Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 11 Jul 1950

Vol. 122 No. 7

Committee on Finance. - Vote 67—Health.

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £1,564,000 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1951, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Health, and certain Services administered by that Office, including Grants to Local Authorities, Miscellaneous Grants and a Grant-in-Aid, and certain charges connected with hospitals.

My speech on the introduction of the Estimate for last year dealt mainly with plans which were then made for the improvement of the health services, notably in the tuberculosis service. Since then, considerable progress has been made in the achievement of these plans. I will later give an account of what was done during the past year and what it is hoped to do in the coming year in the further improvement and expansion of the health services, but, before doing so, I would like to run over the vital statistics for the past year. The figures I give in respect of that year are provisional.

The birth rate per 1,000 of the population for the year 1949 was 21.4. This is less than the figure for 1948, but also less than the figure for the immediate preceding years. It is, however, well above the average for the two decades preceding the recent war. The birth rate for England and Wales for 1949 was 16.7; the rate for Scotland was 18.5, and for the six North Eastern Counties was 21.4.

The number of marriages in 1949— 16,299—was almost the same as in the previous year. The death rate for 1949 was 12.7 per 1,000 of the population. This is somewhat higher than the figure of 12.1 for the year 1948 which was, however, the lowest ever recorded for this country. While comparisons of the crude death rates between different countries may be misleading, it is worth while nothing that the death rates for 1949 for the neighbouring countries were—England and Wales, 11.7; Scotland, 12.3; the rate for the six Northern Eastern Counties was 11.5.

The infant mortality rate, that is, the number of infant deaths per 1,000 births, was 51 compared with 50 for 1948, and an average of 67 for the five years up to 1948.

It is satisfactory to see that the figure for 1948, which was the lowest ever recorded, has been substantially maintained, but our figures give no grounds for complacency. For example, an infant mortality rate as low as 22 has been recorded in New Zealand. The slight increase in the number of infant deaths here in 1949 over 1948 was accounted for largely by an increased incidence of gastro-enteritis. There were 483 deaths from this disease in 1949 as compared with 352 in 1948. The disease did not, however, reach the epidemic proportions of the 1943 to 1945 period, when there were over 1,000 deaths from it in each year. Even at the 1948 figure, the numbers of deaths from this disease were too high and the sharp increase in 1949 makes it abundantly clear that the special measures taken to control the disease must not be relaxed in any way.

As a contrast to gastro-enteritis, there have been spectacular decreases in the number of deaths from most of the other infectious diseases. The number of deaths from tuberculosis in 1949 was 2,651, which was 452 less than the figure for 1948, which was, up till then, the lowest ever recorded for this country. This big decrease is particularly gratifying because it is somewhat of a surprise. With more accurate notification of tuberculosis and certification of this disease as a cause of death, one would have been inclined to expect an opposite trend. It would not be safe at this stage to predict what the figures will be over the next few years. The number of deaths from diphtheria was ten; from typhoid fever, 12; from whooping cough, 131; and from measles, 53, all representing substantial reductions on previous figures. Deaths from scarlet fever increased from five in 1948 to 11 in 1949, and deaths from influenza from 201 to 264.

Deaths from cancer showed a small reduction as compared with 1948. The average number of deaths from this disease over the last five years, however, was almost 4,000. It, therefore, kills more people per year than tuberculosis, and even though it does not attack the younger members of the community as tuberculosis does, the figures emphasise the need for such active measures to be taken against it as the present state of medical knowledge permits.

The general picture presented by the vital statistics for the past few years is one of slow but continuous improvement. It is difficult to say to what extent this improvement is due to improvements in the health services, but I do not think it is unreasonable to assume that the improved services have done much to bring about the better figures at least for infant and maternal mortality and for deaths from the infectious diseases.

In my speech introducing last year's Estimate I explained what I hoped to do in the provision of hospital beds. I mentioned that a short-term seven-year building programme had been worked out and that the planning of the projects included in that programme was being proceeded with as a matter of urgency. Progress on planning has been very satisfactory and in many cases constructional work started during the past year. A substantial proportion of the short-term building programme was under construction by the end of 1949.

Amongst the more important projects on which building work commenced over the past year or so are two of the proposed three regional general hospitals, namely those at Galway and Limerick, the large new hospital at Gurranebraher, County Cork, the new 304-bed children's hospital at Crumlin, Dublin, the regional sanatorium at Galway and the sub-regional sanatorium at Ardkeen, County Waterford. Site development work for the two remaining regional sanatoria—those at Cork and Dublin—is nearing completion. Site development work for the children's sanatorium at Ballyowen, County Dublin, was completed, and building work was started some weeks ago. Work is well advanced on the provision of infant welfare units at the three Dublin maternity hospitals and the new maternity unit at the Cork City Home and Hospital should be completed this year. Other works which have started are a 100-bed extension at Portiuncula Hospital, Ballinasloe, and new nurses' homes at St. Michael's Hospital, Dún Laoghaire, and the Meath Hospital, Dublin. In all, contracts valued at over £4,800,000 were placed for hospitals in 1949; a further £2,000,000 worth of work has already started this year and further works costing between £2,000,000 and £2,500,000 more are expected to be under way before the end of the year.

The satisfactory results achieved so far have justified the decision, so far as hospital construction is concerned, to concentrate all energies on a set programme and within that programme to give priority to particular projects for which there was greatest need or which could be proceeded with at an early date and so clear the way for other projects rather than to dissipate energy on the detailed examination of a host of projects which there could be no hope of completing in any foreseeable period. Deputies who are concerned with projects which are not included in the short-term programme should be encouraged, by the progress achieved so far, to look with reasonable confidence towards the initiation of the deferred projects before many years have elapsed.

There is, however, one aspect of the building programme which is not progressing satisfactorily. This is the planning of county clinics. These clinics will fill a very great want in helping the early diagnosis of illnesses and in bringing the services of specialists nearer to the people. They should also relieve pressure on hospital beds in so far as investigations can be done there without the admission of patients to hospitals. I am sorry to say that, despite frequent encouragement on my part, many local authorities have been slow in advancing the planning of the clinics and I would ask all Deputies who can do so to help in pushing them on.

One disappointing feature in connection with the hospital construction programme is the very high cost of the projects already started. Although considerably higher costs than before the war were to be expected, the extent of the advance in cost was greater than could have been foreseen. Because of this, and in order to ensure that the funds available are spent to the best advantage, it is essential that all concerned with the planning of hospital projects should secure such degree of economy as is consistent with sound construction and a reasonable arrangement of essential accommodation. Deputies who are members of local authorities or of voluntary bodies concerned with hospital building can give considerable assistance in this matter.

Progress in the provision of hospital beds for pulmonary tuberculosis cases has been particularly satisfactory. Since April, 1948, 2,000 additional beds have been provided. Some of these, such as those in Castlerea Sanatorium and the Mallow Chest Hospital are designed to relieve the shortage until the regional sanatoria are completed. Others, for example St. Mary's Chest Hospital, represent permanent additions to the total number of beds available to accommodate persons suffering from this disease. The total number of beds now available for persons suffering from tuberculosis is estimated at 5,500. There is, however, still need for getting on with the completion of the permanent accommodation in the regional sanatoria as rapidly as possible. Until these sanatoria are completed, the position will be eased by the completion of some smaller projects. A new sanatorium at Killybegs, County Donegal, has just been opened, with a bed capacity of 72. Further accommodation is being provided as opportunity offers elsewhere. The provision of accommodation for 250 child tuberculosis patients in a new sanatorium at Ballyowen, County Dublin, which is expected to be finished next year, will largely solve the problem of institutional treatment for these children.

On this question of bed occupancy and waiting lists there are a few observations I would like to make.

I have mentioned the provision of 2,000 additional beds in about two years, and this might lead to the inference that the incidence of the disease is increasing. It is, however, reasonable to assume that there has been no increase in incidence—the decrease in the death rate provides confirmation of this. What is happening is that due to the payment of allowances under the Infectious Diseases (Maintenance) Regulations and to a more enlightened attitude on the part of the public resulting in part from the extensive publicity given to the facilities for free treatment for the disease in recent years, there is much less tendency to hide the disease than there was formerly, and persons who suspect that they may be suffering from it are availing to a much greater extent of the diagnostic facilities provided, to which I propose to refer shortly.

In regard to waiting lists, it should be realised that even if there were unlimited beds available for treatment, there would still be waiting lists. Tuberculosis is a long-term disease and most persons in whom the disease is diagnosed, realising that they must spend a fairly long period in hospital, particularly if, as is often the case, they are not acutely ill, like to have a week or a fortnight or even longer in which to make arrangements in regard to their affairs before they will accept hospital or sanatorium treatment. A waiting list of, say, 200 to 300 in relation to a bed capacity of 5,500 would not be unreasonable.

There is the further consideration that the flow of discharges of patients in the 2,000 beds provided in the last two years is not yet as great as in beds longer established. When large numbers commence treatment at roughly the same time, the beds are immobilised for the full treatment period and it takes some time before the flow of discharges events out.

Two other factors affecting this question remain. One is of a temporary nature. It relates to persons whose condition after a normal period of treatment becomes stabilised as "chronic", and who are discharged from the sanatorium because they have derived the maximum benefit from their stay there. Many such persons have been brought back into tuberculosis institutions to avail of the surgical procedures now provided and this backlog of cases has affected the turnover of beds for "new" cases. The second factor is that earlier diagnosis and treatment facilities, which have now become available to a greater extent than formerly, result in a shorter stay in the sanatorium and the effects of this, on a large scale, are now only beginning to be felt.

Apart from the provision of extra accommodation, other sides of the tuberculosis service were developed. Two thoracic surgeons are now working in institutions in Leinster, Munster and Connaught. Operating theatres, equipped for the provision of the most modern treatment, are available at St. Mary's Chest Hospital, at Rialto Hospital, at Mallow Chest Hospital, at Castlerea Sanatorium and at the Limerick City Home and Hospital for these surgeons.

Further steps were taken to improve the diagnostic service. In October last a circular was sent to all the health authorities recommending them to make arrangements to enable private doctors in their areas to get free chest X-rays for their patients. This service is now in operation and the attention of doctors and the public has been drawn to it by wide Press publicity sponsored by the Department. Early diagnosis of tuberculosis gives a much better chance of recovery and permits steps to be taken to prevent the spread of infection. It is most important that this service should be used as much as possible. I would appreciate any help given by Deputies in publicising this service to their constituents and correspondents.

In addition, mobile X-ray units will be used to provide a mass radiography service. Such a unit has been successfully operated by the Cork County Council since April, 1949. It consists of a van in which the X-ray apparatus is housed and which has accommodation for a doctor and the persons requiring X-ray. It has been found a most convenient way of providing a mass radiography service and from April, 1949, up to the end of March last approximately 11,000 miniature radiographs and about 2,000 larger plate films were taken by this method in the county. One hundred and four new cases of tuberculosis were diagnosed. It is hoped to provide six of these units in other areas in the near future. The Dublin Corporation mass radiography unit at Lord Edward Street, Dublin, continues to function, but I feel that it is still not working to capacity. I have referred to this in a recent reply to a parliamentary question.

A new high-powered X-ray set was installed at the corporation's dispensary, Charles Street West, in July, 1949. The installation of this equipment should enable a first-class diagnostic service to be provided at this dispensary, which is the corporation's principal chest clinic for the city.

Courses of study were organised by the Department last year in Wales, England and Denmark, for medical officers engaged on tuberculosis work in this country. Eleven medical officers took the Welsh course which lasted eight weeks. Two took the English and six the Danish course. The special feature of the last-named course was the study of B.C.G. vaccination.

The scheme of cash allowances under the Infectious Diseases (Maintenance) Regulations, 1948, continued to operate satisfactorily. It was found necessary to make some minor amendments of the regulations to enable allowances to be paid in respect of domestic help rendered in certain circumstances by relatives of patients.

Last year I referred to the question of the rehabilitation of tuberculosis patients.

Vaccination against tuberculosis with B.C.G. has been part of the Dublin Corporation's tuberculosis service since 1948. Vaccination is offered to uninfected contacts of persons suffering from tuberculosis, to children in residential institutions, to infants born in the city maternity hospitals where there is a family history of tuberculosis, and to some other groups who are subject to special risk.

In June, 1949, a group of medical experts in close touch with the tuberculosis problem agreed to the Minister's request to form a special committee called the National B.C.G. Committee for the purpose of extending the B.C.G. vaccination service at St. Ultan's Hospital to serve the country generally until the various health authorities are in a position to provide this type of vaccination as part of their tuberculosis service. The committee's vaccinators work in close contact with the medical officers of the various health authorities which have adopted B.C.G. schemes. The vaccinators are now working in 15 counties. Up to 31st May, 6,600 vaccinations and 20,500 skin tests (preliminary and post-vaccinal) have been carried out.

I would like to record my appreciation of the work of national importance, in the field of preventive medicine, being performed by the members of this committee whose services have been given voluntarily. During the short period the committee has been functioning, there has been splendid co-operation on the part of the health authorities and the general public with the trained staff of vaccinators, and this co-operation augurs well for the integration, in the near future, of this valuable protective scheme with the health services operated by local authorities. It has been established that the use of this type of vaccination on a wide scale in other countries had produced a high degree of immunity from tuberculosis in the community, and it is gratifying that this country has made a good start in adopting this valuable preventive measure here.

The service to control and prevent other infectious diseases continued to operate quietly and effectively, and the incidence of most of these diseases give no cause for alarm.

I wish to express appreciation of the efforts made by all in this campaign and I hope that they will keep the good work going.

To conclude this account of the fight against infectious deseases, I would like to emphasise again that all health authorities provide free treatment and diagnostic services for tuberculosis and other infectious diseases. These services are not perfect, but efforts are being made to improve them as rapidly as possible. The public should realise that if they are suffering from any infectious disease they are entitled to free treatment for it by the health authority and that it is their duty to their families and to the community to avail of this treatment. It is also the duty of the health authorities to provide these services promptly, courteously and conveniently.

A survey into the nutritional condition and the food habits of the people which commenced in 1946, has now concluded and a number of reports on the results of the survey in urban and rural areas have been published.

I referred last year to what was then being done to bring the various parts of the Health Act, 1947, into effect. I will now give an account of the progress since then on these matters.

The progress made in regard to the introduction of the comprehensive free mother and child service visualised in the Act is not as great as had been hoped.

Discussions are in progress between the Dublin maternity hospitals, the corporation and the Department regarding maternity services and a neonatal infant service for Dublin and district. I have already referred to the steps taken to provide accommodation for the hospital side of the lastmentioned service. Works has been proceeding on the preparation of a draft comprehensive scheme for the country at large. A tentative scheme has now been prepared, and it will soon be considered by the Irish Medical Association. In these circumstances, I am sure the House will agree that it would be better that I should not furnish details of the scheme here now.

The food hygiene regulations, which have been under consideration for some time, were sent to various trade organisations—retailers, wholesalers, importers, manufacturers, trades unions, etc.—to the representatives of the medical profession and to local health authorities. Many helpful suggestions were made by these bodies and they have now been considered and, where desirable, are being incorporated in the regulations. The draft is now being put into its final form, and it is expected that these regulations will be made very soon. I had hoped that they would be made sooner, but the regulations represent a very comprehensive and complicated code and required careful drafting. Because of their importance, I am making every effort to expedite work on them.

To enable persons affected by the regulations to study them and, where necessary, to put their houses in order so as to comply with the regulations, they will not come into operation until some months after they are made. The proposed regulations were generally welcomed by the various trade interests as well as by the general public.

During the year further measures were taken to improve the medical services provided under the Public Assistance Act for the more needy classes of the community. Up to the present these services have been handicapped by the fact that persons requiring specialist attention were often obliged to travel to the larger cities in order to obtain it. It is the intention that, in future, all possible treatment will be given locally. To enable this to be done, the services at the county and district hospitals are being improved. Attractive conditions of service for county surgeons have been sanctioned and it is hoped that these conditions will ensure the maintenance of a high standard among appointees as county surgeons. It is proposed also to recommend to local authorities that they should, as opportunity offers, appoint whole-time county physicians and county obstetrician-gynæcologists in each county. These physicians and obstetricians will be highly qualified and it will be possible for them to provide treatment at specialist level in county hospitals. Regional specialist orthopædic surgeons have been appointed to serve most parts of the country and it is hoped to provide this service for the entire country soon.

During last year it was found necessary again to circularise local authorities requesting them to take immediate steps to improve the public assistance dispensaries, not only as regards their structural condition, but also in relation to the equipment and the amenities provided for patients and staff. It is admitted that this is a very difficult problem as a large number of the dispensaries which are not capable of reconstruction must be replaced. Elaborate premises are not required, however, and all local authorities should take energetic steps to bring their dispensaries up to a decent standard. The Minister hopes that in every county an immediate start will be made to replace those buildings which cannot be made satisfactory by reconstruction. I would urge those Deputies who are members of local authorities to cooperate in this effort.

I referred last year to the condition of the county homes. In some counties considerable improvements have been made in these institutions, but many of them still fall very short of the standards which are desirable. The interdepartmental committee which was established to advise on the measures which should be taken to reconstruct or replace these is continuing its work and its report is expected to be furnished soon.

Further measures were taken to improve the medical services provided in St. Kevin's Hospital, Dublin, by the appointment of a specialist visiting gynæcologist and a visiting ophthalmologist specialist. Hitherto, surgical operations were carried out in St. Kevin's on three days per week. Arrangements for the performance of daily operations are well advanced, and will be completed very shortly. In addition, the appointment of directors and assistant directors of surgery and medicine and a director of pathology should shortly be made which, as well as providing a better service for the patients there, will bring the establishment of the proposed post-graduate medical school a step nearer.

On the subject of St. Kevin's, I should perhaps say that at long last a start is about to be made with the much-needed structural improvement of this, the largest of our Irish hospitals, to bring it up to modern standards.

In accordance with the recommendations of the Consultative Cancer Council a central body, known as Comhlachas Ailse na h-Éireann (The Cancer Association of Ireland) was recently established. The association has been constituted under the Companies Acts and will be financed from the Hospitals Trust Fund. The directors of the association, all of whom are willing to act without remuneration, are members of the medical profession with special knowledge and experience of cancer work, representatives of the medical schools and local authority medical services, laymen with administrative experience and a representative of the Department of Health. It is intended that the association shall be an authoritative body and it has been given wide powers to enable it to ensure a full service on a national basis for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of malignant diseases and diseases of the skin.

It is expected that this new organisation will receive the co-operation of local authorities and of the other bodies and institutions which, up to this, have done much excellent work in this field and that the present cancer service will be co-ordinated and considerably expanded. As the new body will be the primary national agency for the development and improvement of the cancer service, it will be responsible for advising and assisting the Minister on all matters relating to any aspect of that service. It is hoped that the association, with the help of the local authorities and other bodies engaged in the service, will succeed in providing, within the financial and other resources available, a modern cancer service with up-to-date facilities for diagnosis and treatment adequate to the needs of the people. It is understood that the new association has acquired extensive premises and property in Dublin capable of development as a fully equipped centre for the treatment of cancer.

Before dealing in detail with the demand for moneys for the health services contained in the Estimate now before the House, I think it is appropriate that I should say something about the other great source of funds for hospitalisation, that is, the Hospitals Trust Fund.

The House will be aware of the very disconcerting rate of growth of the deficits of the voluntary hospitals. They had reached, in respect of 1948, the last completed year for which audited figures are available, a total only £2,000 short of £400,000. It would, of course, be reasonable to expect that, with the fall in the purchasing power of money during the war years, the deficits would rise, but the progression from £116,000 in respect of 1938, the last pre-war year, to almost £400,000 in respect of 1948 is, to say the least of it, extremely steep. In reply to Deputy Briscoe's question on 4th instant, I gave very full information in regard to certain of the steps taken to remedy the position, and I do not wish to occupy the time of the House now by repetition in detail.

Briefly, these steps may be summarised as follows: The amount which will be paid in deficits in respect of each of the years 1950, 1951 and 1952 will be £400,000, which, as I have mentioned, is the approximate amount of the deficits in 1948. The payments on foot of deficits will be made at a much earlier date than at present—as much as 12 months earlier in respect of nearly half the amount and approximately six months in respect of the major portion of the second half. This will save hospital authorities a good deal of their embarrassment in respect of borrowing and will save, in cash, the overdraft interest.

The payment which, as from 1st July, will be made to most hospitals by local authorities in respect of their patients, will be increased from £3 13s. 6d. to £4 4s. 0d. a week. This increase will fall in full on this Vote this year and, in the case of most local authorities, it will be several years, owing to the operation of the Health Services (Financial Provisions) Act, 1947, before any portion of the increased charge will fall on the local rates. The Minister for Social Welfare also has taken steps to increase payments made from National Health Insurance funds in respect of the maintenance of national health insurance patients.

The basis on which the payment of deficits will be made to each hospital in respect of each of the three years 1950, 1951 and 1952 will be either (1) the average amount of the deficit in the three years 1947, 1948 and 1949, or (2) the hospital's estimate of the amount of its deficit in 1950, whichever is the lower.

I do not think any Deputy will consider that an unreasonable basis. I may say that over one-third of the hospitals will be entitled to get up to the full amount of their estimated deficit so that no hardship or semblance of hardship can arise in their cases. In other cases the earlier payment and the increased income resulting from the increase in the capitation charge will either bridge the gap completely or go a good way towards it.

I feel that it is important that I should repeat what I already said in my reply to Deputy Briscoe about two matters. The first is that certain members of hospital boards have for some time been urging the Hospitals Commission to do something on the lines of what has been done. I will quote again the appropriate extract from the circular issued by the Hospitals Commission dealing with the matter:—

"The commission is aware that hospital authorities have been keenly alive to the extreme seriousness of the deficit position and, from time to time, representations have been made by members of hospital boards that more effective measures of internal control of expenditure might be achieved if hospitals were informed in advance of the amount of the grants they might expect to have paid to them in respect of the following year's deficits. It was contended that the current system of paying the deficits tended to sap the initiative of boards of management, since under it there did not appear to be the required incentive to economise."

The second point is that I wish to emphasise that at no time did the total annual investment income of all the Hospitals Trust Fund exceed £330,500, and as the amount paid in deficits in respect of 1948 was nearly £400,000, as the amount to be paid in respect of 1949 will reach that figure, and as £400,000 is the annual figure now fixed in respect of the years 1950, 1951 and 1952, it is futile to talk about the reservation of the investments of the fund to provide an endowment to pay the deficits. Even if every penny in the fund at its peak had been earmarked as an endowment for the deficits, the income would be insufficient for the purpose. I am not aware, however, that it was ever the intention to earmark all the money in the fund as an endowment. The sum provisionally set aside for that purpose some years ago was, as I mentioned £5,720,000, and that could do no more than meet half the deficit. I hope, therefore, that in future there will be less uninformed criticism on this matter.

I move that the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration. I have listened with great interest to the introduction of this Estimate by the Minister for Health. First of all, I want to comment on the different approach there is to-day on the Minister's third Estimate compared with his approach in previous years. I think it is fair to say that the Minister has approached the House to-day in a very chastened mood. Possibly two and a half years' experience in this very responsible office has brought home to him that one cannot just make out of the Department of Health a political issue.

I think it was quite unreasonable and unfair in the past for the Minister to have introduced the atmosphere that in the period of office of his predecessors practically nothing had been done in the matter of progression towards improvement of health services and in the general welfare of the public. The Minister will have to admit now that if we make a comparison between the results which have been obtained by his predecessors in office, considering where they started and where they left off, they have not done a bad job.

There are various matters arising, apart from all the useful and technical information the Minister has given to us in regard to the improvement in services and the additions in treatment. I have been asking questions from time to time in order to correct the impression that has been wilfully and wrongfully made on the minds of the public with general regard to the approach of all sections of this House to this very important and serious matter. I think it should be reasonable to deal somewhat with the history of health services in this country and to come gradually to the position that we have reached to-day. In 1922, when the British handed over these 26 counties, it was admitted that hospitalisation was wholly inadequate. Nobody questions that. When we secured our native Government in these 26 counties we found the treatment of health generally to be wholly inadequate. It is no harm to recollect the situation, so that we can make a comparison. The then Cumann na nGaedheal Government were handed over the workhouse or poorhouse system, where people for whom no hope existed were taken in. To a certain extent, these institutions were considered to be part of our health services. That Government made a start by abolishing the workhouse and substituting—in many cases, in the same buildings—something which was far better, what was called county infirmaries. Practically all of these institutions were then reconstructed and became county hospitals or county homes. Surgeons were appointed and medical services generally were improved, and there was a recognition that some drastic and rapid steps would have to be taken.

Still, out of the resources of the State, out of the income of the total State revenues, one could not think in terms of hundreds of millions of pounds, notwithstanding how necessary expenditure of that magnitude might be. The then Government had to deal with this in the best manner it could, both with regard to State assistance and to expenses which local authorities would be allowed to develop. Progress was made, and within those years, 1922 to 1932, a new development took place, in the establishment of the Hospitals Sweeps.

The Hospitals Sweeps were conceived mainly to try to bring about an alleviation in the situation of certain hospitals which appeared to have very substantial overdrafts, the reduction of which from voluntary subscriptions appeared to be impossible. The Hospitals Sweeps became a factor in the life of the nation. They achieved success and brought in an income above the wildest dreams of those who were the advocates of them. For a short period, only certain hospitals for whom the Sweep had been created benefited. Some hospitals refused to have anything to do with it. It was concerned with those who had signed consent to the promotion of these sweeps to alleviate their particular situation.

In the first successful sweeps, some couple of million pounds became available for a limited number of hospitals and the sweeps as such were looked upon with such favour and were given such great support that, apart from the fact as to how they were run, it became such a factor of importance in the life of this nation, with particular reference to the benefits that it could bring to hospitals, that the State had to step in and regularise the control of this money, so that it would be spent in the best interests, not of certain hospitals but of the whole community. One of the lessons learned in the early stages was that, where hospitals received large sums which were immediately transferred into additional structures and up-to-date medical apparatus, unless a certain sum was laid aside for investment, to bring in an annual income, those hospitals would ultimately find themselves in a worse position than before. They would have much bigger buildings and be run much more efficiently, but at greater cost, and if all the money went into bricks and mortar, machinery and plant, there would be a difficulty in providing for their upkeep and the deficits would be greater than they had in the past. The idea was born that, even if one had control of all this money through Government intervention for the purpose of directing it into channels where it would give the best return to the community as a whole, and for the purpose of ensuring that every section of the community would benefit—a lesson had been learned, and the practical application of that lesson was put into effect by a decision to divert some of the moneys of every sweepstake into a fund which would be invested and bring in through that investment an annual income to meet deficits in hospitals. That idea was put into effect.

The Minister has referred to the subject of deficits. I want to take him to task in an effort to show him and the House that the steps he now proposes to take will ultimately lead us into a situation where difficulties will arise and where the administration of our hospitals will be interfered with unnecessarily and in some degree curtailed. Instead of benefits accruing to the public because of better hospitalisation, the restriction upon money will create a difficulty in putting into effect improved hospitalisation for the benefit of the public. The Minister is unfair—I do not mean that he is personally unfair, but unfair in his approach to this matter—in his description of the situation when he takes the years 1947, 1948 and 1949 as the three years upon which to base an average in establishing a deficit in a particular hospital. Is it not clear to the Minister that the cost of living and the prices of commodities, medicines and so forth, and wages can bear no comparison in the year 1950 with the year 1947? To take 1947, 1948 and 1949 as the three years on which to strike an average immediately puts our hospitals into a position where they cannot possibly meet a figure based on that assessment. If the Minister wants to take a real figure and approach this matter in a realistic way, he should take the deficit as anticipated in this year on the basis of present costs and he should further take into account the fact that we have not yet reached the peak of the increases in relation to the cost of commodities, or, as he puts it, in the loss of the purchasing power of the £, or, as other people may put it, further increases in the wages of hospitals' staffs.

Surely the Minister will be the first to admit, being himself a medical man, that one cannot run a hospital as one would an industrial undertaking. Practically the entire approach in the running of a hospital, as far as the patients are concerned, lies in the human relations between the patient, the medical officers and the staff in charge of the hospital. One cannot just bring in a human being who is ill, put him into a bed on an estimated number of bed-days at an estimated cost of upkeep with regard to medicines and so forth, and calculate that one will have him out on a certain date back again at work as if he were a cog-wheel in some machine. Is it not quite clear that the medical profession cannot possibly be expected to estimate what their expenses will be in that regard alone, quite apart from the fact that they do not know how many patients or how many different diseases they may have to cope with? They do not know whether there will be epidemics or a series of accidents. They have to deal with each particular situation as it arises. If they are compelled to face a situation where they must, first of all, consider the question of cost before they consider what help or assistance they will give or what particular treatment may be necessary, then the Minister is introducing into hospital treatment in this country something new and something which is bound to have undesirable repercussions.

Because of development and because of the availability of money from the Hospitals Sweeps in the years 1932 to 1939, a great deal had been done. Capital expenditure in the erection of institutions had been made. From the point of view of the political approach to this matter, may I point out that when we were in Government the Minister in charge of Health did not think it was dignified to wear upon his cuffs details of what had been done in order to advertise results upon the hustings during election campaigns? Because of that many of us were ignorant of what had been done. One appreciates that this is something which one must approach almost from the point of view of an enlightened benevolence and, for that reason, Ministers in the past did not think it desirable to advertise results. They did not go out day after day and say: "Another new hospital built; so many more beds for our sick." Some of us now on these benches did not know what they had accomplished. When I heard the present Minister in one of his previous Estimates stating here that when he took office he found nothing had been done and that there was nothing in his office except plans, plans and more plans, I put down a question for the purpose of eliciting some information as to what the position actually was. The Minister stated that he would get things done. To my amazement, I discovered that quite a lot had been done when I received the answer to my question. I discovered that under his predecessors' administration, whatever money was available was utilised for the purpose of building 34 new institutions with proper building materials—not half-baked, stucco institutions. I asked where these institutions were and what had Fianna Fáil done. In the years 1932 to 1939, Fianna Fáil built at Mallow, Kilkenny, Portlaoighise, Castlebar, Monaghan, Tullamore, Roscommon, Sligo, Cashel, Mullingar, Nenagh——

On a point of order. What has this to do with my Estimate?

I am afraid the whole question of health arises on it.

I am leading up to something. I am leading up to what has been done in the past in relation to building hospitals and what was not done in the past two and a half years. When I was interrupted, I think I had got as far as Nenagh.

The Minister was entitled to raise a point of order.

Certainly. I merely do not wish to repeat myself. I had got as far as Nenagh. Thirteen district hospitals had been built at Millstreet, Youghal, Midleton, Schull, Clifden, Kenmare, Listowel, Killarney, Ballina, Belmullet, Thurles, New Ross and Gorey. During the same period, mental hospitals were built at Castlerea. Monaghan and Ardee and the National Maternity Hospital at Holles Street, Dublin. All these hospitals were constructed of solid stone or concrete building material; they were properly planned and well built as permanent institutions additional to those already in existence. Listening to the Minister, one would gather that his predecessors had nothing but plans on paper in the office. The contrary is the truth. By reason of their modest approach to this question of hospitalisation, and without taking political credit for what they were doing— our political opponents, of course, have criticised us because of our approach to hospitalisation—the public were unaware of what the Minister's predecessors had done, and believed what the Minister for Health and his colleagues had attributed to us, namely, a complete neglect of our duties and of our responsibilities in regard to this very important matter.

A number of members of this House serve not only on local authorities but on their subsidiary bodies. They also serve as members on hospital boards. I do not care to what Party in this House those public-spirited persons belong. What I do know is that, when they sit as members on a hospital board, on a local authority hospital or a voluntary hospital, differences of political opinions never arise amongst them. They work together, they help each other, and they try to improve the administration of the institution with which they are connected, as well as the lot of those who happen at the moment to have the misfortune to be patients in it. I suggest, therefore, to the Minister that, from now on in this House, it would be a good thing if that question were approached from that angle here. On the 4th July when I asked the Minister a question relating to the new intimation which had been given as to how hospital deficits were going to be carried in the future, I received an answer which I would commend him to read again. If he does, I am sure he will feel sorry that, in giving that reply, he could not resist insulting his predecessors in office for their supposed, or alleged mismanagement of these Hospitals Trust moneys. He could not resist jeering and gibing at — and untruly — what his opponents take credit for, an alteration in one little item of administration for which he could not get credit. Neither did he give unrestricted and full credit to the local hospitals themselves.

In the course of his answer to that question, and on his Estimate to-day, the Minister talked about savings to the hospitals by an earlier payment to meet the deficits; that, instead of the hospitals having to wait a full year until they got money to meet the deficits, thereby involving them in huge overdrafts on which interest had to be paid to the banks, he was now going to make payments to meet those deficits twice a year to help save the hospitals the payment of considerable amounts by way of interest charges to the banks. Is it not a fact that when the deficits started to rise within the last few years, and only within the last few years, to the figure which they have reached, the hospitals themselves pointed out to the Hospitals Commission that the holding up of payments in respect of deficits until the audit took place was costing them a considerable sum of money? I think that over the years in question, there was a considerable amount of money involved in that way. I have not the exact figure with me, but I know it was certainly in excess of £15,000 or £20,000, paid by way of interest charges alone. The fact that the Minister is now releasing money, which is in the coffers of the Hospitals Commission, at an earlier date to the hospitals is nothing to take credit for, and nothing to blame his predecessors for, because the Minister must know that the figure in respect of deficits was considerably lower some years ago than it is to-day. The rise in deficits only became particularly noticeable in the last few years, not because of anything the Minister had done—I make him a present of that—but because of the increase in the cost of hospital maintenance.

The Minister went on to emphasise what had been done as regards tuberculosis, and the number of beds which had been made available. I want to take him to task on that. Would the Minister have the number of beds that are available if he had not, in fact, converted into tuberculosis sanatoria some of the hospitals which we had built for other purposes? It is all very well to say that we built general hospitals and that we had so many beds in them, but the Minister takes away these beds for tuberculosis purposes and then gets up and says. "I have added another 50 beds." There has been no such thing as added beds. I want to give some bed figures in respect of the new hospitals that were built under the Administration that was here in the years from 1932 to 1939. In the latter year, building had to stop because of the war, but in the years that I have mentioned, 4,000 beds were added to our country's hospital bed accommodation. We were told that between the years 1939 to 1947— that is to say, in the period from the beginning of the war until the Fianna Fáil Administration handed over to the present Government—2,600 beds were added to our hospital accommodation. In other words, in the whole period from 1932 to 1947, 6,600 new beds were added in new hospitals which were newly built, newly constructed and newly planned. The claim is that 6,600 new and additional beds have been provided in our hospitals since the Government took over. What has happened to those beds, apart from the fact that there were other hospitals in the course of construction? There were other hospitals which had been planned and which also were taken over. Fianna Fáil is not making any claim in respect of the beds which they handed over to any particular institution, but I want to know what has happened to those beds.

I could not catch the exact figure which the Minister gave to-day. In the last figure he gave me he claimed to have provided 1,791 beds for tuberculous cases before he had completed two years in office. If we make an analysis of this claim, what do we find? That contracts in respect of 227 of these beds had been placed by Fianna Fáil, and that sanction for another 144 had been given, apart from the 520 beds which were provided between Castlerea and Mallow institutions. These two institutions were already in being, but were transferred for use as tuberculosis sanatoria. I am not finding fault with what the Minister did or why he did it. What I am finding fault with is that there should be this attempt to claim so much political kudos, so much "ballyhoo," because that is what it amounts to. What I want the Minister to tell us when he is winding up the debate is, how many hospitals have been completed since the change of Government? I am not going to say what he should have done or what he could have done. I want to refer again to his reply to a supplementary question of mine when he gave me information about the number and location of institutions built by Fianna Fáil. I will be the first, publicly, to take off my hat to the Minister if, in seven years, he will build half the number of hospitals that were built by his predecessors in the same period of years at twice the cost. I say that because I know that building costs have gone up. If he could achieve that, I think it would be a tremendous achievement under present-day conditions, and I would be the first to pay public tribute to him. I say that for this reason, that I do not think the Minister, when he allowed himself to be drawn into capitalising politically on his Department, knew what the problem was and how hard it was. I do not think he really knew what had been accomplished by his predecessors. If the Minister were to unfold his innermost thoughts here. I think he would be bound to admit that when he gave the answer to the question about what had been accomplished by his predecessor he was, if not agreeably surprised, at least very surprised.

Now I want to come to the present situation and try to persuade the Minister — if he does not want to listen to me, perhaps he will consult with others on his own side of the House and listen to them—not to proceed with a new method of dealing with hospital deficits. I will give him an instance to show how difficult and dangerous such a thing can be. There is a hospital in Harcourt Street, Dublin, called the Children's Hospital, and I happen to be a member of the board of that hospital representing the Dublin Corporation. The Minister has indicated to that hospital that the deficit, which on the last occasion was £15,000, has now to be reduced to £10,000, or £5,000 less. That hospital received the same document which other hospitals received. Apparently, however, nobody realised that this is a children's hospital and that it gets payment for its patients in a different way from that which operates in connection with ordinary voluntary hospitals. The board of that hospital have been told that they must operate on £5,000 less in the year 1950. But six months of 1950 have already passed and the 30 per cent. reduction in the deficit has to be made within the second six months, which means that the hospital would have to reduce its operating costs, not by 30 per cent., but by 60 per cent. of the deficit in the remaining six months. Surely the Minister will agree that there should have been some notice given of such a drastic suggestion, that it should only operate, say, six months from now, and that it should not operate retrospectively to six months ago.

I have dealt with the reason why hospital administration has increased. I think the Minister will be bound to recognise that everything has gone up and that, taking the average of 1947, 1948 and 1949 is not fair. If he wants to get the exact figure of costings, he should base it on to-day's rate of wages and to-day's cost of materials, and also take into account that we have new forms of treatment with regard to many ailments and diseases which are thoroughly successful but very costly. If we are to throw overboard the use of up-to-date medicines and treatments and go back again to the system of trial and error or to the castor oil treatment for patients, we might as well give up talking about hospitalisation.

In the case of this particular hospital the increase of 10/6, from £3 13s. 6d. to £4 4s. 0d. per bed, will only mean an additional £510 in the annual income. The hospital will not be helped very much by that. It gets no payment under the National Health Insurance Acts, and I do not know how the hospital will carry on until the mother-and-child welfare scheme comes into operation. It has no means of getting any additional money except the extra bed charge. The actual cost in this hospital is £7 per week for each bed and the increase from £3 13s. 6d. to £4 4s. 0d. will only bring in an additional £510 in relation to the number of beds.

I suggest to the Minister that the Harcourt Street Children's Hospital is typical of other children's hospitals and that the effect on these hospitals will be similar. I suggest that he should ask himself whether his intention is completely to abolish the invested moneys which were to help towards the payment of these deficits. I also suggest that he should withdraw this circular which has been sent to the different hospitals and reconsider the matter so that, if there is to be an alteration in the present position, it will be brought about as a result of negotiations and an examination of the position of each hospital and not put into effect until the new year. Six months of the year have already gone and how could the hospitals get back the money already spent?

The Minister, in introducing the Estimate, gave us a lot of useful information and statistics. But, notwithstanding all he has learned and the changed manner in which he introduced the Estimate to-day, he does not want to acknowledge the things which were made possible for him. Is the Minister prepared to say who introduced the allowances for tubercular patients to enable them to have treatment much more easily than in the past? Was it the present Minister or his predecessor? Why does the Minister not recognise that, so far as the health of the nation and the welfare of our people are concerned. political differences should not be allowed to enter into the matter?

It is a wonder these words do not choke the Deputy.

I wish the Deputy was here earlier.

I heard enough.

If you heard enough and it is bothering your conscience, you can go out. I know you have no conscience.

Do you remember the date on which the allowances were introduced?

I am asking who introduced the scheme.

About 14 days before the general election in 1948.

Is that a fair approach to the matter? I will admit that when the Minister came into the Dáil he was launched into a ministerial position without any previous experience and that, obviously, until he had some experience he could not be expected to recognise the implications of certain expressions he used or certain things he said. I would be the first to forgive him for what he may have said here after the heat of the election campaign. Now that he has gone so far as to say that this scheme was introduced by Fianna Fáil 14 days before the election, does he not admit that in order to put such a scheme into effect, there had to be a considerable amount of study and co-operation between the Cabinet of the time and the officials of the Department and that it was not done as a special trick on the eve of the election?

It took you 16 years to do it.

Is the Deputy suggesting that nothing had been done in the matter of hospitalisation and public health for 16 years?

Nothing was done for tuberculosis in those 16 years.

Tuberculosis is only one item in the scourges that afflict this country.

It is a very urgent one.

I suggest that if the Deputy is good enough to read my contribution to the debate, and if he will, if he wants to absorb any knowledge of the real facts, he will have to acknowledge that in the 16 years of Fianna Fáil Administration, a great deal was done. It was not known because as I said before, men in positions of responsibility dealing with a matter of this kind, approach their responsibilities with a certain degree of dignity and do not wish to capitalise in elections what they have done for tuberculosis, for cancer cases or for the poor people.

It is the first time that I ever heard that Fianna Fáil hid their light under a bushel.

The Deputy is very young in politics. He may have views which will change and mellow as he gets older. We see a headline in the Independent of the 12-11-49: “Contract for a Million Pounds Sanatorium.” What does it mean? In our days we did not put headlines in the papers reciting the price we were paying for sanatoria or hospitals. We built them and we saw that the people got them.

Would the Deputy like me to read out the list again? Apparently there are in this House——

Deputy Briscoe may not repeat himself in order to oblige any Deputy.

I gave a list of the 34 hospitals built under the Fianna Fail Administration, the details of which were given by way of answer to a parliamentary question by the present Minister. The Deputy, whether he was here or not when I read out the list giving the location of each building, now gets up and asks where are these buildings.

I did not even get up.

If a Deputy wants to make an interjection and to be completely in order, he should rise in his place even to make an interjection. I want the Minister to approach this matter from the point of view that this is a subject in which we are all interested and in which we all want to do our share. Some of us may be blessed in that we are able to do more than others but, nevertheless, it is not for any lack of desire that each and every one of us, whether we are Deputies or representatives of local authorities, are not able to do as much as we would like to do, but we want to get this work done as well as it can be done. That is why I suggest to the Minister that the question of hospitalisation and of the treatment of our people who suffer from various forms of illness, should not be made a matter to be brought into the arena of politics.

I want to turn for a moment to the question of the treatment of cancer. The Minister has told us, and we have read in the Press already, that he set up a body to examine this matter, to see to what extent recommendations might be made for improving investigation and detection of the disease in its early stages so as to make better use of whatever scientific developments may take place from day to day. I want to make this suggestion to the Minister. There are a number of voluntary hospitals in Dublin which for some years have been doing a certain amount of research in this matter. I think that the time has come when the ordinary voluntary hospitals, in the interest of economy, should be relieved of this particular branch of research and that it should be handed over to the central body. In the particular hospital of the board of which I happen to be a member, Baggot Street, we have a small fund. Somebody bequeathed a sum of money to the hospital and directed that the interest was to be devoted to cancer research. I suggest, and I do not think anybody will be offended by the suggestion, that the income from that particular fund should be handed over to the central authority which the Minister has arranged to have set up and that they should take charge of this research work. I hope that we are going to have a proper central authority, with a proper approach to this question. Perhaps Deputy McQuillan might be interested to know that, while tuberculosis is, and always has been, a great scourge to the nation, cancer is rapidly becoming an almost equally serious scourge. As a matter of fact, from the figures published in the statistical returns, one can see that the incidence of cancer is even greater than that of tuberculosis. Of course, there is a reason for that. The span of life has been lengthened and cancer is a disease that attacks senior adults more than young people. As the span of life has been increased, this new scourge is becoming much more active. I agree that it is a matter which should have the immediate and constant attention of whatever bodies the Minister has set up to deal with it. To me, a great number of them are only names. Nevertheless, I believe that, with the object of bringing about every possible economy in certain of our voluntary hospitals, this particular branch of hospitalisation should be taken from them and handed over to the central body in whatever hospital it is located, which will specialise in skin and cancer diseases.

I want to go back again for a moment to the question that is worrying me most at the moment, namely, the question of the subsidy on the hospital deficits. The Minister is aware that in the year 1949 the deficits of the existing hospitals reached a total only £2,000 short of the £400,000 which the Minister has now fixed as the maximum which they will receive in future. With the addition of a number of other hospitals, the deficit will naturally be increased. If the £400,000 is to be taken as the ceiling, the amount which each hospital will have to get will have to be reduced, seeing that the total amount is to be distributed over the existing hospitals and the additional number of hospitals which are shortly to be provided. I would ask the Minister to look at this matter in a different light altogether. First of all — and I am about to conclude now — I beg him, notwithstanding his commitments for capital expenditure, for the comparatively few hospitals we will get for the £7,500,000 in seven or five years, not to dissipate that £5,000,000 or £7,000,000 or whatever it is that brings in this annual income. The Minister did mention the other day—I thought it rather strange — that the capital value of the invested money had depreciated as one of the reasons why he prefers to dissipate it.

Mr. O'Sullivan

Of course it is true.

But the income had not depreciated; the income was constant. So long as we use pounds sterling, linked as they are with Threadneedle Street, it does not matter if the invested money falls from 100 to 92 so long as the income of the original 100 keeps coming in. Is that not the answer to it? The income was not depreciated; as a matter of fact you could have bought, at the reduced face value of those securities, more of them to bring in the same rate of interest which would have in the net result given you a slightly preferential increased rate on your capital cost. As long as we are living in the circumstances in which we are living—I ask Deputy Hickey to tell me what was wrong with it—with these bits of paper we call pound notes which have a certain value because of being linked with the other country, as long as we are operating that system, is it not wise to operate it to the safest extent possible?

Is it not true that the money is invested in every part of the world?

I have not the list of investments. I do not know what the money is invested in. I do not know whether it is in State loans, but perhaps Deputy Hickey might put down a question on the first day of the reassembly of the Dáil to find out.

I got it before.

Where is the money invested?

All over the world.

What is wrong with that?

The Cork Corporation could not get money to build houses.

From the Hospitals Trust Fund?

I think that the hospital moneys have been made available from time to time to Dublin Corporation. I speak subject to correction, but I have a recollection of Dublin Corporation receiving letters from the Hospitals Commission, saying that they have a certain amount of money available, and that they want to lend it to us for a limited period, and asking what we would pay them. Subject to correction, I say that we have made use of that money —not to the injury of the hospitals because we have paid it back—and I do not know why Cork Corporation could not get it.

If it would be relevant I could tell you more about it.

It is relevant to discuss the moneys put aside to meet the deficits on hospitals; it is equally relevant to discuss whether these moneys are wisely or unwisely invested, and I think it would also be relevant to discuss what rate of interest they are bringing in so Deputy Hickey, I am sure—subject to the Chair telling me to mind my own business — could make it relevant to the debate if he wanted to.

I just want to say that when I asked this series of five questions on July 4th I drafted the questions from the circular of the Hospitals Commission which was sent to the hospitals. I did not do what the Minister did here to-day. I did not ask the Minister: "Quote"; and then when I got to the end of the quotation say: "Unquote." But I actually framed the questions on the actual wording of this document. The Minister gets up in this House and says that the statements of Deputy Briscoe are without foundation, incorrect and untrue. I think that is going a bit far. I think that the answers to the questions were a little bit wide of the mark. I asked certain questions and got no information. It is true that the Minister to-day, when introducing his Estimate, gave some little information in a slight reference, but this is a pretty serious matter.

I do not know how many of us are members of hospitals here or throughout the country, but the management of a hospital is a day-to-day hard job. We have the hospital medical staff; we have the able administrators; we have public-spirited citizens whose names never appear in the newspapers, but who are on the board of hospitals, and we have elected public representatives. We sit around tables and have meetings regularly and examine everything. I am on the visiting committee of a hospital and we have had a book in our hands showing the amount of bottles of stout that have been accorded to the patients in a particular room and the odd nip of whiskey given to some other patient. A record of every bottle of stout and drop of whiskey given to a recuperating patient is kept in a book and we members of the board go round to see that the privilege of having a drop of stout or whiskey for a patient is not abused. Every week we, on the visiting committee, sit down to examine quotations from greengrocers, butchers and suppliers of all materials to see whether the prices are going up or down and to see how, without falling foul of the medical men—the Doctor Brennans—we could ensure economies. The doctor says: "If you want me to look after my patients and get them well, give them this or that food." The doctor does not ask the board how much it costs to give the patient a drop of chicken soup. All he says is: "I want this patient, after his operation, to get this and that and a bit of fruit." We have to say: "We have just so much money. We cannot give the patient the things you suggest. We will be questioned and we will be surcharged." Already the Minister has been notified by the board of the Children's Hospital in Harcourt Street — not an incorporated body — that they have given instructions to their legal adviser to take steps to have it recognised as an incorporated hospital so that in case there is a deficiency above what the Minister will allow they will not become personally liable for it. That is the crisis to which I referred in my question.

The crisis is due to the money factor.

Certainly the crisis here is due to the money factor brought about by the Minister's decision on the advice of the Hospitals Commission. Nevertheless, we have to deal with the crisis as it concerns us. The Minister has been informed that this position is there. You have a certain type of people who are on visiting committees and sit around tables in hospitals — the Minister probably has experience from his earlier days of this type of people who are on hospital boards. Most of them are not in politics and are unknown to the community; the public do not know they are giving their service but they cannot take the risk of having to pay out of their own slender resources. I hope that the Minister in giving his reply will indicate that he intends to be gentle in the matter and at least postpone the operation until those of us who are affected by it and concerned with it have a better opportunity of examining it and co-operating with the Hospitals Commission in doing what is best as far as it can be done without interfering with our administration and the proper care of the people who come under our charge in these hospitals.

I think that Deputy Briscoe, in the course of his contribution to this debate, should have gone all out when he mentioned one hospital in particular in my constituency taken over by the Minister for Health, Mallow Hospital. It is well to remember that the hospital was erected under the régime of Fianna Fáil and handed over by the contractors to the local authority in 1936. Between 1936 and the time the Minister for Health took over the institution the hospital stood there as an eyesore to the people. For 12 years it was not used for the purpose for which it was built. When Deputy Briscoe was making his contribution and trying to gain credit for the erection of hospitals, I think that he should have explained the true facts: no effort, good, bad or indifferent, was made under the Fianna Fáil régime to have that hospital open to the people who were suffering from any ailments, let it be tuberculosis or otherwise. When the Minister visited Cork County in 1948 he gave us a definite promise that he would give us permission for the erection of two hospitals. I have been informed recently, as a member of the local authority concerned, that the Minister is now prepared to give sanction for the erection of one hospital for the county.

I want to warn the Minister to be very careful about giving final sanction, because the application for sanction has been submitted by a body which is non-existent in Cork County. The body which has made application for sanction for the erection of a cottage hospital at Mitchelstown is not a statutory body. The one and only authority which has the right to submit proposals to the Department and to make decisions is the statutory body, the Cork County Council. There is on the books of the Cork County Council a motion which was never rescinded in respect of the erection of a cottage hospital at Charleville, and I can tell the Minister that, on the files connected with that matter, is still the very cheque accepted from the contractor as far back as 1934. I advise the Minister not to jump too quickly in connection with this very important matter, but to give it every consideration, and I suggest that the most important step to be taken is to send down his officials, as he was requested to do by the local authority, to hold a sworn inquiry into the reason why this hospital is required.

During the past month, the Minister has sanctioned a grant to the northern committee to carry out certain repairs to Fermoy Cottage Hospital. Fermoy is only nine miles from Mitchelstown and a sum of £10,000 is to be spent in renovating the Fermoy hospital and, in addition, an additional sum is to be spent on the erection of a new hospital at Mitchelstown, while Charleville is 17 miles from Mallow and roughly 35 or 37 from Cork City. I suggest that the greatest hardship is inflicted on the people living in the western part of that area. I warn the Minister to be very careful and not to walk into the trap, because the vote taken with regard to this hospital was not a proper vote. The vote was taken by a committee which has no powers and which did not give consideration to the facts. I hope the Minister will give every consideration to the proposals submitted by those public representatives who know the locality thoroughly. If he does, I am sure that the hospital will be erected in the proper place.

On 26th August, 1948, the Minister was reported in the Irish Press as saying that the Government had taken over a sick and tired country. I think it is true to say that the country has been sick and tired since of listening to the efforts of the Coalition Government to soft-pedal the work done by Fianna Fáil in regard to the improvement of the health of the country. I must say that I should like to join with Deputy Briscoe in noting, with pleasure, a change in the attitude of the Minister, and, on hearing him read his opening statement, in noting that on the whole he seems to be examining the facts of the situation, reporting in an impartial manner upon them and trying to get away from mere propaganda.

I do not want to repeat all the statements made by Deputy Briscoe with regard to this matter, but I think it well to remind the House that the death rate during the Fianna Fáil term of office fell from some 1.27 per 1,000 of the population in 1935 to 1.14 per 1,000 in 1946, in spite of the fact that we had to get through a difficult period of a world war, when all plans for hospitalisation were necessarily slowed down through lack of materials and lack of labour, and, in particular, in some cases lack of mechanical equipment. That is only one of many figures I could give showing reductions in the numbers of deaths from many important diseases.

I think that perhaps the best tribute that could be paid to the previous Government is to be found in the various reports of the nutritional survey published at intervals during the past two years, which show that in this country there are very few people who are suffering literally from a serious form of malnutrition, that the main problem is to provide certain categories of the population with a better balanced diet and that most of them receive an adequate amount of food to support life. I was agreeably surprised by some of these reports, because I thought there was a rather greater problem facing us than, in fact, proved to be the case. We also know that this country has one of the highest calorie intakes in the world per head of the population. Although we may not have reached the level we would like, we can compare ourselves with a great many other countries which had a better chance than we had to develop sound health principles.

I think it is just as well also to remind the House again that a good number of the schemes to combat tuberculosis were initiated by the previous Government, while paying tribute to the work of the Minister, who obviously has great enthusiasm for the tuberculosis side of his work. The county organisation for combating tuberculosis was put into proper shape by the previous Government; arrangements were made to provide food and special clothing for patients; the grant for the breadwinner was introduced by the previous Government; the first radiography centre was introduced by the previous Government, and the arrangements to experiment with the B.C.G. vaccine were also introduced by the previous Government.

In connection with the general question of tuberculosis, I should like to ask the Minister whether he thinks that, as a proportion of the total expenditure on this disease, enough is being spent in the way of propaganda. Now that he has got his hospital beds in nearly sufficient numbers, does he think that enough is being done to secure early notification? I should like the Minister to give us any information at his disposal as to the number of cases reported to tuberculosis officers, where the disease had not reached any serious stage, now as compared with 15 years ago, or any other period the Minister likes. There has been a good deal of health propaganda by the Red Cross Society and also, I think, recently, directly by the Ministry of Health, and in that connection I should like to ask the Minister a question, because from what I know, in recent years, there still is a horror of facing the fact of having tuberculosis. In spite of the breadwinners' allowance and in spite of all that is being done, many people get the first symptoms, symptoms of which they are fully aware themselves, and still dread to go to the tuberculosis officers. If any progress is being made in that matter, I am delighted to give the Minister a good share of the credit for it because I know that, under his office, the propaganda work has increased considerably. I should like to ask him about it.

I should also like to ask the Minister whether he has pressed the Minister for Industry and Commerce to complete the necessary arrangements for the introduction of new measures to deal with conditions in factories. There were about three or four matters being considered by the previous Minister for Industry and Commerce at the end of the war, when it was possible to get materials to make alterations in factories. One of them was an up-to-date Factory Act. I would like to ask the Minister whether he has discussed this matter with the Minister for Industry and Commerce. I am perfectly certain that a considerable amount of tuberculosis can be caused in factories of an old-fashioned type, where the proprietors are doing their best to observe good conditions, but where they themselves want to be told by the Minister for Health of the day what should be the desirable minimum in the way of air and light and so forth. I would like the Minister to tell us what progress he has made in that matter.

I should also like to ask the Minister whether he is taking action arising from the nutritional surveys. He has had them now for all classes of the population, including the working-class people in the centre of Dublin. The most recent report has been that affecting agricultural labourers. I should like to ask him whether, in regard to the deficiencies shown in the intake of certain vitamins and certain types of foodstuffs, he has considered the reports in the light of how far it is a matter of instruction and propaganda, and how far it is a matter of deficiency of income, and what steps he can take, from his own standpoint, to improve the diet to the degree that it is a lack of instruction and education. Obviously, it is not his job to increase the income of the people or the income of any section, but it is his job to study those surveys to see what can be done about the propaganda side.

I am sure the Deputy will find that insufficiency of income is as big a factor as any.

Deputy Hickey may be right in certain matters, but I do know of families, people who mean very well, where more could be spent from the family budget on the provision of fresh milk at the expense of other things that are not quite so necessary. I am not saying that that would apply in every case, but it certainly applies in regard to a considerable sumber of families of which one can be aware.

They are the exceptions.

Next, I should like to ask the Minister to give us more information about the measures to combat gastro-enteritis, principally in Dublin. It will be recalled that the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, I think, during the war, introduced the special scheme and encouraged the special group of people in Dublin Corporation for the combating of this terrible scourge among children. I should like the Minister to give the House some more information about how far he thinks the disease is being combated apart from the question of making available improved housing conditions and whether there is not still a lag in regard to the actual treatment of the disease—in other words, whether the matter is beyond his control and relates purely to housing or whether still more measures could be undertaken to reduce the number of deaths from gastro-enteritis in Dublin.

The Minister gave us very little information in connection with the operation of that part of the Fianna Fáil Public Health Act which related to the regulations for the preparation and distribution of food under sound health conditions. I should like to ask the Minister what progress is being made with the application of the regulations which I think the Department, under his administration, prepared, based upon the Act; how far he can say that conditions have notably improved in Dublin, particularly in regard to the exposure of food, the method of preparing foods, the method of storing both foods and drink. Perhaps the Minister could give us a few words on that matter. It would be most interesting because it has been quite evident for a very long period that improvement is needed.

I next want to ask the Minister to give us some more information with regard to his views on the provision of dispensary nurses. Having watched the working of the Jubilee Nursing Organisation for many years and having seen the splendid services that organisation performs for the community, I was delighted when Fianna Fáil introduced the Health Act which, among other things, foresaw the establishment of a fully qualified and very highly qualified dispensary nurse for each dispensary district over and above the midwifery nurse, whose job was to follow up the work of the doctor, to go back to the people's homes, to find out whether conditions could be improved in the home that would prevent disease in future and, in general, to be a sort of humanising and propaganda influence throughout the country in the dispensary district. I would like the Minister to give his views about that. As far as I know, these nurses have not been generally appointed. Has he approached the Jubilee Nurses' Society with regard to the training of these nurses or has he found it difficult to secure nurses of the right type?

My own view was that, if these dispensary nurses were to be appointed, they should not only be trained in medical matters but should be trained in social science, that they should have the very highest qualifications, not only as nurses but as propagandists. As everybody knows, it is very easy to learn the elements of propaganda in health and most difficult to convey propaganda effectively sometimes, without causing offence to the people concerned. Health propaganda is a vocation, like medicine itself. The Minister knows the work that is being done in various countries for the establishment of social science courses because of the fact that all that work is in the nature of a vocation for which only certain persons are suited. I would ask the Minister what progress is being made in regard to that matter.

Perhaps the Minister could also tell us approximately how many county. councils have gone some distance towards the preparation of plans for health clinics. Another aspect of the Health Act that was considered most important in our time was the provision of health clinics in every county, places where people could go to get advice, not only when they were ill, but advice on keeping well, centres of propaganda, the whole idea being to convert medical administration for each county to being preventive as much as curative. Could the Minister give us some figures on how far county councils have gone in that matter because my own belief is that, as in connection with all matters where there are a great number of technical issues involved, the Minister will have to press county councils, however willing they may be, to engage on what is for them an entirely new system of administration.

In view of the very unpleasant figures that are issued from time to time in connection with the percentage of people admitted to the lying-in hospitals in Dublin suffering from a certain disease, I hope the Minister will give us some more information in regard to whether he thinks effective progress is being made in regard to that matter. I need not say any more than that. The Minister may or may not think it fit to introduce the subject. Nevertheless, I think we are bound to face the issue, particularly as far as the centre of Dublin is concerned. I would like to ask the Minister if he has any information on that matter to give to the House.

I noticed in a speech made by the Minister, reported in the Irish Press on 8th November, 1948, that he has been thinking of and toying with the idea of some further interference by the State in the medical services of the country, and I noticed that doctors who are chairmen or important directors of various medical associations have been warning the Minister of the danger of interference by the State in medical practice. I think we should hear a little bit more from the Minister as to whether he has had an opportunity to read the White Paper published by the previous Government in regard to the extension of State medical services in the country. I think the White Paper was of a tentative character. I do not think the previous Minister for Health committed himself finally. He had introduced certain ideas which were in the nature of a compromise between complete national medical service, as now existing in Great Britain, and conditions as they have been until recently in which, I understand, about 50 per cent. of the population receive wholly or partly free medical service under the Public Assistance Acts.

It will be recalled that in that White Paper the Minister for Health envisaged the creation of entirely separate medical health organisations throughout Ireland—separate and distinct from the local government organisation or the county council. This is necessarily a very brief description of the White Paper. He then envisaged the provision of free institutional treatment to persons of income of over £250 a year and under £500; to farmers on holdings of over £25 valuation and under £50 valuation. For persons receiving £250 and under income, and to farmers living on valuations of under £5 he envisaged free medical and institutional treatment. I imagine that the scheme in the mind of the Minister was meant to overcome the one difficulty which faces all countries, namely, that of providing a sufficient amount of expert diagnosis and treatment all over the country exactly where it is required at the right time. I imagine that the White Paper published then was a compromise between the idea of a completely socialised medical service and what exists at the moment. An advance towards it is being made in connection with the mother and child health services. The Minister might tell us a little more about how soon he envisages that that will be completely in operation. I do not think anyone should be prejudiced in regard to this matter by the gross incompetence with which the medical service of Great Britain has been socialised. As everybody knows, everything was done in a violent hurry. Free hospital service was given before a sufficient number of hospital beds were available, and doctors in Britain are treating as many as 70 and 80 cases a day under this system. Some of the results have been fantastic. For instance, there is the case of an Irish doctor working in Britain, who was called up by a hysterical father and asked to come to the house to put the baby to sleep because the baby had been crying for an hour. When the doctor protested that that was not his duty, the father concerned protested violently that under the health service it was essential that the doctor should come and help the fathers when their children could not be put to sleep. That incompetent handling of the full socialisation of medicine in Britain should not debar us from thinking realistically about the matter. If it is possible, and this is important, for working people, the lower middle class and the middle class income groups in this country to get proper medical treatment—to go soon enough to the doctor and often enough to the doctor to secure treatment—within the present system, then by all means let us not extend the State control of medicine; if it is not possible, let us see how far we can go without having the disadvantages of the bureaucratic system, the difficulties of which everybody is aware.

I next want to ask the Minister a number of miscellaneous questions in regard to the health service. The first is in relation to the Medical Research Council. Does the Minister think that, in the light of a £106,000,000 Budget, the grants to the Medical Research Council are sufficient? Does he really believe that he is giving enough to enable this country to contribute materially towards medical discoveries? I am told that a good deal of the advance work leading up to the discovery of the new drug cortezone was done under the inspiration of an Irish doctor who secured a grant to go to a hospital on the American Continent. He, in turn, inspired another doctor and, as a result, the drug cortezone was discovered. I understand that it is going to be, one day, one of the great new drugs—possibly surpassing penicillin in importance. I am not mentioning this as a definite example of any inefficiency on the part of the work of the Department: I am speculating as to what would have happened if there had been larger grants devoted to medical research and if, perhaps, the Irish doctor in question had been enabled to complete the whole of the work in connection with the discovery of the drug himself.

My next question is in connection with the standard of anaesthetics in this country. Has the Minister considered the general question of the improvement of the standard of anaesthetics in this country? I happen to have made what, naturally, in my case, must be regarded as a purely dilettante research in connection with this matter. I find that the standards vary enormously throughout the country—particularly standards in regard to such matters as post-operative shock treatment and the utilisation of the special and modern forms of anaesthetics designed to enable people who are delicate or who suffer already from certain diseases to have operations successfully. As in all cases, it is frequently left to the medical authorities of the day to define what should be the standards, but nowadays the medical authorities are only too glad to have the co-operation of the Minister for Health when the moment arrives for the improvement in the standard in the particular form of medical treatment. I should like the Minister to tell the House how far he has considered that matter. Does he believe that the type of anaesthetics administered, shall we say, not in the great specialised centres is adequate, having regard to the modern knowledge that exists in regard to anaesthetics?

Another question which I should like the Minister to answer is whether arrangements have been made for the sufficient supply of aureomycin to hospitals or whether it has been debarred because of the expense of the drug. Further, we should like to hear if he considers that knowledge of that drug has been spread sufficiently.

Dealing in general with health propaganda, and apart from nutrition or tuberculosis, would the Minister tell us how far he thinks the propaganda of his Department has succeeded in reaching the people as a whole? Will he tell us whether, in the light of the experiment he has conducted, he does not believe that a more strictly personal touch is required for the introduction of health propaganda to the people of the country? I have already said that I think that dispensary nurses could do a great deal of that work. We shall be glad to receive more information from the Minister in that respect.

I come now to mental hospital treatment. Last year I asked the Minister some questions, to which I do not think he took occasion to reply, in the course of the debate. I should like him to tell us what progress is being made in relation to the adequate provision of psychiatric treatment in this country. In what proportion of our mental hospitals have people had made available to them the very best form of modern treatment, as suitable to conditions in this country, having regard to the special principles that would have to apply in this country?

The Minister has told us very little about the general position of the nursing community. We are well aware how difficult it is to obtain nursing staff. I think the Minister should tell us a little more about how far he thinks the improvement of conditions in the nursing world has gone towards alleviating the conditions of nurses, how much further he intends to go and what he considers to be really desirable.

The Minister has told us that deaths from cancer exceed those from tuberculosis. We should like him to tell us a little more about the propaganda work to persuade people to provide earlier notification of symptoms of the disease. We know that a great deal of propaganda has been done by the Department in regard to general health measures, but I have not noticed very much of that kind. It is propaganda of a most unpleasant sort. It is more or less in the nature of shocking people into a realisation of their position. It is the type of propaganda which is done very widely by American insurance societies in American magazines, warning people to go to the doctor, if they have certain symptoms which may indicate that they may have that disease. We should like the Minister to tell us what progress has been made in regard to the earlier notification particularly of the forms of cancer that are definitely curable, for the time being at least, if notification is early.

It may be taken for granted that the dispensary doctors, on the whole, are extremely efficient men who work honestly and faithfully in the performance of their duties. But there are definitely exceptions scattered through the country, people who are very careless. There are cases of doctors who go off and leave their residences without appointing a deputy to take their places while they are absent. Many of them do not mean any harm: they just get careless. There were two or three cases brought to my notice within the past year which would seem to suggest that the district medical inspector from the Department did not read sufficiently the dispensary doctors' books in order to check things. I know that those people form only a very small minority and mostly they tend to be the older men. I am not casting any aspersions against dispensary doctors as a whole, because the standard has enormously improved and it has been very high for many years. I am merely asking the Minister whether he is satisfied that his inspectors do their best to correct the deficiencies of a small minority who do give rise to anxiety in certain districts.

I would like also if the Minister would give us some information on the degree to which he has succeeded in a thing that we were not able to do, because of the war, and sometimes because of political pressure, and that is, locating dispensary doctors in the right place. Will the Minister say how far dispensary residences have been or are being erected in the centres where they should be, and how far he has managed to draw dispensary doctors in certain areas from the nearest large towns, where admittedly it is more pleasant to live, to a residence provided by the local authorities where they are in the midst of the people whom they have to treat? Perhaps he will give us some idea of what improvements he has been able to carry out in relation to that matter.

Some months ago the Minister referred to what he described as the scandalous state of certain county homes. We all know it is not very easy to do everything immediately in the way of improving conditions. We are aware of the progress that has been made, and the fact that there must be difficulties in every aspect of the work of the State for an improvement in the lives of the people. We realise that everything cannot be done at once. The Minister has had many demands made upon him by local authorities, who have pointed out that they cannot afford the cost of improving or reconstructing county homes. Can he offer may hope of being able to provide the money necessary for reconstructing county homes or building new county homes? He is bound to find out that the money is not there and he will have to postpone the construction or reconstruction of hospitals, or postpone the drastic improvements that are required in the case of a good number of county homes. We should like to hear if he has made anything of a realistic approach to that matter and how far he has gone in defending his position when he said that more should be done about the improvement of county homes.

That is really all I have to say on this Estimate. I have tried to make what I have said as constructive as possible. I think the Minister's initial statement was a little bit confined and, if he could answer my questions, I am sure it will prove of interest not only to Deputies here, but to the general public. What I have mentioned concerns a great number of miscellaneous matters in relation to the improvement of our health services.

When I came into the House to-day I was rather amazed at my colleague, Deputy McAuliffe, of North Cork, making such a desperate attack on the elected representatives of the North Cork area. I am sorry my colleague, Deputy Keane, also of North Cork, is not in the House. I should like to inform the Dáil that there are three boards of health at present operating in Cork County. I admit they are only in an advisory capacity. The North Cork Board of Assistance comprises 25 county councillors elected from different portions of North Cork. It was they who decided in favour of having a cottage hospital in Mitchelstown. I always thought the Labour Party was a democratic party and I was amazed at Deputy McAuliffe making an attack on a democratic institution comprising 25 representatives elected by the people, in order to draw grist to his own mill.

I am glad the Minister has decided to erect a hospital in Mitchelstown, which is in my constituency. I would like to point out to him that the proposition was vetoed by the county council, but the site has been selected and purchased and that is an end of it.

The next thing I want to deal with is the matter brought up here by a Roscommon Deputy and, I think, a Dublin Deputy, and that is in connection with X-ray treatment in Cork. I was rather amazed when the Deputy from Roscommon mentioned it. If you were to speak of X-ray to 90 per cent. of the population there, they would think it was some kind of an atom bomb. That is about how much they know of X-ray treatment in Roscommon, because they have none there.

Do they know any more in Cork?

I will deal with Cork for the benefit of everybody concerned. We were informed here by the Minister for External Affairs, who was speaking on behalf of the Minister for Health, that there were any amount of complaints about the negligence of the local authorities in Cork. What has happened to the Minister is this, that he has now collected so many heads of Departments over there, or people who think they are heads of Departments, that they do not even know the authority to write to. They wrote to the Cork County Council, which has nothing to do with the matter, and to the Cork Corporation, which has nothing to do with it either. The body elected for that purpose, an autonomous body, is the South Cork Board of Assistance. When I think of the side-tracking that has been done, I believe the Minister will agree with me that he would need to do a share of carving in his Department and have at least one boss there. Too many cooks spoil the broth.

We have at present in Cork City an X-ray unit in the district hospital and we are making application to have a better one installed there. There is already an X-ray unit in the north infirmary and another in the south infirmary, another in the Mercy Hospital and another in the Bon Secour Hospital. There is, I presume, to be one in the new hospital about to be erected in Gurranebraher, and I know there is one to be placed in the new regional hospital that is to be built in Cork. That is seven X-ray units to look after Cork City, the place about which the complaint is made that there are no X-ray facilities. In addition to that, we have —and we are proud of it—the only mobile X-ray unit in the Twenty-Six Counties, travelling from town to town and from village to village, each day of the week. Then the Deputy from Roscommon with Deputy Dr. Brennan from Dublin come along here to complain of the absence of X-ray facilities in Cork City.

Our trouble is that the Department of Health have become so mixed up now between all the proposals they have that, firstly, they do not know whom to send to and secondly, they do not know where to stop. If we were to carry out all the strange proposals we got from the Department during the past few years, I do not know where we would be. They have the idea of a new clinic here and a new clinic there. They are also on the job of new dispensaries for different parts of South Cork. Deputy Hickey—I am glad he is here now—was a member of the South Cork. Board of Public Assistance at a time when a resurvey of the dispensary area by the South cork Board was decided upon and was sent to the Department. In answer to a question here, asked by Deputy McGrath some couple of months ago, we were informed that that survey had been finished close on two years ago, but that it would not do at all to let us, the board responsible, know the ramifications of the survey and have a copy of it. We got an Order from the Minister for a dispensary here and a dispensary there. As Deputy Childers has pointed out, dispensaries should not be put on the verge of two areas. We cannot put them up until we know the particular areas they have to cater for. Surely, two years should be long enough for the Department of Health to spend gazing at the map of South Cork, one official after the other, one fellow saying: "We will push this line a bit this way," and the other saying it could be pushed the other way. It is about time the Department got down to business. Instead of sending an Order to the board to put up a new dispensary, they should send down the survey that was finished two years ago and let us plan according to it.

You would never do it.

It will never be done at the rate the Department is going.

At the rate of progress below.

In the case of any proposal or suggestion sent down by the Minister to Cork County, anything that he looked for he got, whether in connection with the improvement of the health services, the sanatorium, or anything under the board of public assistance. Every hospital he looked for was given to him, with the two hands out—hospitals in Mallow and Macroom and in Skibbereen, each one handed over to the Minister, just what he asked for.

Was it easy to get the Mallow hospital?

Deputy Desmond knows that was the case. I see the suggestion by Deputy McQuillan that he invited the Minister. In the case of Mallow hospital, the Minister invited himself. He came down—and I was glad he had the courage to come down—and looked for that hospital himself. After the arguments the Minister put up, here is one who voted for giving it to him.

Not until then.

No, not until then, until I heard his arguments. It did not come before us previously.

In the case of the regional hospital, on the 13th April, 1948, the county manager, Mr. Desmond and myself, as representing the South Cork Board were invited to an interview with the Minister in connection with the new regional hospital. We met the Minister, who put up two propositions to us, (1) for the regional hospital and (2) for a regional maternity hospital. At that interview, we informed the Minister that as far as the South Cork Board of Public Assistance was concerned, there would be no delay whatever, that everything he required would be done the moment he asked for it and we expected that there would be no delay in his Department either. Sure enough, on the 14th April, the letter came down from the Department looking for 416 beds, 32 of which were for orthopaedics. The number of beds and the staff planning arrangements for attendants and nurses for the maternity hospital had not been prepared by the Minister. We were to get that for the special meeting that we were calling. I promised that we would call it when we went down. That was for the maternity hospital. The next thing was the board meeting on the 4th May, 1948, which decided that we consent to the Minister's suggestion and send up our medical men and architect to the Department for consultation. They went on the 10th May and they came down on 14th May with a proposal for 296 beds on the instructions of Dublin. That was agreed to at our special meeting on the 14th. By letter on 19th May the decision of the board was sent to the Department. In the meantime this board was phoning and writing the Department every week starting in the first week in May asking for particulars as regards the maternity hospital. Nothing more was done from 19th May until 1st October, 1948, when they agreed to the accommodation and suggested a further meeting. Then we had some rumours travelling around in connection with this famous maternity hospital and some letters from other bodies. We sent up a deputation to the Minister on 6th October. The schedule for the regional hospital was prepared by the architect and forwarded to the Department on 23rd October. The schedule took from that until June, 1948, to be approved. I hope the Minister is making a note of these dates. The mortuary was approved in August, 1949. There was also a question about the laundry; that is still in the air. The Department wrote stating they wanted the preliminary sketch scheme for both the regional and the maternity hospital on 5th November and they were sent on with the architect's report on 9th November, 1949.

From what is the Deputy reading?

I am reading from a report of the meetings taken down by myself. If the Minister likes I will read them all.

When was the site acquired?

Wait until I have finished with this job.

15 years ago!

I will answer the Deputy when I have finished and we shall see then how far you are getting with the job. On 9th February of this year a letter was sent from the Cork Board of Assistance to the Department asking for approval. We were told: "Not yet; it was a very serious problem." That was sent down on 15th June when we got this letter suggesting a whole lot of changes; the principal objection to the scheme was that the roof was too high and that we would have to lower it. That is the latest excuse found by the Department for holding up the regional hospital.

After 15 long years.

Yes. That is the last excuse.

After 15 years.

The roof is too high and we shall have to lower it. That was not discovered by the Department until 15th June, 1950. I shall go back now and deal with the ramifications in connection with the maternity hospital. You will then understand my reason for saying that there seems to be at least five different heads in the Department of Health.

Hear, hear!

I would say that 50 per cent. of them could be done without. With regard to the maternity hospital, this was dealt with at an interview between the Minister, the county manager and myself on 13th April, 1948. The Minister personally guaranteed then—I am glad he is here now— that the schedule of accommodation would be in our hands within a week or, at latest, a fortnight. That was in April, 1948. From April, 1948, to 6th October, 1948, we were writing for that schedule of accommodation. In the end, we said that we would go up and have another chat with the Minister. We came up to Dublin and, lo and behold, we found that the Minister's advisers had gone off at a tangent. They had forgotten all about South Cork Board of Assistance; apparently they did not think it existed. They had taken up another body, with Professor Alfred O'Rahilly as the chairman of it, and they were in communication with him as to where the new maternity hospital would be built. We have heard a good deal of noise about county managers and all the rest of it and we always understood that Clann na Poblachta especially were very keen on democratic institutions. But here the Department picked out an individual who had nothing at all to do with a maternity hospital and completely forgot the guarantee that had been given by their own Minister that the schedule of accommodation would be down in less than no time. I do not know whether these negotiations were carried out by letter or by interview, but there was a kind of sparring match with Professor O'Rahilly on this matter for six months. I shall read now the report of our county manager to the board on our return from that particular interview with the Minister. I asked the county manager to prepare a report because I would prefer to have an unbiassed report for the Minister.

Notwithstanding the fact that two sites were bought 14 or 15 years ago.

Fan go fóil. Deputy Hickey can tell us all about these things later on. I would not be allowed by the Chair to go back 14 years.

You do not want to. It would hurt.

If the Chair will allow me, I will go back, and ten years before that, too.

The Deputy will continue. It is up-to-date information we want.

This is the report given at a board meeting on 25-10-48:—

"The manager, in his review of the discussion which took place between the Minister and the deputation, stated that at the beginning of the conference Mr. McGrath asked the Minister if there was any truth in the rumour that had been current in Cork to the effect that a maternity hospital was to be erected on the site of the former Muskerry railway station on the Western Road. The Minister, in reply, stated that he had been informed that the site of the maternity hospital had been discussed by the University College, Cork, authorities with representatives of the Cork Corporation, Cork medical practitioners and cork County Council and that it had been agreed at the discussions that the Muskerry railway site was more suitable than the Wilton site for the erection of the proposed maternity hospital and that, on receipt of this information from the President of University College, Cork, the Minister agreed, after discussing the position with his technical advisers, and the erection of the maternity hospital on the Muskerry site was now contemplated. The members of the deputation expressed their surprise on hearing that the conference referred to by the Minister had been held. They had no previous knowledge of the holding of the conference, and they asked what representatives of the Cork Corporation and of the county council had taken part in those discussions. The Minister stated that he had been informed that the Cork Corporation had been represented by the Lord Mayor of Cork (Deputy Sheehan) and that the county council had been represented by the county manager. The county manager himself had said that he had no knowledge of the conference mentioned by the Minister and had taken no part in it."

That is my reason for referring to the delay of six months in connection with the regional maternity hospital in Cork. During the period from the 13th April, 1948, to October, 1948, the Minister's Department ignored completely the elected representatives of the local authority responsible for the erection of the regional hospital. The Minister's advisers, apparently, went off at a tangent and communicated with Professor O'Rahilly, President of University College, Cork, and apparently the whole matter was to be settled by Professor O'Rahilly in consultation with himself, because I cannot find that he consulted anybody else. I was glad of one thing, namely, that the county manager was present at the deputation, and was able to contradict the statement that the Cork County Council was represented by the county manager, because if he had not I certainly would have put in a notice of motion proposing his immediate suspension.

Did you not put down a motion proposing to suspend the county manager?

That was at the time the Minister for Agriculture told us that we were to reduce the rates. I have dealt with the six months' delay in connection with the maternity hospital. The minute goes on to say:

"The members of the board's deputation then submitted to the Minister that the erection of the maternity hospital on the Wilton site had already been approved by the board who were the hospital authority for the South Cork district. The relative merits of the sites in question—on the Western Road and at Wilton—were then discussed after which the Minister informed the deputation that the maternity hospital would now be erected at Wilton as originally contemplated, and that a draft statement of accommodation and staffing would be transmitted for the board's consideration by the 20th of the month."

The Minister kept his word on that. That explains our main difficulty in Cork. You have apparently in the Minister's Department a duplication of officials. One crowd finds that they are in communication with the South Cork Board of Assistance which is the hospital authority; another team, in order to find something to do, sends a communication to the Cork Corporation; a third team sends a communication to the Cork County Council, while a fourth team communicates with Professor O'Rahilly. That is the only explanation that I can find for all this. The actual position is that while, with the best will in the world and with the utmost co-operation, we started out together on the 13th Apil, 1948, to get going on this hospital, the preliminary plans have not yet been approved.

After 18 years.

I would not have bothered about this were it not for the Roscommon Deputy. I think that when he heard X-ray mentioned he was thinking it was an atom bomb. At any rate, we have got as far as this, that, before the preliminary sketches are passed, we will have to send up another plan for the lowering of the roof. They were afraid that the roof was too high, and that there might be too much air-space for the patients. The Minister will find all that in his last letter of the 16th June, 1950.

The next matter that I want to deal with is the orthopaedic unit. For some time we have been very anxious to get going ahead with this in Cork. In July, 1948, we sent up our engineer's estimate, which amounted to £17,000. Apparently among the officials who now control this country a meeting was held in the Department by them. They got angry at the idea of an ordinary engineer down in Cork daring to make any suggestions in regard to an orthopaedic unit, or to the preparation by him of plans and specifications. Accordingly, they sent down an order that this was a matter which would have to be handed over to a consulting architect. The point, of course, in connection with that is this, that if a consulting architect prepares plans, the higher the cost of the work the higher will be his fee, because he is paid on a percentage basis. If an ordinary engineer estimates a job to cost £50, and if it subsequently has to be handed over to a consulting architect, he will prepare something that will cost at least £10,000. The higher the cost the higher his fees. The Minister's instructions with regard to this orthopaedic unit were carried out, and immediately the estimated cost of the work jumped from £17,000 to £34,000. The Department said we should economise a bit, and after a great lot of cutting in connection with certain things it was brought down to £30,000, so that everything in the garden was lovely in July, 1949. The next thing that happened was that the Minister sent a letter to the Cork Corporation, again ignoring the hospital authority, about an orthopaedic unit in Gurranebraher. After the South Cork Board of Assistance getting a bill from the architect for his fees on the £32,000 job, we decided that we had better have another chat with the Minister. After we had our plans fixed and everything done, the Minister solemnly told us that he did not want it at all, that he was going to put up one in Gurranebraher. That is why I think some steps should be taken in that Department to straighten it up. If I were the Minister in charge of that Department, there would be a few of them there getting the boot.

However, the orthopaedic unit is to be in Gurranebraher, and I take it there will be accommodation for at least 200 beds there. In the Minister's letter of the 15th June there is no suggestion as to what is to be done with the 32 beds included in the plan for the Cork regional hospital for orthopaedic cases. It is said that you should not look a gift horse in the mouth, and, as the Minister is paying the full bill, I suppose it would be wrong for me to stint his activities. We will probably find somebody to put into the 32 extra beds some time or other. The fact remains that in this letter of the 15th June, after deciding that Gurranebraher was to be taken over for an orthopaedic hospital and after all the work and the efforts of the South Cork Board of Assistance and their officials, there was nothing said as to what was to be done with these 32 beds. I would want a van to bring up all the communications received from the Department of Health in connection with that little orthopaedic unit to be set up in the District Hospital. Somebody, however, will have to pay the architect's fees and, as soon as his bill arrives, I intend having it sent on with my compliments to the Minister who has been the cause of the trouble.

That is the position, and that is why I am anxious that there should be some clearing up of the situation, some clearing up of this kind of roaming commission. I am sure the Minister will admit that on any occasion on which he called on the South Cork Board of Assistance to do anything he was met more than half-way. Some time ago the Minister made a suggestion that the South Cork fever hospital should be taken over for maternity purposes as an urgent matter. That was in September or October, 1949. In November we had a visit from Mr. Dowling, Dr. Lysaght and Mr. Colm Murphy, an architect, and they went all over the place and approved of it, and laid down what was to be done there. We are now in July, 1950, and we have not heard a word from the Department or the Minister since. That kind of uncertainty makes you afraid to do anything. If you do anything to-day, it is going to be scrapped to-morrow. It is only putting money into the pockets of so-called architects. Those boys will present you with a bill for £20,000 if you only ask them to come in and sit down for half an hour. It is about time we had some definite fixing up in that Department, about time we knew exactly what they require, and not have the Minister asking a board to do one thing to-day and an entirely different thing to-morrow. We should not have the Minister suggesting that a board should do a certain thing and then communicating for six months with some individual who had nothing at all to do with it, spending six months hob-nobbing with him. He would still, apparently, be hob-nobbing with him only for the rumour that got around Cork City as a result of which the board sent a deputation to the Minister. There should be an end to that kind of thing.

I can assure the Minister that any co-operation that he requires so far as the South Cork area is concerned we shall be only too happy to give it to him. Cork County has proved beyond yea or nay that any co-operation or assistance required from them has been given and always will be given. I hope that the Minister will endeavour in his spare time, if he has any, to do something for that county. If we have a mobile unit in a couple of years I would be prepared to lend it to Roscommon.

It would not be much good.

I have put the case as I see it and I should like the Department to decide now to go ahead with the regional and maternity hospitals in Cork. We should pick up now where we left off and not have men looking for excuses for delaying the work. Apparently, they got away with it before. It is about time it was ended. Apparently, some officials, after lying quiet for a few months, have got into the saddle again and are on the warpath. If the Minister wants a hand over there, I will give it to him if no one else will.

Get away from the X-ray unit.

Wait until we X-ray you.

There are a few points I want to make on this Vote. Some time ago I asked a question in relation to the after-care treatment of tubercular patients. There are a few aspects of that question which have been brought under my notice from time to time. There was one case, where the parties concerned applied to have an extra room built to their house and, in reply to a question from me, the Minister stated that it was a matter for the Department of Local Government, with which I took it up afterwards. I want to take advantage of this debate to emphasise that after-care is just as important as treatment in the acute stages of the disease. Unfortunately the Minister has no responsibility for the particular point which I want to raise. I know one case in which there were three members of a family in a sanatorium. There were 13 altogether in the family and the father applied to have an extra room erected in the council cottage he occupies. There was an extraordinary delay in dealing with that application owing to the enormous amount of red tape that was brought into play although these three patients were due to be discharged. In my opinion not alone one room but two rooms should be built to accommodate cases like that. I am sorry that work does not come directly under the Department because it is just as important as treating a patient in the acute stages. If their homes are not properly equipped to receive them when they are discharged, I feel that all the good work expended on treating them during the acute stages is simply wasted. Until proper provision is made in that way I shall continue to ventilate the grievances of these people here and elsewhere. We are sometimes told that as many houses as possible are being built. In the example which I have given, the family concerned had a reasonably good house but they had not sufficient rooms to accommodate all the members of the family. I could point out a number of similar cases.

I asked the Minister some months ago for a statement of his attitude towards the question of after-care. The Red Cross Society to which I belong, also asked the Minister for some information in this regard, as we were anxious as a voluntary body to cooperate with the Department of Health and to pull our weight. I am rather disappointed that we have not had a more definite statement on that very important work. No words of mine can overstress the urgent necessity for sufficient after-care treatment, because many unfortunate victims of this disease who are discharged from a sanatorium in a reasonably good condition, because of lack of after-care revert to a condition which is even worse than their condition when they first entered the sanatorium. They are obliged to return to the sanatorium very often and eventually finish up by not coming home at all. The Department of Health will definitely have to take a more active interest in this question of after-care treatment. I know it is a big job, one that will require the co-operation of the patients themselves and of all the voluntary organisations that can assist the Department.

In regard to the question of the allowance to tubercular patients, the amount paid to patients living within the corporation area is somewhat higher than that payable to patients living in the county area. Here in Dublin we have a number of people who have been transferred from slum areas to areas just outside the boundary of the borough and as a result their tuberculosis allowance is being cut down. Perhaps the Minister would indicate if he could bring in amending legislation to remedy this matter, because these people are still living in corporation houses. They have to pay rent to the corporation and I do not see why they should not get the same facilities in the matter of allowances as people resident within the city area.

I come now to another bone of contention, the question of the treatment of cancer. It is a terrible pity that while the great scientists of the world can pool their genius in times of war to invent engines of destruction, in times of peace they cannot similarly pool their intelligence to devise some method of treating the great scourge of cancer. While cancer research is carried out in all hospitals, we are still mainly dependent on two well-known cancer institutions, the Northbrook Cancer Hospital and the Hume Street Cancer Hospital. I was rather surprised and disappointed to note at the last annual meeting of the Hume Street Cancer Hospital that the Minister had turned down a request to provide six extra beds. I have no axe to grind on behalf of any of these hospitals, but they are doing work which is most worthy of support, and I think that in the case of an old established hospital of this kind which has an excellent reputation over a long number of years, the Minister might be more sympathetic. They have an established tradition and if they are able to assist in the saving of human life by the provision of more beds and the installation of more up-to-date equipment, I think their efforts to fulfil their obligations to society should be assisted. The Minister and his Department, no doubt, are in the best position to know the full circumstances. I have to rely for my information on my own experience and such knowledge as I gain attending the annual meeting and reading the reports of the secretary. I note that the Minister is going to establish another hospital to deal with cancer. I welcome that but, even so, I do not see why the Minister should refuse permission to a board which has such a fine tradition behind it to provide five or six further beds for the accommodation of cancer patients. I await the Minister's reply with interest.

With regard to cancer research, no words of mine or of anybody else in public life can make the public more fully aware of the number of reasonably young people who die from that dread disease. We would welcome any humanitarian philanthropist who could give money for cancer research and anything that can be done by any Government—I see that the Minister has set up a cancer council—or by any Department to eliminate that disease should be done and any money spent will be well spent. It is a matter of national importance, not of Party politics. I would ask the Minister to say what work has been done during the past year to assist in the elimination of that dread disease and to encourage people to come for early diagnosis. I admit that it is very hard to diagnose cancer.

There are some 300,000 people in this country suffering from rheumatism in one form or another and I have, unfortunately, too much personal experience of it. My Old I.R.A. officer is now a patient in a hospital, suffering and crippled with it, and if he had got early treatment in an up-to-date rheumatism clinic he might, perhaps, have been better. It was late when he went for treatment. We should have rheumatism clinics in every county and put up-to-date treatment at the disposal of the people, as it is also a scourge. Numbers of our people have aged prematurely as a result of it. No matter what progress has been made with the diagnosis of other diseases, the treatment of rheumatism still leaves a lot to be desired and we are still a long way behind in its cure and treatment. We have doctors who are excellent at it and I do not see why these skilled specialists could not be brought together so that they could consult and see what could be done to provide rheumatism clinics so that the people in the country could get the treatment which the people in the cities have the opportunity of getting.

It is time that we should be able to deal with the question of young children of low intellect being admitted to public mental hospitals. It is not fair to have such children or imbeciles, some not so bad, some, perhaps, epileptics, having to mix with adults in public institutions, and the nation should come to their assistance. The Order of St. John of God is carrying out a lot of work and, during a recent conference, Ministers of State made a lot of promises, but this is a very urgent matter. I am getting letters day after day asking me if I could get a child into this or that institution but, while the Order of St. John of God is doing wonderful work, they have over 1,000 on their waiting list and some of these children are finding their way into our public institutions. This is a matter of vital importance and I am not trying to score politically on it. None of us knows from day to day what is going to happen to ourselves or to anybody belonging to us, and the nation should be alive to the matter.

I should also like the Minister for Health to give due honour to some very efficient medical men we have in our mental hospitals who are trying to give up-to-date treatment. I should like to see them encouraged in their work and I would like to see, if possible, research work carried out in laboratories. Although I do not like to do it, I think I should mention one leading man who has contributed a great deal to the cures of a number of people who are, unfortunately, afflicted with mental disease. I must say that he did a good deal on his own, with the support of a very considerate committee. I refer to Dr. John Dunne. He, with Dr. Fitzgerald and others, should get every encouragement by means of putting research laboratories at their disposal to assist them to cure these shocking diseases. It would be welcomed by the nation as a whole.

I promised the House that I would not talk very long on this matter, and I have merely dealt with matters about which I am deeply concerned. There is one thing, however, that I cannot understand, a matter with which Deputy Briscoe dealt fully, that is, the Minister's asking hospital boards to cut down on expenditure because he wants to go ahead with the building of hospitals. It is very hard to know what is best when you are facing a big problem, but, from my experience of a number of hospitals, the one thing I have found about most of them is that they are on the niggardly side. If the resources of the country and of the ratepayers would allow more to be done for people in a low state of health I would strongly advocate it, because I do not know of any hospital that is in any way over-generous. The only hospitals I know which are reasonably generous are the sanatoria, where they have to feed the people. To ask them to cut down expenditure and cut their cloth according to their measure is a serious step for any Minister or Department of State to take. A thing like that should be considered. Like everyone in this House, I have been in hospitals, visited them and been in association with them, and I should like to see, if possible, houses of recuperation for poor patients where they could get extra treatment and extra nourishment before they go back to bad homes or perhaps to live on subsistance allowances from the rates or other public charities.

These are matters about which I feel very strongly. It is very little use for us to build a ship if we have not got the crew to man it. If we are not able to look after our people in hospital, and when they leave hospital, if we are not able to do something for them to build them up when they are not in a position to do it themselves, it is a matter for us to consider what the nation's resources can do for them. I have had sad experience of misery and poverty amongst certain classes of the community, and if we are now to ask the hospital authorities to cut down further, we are doing something which is wrong.

I should like to see the day when the walls of all the workhouses and institutions will be razed to the ground and the resources of the nation applied to the building of decent, cheery places, instead of these gloomy places where people, instead of getting physical treatment, have to suffer mental torment by reason of their gloomy surroundings. I hope I will live to see the day, whether I am in public life or not, when all such places, which are an eyesore to-day, will be a memory and not a reality.

I think it is right that the House should pay tribute to the comprehensive, simple and efficient statement which the Minister made in presenting his Estimate. It was a statement entirely free of political bias, and one in which he did not claim the least amount of political gratitude. It was a statement thoroughly objective in its character, dealing as it did with the programme which he intends to put into effect in the coming year. It seems to me that it is characteristic of certain elements of this House to use any weapon at their disposal for the purpose of gaining political credit, and I was rather surprised that Deputy Briscoe should have used arguments for the purpose of gaining political credit. The Minister's statement is one which shows that he realises his position and his responsibilities, and he does not come before the House chastened, as Deputy Briscoe would lead us to believe.

Any difficulties which confront the Minister to-day had their origin in the history which Deputy Briscoe related. If the voluntary hospitals have lost any of their freedom, and undoubtedly they have, they must attribute the cause of it to the Fianna Fáil Party, because it was they took the first step towards what I believe must eventually become some form of State control. It was they who embarked, in their first Budget, on an item of finance which does not reflect credit on them, or even on their successors, and I include the present Government. When Deputy MacEntee was Minister for Finance, the first thing he did was to ask the House to impose a stamp duty on the hospitals sweepstake receipts of 25 per cent., and from 1932 to the present day that stamp duty has remained. The amount of stamp duty payable in respect of the recent sweepstake was £104,312 2s. 7d., as given in the official returns to the Revenue Commissioners. If every year that stamp duty had been placed at the disposal of the Minister for Health, I am perfectly certain that the problems which face him to-day would not be a reality.

Quite recently, as Deputy Briscoe suggested, the Hospitals Commission circularised their hospitals and informed them of the Minister's intention. Let me say at once that I agree with the Minister. I agree that the Minister has a right to secure that waste and unnecessary expenditure will be prevented, and, as he and his predecessors supplied huge buildings and expensive equipment, it is only reasonable that he, as the custodian of the purse which provides the moneys to permit of the progress of the hospitals, should have some say, both in regard to administration, and to the manner in which the moneys he gives shall be spent. To-day, Deputy Briscoe quoted certain hospitals. Every one of them was a rate-aided institution except one, Holles Street Hospital. If Deputy Briscoe casts his mind back to the origin of the new Holles Street Hospital, he will recall that that hospital was practically completed before the entry of Fianna Fáil into the administration of this State and that Fianna Fáil can claim no credit for the erection of Holles Street Hospital. On the other hand, I give them credit—and I think a good deal of credit is due particularly to a much maligned man, I mean Dr. Ward—for their contribution to the erection of other voluntary hospitals, including my own. In my recollection of other days in hospital administration, I can only think of one extraordinary miracle whereby, before the origin of the Committee of Reference or Hospitals Commission, 52 voluntary hospitals, having two representatives each, were able to sit down in the Mansion House and to agree on the allocation and distribution of moneys. I often wonder whether it was a good thing that the State ever took control of these moneys.

One matter which, I think, deserves mention here, is that, not since the days of Sir Charles Cameron—and that is some time ago—has any Minister taken such prophylactic measures to prevent disease as the present Minister. Apart altogether from the work which he has done in trying to prevent the spread of tuberculosis, in trying to conserve the life of children by school examination—of course, that was done by Fianna Fáil also—this year he has embarked on a campaign which, I think, deserves much more notice than it has already received, that is, the eradication of one of our greatest enemies, the simple little fly. I suggest that the Minister should take much more stringent measures than have already been taken in trying to eradicate that pest. He has only to go to any of our restaurants or cafés and he will see there an abundance of these insects circling everywhere, on the food and the milk, contaminating the food and probably spreading disease. If, in conjunction with the Minister for Local Government, steps could be taken to make it almost a crime to allow that sort of thing, I am perfectly certain that the health of the nation would greatly improve. As we are limited to a few minutes, I can only conclude by once again congratulating the Minister on what must have been one of the fairest and one of the most objective exposés ever made in this House.

I am not concerned so much with what happened in the past. I do not mind how the present position of the hospitals in relation to Hospitals Trust moneys came about. I am concerned with the position in which the hospitals find themselves to-day. On that score, I would say to Deputy Dr. Brennan that I am prepared to concede the point as to the stamp duties that were imposed under the Fianna Fáil Administration, but, if Deputy Dr. Brennan could only realise the contributions which have come out of State moneys to local authorities and others for public health, even since 1947, under the 1947 Act, he would know that they far exceed what has been netted in the way of stamp duties which have been taken from the Hospitals Trust funds.

I am glad to see the Minister in good health again, but I am sorry to say that I am not prepared to congratulate him on his year's work because I find that very, very little has happened since we met here a year ago.

As we are confined to a shorter period than we would like for this discussion, I will address my remarks principally to the Dublin question. From time to time I have put down questions to the Minister regarding hospital building in this city. I am not satisfied at all—and neither is the Minister, according to a reply to a recent question of mine—that the bed position in this city has changed appreciably. I am talking about the general bed position. I am not speaking of beds which have been provided for tuberculosis patients or of cots which have been provided. The Minister must know—I have said it before— that any doctor in the city will tell him of the difficulty of having a person admitted to a Dublin hospital. It is practically impossible and there are periods of the year when it is practically impossible to have a person admitted even to a nursing home in this city. Even in regard to cots for children, during the scarlet fever outbreak here in the winter, I had occasion to contact Clonskeagh Fever Hospital to beseech them to take a child who had scarlet fever away from a family of five other children. They told me that there was a waiting list. That is a position that must not recur during the coming year. I hope the Minister will see that there is sufficient bed and cot accommodation in the children's hospital to deal with any similar outbreak that may take place during the coming winter.

Hospital building, as I have said, has not started. I have asked the Minister time and again about the St. Laurence's Hospital. The St. Laurence's Hospital now, so far as I can see, is not on the short-term programme but on the longterm programme. It is still in its initial stages and there is just a shuttle-cock procedure between the board of St. Laurence's Hospital and the Department of Health and when anything tangible in the nature of plans or anything tangible in the nature of hospital building will come about I do not know and I am certain the Minister could not give an accurate forecast. In the meantime, part of the Richmond Hospital is in a ramshackle condition.

I am a member of the board of St. Laurence's Hospital. There is much dissatisfaction in regard to this business of backwards and forwards to the Department and of being held up for one reason or another. There is no freedom of action. There is none of the autonomy that the Minister and his colleagues talked so much about in relation to hospitals and local bodies and so forth before the election but more and still more of the steel grip of the Department. The governors give their time there voluntarily and they come out after every meeting with the same feelings of futility and frustration. The Minister must come to grips with that problem. In the first instance, he has voluntary boards running the hospitals of this city. Deputy Dr. Brennan knows perhaps better than I do that even if the voluntary funds are gone in relation to voluntary hospitals there are voluntary physicians and surgeons running these hospitals who do not get a penny piece for their work in these hospitals. I have here a copy of a document sent by the Hospitals Commission recently to the boards of the voluntary hospitals. To my mind it can be described as one of the new brooms of the Hospitals Commission that are endeavouring to sweep clean. Having regard to this and similar communications from that body since the new appointments, I think that I prefer the old broom. At least, the old broom was shaped: it knew the crevices which it had to get into to clean them out. The present Hospitals Commission, on the direction of the Minister, come along and say this in the second paragraph of the circular which they issued recently to all voluntary hospitals:—

"The commission is aware that hospital authorities have been keenly alive to the extreme seriousness of the deficit position and, from time to time, representations have been made by members of hospital boards that more effective measures of internal control of expenditure might be achieved if hospitals were informed in advance of the amount of the grants they might expect to have paid to them in respect of the following year's deficits."

I should like to know from the Minister what representatives made those recommendations to him. I have had considerable experience of hospital boards. This matter arose, in other words, some years ago, and a very close study was made into every department by the finance committee of the St. Laurence Hospital. I can assure the Minister that every farthing is accounted for in that hospital and that there is not a more competent board of management anywhere. In the middle of a financial year a hospital whose deficit will be in the neighbourhood of £60,000 is told by the Minister that they can expect at the end of this year only £43,000. That is my first quarrel with the Minister. Who told the Minister that the most effective measures were not being taken? I know that the most effective measures are being taken. From my knowledge as a representative in the past on the standing committee of the voluntary hospitals, I know that the same thing applies to other voluntary hospitals in this city. If the Minister thinks that £400,000 is going to meet the demands of the voluntary hospitals the Minister will have to think again, because it will not. The money will have to be found, whether out of Hospitals Trust moneys or out of State funds. I think that the Minister, preelection, was all for its coming out of State funds.

In relation to Hospitals Trust money, my recollection is that, in the first instance, it was never intended to put this money to capital use at all but that the Dublin voluntary hospitals and the voluntary hospitals throughout the country should benefit, and benefit to the fullest possible extent. The position to-day is that Dublin is top-heavy because it is taking patients from all over Ireland. There are many Dublin people who cannot get into a Dublin hospital. That position will have to be rectified before any new building is undertaken elsewhere. The St. Laurence's Hospital of which I speak and which will have approximately between 400 and 500 beds will have to be gone on with.

Another very objectionable section in this particular communication is that which refers to capitation payments in respect of local authority patients. As a Dublin representative of city hospitals, I was never satisfied that what the Dublin hospitals received from county boards of health was sufficient. Now, the county boards of health, in keeping with the Dublin Corporation, are being asked to increase their contribution from £3 13s. 6d. to four guineas per week. The cost of maintaining a patient in a Dublin hospital is seven guineas per week, without taking physicians' services into account at all. I ask the Minister to be consistent in this matter. I do not want to be political on this issue. Surely, however, public health is a branch of policy.

When the Minister's colleagues ask on the one hand that the rates be reduced everywhere and at the same time support a policy that will result in an increase in rates everywhere, I cannot see that they are being consistent. Dublin Corporation is already paying £120,000 to the Dublin hospitals. We are paying a grant on a bed day's basis and not on a capitation basis. I should like the Dublin ratepayers and the Minister's colleagues to remember that the next time a question of rates arises in the Dublin Corporation and to place the blame and the cause of the increase in rates on the right shoulders.

Under the heading "Capitation Payments in Respect of Local Authority Patients" we read the following subparagraph:

"The hospitals will cancel any existing agreements whereby they maintain and treat patients sent by agencies other than local authorities (e.g., medical benefit societies, Government Departments, commercial firms) at rates less than four guineas per week and they will insist upon the payment of a sum of not less than the figure in respect of such patients in future."

There are a number of very small, old-established trade unions in this country, some of them with a membership of only 100 or 150—small craft unions. They pay a lump sum. It is not a very big sum, but very often it more that recoups the hospital for what it has expended, and very often, on the other hand, it does not. But this is a very old-established custom as between hospitals and trade unions. I would like to hear the Labour representatives speaking on this particular aspect, this instruction to hospitals. I think it is a very retrograde step. This was something that was done years ago when people came together, stood on their own feet, and agreed to pay out of their resources, out of the resources of the union, something to the hospitals, so that a bed or beds would be kept there for their members.

They helped to keep the hospitals going.

Yes, at a time when there was no income from sweepstakes. The same applies to Córas Iompair Éireann and similar firms. Córas Iompair Éireann and other big concerns in the city pay a lump sum to the hospitals in this connection and in other places they pay on a capitation basis. I think this is a most objectionable thing and I trust the Minister will reconsider it. I am sure some representations will be made to him from the clinical hospitals association. To qualify it all the circular says:—

"Bearing in mind the primary importance of not impairing essential hospital services."

How can you go ahead on a reduced indicated sum, as has been indicated to the Dublin voluntary hospitals? How can you go ahead without impairing the essential hospital services? It cannot be done. There can be no development, no increases in salaries and wages. The cost of food rises daily and a general increase in wages is expected in the building trade in September and the hospitals, particularly St. Laurence's, are in great need of repair. The Minister should direct attention to the conditions that exist and to the scales of wages and salaries in the voluntary hospitals; from the porter up they are the worst paid people to be found anywhere.

I ask the Minister to withdraw that circular and to meet the voluntary hospital people, the people who are giving their time voluntarily. He should not have issued this direction without first thinking, without first meeting the people who know all about it. I am not a medical man, but I have some knowledge of administration and I say that this is the most foolhardy circular that was ever issued from any State or semi-State Department. So far as we are concerned in the Dublin Corporation, we have had occasion to meet the Minister a couple of times during the year and we were very disappointed that he was not in a position to meet what we think are just demands. We have several projects, the principal of which is the erection of a nurses' home at Vergemont fever hospital. The Minister can offer £120,000 for the hospital, but the position in regard to the nurses' home is somewhat different.

The conditions under which certain of the staff have to exist have already been aired here. They have to go outside the hospital and look for lodgings —the nurses and other personnel. It is not always easy for people who are employed in a fever hospital to get lodgings. I do not know why, when we are getting a full grant in respect of a hospital building, the same should not apply in respect of nurses' accommodation. We have a similar state of affairs in connection with the extension to the Rialto Hospital. We need accommodation for five medical officers and the estimate is £5,000. The Minister said: "I have not a penny." The same thing applies to swimming baths in the city. The Minister thinks it is a very laudable project and that we should have a first-class swimming bath. A first-class one would cost in the neighbourhood of a couple of hundred thousand pounds and the Minister again says: "I have not a penny."

Is it from the Sweepstakes Fund you want the money?

You could not pay it out of the Sweepstakes Fund. I am talking on a completely different line. In respect of any capital expenditure by the Dublin Corporation, there is not a penny to be got from the Minister. In relation to health clinics we have to put up £30,000—that is the amount for our regional health clinics. The least the Government might do would be to recoup the corporation the full cost of the health clinics.

There are some other points with which I would like to deal. I think I mentioned one before, but I will repeat it, and that is the demand that the Joint Mental Hospital Board of Grangegorman and Portrane makes on the Dublin ratepayers. For the year 1949-50 the amount was £403,849, and the grant from the Central Fund was £31,980. I think that is a grossly unfair burden to place on the ratepayers. In the same way I think the demand for £500,000 from the Dublin Board of Assistance is a grossly unfair burden. The Minister must know that in respect of health services, just as in respect of housing or any other service, Dublin is a sort of clearing house. I fail to see why the Dublin ratepayers should be called upon every year to face an expenditure of approximately £500,000 in respect of both of these institutions.

Deputy Burke spoke about rheumatism and he stole some of my thunder in that connection. But I would like to disillusion him, and I am glad to be able to do so. We have the most up-to-date treatment for rheumatic diseases in this city. I think everyone will pay the highest tribute to the Dublin rheumatism clinic and its medical director and staff. I must ask the Minister, where does the programme stand? When Deputy Ryan was Minister, I understood from conversations we had with him that the scheme for regional clinics was about to be put into operation. So far as I remember, there was a survey made of the incidence of rheumatism in the various counties. We stand very much in the same position as regards rheumatism as we stood when the clinic was founded eight or nine years ago, except that there are more patients than ever and we are not in a position to deal with them. There is a fortnight's waiting list at the moment. We cannot meet them and we should be able to meet them on demand.

It is going to be very difficult, and the Minister must know that, to get staff, to get technicians and physiotherapists at the clinics or in the hospitals, if they are not going to be paid properly, if the rate which applies at the moment to all parts of the country is to persist. There is not any imagination behind the existing rate. Any person can see that it is quite impossible for an individual to live in this city if he is receiving the same salary as he would receive in some other parts of the country. Everything is so much dearer here. In my opinion the Minister will have to revise his salary scales in relation to technicians and others. We are losing them month after month. They come in and stay for a little while and then they go away. Some of them have remained through a sense of loyalty to their country, but the others go where there is a greater attraction, where the salaries are higher.

So far as the dispensary doctors are concerned, I have no fault to find with dispensary doctors, especially in Dublin. If the Minister reads the debates on this Estimate in the years before he became Minister, he will find that I have always complained that dispensary doctors have not got a fair salary, that they are not adequately recompensed, particularly the Dublin dispensary doctors for the amount and the variety of the work they have to do.

I would like to see the boards given a greater measure of autonomy. They are composed of people who are giving their time and services free. They have considerable experience and if the Minister trusts them more he will find that, in the long run, the hospitals will be run more smoothly and the Minister's Department will run more smoothly also.

I have very little to say, as if a person who is a member of a local authority were to go into all the details that are discussed at county council meetings it would take a long time. The question of the rates of pay of mental hospital attendants was brought to my notice some time ago. I understand that those in Portrane and Grangegorman are paid at a higher rate than those in other mental hospitals throughout the country. If that is so, I would expect the Minister to look up the matter and rectify it. Wherever they are employed, whether in Castlebar or Ballinasloe, or in Grangegorman or Portrane, the pay and conditions of employment should be the same. I do not know what the difference is at present, but I am informed that there is a definite advantage in the two I have first mentioned. In all other State services the rates of pay and scales of salary are practically the same. The Departments of Local Government, Justice and Education, for instance, have standard rates which apply not to one individual county but to every county of the twenty-six. When the Minister examines this question, if he tries to give satisfaction to those employed as mental hospital attendants, I and every other Deputy would be grateful to him. Attendants in any kind of nursing institution, and particularly in mental hospitals, have not an easy job and there is a strain on their health, mental and physical. Indeed, of the many who go into those hospitals, quite a good number have to leave because they are physically or mentally unable to stand up to that type of employment. Knowing the Minister as I do, I feel certain that he will decide favourably for those people, as it is unfair that they should be working at a lower rate throughout the country than they are here in Dublin.

I compliment the Minister—and also welcome him back into the House—on the effort that is being made regarding hospitalisation. In my county we have made demands on the funds of Hospitals Trust to put up extensions and build nurses' homes and so on. We are not very satisfied that we have got as much as we should get, since we are a highly rated county of people living in very poor circumstances. At the same time, to anyone who goes about the countryside it is very encouraging to see the effort that is being made to get to the core of the scourge of tuberculosis. The Minister's campaign over the past few years has proved definitely that it is being successful and that it is worth while. Numbers of people are, we know, returning every day in very good health from sanatoria and they are being cared for while convalescent by help from the State scheme. This new system deserves every encouragement and for it the Minister must get every word of praise we can give him.

I am sorry I had not the advantage of hearing the Minister's speech. I was informed, just about midday to-day, that this particular debate was to take place and it came on rather unexpectedly, as far as I am concerned. Deputy Dr. Brennan mentioned that the Minister made a very praiseworthy speech and that it was entirely devoid of political taint. All I can say is that the Minister must have greatly changed, as I have not heard a speech from him that was not more political than medical. The ultimate aim of the medical profession is to create a condition in which the further services of its members will be unnecessary, that is to say, the real aim of medical science is to prevent disease. If the medical profession were to succeed in that, then the medical profession would no longer be needed. It is doubtful if they ever will succeed entirely in preventing disease and if there are any medical men listening to me they need not be depressed, as they will be needed for some time to come.

To prevent disease, it is only common sense that we should start at the beginning. We must take the expectant mother and see that everything possible is done so that the baby can arrive under the most favourable circumstances. When the baby does arrive, we must see that that baby is properly looked after and is guarded against disease, the common diseases of childhood, that it is properly treated and brought up to be a sturdy citizen, until we hope to rear as healthy a race as possible. That would entail advice from doctors and nurses, treatment such as immunisation against common diseases of childhood; and, where necessary, the child should be treated for such things as adenoids and tonsils, eyes, teeth and so on, with general attention to any other ailment that might arise.

In 1947 the Health Act was passed by the Oireachtas. One of the principal provisions of that Act was to give local authorities the necessary powers to organise what is usually referred to nowadays as "mother and child welfare services." In February, 1948, when the present Minister took office, the drafting of regulations for the local authorities was in hands and the Department had promised me at that stage that these model regulations would be ready for circulation to local authorities within a few months. Subsequent to their receipt, the local authorities would consider them. They would not, of course, be bound to adopt these model regulations because the Department of Health, contrary to the beliefs of some people, is not a despotic Department. The local authorities would be free to frame their own regulations.

It was intended at that time to make each district a unit and the idea was that the district would coincide with the present dispensary district. A survey of the country was being made; some of the counties had actually been done in February, 1948. It was intended that where the survey showed that a district was too big, it would be divided and one man would be placed in charge of each unit. It was held that no medical man in charge of public health should have too big a district. It was proposed that each man in charge of a district would have under his control a general nurse and a maternity nurse. That was the position, as I knew it, when I was leaving the Department of Health in February, 1948.

Trained personnel is, of course, necessary—a medical officer, a general nurse and a maternity nurse. Suitable premises are also necessary—such premises are now referred to as clinics —and proper equipment. I do not know what the Minister's attitude is with regard to this matter. I do not know what his attitude is in regard to public health in general. I think we are all agreed that most of the present dispensary premises should be replaced by proper clinics. I do not know what progress, if any, has been made. When I speak of progress, I mean real progress and not just the kind of speeches to which we have become so accustomed as to what was not done in the past and what will be done in the future.

I, as Minister for Health, had some meetings with the medical profession. We were talking tentatively of a scheme. The medical profession gave me their views and offered certain objections to some of the proposals put forward. I had promised them that, if this scheme were implemented in the way I had outlined it, it would be necessary to discuss with them conditions of service, remuneration and so on and I promised to meet them at a later date with a view to discussing terms of that kind with them. I do not know whether any progress has been made in that direction. As far as we can see, not very much has been done. We have not seen any account anywhere that the Minister has met the medical profession and come to terms with them in the taking over of these new districts. We have not seen many clinics being erected. We have read in the Press a good deal about them, but we have not seen any being erected. We have not seen any advertisements for nurses to be allocated to these districts. Generally speaking, we have not seen anything done in the past two and a half years.

I admit it takes some time to get things done. I said I expected to see these model regulations sent out to local authorities early in the summer of 1948. Naturally, the local authorities would want a reasonable time to consider these regulations and make amendments to them or offer suggestions, as they thought fit. That would probably take another six months. It would have taken probably six months concurrently to deal with the medical profession and, in all, it would have taken possibly 12 months to get things moving under the mother and child welfare scheme. I do not think anyone can defend a delay of two and a half years. The Act of 1947 was passed principally for the purpose of giving local authorities an opportunity of introducing these mother and child welfare centres under the Act. Nothing has been done to implement the Act in that respect.

We hear complaints from the medical profession. We hear anxious queries as to what the future is likely to be. I do not know whether some Deputies would claim that there are very good actors in that profession. I think that the majority of them are genuinely troubled about the future.

I take it that any body of men trying to make a living in a certain profession or trade naturally become anxious about their future if they think their profession or trade is threatened. They are anxious to know what the trend is likely to be. We know the medical profession has condemned State interference with medicine. We know they have been finding fault with interference by the Department in various directions. I do not know whether their grievance is or is not justified; I am not inclined to think it is. I met certain medical men during the past week or so and they complained very bitterly about what they called the interference of the Custom House. I could not see that there was very much in it myself, but the point is they believe there is interference and that there will be more interference in the future. They believe that State medicine is about to be introduced. I think it is bad to leave a profession of that kind in doubt and the Minister should state clearly and unequivocally what his intentions are. There may be some difficulty. It is a very big question. Possibly the Minister will have to consult his colleagues in the Government before he makes a statement to the medical profession. To some extent, I can understand his difficulty because the leftist Ministers want to go one way and the right-wing Ministers want to go the other way. It might be difficult in that case to reconcile all Parties in coming to what might be regarded as the common view. That must be got over and the Minister must try and tell the medical profession what the future, as far as they are concerned, is going to be.

Before leaving this question of mother and child welfare. I want to make the point that the Minister has made no progress in that particular line even though it is one of the principal ways in which disease can be prevented. I am sure everyone will agree that the prevention of disease is very much more important than the treatment of disease even though the treatment of disease is necessary too.

Deputy Dr. Brennan, when speaking, said that he wanted to pay a tribute to the Minister for what he had done in prophylactic medicine in the prevention of disease, but the only thing he could think of was the house fly. I do not want to minimise the seriousness of the house fly as a carrier of disease, but it gives one an idea when Deputy Dr. Brennan gets up and pays compliments to the Minister for what he has done in the prevention of disease, and when the only thing he can think of is the campaign with regard to the house fly which was only started in the last few weeks. Mother and child welfare is not only a difficult matter, but it is a tedious matter. It is, perhaps, one that does not fall in with the general conduct of the Minister, because, as we all know, the Minister is given to publicity. Well, there is no publicity in that but there is a great deal of hard work in it.

The Minister stated his programme in regard to tuberculosis on many an occasion. Someone presented me with cuttings of the Minister's speeches. I think that practically every speech he has made in the last two and a half years is about tuberculosis. He has stated that his object was to provide a certain number of beds within the first two years, and after that to go on with the building of the big regional sanatoria. He did not give any promise as to how long it might take to provide them. It is evidently taking quite a long time.

Again, I want to put it that the prevention of tuberculosis is a very much more important matter. The provision of the regional sanatoria is very important, too, but the prevention of tuberculosis should engage our attention first. People have the habit of getting up and saying that, unless you have better houses and better diet, tuberculosis cannot be prevented. I would like Deputies to be honest in this matter. Those of them who have travelled in other countries should be honest and admit that housing in this country is not very far behind that in most other countries. We have proved, positively, that, as far as nutrition is concerned, we are practically the leading country in the world. Let us not, therefore, put the blame for tuberculosis on bad housing or poor diet. It must be due to other causes. Of course, you have tuberculosis in every country in the world. We have more of it than they have in some countries, and not as much as they have in other countries. We should try, as far as we can, to prevent it.

I have mentioned that there has been no improvement in the public health. There is no improvement, for example, as regards school inspection. It is the same as it was in the old days. When I brought in a Bill in 1947 I pointed out that under the scheme we had at that time, four or five years might elapse before certain children were inspected in school. That is too long a period. There is no improvement, so far as school inspection is concerned, and generally there has been no improvement in the matter of public health. So far as I know, there has been no improvement in the way of further provision for mass radiography. I know that of my own knowledge, because I come across cases in the course of the work on which I am now engaged. I know that there is no follow up in the case of a person affected with tuberculosis. It may be three or six months afterwards that you come across a brother or a sister of that person. Neither of them has been X-rayed to ascertain whether they have become affected through contact with that relative. These are things which have been neglected—I think they should not have been neglected—in the last two and a half years. We also hear of people treated in their own homes who are not being looked after as they might be.

We heard Deputies this afternoon say that nothing has been done in the last two and a half years. We heard a great deal about cancer, about cancer research, and about a cancer institute. We heard a great deal of talk, but nothing has been done. Cancer is a very serious disease, and nothing is being done either to study it or to try to prevent it. We have the same position as regards rheumatism. Deputy McCann rightly said that when the clinic for the treatment of rheumatism was set up it was hoped that personnel would be trained there who would be capable of taking clinics in various centres in the country where there are county or regional hospitals. I do not know if anything is being done so far as that is concerned either.

When the Minister came into office he complained that the county homes were the same as they were in 1847. Well, they are still the same as they were in 1947, and so, according to the Minister, they are the same as they were in 1847. Nothing has been done to remedy matters in that respect. I do not think we are making very much progress. We hear, of course, various statements from the Minister. For example, he opened a three-room unit in Peamount Sanatorium on the 16th July, 1949. I propose to read a brief extract from his speech as reported in the Irish Independent so that I cannot be accused of being unfair to him. He said that this extension:—

"will help the preventative treatment now becoming available through local authorities."

He also said:—

"The new blocks are an example of the standard which they in the Department of Health intended to achieve in every sphere of their activity."

That is the sort of speech which the Minister makes everywhere. I am sure anybody listening to him would never have believed that these three units at Peamount were actually being built when the Minister took over. I suggest that the making of the Minister's Department a political Department is not going to be very good. It is not going to help the health of our people. I think that if the Minister, instead of thinking of the political aspect of it and of trying to claim credit for everything that is being done, would try and see that everyone in the country, whatever political party he belonged to would help as far as possible in meeting the problems that arise in his Department, it would be much better than to be making these political pronouncements.

I move to report progress.

Perhaps the Minister might be allowed to conclude, even though it is 7 o'clock.

The Vote for the Department of Justice might wait, if the House so desires.

Agreed: That the Minister for Health be allowed to conclude.

In concluding the debate on the Estimate for the Department of Health, I should first like to pay a tribute to the level of the debate which has taken place this evening and, particularly, to the fact that the level of the debate was maintained largely by members of the Opposition. I think that is a tremendous improvement in the standard of discussion in the House. A tremendous number of items were brought forward, even though briefly, by the different Deputies, and I shall do my best in the time at my disposal, under the circumstances rather limited, to deal with them as adequately as I can.

I should like first to take a number of points raised by Deputy Childers' in the course of what I believe to be a very thoughtful and well-considered contribution. He asked me a number of questions, on some of which I think it is possible for me to give him some assistance. He wanted to know whether we were making much progress with our attempts in relation to the diagnosis of tuberculosis and in our attempts to encourage people to seek diagnosis early and, of course, treatment and consequent cure. I shall try to cover the whole question of health propaganda and publicity, including tuberculosis, cancer, general hygiene and instructions in relation to food and drink. We have attempted to use the different media at our disposal, including the radio and the newspapers, through advertisements, news items and contributions by different authorities. For the last 18 months we have had travelling cinemas visiting national and secondary schools which are able to operate even in the absence of an electricity supply, which is a problem that faces them in some of the schools. In this way we are trying to use the radio to bring a knowledge of public health and hygiene to the adult and, through the 16 mm. films, to the children in the schools in order to inculcate in them a fundamental knowledge with regard to health and matters relating to health. In view of the definite benefits of the cinema, we are proposing to extend the service considerably throughout the country. In relation to the radio, we have attempted to use it to the maximum and have found it to be of certain advantage.

The Deputy was also anxious to know whether we found that we were getting an increased return from this propaganda. I mentioned in my opening speech a figure of another 1,000 persons who had not been on the list in 1948, which was then 1,000; that is, the number who were waiting on sanatoria then was 1,000 and since that time, in addition to the 1,000 beds which we have had to provide to accommodate those people, an additional 1,000 people have come on to the lists in the last two and a half years. It would appear from that that the notifications have increased considerably. This is a matter of opinion, but I believe that that figure is still rising and, as I said earlier, it is not due to an increase in the incidence but to the fact that the people are tending to come forward more readily as their attention is being brought to diagnostic and treatment facilities more frequently in the Press and through the radio.

The Deputy also asked whether the regulations proposed under the Health Act concerning the handling of both food and drink are likely to be available soon. As I pointed out earlier, they are already prepared after considerable consultation with interested bodies, the trades and professions, and we are now in a position to introduce those regulations in the very near future. As I said, they are very comprehensive and they should bring about considerable changes and improvements in the standard of handling food and drink in the country. Consequently, as they will mean in certain cases considerable changes in the equipment and furnishing of shops and restaurants, we propose to leave an interval of about six months between the introduction of the regulations and the insistence that they should be carried out by the various bodies.

Deputy Dr. Ryan dealt with a very important subject when he referred to the very important section in the 1947 Health Act passed by the Government of the time dealing with what has come to be known as the mother and child service. Quite naturally, he has expressed himself as interested in the progress that is being made in regard to this extremely important proposal in relation to the health of the country.

The mother and child service proposes to introduce hospital, medical and surgical services for all mothers in respect of motherhood and for all children in respect to all matters relating to ill-health and disease up to the age of 16. It would be well to understand that this is a very far reaching proposal which I propose to introduce under the 1947 Health Act. I should like to pay tribute to that particular section of the Act, as being a particularly enlightened provision and one which I feel is going to bring great benefits to the health of this very important section of the community. Quite rightly, Deputy Dr. Ryan said there had been considerable controversy and discussion leading to a state of unease on the part of the medical profession and leading to a number of statements by members of the profession, many of which we could have done well without.

The present position in relation to the vital statistics affecting the lives and the health particularly of our children gives serious grounds for concern, especially when these statistics are compared with similar statistics of other nations. We are all agreed on this, not only here in this House but amongst the medical profession and also amongst the general public. I think it must have been arising out of this concern, expressed during the period of office of the previous Government and reiterated in the time of the present Government, which determined both Governments to give expression to the wishes of the people that a comprehensive, free and universal mother and child service should be introduced without delay.

Appreciating the tremendous significance of this development in the life of the country and also in relation to the livelihood of members of the medical profession, I have naturally gone slowly in coming to final conclusions concerning the pattern upon which we should base this new development. I suppose it was reasonable to expect that the medical profession should be or could be concerned with future developments here in the light of what has happened in other countries. Possibly, that has led to statements by responsible medical men, or rather by medical men in responsible positions, which have tended to confuse the position and to misrepresent what is in the minds of members of this Government concerning the future of the health services. I should like to state that our needs and our intentions in relation to medicine, the health services generally, and their reorganisation, spring from the demands of the shamefully high disease and death rate of our children. Our intentions are simple, straightforward and humanitarian and, I am quite satisfied, strictly in accordance with the fundamental ethics of the Christian philosophy upon which our Constitution is based. I believe that it is wrong, mischievous and dangerous for persons, medical men in authoritative positions, to confuse the picture in relation to our intentions and to give the general impression that we intend by our action to interfere in any way with either the family life of the community, the doctor-patient relationship or with any of the other desirable conditions under which medical practice is carried out here at present. I believe that it is unworthy of members of that profession of which I am a member to try to confuse—and I submit that an attempt has been made to confuse—a simple matter of pounds, shillings and pence with questions about high principles and morality.

Objection has been made to the introduction of a free service for all as if it was something new or something alien to the present conditions of our health services. A free service for all, irrespective of income, rich and poor alike, is at present available in relation to all infectious diseases and whether you have money or whether you have not, rich or poor, you can receive, from the first X-ray picture which tells us you have tuberculosis to the last which tells us that you are cured, right through an expensive process of treatment that is at present available, a completely free service. I feel that the 5,500 people who are at present availing of hospital treatment under that free service would deeply resent the implication made from time to time that they were indulging in anything amoral or unprincipled.

I think that we should attempt to get some clear thinking into this matter of State interference or State control, as it is called from time to time. You have only got to go through this Book of Estimates and see what I am paying on behalf of the people of this country in matters of health to know that it is ridiculous to try to ignore the fact or decry or play down the fact that the State is taking a greater and more important part in the development of our health services as in many other matters. The whole process of medicine and medical treatment has become much too expensive to allow it to try to depend on flag days, jumble sales or the haphazard whim or fancy of any charitably or kindly disposed persons who may tend to give their money for the improvement of the health services.

In relation to the question of a fee for services, what has been said recently, "he who can pay must pay", is, I submit, specious nonsense for which there is no foundation whatever. As I have said before, I cannot for the life of me see the merit or the benefit in having a money transaction between a doctor and his patient. I believe that in the future we will get a type of doctor growing up in a different and, in my view, a better tradition, who will be prepared to work in a salaried service. That is for the future, however. I would not like medical people at present to think that that is what is facing them in the immediate future. That is my own personal view. I can see no objection or humiliation in a medical man taking an annual salary. We all do it here; civil servants and teachers do it; many doctors in institutions take salaries and they find nothing wrong with it. I do not believe, knowing my medical colleagues as I do—many of them men of tremendous hard work, self-denial and self-sacrifice who have given their lives working for the sick and for the poor—that they are among the only ones who must have the constant carrot of a fee for services dangled in front of them in order to flog their flagging morality and high principles.

In relation to these services—I might as well make this point clear as it is the one point on which I propose to stand irrevocably—I will not concede in any way in relation to the means test. I believe that a means test in relation to health is an unforgivable degradation and an interference with the privacy of the individual and I do not believe that here, 30 years and more after the liberation of a large part of our country, we should be considering the introduction of this service in which we should have to make special provisions for the continued existence of the pauper or of any extensive degree of poverty in our State.

This service which has been drawn up in its details is a tentative one and we have brought the matter to the Medical Association because I believe if they will give me the benefit of their tremendous reserves of knowledge and experience gained over years of work in the field, I can with their help evolve a service which will give equal justice to the people whom it is our privilege to serve, the mothers of our country and their children and also the members of the medical profession, because I fully appreciate that just as these ladies and their children whom it is my anxiety to help have these rights for which I propose to work and fight if necessary, fundamental rights under the Constitution, so also have the members of the profession, and I propose equally to give the same sympathy and, I hope, understanding to their problems. We must remember, however, that we are working for the greater good of the community and it may be necessary that sacrifices must be made.

I believe that our medical men throughout the country are, generally speaking, as fine and as high-principled a group of workers as there are in any country, and I feel that when they understand that our objective is to leave to them their autonomy, their independence, so far as is humanly possible, because, as Deputy Ryan pointed out, in spite of the opinions held we have no despotic intentions and no anxiety to take on any greater responsibility than we have at the moment, and we have plenty, they will understand our position. So long as we, on behalf of you and the people, get value for the money we propose to expend on our health service, we will be quite satisfied. The profession have admitted that they cannot give us this service of their own accord and that is perfectly natural. I believe that a solution of our problems can be arrived at in a friendly atmosphere, so long as certain fundamental points are understood and accepted. The spokesmen of the profession, who, I must confess, have not tended to help matters up to the present, will have to make a little more obvious to the public the advantages which they propose to make available under a continuation of the present system or any amendments which they propose to introduce and can carry through of their own accord.

I should not like to go any further into the details of the mother and child service at the moment, if the House will forgive me, as they are largely tentative and provisional and are being discussed with the members of the profession, whose advice and help I am anxious to receive, if they feel that they can give them to me on behalf of our people. There was a suggestion recently in a speech by the president of the association that dispensary doctors would have increased responsibilities. In relation to that point—Deputy Ryan referred to it, too—naturally, if there are increased duties or increased responsibilities, there will follow increased remuneration. I hope I have tended to make the position reasonably clear in relation to that new development of our health services. I have dwelt on it for a fairly long time, because I think it important that Deputies should understand that the Minister or the Government is not leading them into any hare-brained or unnaturally revolutionary scheme which is going to deprive the profession of their livelihood or interfere in any way with the standards, the principles or the morality of those who benefit under our scheme. It is merely an extension of an existing principle of treatment.

Deputy Briscoe has referred on a number of occasions—and I think he is genuinely worried about the matter —to this question of the voluntary hospitals' deficits. I felt that I had dealt fairly fully with that problem recently, in reply to a question which the Deputy put down, but it appears that he is still concerned, as are others, like Deputy McCann, who also referred to it. The policy in relation to deficits of putting a limit to the deficit for the next three years of £400,000 is not a sudden decision of my Department, but has been the subject of discussion from time to time between the Department and various hospital groups since so far back as 1944, when, under Deputy MacEntee, the question was considered, as it was becoming, even then, six years ago, perfectly obvious that the deficit position was getting completely out of hand.

It is very difficult to know exactly what Deputy Briscoe's problem still is. We do not wish in any way to curtail the activities of the voluntary hospitals and we feel that the payment of a sum of £400,000, in addition to the other points I have mentioned, is a fairly reasonable treatment of the problem.

In relation to these deficits, I would like to refer to a letter which appeared in the Press on Saturday last, which showed that there were others besides Deputy Briscoe concerned about this problem. This letter was issued with the approval of the Board of the Associated Dublin Clinical Hospitals. It contained some very misleading statements and several inaccuracies, together with an allegation that I had made gravely misleading statements in this House in reply to a Dáil question. I would like to repudiate emphatically that allegation.

The stabilisation of hospital deficits has been under consideration for some time. I felt that it would be unfair to the hospitals to take any measures to curtail the deficits grants until the increase in the remuneration of nursing and domestic staffs and the increased expenditure due to the reduction in the working hours of these staffs was reflected in the accounts of the hospitals. This increased expenditure appears in the accounts for 1949 and has been taken into account in arriving at the sum which should be made available to the hospitals to meet their annual deficits for the years 1950, 1951 and 1952. In deciding to stabilise the deficits, regard was had also to commitments approved by the Hospitals Commission.

I find it difficult to understand the statement that the grants to be paid for the years 1950, 1951 and 1952 "ignore the circumstance that costs have risen during the years 1947, 1948 and 1949". As the writer states in the letter, the grants are based on the average of the deficits for those years. It is obvious, therefore, that the increased costs referred to have been included in the proposed grants for the next three years.

In regard to the point made that costs are still increasing, I am informed that there has been no significant increase in the cost of medicines and drugs during the past two years. In fact, there has been a very considerable decrease in the cost of penicillin and streptomycin—two drugs which have a very extensive use in the hospitals. As regards foodstuffs, I would point out that the index figure for food, base, August, 1947, equals 100, was less than average 98 for 1949 and the available figures for 1950 do not indicate any significant change since.

The writer of the letter is also confused when he states that the increase in the hospital bed accommodation during the years 1947, 1948 and 1949 has been ignored. The increase in the hospital bed accommodation in these years is reflected in the hospital accounts for the years in question and has, of course, been allowed. Where, however, the increase is only recent, special consideration will be given to the matter when the accounts for the year are available.

The letter referred particularly to a maternity hospital in which a new neonatal unit is being provided and speaks of the cost of specialist and nursing services for the unit as an item of additional cost to the hospital. The fact is that the cost of the nursing and paediatric staff required to operate this unit will be borne by the local authorities and, therefore, these costs will not be a charge on the funds of the hospital. The provision of an X-ray plant in the same hospital is referred to. This is a capital item, the cost of which will be borne from Sweepstake Funds totalling £103,000 which are already held by the hospital. The cost of the proposed mother and child service will be borne by the health authorities and not by the hospitals.

The letter states that "where until now the Dublin hospitals have treated rich and poor alike the commission's circular will mean inevitably that the sick rich man can get the treatment that the hospitals cannot afford to give the sick poor". This is, of course, untrue. The cost of treatment of the sick poor is borne by the public assistance authorities. The cost to such authorities has been increased to £4 4s. 0d. a week to bring it more into line with actual maintenance costs.

The letter complained also that "much play is made in the circular on the economies to be effected by a new system of paying interim grants on the hospital deficits thereby reducing payments on hospital overdrafts". In fact, no play has been made on this matter but if, as is stated in the letter, the new system will result in a saving of £50,000 in overdraft interest over a period of five years, that is, a saving of £10,000 a year, I need only say that this sum, added to the £50,000 a year extra which it is estimated that the hospitals will receive from public assistance authorities by reason of the increase in the maintenance rate, will be a very considerable contribution towards the finances of the hospitals.

It is also a source of complaint that the hospitals have been requested to demand the payment of £4 4s. 0d. a week from "public bodies" which have made arrangements with them for the treatment of patients. In view of the earlier statement that hospital bed costs are between £7 and £8 a week, one would have thought that the hospitals would themselves have sought a revision of the contracts with such public bodies without waiting for such an obvious course to be pointed out to them. I am not aware of any good reason why such "public bodies" should expect to have their patients treated in the hospitals at a capitation charge considerably less than that now payable by public assistance authorities.

May I interrupt the Minister? I do not know that anybody in the House raised this letter to which the Minister is referring but, as the Minister is now answering the letter, it is only fair to say that that last point made by the Minister, of course, is on a wrong basis. In regard to the reference to contracts, there were contracts with trades unions and other such bodies who, besides paying the £2 2s. a week, agreed on a six months' notice basis also, to give a very substantial grant every year to the hospitals. That has been the practice for very many years. The Minister now is suggesting that that is in reference to local bodies. It has no reference whatever to local bodies.

I will read this letter, because I think it is a matter of important public policy.

I am only correcting the Minister. If he is reading, it is his own business to read what he likes. I am only referring to the fact that that particular reference is evidently misunderstood by the Minister. The position is that voluntary hospitals had made contracts with various bodies, including trade unions, who, besides giving an annual grant, whether they had patients to send in or not, had a special arrangement with each voluntary hospital to pay not more than £2 2s. a week for their members.

It is that to which they objected. The Minister is now forcing the hospitals to break their agreements with these bodies, trade unions and other such organisations, and from now on to charge them £4 4s. No such arrangement exists with local authorities because local authorities are bound to pay the £3 13s. 6d. laid down, which is now being increased to £4 4s. I think the Minister is making a mistake there, not wilfully, and I think it is only fair to point out that there is a mistake.

The general intention is that the hospitals will make reasonable arrangements with the different bodies with which it had these contracts up to date and that if these need amending——

It is for the trade unions to answer for themselves on that. They have been a very great source of support to the hospitals.

They have an opportunity of discussing it and of defending their point.

Incidentally, I am charged with endless lecturing of hospital boards. I emphatically repudiate this charge, which is entirely unfounded if not malicious. Neither have I at any time attempted to represent the members of hospital boards as extravagant, incompetent and unco-operative and I may say that I am getting more than a little tired of such baseless accusations. Nobody has a greater appreciation than 1 of the very valuable work being done by these hard working, able, conscientious men and women who devote their time to running the hospitals. I have not on any single occasion lectured the hospital boards but I have on several occasions expressed appreciation of the valuable work which they are doing.

A modern hospital is a very complex organisation, requiring administrative ability of no mean order for its successful administration. There is evidence that the commercial aspect of hospital organisation has in the past been relegated as a matter of secondary importance. There was apparently overlapping and duplication with consequential unnecessary expenditure. I have no doubt that considerable economies can be achieved if attention is devoted to this aspect of hospital organisation in future, but it is not for me to "lecture" the hospitals on how this should be done, even at the request of the chairman. Rather is it a matter for each hospital to study its own organisation and to decide for itself where economies can be effected without interfering with essential services. In this connection the following figures referring to two voluntary hospitals in Dublin indicate a necessity for an investigation into hospital costs. These are competent boards.

Average daily Bed Occupancy

Total Out-Patients' Attendances

Expenditure on Drugs and Chemicals

£

Hospital A

147.8

85,956

10,123

Hospital B

302.5

102,297

7,041

It is my statutory duty to ensure that the moneys made available to the hospitals from Hospitals Trust funds are duly expended on the purposes specified. The only conditions which I have imposed on the hospitals are those which any prudent business man would insist upon in the management of his business and I cannot understand why they should give rise to complaint. I am glad to note the willingness of the Board of the Associated Dublin Clinical Hospitals to co-operate with me in trying to reduce costs.

It is quite obvious that in the administration of the Hospitals Trust funds we cannot have it both ways. We cannot spend the money building hospitals and at the same time pay increasing deficit costs. What I have decided to do is to fix the deficits at what I believe to be a reasonable figure for three years and then depend on the ingenuity, common sense and ability of the hospital boards to see that they will be able to continue running these hospitals for at least a period of another three years in the same competent manner in which they have carried on in the past.

In making an arrangement like this, I believe that there will be hard cases. I think that the one to which the Deputy referred will turn out to be one of these, the Children's Hospital. I feel that, first, they should make every effort to attempt to keep within the budget which has been laid down for them and that then, if this genuine effort fails, it will be my job to attempt to meet their difficulties and give them what assistance I can.

I agree with Deputy Burke that cancer is causing us considerable concern. Probably Deputy Dr. Ryan was being serious but I do not know how he related his statement to the facts when he said that nothing had been done in relation to tuberculosis, cancer and various other matters such as that. I shall not reiterate the position with regard to tuberculosis. The position with regard to cancer—and Deputy Briscoe referred to this matter as well —is that this new company has now got to the stage of acquiring premises in Dublin. I understand that they propose to staff and equip these premises and to make it into a first-class modern cancer unit. They also have plans to provide a unit in Cork. I have entrusted to them the responsibility of developing the national cancer service. They have made considerable progress, having cleared away all the preliminary work, and I feel sure that in the near future they will start to show real results. The intention is to develop this service in co-operation with the existing authorities—the two mentioned by Deputy Burke, Hume Street and St. Anne's, Northbrook Road—as far as possible. Suggestions such as that made by Deputy Briscoe concerning Baggot Street Hospital would, I am sure, be welcomed by them and it would be a desirable development that all research should be centred under the one roof.

Deputy Childers referred to the standard of anaesthetics. That, of course, is an extremely difficult question to answer. There is no doubt that we are concerned with the standard in some parts of the country. Generally speaking, it is on the same high level as the rest of the medical practice in the country. We have, however, asked the anaesthetists and the Medical Association to consider the problem and to recommend to us a plan for improvement where necessary of the standard of anaesthetics.

Deputy Childers also asked about the development of psychiatric services. Under the Act, local authorities are encouraged to develop voluntary psychiatric clinics in each centre. Some progress has been made by some of the local authorities and we hope there will be a considerable extension because it is doing, we believe, a tremendous amount of good in saving people from deteriorating in mental health and in that way in reducing the population of mental cases in our institutions.

Deputy Briscoe said, and Deputy Dr. Ryan contributed to it, something on the general lines of how chastened I was this year compared with other years. I am afraid the attitude, so far as I was concerned anyway, was more one of self-satisfaction than of being chastened. I was, I felt, in the happy position of being able to state a fairly reasonable case for which we could, in the Department, take a fair degree of credit. Consequently, I did not feel that it was the slightest bit necessary for me in any way to overplay any particular point or suppress any information which was not particularly startling or which did not show an extraordinary degree of progress.

I felt that to have started something like over £6,000,000 worth of hospital buildings in various parts of the country was a reasonable achievement for a Government Department, working with all the difficulties arising from what has been described from time to time as red tape, etc.; that, in addition to providing over 2,000 beds in tuberculosis and numerous surgical clinics throughout the country, and in addition to organising food and drink regulations and the tremendously intricate, complicated regulations following the introduction of the mother and child service.

I think that the best proof of the truth of my statement, that the Department was full of plans when I went into it, is the very fact that it has been possible to put so many of them into operation in the last two and a half years. I hope that I will have to redeem Deputy Briscoe's promise to take off his hat to me in five years' time when we have completed our seven year programme of hospital buildings, two years having gone.

What were the conditions I suggested?

That I should build for half the beds.

Half the hospitals built by Fianna Fáil in seven years at twice the cost.

I believe there is a pretty good chance of my asking the Deputy to take off his hat.

I will take it off humbly if it is necessary for me to do so.

There were more people preparing for the county homes in those years.

The Deputy did not change yet; nothing will change him in saying what has no relation to the truth.

I would like to close now by referring once again to this problem of the mother and child service and to the organisation of our health services under that mother and child service. We intend to implement that section of the Health Act which will provide a service for all free, and we hope that it will be only a very short time now before this service will be freely available to mothers and children in the country.

I sincerely hope that our difficulties in relation to the medical profession will not prove too serious. I hope they will fully appreciate that we will give sympathetic consideration to their problems, and that we are fully conscious that those problems are real and are probably a considerable source of worry to them at present.

Major de Valera

On a point of order. I would like to make it clear that we would not acquiesce in what, I think, unwittingly has been the action of the Minister in dealing with matters which were not raised in the debate. On a point of proper order and procedure here, I think the Minister should cover all the matters of which he wishes to make an issue, in his opening speech and, strictly speaking, his reply should be confined to matters raised in the debate and cognate subjects. I make that point with reference to the letter. It means that nobody has a chance of answering the Minister in respect of such a thing as the letter. I mention this merely to obviate any inference of tacit acquiescence.

I ask permission to put a question to the Minister regarding my constituency of Roscommon. With reference to the extension of the county hospital and the nurses' home and the extension of accommodation for the domestic staff, will the Minister reconsider the position? We had an intimation that assistance would be given to us for those proposed extensions. There were promises given in 1946 and 1947. I suggest the Minister should give effect to the promises made then, no matter who the Minister may have been. We are in a pretty bad position. Some people are already kicking up a great rumpus in the county because of the extra charge. Will the Minister reconsider this matter and endeavour to do something about it? It is creating a very serious position in our place, anyhow.

I was not here for all of the Minister's reply, but I understand he did not say anything about the appointment of dispensary nurses. Could he possibly deal with that now?

We are very anxious that dispensary nurses should be appointed throughout the country. We have actually appointed public health nurses in a number of counties and under the mother and child service nurses will be appointed in each dispensary district, where the local authority considers it desirable. We think it is a very desirable development.

Will the Minister say if he is availing of the services of the jubilee nurses in so far as he can do so?

We fully appreciate the tremendous work they have done in the past and we are anxious they should continue to play their part in our health services.

I should like to put a question to the Minister similar to the question put by Deputy O'Rourke. I am concerned with Waterford and I should like to know whether, in the near or the distant future, the Minister can hold out some hope with regard to the various hospitalisation problems existing in that county?

In reply to Deputy O'Rourke, let me say that I will have the matter to which he refers looked into. If a definite undertaking was given by the previous Minister, I invariably fulfil any obligation where it has been given.

The Minister will find I am right, that there was such a promise.

I will have that matter investigated. Concerning Deputy Little's point, the short-term programme has gone ahead fairly well and I suggest to Deputies that they should take heart in the fact that it has gone ahead so well in the other places which need hospitals. Waterford will not have to wait unduly long before we take up consideration of the problems there.

Question—"That the Estimate be referred back for reconsideration"— put and negatived.
Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share