# Digital Exclusion Is a Policy Choice: How Ireland Is Failing Older Adults Online
**SEO Title:** Digital Exclusion of Older Adults in Ireland: A Policy Choice We’re Making | Críonna Health
**Meta Description:** 34% of Irish people aged 75+ have never used the internet. As banking, healthcare, and government services move online, digital exclusion isn’t inevitable—it’s a policy choice with serious consequences.
—
## Executive Summary
In 2025, more than one-third of Irish people aged 75 and over have never used the internet. As essential services—banking, healthcare, government, transport, social connection—migrate online, this digital divide isn’t a technological inconvenience. It’s a form of systematic exclusion that affects health outcomes, financial access, social participation, and fundamental citizenship. This exclusion isn’t inevitable; it’s a policy choice. Ireland can continue current trajectories, or it can make different choices—as other countries have done successfully.
—
## The Scale of the Problem
### Ireland’s Digital Divide by the Numbers
According to the Central Statistics Office’s Internet Coverage and Usage in Ireland 2025 report:
| Age Group | Never Used Internet | Regular Users (daily) |
|———–|——————–|———————–|
| 16-29 | ~0% | 98%+ |
| 30-44 | ~1% | 96%+ |
| 45-59 | ~2% | 91%+ |
| 60-74 | ~10% | 78% |
| 75+ | **34%** | 42% |
*Source: CSO Internet Coverage and Usage 2025*
The headline improvement—from 41% of 75+ never having used the internet in 2024 to 34% in 2025—masks the structural nature of the problem. The cohort is changing (people entering the 75+ category have more digital experience than those leaving it through death), but the gap between oldest and youngest adults remains vast.
Additional findings:
– Just 5% of people aged 16+ had never used the internet overall in 2025
– Of internet users over 75, many have only basic skills (email, simple web browsing)
– Rural areas show higher digital exclusion rates than urban
– Lower socioeconomic groups are disproportionately affected
– 65% of respondents aged 60-74, and 57% aged 75+, used the internet for health information—but this means 35-43% did not
### What This Means in Practice
**Banking:**
The migration to digital-only banking is accelerating. Bank branch closures continue across Ireland, with rural areas particularly affected. Many routine transactions now require online access or ATM use with increasingly complex interfaces.
For the digitally excluded, this means:
– Travelling significant distances to access branches with reduced hours
– Dependence on family members for financial management
– Inability to access online-only products and better rates
– Vulnerability to fraud from unfamiliar payment methods
– Loss of financial independence and dignity
**Healthcare:**
The health service increasingly assumes digital access:
– Online appointment booking replacing phone systems
– Patient portals for test results and records
– Telehealth consultations—accelerated post-COVID
– Electronic prescriptions
– Health information and self-management tools
For older adults seeking health information, the CSO found significant online engagement—but also significant exclusion. Those excluded from digital health resources face:
– Barriers to appointment access
– Delayed access to test results
– Inability to use telehealth options
– Reduced access to health information
– Greater burden on in-person services
**Government Services:**
The Irish government’s digital-first strategy moves more services online each year:
– Revenue returns and communications
– Welfare payments and information
– Driving licence and vehicle registration
– Local authority services
– Immigration and citizenship
While alternative channels nominally exist, they’re often slower, less accessible, and receive less investment. The implicit message: digital is expected; alternatives are grudging accommodations.
**Social Connection:**
The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated digital social connection:
– Video calling replaced family visits
– Community groups moved online
– Social media became primary news and connection source
– Events and activities required online registration
For the digitally excluded, pandemic isolation was compounded by digital isolation. As hybrid approaches become normalised, those without digital access face continued barriers to participation.
**Commerce and Daily Life:**
Essential activities increasingly require digital skills:
– Price comparison and online shopping (often significantly cheaper)
– Transport booking (buses, taxis, trains)
– Entertainment and culture
– Restaurant and event booking
– Information and news access
The digitally excluded pay more (no access to online discounts), have less choice, and face greater inconvenience in daily life.
—
## Digital Exclusion Is a Policy Choice
### The Framing That Must Change
The conventional framing treats digital exclusion as a problem of older people—their lack of skills, interest, or capability. This framing is wrong and harmful.
Digital exclusion is a policy choice because:
**1. We chose to move services online without ensuring universal access**
No law of nature required banks to close branches. No technological necessity demanded health services assume digital capability. These were policy and commercial choices, made by organisations prioritising efficiency and cost reduction over universal access.
**2. We chose inadequate digital inclusion investment**
Ireland has digital skills programmes, but investment is modest relative to need. Community digital hubs exist but coverage is patchy. Formal training reaches a fraction of those who need it.
**3. We chose technology designed for younger users**
Most digital services are designed by young developers for young users. Small fonts, complex navigation, assumption of smartphone familiarity, frequent interface changes—all create unnecessary barriers for older users.
**4. We chose not to maintain adequate alternatives**
As digital becomes “standard,” alternatives atrophy. Phone lines are understaffed. In-person services have reduced hours. Paper forms are “available on request” but not proactively offered.
**5. We chose not to measure or address exclusion systematically**
Unlike gender or disability, age-related digital exclusion is rarely subject to systematic impact assessment. Services go online without formal consideration of who will be excluded.
These are choices. Different choices are possible.
### The Consequences Are Not Equally Distributed
Digital exclusion’s harms fall disproportionately on those already vulnerable:
**Lower-income older adults:**
– Less likely to have internet access at home
– Less able to afford devices and data
– Less likely to have family members providing support
– More dependent on services moving online
**Rural older adults:**
– Poorer broadband infrastructure
– Fewer in-person alternatives when branches close
– Greater distances to travel for face-to-face services
– Less access to community digital support
**Older adults living alone:**
– No household member to assist
– Greater isolation when digital connection required
– More dependent on external services
– Higher vulnerability to fraud and exploitation
**Older adults with disabilities:**
– Additional barriers from inaccessible design
– Assistive technology not always compatible with services
– Sensory impairments compounding digital challenges
– Physical limitations affecting device use
This creates a troubling pattern: those with least resources face the greatest digital barriers, compounding existing inequalities.
—
## What Other Countries Do Better
### International Best Practice
**Estonia: Digital by Design, Accessible by Law**
Estonia is often cited as a digital governance exemplar. But its approach includes explicit accessibility requirements:
– Every digital government service must have a tested offline alternative
– Digital accessibility standards are legally mandated
– ID cards provide both digital and physical verification options
– Free digital skills training is widely available
– Community digital assistants support those who need help
The Estonian model shows that digital-first doesn’t require digital-only.
**Finland: Rights-Based Approach**
Finland treats internet access as a fundamental right:
– Universal broadband guarantee ensures rural access
– Digital skills are part of lifelong learning entitlements
– Libraries provide comprehensive digital access and support
– Assisted digital services are standard, not exceptional
– Regular national surveys measure exclusion and drive policy
Finland’s older population has significantly higher digital engagement than Ireland’s, despite similar demographics.
**Singapore: Seniors Go Digital**
Singapore launched a comprehensive programme specifically targeting older adults:
– Community hubs provide devices, connectivity, and training
– Peer “Digital Ambassadors” provide ongoing support
– Simplified interfaces developed for key government services
– Family education to support intergenerational learning
– Significant government investment (S$100m+)
Results: digital engagement among over-60s increased from 58% to 82% within four years.
**Denmark: Mandatory Alternative Channels**
Denmark requires that:
– Every public digital service must offer a non-digital alternative
– These alternatives must be equally accessible and functional
– Regular audits assess alternative channel quality
– Citizens can register permanent exemption from digital requirements
– Supported digital access available at all public libraries
This “no citizen left behind” approach ensures digital-first doesn’t mean digital-only.
### What These Countries Have in Common
**1. Explicit policy commitment to universal inclusion**
Digital exclusion is framed as a policy problem requiring policy solutions, not an individual problem requiring individual adaptation.
**2. Investment proportionate to need**
Significant resources are allocated to digital inclusion—not token programmes but substantial, sustained investment.
**3. Legally mandated alternatives**
Non-digital channels are required, not merely permitted. Their quality is monitored.
**4. Design for diversity**
Services are designed with older and less digitally confident users in mind, not adapted for them as an afterthought.
**5. Measurement and accountability**
Digital inclusion is measured, targets are set, and progress is reported—creating accountability for improvement.
—
## Ireland’s Current Approach
### What We’re Doing
Ireland is not entirely inactive on digital inclusion:
**National Broadband Plan**
The €3 billion National Broadband Plan aims to bring high-speed broadband to every premises in Ireland. While important for infrastructure, connectivity alone doesn’t create digital inclusion.
**Digital Skills Programmes**
Various programmes exist:
– SOLAS digital skills courses
– ETB community education
– Library digital literacy programmes
– Volunteer-led initiatives (e.g., Age Action)
These programmes reach thousands of learners annually but coverage is uneven and scale is insufficient for the hundreds of thousands who need support.
**Age Friendly Ireland**
The Age Friendly programme recognises digital inclusion as a priority:
– Age Friendly Businesses include digital support expectations
– Local authority programmes include digital initiatives
– Partnerships with tech companies for training
However, digital inclusion is one priority among many, not a dominant focus.
**Banking Commitments**
Following pressure, banks have committed to:
– Maintaining certain branch services
– Providing digital support for customers
– Community banking hubs (piloting)
Implementation remains inconsistent, and the trajectory toward further branch reduction continues.
### What’s Missing
**No legal mandate for alternatives**
Unlike Denmark or Estonia, Ireland doesn’t require offline alternatives for digital services. Organisations can (and do) move fully online.
**No systematic impact assessment**
There’s no requirement to assess digital exclusion impacts before moving services online. Services migrate without formal consideration of who will be excluded.
**Insufficient scale**
Current programmes reach a fraction of those in need. Waiting lists for digital skills training are common. Rural coverage is particularly weak.
**No integration with healthcare**
Despite the move to digital health, there’s no systematic programme to ensure older adults can access digital health services. The Sláintecare programme mentions digital but lacks specific inclusion provisions.
**No mandatory accessibility standards**
While the EU’s Web Accessibility Directive applies to public sector websites, enforcement is weak and private sector services have no comparable requirements.
**Inadequate measurement**
Beyond CSO surveys, there’s no systematic measurement of digital exclusion impacts—on health, finances, or social participation.
—
## The Real Costs of Digital Exclusion
### Health Impacts
Research consistently links digital exclusion to poorer health outcomes:
**Access barriers:**
– Delayed care from appointment booking difficulties
– Missed preventive services requiring online scheduling
– Reduced telehealth access during COVID and ongoing
– Less health information and self-management capability
**Mental health:**
– Social isolation compounded by digital isolation
– Reduced access to mental health resources
– Dependence and loss of autonomy
– Frustration and demoralisation
**Cognitive health:**
– Digital engagement associated with cognitive stimulation
– Exclusion removes cognitive exercise opportunities
– Correlation (though not proven causation) between digital engagement and reduced dementia risk
A UK study estimated that digital exclusion costs the NHS £190m annually in preventable health deterioration. Proportionally, the Irish health service impact would be €25-35m.
### Financial Costs
**Individual costs:**
– Missing online-only discounts and better rates
– Higher transaction costs for in-person services
– Potential for fraud from unfamiliar systems
– Reduced financial management capability
**System costs:**
– Maintaining dual channels more expensive than planned digital-only
– In-person services congested by those who cannot access digital
– Fraud losses from vulnerable populations
– Social welfare costs from poverty compounded by digital exclusion
**Economic costs:**
– Reduced consumer participation in digital economy
– Loss of skills that could contribute to workforce
– Reduced entrepreneurship and self-employment among older adults
### Social Costs
**Connection and participation:**
– Isolation from family using digital communication
– Exclusion from community activities requiring online engagement
– Reduced civic participation as information moves online
– Loss of voice in public discourse conducted digitally
**Dignity and autonomy:**
– Dependence on others for basic tasks
– Loss of privacy (needing help with banking, health)
– Feeling “left behind” by technological change
– Diminished sense of competence and worth
These costs are real but often invisible in policy analysis focused on service efficiency.
—
## What Needs to Change
### Policy Recommendations
**1. Legislate Universal Alternatives**
Require that all public services—and regulated private services (banking, utilities, telecoms)—maintain functional, accessible offline alternatives. Not grudging accommodations but genuine alternatives.
Model: Danish legislation requiring non-digital channels with equivalent service quality.
**2. Mandate Digital Impact Assessment**
Require organisations above certain thresholds to assess and mitigate digital exclusion impacts before moving services online. Include exemption mechanisms for those who cannot adapt.
Model: Estonia’s accessibility requirements for all digital government services.
**3. Scale Digital Inclusion Investment**
Significantly increase investment in:
– Community digital hubs with trained staff
– Outreach programmes reaching those who won’t seek training
– Device provision for those who can’t afford hardware
– Ongoing support (not just initial training)
Target: Reaching at least 50,000 older adults annually with meaningful digital skills support.
**4. Integrate with Healthcare**
Make digital health access a specific Sláintecare priority:
– Assess digital capability at health service registration
– Provide supported digital access at GP practices and pharmacies
– Design telehealth for varying digital capability
– Ensure non-digital pathways for all health services
**5. Enforce Accessibility Standards**
Strengthen and extend accessibility requirements:
– Rigorous enforcement of existing public sector requirements
– Extension to private sector services above threshold
– Senior-friendly design standards developed with older users
– Regular accessibility audits with published results
**6. Measure and Report**
Establish systematic measurement of:
– Digital exclusion rates by demographics and geography
– Service-specific exclusion impacts
– Progress against targets
– International comparison
Publish annual reports with accountability for improvement.
### What Service Providers Should Do
**Banking:**
– Maintain in-person services proportionate to customer need
– Design digital services with older users as primary (not edge) cases
– Provide proactive support for digital transitions
– Partner with community organisations on training
– Measure and report age-related service access
**Healthcare:**
– Assess digital capability at patient registration
– Offer supported digital access at all touchpoints
– Maintain robust non-digital pathways
– Train staff to assist with digital access
– Design telehealth for accessibility
**Government:**
– Make offline alternatives proactive, not reactive
– Design digital services with non-native users in mind
– Partner with libraries and community centres
– Resource alternative channels adequately
– Set digital exclusion reduction targets
**Telecommunications:**
– Simplify devices and interfaces for varying capability
– Provide affordable access specifically for older users
– Support community training programmes
– Design customer service for non-digital contact
### What Communities Can Do
**Libraries:**
– Expand digital access and training
– Provide one-to-one support for complex tasks
– Partner with health and welfare services
– Offer device lending programmes
**Community organisations:**
– Establish peer support networks
– Train volunteers as digital ambassadors
– Create regular drop-in sessions
– Advocate for inclusion in local services
**Families:**
– Involve rather than substitute (help with, not do for)
– Be patient with different learning styles
– Recognise security concerns and address them
– Maintain non-digital connection alongside digital
—
## A Different Future Is Possible
### Imagining Digital Inclusion
What would genuine digital inclusion look like?
**For individuals:**
– Every older adult has the opportunity to develop digital skills through accessible, high-quality training
– Those who cannot or choose not to use digital services face no penalty in access, cost, or quality
– Technology is designed with older users in mind, not adapted for them as an afterthought
– Support is available when needed, not just during initial training
**For services:**
– Digital-first never means digital-only
– Accessibility is a design requirement, not an add-on
– Alternative channels are maintained with equivalent service quality
– Exclusion impacts are assessed and mitigated before service changes
**For society:**
– Digital capability is recognised as a social determinant of health and wellbeing
– Investment in digital inclusion is proportionate to its importance
– Progress is measured and organisations are held accountable
– No one is left behind as technology evolves
This isn’t utopian. Countries like Finland, Estonia, and Singapore are approaching this standard. Ireland can too—if we choose to.
—
## Conclusion: The Choice We’re Making
Digital exclusion isn’t happening to older adults. It’s being done to them—by policy choices, commercial decisions, and societal priorities that consistently privilege digital efficiency over universal access.
The numbers are stark: 34% of Irish people aged 75+ have never used the internet. As essential services move online, this third is being systematically excluded from banking, healthcare, government, and social participation.
This is not an inevitable consequence of technological progress. It’s a choice. Other countries have made different choices and achieved different outcomes.
Ireland stands at a decision point. We can continue current trajectories—hoping the problem will solve itself as digitally native generations age. But this abandons a generation of older adults to exclusion, compounds existing inequalities, and undermines our commitments to healthy ageing and social inclusion.
Or we can choose differently:
– Legislate universal alternatives
– Invest proportionately in digital inclusion
– Design for diversity
– Measure and hold accountable
– Leave no one behind
The technology isn’t the problem. The problem is us—our priorities, our choices, our willingness to accept exclusion as the price of progress.
What kind of society do we want to be?
—
## Key Statistics Summary
| Metric | Figure | Source |
|——–|——–|——–|
| People 75+ who have never used internet (2025) | 34% | CSO |
| People 75+ who have never used internet (2024) | 41% | CSO |
| Overall population never used internet (2025) | 5% | CSO |
| People 60-74 seeking health info online | 65% | CSO |
| People 75+ seeking health info online | 57% | CSO |
| Estimated health service cost of digital exclusion | €25-35m annually | UK extrapolation |
—
## Pull Quotes / Tweetable Lines
> “34% of Irish people aged 75+ have never used the internet. As banking, healthcare, and government move online, this isn’t a digital divide—it’s digital discrimination.”
> “No law of nature required banks to close branches. No technological necessity demanded health services assume digital capability. These were choices.”
> “Digital exclusion isn’t happening to older adults. It’s being done to them—by policy choices, commercial decisions, and societal priorities.”
> “Digital-first should never mean digital-only. Other countries have legislated this principle. Ireland hasn’t.”
—
## LinkedIn Companion Post
**Digital Exclusion Is a Policy Choice**
34% of Irish people aged 75+ have never used the internet.
Meanwhile:
• Banks close branches
• Healthcare moves online
• Government services go digital
• Social connection requires Zoom
This isn’t a digital divide. It’s a policy choice.
No law of nature required:
• Banks to make digital-only the default
• Health services to assume digital capability
• Government to invest less in offline alternatives
• Technology to be designed only for young users
Other countries made different choices:
🇪🇪 Estonia: Every digital service must have a tested offline alternative
🇫🇮 Finland: Internet access is a fundamental right
🇩🇰 Denmark: Citizens can register permanent exemption from digital requirements
🇸🇬 Singapore: S$100m+ investment increased over-60 digital engagement from 58% to 82%
Ireland’s approach:
❌ No legal mandate for offline alternatives
❌ Insufficient training scale
❌ No systematic impact assessment
❌ No integration with healthcare
The result: Hundreds of thousands of older adults excluded from essential services.
Digital exclusion costs:
• Health outcomes (estimated €25-35m annually)
• Financial access and fairness
• Social connection and dignity
• Civic participation
This isn’t inevitable. It’s a choice.
We can choose differently.
Full analysis: [link]
#DigitalInclusion #AgeTech #HealthyAgeing #Ireland #Policy #DigitalDivide
—
*Word Count: 3,312*
