I wish to raise an important issue, but, first, I support Senator Denis Landy's call on the Minister of State at the Department of Education and Skills, Deputy Ciarán Cannon, on the issue of school transport. It is only right that an amnesty be given to those families who inadvertently picked a school that might be one metre further away than what was perceived to be their nearest school and, as a result, are deprived of school transport. What has irritated me about this issue is that I fought for two families last year on the basis that there were empty seats on a bus, but I was refused point blank. However, I subsequently discovered that discretion did prevail in other parts of the country where children who had picked the school that was furthest away secured school transport because there was availability on buses. The Minister must deal with this issue.

The issue I wish to raise concerns a report I read in the newspaper this morning - it is no surprise to me - that the rate of sick leave in the Department of Social Protection outweighed that in any other Department. For me, this is an exact science because for every action there is a reaction. If one piles enough pressure on people, in this case employees in the Civil Service, something will give. Since the end of the so-called good times no extra resources have been put into the Department of Social Protection, although the floodgates opened with regard to applications for social welfare payments. To compound the issue, we have medical referees who have decided to refuse everything, be it disability allowance or invalidity pension, despite the fact that one of the conditions for receiving disability allowance is that one must be unavailable for work for at least 12 months. I have encountered so many cases-----

Does the Senator have a question for the Leader?

I do. I have dealt with many cases in which the person applied for disability allowance and was refused. They sought a medical reassessment and were refused. They appealed and six months after appealing the decision their file was sent from Longford to the appeals office. When one asks when the appeal will be heard, the office cannot state whether it will be in three, six or 12 months. Therefore, cases are ongoing for almost two and a half years. The bottom line is that we are dealing with faceless medical referees and appeals officers who are making decisions to frustrate people.

This is piling pressure on the civil servants trying to administer the scheme, in respect of which no additional resources have been put in place. I call on the Leader to bring this matter to the attention of the Minister for Social Protection for no other reason than to ensure the pressure is taken off the families who have made these applications and are being frustrated by the system.