at the negotiating table of the Six Nations and the Heineken Cup would be severely weakened as each partner is expected to deliver a series of assets to the table in a manner that will allow them to maximize the centralised negotiation of television rights by the respective tournaments. While I understand the French have designated certain elements of these tournaments, they are in the enviable position of being able to bring major terrestrial television channels to compete at the table for their rights and to compare their situation with Ireland is simply to misunderstand the commercial realities.

I have heard the academic argument being made to the effect, "But they will have the right to sell their games here into the other markets". That simply does not take account of the reality that broadcasters want to buy tournaments or events in their entirety. In this way they can build audiences and make it a success from their perspective. If the IRFU is no longer part of the central selling arrangements it will only own the rights to three out of five Irish matches in the Six Nations tournament in a good year in a competition that consists of 15 matches in total.

Trying to sell matches on a piecemeal basis hugely diminishes their interest and, in turn, value for broadcasters, leaving the IRFU seriously exposed as to the value of matches with no guarantee that broadcasters in other countries will actually want the match or that the rights' holders will sell the rights at Irish market values for the away matches back in to the Irish market. I support rugby on free-to-air channels as part of a balanced approach and indeed the Six Nations Championship is currently free-to-air and the Heineken Cup is available free-to-air on a deferred basis. What nobody wants is the dismantling of a hugely successful structure with resultant carnage. Ireland's failure to bring unencumbered television rights to the table would inevitably reverse the position whereby the IRFU receives greater revenues from television rights through its membership of ERC and Six Nations than it can put into the central pot. The unfortunate facts are that an enormous drop in revenue would lead to a spiral of decline with Irish rugby becoming a second class citizen on the world stage.

I am convinced that the ultimate consequences of the Minister's proposals would be as follows — a significant reduction in resources for the professional game; the inability of the Irish provincial teams to compete at the highest levels; the loss of Irish rugby's key income generators, that is, its best players; a probable reduction in the number of professional provincial franchises or teams; the inability of the Irish international team to be a serious and consistent force at international and World Cup levels; the rapid decline of Irish rugby into a second tier contender and the end of the game's mass appeal in this country; the consequential reduction in the effect and value of a strong and vibrant rugby sector to the national and regional economies; and the weakening of international sporting relations and patronage for Ireland incorporated.

Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources (Deputy Eamon Ryan)

I welcome the chance to engage further in this debate. I intended to listen to the priority question which was asked today and I am again called to respond to this issue because of the nature of our Adjournment debate. I am happy to do that. If the Deputy would like, I might respond to him by throwing back a number of questions to aid his consideration. Taking his points, if I can, the direction of my questions will be based on his speech and some of the thoughts I have reflecting on that.

The first point is debatable. The Deputy said that the growth of the game of rugby is directly correlated to the amount of money invested in the game. People would question that assumption but I will accept it for the moment. The €250 million that the Government has invested in recent years in stadiums and clubs and through licence fee money and broadcasting rights gives us a say in sport.

We are selling broadcasting rights for approximately €5 million, with €3 million from the sale of Six Nations games and €2 million for the Heineken Cup but the Deputy estimated losses of €10 million to €12 million from our shared pool with other broadcasters. I would question his estimate, however. The bulk of the money we bring in from other countries, or approximately €8 million, comes from Six Nations games and I understand this money is guaranteed by contract arrangement for the next three years. I see no reason why that should not continue into the future as the revenue that we would accrue. The fear of losing €11 million is greatly diminished by the certainty that €8 million is already guaranteed. In regard to the Heineken Cup, we are selling rights for €2 million and collecting €3 million in additional revenue — these figures are broad and I merely use them to tease out the Deputy's arguments — and we must ask whether we are likely to lose this money.

I disagree with the Deputy's assertion that by seeking to ring-fence games away from pay television, we would threaten these revenues. I do not think anybody is proposing an arrangement which would exclude pay television operators, who provide good coverage and important sporting services. All we are seeking is to ensure that Irish people are not excluded from certain events. The evidence shows that by closing off free-to-air access, at least four fifths of the audience are excluded. We would thereby prevent Irish sporting fans from viewing games which they regard as important. Younger people would be excluded because typically they cannot go to pubs to watch games. It is important that they have their heroes and that they can grow up thinking they will be the next Ronan O'Gara or Brian O'Driscoll. We would also be excluding older people. I have received genuine correspondence from all sides of this debate, including letters from people who expressed fears that anything would happen to the sport. That is the last thing I would like to see. I have also received a number of letters from older people who played the game in their youth but cannot follow it now unless it is made free-to-air.

Rugby, which has done very well recently, can be moved away from what is seen as an exclusive arena involving certain schools and areas to a broader constituency which might include the Deputy's own county. Exclusion would not be a clever strategy for the development of the game of rugby in this country. I can offer many good examples of how we can offer an inclusive approach that is also commercially viable. Most recently, FAI friendly matches were made available on free-to-air television in Ireland as well as on pay television. In the past one could switch from one commentator to another without affecting transmission or broadcasting rights. Numerous broadcasters and commentators were able to share Champions League matches, thereby making them even more popular and successful. Rather than seeking to ring-fence, therefore, we want to include as many as possible.

The Deputy personally believes Six Nations matches should be free-to-air. I have heard similar opinions from other people who have raised concerns about these proposals. If it is his personal view that Irish people should be able to see the Irish team in action, it is better to be honest and ask broadcasters to negotiate to put such arrangements into place. That will not undermine the revenue stream for the Irish team or rugby in general. I welcome the ideas of others in regard to trying to ensure matches are free-to-air without guaranteeing that objective.

It is true that France has in place commercial arrangements which guarantee free-to-air access for the national team and local teams when they are playing in their Heineken Cup finals. I accept that France has greater commercial might but while we may be small in numbers, we have enjoyed huge success when we travelled away to support our teams. I contend that we have made that competition in recent years through free-to-air access. We were able to build our success because so many people were able to watch matches, with 500,000 people tuning in to share the experience of winning. We should not be shy when we go to other countries for sporting occasions. More than any others, Irish supporters bring colour and a good atmosphere. That is worth something.

I do not suggest a piecemeal approach to selling rights. It is up to the IRFU and its international partners to agree the best arrangements. We are not looking to impinge upon rights, sales or commercial revenues in other countries. I believe it is possible to meet both objectives. The Government is considering the public interest in making certain sporting events freely available and paid for at commercial rates to help the sport continue to thrive.

I do not agree with the Deputy's conclusion that such an approach might weaken our international sporting relationships. The French and British Governments are considering the very same measures at present. Nor do I think it will damage patronage for Ireland, Inc. This country is not just a commercial operation. Ireland comes together for key sporting events, such as certain Gaelic football, hurling, soccer and rugby matches. We are slightly diminished when we do not share these successful moments. We must consider whether we want to protect and develop these events for the Irish nation as well as for the good of Irish sport.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Michael Kennedy)

I was a little liberal with time because it is an interesting topic.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.40 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Wednesday, 2 June 2010.