HSE finances and medical-card reviews
Senator MacSharry criticises HSE overspending, proposed cuts, executive remuneration and medical-card reviews, arguing that eligibility assessments are an insensitive blunt instrument. He moves an amendment seeking a Health Minister debate that day, with other Senators supporting his concerns.
As Members will know, the HSE's service plan is supposed to be announced today and I wonder what is in store for us. Let us recall the €119 million overrun last September. What is it now? What about the proposed cut of €666 million? What about the notional achievement of €113 million in cuts to medical cards? In parallel, there are 29 CEOs in hospitals throughout the country being paid additional money from other sources. In addition, 34 out of 63 disability service providers receive HSE funds. That breaches the guidelines for HSE CEOs at a time when we saw, for example, St. Michael's House writing to families whom it caters for to inform them that it would have to cut services due to a reduction in funding.
All of these anomalies exist against the backdrop of the Government continuing to insist that there will be free GP care for under 5s even though, on the lunchtime news today, we heard the chairman of the National Association of General Practitioners call the plan laughable. The same applies to the overall plan to provide universal health care for all. It does not seem to be consistent with Government policy and certainly outcomes so far.
I wish to amend the Order of Business and call for the Minister for Health to come to the House today to discuss the blunt instrument that is called a "probity drive" which is used to assess and review medical cards. As so often is the case with anomalies in the health service, it takes a high profile intervention before finally some progress is made. We can hardly have a more high profile instance than what developed today. I refer to Ms Marie Fleming and her poor family. Ms Fleming went to the Supreme Court to seek the right to die but was unsuccessful. I apologise for mentioning names but I must use privilege in the public interest on this occasion. Her partner, Tom Curran, was on the lunchtime news today to highlight her individual case. He said that he was contacted as part of a review of her medical card and asked whether her condition had changed. He made contact by telephone with the HSE who asked him to fill out a form to give details of her medical condition. This was not good enough for the HSE and it followed up by seeking proof of her medical condition. It seems that he telephoned another three times to be asked to fill out further documentation.
Comment on this
Mr. Curran rightly pointed out to the nation that the medical card review was a waste of resources, money and time.
Comment on this
Is it not possible to log the fact that somebody suffers from multiple sclerosis-----
Comment on this
-----and that his or her situation will not change. I ask the Cathaoirleach to indulge me, please.
Comment on this
This is far too blunt an instrument. There is not a member in this or the other House who has not had personal experience of a lower profile case that is equally needy.
Comment on this
Yes. I move an amendment that the Minister come to the House today. I do not care how busy he is with the media launch for the service plan for the HSE. We must have progress in this area where people's human needs are taken into account rather than this blunt instrument to save money.