asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he will state the reasons why the trustees, who for nine years were dealing with the funds of the National Health Insurance Society, and who by wise management substantially increased the society's assets and thereby won repeated commendation from him, were not reappointed; and what special qualifications, if any, the new trustees had which would justify him in appointing them.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - National Health Insurance Society Trustees.
The three trustees of the National Health Insurance Society are, under statute, appointed by the Minister for Local Government and Public Health from year to year, and they act as members of the Committee of Management of the National Health Insurance Society. Last year I invited each of the outgoing trustees to continue to act during the current year. Bearing in mind, however, certain events which had transpired during the most recent term of office of that Committee of Management I considered it necessary to make explicit what might reasonably be regarded as the minimum obligations of courtesy, good faith and cooperation which any Minister of State is entitled to expect from those whom he appoints to fiduciary offices. I accordingly asked those whom I proposed to appoint to the committee to give me the following assurances (1) that they would strive to ensure that a close and cordial liaison was maintained between the Committee of Management and the Ministry; (2) that should anything arise which might disturb harmonious relations they would inform the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary who appointed them, and (3) that before publicly raising any such matter with the Minister or Parliamentary Secretary they would resign. It is clear that these assurances would not fetter in any way the independence of judgement of members of the Committee of Management. Unfortunately, two of the outgoing trustees felt unable to give these assurances and, in such circumstances, I was regretfully unable to reappoint them when their statutory term of office expired.
As regards the latter part of the Deputy's question, I am satisfied that the persons whom I appointed in place of the two former trustees possess all the qualifications of character and experience of affairs necessary to enable them to carry out their duties in the best interests of the society and of its members.
Can the Minister say if the two trustees who were not able to give the assurance which he required were lay people, and that the person who would give the assurance was a civil servant, and further, is he in a position to say by how much the management of the National Health Insurance Society benefited by investments which the trustees made during their period of office?
The second part is a separate question.
The latter part of the question is entirely separate. It does not matter to me whether a person is a layman or an officer of mine or any other Government Department. His primary duty is, I think, to ensure, apart altogether from the conduct of the committee of management, that he will maintain or endeavour to maintain proper relations with the Minister who appoints him.
Can the Minister say by how much the management of the National Health Insurance Society benefited by the investments——
That is a separate question.
It is in the question, Sir.
There is one trustee who agreed to the Minister's conditions. Was he reappointed?
Certainly.
He was, of course; why would not he?
The Minister is not in these matters a mere cipher and Deputies had better realise that.
He is worse. Heil Hitler.
The Minister should answer the whole question.
The Minister says this third trustee was reappointed.
Yes, having given me the assurance which I asked from the other two.
Having surrendered.
Was he reappointed as trustee?
Certainly, yes.
Would the Minister say if he is now acting as such?
Yes.
Not like the other two boys.