I move:
That the Second Interim Report of the Select Committee on the Health Services, presented to Dáil Éireann on 6th March, 1963, be adopted.
Health Services Committee—Second Interim Report: Motion.
I move the following amendment:
To delete the words "be adopted" and substitute:
"be referred back to the Committee for reconsideration and that, since the Committee has made substantial progress in the investigations into the position of the existing General Medical Services, the Committee, in lieu of its present obligation to report by 31st March, 1963, be permitted to complete its investigations of the General Medical Services and to report to the Dáil on these services with recommendations not later than 1st June, 1963, and, on completion of its report on General Medical Services, to complete its investigations and to report with recommendations on the other health services not later than 1st December, 1963."
I regret I must dissent from my colleagues, Deputies in the Select Committee of the Dáil, in the presentation of this report. I believe the proposals in the report, particularly the proposal which does not specify any date for a reference back in regard to the task set to the Committee, is undesirable. As the House knows, the Committee was established about a year ago. Since that time, we have made some substantial progress, as the report points out, in the consideration of one aspect of the health services, namely, the general medical services. It is agreed by the Committee that we have advanced well in the consideration of that section of the services. It has taken a year to arrive at that stage.
There are the other components of the medical services before the Committee—the ophthalmic services, mental hospital and other type services, dental services, mental defection in young people, nursing services, the ambulance section, the care of old and disabled persons and other smaller matters such as chiropody, and so on. It seems to me, therefore, that, taking our present rate of progress as a yardstick for future progress, it is reasonable to suggest that the Dáil will not get its report in toto on all the services for a very long time. It could certainly be another year.
The position is, as this report points out, that, while we have made this progress at a very slow rate, we now have to inform the Dáil that in future we cannot continue progress at even this rate. Consequently, I believe the House should have every right to feel disturbed by the fact that they are now asked for an indefinite extension of the Committee's consideration of the tasks set them. I, as I feel sure everybody knows, have never been enthusiastic about the idea of Dáil commissions. It has certainly turned out in this case to be the classic device used since Victorian times, and probably long before that, by a Conservative Government in office anxious to resist change and to resist progress.
We have at present commissions established to consider many other aspects and activities of our society in regard to very important branches of these activities, such as education in particular, the Irish language, rural Ireland, itinerants and so on. However, while all of these have their varying degrees in importance, I believe the Committee on Health Services by far the most important. Therefore, I think our discussion of the matters under consideration by this Committee for the improvement of health services is something which both the Government and the Opposition should put their minds to. I disagree with the general idea of commissions because I believe the general intention behind them is merely to defer taking decisions for as long as possible. The idea of a commission is on all fours with other proposals aimed at concealing the fact from the public that the government of the country has been so conducted over the years that, in fact, we cannot afford to provide——
On a point of order, I suggest that the line which the Deputy is now taking must be construed as an attack on a decision of the Dáil to establish the Select Committee. The only point which we are entitled to consider here is the report of the Committee, whether it should be adopted as presented or adopted with the amendment tabled by Deputy Dr. Browne, that is to say, to fix a definite date for the Committee's report. Deputy Dr. Browne is not entitled to discuss the merits or otherwise of the decision the Dáil took——
I thought Deputy Carty was Chairman of this Select Committee, not the Minister for Health.
I am.
If the Deputy proceeds on the line of discussing commissions and committees in general and finding fault with them, or making it a platform from which to speak on other matters, I cannot allow him. So far, he has been strictly within the rules of order.
So far, I am a member of the Select Committee and it is, therefore, clear that I accept the decision of the Dáil establishing that Committee whose function is to try to find out the defects in the medical services and to make recommendation for the elimination of these defects. I cannot simply be a silent party to a continuation of the delay—avoidable delay—which I believe is embraced in the report submitted here, a delay in bringing back to the Dáil the Committee's suggestions and comments on the health services and on how the defects in them could be remedied. I say the matter cannot be dealt with in the dilatory way apparent in this report which does not specify any date whatsoever for their final report or, indeed, for their interim report.
I should make it clear, perhaps, that, when I agreed to act on this Committee, I did so on the assumption that we would adhere to the recommendation of the Dáil that the Committee report back by a certain date. We did not report back by a particular date but have asked the House for an extension of that date. I disagreed with that on the Committee; I disagreed with the decision to look for an extension of the date and continued to work on the Committee in the hope that we would be in a position to report back to the Dáil by 31st March. As the report points out, we will not report back by 31st March. I am conceding that we have not yet arrived at a position where we could report usefully in regard to comments and suggestions on the health services but I do say it is possible for the Committee to report back by the date specified by me here, 1st June next, in relation to the general medical services. I see no objection whatever to that proposal.
With the greatest respect to all the good men and women who have come before us, I must confess that I have derived very little value indeed from the investigations which we have carried out. However, leaving that aside, I have merely had my own beliefs in regard to our health services confirmed, my beliefs as an individual, my beliefs as a politician and my beliefs as a professional, that grave defects exist in the health services and that these grave defects should be removed as soon as possible.
While it is a matter of relative indifference whether the various other commissions of differing degrees of importance refer back with expedition, this question of health is of such fundamental urgency that we simply cannot allow an indefinite extension of the activities of the Select Committee. Remember, there are serious defects in the services and we have had it on excellent authority here, leaving aside whatever has been submitted to the Committee. We have had the main Opposition Party here moving motions in which they have put the most comprehensive case, made the most compelling indictments of the existing health services and in particular, of our general medical services.
I cannot allow the Deputy to proceed to discuss anything that has been referred to the Select Committee for examination. Let that be understood.
Surely this report refers to the general medical services?
They may not be discussed because they have been referred to the Select Committee. It is only dates, really, that are relevant to this discussion, dates as to when the Select Committee may report.
I am trying to make the case that if this motion is accepted, then no action will be taken in regard to the health services and I suggest in my amendment that action should be and can be taken.
This House referred certain matters, under terms of reference, to a Select Committee. That Select Committee is considering the matter and has made an interim report and will further consider the matter for a final report. Obviously, I cannot allow matters which have been referred to that Select Committee to be canvassed and discussed here.
On a point of order, in Paragraph 5 of this report, it is stated that the hearing of evidence on the general medical services by the Select Committee is well advanced. Is the Deputy not entitled to comment on that statement which is embodied in the report itself that, in view of the fact that the hearing of evidence is well advanced, a case can be made for the date laid down in the amendment?
The Deputy has already said that.
I am allowing the Deputy to suggest that the date should be extended or that the date should be restricted; I am not putting any bounds on him in regard to that, but it is obvious to anybody who understands Parliamentary procedure that if the House refers a matter to a Select Committee, it cannot then proceed to discuss it while it is in the Committee.
Surely, I have to make a case for dissenting from my colleagues and to give my reasons for my proposals?
The Deputy is doing very well as he is at the moment.
Yes, but I was interrupted by the Chair.
Yes, because the Deputy was straying from the path which I thought he should keep to.
The Minister for Health is responsible for that.
For what?
Do not try to do a "Deputy Norton" now.
The Minister does not want to hear Deputy Dr. Browne on this.
It is very difficult——
I believe it is very difficult, but will the Deputy keep within the amendment?
We are all aware that the reason this Select Committee was established was to make recommendations in regard to the health services and, as I have said, we have had from all Parties here support for the view that changes of varying kinds were needed. Both the main Opposition Party, Fine Gael, and the Labour Party, supported this view. The procedure which we had adopted on the Committee was to deal with the services in two broad blocks. First, we took the general medical services, as mentioned in the report. We proceeded by examining these services in isolation and we have left for our later consideration the other ones which I mentioned in opening.
On a point of order, is it in order for Deputy Dr. Browne to refer to the programme and plans the Select Committee have mapped out for the conduct of their business?
Surely it is self-evident from the report?
It is in the report.
It is in the report.
There is no reference to that in the report.
Read Paragraph 5.
There is reference to a certain examination that has been carried out. There is no reference, or should not be any reference, to the future plans and programme mapped out by the Select Committee.
May we not take it that the Select Committee would carry out the task set it by the Dáil, which is to examine all the services, including the general medical services?
That is what I am trying to impress upon the Deputy, that that task has been given to the Committee.
As the report points out, we have made very good progress in the consideration of the general medical services and I believe that it is possible for us, arising out of the progress we have made, to recommend to the Dáil that we be relieved of the responsibility of referring back en bloc on the services and that we be allowed to conclude our consideration of the general medical services.
The point I have found it difficult to impress on my colleagues is that we could carry out that separate investigation to a conclusion and return here and make recommendations in regard to it. Being completely reasonable in conceding to them that because there is other evidence to be heard it will take some time for all the evidence to be collated and considered and digested by the various members of the Committee and that the conclusions and recommendations would then take time also to collate and to make to the Dáil, I suggested that we should be allowed the whole of April and May and most of this month, that is, nearly three months, to conclude considerations which are conceded in the report to be well advanced. That is a very reasonable position and I sincerely hope that it will be supported by the main Opposition Party, the Fine Gael Party, and by the Labour Party who have on a number of occasions made it quite clear that they feel that there are grave defects in our general medical services and who have also made it quite clear on a number of occasions that they know how these defects could be remedied, so that I do not see why there should be any difference between us at all on this proposition.
Some Deputies may feel that this is undesirable insofar as it does seem to recommend that we should have piecemeal legislation in regard to health services. I do not think we should worry but the fact of the matter is that health legislation in this country——
I have given the Deputy a good deal of latitude. He is now proceeding to discuss the method by which legislation should be brought before the House. He is endeavouring to discuss heads of legislation. That matter has been referred to a Select Committee by the Dáil and the Dáil would be putting itself in a peculiar position if it referred a particular matter to a Select Committee to report on and then proceeded to discuss that matter here.
May I put this point? If the matter is referred to a Select Committee and the Select Committee never reports back, what is the position? We have this possibility now because in this report no date is mentioned.
I do not want to be rude to the Deputy but the Deputy has the means of finding out the answer to his question by referring to my Office or myself. This is not the method.
Surely, in those circumstances, we would be permitted to suggest to the House the reasons why we believe the report is being deferred, simply because the Committee does not want to report back?
The Deputy has said that but this is not the way to bring that matter before the House.
Surely that would involve a motion to discharge the Committee?
This is not a motion to discharge the Committee.
No, but surely that is the way the Deputy could do it if he wanted to.
Let the Deputy take the appropriate action.
I believe that the effect of deferring the report in this way will be that there will be avoidable delay in the presentation of the report, that this is clearly a retrograde decision on the part of the Committee and that the Dáil should not be party to that decision and that they should recommend to the Committee that the task set them by the Dáil should be completed in the way I have suggested.
I think the position in regard to the public is that they believe that because this Select Committee of the House is sitting the avoidable suffering, avoidable pain and avoidable deaths which are resulting or which do result from the defective standards of our health services are unavoidable until we have a full consideration of the problems involved and that until the Dáil Committee completes its consideration, there can be no alleviation of this very undesirable state of affairs in our health services generally. I believe that to create this impression, as this report does—that there is no other way out of the position where we have these defective health services —is to mislead the public. It is dishonest on the part of the Select Committee——
This is really attacking the appointment of the Committee.
It is the report I am speaking about. It does not convey the true facts to the public and for that reason it is consciously and deliberately misleading——
Does the Deputy stand over that?
I think so, yes. I have no objection. I believe it is consciously and deliberately misleading the public.
Will the Deputy tell us how many members supported him in relation to this matter?
I think it would be better to allow the Deputy to proceed.
I believe that this Committee, since the beginning, was instituted by the Minister in order to mislead the public, deliberately and consciously to mislead the public into the assumption that he intends to take some radical steps to improve the health services. I do not think he has any such intention. As I said, this is clearly a time-wasting procedure. I do not mean any disrespect to those who have come before the Committee but I think it is a waste of public time. It is misleading the public in its intent to convey the impression that there is a sense of serious urgency and that this Committee is seriously concerned with the future of our health services and determined to spare no efforts to act as rapidly as possible in bringing about the badly-needed alleviation in our health services. I think there is no controverting that fact. The Minister does not surprise me at all because he is a member of a Government who are virtually bankrupt and simply——
That does not arise.
——must take whatever steps they can to delay——
That does not arise in this debate.
All that surprises me is that he should have got the co-operation of the Fine Gael and Labour Party Opposition in this Committee. I hope they will take this opportunity of reversing their decision and trying to help in the achievement of the very radical changes which are needed to bring our health services up to a reasonable standard so that all persons are treated with the same level of medical care in our health services and that everybody has the same——
The Deputy is endeavouring to discuss the medical services which have been referred to this Committee. I have told him that should not be done as it would be simply stultifying the Dáil that made the appointment of the Committee if it proceeded to discuss the matters referred by it to the Committee. The Deputy is repeating himself very much.
It must be quite clear to everybody here that this is a debate on the health services which has gone on for the best part of 20 years and anybody who suggests that there are any of us here who are not clear in our own minds as to the proper pattern our future health services should take is either a very cynical or very foolish person. We are all clear in our own minds as to the type of health service required, although we differ on the way in which it should be carried out. We know that radical changes are needed and that the Committee have asked the House for an indefinite extension of their time——
It is not indefinite.
If that is acceded to by the House, I want to make it clear that there is an all-Party conspiracy in this hypocritical decision.
"Everybody is out of step but my Johnny."
I do not want to discuss the work of the Committee because that is not possible since I am not a member of the Committee nor have I any information of any kind as to the work which this Committee have done or upon which they are now engaged. The general feeling of this House when this Committee was set up was that it should apply itself to dealing with the problems thrown up by the Health Act of 1953 and any new problems which have since emerged. I understood that the House generally accepted the point of view that after our experience of the Health Act, we should have another look at the whole situation; see where the infirmities and imperfections lay and endeavour to provide a remedy for them.
The original thought on this matter was that we should get a solution for these problems within a relatively short period but the fact that we have this report and, I think, previous reports, are indications that it has not been as easy to find a solution as was originally contemplated. The Committee—I do not know in what proportions one way or another —has come to the House and asked for a postponement of the date on which they should make their report, due, presumably, to the fact that they have not been able to masticate the amount of evidence they received nor to complete the processing of that evidence so as to enable them to reach a solution for the problems which confront them. I do not want to go over that ground or to attempt to apportion responsibility here or there for the fact that we have not a report from that Committee at the moment. I am sure many members of the Committee are anxious that the report should be presented to the House with the utmost expedition and that it should eliminate many of the difficulties which have shown themselves in the structure of the Health Act, 1953.
What I am concerned about at the moment is, that, whether we like it or not, whether we amend this motion or not, it is obviously going to be some time before we receive a comprehensive report on the general practitioner service and on all the other facets of medical treatment here. In the light of things, it may very well be that this House will not have an opportunity of dealing with that matter even in the lifetime of the present Parliament. Of course, it may be possible that the report will be available earlier, but at all events, we are not going to have the report as early as we first contemplated.
At this stage I want to ask the Minister, seeing that he, too, must have hoped the report would be available earlier than it now will be available, to exercise his ministerial functions and to ask the county managers to relax the rather rigid interpretation of the means test imposed by them in the administration of the 1953 Act.
This is going outside the bounds of the report.
I am merely asking the Minister, who has power in this matter since he is the interpreter of the wishes of this House, that, as we have reached a stage in which, contrary to all our expectations, the Committee are not able to report, he should, in that emergency circumstance, exercise his powers to do something with our health services, because we will not be able to get a recipe for the solution of the difficulties from the Committee set up by this House.
I do not think it is unreasonable to suggest to the Minister in a matter of a couple of minutes what he could do to relieve the situation suddenly thrown upon the House.
This is a motion that the report be adopted. There is an amendment for certain qualifications.
The motion recommends a certain procedure. The amendment suggests: "You have done so much in respect of one field, you ought to go on and finish that and you should leave the other fields and complete them by a certain later date." That is the point being discussed at the moment.
That is in by way of amendment.
I want to push another point of view, which is probably between both points of view, namely, that if, well and good, the motion is carried and the whole question of presenting a report within a particular date is deferred, I think it falls on the Dáil to say: "If we cannot have the report within the date originally contemplated, it is not outside the powers of the Dáil to suggest to the Minister that in the meantime he should take some definite steps to ease the burden on the people for the relief of whose burden we established this Committee."
I do not propose to spend much time on it. I think I am entitled to say to the Minister that he would obviate much of the hardship which may arise if there is a delay in presenting the report, if he would, in conjunction with the county managers, examine the possibility of modifying the means test at present imposed on persons where they are patients in hospital or where they apply for medical cards. These are the two most pressing aspects of the defects in our health services from the point of view of people up and down the country. If these two problems could be eliminated, much of the complaint about the Health Act, 1953, would disappear.
Now that we have apparently reached the situation that we cannot get a recommendation giving us an early solution for the imperfections in the Health Act, I am asking the Minister to take the step of saying to the county managers: "We have run into difficulties in this and we will not have a report on time." At the same time, he should ask them to relax the means test they are at present imposing rather rigidly in many parts of the country on patients seeking admission to local authority hospitals or people seeking a medical card as a means of access to the general practitioner service because their income is not such as to enable them to pay the current charges of medical practitioners. If the Minister would do that, he would be making a substantial contribution to an easement of the present difficulties imposed on persons without medical cards whose resources are, nevertheless, not sufficient to enable them to pay hospital fees or pay general medical practitioners.
This Committee is representative of all sides of this House. It was elected by this House to do a particular job. We have our own policy to put before the country on the question of health services. This Committee was set up by the House to examine certain questions and asked to report by a given date. They have come back to the House and said: "We are not physically able to report by that given date, if we are to give the consideration to the questions referred to us which we think is requisite."
In my opinion, if the Committee want more time, they should get it. I see no object whatever in solemnly declaring that the Committee are to report before a date on which the Committee themselves say they are able to report and, therefore, we are supporting the motion that the interim report submitted by the Chairman, Deputy Carty, should be adopted.
As one of the Labour Party representatives on the Committee, I want to say to Deputy Dr. Browne that I am as keen to finish our deliberations and come to a final decision as any other member. This Committee have met more often than any other Committee set up by the House within the given period. Even during the Recess and during the wintry weather of last January, we travelled hundreds of miles to attend meetings of the Committee in the afternoons and evenings. Not only have we to consider the evidence already given, but we still have many more important bodies to give evidence, which will have to be digested later before we can come to any decision on the first task entrusted to us.
We were not set up to report on general medical services; we were set up to report on the health services as a whole. I want to repudiate any suggestion by Deputy Dr. Browne that this is an all-Party attempt deliberately to hold up the House. It is my honest belief that every member of the Committee is just as keen as Deputy Dr. Browne and I to conclude, to establish what the difficulties are, to find remedies and to report back to the House. I repudiate any suggestion that the Labour Party or any other Party by any deliberate action are trying to delay a report in this case.
Or trying to mislead the House—that is the allegation that was made.
We are not trying to mislead anybody.
(South Tipperary): I am as anxious as anybody to get an early report from the Health Services Select Committee but this amendment suggests that we should, in the first instance, submit a report on the general medical services; in other words, the general practitioner services. We have not considered any other aspect than that yet and even as regards these services, we have not considered the financial aspect. To my mind, general practice, institutional practice and public health practice are all closely linked and their administration and their financing are also closely linked. I felt that we could not submit a piecemeal report. We would have to make our various investigations and then try to co-relate the different facets of medical practice in order to present a sensible and comprehensive report. It was in that spirit that the Committee thought that extra time was justifiable and justified. It is not with any intention of delaying the report and there is no suggestion of any conspiracy of any sort whatever.
Deputy Carty to reply.
I should like to be clear on this. Is there a right to reply?
By whom?
By Deputy Dr. Browne.
No; Deputy Carty, the mover of the motion, has a right to reply.
I should like to say a few words on this. The amendment is a very fair and reasonable one because it asks this Select Committee to report by a certain date, that date being 1st June, 1963. To my mind, it is nonsensical for any Committee, Select or otherwise, to be given a job to do without this House providing a specific and reasonable date for that Committee to report back. Deputy Hogan has pointed out that this Committee have confined themselves so far to a discussion on the general medical services. We know if we listened today to the Minister for Health that the general medical services are crying out for improvement and that two most important aspects of the general medical services that need immediate attention are first, choice of doctor and secondly, the present cost of medicines. There is nothing wrong with the suggestion made by Deputy Dr. Browne that the Committee finalise the position now on the general medical services and report back to the House with their recommendations by next June.
If the motion moved by Deputy Carty is passed, in my opinion, it will mean there will be no change in the health services for the next three to four years. Every Party has made it quite clear over the past 15 years, since I came into this House, that they are dissatisfied with the health services and particularly with the general medical services. I do not think it unfair to ask the members of the different political Parties to get a move on. Nobody suggested that the individuals who sat on the Select Committee were slow themselves. I do not for a moment suggest that the individuals were responsible for the hold-up but I do believe that the idea behind this Select Committee was to procrastinate and we have the evidence here in the Second Interim Report which does not even set a date for the next report back.
It is admitted in Paragraph 5 that the hearing of evidence on the general medical services is well advanced. "Well advanced" in the mind of the Minister for Health could mean he had reached the age of senile decay. "Well advanced" in the mind of the Committee means they have almost reached the stage where only a limited amount of evidence is now to be taken. I do not know what that is but having listened to Deputy Hogan, I believe it is quite clear that as far as the general medical services are concerned the Committee, if they put their minds to it, would be able to report back in a short space of time. It is a very sad comment on politics that we have an appeal made to the Minister asking him to ask the county managers to stay their hands in regard to the means test. I have never heard anything as ridiculous in my life.
If the position has now been arrived at that the Minister is in a position to tell the county managers not to implement the means test, to be easy on John Murphy in Cork, or not to be hard on such an individual in Waterford, and the Minister has the power to do that, what is all this nonsense about the Select Committee? Does it not mean that the Minister has power to suspend the means test tomorrow, that he has the power to tell the county managers: "We no longer have a means test; we want you to implement a certain line of policy laid down by the Government"? There is no use suggesting as a temporary solution that the Minister should call on the county managers to go easy on the means test. The people who decide policy are the members of this House. They are the people who make the laws and the county managers are officials who carry out the law and if there are to be any orders given, they must be by this House through the Minister who is the responsible authority. There is no question of appealing.
In the circumstances, I have no hesitation in supporting the amendment. As far as the general medical services are concerned, the Committee are almost in a position to report and it is reasonable to extend the time. When the House has the report, the Minister will be in a position to present, to the relief of the general public, the views of the Committee which bear on the cost of medicines, the choice of doctors and admission to the various hospitals throughout the State. We have an example here today—I will not go into details—of the Minister taking 20 minutes of Question Time to reply to two simple questions on the Order Paper on the right to go into a hospital. Is not the fact that the Minister took that length of time to answer the simple questions, proof positive that the time is ripe to make a change in the general medical services?
In view of the trend taken by this discussion, I feel it necessary as a member of the Committee to place certain facts on record. First of all, it is quite apparent that the amendment to this motion is in fact a vote of no confidence in this House and in the Committee established by this House, and indeed Deputy Dr. Browne in all honour, if he possesses that characteristic, should now resign from the Committee, the Committee which he has repudiated, and the House he has sought to repudiate.
I am considering it.
For the record of the House again, it is quite apparent to anyone who may take the time to peruse the verbatim reports of the various lengthy meetings of this Committee and I feel it incumbent to say it, that one of the reasons for some of the procrastinations, delays, and even frustrations at times of that Committee has been the behaviour of Deputy Dr. Browne. I feel that——
On a point of order, is it in order for a Parliamentary Secretary to discuss the actual details of the discussions that take place at a Committee meeting?
The proceedings of the Committee should not be discussed.
It is gross misrepresentation as anybody who reads the reports will see. The reports should be put before the House and they can verify that. I hardly ever interfered in this Committee at all. I defy the Ceann Comhairle to insist that the reports be put here so that Deputies can read them for themselves and find that this is a gross misrepresentation of the position.
I think the Parliamentary Secretary should be asked to withdraw that severe statement.
I do not intend to withdraw it——
It is a disgraceful suggestion.
——and, indeed, I do not intend to discuss the details of the various Committee meetings. As Deputy Kyne has just stated, practically all the members of the Committee attempted to investigate——
That is quite a different thing from charging me with holding up the work of the Committee.
——each detail of our health administration seriatim, starting with the general medical services. As a responsible body, we decided, in following up that investigation, to ensure that we had presented before us all the representative bodies and organisations which wished to put their views before us. We heard them in detail, ranging from the representatives of a number of local authorities through the various doctor associations and, indeed, representatives of trade unions. We found many constructive suggestions emanating from these bodies and we wish now to consider those suggestions.
I repeat again that practically all the members of the Committee were agreed that no particular aspect of our health services administration could be considered in isolation from the point of view of drawing conclusions. We decided to take all aspects in stages and, following on that decision, we took first the general medical services. It was, however, practically a unanimous conclusion of the Committee that no positive recommendations in regard to the general medical services could be made in isolation; no recommendations could be made, therefore, until we had finished our full programme of work and had given full consideration to the health services in toto in the light of the various statements made to us.
This point of view has been very well expressed by Deputy Hogan. We commend that view to the House and I am sure the House will appreciate, as a result of the expression of that view here, that the Committee are functioning well and in a responsible way. Most of the members on the Committee have open minds. They are not obsessed by any particular doctrinaire theory in regard to our health services. Most members are genuinely seeking information from the representative groups appearing before the Committee. It is only a minority element on the Committee that is operating in another fashion, insisting on making lengthy, tendentious speeches on numerous occasions at meetings of the Committee.
Might I ask you, Sir, to rule on this matter? A serious imputation has been made against me in regard to my activities on this Committee. My activities can be readily verified by the presentation of the Committee reports to either this House or yourself. If the Parliamentary Secretary does not withdraw the charge the reports should be submitted to the House for verification.
We have all got the reports from time to time.
The reports will be easily available.
I have nothing to be afraid of.
But something to be ashamed of perhaps.
It is, I think, rather unusual for a member of a Committee of this House to put down an amendment dissociating himself from a decision taken by his Committee. I am sure Deputy Dr. Browne has no intention of disowning the Committee of which he is a member.
I think he has an intention of doing so.
A majority decision to publish and adopt this Second Interim Report was taken by the Select Committee and it is rather strange that the Deputy had to adopt the unusual procedure he has adopted in putting down an amendment here today. Deputy Dr. Browne said today that he disagrees with committees. Nevertheless he is a member of this Committee and, if he is dissatisfied with what we are doing, or with what we are trying to do, he has a course of action open to him.
He referred to a classical device for wasting time. I can assure the House that this Committee have not indulged in any time-wasting tactics. Deputy Kyne dealt more than adequately with that. He told the House of the meetings we had during the Recess the difficulties we experienced in travelling here, and the difficulties we have been having all down along the line in holding our meetings and getting the reports published for the consideration of members. We have to travel between Leinster House and the Department of Industry and Commerce in order to hold our meetings. It is a kind of shuttle service. We are working under great difficulties, as this report states, and it is very unfair to say we are not working with all possible expedition.
Deputy Dr. Browne let the cat out of the bag when he said that he had heard very little of value from all the estimable people and the reputable organisations that came before us to help us. He may not, of course, have an open mind. He may have certain preconceived opinions as to how our health services could be improved or should be bettered. The majority of the members of the Committee have open minds and are seeking for the truth to find out in what manner the services can be improved. What impresses me most about this Committee is that every member is interested in seeing how the services can be improved. We shall do our best to bring forward at the proper time, having considered the evidence before us, a report which will, we hope, be of some use to this House.
I am glad it is conceded that we have made substantial progress in our investigations. Deputy Dr. Browne suggested in his amendment that, in lieu of its present obligation to report, the Committee should report by June 1st next on the general medical services and he wants us to report by 1st December next on the other services. It is appropriate, I think, to refer here to the terms of reference under which this Committee was established.
The Dáil has power to change the terms of reference.
The principal one is:
"to examine to what extent, if any, experience has shown that, having regard to the general structure of our society, the existing system of health services does not meet in a reasonable way and at reasonable cost the essential needs of the various sections of the population for medical care and attention and, if the examination should disclose any significant defects in the system, to what these are due;"
The emphasis here is on the system of health services and it seems clear to me that the intention of the Dáil, when it appointed this Committee, was that there should be a comprehensive examination of the system of medical services and that the general medical services or any other service should not be reported on in isolation.
We should have regard to the fact that the scheme has to be financed. If we issued an interim report on the general medical services, which we are not in a position to do, we would tie the hands of the Committee when the other services came to be examined and we would especially tie them in regard to finance. We must examine all the services and then submit our reports. I do not think it would be wise for the Dáil to press the Committee to make a separate report on the general medical services because it might inhibit the Committee later on in their consideration of the other services.
The report that has been presented will show the House that we have been working fairly hard and going ahead as rapidly as we could in the circumstances. None of us wishes to stretch it out into future interminable meetings. We want to get rid of this as quickly as possible. I can give an assurance on behalf of the great majority of the members that there is no delay and no inclination on our part to dilly-dally with the completion of this work. I think it is reasonable for this House to leave it to the Committee to finish the report as soon as we possibly can.
Question—"That the words proposed to be deleted stand"—put and declared carried.
Vótáil.
Will the Deputies asking for a division please rise?
Deputies Dr. Browne and McQuillan rose.
The Deputies will be recorded as dissenting.