asked the Taoiseach if he will state the names of the medical practitioners on the general panel from which persons are selected by the Local Appointments Commissioners to act on selection boards; and also the number of occasions upon which, and the number of appointments in respect of which, each of them has acted on a selection board during the year ended 31st December, 1945.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Doctors on Selection Boards.
As I stated in reply to a question by the Deputy on the 6th March, membership of an interview board is honorary and it is not desirable to furnish the names of those who have given their services for this purpose on the explicit understanding that all dealings between them and the commissioners shall be strictly confidential. The Deputy will appreciate that, for the same reason, it would be undesirable to publish the names of the medical practitioners on the general panel from which persons are selected to act on interview boards. I cannot, therefore, give the Deputy the names. I have here, however, some information, in statistical form, which may meet his requirements. The information is as follows:—
There are approximately 150 medical men on the panel. During the period referred to by the Deputy 51 of these acted on boards; 16 others were invited, on at least one occasion, to act, but were unable to do so. Of the 51 who acted, 36 acted on one occasion only, 14 acted on two occasions only and one acted on four occasions. On these occasions the number of appointments dealt with by the board varied from one to eight. Of the total number of appointments dealt with during the period, the number of medical appointments was 52.
I take this opportunity of referring to a point raised by Deputy Dillon in supplementary questions following my reply to Deputy Mulcahy on the 6th March. Deputy Dillon, apparently, had in mind the practice whereby the Local Appointments Commissioners on some occasions ask one interview board to deal with a number of posts. This arises particularly in the case of dispensary medical officerships. I have made inquiries in this matter and I find that the position is as follows:—
In ordinary circumstances, a separate board would be set up for each post to be filled. It happens fairly often, however, that there is a number of vacancies to be filled at the same time and that an appreciable number of candidates have applied for more than one of the vacant posts. In such a case it is the practice of the commissioners to constitute one board to deal with all of the vacancies, because if the positions were dealt with separately many of the candidates would be involved in the expense and inconvenience of a corresponding number of journeys to Dublin or elsewhere for interview. Moreover, the difficulties of finding suitable persons who are able and willing to act on boards—difficulties which are already considerable—would be greatly increased.
It must be emphasised that there is no difference, so far as the principles or methods of selection are concerned, between the case in which one position only is being dealt with by a board and that in which a number of positions is being dealt with at the same time. In the latter case, the commissioners take each position in turn and decide, on the markings and placings arrived at by the board, which of the candidates who have applied for that position is to be considered for recommendation to the local authority concerned in accordance with the prescribed regulations, and they make their recommendation for each post accordingly. If, in the final order of merit determined in accordance with the regulations, the same candidate is placed first for more than one post, he is normally given his choice. There is no essential difference between this procedure and that of setting up a separate board to deal with each vacancy.
That was very interesting, but the Taoiseach will understand that my question asked for the names of the medical practitioners on the general board from which selections are made. Does he not understand that, if we go into the theory of the matter, the theory is that the general medical profession in the country, by reason of the fact that representatives of theirs are on the selection board, can have a chance of seeing that only the highest standard of qualification will secure a public appointment to a medical officership? Will the Taoiseach say what good reason there can be why the 150 medical practitioners in the country who give their services in this way would refuse to allow their names to be made known to the public?
All I can say is that in the past they have been very anxious that all dealings, names, and so on, would not be communicated. For instance, if there is a post advertised, any person on the panel may be a possible member of the selection board; and it is possible that people would be coming along trying to canvass them, and bringing pressure of one kind or another and subjecting them to a certain amount of annoyance. That is the only reason I can see.
Is it not a fact that this question is not asking for the names and addresses of special boards, but for the names and addresses of those who in a public-spirited way are prepared to give this service gratis? Why should they be, as it were, a dark brotherhood? In the interests of the public service and of public confidence, should not the names of those doctors be known?
I would not like to express an opinion on that. I can see what the Deputy would like to have and, if it were possible, it might be better to arrange it in that way; but there have been these difficulties which the commissioners have communicated to me. I could ask the commissioners whether they would consider if it would be possible to have a panel which would be published. At the moment, however, anything done with these panels has been on a confidential basis.
Some of us feel that, in the public interest, we have to poke at this question until the public do know who the people are in the different professions who are acting in that public-spirited way by advising in regard to the different appointments.
Will the Taoiseach give very careful consideration to that aspect of the question to which he has referred when he says that, even if the panel consisted of so large a number as 150, were the names of these voluntary persons to be published they might be exposed so much to the annoyance of canvassing that the most desirable types of professional men, who are at present prepared to serve anonymously, would decline to serve rather than expose themselves to the perennial approach of interested persons who would seek to secure their favour on the chance that they might be included in a particular panel for a particular appointment, because there will be surgeons, physicians, pathologists and so forth? One may, therefore, forecast with reasonable probability a limited number of the total of 150 who would be probably called to a particular board owing to the peculiar qualifications which the position to be awarded called for and that would make it possible for canvassing to take place and a great many men in these circumstances would not undertake this extremely onerous task.
That is the other side of the question.
There are many sides to the question.
There are.