Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 9 Mar 1965

Vol. 214 No. 10

Committee on Finance. - Vote 49—Health.

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £318,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1965, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Minister for Health (including Oifig an ArdChláraitheora), and certain Services administered by that Office, including Grants to Local Authorities, miscellaneous Grants and a Grant-in-Aid.

Deputies will recall that when I introduced the Estimate for this Vote in June of last year I also introduced a Supplementary Estimate, the need for which arose from the grant of increases in remuneration to members of health authority staffs. These were "ninth round" increases, and the additional provision was required to enable Health Services Grant to be paid from the Health Vote towards the expenditure by health authorities additional to that on which the grant provision in the original Estimate had been based.

The reasons for the second Supplementary Estimate which I am now placing before the House will be apparent from the information set out in the Estimate. The additional provision, which falls under two subheads of the Vote, amounts to £818,000, against which I have found it possible to set a saving of £500,000 under another subhead, leaving the net requirement at £318,000.

Under Subhead A of the Vote, which relates to remuneration of staff of the Department, an additional sum of £68,000 is required to cover expenditure which has to be met as a result of general ninth round increases and, also, adjustments of remuneration of grades arising out of claims made through the Civil Service Conciliation and Arbitration Scheme.

Under Subhead G—Grants to Health Authorities, it is necessary to seek a further £750,000. This is the amount by which, it is estimated, the grants payable in the current financial year will be increased by reason of increases in remuneration of certain staffs of health authorities, mainly medical and nursing. These increases are the result of decisions taken at arbitration under the Scheme of Conciliation and Arbitration applicable to local staffs. It is estimated that the gross additional expenditure of health authorities in this respect within the current financial year will be £1,580,000, and one-half of that amount will be recoupable as Health Services Grant. The total estimated amount to be recouped is £790,000. Under the arrangements for payment of the grant, ninety-five per cent is payable within the financial year in advance of the submission of final accounts, and accordingly the amount to be met within this year is £750,000.

It will be seen from the Estimate that I am budgeting for a saving of £500,000 under Subhead K—Hospitals Trust Fund—Grant-in-Aid. As I explained when introducing the original Estimate the purpose of this Grant-in-Aid is to enable me to continue with the hospital building programme. Due to the interruption of building work in the Dublin area, as a result of the building strike last autumn, progress on projects then in operation was much less than had been expected and other work could not be started as early as had been hoped. Mainly for this reason I find it possible to limit my demands on the Grant-in-Aid this year and I am accordingly in a position to set a saving of £500,000 against the gross additional provision which I am seeking under subheads of the Vote.

This Supplementary Estimate covers, of course, a very limited scope. In fact it operates to make additional provision resulting from the spiral of inflation and the consequential necessity to adjust salaries and incomes to meet the steadily increasing cost of living. The broad question of the health services will arise for discussion on the Minister's main Estimate when it comes before the House and we do not propose now to trespass on the patience of the Chair by seeking to initiate a wide debate on the health services within the narrow field provided by this Supplementary Estimate. Frankly, however, I am not clear in my mind as to the exact machinery whereunder the Minister takes credit to himself for a saving of £500,000 under subhead K—Grant-in-Aid. Are we to take it that, in substance, he is using £500,000 from the Grant-in-Aid from the Hospitals Trust Fund this year for the purposes of the Vote or is he saying he will not be called on for half of the Grant-in-Aid he had planned to give the Hospitals Trust Fund in order to proceed with hospital building? Perhaps he would be in a position to say whether, in view of this fortuitous economy this year, he will have to make provision next year for all the additional costs set out in this Supplementary Estimate, plus the £500,000 he finds himself free not to pay in the course of this financial year owing to the building strike.

This Supplementary Estimate covers a very narrow field and I agree with Deputy Dillon that it would be unwise for that reason to try to broaden the scope of the debate on it and have a full dress debate on health. Because the money required is for the specific reasons set out, we feel there is no point in having any further debate on it and we are agreeable to passing the Supplementary Estimate.

It is very gratifying to know that, for once, the Leader of the Opposition finds himself bound by the Standing Orders and does not, therefore, propose to exceed the ambit of the Supplementary Estimate. I am very grateful for that. I think the Leader of the Opposition ought not, however, encourage the belief that we are in an inflationary spiral because, if that view were to become a commonplace opinion, then we should be heading for financial disaster. Moreover it would be a disaster not based upon the facts, but upon the misleading propaganda in which persons like the Leader of the Opposition commonly indulge when they are on an election platform.

A large part of the increase for which I am now asking the House to make provision does not arise so much from the ninth round as from the fact that there has been a readjustment of remuneration ostensibly to preserve or restore the relative importance of certain vocations. A great part of the money which I am now asking the House to provide for disbursement among health authority staffs arises out of status claims, most notably that which was made recently in regard to the remuneration of psychiatric nurses. That is not a reflection of the cost of living. It is merely a recognition of the fact that for some time past what would be regarded as equitable remuneration for these staffs has lagged behind that which has been accorded to other public employees. It has got nothing whatever to do with a spiral of inflation. It is merely a readjustment of relative remuneration in order to bring the people in certain employments into proper accord with what is being paid in others.

With regard to the query the Deputy put in relation to the draw on the Grant-in-Aid, the Grant-in-Aid is provided in order that I may be able to continue my building programme; but, if it is not necessary for me to draw on that Grant-in-Aid, I have more money available from the Hospitals Trust Fund in order to meet the demands of the voluntary general hospitals arising out of the increase in the remuneration of their staffs. As the local authorities pay capitation to the voluntary general hospitals on the basis of the number of local authority patients for which they provide, I am in the situation that I do not have to draw on the grant for building purposes, and am able to find the money out of the Hospitals Trust Fund. I am, therefore, quite entitled to take credit for the fact that I did not make that draw on the Fund.

That is as clear as mud and the Minister knows it is as clear as mud.

Vote put and agreed to.
Supplementary Estimates Nos. 41, 46, 42, 16, 18, 29, 31, 32, 34, 40, 43, 2, 21, 44, 9, 48 and 49, already agreed to in Committee on Finance, reported and agreed to.
Main Estimates, 1965-66—No. 45, External Affairs, and No. 46, International Co-operation—already agreed to in Committee on Finance, reported and agreed to.

Might I ask a question? You say the main and Supplementary Estimates reported and agreed to?

External Affairs and International Cooperation.

We are about to consider the Central Fund Bill. This Central Fund Bill does not cover Main Estimates. It covers only Supplementary Estimates.

The two main Estimates I have already mentioned are covered in the Central Fund Bill.

I thought it related only to Supplementary Estimates in respect of the current financial year.

Although these two Estimates were appropriated, they go into the Central Fund Bill in order to give me authority to draw the money from the Central Fund.

I just want to be clear as to whether these two main Estimates are covered by the Central Fund Bill.

These two Estimates were not in the Vote on Account.

No, they were not, but still I am informed the Central Fund Bill covers them.

As you will remember, we are operating for the first time this year the new financial procedure.

In order to give me authority to take moneys from the Central Fund, I must get this clause put into the Central Fund Bill, although the moneys have been already appropriated. This differs from the others in that way.

Top
Share