asked the Minister for Defence if he has received an application for a pension from Private Joseph McManus, 1063 Transport Branch, Defence Forces, Columb Barracks, Mullingar, a married man with a large young family, who was discharged from the Army on the 9th of August, 1944, as medically unfit and has been unable to work since; and, if so, if he will state what action, if any, he has taken in the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Application for Army Pension.
An application under the Army Pensions Acts was submitted by No. B/1063 ex-Private Joseph McManus, and was duly investigated. It was not possible to grant him any award as the disability in respect of which he claimed is not attributable to his service in the Defence Forces during the emergency period. A notification to that effect was sent to him on the 16th March last.
I should like to ask what was the condition of this man's health when he joined the Army, as I am sure we had a doctor at that particular time.
When this case came before the Military Medical Board it was found that he had been suffering from the complaint as far back as 1925 and the Military Medical Board therefore could not regard the complaint as being attributable to service during the emergency period.
May we assume from that reply that, if it appeared that a serving soldier had contracted a complaint during the period of his service, he would not be discharged from the Army unless he had been cured of his condition?
The Military Medical Board only assess on the question of whether the disease was attributable to service in the Army or not. In this case it was satisfactorily proved that this man had been suffering from the particular complaint for a number of years and therefore it could not in any circumstances have been regarded as having been attributable to service during the emergency period.
Is the Minister satisfied that that is fair treatment for a soldier—an arbitrary decision by two doctors that the person is not suffering from a disability attributable to service and that that is the final word? Is the Minister satisfied with that procedure? Is he not aware that very many hardships are arising from such arbitrary decisions?
There are two medical officers to examine the cases and, if there is any doubt, a specialist is brought in from outside. There is no question of its being an arbitrary decision.
When that arbitrary decision is given, what is the procedure? Is there an appeal allowed from the decision on the part of the applicant? I am aware that if a decision was given in favour of an applicant and the Minister thought that the applicant was not entitled to a pension, the Minister could appeal against the decision. I want to know if there is any procedure under which an applicant can appeal against a decision?
If the applicant can bring forward any evidence that the original decision was not a correct one, his case will be referred to the Medical Board.
Is the Minister not aware that all the evidence as to the soldier's disability is in the possession of the Minister's Department; that it is unfair to ask an applicant to produce evidence which is in the possession of the Minister's Department? Is the Minister prepared to give a summary of the evidence on which these two medical officers decided that that applicant was not entitled to a pension so that the matter may be referred to an independent medical opinion and the applicant can appeal?
I am not prepared to do that.