asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce if he is aware that Éire citizens insured against accident whilst working in England, under the Workmen's Compensation are debarred from receiving the compensation if they return to Éire; if he will cause inquiries to be instituted with a view to protecting Éire citizens who may become incapacitated in Great Britain and expatriated on medical grounds to this country on the advice of medical officers of the various concerns employing Éire citizens in Great Britain.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Workmen's Compensation.
Mr. Byrne
I am aware that workmen injured by accident whilst working in England in such circumstances as to entitle them to compensation under the British statute, the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1925, are debarred by that statute from receiving compensation if they cease to reside in the United Kingdom, unless the injury is likely to be of a permanent nature. Section 16 of that statute makes provision under which a workman receiving a weekly payment of workmen's compensation who ceases to reside in the United Kingdom (including the Channel Islands or Isle of Man) and whose incapacity resulting from the injury is likely to be of a permanent nature, may continue to receive such weekly compensation after he has ceased to reside in the United Kingdom, provided he fulfils certain conditions. These are, that the workman, before ceasing to reside in the United Kingdom, shall take the necessary steps to obtain from the medical referee for the area concerned in the United Kingdom a certificate that the incapacity resulting from the injury is likely to be of a permanent nature, and that the workman, after leaving the United Kingdom, shall prove in the prescribed manner and at prescribed intervals his identity and the continuance of his incapacity.
I am not aware of any case in which a workman who was permanently injured in England in such circumstances as to entitle him to workmen's compensation, and who complied with these rules, failed to receive weekly compensation after his return to this country, but if the Deputy will give me particulars of any such case I will have it investigated.
Our statute—the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934—contains in Section 32 a similar provision to that in the British statute. Our section is, however, more favourable to workmen (including British workmen who become injured and entitled to compensation here) in that it enables injured workmen to continue to receive compensation, after ceasing to reside here, if the employer's medical practitioner certifies that it is desirable, owing to the condition of health of the workman, that he should reside outside the State. I am well aware of the desirability of obtaining a reciprocal benefit for our citizens under British law; but the Deputy will appreciate that the matter does not rest entirely with me or with the Government of this State. The Deputy may be assured that everything which it is possible for my Department to do will be done in the matter.
Mr. Byrne
The length of the Minister's reply shows how important this matter is. I should like to ask the Minister is he aware that there are at least 20 cases in the City of Dublin of people who were injured whilst working in England, and who were told that they would get workmen's compensation. After they arrived home the insurance company concerned wrote to tell them that they were not entitled to workmen's compensation whilst living here. There was no means of getting a passport to get back to England to draw the money then. In view of these circumstances, will the Minister communicate with the employers, the insurance company and the British Government, because it was disclosed here yesterday that over 50,000 workers have gone from this country to England within the past few years? It was because of two or three cases, the circumstances of which I know personally, that I put down this question, but I have been informed that there are at least 20 such cases in Dublin. I put down this question because I think the difficulties in the matter are not insurmountable. I have reason to think——
The Deputy is now making a speech.
Mr. Byrne
I am asking the Minister is he aware that the British Government are disposed to ask employers and insurance companies to pay compensation to injured workers living in this country if the Minister would ask them.
This is a matter of British law. What the British Government is prepared to do is presumably indicated in their law, and, under British law, workmen are not entitled to receive compensation when they leave Great Britain unless the injury is of a permanent character.
Mr. Byrne
What about the 20 people to whom I have just referred who were sent home and who are now forced to live without any compensation? I have reason to believe that any representations made by the Minister will receive sympathetic consideration. Fifty thousand of our workers have gone across there recently and if any of them are injured either permanently or temporarily, they are deprived of the means of sustenance if they return home.
I think the Minister should realise that the British Government in the present circumstances have at least as much power as our Government under the Emergency Powers Act. The British Government also realise that they are getting good service from our people who have gone over there to work, and they would be prepared, I think, to receive representations from our Government on this matter.
I have no reason to think that they would. There are obvious considerations which must affect the British Government to the same extent as they would affect the Government here when drafting our legislation. It is quite clear that there are many reasons why the payment of compensation for injury of a temporary character becomes a matter of difficulty when the recipient lives outside the area of jurisdiction of the Government concerned. Therefore, British law provides for such payment only where the injury is of a permanent character and subject to compliance with certain conditions. From the various efforts which have been made to get an arrangement in relation to Irish workers employed in Great Britain as good as that which applies under our law to British workers employed here, I have no reason to believe that the British Government would change their attitude in this matter.
Surely the Minister realises that there is a question of equity in the matter, apart altogether from the legal aspect?
Does the Minister not realise that the Act was passed to deal with ordinary conditions, and that the situation at the moment is that at the end of six months it is necessary for a person seeking work to have his permit renewed? If the permit is not renewed, it is impossible for him to live there, even if it is only for the purpose of receiving his compensation.
Is the Minister aware that the authorities on the other side are not prepared to accept a statement from the local medical officer here that people who had been injured in the course of their work on the other side, and who afterwards returned to this country, are still incapable of work?
That is the law in Great Britain, the country in which these persons received their injuries. I cannot change British law.
Could not some agency arrangements be made to pay them compensation whilst living here? Most of the insurance companies operating in this country have headquarters in England.
It is not a question of an arrangement with an insurance company. It is a question of what the British law prescribes.
Is the Minister aware that arrangements have been made in the past for the payment of such compensation?
The British Workmen's Compensation Act, which is the law in England, prescribes that payment of compensation for a temporary injury cannot be made in cases where the worker has left Great Britain.