asked the Minister for Health the number of doctors which he envisages will be necessary to operate the free choice of doctor scheme in the new health services.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Health Services.
81.
It would be difficult to envisage an overall number for this purpose. The needs of each area would have to be considered separately.
82.
asked the Minister for Health what criteria must be met by doctors who wish to be included in the free choice of doctor scheme in the new health services.
This is a matter which will be provided for in the detailed conditions governing the scheme.
I have already stated that I shall give information to the House about the scheme at the earliest possible date.
Has the Minister stated to the Medical Association and the Medical Union that admission to the new health service would be confined to doctors who were practising prior to the introduction of the White Paper on Health? Has he stated that on any occasion?
The point about this is that the Deputy asks about criteria and what I may or may not have said in discussions with the Medical Association or the Medical Union are not relevant.
It does not arise.
Has he laid down conditions?
My concern is that the standard of entry into the profession should continue at all stages to be high.
Would the Minister state if he has laid down any conditions as to qualifications?
Question No. 83.
A Cheann Comhairle, I got no reply from the Minister.
The Deputy should not monopolise Question Time.
I do not want to do that, but I would like an answer to my question. I asked the Minister if he has stated on any occasion that he has laid down special conditions?
I do not think this is relevant to the question.
What criteria must be met then? That is in my question.
I am prepared to give no more information.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
There would not be time to raise it on the Adjournment today.
83.
asked the Minister for Health if he has reached agreement with the two medical unions on the form of a future health scheme.
84.
asked the Minister for Health if negotiations between him and the medical profession on the method of payment to doctors under the new health services have broken down.
85.
asked the Minister for Health what method of payment to doctors has been decided by him under the free choice of doctor scheme in the new health services.
86.
asked the Minister for Health when the free choice of doctor for lower income group patients will be provided.
87.
asked the Minister for Health if the implementation of the proposals in the White Paper on free choice of doctor is contingent on agreements with the profession on the method of payment of doctors.
88.
asked the Minister for Health if he will take steps to ensure that there is adequate press coverage of the present negotiations between his Department and the medical representatives regarding future health services.
With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions 83 to 88 together.
I have already stated in replies to earlier questions that negotiations on the proposed new general medical services scheme have been going on for some time with representatives of the medical profession and that progress has been generally satisfactory.
My most recent meeting with the medical organisations took place on 20th June when, following a full discussion I made a proposal on the method of payment which the representatives of the profession said they would report back to their councils.
I have agreed with the representatives of the profession that the details of the proposed arrangements will not be published for the time being.
Is it not a fact that he said to the negotiators of the medical profession that he had decided on one method of admission only and there was no purpose in any further discussion?
I am not sure what the source of the Deputy's information is.
Is it a fact that he stated there was no purpose in further discussion? He had decided on one method of admission. May I ask the Minister that?
I do not think the Deputy may.
Would I be in order in asking, a Cheann Comhairle, why the Minister will not answer my question?
I can read the reply again or, at least, that part of it which is relevant.
I have agreed with the representatives of the profession—of which the Deputy is a member—that the details of the proposed arrangements will not be published for the time being.
It does not help matters when, at a press conference held on this matter, the Minister should personally condemn a member of the journalists' profession for the policy of his newspaper.
That does not arise. That has nothing to do with the question.
I asked a question as to whether there was adequate press coverage of the negotiations.
I think Members of this House should accept and discharge the responsibilities they have as such.
Deputies
Oh!
Will the Minister state why these negotiations are being carried on in secret? They concern the public and the community at large and the public are very anxious about health.
That is a separate question.
I wish to make it clear——
The Minister is being evasive.
This a very important matter and I do wish to make it clear that I have been in consultation with the representatives of the medical profession and it was agreed that the details of the negotiations, which have been going on with me personally and also with officials of my Department for a considerable time now, would not be revealed. I intend to honour the promise I made in that regard and the members of the profession, as I am very glad to see, have themselves equally honoured that obligation. I also want to assure the House that there will be an opportunity for Deputy O'Connell and every other Member of the House to discuss the details when the representatives of the medical profession and I finally reach agreement on them, and that I will resist all efforts by Members of this House or people outside it who, for mischievous or other reasons, would try to force either myself or the doctors' representatives to break our word.
Will the Minister state if the medical profession——
Question No. 89.
Further to the Minister's reply——
I am calling Question No. 89. Would Deputy O'Connell please resume his seat and let the remainder of the Questions proceed?
On a point of order, I have raised a question which has not been answered—the matter of press coverage. It is extremely wrong of the Minister to condemn a journalist who was at a press conference in the course of his duty.
There is no point of order.
On a point of order.
There is no point of order. I am calling Question No. 89.
On a point of order.
Question No. 89.
On a point of order.
(Interruptions.)
The Minister has been evasive from the very beginning.
Will Deputy O'Leary please cease interrupting?
The Minister has been most evasive.
Would Deputy O'Connell please resume his seat?
On a point of order, could we be informed——
The Minister has been most evasive. He will not answer questions on a very important matter.
The Minister will not be forced to break his word.
On a point of order.
This is public business.
Was the Minister not answering Questions 83 to 88 and, if so, Question 88 includes press coverage and you informed Deputy O'Leary that he could not discuss press coverage as it was not in the question.
That is not a point of order.
It is in Question 88 and you informed the Deputy that he could not discuss it.
The Deputy is not in order. I am calling Question 89.
I did raise this matter of adequate press coverage and I did ask the Minister, in a helpful way, does he think it leads to peaceful settlement in this matter for him personally to condemn a journalist at a press conference because a principal newspaper covering this conference refers to the dispute between the Minister and the other party involved?
I want to say quite clearly that at no stage did I condemn any journalist.