The decision by President McAleese to focus attention on the terms of the Health Amendment (No 2) Bill and on the shabby treatment of old-age pensioners in nursing homes is a welcome development.
The announcement by the Ombudsman, Ms Emily O'Reilly, is no less important. By summoning members of the Council of State to advise on whether she should refer the legislation to the Supreme Court to test its constitutionality, Mrs McAleese has ensured that the issue will not disappear from public view. While the President has absolute discretion concerning the course of action she may take - and the eventual outcome of any referral to the court is uncertain - it is important that such a fundamental change in the State's duty of care to citizens is minutely examined. And, for those badly-treated citizens, redress will continue to be offered by the Ombudsman.
This legislation was rushed through the Dáil and Seanad in the absence of adequate consultation with interested parties or public debate. It abolished the rights of medical card holders to free nursing home care, placed the previously-illegal deductions from old age pensioners on a statutory footing and offered restitution of up to €2,000 to those who had their money wrongly seized. The Tánaiste and Minister for Health, Ms Harney, said that while the Government was not legally bound to repay any of the money, it felt it had a moral obligation to make some restitution. It was a mealy-mouthed claim. And she defended the rapid passage of the Bill on the basis that delay would cost the State about €10 million a month.
Sharp political practice is involved here. The Coalition Government has known for years that any deductions for nursing home care from the pensions of senior citizens with medical cards was of questionable legality. It was told so in numerous reports by the Ombudsman. And letters that passed between former ministers for health and for finance, Mr Martin and Mr McCreevy, in 2001, referred to the problem of increasing costs and the need to legislate for the situation. Nothing was done.
Those letters also expose, in the starkest terms, the determination of this Government to operate in secrecy and to avoid public accountability. Changes made to the Freedom of Information Act in 2003 by Mr McCreevy banned the release of this kind of ministerial correspondence and other Government files, imposed new charges and made it extremely difficult to hold the Government to account. If the letters had not been released to RTÉ before those changes were made, the electorate would have remained in ignorance.
The treatment of elderly citizens by this Government has been shameful. Illegal deductions from their pensions and a determination not to repay the purloined amounts reflect its arrogant and dismissive attitude towards vulnerable people. Now, however, there is hope. Pensioners appear to have found champions in both the President and the Ombudsman.