asked the Minister for Defence if there are any provisions for treating in St. Bricin's Hospital Army pensioners who are suffering from war wounds.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Hospital Treatment for Army Pensioners.
84.
There is no entitlement under the Army Pensions Acts to free medical or hospital treatment whether the pension is temporary or final. A person in receipt of a temporary award may, however, as a condition of its continuance, be required to undergo such treatment with a view to containing, reducing or finalising the pensionable degree of disablement. These factors do not exist in the case of a final award.
Surely the Minister will agree in this case that while certain individuals can have hospitalisation, examination and treatment in St. Bricin's Hospital, others who are in a far worse financial position find it difficult to understand why they cannot have treatment in St. Bricin's? Will the Minister have a look at this matter also?
Over the years many requests have been received for free hospitalisation in St. Bricin's Hospital. The Old IRA organisations have made requests, not only for men suffering from wounds, but also for people disabled by disease. These requests were refused by the Government on 19th August, 1952. I have examined the matter many times since I became Minister and I have satisfied myself that that decision was a fair decision. The situation arises here that if you admit one class, you would have to admit others and there would not be sufficient accommodation in our military hospitals. Pensioners, in common with other sections of the community, are entitled to benefit and hospitalisation under the Health Acts, if their circumstances warrant it. I think, therefore, that the decision of the Government in 1952 was a fair one.
Surely the Minister will be aware that a great many of these people do require treatment and it is only fair that if they ask for such treatment in St. Bricin's Hospital, such requests should be considered? Is the Minister not aware that there are certain individuals who can get such treatment? It is very annoying for those who feel that they also are entitled, and who may have sufficient or even more justification, to find they are refused. Would the Minister, because of the fact that some people might take advantage of this, not agree that this is something which needs an up-to-date appraisal and which should not be dependent on what somebody did in 1952 in order to prevent embarrassment to the Government?
I agree with the decision. Perhaps I should make it plainer to the Deputy that the persons who at the moment get free residence and treatment in St. Bricin's are persons in receipt of temporary awards. They are treated with a view to reducing their degree of disability, so that their pensions may be reduced.
The Minister is aware that no such effect has taken place?
It has.
I will put down a question to the Minister next week to find out by how much it has been reduced. We are all aware that there has been discrimination.