Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 5 Mar 2013

Vol. 795 No. 1

Topical Issue Debate

Fish Farming

I thank the Ceann Comhairle's office for selecting this Topical Issue matter. I welcome the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Deputy Coveney, to the Chamber to debate this very important issue. I appreciate the very heavy workload he has at present with regard to CAP reform in Brussels, and I appreciate him taking the time for this matter.

I accept the bona fides of the Minister with regard to this project, the job creation potential of projects such as this and the potential for growth in the organic salmon industry. I am sure the Minister is aware of the concerns expressed locally in a march last Saturday and in communications we have had in recent months. Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM, and local angling groups have made presentations to local authorities in Galway and have met a number of Oireachtas Members including me. Their concerns are numerous and include the effect sea lice would have on native salmon and trout smolts in the Spiddal, Cashla, Costello, Kilcolgan, Clarinbridge and Corrib river systems. There are also concerns regarding fish escaping from such a large salmon farm which will have more than 7 million salmon at its peak, and regarding pollution and the impact on local angling. Connemara and Galway are renowned for their angling, with Lough Corrib being the largest lake in the Republic, and it is a hugely important industry for us.

I mo thuairim, tá ceisteanna fós le freagairt maidir leis an bhfeirm éisc seo. Má théann sí ar aghaidh, beidh sí mar cheann de na feirmeacha éisc is mó san Eoraip. Tá a fhios agam go mbeidh poist á gcruthú, cé nach bhfuilim cinnte cé mhéid, ó thaobh próiseála agus is maith an rud é sin. Tá imní, áfach, ar iascairí agus ar chomhlachtaí iascaireachta faoi thruailliú, faoi mhíolta mara agus faoi impleachtaí ar éisc fhiáin. Teastaíonn freagraí ar cheisteanna ó ghrúpaí iascairí ó Chonamara agus ó Ghaillimh chomh luath agus is féidir.

The board of Inland Fisheries Ireland has indicated concerns about the location and scale of the proposed salmon farm and how its development and operation could impact on wild salmon and sea trout stocks and their habitat. These concerns are based on scientific reports by respected authors and knowledge of the impact of existing fish farms on salmon and sea trout populations off the west coast of Ireland. Sea lice would have devastating effects on wild salmon, as they account for up to 39% of salmon mortalities according to recent peer-reviewed international scientific literature. Concerns have also been expressed about the associated loss of jobs in the recreational angling and tourism sector if the development proceeds without adequate environmental protections being in place.

I call on the Minister to publish the responses from BIM to his Department with regard to the queries and concerns of local groups about the environmental impact statement. We need transparency in all issues and in this case it would allay fears and concerns and allow local groups, anglers, individuals and Inland Fisheries Ireland know exactly what BIM is applying to do before any decision is made. I appreciate the Minister and the Department will ultimately have to make the decision. I understand they will receive advice or a lead opinion from the Irish Marine Institute but it is important the responses to the scientific facts are known and presented.

I see aquaculture as a crucial component of the Government's Food Harvest 2020 strategy. To expand the production of Irish organic farmed salmon, I tasked BIM to investigate the creation of new fish farming production areas in deeper waters. The placement of farms in deep waters is designed to ensure there is no impact on Natura 2000 sites, no significant environmental or visual impact, and no interference with migratory salmonids, wild sea fisheries, navigation or tourism interests.

BIM has estimated that just one of these production areas could generate over €100 million in exports per annum and create approximately 350 direct jobs.

A further 150 jobs will be created indirectly in the service sector, supplying fish feed, netting, transportation and other services.

Last year, BIM submitted an application to my Department for an aquaculture licence for the cultivation of fin fish near Inis Oirr in Galway Bay. The application and its accompanying environmental impact statement is being considered under the provisions of the Fisheries (Amendment) Act 1997 and the Foreshore Act 1933, which provide for extensive consultation with stakeholders and also for a period of general public consultation. The public consultation stage of the assessment process in respect of the application is now closed and a total of 410 valid submissions were received by my Department.

All aspects of the Galway Bay application are currently being examined by my Department in conjunction with its scientific, engineering, technical and legal advisers. All submissions received as part of both the statutory consultation stage of the process and the general public consultation stage will form an integral part of my Department's consideration of the application. It is important to note that the legislation provides for extensive consultation with stakeholders, including Inland Fisheries Ireland, which has responsibility for wild salmon stocks.

It is important for Deputies to understand that as the application is under active consideration as part of the statutory process, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on the merits or otherwise of the application pending the completion of the formal assessment process by my Department. The application process is governed by legislation and must not be subject to parallel discussions by me as Minister or my Department, which could be misconstrued as indicating a predisposition by my Department in respect of the application. Of course, no such predisposition exists and the formal assessment process will take into account and evaluate all the observations received from stakeholders and the general public in relation to the application.

It should also be noted that the legislation provides for a possible appeal of the ministerial decision to the Aquaculture Licences Appeals Board, an independent authority for the determination of appeals against decisions of the Minister.

I assure Deputies that the public interest is well protected under the provisions of the relevant legislation and I am conscious of the importance of proceeding fully in line with the statutory requirements, given the scale and ambition of this particular proposal.

I thank the Minister for his reply, although I appreciate that it is constrained due to the active nature of the application. I appreciate that the Minister cannot comment on the ins and outs of the application. Unfortunately, however, there is widespread concern in the locality about this matter. The responses to the queries pertaining to the application from BIM should be published. All the information should be put out there to enable everybody who has a genuine concern about the possible impact of such a large-scale project, including the IFI, local angling groups and those involved in tourism, to air their views. If they had that information as well as all the responses, they would be better able to judge whether all the facts were there and, if so, whether they were correct.

BIM states that 90% of salmon smolts from river catchments travel along the coastline up to the North Atlantic, yet local angling groups and the IFI state that 90% of the same salmon smolts swim deep into Galway Bay. Which piece of advice is the correct one? Facts should be indisputable but unfortunately we are getting two sets of facts. We need to know which is correct before any decision is made. It is imperative that all the scientific data is available so that it can be fully assessed. Before a decision is made, people should be confident that everything can be examined in a transparent manner.

I understand that some people are concerned about this project, while many people support it. When one is doing something new in Ireland, concerns are always expressed, which is as it should be. That is why we need to follow a procedure, which we are doing. That procedure is consistent with the legislation. I will take the advice of my Department and the scientists in the Marine Institute on this application, as I do for other aquaculture and fin fish farming applications as and when they arise. It is important to apply the same standards to this project as to others, so we will follow the procedure to the letter.

BIM is making its case for this particular project. It has been actively trying to do that through public meetings and information sessions. Ultimately, however, I must separate myself from the project to the extent that I need to make an independent decision based on the submissions of concern that have been made and also the advice I receive from scientists in the Marine Institute. When I get those recommendations from the top marine biologists and scientists, in the context of the questions and concerns that have been raised, I will make a decision accordingly on foot of that information. I hope to be able to do that in the not too distant future.

If people disagree with that decision they will have an option to appeal it. We then have an independent system that will have to examine all the available facts and opinions. We will then have a second opinion. However, my Department will be rigorous in assessing this matter so that any decision is consistent with the law. It must also be consistent with protecting the environment while at the same time considering the commercial opportunity of such a proposal. That is what I am obliged to do and I will remain independent. That is why I will be somewhat limited in what I can say about the project while I am considering this application.

Housing Adaptation Grant Expenditure

I am grateful for this opportunity to refer to the letters that were issued by the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to local authorities last Friday. They announced major, severe and draconian cuts to housing adaption grants and a number of other grants. Last year, the Department allocated approximately €55 million for this important area, yet these grants will now be cut on average by 38%.

I want the Minister to explain why Laois was singled out for one of the worst cuts in the whole country. Last year, we received an allocation of €867,000 from the Department, but this year it has been cut by 76% to €208,000. The council provides its own 20% matching funds.

These housing adaption grants are for people with disabilities to help install access ramps, stairlifts, downstair toilet facilities and showers. The scheme for housing aid for older people is to help those in poor housing conditions to make the necessary repairs so they can stay in their own homes. The mobility aids housing grant scheme is to allow people to get urgent works carried out, including grab-rails, access ramps, level access showers and stairlifts. All of these grants have been cut dramatically.

It is noteworthy that the letters went out last Friday to local authorities and there was no public announcement. The letters were issued within 48 hours of the Minister of State, Deputy Kathleen Lynch, announcing the axing of the mobility allowance and the motorised transport grants. Two days after that announcement, the Minister chose not to issue a public statement on her decision to cut these grants by 40% on average. She merely issued a letter to local authorities. As I understand it, the figures are not even available across the country. Each local authority has its own information. At the first opportunity, the Minister should consider a supplementary Estimate for Laois in view of the excessive cut to grants in that county.

I want to add my voice to this matter. What does the Government have against older people and those with disabilities? Last summer, we witnessed people with profound disabilities camping outside Government Buildings to ensure that their personal assistants would be reinstated. Last week, we saw cuts to the motorised grant and the mobility grant.

Today, one hears of cuts to the allocations of various county councils in respect of the disabled persons grant, the housing adaptation grant, the mobility grant and the housing aid for the elderly grant. Westmeath County Council will experience a grant cut of more than 46% from €988,155 to €435,722 this year. Longford County Council is facing a cut of 42% and this is despite both county councils, whose members I compliment, in their wisdom putting by their allocation from limited resources to ensure they could get the maximum possible allocation from the Department to ensure that older people and people with disabilities would be allowed to live out the rest of their lives in independence and with a sense of dignity. These grants are used to install stairlifts, access ramps and level access showers. They are used to replace windows and doors and to rewire houses. This is not about putting people into the lap of luxury but is simply about ensuring that elderly people and people with a disability can live in dignity.

The Minister of State will be obliged to revisit this issue. It is a callous cut and while I do not doubt the Minister of State is a genuine person who wishes to ensure that value for money is achieved, she must revisit this issue because, with their limited resources, the councils have allocated enough money to enable work to be done. In a final point, apart from the good work being done for those who benefit therefrom, such works are a major boost to small contractors in the rural areas. I know of a number of such contractors-----

I thank the Deputy but he has gone way over time.

-----who have stated they would have gone out of business in recent years were it not for this grant.

I call on the Minister of State, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, to respond.

I thank Deputies Robert Troy and Sean Fleming for raising this matter. As Minister of State with responsibility for housing, I am keenly aware of the challenges the Government faces in delivering housing supports to a range of vulnerable households and groups. The difficulties facing the State's finances and the necessity to reduce public expenditure to sustainable levels are having an impact on capital programmes all across the public service and my Department's housing programme is no exception. Members will be aware and Fianna Fáil Deputies in particular should be aware of the reason for such reduced allocations. However, the amount of capital funding available has decreased significantly in recent years along the lines highlighted in the medium-term Exchequer framework for infrastructure and capital investment from 2012 to 2016. Regrettably, these steps are necessary to bring stability to the public finances and, as a result, capital spending on housing programmes in 2013 will be lower than last year. I could spend time explaining the reason for this but certainly, the previous Government has a great deal more responsibility for it than has any action taken by the current Administration. Unfortunately, one is faced with a situation in which capital budgets right across the board have been cut.

That said, I am determined to make the best use of this limited budget and to target those who are most in need. To this end, the social housing supply initiatives are now nearly completely focused on meeting the housing needs of elderly people, people with a disability and the homeless. Approximately €120 million is being dedicated to this important programme in 2013. Reduced capital budgets inevitably give rise to difficult choices and decisions in allocating the available funding. In the case of new social housing supply, there are alternative supply routes through the leasing of properties to augment the smaller numbers coming from the traditional capital funded construction programmes. Last year, more than 6,000 additional social housing units were provided, taking all supply routes into account, and I am confident that a further 5,000 units will be provided this year. These difficult choices mean balancing a dwindling capital budget across a range of important areas and spreading those scarce resources in a way that meets the needs of those concerned as best one can. The capital budget must cover regeneration, improvements and energy retrofitting of the social housing stock, as well as adaptation grants for private housing.

I also am conscious that substantial grant funding was provided for improving and adapting private houses in recent years. In the past two years, almost 22,000 householders benefited under the schemes. This year, I am allocating 12.4% of the housing budget or approximately €34.2 million to the grant schemes, compared with 13.2% in 2012. In allocating the available funding across all 34 city and county councils, I have done so in as transparent and as fair a way as possible. Between them, local authorities currently have contractual commitments from last year in respect of approved grants totalling €18 million. Local authorities were always encouraged to maintain continuity with regard to approving and paying grants and commitments carried forward into the new financial year always had first call on the available funding. This year, each authority was allocated the full amount of their contractual commitments. The balance of the available funding was allocated on the basis of each authority's share of the new applications on hand in January 2013. I believe this to be a fair and equitable way of apportioning the funding. However, I appreciate this approach has resulted in lower than expected allocations for some authorities. Deputy Fleming should be aware that, regrettably, only Laois County Council reported a zero commitment in respect of contractual commitments on approved works, which has had a major effect on the allocation to Laois in particular. I accept that particular difficulties may arise in some local authorities in the course of 2013 but have a contingency in place to deal with this. I have set aside a capital reserve of approximately €2 million and will consider applications from local authorities for a supplementary allocation once the initial allocation has been exhausted. I hope this gives Deputies some light at the end of the tunnel but it genuinely was a fair way in which to allocate the money, that is, first to the commitments that already existed and then on the basis of the applications that came in from the various counties.

The Minister of State may assist in respect of transparency by publishing the list that went to each local authority, as Members have not had sight of it.

I will revert to the Deputy in this regard.

Second, the reason Laois County Council had zero commitments was it did not enter into commitments when it did not know it was guaranteed funding. It is being penalised for being prudent whereas in respect of the other counties, the Minister of State has indicated that €18 million of commitments were entered into without a guarantee of funding and consequently, they have access to the first tranche. In other words, the responsible local authority that was clearing its waiting lists and not entering into commitments has been unfairly penalised. I spoke today to the Minister of State's departmental officials in Ballina, who genuinely were very helpful, and a letter was sent today by Laois County Council seeking some additional funds from the capital reserve. The Minister of State will understand the point that because Laois County Council was highly organised in its business, it did not have commitments it could not meet and the council should not be penalised for that. During the course of the year, the Minister of State should make good a significant amount from that reserve.

My final point is I do not accept the premise of the Minister of State's comments on scarce capital resources within the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government. Last year alone, there was a vote in this Chamber on the subject last week, €63 million of underspent funding on the water investment programme was handed back to the Department of Finance-----

Okay Deputy. Please give Deputy Troy a moment.

-----because of mismanagement of the capital budget in the aforementioned Department. Some of that money should be going to these people this year.

A slash in capital budgets is not the answer. This is a time when the Government should be considering labour-intensive projects and these grants were a great incentive and stimulus to small contractors, many of which will make the point they actually kept them in business. It is typical of the current Administration that it is not looking at the bigger picture as disabled people or elderly people who cannot have the required works done to their houses will end up in long-term nursing home care. That will cost the State €800 per week when in some instances, all these people seek are grants of €2,000, €3,000 or €4,000 to get their houses adapted to meet their needs. A reserve of €2 million simply is not enough. The Minister of State must return to the Department where my colleague has highlighted areas in which she should seek additional resources. All Deputy Fleming and I are asking is to give elderly people and disabled people a sense of dignity in order that they can live in modest comfort for the rest of their lives.

As the Deputy noted, this contingency fund is in place and the Department certainly intends to use it in a focused way. I also am considering the possible reduction in the upper limit of the grants because in some cases, the averages are only between 30% and 50% of the actual upper limits. This would be a way of spreading the money around further. I am also engaged in attempting to ascertain whether some kind of stimulus proposal can be put in place this year that would employ some of those people to whom Deputy Troy referred. Perhaps it would not necessarily be in this particular scheme but, for example, local authority houses could be retrofitted more extensively than is the case at present, which also would ease the burden of the payment of fuel bills for people in some of the older local authority houses. I am certainly conscious both of the need to stimulate employment and of the employment these grants provide. I protected the budget as best I could and my Department was obliged to spread it around as well as it could. I thank the Deputies for raising the issues and I will certainly consider the proposal by Deputy Sean Fleming that the information be published for the entire country.

Youth Services Provision

Go raibh maith agat agus go raibh maith ag an Aire as bheith anseo chun éisteacht a thabhairt don méid atá le rá agam. It is very important that the Minister is here to listen and hopefully I can impress upon her to do whatever is necessary to avoid cuts to some of the projects listed. They are not all within my constituency but I will concentrate on the projects that I know best.

These projects in the main are in working class or disadvantaged areas, whichever title the Minister wants to use, but they tick all the boxes that always define areas of major need, where the drug problem has been at its height. In the past there was low educational attainment in these areas. Much has been done about that in recent years and the cycle has been broken but if we continue with the cuts in youth services the cycle might be created again. Many are areas of very violent crime but they are also areas of severe poverty. They are impoverished in many ways. Whereas in richer or more affluent areas in Dublin there might be a call on the community to fund or help part-fund some of the projects that is not an option in most of these areas. The groups with which I have worked are imaginative in their fund-raising. They have tried everything, they have examined every grant available not only in Ireland but around the world. They have appealed to philanthropists. They have considered alternate sources of funds. They have pared all of their overheads right down to the bone because this is not the first cut. It comes after a series of cuts.

In many cases they have pared back their services, wages, and administration costs. It is not as if they are not aware of the need to be prudent in this day and age. They have done that in buckets yet they were told before Christmas to expect a cut of maybe 3%, 4% or even 5%. The cuts are huge for some of the projects listed by the City of Dublin Youth Services Board because they have already pared down. I will not deal with two groups, Focus Ireland and Candle which are substantial, and there are major reasons for that. I have some problems with them because alternative funding is already in place to capture that. Maybe the Minister is considering those organisations. Groups such as The Base in Ballyfermot have been pared down. The size of the funding looks attractive but it has been cut by 14% which would not sound huge if we were in an era of plenty but a cut of €60,000 from the budget of an organisation dealing with the most disadvantaged children in Dublin 10 is huge. That means job losses, curtailment of services, closure on certain days. The same could be said of the Ballyfermot youth services. Deputy Conaghan, who is here, would know some of the groups I am listing and the effects of such a cut on the Ballyfermot Youth Services or The Base. It is suggested that €73,000 will come out of its budget which is substantial.

I know that the final decision does not necessarily lie with the Minister but she can sign off or refuse to sign off on what the City of Dublin Youth Services Board presents to her. I urge her not to sign off on cuts of that scale and to look again to ensure that services do not end up reducing their service or their hours, especially at this time for young people.

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue of support for youth services and I know the services to which he refers. I have been to The Base in Ballyfermot and I know the work of the Ballyfermot Youth Services and I want to support as much as I possibly can the work done by youth services in Dublin and throughout the country. I recognise its value and would like to be investing more in it if that was feasible.

In 2013 my Department will provide funding of €53.173 million to support the provision of youth services and programmes throughout the country, including in particular, as the Deputy rightly says, in disadvantaged communities. That funding supports national and local youth work. There are approximately 1,400 paid staff, 40,000 volunteers and 400,000 young people participating in youth services and activities. We need to give more exposure to the work and make sure that youth work is recognised for the continuum of services it gives to young people. It has a huge role to play which I will focus on during my EU presidency of the Youth Council to help young people participate in training and eventually employment as well. That aspect of youth work increasingly needs attention.

As in all areas of the public sector, the Department of Children and Youth Affairs has had to find savings as part of the comprehensive review of expenditure, CRE. We must play our part as part of the collective Government effort to reduce our unsustainable day-to-day deficit. That is the reality for my Department as well as others. The CRE, published in December 2011, set out clearly the savings required for my Department in each of the years, 2012 to 2014. I published that, along with the detail of what would happen to all of this funding over that three year period. That was known to everybody involved. When we published the review we had a seven page chapter outlining the savings we required from the youth work funding schemes and it came to close to 10%. The bodies who administer these grants on behalf of the Department were notified about this and would have been familiar with what was in the CRE for the three year period in question. In the course of the past few weeks and months I have met with representatives of the youth sector with a view to determining how best to minimise the impact of the reduction in the 2013 budget on youth services, given the challenging budgetary situation we face. The administering bodies have been asked to examine issues such as salary levels, conditions, administrative costs across projects and services, if these have not already been addressed.

As far as possible I want to protect the front line services that youth workers and services provide to very vulnerable young people. In order to try to maximise the use of the funding available for youth services and programmes I have given flexibility to the local bodies which administer the grants, normally the VECs, to propose the reconfiguration of the allocations provided, having regard to the knowledge available to these bodies about the needs of young people at local level. There is flexibility built in to the bodies which administer the schemes to examine each project and come back to me with recommendations. As the Deputy says it comes back to me in the end.

In that context last week the City of Dublin Youth Service Board, as the local grant administering body in the Dublin area, submitted a proposal to the Department requesting that percentage reductions, different from those outlined in the CRE, would be applied to projects in the Dublin area. Their rationale, as they said to me, was to minimise the disruption to services and they said they had examined each of the projects and made recommendations based on the examination of those projects. In their analysis the majority of projects would receive cuts of less than 10%, many would be cut for example by 2%. They paid particular attention to the smaller projects and wanted to ensure they would continue because they felt they were providing a valuable service. They also said that some of the larger projects would receive greater reductions, hence the projects the Deputy mentioned which are receiving larger funding. I appreciate that they have made huge efforts to manage within that funding. That is the recommendation that has come to me.

I am examining the proposals from the City of Dublin Youth Service Board. My Department officials met last Friday with the board and we are examining the proposals that have been submitted.

There is no cut at present for the local voluntary youth clubs. Some other funding has been made available for the support of youth work this year. I am examining the proposals and the approach of the board and I will make a decision shortly. I take on board the points made about the value of the services being provided.

I hope I have impressed upon the Minister the need not to proceed with these developments. Even though they are large-scale organisations, a cut of 3% can be the difference between staying open one day and closing. The same applies to Bradóg in the north inner city, which faces a cost of 14%, and Sphere 17 in Darndale, which faces a cut of €122,000. For any organisation, that would be a huge cut and means fewer jobs and services. The cumulative effect in my constituency amounts to almost €500,000, not including the Focus Ireland cut. It is substantial in respect of youth services in one constituency. This is taking place on top of cuts to child benefit, maternity benefit, DEIS schools and special needs assistants and tax increases. In the past, money might have been found by appealing to parents to contribute an extra donation but they cannot do so now. Services have changed work practices to accommodate changes to funding but organisations cannot take any more cuts on the scale suggested.

I will examine in detail the impact of the proposed changes in budget allocations and I will try to ensure we make the most equitable decision on changes in funding. We will make every effort to preserve jobs and opening hours. We will make a decision in the most equitable way possible.

Hospital Facilities

I raise this matter on account of the serious ongoing trolley problem at Mayo General Hospital, which is in the red zone as it has between ten and 12 patients, on average, on hospital trolleys day after day. The problem has been intensifying over the past year and is getting worse. It affects elderly people, who are not fit to be left lying on trolleys.

This is of grave concern to the Minister for Health. I compliment him on his nationwide campaign to eliminate the problem and his initiative in setting up and funding the special delivery unit to tackle the problem of people on trolleys. The state of affairs at Mayo General Hospital is even more disturbing given that the hospital got on top of the trolley problem in 2011 with a 64% reduction in the number of people on trolleys. This is a considerably greater achievement than the national average, a reduction of 20%. There is evidence that the management knows its stuff and has a track record of thinking outside the box to tackle the issue. This is exactly the challenge the Minister has laid down.

However the problems and blockages at Mayo General Hospital are caused by external factors and the problems are twofold. There was a significant increase of 8% in people presenting at the accident and emergency unit in 2012, together with an 8% increase in the number of medical patients being treated in the hospital. One of the reasons for this is that 5% of patients are from Roscommon. This is a knock-on effect of the closure of the accident and emergency unit at Roscommon hospital, which leads to an increase in the number of people presenting from Roscommon. Anecdotally, it seems that changes to the way GPs are paid means they are doing fewer house calls. Consequently, more people are being referred to accident and emergency units. There is an increased dependence on the public health system, with fewer people able to afford private health care.

The greatest problem causing overcrowding at Mayo General Hospital is delayed discharge, which is a major problem in the hospital. This week, the average delayed discharge daily figure is 16 patients. Last week it was 12. Over the previous weeks a similar pattern has emerged. These patients are passing their time in an acute hospital bed and should be transferred into stepdown facilities. The problem is a lack of stepdown facilities available in the county.

A startling statistic is that following the closure of 12 stepdown beds in Ballina District Hospital since the end of 2011, the number of delayed discharges at Mayo General Hospital has increased by 400%. The blockage at Mayo General Hospital is chronic and needs urgent intervention, which is what I seek. I acknowledge the €105,000 allocated from the special delivery unit this year and the €300,000 last year to support the acute medical assessment unit. These moneys were spent to good effect.

The money allocated for this year is insufficient to address the problem. We need more stepdown facilities. I request that the HSE is directed and funded to open 12 beds in Ballina District Hospital. It makes economic sense. A patient in a medical bed in Mayo General Hospital costs the State €900 per day, compared to €1,000 per week at Ballina District Hospital. Stepdown beds at Swinford and Belmullet district hospitals could also be part of the solution. It is imperative funding is made available for two intermediate care teams in County Mayo. This will allow patients, where appropriate, to receive hospital-style treatment in their homes. In many cases, it would prevent these people being admitted to hospital in the first place and allow for early discharge. I seek funding and urgent intervention. Management has a proven ability to tackle the trolley issue but external factors are having an impact and the hospital needs the support of the Minister and the Department.

I thank the Deputy for raising this issue. The Government is committed to ensuring that patients receive the highest standards of care in the appropriate settings, be they acute, community, primary or residential. The traditional focus on the institution rather than the patient must be changed. To this end, we support older people to live at home and in their communities for as long as possible. This is realised through a range of community-based services such as mainstream home help, enhanced home care packages, or via other supports such as meals-on-wheels and respite or day care. The services are designed to be as flexible as possible to best meet the needs of individual recipients, their families and their carers.

In order to meet increasing population needs and to deliver sustainable services within available resources, innovative models of care are required to further advance the development of equitable integrated care for older people across community-based services, intermediate care options and quality long-term residential care services supported by a robust and well-funded scheme. The provision of intermediate care options and the provision of clear pathways of care for older persons accessing the health care systems will continue to be developed in 2013, with specific emphasis on the provision of transitional intermediate type care to address the issue of unnecessary admissions to acute hospitals and the requirements for long-term care. This will build on the work commenced in 2012, which saw an investment of €11 million in these types of services.

The HSE service plan 2013 was published on 10 January 2013 and the HSE west service plan was published on 28 February. Budgets have now been allocated for each local area within HSE west. New developments for 2013 are identified across a number of services, including funding of €35 million nationally for mental health, €620 million for primary care and €90 million demographic funding to include services such as screening, expansion of the ambulance service and a specific €10 million for pressures arising in hospitals.

Decisions will be taken shortly on prioritising need for this funding. They will be taken on the basis of current productivity and performance in managing existing resources. The needs and issues highlighted by the acute services in Mayo to which the Deputy referred will be taken into consideration in the process of allocating the funding.

I am happy to note the Deputy's acknowledgement that the provision of care in other settings could facilitate the better use of acute hospital resources. I assure the House that decisions relating to the funding of all services seek to address efficiently the needs of individuals and their carers. I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. I will bring it to the attention of the Minister for Health.

I thank the Minister for her response. I welcome the fact that it spoke to the concern regarding the trolley numbers in Mayo General Hospital that owe to blockages and a lack of step-down facilities. An urgent case has been made for some of the €10 million in funding to relieve hospital pressures to be released to Mayo General Hospital. Better value for money would be achieved if patients who were more suitable for step-down facilities were not in expensive medical beds. Re-opening 12 beds in Ballina District Hospital would make a considerable contribution to solving this problem. In light of the fact that decisions on prioritisation are imminent, I ask that this view be taken and that real support be given to the district hospital's management. From my regular dealings with it, its management is trying its best to stick to the Minister's intention, that is, to solve the problem creatively.

I will bring the Deputy's points to the attention of the Minister for Health, Deputy Reilly.

Barr
Roinn