I move:—
That a supplementary sum not exceeding £3,000 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1949, for Wound and Disability Pensions, Further Pensions and Married Pensions, Allowances and Gratuities (No. 26 of 1923, No. 12 of 1927, No. 24 of 1932, No. 15 of 1937, No. 2 of 1941, No. 14 of 1943, and No. 3 of 1946); Military Service Pensions, Allowances and Gratuities (No. 48 of 1924, No. 26 of 1932, No. 43 of 1934, No. 33 of 1938, No. 5 of 1944, and Nos. 11 and 34 of 1945); Pensions, Allowances and Gratuities (No. 37 of 1936); Payments in respect of Compensation for Members of the Local Defence Force (No. 19 of 1946); for Sundry Contributions and Expenses in respect thereof, etc.; and for an Extra-Statutory Grant.
This Estimate is a supplementary Estimate for some £3,000 by way of ex gratia payment in respect of medical expenses incurred by a person who was wounded during the course of his duty as a member of the Irish Volunteers and who was treated for his wounds while resident outside this country. The circumstances which necessitate the introduction of this particular Estimate are rather confused and complicated and I will endeavour as briefly as possible to give the Dáil a full picture of those circumstances. In the early Wound Pensions Act of 1923 there was no provision for a statutory board for the administration of those pensions. It was left to the Minister for Defence by way of regulations to provide for the machinery to administer and carry out the Act. Such regulations were drafted by the Minister and provided for a Medical Pensions Board which would consist of a president and two members, the president and both members being medical men. In addition to that there was an Army Pensions Board consisting of a chairman, a layman and, when required, a medical consultant. The procedure normally was that the findings and recommendations of the Medical Pensions Board were adopted.
There was another thing of significance in connection with the present proposal, namely that when an applicant got a temporary pension that pension could not be made final for a period of two years. Further, as long as that pensioner was on temporary pension he could get medical treatment free arising directly or indirectly out of his wounds. If he was on final pension he could not get such medical service, hospitalisation, etc., free. The things, therefore, to be remembered are (1) the medical board, (2) that no temporary assessment could be made final for a period of two years, and (3) that a man on final pension could not get free treatment.
The particular case in question was of a volunteer who received multiple wounds in a number of engagements. He came up for wound pension in 1923 and was granted a temporary pension; he came up again in 1924 and was granted a temporary pension; he came up again in 1925 and 1926 and was granted a temporary pension. Some time following the award of the temporary pension in 1926 by the Medical Pensions Board, the Army Pensions Board recommended that he be given a final pension at a lower degree of assessment than was recommended by the Medical Pensions Board.
The Minister for Defence acted on the recommendation of the Army Pensions Board and gave him a final pension, indicating that it was final in money and in the degree of disablement. That assessment of a final pension by the Minister was within two years of the temporary assessment and appeared to be in conflict with the law as it then stood and was found subsequently by the Attorney-General to be so. However, a year or so later, as was conceived possible by the Medical Pensions Board, this man's wounds broke down to a very extensive degree and his health broke down also as a result of the wounds breaking down. He was abroad, and he could not get treatment at State expense because he was on a final pension. The breakdown of the wounds was extensive and the treatment was expensive, necessitating nearly two years' treatment and hospitalisation. Because he was on final pension the bill could not be paid.
Some time later the case was reopened and referred to the Attorney-General. The Attorney-General's ruling was to the effect that, although there was an element of doubt, it appeared that this final assessment was within two years of the temporary assessment. As there was doubt, confusion and misunderstanding in a way which can be perfectly understood, it appeared to me that the most reasonable way was not to sit in judgment by way of legislating as to which decision was correct, but to come to the Dáil asking for an ex gratia payment, to put it to the Dáil that it was a type of case in which the person should not be mulcted in the way of money for anything that arose out of his wounds, that the expenses incurred should be recouped by way of an ex gratia payment rather than altering the whole legislative code as it stands at the moment. That is what I am asking the Dáil to do.
