Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 4 Jul 2017

Vol. 252 No. 11

Commencement Matters

Respite Care Services Provision

Thank you, a Chathaoirligh, for selecting this matter and I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Finian McGrath, for coming to the House to discuss it. There is a problem with the provision of respite care for adults with mental disabilities in the Ballina area of County Mayo. The service is provided through a service level agreement between the HSE and Western Care Mayo.

I will preface my remarks by pointing out that where the service has been available it has been good and people were happy with it. However, a problem arose last March. There was a safeguarding emergency which meant that current service users could not avail of the service because it had to be provided to a particular person on account of the safeguarding emergency that arose. Unfortunately, the service does not appear to have resumed or returned to normal.

There also appears to be a problem with information feeding back to the families of the dependent adults on when a normal service will resume. Between 40 and 43 adults in the Ballina area received the service in 2016, so it is important for the families. These adults are often in the care of their parents and the respite care provides a break for the dependent adults and their families. The fact that the service has been disrupted is also a cause of concern because many of these dependent adults have anxiety problems or suffer from autism. They need regularity of service and to avoid disruption.

Aside from the delay and disruption in the service for the people who had been receiving it, the other aspect to this is the number of dependent adults who have been waiting for this service, which I have been unable to ascertain. One family described their situation to me. When their child reached 18 years, the age of majority, they were sent to adult services, but they have been on a waiting list for four years and have not received respite care for that period. I am also aware of another case, although I cannot say if the waiting period is as long as four years.

I have put questions to the HSE management and to Western Care Mayo but I received no satisfactory answers, which is why I asked that the Minister come to the House today.

Quite a number of the families are anxious, as are the adults involved. The least we could do is to provide a service. The Minister of State would have to agree that four years is an inordinate length of time for anybody to have to wait for this very important service. The Minister of State might be able to shed some light on a number of the questions I have raised and give clarity as to how soon the service might resume.

I thank Senator Michelle Mulherin for raising this very important issue in respect of respite services. I know that she is a very strong campaigner for people with disabilities, particularly those in the Mayo area. It is a very important issue. I accept many of the points the Senator has raised and I will deal with them later on in my response. It is also important, however, that we know what is going on in respect of the provision of respite care both locally and nationally. The Programme for a Partnership Government recognises the need for respite services to be developed further. The Government is committed to safeguarding vulnerable people in the care of the health service by providing services and supports for people with disabilities which will empower them to live independent lives in accessing the services they choose and enhance their ability to tailor the supports required to meet their needs and plan their lives.

The provision of respite services has come under additional pressure in recent years. I accept that point. Particularly since I took over 11 months ago, we have focused any available development funding primarily on the provision of day places for pupils graduating from school or rehabilitative training programmes. This has led to increased demand for respite for those young adults who would have previously accessed respite as children. In my first 12 months we put extra money into providing a day service for those 18 years old and older. That issue has now been resolved and it is now time to move on to the other issues which the Senator raised, such as that of respite care.

The HSE social care operational plan for 2017 aims to provide 182,000 overnight stays in centre-based respite services in addition to the 41,000 day respite sessions. Western Care has a service agreement with the Health Service Executive under section 39 of the Health Act 2004, on whose behalf it provides supports and services to people with intellectual disabilities in County Mayo. This includes funding for respite services for those with an intellectual disability. During 2016, Western Care provided 5,412 bed nights of respite to children and adults in Mayo. The total provided to adults was 4,278 bed nights of respite services located in Belmullet, Ballina, Ballyhaunis, Ballinrobe and Castlebar. In addition, some supports were provided to both children and adults to allow them to remain in their own homes. A total of 162 children and adults availed of this service during 2016 with the level of service each person used varying.

The number of adults currently waiting for respite services in Mayo as per the national database categories is 127. The categories included crisis and planned respite, overnight respite at home, regular part-time care every weekend, regular part-time care on alternate weekends and occasional respite with a host family. Unfortunately, I am unable to provide the Senator with the length of time these individuals have been on the waiting list in the timeframe given, but I will ask the HSE to write to the Senator directly with those figures. The Senator mentioned four years. I am absolutely shocked that any family of a person with a disability would not have received respite in four years. That is not acceptable. I will get the HSE to get back to the Senator.

In respect of the Ballina area, Western Care is funded by the HSE to provide 931 bed nights of adult respite per annum throughout 2017. In 2016, this level of service was provided to approximately 40 people. However, in March 2017, respite was cancelled for all service-users in the Ballina area as the facility had to be used to provide emergency residential placement, which caused the blockage there. As a result, Western Care is currently examining all possible options available, including reconfiguration of services, in order to restore some level of respite care in this area. Western Care is currently in discussions with the HSE to examine options with regard to solving this issue. The HSE remains committed to ensuring that respite services resume as quickly as possible. I also wish to reassure the Senator that we have included a strong focus on respite care services in the social care plan for 2017 to 2018 in our negotiations over coming weeks.

The Minister of State provided a comprehensive response. I ask Senator Mulherin to be brief.

With the permission of the Minister of State, I will bring to his attention the name of the individual who has been waiting for respite care for four years and provide details of the other cases of which I am aware. There is clearly an issue with resources in Western Care. The disruption to its service occurred in March. It is now July and I ask the Minister to ensure that those who have experienced disruption and those on the waiting list for respite care are provided with information because they do not know when they will receive care. I would like to provide further clarity to the individuals in question. I can also provide the Minister of State with details of cases which could shed light on what is happening in the service and could be instrumental in delivering the service.

I will give priority to the Ballina area and the blockage in the service there. As the Senator indicated, a safeguarding issue in an emergency case had a negative impact on respite services. I acknowledge the point the Senator made on the family clinic. I have been speaking to those in the services for the past 11 months in an effort to create a closer relationship with families and parents. It is unacceptable if there is a disconnect or a lack of information.

I will follow up on the individual cases the Senator raises. I am amazed to learn that someone has not been provided with respite care for four years. The Government restored the carer's grant of €1,700 per family per annum, which is not means tested. In recent months, a number of families informed me that they used this money to pay for respite services. Approximately 101,000 families are in receipt of this payment. However, a couple of thousand of other families who are eligible for the grant are not collecting it.

I fully accept the Senator's sincerity on this matter and that her comments are correct. Yesterday, I had a one-to-one meeting with the Taoiseach to discuss disability policy for the next 12 months. In fairness to him, the Taoiseach also raised the issue of respite services and he is very conscious of the need to do something about this issue. We must also fix local problems, address the lack of communications and ensure a more inclusive approach is taken to families. I will convey the Senator's concerns to the Minister and the HSE.

Joint Labour Committees Agreements

I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Breen. In the past two weeks alone, I have been contacted by many security workers from around the country who are not receiving from their employers the hourly rate of pay for the job they do. This practice must stop. As Senators are aware, as part of the most significant enhancement of workers' rights legislation anywhere in the world in recent years, the previous Government re-established a system of joint labour committees. This system was designed to ensure that vulnerable workers in sectors of the economy where pay is low and terms and conditions are at their most basic can have better pay, terms and conditions negotiated in a structured way and where the outcome of any agreement arrived at can be given the force of law. Two such orders, covering the rights of 20,000 security workers, have been signed in less than two years. The employment regulation order signed by the Minister of State, Deputy Breen, on 1 June sees the legal basic hourly rate of pay increase from €10.75 per hour to €11.05 per hour. As part of this agreement, security workers will earn more than what is considered a living wage by 2019, which is very welcome. These are minimum legal rates of pay.

Some security guards are being ripped off and effectively robbed of their legitimate wages. Unscrupulous companies engaged in this practice are breaking the law and must feel the force of the law upon them. Rogue security firms, of which there may be dozens, do not all share the view expressed by the Irish Security Industry Association, which helped negotiate the new legally binding arrangements.

On 1 June, its chairman, Alan Durnan, stated that it was a great result for both the employers and employees of the industry and that improved terms and conditions for security officers are critical to attracting and retaining high calibre personnel.

Those who break the law by not paying their staff properly are not only stealing from their staff, but also sticking their two fingers up at the decent businesses in the industry who are compliant and who see their staff as an intrinsic part of the business and not a commodity to be used and abused. I have advised staff who have been affected by this and contacted me to make a formal complaint to the rights commissioners' service as per the legislation. That is what the legislation suggests they do. That is the legal route. However, if a worker or a trade union cannot, for whatever reason, take a case, the legislation governing this area provides the Minister with the opportunity to take a case on behalf of a worker in the event of non-compliance. I think that the Minister should consider this approach because I am seeing considerable non-compliance involving a considerable number of companies throughout the country. Errant security companies are queering the pitch for decent security companies that are prepared to pay the legal minimum rate of pay to security workers. They value those workers and, as I understand it, that is the law of the land.

I thank Senator Nash, who is very much associated with the commencement of the employment orders for the security industry as well as the contract cleaning area, for raising this issue.

I wish to clarify that the employment regulation order that is in place for the security sector came into effect on 1 June last and not 1 June 2016, as had been suggested by the Senator. It is only in effect for the past month of so. The Industrial Relations Act 1946, as amended by the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2012, provides for the making of employment regulation orders, EROs, whereby proposals on pay and other terms and conditions of employment for workers in certain sectors are formulated by joint labour committees, JLCs, and adopted by the Labour Court if the court is satisfied that the JLC has complied with the relevant sections of the 2012 Act. The Labour Court then makes a recommendation to the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation and, if the Minister is satisfied that the Act has been complied with, the Minister will make an employment regulation order, the terms of which are legally enforceable and applicable to all employers in those sectors. It is important to note that they are legally enforceable.

Statutory Instrument No. 231 of 2017, Employment Regulation Order (Security Industry Joint Labour Committee) 2017, came into effect on 1 June 2017 following a consultation process that commenced in January last, following which the security industry JLC agreed proposals on terms and conditions for security operatives. These were subsequently adopted by the Labour Court which submitted a recommendation to me. Being satisfied that the relevant provisions of the 2012 Act were complied with I signed an order on 30 May last. Prior to that order coming into effect, Statutory Instrument No. 417 of 2015, Employment Regulation Order (Security Industry Joint Labour Committee) 2015, which came into operation on 1 October 2015, applied to the sector.

The number of inspections carried out by inspectors from the Workplace Relations Commission in the security sector between 1 October 2015 and December 2015 were three, with two employers in breach. In 2016, there were 17 inspections, with five employers in breach. It might be useful to the Senator to know that there have been five inspections to the end of May 2017, with two employers in breach. The Workplace Relations Commission anticipates that a similar number of inspections will be carried out in the sector this year as compared to last year.

I note what Senator Nash has been saying about rogue security firms and will take it on board.

I am very encouraged by the increased level of inspections by the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, inspectorate. It is important that the message goes out that rogue security firms will not be allowed to continue not to comply with employment regulation orders, EROs. They are the law of the land. I have evidence of security firms which in recent weeks were not paying the new rate. I have advised those affected to bring their complaints to the rights commissioner and the WRC.

When I did some research on this I saw that some security firms are quite brazenly going onto recruitment websites and putting advertisements for rates of pay that are lower than the legal rates of pay. Some of these advertisements are dated 28 June and 1 July. This is continuing. I do not think this is a mistake.

These people are thumbing their noses at the law, insulting their employees and expecting them to work for a rate of pay that is less than the legal hourly rate. That is not acceptable. There is provision in the legislation, as the Minister of State knows, to apply for an exemption from an ERO rate. It is like the exemption that applies under the National Minimum Wage Act 2017 and nobody has made an exemption request under that Act or under the joint labour committee, JLC, system.

It has been brought to my attention that some of the security firms which appear to be non-compliant with the new rate are in fact receiving State contracts. There is an obligation on anyone who is operating a State contract under public procurement policies to respect the law of the land. The JLC system in security is the law of the land. An ERO was properly put to the Minister of State who signed it, was satisfied that it was legal and laid it before these Houses. That is the legal rate of pay. Those who do not respect the legal rate of pay should be stripped of their State contracts.

Senator Nash has said the rate of pay is €11.05 and will increase to €11.35 in June 2018. If there are employees being abused by rogue security firms that should be brought immediately to the attention of the WRC. All enterprises are covered by the employment regulation order but if an enterprise is experiencing financial difficulties it can apply to the Labour Court for an exemption from its obligation to pay the rates. There are many people jumping on the bandwagon.

The law must be enforced, as Senator Nash has said. If this practice is noted it should immediately be brought to the attention of the WRC. I thank the Senator for raising the issue. It is always good to be aware of these issues. Security is a huge sector particularly in the entertainment area. The commission offices may be contacted on 1890 80 80 90 or through the WRC.

Local Government Reform

I welcome the Minister of State at the Department of Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government, Deputy Phelan, to the Chamber. I think it is his first time here in his capacity as Minister of State. I wish him luck and success. I am sure he will always have happy memories of the long hours he spent here in the past. It was a good alma mater for him.

I also welcome the Minister of State to the Chamber, where he has been involved in many a debate.

I want clarity on what the new Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government will do for Cork and for the proposal to merge the local authorities or whether the population of the city will increase. This issue has been going around since the 1960s and has not been dealt with by Government, whether Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael over the past few decades.

It is a big issue for the development of Cork county and city. Major national development plans are being proposed that will see increases in population throughout the country. It is important that Cork will have a focus and ensuring this will depend on local government structures and how we drive our local economy. Cork as an entity is one eighth of the area of Ireland. There are over 500,000 people attached to it, if not more. It has potential to grow rapidly due to access to fresh water and sewage systems, which already are in place. The question of how the city and the county are progressed is key to economic development and to the development of the west and rural areas. This aspect also needs to be considered. The northern and western parts of our county are focused on tourism and agriculture and there must be a combined strategy to ensure that everything comes together.

We have seen two reports. One, issued in September 2015, proposed that there should be one local authority. A counter report issued in March 2017 stated the city needs to incorporate a major part of the county itself. What we need now is clarity. We need a roadmap for the future and to have those issues aired. The consultants have had their say. The people in the universities have had their say. The politicians and the executives have had their say. Everyone bar the people has had their say on this very important issue. We need clarity from the Minister of State as to what he and his Department propose to do.

A local election is looming in 2019. Public representatives need to know what the Minister of State proposes in respect of that local election. They need to know whether there will be new boundaries or no change to the boundaries. Will a boundary commission be set up just for Cork or for the entire country? This is a very complex issue that must be dealt with in a very sympathetic way. Feelings are running high in this part of the world. The Minister of State knows better than anyone how feelings can run high regarding boundaries. When there was a proposal for Waterford to expand into Kilkenny he was vocal in opposing it. He should now bring his experience to bear on what is happening in Cork. He is the Minister of State in charge and he should have the ability to drive a fair and equal partnership in order that everything that can works to some degree in tandem in Cork.

The Senator is handing the Minister of State a greasy ball.

I thank Senator Lombard and the Cathaoirleach. I am glad to be back in Seanad Éireann, albeit in a different capacity.

The issue the Senator raises is highly contentious both in Cork and around the country. The report of the Cork local government committee in September 2015, based on the position of the majority of the committee, recommended that a unitary authority should be established as the statutory local authority for Cork as a whole. There were actually three reports rather than the two the Senator identified, as there was a minority report from that committee also. The minority report considered it essential to retain the city council as a completely separate local authority and took the view that a unified authority would not be able to address adequately the different needs of urban and rural areas. Both the majority and minority groups on the committee agreed that retention of the status quo in Cork was not a tenable option.

As the recommendations were inconclusive, the then Minister established the Cork expert advisory group in October 2016 to examine the majority and minority reports and underlying material. It had a mandate to identify and examine a wider range of options for Cork than might have been considered previously. A key question which the group sought to address is what arrangements would best promote sustainable economic growth and strengthen Cork's position as Ireland's second city and an economic engine for the south of Ireland, along with the implications for business development, population growth, housing provision and associated infrastructure, particularly sustainable transport.

That group's report, published in June 2017, concluded that the current local government arrangements in Cork are unsustainable. Having evaluated a range of options against relevant criteria, it concluded that on balance, an expanded city council area offered the best solution, particularly in terms of the structure of local government and a strong focus on the needs and demands of the metropolitan area, including regeneration. The report also recognises the specific service needs of rural areas.

This would involve two separate local authorities with an extension of the city council boundary, which the report concluded represents the best governance model for Cork.

The advisory group also recommended the establishment of a statutory metropolitan body to formulate and oversee a Cork metropolitan area plan to address strategic economic development, housing and infrastructure matters in the wider Cork area. Implementing a significant extension of the boundary of Cork city will be challenging and will involve considerable further logistical work and a detailed financial and organisational analysis to identify assets and liabilities and address issues such as the necessary financial and other adjustments between the local authorities, the transfer of staff and the establishment of new structures to ensure that the challenges of implementation are addressed effectively.

An implementation oversight group with relevant expertise, in particular in the financial area, is to be established to oversee the process. The changes represent the most significant population transfer associated with a local government boundary change in Ireland. This will be reflected in the consequent timescales for implementation. Arrangements for the operation of the implementation oversight group are being finalised. Its initial main task will be to submit a detailed implementation plan in the early autumn.

I will try to get more specific information for the Senator on the implementation plan and when it will be submitted. The Senator is right to identify the point that the potential transfer of such tracts of the county into the city area would have significant financial implications for Cork County Council, were it to happen, not to mention the review of local government electoral areas. There will be a national review of those areas, which is due to start in autumn of this year following the recent publication of the Dáil boundary report.

At this stage, the implementation oversight group is charged with finalising the boundary issue between Cork city and county. I will work with it, as will the Department, to ensure that happens as soon as is practically possible.

I thank the Minister of State for his response. I am not too pleased with many aspects of it. Clarity is the major issue I sought but did not receive today. I mentioned that we have heard the views of academics, politicians and executives. Perhaps it is about time that we asked the people for their views and there should be a plebiscite on this issue. What is the view of the Minister of State with respect to asking the people of Cork their opinion? Everybody else has had an opinion on this, except for the people. It is a major issue in Cork. It is the subject of major debate and the Minister of State has dealt with the issue. He has seen how things can run deep. Would the implementation body believe it is appropriate that a plebiscite be held on this issue?

As Theresa May knows, a plebiscite does not always offer the answer one would like.

The implementation group will investigate every aspect of what might be suitable for Cork. However, it is the job of officials in local authorities, elected members of local authorities and Senators to represent the views of the people - Senator Lombard represents the people of Cork. I represent the people of Carlow-Kilkenny and the wider country in my new position. A local plebiscite, as was previously suggested, might muddy the waters even further. A report has to be implemented and the group will be established in the autumn. It has a big job of work to do.

I am sure there will be a lot of chewing on this bone in the next 12 months.

Top
Share