Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 1 Mar 1933

Vol. 46 No. 2

Supplementary and Additional Estimates. - In Committee on Finance. Vote No. 7—Old Age Pensions.

Minister for Finance (Mr. MacEntee)

I move:

Go ndeontar suim bhreise ná raghaidh thar £250,000 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1933, chun. íoc Pinseana Sean-Aoise (8 Edw. 7, c. 40; 1 agus 2 Geo. 5, c. 16; 9 agus 10 Geo. 5, c. 102; Uimh. 19 de 1924, Uimh. 1 de 1928; agus Uimh. 18 de 1932); chun Pinseana fén Blind Persons Act, 1920 (10 agus 11 Geo. 5, c. 49, a. 1 agus Uimh. 18 de 1932); agus chun costaisí riaracháin áirithe bhaineann leo san.

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £250,000 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1933, for the payment of Old Age Pensions (8 Edw. 7, c. 40; 1 and 2 Geo. 5, c. 16; 9 and 10 Geo. 5, c. 102; No. 19 of 1924, No. 1 of 1928 and No. 18 of 1932); for Pensions under the Blind Persons Act, 1920 (10 and 11 Geo. 5, c. 49, s. 1 and No. 18 of 1932) and for certain administrative expenses in connection therewith.

This Supplementary Estimate is one of seven which were passed by the last Dáil and which, not having been covered by an Appropriation Act before the dissolution of the Dáil on the 2nd January, have to be re-introduced in the present Session. The provision arises as a result of the passing of the Old Age Pensions Act, 1932.

Mr. Dillon

In the administration of this new Act, I am afraid that considerable confusion arises in respect of the provisions for pensions for blind persons. The definition in the Act of "blind person" is, according to my information, in danger of breaking down. It is becoming increasingly difficult to ascertain what degree of defective vision entitles a person to a pension under the terms of the Act. The terms of the Act provide, I think, that if a person's vision is sufficiently defective to make it impossible for him to pursue his normal vocation, he is entitled to apply for a pension. This would, perhaps, suggest that a person who was by trade an engraver—a trade which requires exceptional excellence of vision—might, with the advance of years, become entitled to a pension if he ceased to be able to do the finest class of engraving. I should like the Minister to say officially whether the necessity of assuming spectacles would bring a person under that head; whether the fact that defective vision could be removed by means of that kind would deprive him of the right to a pension and whether he would be entitled to refuse to assume spectacles and to claim a pension on the ground that he had not sufficient vision to pursue his normal avocation.

Mr. MacEntee

We were aware when this Bill was being drafted of the great difficulties which would arise if the very stringent definition of "blindness" which stood in the original Acts were to be relaxed or modified in any way. Because we thought that that definition was too stringent, we did modify it in that Act and we are endeavouring, by the exercise of administrative commonsense, to ensure that only people who would be considered by ordinary, every-day citizens to be incapacitated by reason of defective vision from earning a livelihood in any one of the normal avocations which might be open to them will be entitled to a blind pension. I myself, though I am not the final authority in this matter—appeals lie from my Department to the Minister for Local Government and Public Health—would certainly not hold that the mere assumption of spectacles to cure defective vision would entitle an applicant to a pension. I would go so far as to say that in the case of the engraver who, owing to failing vision, was not able to engrave with the same artistic fineness as he was able to do earlier in his career, he would not be entitled to a pension merely on that ground. I say that a man with alternative employment open to him ought to endeavour to provide himself with a livelihood in that alternative occupation. It does not necessarily follow from the definition in the Act that a person who was not able to follow his ordinary employment should get a blind pension.

Mr. Dillon

When the Minister for Local Government and Public Health introduced this Bill I welcomed it, but I suggested that its administration would be greatly simplified if the Minister would consult some small panel of reliable oculists, or persons of that kind, and if he would incorporate in the Bill some definition of statutory blindness. I believe the Parliamentary Secretary would be able to inform us on this matter. There is a regular system of measurement as to people's capacity to see which goes by sixteenths I think. It would be very difficult, of course, to provide against malingering, but if a standard test, on the lines I suggest, was prepared it would greatly simplify the administration of the Act. The Minister advocates the use of commonsense. The words of the Statute give the citizens certain statutory rights and the law is not always interpreted in a commonsense way. People have to go to the Statute and the more watertight we make the Statute the better. What I suggest is that these matters should be taken into consideration and expert advice sought in order to ascertain if some more satisfactory definition could not be hammered out in order to provide security for legitimate applicants and to defeat persons who sought to take advantage of the Act to which they were not entitled.

Question put and agreed to.