Topical Issue Debate

School Accommodation Provision

Deputy James Bannon

I thank the Ceann Comhairle for selecting this matter today. From my conversations with the Minister in recent days, I know she is fully up to date with the funding shortfall currently being experienced by St. Mary's national school in Drumlish. I thank her for the commitment I received that she would be happy to meet the school principal at some stage next week to discuss the issue in greater detail. The number of pupils in St. Mary's has steadily increased in recent years and the school has an enrolment of 209 pupils for the 2015-2016 academic year. The Minister of State will agree that this is an exception to the current trend in Ireland and a clear testament to the vibrant community in the Drumlish area. It is particularly people like the principal, Ms Deirdre Coffey, former principal, the late Ms Elizabeth Brady, and the staff who have spearheaded the expansion and growth of the school in recent years. Meanwhile, the local community, children, parents, staff and board of management have a long tradition of fund-raising for the school when it has needed financial assistance. However, on this occasion the financial assistance required is a bridge too far for the local community.

The total grant aid allocated by the Department currently is approximately €1,200 per square metre whereas total building costs are in the order of €1,500 per square metre. As such, the school is currently falling short by €62,948. As the Minister of State can imagine, this is a substantial gap for a small rural school to try to close. At every stage of the process, the school and board of management have followed the procedures and guidelines set down by the Department and, in total, the school is set to receive €330,400 while total building costs are set at €393,348. This leaves a total shortfall of €62,948. If an outstanding grant of €23,500 is not approved, the shortfall will increase to €86,448. Yesterday, I received a reply to a number of parliamentary questions I asked regarding the securing of extra funding for St. Mary's. I was informed that it was open to the school authority to apply for additional funding but that, to date, no application had been received. While this is true, the school was in touch with the Department last week to raise the issue of the shortfall and it has asked for guidance on the matter. As of today, it has not received a reply. While departmental officials have been extremely helpful with the school at all times, some guidance from officials on how to apply for extra funding is needed. It is to be hoped this will be forthcoming.

I look forward to funding coming forward because this is a very rural school that is doing well with increasing numbers. It is important to ensure it is fully supported by the Department. The Government has supported a large number of schools in the midlands and we are opening three new ones in my constituency in the next week.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

And Mullingar Barracks.

Deputy James Bannon

That is something of which we can be justifiably proud. One of the schools will be the largest in the entire midlands, namely, Edgeworthstown national school, County Longford, which will have 28 teachers.

Deputy Robert Troy

Listening to my constituency colleague, I might wonder what the point is in raising this Topical Issue if everything has been resolved, as nothing could be further from the truth. I met the board of management, the teachers and some parents a week ago. Like their children, they are worried about and confused by what is happening. There is a serious shortfall in the funding provided for an extension at St. Mary's school.

Deputy Bannon is right that the school's numbers have exploded from 145 pupils in 2007 to 209 this year. The school applied through the devolved grant system, met the full terms and conditions in a voluntary capacity and relieved the pressure on the Department by putting the project out to tender itself. Given the size of the extension, the additional classrooms and the extra support room, the school has incurred an additional cost due to the new building regulations, but the Government has not allocated enough money, only providing approximately €1,200 per square metre at a time when building costs amount to €1,500 per square metre. The fire officer who carried out the inspection identified a number of deficiencies in the current building. That it must be upgraded is only right and proper, but this work should be done when extensive renovations are being conducted.

The school chose the cheapest options in the construction and architect tender processes, but it has still found itself with a shortfall of almost €80,000. It is a DEIS school that serves many economically disadvantaged families. It cannot afford to meet the shortfall if the Government does not step up to the mark and make additional funding available.

I welcome the Minister's statement today that she will meet a deputation of the school's principal and some members of its board of management. That is positive, but the principal and board do not want to come to Dáil Éireann for a day trip. They want to come here next week to find out that the Government has made the necessary funding available in order that the board and parents will not be left to make up the €80,000 shortfall.

Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills (Deputy Damien English)

I thank the Deputies for raising this matter. In recent weeks, Deputy Bannon was in contact with the Minister and me in this regard. It is important we bring clarity to the situation. If there is any confusion, we will try to put it to bed. I will offer a formal answer, after which we can go through the details.

This debate gives me the opportunity to outline to the House the current position regarding the building project that is under way at St. Mary's national school in Drumlish, County Longford. In January 2014, the school submitted an application to my Department's planning and building unit for two new 80 sq. m mainstream classrooms and a resource room to cater for increased enrolments. In March 2014, following an assessment of the school's application, the school authority received sanction for a devolved grant under my Department's 2014 additional accommodation scheme to build two additional mainstream classrooms and an additional resource room. The grant was sanctioned on condition that the school authority utilise the grant to build a permanent, stand-alone structure.

Devolved grants allow school authorities the means to address their accommodation and building priorities with a guaranteed amount of funding and give them day-to-day control of their building projects. It is a central tenet of the devolved scheme that responsibility for the management of a project, including cost control, timing of tendering and construction, rests with the school authority.

In September 2014, the school authority submitted an application for additional funding for a replacement boiler and an upgrade of its fire alarm system, emergency lighting and main electrical board. Additional funding was sanctioned for the costs associated with the boiler replacement and upgrade of the main electrical board. The costs in respect of the upgrade of the fire alarm system and emergency lighting were not approved, however, as these works were being carried out in the existing school building and were outside the scope of the approved project.

The planning and building unit was informed that building works commenced on site in August and the first instalment of the approved grant was paid to the school authority in early September 2015. If the level of funding provided by the Department is not sufficient to cover the cost of the approved works, it is open to the school authority to apply for additional funding, which is a common practice. However, if works are being carried out over and above the approved works, the cost of these must be met by the school authority.

The management authority of St. Mary's national school recently informed the planning and building unit that there was a shortfall in funding. In the coming days, the school will be requested to explain the reasons for this shortfall. On receipt of that information, my Department will be in a position to consider the request for additional funding. Obviously, there will be a time lag after the information comes forward. The process must be followed. A school submits the reasons for the increased costs and backs them up with evidence, after which time a decision can be made.

Deputy James Bannon

I thank the Minister of State for his response. I do not play politics with students, teachers or boards of management as others do. I would also like-----

Deputy Willie O'Dea

The Deputy played politics with Army wives when the Government closed the barracks in Mullingar.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard J. Durkan)

One voice, please. Deputy Bannon should proceed.

Deputy James Bannon

I thank the Acting Chairman.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

Deputy Bannon was shouting about it outside the gates.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard J. Durkan)

I am sorry Deputy-----

Deputy James Bannon

The little man was in government for a long time and he wrecked this country.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

The Government closed the Army barracks in Mullingar.

Deputy Ciara Conway

Is there an election coming, lads?

Deputy Robert Troy

So I believe, yes.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard J. Durkan)

-----but your turn will come in a moment.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

This is how Deputy Bannon behaved when he was in opposition.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard J. Durkan)

Deputy Bannon to proceed without interruption.

Deputy James Bannon

The funding system is flawed and out of sync with construction costs. When a small rural school faces a shortfall of €62,000, something is wrong with the system. As construction has started at the school and is moving along steadily, time is against the school and the community in Drumlish. It is important that we bridge the gap of €62,000 and secure the extension. I welcome the Minister of State's remarks to the effect that, if the level of funding provided by the Department is not sufficient to cover the cost of the approved works, it will be open to the school authority to apply for additional funding. I have every confidence in the Minister of State that the request will be considered favourably. I have dealt with a large number of schools in terms of funding shortfalls and so on.

Deputy Robert Troy

The Government closed the school in Ballycloghan.

Deputy James Bannon

I have always found the Minister to be helpful and supportive in addressing shortfalls. I do not doubt that the same will be the case with St. Mary's school in Drumlish.

I thank the Minister of State for taking this debate. St. Mary's is an example of a rural school that is doing well and surviving in tough times. It should be held up as an example of how rural schools should be run. We should do everything in our power to support rural schools. I attended a rural school and have been proud of the rural school network.

Deputy Robert Troy

It is not too proud of Deputy Bannon.

Deputy James Bannon

I compliment the schools' teachers.

Deputy Robert Troy

What about the school in Ballycloghan which the Government closed?

Deputy James Bannon

I also compliment the board of management and staff of St. Mary's in Drumlish.

Deputy Robert Troy

What is important is that the Minister of State has acknowledged that the central tenet of the devolved scheme is that schools are responsible for the management of their projects, including cost control, timing of tendering, and so on. The board of management of St. Mary's adhered to the letter of the law in this regard, on which it should be complimented. The problem is that the funding that has been allocated on a square footage basis is inadequate. The school has been in constant contact with the building unit in Tullamore seeking additional funds.

I do not want to play politics with this matter. St. Mary's is a school in a DEIS area and cannot afford to meet the shortfall. I am not making this up. That there is a shortfall of almost €80,000 is a fact. If money is not made available, it will be left to parents, staff and the greater Drumlish area to make up the shortfall. This cannot happen.

Members must ensure this scheme, administered through the Department of Education and Skills, is fit for purpose, by which I mean the money allocated must meet the building costs. At present, €1,200 per square metre is being allocated, whereas building costs are coming in at €1,500 per square metre. As the two do not add up, the Department must revisit it. Moreover, in this particular instance the school has been in contact informally with the Department's school building unit in Tullamore and it must ensure that when the formal application is received, it is dealt with in a fast, efficient and, most importantly, positive manner to relieve the current anxiety in Drumlish.

Deputy Damien English

I again thank both Deputies. To be clear, the Department's building and planning unit has proven itself to be fit for purpose in recent years. It has responded quite well and has a clear mission, which is to spend taxpayers' money correctly, wisely, fairly and equitably nationwide. Consequently, as the Deputy will appreciate, there must be a formal process. The unit has proved itself - I believe all Members have dealt with quite a number of cases over the years - and it can respond in the correct manner. The Deputy has indicated that the board of management has done the job correctly, with a good record and so on, and once a good record is in place and the school can prove that there has been a budget overrun and the reason for it, the Department and this unit always have shown the ability to do the job properly when a decision is to be made. However, Deputy Troy must appreciate that there must be a process. He is correct that there can sometimes be a timing difference between the allocation of money and the subsequent cost of building, but that must be shown clearly for the approved project. To be clear, I refer to the project that was approved; as the Deputy will appreciate, additional works are different. Hopefully this matter will be dealt with quite quickly. Information is going back and forth and the formal process is on the way but, in fairness, it is the unit's job to assess this matter and to deal with it properly. It will be helped if, as the Deputy noted, the board has done an excellent job in managing the devolved grant scheme. That scheme works well and has delivered many school projects in counties Meath, Westmeath and Longford and everywhere else. It is a successful approach that works well. Most schools speak highly of it, and this is how it should be kept. The unit will respond accordingly to the information provided.

University Governance

Deputy Niall Collins

It is regrettable that the Minister of State's senior colleague is not present, given her proximity to the University of Limerick as a representative for the Limerick region. In any event, the Minister of State will be aware that allegations were brought to my attention in 2012 pertaining to alleged improper payments at the University of Limerick. At the time, I brought that matter to the Committee of Public Accounts and it went through a process. Unfortunately, Members do not have sight of what that process was back in 2012. However, a number of other whistleblowers have now come into the public domain and have made a number of allegations similar to those brought to my attention in 2012. These similar allegations were reported recently in the Limerick Leader and widely by other media outlets. There is much commonality between all these allegations, but one common theme to emerge is that many people who raised their heads and queried certain payments at the University of Limerick were asked to leave. Many of them were paid off and removed from their jobs. In addition, many of them were asked to sign confidentiality agreements and agree to not speak about their experiences. This is quite serious, given the number of people who now have come forward into the public domain. In addition, other people whom I know and to whom I have spoken have not come forward. These are people of the highest integrity who have professional qualifications and are part of professional associations. Their integrity is beyond question and they also have come forward. The alarm bells are ringing, and Members must sit up and take note in this regard.

On foot of this, the University of Limerick has now issued High Court proceedings against the Limerick Leader newspaper, which is quite unprecedented, and against its editor, Mr. Alan English, personally. I have a serious issue with this action, because a State-funded institution is using taxpayers' money in an attempt to gag a newspaper and its editor, which are pursuing matters in the public interest that are in the public domain. In his reply, the Minister of State might address a couple of issues on behalf of his senior Minister. Is the Higher Education Authority the competent authority to hold an investigation into this affair? I ask because the Minister of State's senior line Minister, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, stated this week that she would support the intention to have an external examination of this issue and that the reputation of the University of Limerick was hugely important. All Members agree with that and wish to see it protected. She stated that what was needed was someone independent to investigate all the allegations. Is the Higher Education Authority the competent authority to investigate this matter independently, given that it has been involved in it from 2012 right up to the present? Second, if the Minister of State does not agree that the Higher Education Authority is the competent authority, will he or his senior Minister appoint an independent competent authority to review and investigate this matter and report to the Minister independently? There are issues pertaining to social welfare and to the Revenue Commissioners, for example, that must be investigated.

Acting Chairman (Deputy Bernard J. Durkan)

Thank you, Deputy.

Deputy Niall Collins

Finally, will the Minister of State join with me on his own behalf and that of his senior line Minister, Deputy Jan O'Sullivan, in calling on the University of Limerick to withdraw its High Court proceedings against the Limerick Leader newspaper and against Mr. Alan English?

Deputy Willie O'Dea

While I have great respect for the Minister of State personally, I deplore the fact that the Minister is not present in the Chamber to answer personally on a matter that relates directly to her own constituency. In addition to the cases brought to the attention of Deputy Niall Collins, a number of different individuals have approached me and essentially have told me the same story, whereby people who raised their heads and raised issues about certain payments in particular were literally hounded out. This has happened in several cases that have been brought to my personal attention. It reflects a disturbing pattern of behaviour, and all the investigations that have taken place - that is, the internal university investigations into the circumstances surrounding the situation in which people ultimately were obliged to leave - show a distinct and patent lack of independence. While there are several matters about which I could talk today, one interesting aspect is that in both cases which are in the public domain at present, the university has made an offer to settle on the basis that the two people involved should resign from the university and collect two years' salary by way of payment. That payment of two years' salary involves taxpayers' money, but in both cases the university's so-called and allegedly independent investigator found that the two people had acted maliciously. Why would one pay two years' worth of taxpayers' money to somebody whom one's own investigator, who was meant to be independent, found to have acted maliciously? This matter must be investigated properly and the investigation must be both independent and perceived to be independent.

I also ask the Minister of State what he thinks of the actions of the University of Limerick in resorting to the heavy machinery of the law by employing a high-profile firm of solicitors at what I am sure is great expense to the taxpayer to sue the Limerick Leader, which, like all provincial newspapers, is hardly awash with funds. This proposed High Court action will place a serious strain on an organisation which I am sure is already struggling. In addition, the university's intention to sue the editor personally looks like a deliberate attempt to gag discussion of the matter, put it underground and prevent any discussion in the public domain. The Minister for Education and Skills knows better than anyone else that the Limerick Leader is the main print medium for both the city and county of Limerick, which she and I represent, and has been so for more than a century. While I do not agree with everything the Limerick Leader or its editor says, the Minister of State will appreciate that a free press is essential in a properly functioning democracy. I ask the Minister of State to communicate immediately to the Minister for Education and Skills that Members expect her to contact the university and to ask it, as Minister, to call off these legal bloodhounds.

Deputy Damien English

I would like to thank the Deputies for raising this issue. It is certainly a matter of concern to my senior Minister, but she cannot be in two places at the same time so I am answering this matter on her behalf.

In early 2012, a former employee of the University of Limerick informed a public representative, who in turn informed the Committee of Public Accounts, of alleged irregular practices in the finance department of the University, her attempts to rectify them and how she had been dealt with by the university. The issues were referred by the Committee of Public Accounts to the Secretary General of my Department and, at his request, the HEA sought the response of the university. The university informed the HEA that it was engaging with the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General on the issues and had provided all related correspondence to that office. The president of the university also wrote to the Committee of Public Accounts stating that the university was satisfied that it had dealt fully with the allegations made by its former employee as follows:

The University refutes in the strongest possible terms these allegations. The University has at all times paid expenses in accordance with its Travel and Subsistence Policy and is satisfied that the controls in place ensure that payments are reimbursed in accordance with Policy.

The letter goes on to say that the university was in correspondence with the Office of the Comptroller and Auditor General on the matter, and continues:

The University is subject to rigorous auditing on an on-going basis. This includes external audit, internal audit and oversight by the Governing Authority's Audit and Risk Management Committee. The area of expenses is generally reviewed annually as part of the annual audit. A recent report to the Governing Authority Audit and Risk Management Committee by the University's external auditors confirmed that there were no weaknesses identified in relation to the controls in place regarding expenses.

In June this year, two employees of the university, who were employed in the finance department, requested of my Department to make a disclosure under the protected disclosures legislation. They were directed to the CEO of the Higher Education Authority, as that person is a prescribed recipient under the legislation. The CEO, Mr. Boland, met with the employees on 5 May 2015. An agreed minute of that meeting was provided to the president of the university for his observations. It is important to say that at the meeting no specific allegations were made of financial irregularities in the university. However, the employees outlined a series of events which they considered amounted to bullying and victimisation of them by management and colleagues in the university. They stated their view that this arose because of their questioning of what they saw as irregular practices in the finance department. The employees in question have not, to date, set out specific allegations, pleading a lack of confidence in the university to properly inquire into them. The university, in response to the HEA, refuted the claims made by its employees. It stated that the allegations of bullying and victimisation were not substantiated, and that the employees had refused to co-operate with various inquiries and had been found by one inquiry to have made malicious claims. Both employees are now subject to disciplinary proceedings.

More recently, the former employee has contacted the HEA repeating her initial allegations. At her request, Mr. Boland met with her last evening.

The Department has concerns on a number of levels. First, in the case of the employees and the former employee, they continue to feel victimised for having, as they see it, challenged irregular practices. Second, as the university is an important institution regionally and nationally and the current controversies are potentially damaging to its good reputation, as the Deputies have said, they need to be dealt with comprehensively and conclusively as soon as possible. Third, the demands of public accountability are such that the truth of any allegation of misconduct in a higher education institution needs to be established beyond reasonable doubt. Having regard to these considerations, the HEA, in consultation with my Department and the university, will now put in place a process of review. The precise terms of reference will be established within the next few days. However, I stress that the review will be independent of the university's processes and will cover how the initial inquiry into the allegations of irregular payments and the allegations of victimisation and bullying were dealt with by the university. A final report will be concluded by the end of November. If that is not possible, an interim report will be provided.

Deputy Niall Collins

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. It is fair to say that we are moving in the right direction concerning this matter, and I want to acknowledge that. The Minister of State has indicated that he intends to establish a review. It is important that, in the first instance, this review should not rule out any wider investigation if it concludes that such is required and merited.

The imminent report, whether it is a full or interim one, should be referred to the Minister for Education and Skills, not to the Higher Education Authority or the Department. I await the terms of reference with interest, because they will have to be broad enough to include the whistleblowers to whom both Deputy O'Dea and I have spoken. Their allegations and stories are not in the public domain. They will also have to be afforded an opportunity to speak in confidence to the review panel. That is critical, because there are more people out there who are saying the same thing. They cannot all be wrong.

The Minister did not address the request made by Deputy O'Dea and myself about the High Court proceedings against the Limerick Leader and against Mr. Alan English. That is a critical point, because taxpayers' money is being used to gag a provincial newspaper and a newspaper editor personally. Jobs could potentially be at stake. By the way, the University of Limerick has issued the proceedings. It is a corporate body, not an individual, acting against a newspaper. It is a big State-funded university against an organisation that is providing a lot of jobs, which is an important point. I ask the Minister of State and the senior Minister to call on the University of Limerick to withdraw its High Court proceedings.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I want to get clarification on one point. He states that there will be a review of the circumstances surrounding this specific case. However, a number of other people have come to public representatives such as myself and Deputy Niall Collins making similar complaints. Will the investigation be able to take evidence from those people, in view of the fact that they have already been forced by the university to sign confidentiality clauses concerning settlements that were made at the time of termination of their employment? It is critical that their story should also be heard so that the total context will be available to the independent investigator.

Second, will the Minister of State ask the Minister for Education and Skills to request, or tell, the University of Limerick to withdraw the legal proceedings against both the Limerick Leader and the editor, Mr. Alan English? The proceedings are both inappropriate and excessive.

Third, can the Minister of State give us an assurance that the employment of the two employees in question in this particular case, who are currently suspended, will not be terminated before the conclusion of these proceedings?

Deputy Damien English

The full terms of reference will be available in the next couple of days. I can have them sent on to the Deputies. I presume the terms of reference will be wide in order to cover all this. The Department, the HEA and all involved are anxious that this be dealt with fully and conclusively. There is no point in having a review that does not cover all the concerns and alleged wrongdoings, so those will be dealt with as well.

My understanding is that only one person signed a confidentiality clause and that person has come forward with more allegations, so I presume there will be space there to deal with them as well.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

There have been several people.

Deputy Damien English

I was only aware of one. The Deputy will appreciate that I do not have all the information on the full case. I can check for him, however, and will get that confirmed. The hope is that this review will deal with all this one way or the other. That is why it will be dealt with quite quickly. As regards the Deputy's concern that the review may prevent a further investigation, I do not think it will. Naturally, however, we cannot prejudge what it will come out with, but I presume the review will make recommendations. It is the right process to deal with the matter first of all.

As regards the Deputy's other question, under the protected disclosures legislation of 2014, the HEA is the right channel to go through, in conjunction with the Minister, the Department and the university. I will confirm that for the Deputy.

On the question of the High Court proceedings, it is my own view that it is always best to avoid these where at all possible, but it is not in my gift to lecture anybody on what they should or should not do. However, I will certainly raise the matter, and express the Deputies' views, with both the Minister and the Department.

Deputy Willie O'Dea

Will the Minister of State ask the university to withdraw the legal proceedings?

Deputy Damien English

I have given my view on it. It is not in my gift to ask them or tell them to do that. It is my view, however, that it is best to avoid High Court proceedings where possible. We will see how this review comes on, but I will discuss it with the Department as well.

Medical Card Delays

Deputy Ciara Conway

I want to highlight an issue that is putting undue strain on people who are already faced with stressful times, particularly where their health is concerned. Unfortunately, there is not a family or home in the country that has not been touched by cancer. A particular problem has come to my attention but, in order to be helpful, I also have a solution. I hope the simple answer to the difficulty that people are experiencing will be taken on board and, more importantly, will be implemented.

The issue has to do with the turnaround concerning decisions on medical cards, as well as the pain and financial strain that have been caused by the delay involved.

Over recent months I have had a number of very worried and sick people have come to my office in Dungarvan in County Waterford seeking help with their medical cards. Naturally, these people are extremely worried and stressed about their diagnosis and the treatment they are facing. I am sad to report that while they were focusing on getting treatment and trying to get better, our medical card system was adding to their stress. This is simply not good enough.

I will illustrate the point by way of example. Recently, a lady came to me who had received a serious cancer diagnosis in June. Straight away she applied for her medical card. By the time she had contacted me it was September and there was no decision on her card. Only this morning I received from Kieran Healy, head of customer services at the HSE, a response to a parliamentary question on this issue. The reply clearly states that the application processing team works to a 15-day working day turnaround time for complete applications. That is clearly not the case.

More upsetting, I spoke to the lady who had been waiting from June to September, by which time there was no decision on her medical card. In that time she had incurred bills of in excess of €500 in the pharmacy and was also facing a very expensive bill for four chemotherapy treatments. I know of another case where a sick man applied for a card in August and as of today, 7 October, it has not even been sent for initial assessment. That lapse is far more than 15 days. The response I received to a parliamentary question is simply not good enough.

The applications for a medical card need to be screened initially for serious illnesses such as cancer. These applications should be taken from the pile and fast-tracked. There should be a quick initial scan of applications and the relevant applications should be prioritised for means. The HSE should ensure these are done within 15 days. It is as simple as that. I realise the Minister of State knows that people facing serious illnesses have enough to worry about. They should not have to worry about the cost of chemotherapy or drugs as well. They should be focusing on getting well and should not have to go to Deputies or ring helplines to get something to which they are entitled.

Deputy Denis Naughten

A woman came into my clinic in Ballinasloe recently. She had been diagnosed with cancer. I sympathised with her not because she had been diagnosed with cancer or because herself and her family were going to have to go through that challenge over the coming months but because of the horrendous experience she is going to have to go through to be granted a medical card.

I welcome the report by the Irish Cancer Society because it exposes two issues, the first of which is the failure to recognise properly the medical expenses in the assessment of medical card applications for illnesses such as cancer. It is not a means assessment; it is a mean assessment. The average spend per month for a cancer patient is €862 while the average income loss is €1,400. However, the allowances provided under the medical card system for health expenses, prescribed medicines and appliances and hospital charges come to the princely sum of €62.65 per week. This means the figure of €459.49 per week in costs and income lost, as identified by the Irish Cancer Society, is being ignored in the current medical card assessment. Regardless, even to get recognition from the medical card section for the €62.65 per week, patients on chemotherapy will literally have to sweat blood and tears. The majority of these cases will be granted a medical card at the end of the process, but that is months down the road. It seems that the main policy is to try to wear people down in order that they simply throw in the towel and do not pursue it to the bitter end.

I welcome the report and I welcome that the Minister of State with responsibility for rural affairs is replying to the issue in the House today because the report exposes the active discrimination within the medical card section against people who are sick and residing in rural areas. The report highlights that the average cost for travel expenses per week is €66.23. This is not only for cancer but also relates to other medical conditions requiring frequent attendance at regional centres. The provision for transport under the medical card assessment comes under health expenses. I have seldom seen a case where an application gets anything more than €15, that is, one quarter of the real cost identified by the Irish Cancer Society. We have developed centres of excellence, particularly for cancer, and they are all welcome. For someone in my county who has to travel to Galway for a hospital appointment, the cost comes to €150. We do not have public transport to facilitate such people in getting to the appointment and back again on the same day. As a result, these people must pay for a taxi. The HSE will not assist with this cost and the Department of Social Protection will not assist in the matter either. These people have to fork out the money from their own pockets. If a person is unfortunate enough to come from Arigna, for example, it will cost him €200 to get to the hospital appointment in the first place. No recognition is being given to that fact by the medical card section.

Minister of State at the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (Deputy Ann Phelan)

I thank the Deputies for raising these important matters. At the outset, I am keen to acknowledge the work and effort of health staff that has resulted in Ireland's cancer survival rate improving consistently in recent decades. I have no doubt the national cancer strategy steering group set up to advise on developing a new national cancer strategy for 2016 to 2025 will build on positive developments.

We do not have a universal eligibility system for primary and community health services. I maintain the view that until we have universal health care and everyone is entitled to health care, we will always have anomalies and injustices. There will always be someone who is a little above the means threshold, who does not have the prescribed disease or whose condition is not sufficiently severe. As a result, these individuals will not meet the assessment criteria.

The Deputies will be aware of the publication of the report of the expert panel on medical need for medical card eligibility and the medical card process review, known as the Keane report. One key recommendation was that a person's means should remain the main qualifier for a medical card. The panel concluded that it would not be feasible, desirable or ethically justifiable to list medical conditions in priority order as a means of determining medical card eligibility. The findings of the expert panel raise questions for us as legislators about the approach of basing eligibility for health services on having a particular disease or special assessment arrangements for one disease or another.

The HSE is ensuring a more integrated and sensitive processing of medical card applications. This involves greater exchange of information between the central assessment office and the local health offices on people's medical circumstances and needs. We can see the results of these improvements. The number of discretionary medical cards in circulation has increased by approximately 76%, from 52,000 in mid-2014 to almost 93,000 at the beginning of September this year. Under the General Medical Services scheme, eligibility is granted from the date a complete application has been assessed and a decision is made by the HSE in accordance with the legislation and the national assessment guidelines. The HSE makes every effort to make timely decisions. The HSE has a target to process 90% of properly completed claims within the 15-day period to which Deputy Conway referred. The current turnaround is over 98%. This ensures a short lead time between applications being submitted and a decision being made on the eligibility of the applicant.

I imagine the Deputies will appreciate in light of the legislation that applications must be supported with a range of documentation, as outlined on the application forms. It has to be acknowledged that the processing time for incomplete applications is dependent on the furnishing of the required supporting documentation. Discretion continues to be an integral part of the medical card assessment process. If an applicant's means are above the financial thresholds, as set out in the national guidelines, the HSE routinely examines for indications of medical or social circumstances that might result in undue financial hardship in arranging medical card services and, exercising discretion, may grant eligibility for a medical card on this basis. I am aware the HSE routinely affords applicants the opportunity to furnish additional supporting information and documentation to take account fully of all the relevant circumstances that may benefit them in the assessment, including medical evidence of cost and necessary expenses.

Deputy Ciara Conway

I thank the Minister of State. Nobody is disputing that there are issues in terms of what we as legislators decide to do regarding changes to legislation on eligibility criteria other than means, but I referred to cancer patients who are entitled to medical cards because of their means and are still waiting in excess of the 15 day turnaround period. I received a response today from Mr. Kieran Healy, head of customer services in the HSE. It is not happening.

I was able to lift the telephone in my office in September and within two days a card was issued. The woman concerned had built up a large bill in her local pharmacy and had received a large bill from the treating hospital for her chemotherapy. Pharmacists are under the illusion that medical cards are backdated, but they are not. It is something we as a Government need to tackle. The date of the initial application for social welfare payments is the date from which the card is sanctioned. I am not referring to people who do not have an entitlement to a card, but rather those who are entitled to one.

In the two cases I outlined, in a response the HSE referred to 98% turnover and stated that 90% of people have their applications completed within 15 days. I must know of the two unluckiest people in Dungarvan, County Waterford. They are just two cases of the many I could highlight to the Minister of State. We need to consider backdating the initial application date of a medical card. People who are entitled to a card and who are trying to tackle, conquer and overcome cancer should not have their burden added to because of additional financial pressures resulting from bills from hospitals and local pharmacists.

Deputy Denis Naughten

The problem with cancer patients and the 15 day loophole the HSE uses is that the medical card section in Finglas is involved in what is called a three card trick. Even though it has direct access to Revenue and social welfare and can get information at the touch of a button, it deliberately forces sick patients to go to local tax offices to get printouts of their last tax liabilities and to go into social welfare offices to get printouts of their social welfare payments. Such a policy delays processing applications and saves the medical card section money.

The report of the medical card eligibility group recommended that we should not base medical cards on particular medical conditions. However, the subsequent Minister announced that every child in the country diagnosed with cancer would get a medical card. I ask the Minister of State to lift that age barrier. Regardless of age, if someone is diagnosed with cancer they should get a medical card.

I refer to the rural discrimination that is taking place across the board regarding medical cards, and not just for cancer patients and the chronically ill. I want the Minister of State to address this issue. A patient in Galway city is receiving treatment in Dublin and was given medical expenses of €14.45 a week less than a patient living beside him in Galway city who receives treatment in University Hospital Galway. The reality is that even though there is a lack of public transport in rural Ireland, the HSE is deliberately ignoring transport costs when making medical assessments. This practice is taking place across the county and the reality is that the HSE is actively discriminating against those living in rural Ireland who are sick and cannot travel from provincial towns to regional centres.

Deputy Ann Phelan

I assure the Deputy that we have already taken the initiative on rural transport and are working with the HSE and the NTA on the parts of rural Ireland where people experience difficulties in trying to travel to hospital appointments. We will be able to develop cost savings through such an initiative.

On foot of the Keane report, the HSE established a clinical advisory group to develop clinical oversight and guidance for the operation of a more compassionate and trusted medical card system. The group includes patients' representatives and is continuing its work on the development of guidance on assessing medical card applications involving significant medical conditions. In the context of that work, the group made an interim recommendation, as Deputy Naughten stated, to award medical cards to all children under the age of 18 years with a diagnosis of cancer for a period of five years. This decision was accepted by the HSE director general.

The existing assessment system is complex because it tries to ensure that a wide range of personal circumstances can be taken into account. We are still committed to further improving the existing system and the work of the Comptroller and Auditor General will be central to this in the immediate future. In the medium term, I believe that we should focus on the strategic goal of universal health care, which will benefit everybody.

Deputy Denis Naughten

Will the Minister of State deal with the issue of discrimination?

Deputy Ann Phelan

We are already working on an initiative with the NTA and the HSE.

Deputy Denis Naughten

I refer to rural discrimination in regard to the issuing of medical cards. Will she look into that specific issue?

Deputy Ann Phelan

I ask the Deputy to send me an e-mail on the issue.

Domestic Violence Refuges Provision

Deputy Seán Crowe

I refer to the Respond! women's refuge in Tallaght, Cuan Álainn. I am not sure if the Minister, Deputy Reilly, is familiar with the site. It is ideally located beside the hospital and Garda station. It is anonymous and is surrounded by a supportive community. The difficulty is that Respond!, which is a voluntary agency, has said it cannot afford to fund the refuge for women and children fleeing domestic violence. Respond! has bankrolled the refuge for the past three and a half years without any financial support from the State.

The refuge caters for nine families and has housed 71 women and 96 children, at a cost of €350,000 per annum. Respond! undertook responsibility for it for three years. Without the service women and children may have to return to potentially dangerous environments. I have heard that agencies, including Tusla, accept that Respond! has identified a definite need to care for women and children in such circumstances.

We know that there is a need for these types of refuges. If it closes, where do the women go? We know that if, for instance, they go to the sexual assault unit in the local hospital the Garda usually refer them to the refuge. It has a large catchment area, but it is not just women from Tallaght or the wider area who use the service. Women from different counties may use it, depending on their safety. Clients may move from different refuges.

It is doing its job and working well. If it closes, it means we are moving backwards. What will replace it if it closes? We need to open more refuges rather than close them. It is a question of money. I raised this issue during the debate on homelessness because it is part of that chain. People leave the family home because of domestic violence or sexual assault. We know what eventually forces women to leave the family home - it is usually the women who have to leave and the abusive partner stays behind. There is a safety aspect. What can the Minister do about this matter?

It is not a huge amount of money. The Minister's colleague, the Minister, Deputy Alan Kelly, has said the homelessness issue is not a matter of resources and I am glad to hear it. This is part of that chain because when they leave the home they become homeless. The added difficulty is if the gardaí have somebody in the local hospital who has been attacked or abused they normally look for somewhere for the family to go. We know in Dublin that hostel accommodation is full at night time and there is the same difficulty with hotels, so where do they go? Usually the gardaí put them in the station, which is okay for an hour or two or, at a push, overnight. Where do the families go? If we take this huge important piece of infrastructure out of the system what will replace it? I eagerly look forward to the Minister's reply.

Minister for Children and Youth Affairs (Deputy James Reilly)

I thank Deputy Crowe for raising this issue and I welcome the opportunity to clarify the position on the funding of domestic violence services by Tusla, the Child and Family Agency. I am aware of this issue as Deputy Pat Rabbitte has raised it with me on a number of occasions.

It is my understanding that the Cuan Álainn centre was established independently of the State and opened in 2012. It is funded by Respond! Housing Association. Tusla, the Child and Family Agency allocates available funding for domestic violence to emergency refuge accommodation services and community-based domestic violence supports. It does not fund Cuan Álainn.

I understand that the Cuan Álainn centre provides second stage accommodation for women and children who have experienced domestic violence and who may already have been in emergency accommodation. The facility does not operate as a front-line emergency domestic violence service, rather it provides step down or transitional accommodation to support transition into a permanent settled home. This can include survivors of domestic violence who are transitioning from emergency services to a new, permanent home.

Departmental officials and Tusla recently met Respond!, at the housing association's request, to discuss the current situation in Cuan Álainn. Respond! advised that it was not in a position to continue funding for the centre. The Department sought additional information from Respond!, including information on the housing association's overall financial situation. The most recent information provided indicated that Respond!, which is made up of two companies, was in good overall financial health.

I hope the matter can be satisfactorily resolved, by allowing sufficient time for all avenues to be explored by the relevant parties. This will need to include discussion with other parties, including the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government as it would appear that these families have pressing housing needs. In this regard, I hope that a meeting with Respond! can be arranged shortly. Tusla will continue to work closely with service providers to ensure that women and children fleeing domestic abuse receive all necessary emergency support. The position in respect of the Cuan Álainn service is being kept under review.

Deputy Seán Crowe

I listened to what the Minister said about the fact this was established independently and is a transitional service, but my question is whether it is needed. I would argue, and anyone with half a brain would agree, that it certainly is. It is proposed to close the service on 18 December. As the Minister knows, 25 December is Christmas, and the statistics over the years show this is a time of huge pressure on families when a lot of domestic violence breaks out.

The Minister stated he hopes it can be satisfactorily resolved by allowing sufficient time for all avenues to be explored by the relevant parties. This is grand, but it is kicking the can down the road. I was hoping to hear from the Minister today that some mechanism or avenue of funding would keep this vital service open.

I began by saying it is in an ideal location and fits the criteria. Whether it is secondary to emergency housing, it is part of the chain and the next step is housing. It is a vital part of what we need to do as a society and if it is not being done by the State it should be. We should not rely on voluntary housing organisations or religious organisations for these vital services but unfortunately we do, whether in education, special needs or other areas. We push the problem onto someone else.

I do not know whether the Minister can say anything positive to the staff working in the centre or, more importantly, to those who use the centre. The big question is where to put these families and where they go next. There is also the next tranche of families and children who are trying to get into the system. Where will they go if we do not have this vital piece of infrastructure?

Deputy James Reilly

I thank the Deputy. Obviously our concern is for the families who reside there and need the service. Clearly, there is a need for the State to provide services of this nature and to do so in a planned and organised fashion. It is very welcome that Respond! as a housing agency does this independently without regard to the State, and it is also very commendable that it has funded it, but we need to have a proper organised handover if it is going to cease to fund it. It is not as if the organisation is bereft of funds, that it is overdrawn in the bank or that its capital is expended and it is extended. This is not the case. Its board is quite entitled to make the decision that, having established and funded this, it feels it is not core to its work and that it would like to cease funding it, but there is an onus on it to sit down and speak to us about how it can be handed over in an orderly fashion to allow the Department and the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government to determine how best to continue funding to support women and families who have been the subject of domestic violence and abuse and how to transition from the emergency situation, as Respond! has done by providing the service, into a more permanent solution and permanent home, which clearly involves the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government also. It is not my intention that the service should fall between two stools, and I look forward to meeting Respond! to determine putting in place an orderly transition for the funding of this organisation. It is not fair to the families concerned to have them looking at 18 December, the week before Christmas, with the threat of having the roof over their heads removed.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Wednesday, 7 Oct 2015