asked the Minister for Health if he will state in respect of the proposed revision of Cork Urban and Cork Rural Nos. 1 and 2 Dispensary Districts (a) the date on which revision proposals were originally made, (b) the date and nature of the most recent proposals made by the South Cork Board of Public Assistance, (c) the date and nature of the reply sent to the board and (d) when a final decision may be expected.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Revision of Cork Dispensary Districts.
Proposals were received in my Department from the South Cork Board of Public Assistance on the 16th May, 1957, for the reorganisation of Cork Rural Nos. 1 and 2 Dispensary Districts and Cork Urban Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 Dispensary Districts. No proposals have been received for the reorganisation of Cork Urban Nos. 1 and 2 Dispensary Districts. These are the only proposals for the revision of dispensary districts in the area before my Department.
It was found necessary to obtain further information from the board and subsequently to obtain vertification of the figures supplied. These inquiries were completed early in December last. The proposal is still under consideration and as the Deputy is aware, I have invited the Deputies who are members of the board to discuss the matter with me to-morrow.
In August, 1956, and again in February, 1957, it was suggested to the local authority that a temporary additional district medical officer should be appointed to Cork Rural No. 2 Dispensary District to assist the medical officer of this district, who appears to have to attend an excessive number of patients eligible for general medical services. The most recent proposal from the board related to the appointment of the additional temporary district medical officer to serve in portions of Cork Rural Nos. 1 and 2 Dispensary Districts. This proposal was submitted in November, 1957, and approved on the 27th January, 1958. I have since learned that the board does not propose to proceed with the making of the appointment.
As it is quite clear from the information now given by the Minister that the unfortunate delay n reaching a solution of this problem cannot be attributed to the action or inaction of any Deputy in this House on the South Cork Board of Public Assistance, does the Minister not think that he should now withdraw the serious allegations which he made against Deputy Desmond and others in this House?
I have nothing whatever to withdraw. The Deputy must not have heard the answer to the question. The Department approved of the appointment of an additional temporary district medical officer to serve in portions of Cork Rural Nos. 1 and 2 Dispensary Districts. I have since learned that the board does not propose to proceed with the making of the appointment.
Am I to take it that the Minister persists in the statement he made last week that Deputy Desmond and others are responsible for that state of affairs?
The Deputy may take it that he has to carry his share of responsibility in this matter.
The Minister is not withdrawing that allegation, Sir.
Is it correct to say, in relation to the deputation that the Minister is to receive, that this question was entered last Friday morning and that the letter from the Minister's office in relation to the proposed conference to-morrow was sent out only last Friday night?
Deputy Desmond must be aware of the fact that I had agreed to receive this deputation some weeks ago but there was some slip up in the arrangements, not on my part. However, if the Deputy does not want to come, he need not come.
Further arising from the Minister's reply, is it correct to state that while some person or persons of the Minister's Party were asked to arrange for a deputation, up to the receipt of the Minister's letter, neither Deputy Casey nor I, as two members of the board, knew anything whatsoever about any conference being fixed? May I also ask the Minister is it correct to state that it was only on Friday evening, at 6.30, that the letters were posted arranging for this conference to-morrow?
I do not know exactly when the letters issued from my Department but, if the complaint of the Deputy is that the notice has not been sufficiently long——
No.
I am quite prepared to postpone——
No.
——the deputation and, if there is any inconvenience to the Deputy, he need not attend.
May I ask the Minister why it is that, although we have been looking forward to this conference for the last four weeks, it was only on last Friday night that the Minister decided to grant that conference?
You see, the Minister has a little more to do than to look after all the complaints of Deputy Desmond and he just cannot arrange that these letters should go out at a time which appears to be convenient to Deputy Desmond to receive them.