asked the Minister for Defence if his attention has been drawn to the case of ex-Volunteer Michael Daly, Army No. 12978; if he is aware that Daly was discharged from the Army, medically unfit, on 25th April, 1924, after serving for one year and three hundred and seven days, and was awarded a pension of twenty-one shillings per week from April 26th, 1924, to May 31st, 1925, and that a special jacket was to be supplied; that on medical re-examination he was refused continuation of pension or gratuity; that this man, it is stated, is at present compelled to wear a surgical jacket, is unfit for work, and is without means of support, and if he will take steps to have this case reconsidered with a view to the payment of compensation or pension.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - RECONSIDERATION OF EX-VOLUNTEER'S CASE.
The facts regarding Mr. Daly's discharge from the Forces and his claim under the Army Pensions Act, 1923, are as stated by the Deputy. On being medically re-examined, the claimant was found to be suffering from a disability which, I am advised, is not due to the original injury, a fall from a bicycle. I consider that he has already been sufficiently compensated in respect of the latter injury. I regret, therefore, that I am not in a position to make any further award to him.
Is the Minister aware that this ex-Army man has still to wear a surgical jacket which was recommended by the Minister's Department? Is he aware that the man is still unfit for work and has no means of support? In view of those circumstances, and the fact that the man's own medical adviser certified that the disability is due to injuries received while in the service, will the Minister not consider the advisability of giving that man a hearing?
I am not a medical man, but I know that this man was, on two occasions, before independent surgeons, and both surgeons advised that it is not established that the disability is due to injuries sustained in the service. It was recommended by the Army Pensions Board that no further award should be made to the claimant and that he was sufficiently compensated.
Mr. BYRNE
Your medical officers turned down this man, and other medical officers, equally as good as your men, certified that the injuries were received as a result of Army service and were aggravated by Army service. Men of this type are now thrown out on the scrap heap. In this case the man is wearing a surgical jacket recommended by your Department. Is he to get nothing to keep him? Is that the way to treat your ex-National Army men?