Deputy T.F. O'Higgins in his opening remarks said that the I.M.A. has the constitutional right to advise its members on the terms and conditions of appointments. I am not denying the right of any body to advise its members as to their conduct but there rests upon the Minister, the person who occupies the position of a Minister responsible for any Department, the responsibility to ensure that the position which he holds on behalf of the people, and which has also its constitutional rights and its duties, is fully maintained. I have the right and also the responsibility to see that no organisation in this country will succeed in its endeavour to prevent the proper functioning of any Act of the Oireachtas. I am convinced, by my knowledge of what has happened in this regard since the middle of 1958, that the purpose of certain members of the I.M.A. is to bring the administration of the Health Acts into disrepute with the general public and to prevent them from functioning properly.
The Deputy referred to public undertakings which I have given. I am prepared to stand over them. They were not unconditional undertakings. There was a condition attached to my offer to receive a deputation from the I.M.A. and it was that the ban which they had imposed, the proscription which they had imposed upon applications for certain posts, should be withdrawn, because that ban was imposed without due reason, without any justification and without prior notice.
The Deputy has also suggested that it is merely a question of nomenclature, so far as I am concerned. He has referred to the act of the I.M.A. as "what I have termed a ban." The designation of the action which the I.M.A. has taken did not, of course, originate with me. I have here the official report of the proceedings of the Central Council of the Association held on 23rd April, 1959, and published in the June issue of the Journal of the Association. It refers to "the proscribed posts" and to "proscription of posts." The official report of the proceedings of the annual general meeting on 30th June, reported and quoted in the August issue of the Journal, referred to a resolution from a branch as follows: "This branch is of opinion the time is opportune for revising the Association's policy concerning (a) the ban on medical appointments."
So there is a ban. I have further evidence here, but I do not wish to utilise the time left to me to go into it, showing that, in fact, there was and is a ban. I informed the Association that so long as that ban was persisted in, I would not meet them. They published a letter disclaiming that there was any ban. Acting on that, I indicated that, since there was no ban, I was prepared to meet them but evidence came to me later, and continues to come, to indicate quite clearly that there was a ban and that it remains.
I went down to the function to which Deputy O'Malley has just referred; but I went down there under conditions and as a result of assurances which I had received from prominent members of the Association. Here it is necessary for me to read an extract from a letter which I wrote to one of these gentlemen, one of the gentlemen who was responsible for the insulting reference to myself which was published recently.
Let me say this. I am not dealing with this as a personal matter. I am dealing with this issue as a Minister of State charged to protect the prerogatives of a Minister on behalf of the public. Here is what I did write to one of the gentlemen who has had the audacity to refer in the newspapers to my attendance at this dinner. One thing I have learned as a result is to beware of dining officially with doctors in future. I said this:
Dear So-and-So: Further to our conversation at the Reception in honour of the President on Thursday night last regarding my acceptance of the invitation of the Irish Medical Association to their Annual Dinner at Killarney on the night of Wednesday next, 1st proximo...
my letter was dated the 26th June—
However, as I was unable to attend the similar function last year, but mainly as an earnest of my desire for good relations between the profession and the Department of Health in the interests of the general good, I would like very much to attend this year.
The position, however, is not without difficulty.
The Association has assured me and the general public that there is no ban or boycott on medical posts in local authority hospitals. On the basis of that declaration and accepting it as unequivocally and definitively expressing the considered view of the Irish Medical Association, I agreed to meet a deputation from the Association in an effort to arrive at a solution of certain matters at issue between us. Recent events at Mallow, however, seem to belie the statement that there is no boycott. An effort is being made to clear up the situation there and if a satisfactory settlement can be arrived at in the next day or two, I shall ask the Taoiseach to make arrangements for my absence and will have pleasure in accepting the invitation to the dinner.
A day or two before I was due to depart for this function, the issue of the Journal of the Irish Medical Association appeared and in that issue, instead of the usual editorial, they had cribbed an editorial which had appeared, I think, a fortnight before in one of the provincial newspapers and published it as their own editorial. I immediately indicated that in those circumstances I was proposing not to attend the dinner of the Irish Medical Association. I received certain reassurances, however, and in consequence I wrote again to my correspondent and said:
Thanks for your note and for the assurances which it gives. I confess that, were it not for these and those which the Association's President Elect, Dr. Dolan, also gave me on Saturday evening, I should have been slow to make the long journey to Killarney and back this week in view of the Editorial in the July issue of your Journal.
I was the more annoyed by the ill-timed reprint of The Nationalist editorial in the Journal, as in the spirit of my letter of the 15th June to the I.M.A. I had with some restraint refrained from replying to it. However, Mr. Murray has told me of the discussion which he had with Dr. Reilly and your good self, from which I gather that, being gravel'd for lack of matter, the Editor of the Journal had to find something to fill the page. Accordingly, as I am a good-natured man, I am looking forward to being with you and your colleagues on Wednesday. My wife is coming also—she feels that her presence will safeguard me from the lancets and scalpels of the brotherhood.
Those are the conditions upon which I went to this dinner at Killarney. Notwithstanding the letter to which Deputy O'Malley has referred, I am still prepared to meet the members of the Irish Medical Association, but only because I put the public interest above my own private and personal position. Indeed, if that letter had referred to me in my ordinary capacity as a private citizen in this State, I should refuse ever again to speak to any person responsible for it. In spite of all this, I am still prepared to meet a deputation from the Irish Medical Association, provided that they honour their word, that they make good their disclaimers and withdraw the ban upon these posts.
