The speeches made on this Vote mostly seem to deal with the same point and they were mainly about special allowances. There were some other points made by other Deputies. Deputy MacEoin asked a question regarding the recent changes of the personnel on the Referee's Advisory Committee under the 1934 Act. These changes were made under Section 6, sub-section (2) (a) of the Military Service Pensions Act, 1934. I dealt with that matter in a reply to a recent question, but apparently Deputy MacEoin wishes to know under what section that action was carried out and I am now informing him. Under that section, members hold office during the pleasure of the Government.
Deputy MacEoin also mentioned the question of the amendment it was proposed to introduce to extend the time for applying for special allowances. It is hoped to introduce legislation shortly to extend the date for application for medals which would qualify certain people for special allowances. A number of other Deputies, Deputy Gilbride, Deputy MacCarthy and Deputy Carty, also asked that question.
Deputy Gilbride also referred to the reduction which took place in the number of special allowances awarded. Special allowances are reduced for either of two reasons. The first is because there is a reduction in the appropriate annual sum under the Act. For example, when the applicant reaches the age of 70 or his children reach the age of 18, the Act provides there shall be a reduction in either of those cases. The second reason for a reduction in the special allowances is if there is some improvement in the applicant's means. If any Deputy believes that that has been wrongly administered in any particular case, he can always have, if he asks for it, a statement of the means taken into account in arriving at the decision to reduce the special allowance in that case.
The delays that take place in giving special allowances were mentioned by a number of Deputies. Deputy Carty objected to the fact that it should be necessary for people, whom he described as veterans of the War of Independence, to submit to the indignity of having to produce reverification in respect of medals already awarded. This was decided upon because it was in fact discovered—and I think it was discovered first as a result of representations made by Deputies—that, in a number of cases, medals have been awarded to people who were not really entitled to them. Originally the award of a medal did not carry any financial benefit with it and apparently the machinery for awarding them was not foolproof. The result was that a number of medals were awarded which, it was subsequently found, should not have been awarded. It was to avoid wrongful expenditure of public moneys it was decided that, on the question of applications for special allowances, it would be necessary to have this reverification.
I agree with that decision. I think it is right that the expenditure of public moneys should be carried out only in accordance with the law—in other words, that public money should not be given to anybody who cannot prove satisfactorily he is entitled to it. I do not think there is any indignity in asking a man to establish the fact he is a person to whom the Act was meant to apply and that he is, in fact, entitled to be granted a special allowance.
The investigation of claims for special allowances is carried out in three stages. The first is that the applicant has to establish the fact he is a qualified person. In order to do that all the officers of his company or battalion are written to for verification. It is in that first stage that the biggest delay occurs. Unfortunately there is often considerable delay in getting these Old I.R.A. officers to reply to these queries. Perhaps the reasons are those mentioned by some Deputies to-day, that some of these men are becoming old and dis-interested; that their memories are not as good as they used to be and they find difficulty in remembering details. I certainly cannot think of any other way in which this verification could be carried out. I believe it is right that these matters should be thoroughly verified before public money is spent.
Deputy Carty referred to these people as veterans of the War of Independence. Surely it is only right that we should first of all establish that they are, in fact, veterans of the War of Independence before these special allowances are allotted? I have every sympathy with people whose claims for allowances are held up in this way and I do everything possible to expedite them. As I say, the biggest part of the delay is this step of verification.
The second step is to establish the applicant's means. This is investigated by means of the local social welfare officer. It is very rarely any undue delay occurs at this stage. It is only in very difficult and complicated cases that delay occurs. I know it happens sometimes but not very often.
The third step is to establish whether or not the applicant is incapable of self-support by reason of permanent infirmity. Providing he is under 70 years of age, it has to be established he is incapable of self-support. That is done by the Army Pensions Board. They do not insist on the applicant travelling to Dublin. They appoint local medical officers to examine the applicants. Sometimes there are borderline cases and it is necessary for the board to arrange to have a series of tests carried out before they are finally convinced that the person is, in fact, incapable of supporting himself by reason of permanent infirmity. Surely it is only reasonable, since that is the condition on which these special allowances are granted, that the board should satisfy themselves on this point also?
Those are the delays. I do not know of any other delays that have occurred except in the establishing of these three steps. Each of them is necessary and I do not think any of them are unreasonable. Any delays that are alleged to be due to the board itself I will have investigated if I am notified of the details.
Deputy Carty mentioned another point concerning injuries received in the Army which do not recur until after the person concerned has been more than five years out of the Army. That is something of which I was not aware. I shall look into it and see what is the position.
Deputy Booth referred to disability pensions for people who contract tuberculosis in the Army. Soldiers in the Army are insured under the Social Welfare Acts. They qualify for the same benefits under the Social Welfare Acts as people outside. With regard to officers, I have to draw Deputy Booth's attention to the fact that neither the Civil Service, nor the Garda have a similar provision to that which he suggests for the Army. I do not think the risk of contracting tuberculosis is any greater in the Army than in any other occupation. In fact, it would be my opinion that Army life would make people more resistant to this disease than other occupations. Whether a special case can be made for this provision in regard to the Army as distinct from other occupations is a matter that will have to be gone into. Certainly I do not know that there is any special case to be made in that respect.
I do not think there is any other point raised that requires an answer here. Delays will be eliminated as far as possible, as far as I am concerned. However, any Deputies who have any influence with local Old I.R.A. officers would help considerably if they would impress upon them the necessity of replying, as soon as possible, to the Department's questionnaire in regard to medals.
