Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 22 Jun 2010

Vol. 713 No. 1

Priority Questions

Proposed Legislation

James Reilly

Ceist:

36 Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on the adequacy of her response to the import, production, sale and supply of dangerous head shop products; her further views on the fact that persons continue to be put at risk as new legal drug substances, such as Whack, the cocaine substitute, Amplified, and other new drug products enter the market; if she will confirm that legislation to ban the sale and supply of such products will be introduced before the summer recess; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26181/10]

I reject the suggestion the Government's handling of the issue of so-called "legal highs" has been inadequate. In light of the health risks associated with these products, the Government made an order on 11 May 2010 declaring a large number of substances, commonly referred to as "legal highs", to be controlled drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1977, with immediate effect.

Approximately 200 individual substances were controlled by this legislation. The substances controlled include synthetic cannabis-type substances, contained in Spice products, BZP-related substances sold as party pills, mephedrone and similar substances sold as bath salts or plant food and GBL and 1,4BD, often referred to as liquid ecstasy.

It is now a criminal offence for a person to import, export, produce, supply or possess these legal high substances. Possession and supply are subject to serious criminal sanctions of up to seven years imprisonment and/or a fine for unlawful possession and, on indictment, up to a maximum of life imprisonment for unlawful supply.

These regulations have had a significant impact on headshops, removing the majority of their products from the market, and, as a consequence, a large number of such shops have closed.

The Government has always acknowledged attempts would be made to circumvent these regulations. Since these substances were brought under control, other substances have been coming on to the market that are not subject to controls under the Misuse of Drugs Act. My Department is working closely with the Department of Justice and Law Reform, the Garda, the Customs Service, the Forensic Science Laboratory, the Irish Medicines Board and others to monitor closely the emergence of new psychoactive substances. I will not hesitate to seek Government approval to ban additional substances if any of them poses a risk to public health.

Initial analyses indicate the products Whack and Amplified contain new cocaine-type substances. As these substances have anaesthetic effects they fall within the scope of the medicinal products legislation. These products do not hold licences from the Irish Medicines Board or the European Medicines Agency. The Irish Medicines Board has been visiting head shops and removing these products from the market. The board has also been removing several other products from headshops which are known to contain medicinal products.

Last Friday, the Minister for Justice and Law Reform published the Criminal Justice (Psychoactive Substances) Bill 2010. The Bill will make it a criminal offence to sell or supply substances which may not be specifically controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Acts but which have psychoactive effects.

The Minister's rejection of the claim that the Government's response to head shops has been inadequate is astounding. Deputy Feighan raised the matter of head shops in the Dáil in April 2008, over two years ago, yet we have had to wait until 18 May 2010 for some action on banned substances. This has been a lethargic approach. How many of our young people have been damaged as a consequence of this approach? Yesterday at an inquest, the coroner identified that a 19 year old girl in County Kildare died from a combination of heroin and products bought in head shops.

Members have raised the matter numerous times, asking for several initiatives to be taken. The forthcoming legislation from the Minister for Justice and Law Reform is to be welcomed. The HSE confirmed during a meeting of the Joint Committee on Health and Children that 36 head shops were operating in the State. A parliamentary question has revealed that by 10 June this number increased to 48. How many are open now? How many have reopened? Can the Minister guarantee the House that this legislation will be enacted before the summer recess?

We banned BZP pills and magic mushrooms and I recall being the subject of heavy criticism from a journalist at the time for so doing. To introduce regulations of this type one needs strong legal and pharmaceutical regulations. This remains the position. As I have stated in the House previously, the only way to deal with this issue is through the introduction of catch-all legislation by the Minister for Justice and Law Reform. I understand that, following the meeting with his counterpart in Britain yesterday, the UK Minister with responsibility for justice will consider doing the same. I am aware from my colleagues that every European country has serious issues with these substances. As soon as one substance is banned, a similar product comes on the market. There is no way through legislation on medical products or through the banning of particular substances to get ahead of the curve. This is why the catch-all legislation giving the Garda specific powers and prosecuting this as a civil matter is a better approach. This would mean a case is decided on the balance of probabilities rather than reasonable doubt and, therefore, a good deal easier to get prosecutions or convictions.

I am unsure how many head shops are open. The issue is not the number of shops open but a question of what is sold in those shops. Clearly, the intention is to pass the justice legislation before the summer recess. The debate on the matter will begin in the Seanad today or tomorrow.

It is a question of how many head shops are open. We are all aware that they completely and continually circumvent the law with disastrous consequences for our young people. I have asked the Minister previously why she has not issued a ministerial directive insisting that all products sold in these shops are passed either by the Medicines Board or by the Food Safety Authority.

I have also asked that the Minister's colleague in Government, the Minister, Deputy Gormley, would issue a directive bringing these shops under planning law such that he could dictate their location, which should be not within 10 km of a school, pub or club, and to dictate their opening hours, that is between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.

I accept this is a difficult problem. However, it will require a multifaceted approach to close off all the avenues. Given the amount of money they have behind them, as sure as apples are apples these people will seek to circumvent the next legislation as well. Let us at least cut off all the predictable loopholes. I would not hold the Minister or any other Minister responsible for an unpredictable loophole which appears, but we should act on those which are predictable.

We have put in a great deal of effort in consultation with other Government officials and we have listened to all the medicinal and legal expertise available to us. There is no way of introducing legislation to licence such shops in accordance with the Deputy's suggestion involving the IMB because as soon as one dictates that headshops must be licensed, another name would be used. If one then suggests different products must be licensed, such as bath salts, it is simply not possible. All these matters were examined legally and there is no kosher way of doing it through medicines legislation. This is the reason we have gone down the justice route, which is what we had to do in a different era in Ireland in respect of subversive organisations and provide for considerable powers for the Garda Síochána. This will happen in this case and I believe it will be effective.

Health Services

Jan O'Sullivan

Ceist:

37 Deputy Jan O’Sullivan asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will address the funding shortfall of the Brothers of Charity Services in Limerick which has led to the loss of respite services for 63 families and to the reduction in residential services for other clients; if her attention has been drawn to the fact that every possible saving has been made in order to avoid this loss of service but that it has been unavoidable due to a cut in funding of more than €1 million for 2010; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26065/10]

The Government's commitment in the area of disability is consistent. Significant additional resources have been provided for services and supports in this area under the multi-annual investment programme 2006-2009, as part of the national disability strategy. Overall, approximately €1.6 billion is spent annually by the health services on disability programmes, including residential, day care, respite, assessments and rehabilitation services.

I am aware of the valuable contribution the Brothers of Charity services make to the provision of services to people with intellectual disabilities in Limerick. During the period 2005-08, the Brothers of Charity services nationally received more than €631 million in funding from the HSE. In 2009, approximately €177 million was provided to fund these services. This sustained level of investment reflects the significant growth and development in the services provided by the Brothers of Charity during the past five years.

Arising from the introduction of cost containment and efficiency measures in the 2010 budget, the HSE advised all agencies providing services on its behalf of their financial allocations for 2010 and the required adjustments. The HSE is aware of the challenges which this reduction in allocations will present to organisations to ensure they meet the needs of service users and in planning for emergencies that arise throughout the year. In this context, it is vital that all providers work creatively and co-operatively to ensure the maximum level of services are maintained within the funding resources available.

The HSE plans to maintain access to appropriate treatments and services for clients during 2010 despite current resource pressures. The HSE is very much aware of the importance of respite service provision for the families of both children and adults with disabilities, including the impact the absence of respite service provision can have on other services, for example, residential and day care services. Respite services throughout the country are being reviewed on an ongoing basis and the majority of local health offices have reported that services are being maintained, albeit with some difficulty. In all areas, disability managers are working closely with agencies to ensure those with the most urgent needs are prioritised. There has been a continued expansion in the availability of residential support services, especially planned or emergency centre-based respite services, which have grown substantially. A total of 4,599 people availed of this type of service in 2008, allowing them to continue living with their families and in their communities.

Additional information not given on the floor of the House.

The HSE is working in partnership with the voluntary service providers to deal with issues that arise from funding allocations, to ensure the needs of service users are prioritised and addressed and that frontline delivery is given priority. Disability service providers, including those in the Limerick area, have been asked to submit their plans for the maintenance of service levels within available resources and to discuss with HSE management how current challenges can be addressed. As part of this process, the Brothers of Charity services have prepared a detailed document for discussion with HSE personnel at local level. In response to the Brothers of Charity proposal to close one respite service on 14 June, which is affecting 19 service users, local discussions are taking place regarding the implications of this for users of its respite service and the HSE is endeavouring to ensure an alternative service will be made available.

The HSE is aware of the pressures the Brothers of Charity services are experiencing in maintaining existing service levels and responding to the respite needs of service users. While significant changes have been applied to frontline services, in many cases these changes have not necessarily resulted in service reduction but in a different model of service delivery being applied.

The HSE will continue to work in partnership with the Brothers of Charity in dealing with issues that arise from service cuts, to ensure the needs of service users are prioritised and addressed. However, any planned reductions must be risk assessed and risk managed by the Brothers of Charity. There are also plans to develop a local forum in Limerick of all service providers, both physical and sensory and intellectual disability, with a focus on the needs of service users now and in the future.

The Minister of State has given a very general answer to a very specific question. I raise this question on behalf of the 63 families in the mid west who look after their intellectually disabled loved ones at home and who now have nowhere to put them. For example, I speak on behalf of a woman who is looking after her brother. Her parents are dead and she has no other brothers or sisters. She has nowhere to go. Another woman is concerned about going into hospital and reckons she will have to bring her adult son, who is over 40 years of age, with her to hospital.

I will not be satisfied until I get a direct answer to the question of when the respite centre in Clonisle, Limerick, will be reopened. I seek a very simple answer to a very simple question. The amount of money involved is €157,000. It is not a large sum of money but it must be found for this purpose this week.

I did not get to the end of the answer. More specifics are available. Disability service providers, including those in the Limerick area, have been asked to submit their plans for the maintenance of service levels within available resources. As part of this process, the Brothers of Charity services have prepared a detailed document for discussion with HSE personnel at local level. In response to the proposal to close one respite service on 14 June, which affects 19 service users, local discussions are taking place regarding the implications of this for users of its respite service and the HSE is endeavouring to ensure an alternative service will be made available.

I am not satisfied with discussions and talks. We need action. It is not possible to leave families who look after their loves ones at home and who save the State a fortune by not putting them into residential care with no respite whatsoever. Talks are no good. They may solve other problems. There is a shortfall of €1 million in terms of what the Brothers of Charity received this year and other services are threatened. However, my question refers specifically to the opening of the respite house. I demand that the Government finds the €157,000 necessary to keep the house open. Otherwise, they are leaving dependent families, who have nowhere else to go, with an adult intellectually disabled person who may have to attend hospital with them. That is not good enough. Normally, I do not get as angry as I am today when I put questions in the Chamber. However, I am very angry on behalf of those families and parents.

I do not care whether the HSE is in talks with the Brothers of Charity or with the Department of Health and Children. I call for someone to represent the interests of the families affected. It is not enough to simply hold ongoing talks. We need a direct answer. When will the institution open such that the families concerned may sleep in their beds at night?

The position is that discussions are ongoing. No one disputes the value of respite services to families under extreme pressure and who have children or older adults with intellectual disabilities. No one disputes the value of the service the Brothers of Charity provides in this area. Solutions must be found. I agree with the Deputy and there is no dispute in this regard. This is the purpose of the discussions. While I understand the level of anger expressed by the Deputy and that the issue has a particular significance in her area, unfortunately, in this area, the HSE is seeking ways to solve the issue.

Reference has been made to a demography fund. An additional €19.5 million is being provided nationally for service throughout the country. Part of the ongoing discussions refer to that fund. It is a national fund but it refers to an additional 24 respite places in the HSE west area. I assure the Deputy that she will be updated with the outcome of those discussions.

I express my disappointment that the Minister of State directly responsible, Deputy Moloney, is not here. The Minister of State, Deputy Barry Andrews, is not responsible. I would have thought that since the Minister of State, Deputy Moloney, is not here, the Minister for Health and Children would have answered the question because these families cannot be left in the lurch with no answer from either the senior Minister or the Minister of State responsible.

As the Deputy knows, the Government is collectively responsible and any Minister can speak on behalf of the Government.

Since the Minister of State is not here for whatever reason, I would have expected the senior Minister to have answered the question. I will ask the senior Minister to address this issue as a matter of urgency today.

Ambulance Service

James Reilly

Ceist:

38 Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children her views on the fact that a number of ambulances are out of service for several hours at a time because their trolleys are being used for patients in accident and emergency departments; her further views on the fact that on 25 May 2010 eight Dublin Fire Brigade ambulances were detained at the Mater Hospital, one of which was tied up for more than seven hours; if she will put in place cabins which will house additional trolleys at hospitals allowing ambulances to be freed up; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26182/10]

The emergency ambulance service in the greater Dublin area is provided by Dublin City Council in the first instance. When operational circumstances so require, the HSE national ambulance service provides supplementary capacity to ensure that the necessary cover is maintained. Where necessary, this involves the use of available ambulance resources from other counties in the region. Staff and management take specific measures to ensure ambulance cover is maintained, with patient safety the utmost priority. This is what happened on 25 May last.

On that day delays at the Mater Hospital occurred at 4.30 p.m. After contact from the HSE liaison officer, all vehicles, but one, were released rapidly. At 8.30 p.m., there were eight ambulances held. The eight ambulances comprised six of the Dublin Fire Brigade's and two HSE vehicles. The national ambulance service liaison immediately addressed the situation, including consultation with the emergency department staff, the CEO on call and the nursing administration. By 9.30 p.m., four ambulances were released. By 10.30 p.m., all ambulances were available. One ambulance was at the hospital in excess of six hours, owing to the clinical circumstances of the particular patient concerned.

I am advised that the option of storing additional trolleys at hospitals has been considered in the past but not adopted because of significant patient safety, insurance and health and safety concerns. The HSE is, however, in discussion with the major Dublin hospitals with a view to identifying safe and effective measures which will help to minimise the period for which emergency ambulances are held at hospitals after arriving with patients.

Last week "Prime Time" dedicated a programme to accident and emergency departments. It was very distressing to watch disorientated and seriously ill patients waiting for days on trolleys and chairs in cramped and overcrowded accident and emergency departments. In 2004, the Minister issued a ten-point plan to sort out accident and emergency departments and in 2006, she said it would be treated as a national emergency.

At one point in January 2010, the number of people lying on trolleys in accident and emergency departments reached 500. As of yesterday, there were 236 people on trolleys. This is the middle of June with some of the finest weather we have had.

To make matters worse, elective surgery is being cancelled and——

The Minister does not seem to understand that one cannot fix accident and emergency departments unless one fixes the entire system. If one tries to fix accident and emergency departments in isolation, one moves the problem to the wards or back into the community.

Will the Minister explain why in almost six years in the job she has been unable to address this issue, why she has reduced the number of beds rather than increase the number which she said she would do and why she has failed to meaningfully roll out the primary care strategy which at the rate of the current roll-out, nobody in this House will be alive to see its completion?

We did not measure anything six years ago, so we did not how we were doing. Today we know 1.3 million people attend accident and emergency departments and that 94% of them are dealt with in six hours. We know that 54% of people who attend accident and emergency departments must wait more than six hours to be admitted. I accept that is too long but we never had targets before. In fact, we started with 24 hour targets which went down to 12 hour targets.

I agree it is a hospital wide issue. In the case of some hospitals, escalation policy needs to be implemented as it is in every good hospital in the world. If one reads the British newspapers, one will read about the challenges they face with their accident and emergency departments where escalation policies are implemented. We also need to look at what is happening in those particular hospitals. We now have the fair deal scheme which is processed in two weeks in some parts of the country but, unfortunately, in other parts, it is taking somewhat longer and that is placing an undue burden on Beamont Hospital, in particular, and, to a lesser extent, on the Mater Hospital.

Under HealthStat, which I am sure the Deputy reads, we need to look at the mix of public-private activity in these hospitals. I am not satisfied that there is an appropriate mix in accordance with the consultant contract. We need to address that also. I am confident the clinical directors who have been appointed under the new contract and who are working with Dr. Barry White on new clinical pathways for patients will help to greatly alleviate this further this year.

In more than 20 hospitals, we do not generally have any issues with accident and emergency. We have issues in six or seven hospitals which are now the focus of considerable attention from the HSE.

Unfortunately, this considerable attention is not helping patients. In Beaumont Hospital, even with the fair deal scheme, the Minister freed up 30 odd beds but closed 52 beds making the situation worse. I do not accept the Minister's contention that there are health and safety reasons for not having a cabin full of trolleys. The real reason is that if those trolleys were made available, ambulances would be out bringing in more patients and there would be even more crowding in accident and emergency departments.

Why can these trolleys not be stored in accident and emergency departments? Why are there not enough beds in the hospitals to accommodate the number of emergency patients who regularly need admission? It is not about the number of people attending accident and emergency departments but about the number of people lying on trolleys waiting for admission and urgent medical care, which they are not getting. They are not proper conditions for people to work in and they certainly do not do the dignity of patients any good. There is a major issue here. Why is the Minister still closing beds when we clearly have a capacity issue?

I do not agree with the Deputy that beds are the answer to everything. If we were to follow that, we would have approximately 25,000 beds.

The Minister should not rephrase the question, which she is excellent at doing.

It is about how one uses the beds. For example, in some Dublin hospitals, only 30% of people undergoing surgery are admitted on the same day. That should be closer to 70%. We know that many patients are not discharged home before 11 a.m. Good practice is that they should be able to be discharged by 11 a.m. in order that those who require admittance from the accident and emergency department may be accommodated.

I recently opened a new minor injury facility for the Mater Hospital, which is being funded. It has seen 1,700 patients which has greatly improved conditions in the Mater Hospital accident and department.

The Minister should address the question and not everything else.

We must deal with facts. There are huge improvements. I am not taking away from the challenges that exist in approximately seven hospitals which are being addressed.

The Minister should tell that to the patients waiting on trolleys.

Medical Misdiagnoses

James Reilly

Ceist:

39 Deputy James Reilly asked the Minister for Health and Children if she will report on the recent cases of misdiagnosis in maternity hospitals and the steps she will take to address the issue and the serious concerns of the public; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26183/10]

Incidents of this kind are distressing to the women and families involved and I again express my sincerest sympathies to all of those who were affected. They are serious incidents and are treated as such. A number of actions have been taken to support the safe management of early pregnancy loss across the country.

The chief medical officer of my Department and the director of quality and clinical care in the HSE wrote recently to all obstetric units advising them to ensure that the decision to use drugs or surgical intervention in these circumstances must be approved by a consultant obstetrician.

The HSE has now announced details of a miscarriage misdiagnosis review team and its terms of reference. The review team is being chaired by an independent expert in obstetrics and gynaecology, Professor William Ledger, vice president of the Royal College of Obstetrics in the UK who will be joined by Professor Michael Turner, national clinical lead of the HSE's obstetrics programme and Ms Sheila Sugrue, HSE national lead midwife. Service user representation in the management of this incident is being provided by Cathriona Molloy from Patient Focus. It is expected that the review will be completed within six months and the report will be published.

In addition, a clinical programme for obstetric care has been established by the HSE's national director of quality and clinical care. This will define best practice and standardise it throughout the country.

It is important that I put this in context. Ireland has, by international standards, a very high quality maternity service. Maternal mortality, perinatal mortality and infant mortality are all low by comparison to other jurisdictions. Women can be satisfied and confident as they come to use this service.

It is important to understand that the use of scans and other technology must be guided by expert clinical opinion based on careful clinical history and examination. Scans will not always be necessary or appropriate.

I join with the Minister in offering my sympathy to those who have been affected. This is yet another scandal which was left uncovered and unanswered until Melissa Redmond and her husband Michael decided to go public with it. I commend them on their courage in doing that. Many women have come forward since then. Some 250 telephone calls have been made to the helpline by women and their families since this issue arose.

Does the Minister know how many cases will be included in the HSE review and if not, when will she know? Will she call on the Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, to conduct an urgent audit of antenatal and maternity services, including the standard and safety of equipment, staff workloads, care protocols and training of personnel? It should be borne in mind that there are only between 100 and 120 foetal assessment machines in the country. It is farcical for HSE representatives to suggest, notwithstanding they did nothing for six months about replacing the equipment that had been described as "fatigued", that retaining a professional sonographer four hours a day five days a week will be the solution to this problem. There are 3,500 deliveries in that maternity unit each year and, by international standards, it should have at least two, if not four, full-time sonographers. When will the terms of reference be made available to us by the HSE? Why will there not be a truly independent investigation by HIQA?

It is a truly independent investigation. It is being chaired by somebody from outside the country and HIQA officials have been involved in discussing the terms of reference with HSE officials. I can give them to the Deputy because I do not want to read them out here. However, they have been published. The investigation will review the past five years and will examine any case outside that period where the circumstances may lead to the HSE learning from that experience. It is not correct to say that nothing happened in this case. The lawyers for the Redmond family wrote on 7 August and, within a week, the letter was acted on seriously by the HSE, the chief medical officer in my Department and all senior officials and a review took place within the hospital. That is a fact and that is the truth.

Last week, Professor Turner addressed this issue and I attended a press briefing he did. He made the point that, notwithstanding machinery and scans, there is nothing to substitute for clinical examination. The Deputy will know this being a doctor. We need a standardised approach in this area in the country. Professor Turner was appointed in May as the lead clinician in this area. He was appointed like many other experts in the State to do clinical care pathways. We have never had such a position and I am confident, as a result of his appointment in this field by the HSE before this issue ever came into the public domain, that we will have a standardised approach not only in the 19 public maternity hospitals, but also the private ones, and it is important that would happen..

The HSE is in charge of this investigation and if it appoints to people to do it, it remains under its remit. That is totally unacceptable to the Opposition and to the vast number of patients who use our health service. The executive has not been found to be suitable to investigate itself no more than any other group in the country is suitable to investigate itself. We should have a patient safety authority because if cases like this emerge, people would not have to go their solicitors. They could go to the authority, which would act as an advocate for them and address their issue.

The HSE undertaking a review did not result in the machinery being moved or a sonographer being made available. The Minister can refer to extraneous issues as activity but if the core issue, which is faulty equipment and lack of fully trained professional, is not addressed, one can review the service until the cows come home and patients will be left at risk.

We have a patient safety authority, otherwise known as HIQA.

I have to dispute that. HIQA officials say they cannot act as patient advocates.

They set and enforce standards.

I have to correct the record.

When they do that, they are subject to a great deal of criticism from the Deputy and his colleagues.

The obstetrician from the UK is completely independent, as are Professor Turner and Ms Cathriona Molloy from Patient Focus. They are capable of carrying out the appropriate investigation and reporting accordingly with a view to making sure we have appropriate procedures in place and, in particular, a standardised approach across the country. The service varied because we did not have a standardised approach to this service.

Services for People with Disabilities

David Stanton

Ceist:

40 Deputy David Stanton asked the Minister for Health and Children if she has calculated the estimated cost of implementing National Quality Standards — Residential Services for People with Disabilities which were published by the Health Information and Quality Authority in May 2009 on a statutory basis; the number of institutions which will be covered by the standards and the number of residents in each of these institutions respectively; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26184/10]

The HSE estimates 9,000 persons with disabilities are resident in approximately 1,200 centres across the country, which includes approximately 150 centres that provide residential or respite care to some 300 children with disabilities. National Quality Standards: Residential Services for People with Disabilities, published by the Health Information and Quality Authority in May 2009, relate to adult services. These standards will provide a national framework for quality, safe services for adults with disabilities in residential settings.

Given the current economic position, to move to full statutory implementation of the standards, including regulation and inspection, presents significant challenges at this time. Notwithstanding the difficulties of immediate statutory implementation, my Department, the HSE and HIQA have agreed that progressive non-statutory implementation of the standards should commence and become the benchmark against which the HSE assesses both its own directly operated facilities and other facilities that the HSE funds.

The Department of Health and Children is liaising with the HSE in terms of implementing the HIQA standards on a progressive non-statutory basis within existing resources. Currently every service provider is required, as part of its service level agreement with the HSE, to have appropriate mechanisms in place to assess quality and standards for the delivery of all services. This agreement requires all service providers to comply with relevant legislation, statutory regulations, codes of practice and agreed guidance documents relating to the standards associated with the service in question. Providers of care are required to set out in detail the specific actions or plans to maintain and monitor quality and service standards. Examples of such actions include audit tools appropriate to the service, service and service user evaluations and satisfaction surveys. The Department is also engaged in ongoing discussions with HIQA regarding the resources that would be required to implement a mandatory scheme of registration and inspection of residential services for persons with disabilities.

In tandem with this work, and arising from the Ryan commission report, the Department of Health and Children is preparing detailed proposals regarding the protection of vulnerable adults with disabilities who are currently in institutional care. I will bring these proposals to government in the near future.

The first part of my question related to the estimated cost but the Minister of State did not respond to that. He might respond later.

Is it true that the non-statutory guidelines are not legally binding? What weight have they?

Will the lack of statutory guidelines and inspection services have an impact on our ability to ratify the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, given the Irish Human Rights commission has said that the standards relating to the right to health, education and so on are not being met adequately in the State today?

It is not possible at this stage to outline the cost requested by the Deputy. We are awaiting detailed proposals regarding adults and until they are provided and the children's standards are finalised, we will not be in a position to provide details of the cost.

With regard to the rights of people with disabilities under the UN convention, clearly the ambition of the Government to provide a statutory basis for the guidelines is directed towards complying with the convention.

I refer to the weight of the non-statutory guidelines, a service level agreement with any non-statutory organisation provides for detailed compliance with not only the statutory framework, but also regulations and other requirements specific to the service provided. This is the way in which the HSE is able to require the service providers to make sure the service is of at least a minimum standard to ensure safety but also a high quality service. We await final discussions with HIQA and the details of the services provided. Until that is done, we cannot provide the cost.

What is the timeframe for this? Does he agree it is a disgrace in this day and age that there are not independent inspections of services for people with disabilities, the most vulnerable in our society? How many centres run by voluntary organisations and funded by the HSE are not included in the inspection regime under the Child Care Act 1991? Is it true that hundreds of children have no protection whatsoever at this time? If so, what is the Minister of State doing about it?

According to the figures I have, there are 150 centres caring for 300 children with disabilities. Clearly, the Government recognises that this area requires reform and improvement.

That is why we enacted the health Bill, set up HIQA, set down standards and are waiting for the standards to be set down for children. They are a measure of the Government's commitment in this area. The Deputy asked when that will happen. We are awaiting final discussions with HIQA regarding the standards we expect.

This year or next year? The standards for adults were published only last year. I expect we will be in a better position to give an indication to the Deputy in the new term. At this point, I cannot give a concrete date on which we will move to an inspection and registration regime.

It is not good enough.

That concludes Priority Questions.

Barr
Roinn