I think the amendments that have been distributed meet, in so far as I can meet them, the objections that were raised on an earlier stage. I move amendment No. 1:—
In page 2, to delete Section 1 (1).
Committee on Finance. - Public Hospitals (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1940—Final Stages.
I must oppose this amendment, because there is evidence, if any further evidence were necessary, to show that the Minister is still retreating, still running away from the Bill as originally introduced here, the Bill which we discussed here on the Second Reading for the purpose of setting-up a proper bed bureau scheme that would work in a practical fashion and facilitate the admission of non-paying patients into the hospitals. The effect of this amendment, in my opinion, will be to provide those people who have been screaming for a properly organised system of admission into the hospitals with a placebo and it tries to minimise the organised opposition that the Minister has met with from the other side. I think it is a perfect and an absolute disgrace, and I am sorry to see the Minister departing so far from a perfectly good scheme such as the one he presented in this House in the first instance. This is just absolutely typical of the Government, this wavering and wobbling. It is the same in every other Department, and that is what is responsible for the rotten position we have in the country to-day.
I wish the Deputy had read the Bill before he allowed himself to make such outlandish statements. If he had read the Bill he would not be making statements of that kind. I said on the Second Reading that I do not want to impose those conditions on people who do not participate in grants. That is the position still. If the hospitals take the grants then the bed bureau system will operate with regard to them.
The Minister must know that if one, two or three of the larger hospitals withdraw from this scheme—and he is coaxing them to withdraw—that the scheme is doomed to abject failure.
How does the Deputy make out that the hospitals are going to withdraw from the scheme, considering the big deficits they have to meet? How are those deficits going to be met?
Amendment put and declared carried, Deputy Hannigan being recorded as dissenting.
The following Government amendments were agreed to:—
2. In page 2, line 38, Section 2 (1), to delete the word "assisted".
3. In page 3, line 8, Section 2 (3), to delete the words "of the hospitals" and substitute the word "hospital".
4. In page 3, lines 8 and 9, Section 2 (3), to delete the words "including, in particular, duties".
5. In page 3, line 20, Section 3 (1), to delete the word "assisted".
6. In page 4, line 15, Section 4 (4), to insert after the word "fails" the words ", wilfully or without reasonable cause,".
7. In page 4, lines 51 and 52, Section 7 (2), to delete the words "in relation to every assisted hospital".
8. In page 4, line 54, Section 7 (3), to insert after the word "who" the word "wilfully".
I went as far as I could to meet all the points raised.
Question:—"That the Bill, as amended, be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.
Question proposed:—"That the Bill do now pass."
I have only one point to mention. There is still this position, that if a hospital becomes associated with the bed bureau scheme, by so doing, it takes on itself the responsibility arising under the complaint section. That is the situation as I see it.
That is so.
I still regard that as something of a defect. I know the Minister takes the Departmental viewpoint, that you cannot have exceptions, but the Minister knows that nearly all the best rules are the rules that have most exceptions to them. I do not see any reason why you could not have a bed bureau system which would include people who are taking the grants and people who are not taking the grants; impose on the people taking the grants the liability under the complaint section, and leave those that do not take the grants, but may still desire to assist the public with regard to information free from that liability.
In connection with the regulations, there is no real obligation on anyone to do excessive point duty in regard to the operation of the legislation. It might be possible to frame it so that you would have two classes of hospitals in the scheme, one that would be, with regard to representation, ex officio. In that case they might have the beds and get the information from the medical men and so on. To that extent I think it might be possible to operate the Bill without imposing those obligations on the hospitals, while at the same time getting all the advantages.
I do not know whether that would be possible.
Deputy Hannigan appears to take the line that the amendments agreed to by the Opposition and introduced by the Minister are designed to militate against the success of the bed bureau system. I want to say explicitly that my desire was to see the bed bureau operate in respect to every bed in Dublin hospitals, but it appeared to me that if we were to impose a series of conditions which would make it impossible for religious to carry on their institutions we might have forced hospitals that were anxious to co-operate to the full in this bed bureau scheme to withdraw from the scheme, not because they objected to the bed bureau system, but because the Bill was in such a form that if they joined in the bed bureau system they would call down upon themselves conditions and regulations that would have made it impossible for them to carry on their hospitals in accordance with the practice that they were prepared to operate.
Now, Deputy Hannigan may take the view that the attitude of this House to the charitable hospitals of Dublin should have been a Draconian condemnation of their past, with a declaration that we were going to reform them in accordance with our concept of what was right and proper. My acquaintance with the hospitals may not be as exhaustive as Deputy Hannigan's, but it extends over many years both in respect to myself and to the generations that have gone before me who have been intimately associated with the charitable hospitals of this city, lay and religious. And while not pretending for a moment that these institutions are perfect, any more than any other human institutions, I am convinced that the charitable hospitals of this city did their best to cater for the destitute poor of the city, and that is what I am concerned with. I believe that the religious who operated those hospitals are infinitely more solicitous for the destitute poor of this city than either Deputy Hannigan or myself.
I believe the Minister wanted to make it possible for all the hospitals to come in under this Bill and so did the Leader of the Opposition. I believe the result of the amendments introduced by the Minister will be to remove any objections that would have kept vital hospitals out of the scheme. Had the Minister's amendments not been introduced and adopted by this House I would, if the hospitals had consulted me, have advised them to remain out. With these amendments incorporated in the Bill it would take a good deal of argument on the part of anyone in the City of Dublin to convince me that this Bill gave legitimate grounds for remaining outside the Bill. The object I had in mind was to create a position which would make it perfectly easy for any hospital to come in. I believe that we have achieved that purpose and it is a ludicrous misrepresentation of the Minister's attitude towards the Bill to say that he has submitted to this emasculation in order to get the Bill through. I do not often go out of my way to pay tributes to Ministers of the Fianna Fáil Government. But the Minister's attitude on this Bill and his desire to meet reasonable objections on the part of Deputies, even though those objections may not have commended themselves to his advisers, is the kind of attitude that will produce decent legislation through this House. I am grateful for the extent to which the Minister has met reasonable representations in connection with this Bill. In doing so I am satisfied he has given this bed bureau scheme a chance of success that it would not have if it had passed in its unamended form.
What Deputy Dillon has said about religious communities not being able to run their hospitals if some method of supervision is exercised in relation to beds may be correct, but I should like to point out this fact that members of the same religious communities who are running the hospitals, which he contends they would not continue to run if supervision over the beds were introduced, have a very good measure of control over hospitals under the Local Government Department. That is a point it would be well for Deputies to bear in mind. If it is reliably contended that these communities cannot run hospitals if supervision is exercised, I would be quite prepared to accept that. But surely if that is the case the alternative proposition which I put up ought to be adopted, namely, that in these circumstances the important hospitals of the type to which Deputy Dillon refers should secure proper hospital facilities for non-paying patients in this city. The Minister in these circumstances must adopt the alternative scheme of setting up a central hospital to secure these facilities for the non-paying patients in the city.
All I have to say on this, as I indicated the other night, is that I have no views, one way or another, about municipal or State hospitals, but I do say this that we have all to admire the wonderful work done by the voluntary hospitals. The position with reference to the bed bureau was that it was contemplated when the new hospitals were built that a bed bureau should be established on the lines of this Bill; there would not be the same difficulty then to set apart a number of free beds and it would be easier and less repugnant to the people concerned. If we want to get success in this matter it depends a lot on co-operation. I have always been quite prepared to meet any reasonable objection for the purpose of getting that co-operation. Time will tell how this Bill will work. If we get that co-operation it will work satisfactorily. I am quite satisfied that we will get that co-operation and that the Bill will be a success. This Bill has been necessitated by the present needs that exist amongst the medical profession and amongst the social organisations who have nothing more at heart than to secure medical attendance and hospital accommodation for people in need of it. Those claims have been pressed in my Department for a good while. The necessity was there, and very often patients had to be taken from one hospital to another because of insufficient accommodation. If there were a bed bureau, that would inform medical practitioners where beds were available. Co-operation under this Bill will be a success and it will serve a long-felt want.
Question put and agreed to.