asked the Minister for Defence if there is any reason why military hospitals could not be partly military and partly civilian.
Ceisteann—Questions. Oral Answers. - Military Hospitals.
108.
I assume that the Deputy has in mind the admission of civilian patients to the three military hospitals at present in operation. While such patients might be accepted in these hospitals as an emergency measure, military considerations would not permit of their being accepted in the ordinary course.
Is there any advantage or are there not some disadvantages in having hospitals set aside separately for Army personnel?
I would not accept that there are. Military hospitals are a part of any military establishment just as much as army billets or army refectories. It is part of army establishment. Military hospitals are generally within military barracks.
In the United States, the army authorities have opened military hospitals to civilians with the result that the standard available to themselves improved as well as the overall standard. One complements the other. Would the Minister not consider doing the same here?
I do not think there is any parallel at all between military hospitals in the United States and military hospitals here. Ours is a very small establishment and our military hospitals are near or within military posts. It would definitely be undesirable that they should become readily available to the public.
The number of operations of any particular type performed in a military hospital would be so few that the people doing the work there would not have the advantage which people have who do this work every day in the week in general hospitals.
This is not so—the suggestion that, because the through-put of military hospitals is small, the competence of the Army Medical Corps is therefore somewhat less than it ought to be.
I am not making accusations: I am saying it is unfair to the people who want to do this work. I do not want the Minister to impute anything to my supplementary question.
What Deputy Clinton appears to advocate is the abolition of military hospitals, as such.
Yes.
This would be very bad business indeed. The very existence of the Army demands that it be equipped in every way and especially to deal with military casualties if such should arise. Military hospitals are an essential part of any army's equipment.
Can the FCA use these hospitals?
As far as I know, they can: I am not certain.
That is the nearest thing to civilian use that you could get.
Use is made of the military hospitals for the medical examination of old IRA men.
The Minister stated, in reply to my supplementary question, that there is no relation between the United States Army and the Irish Army——
We seem to be enlarging the scope of the original question.
——from the point of view of each Army having its own medical services. The British Army, on which the Irish Army to a large extent was modelled, has opened its doors to civilians to the mutual benefit of soldier and civilian. Would the Minister not consider doing this with our military hospitals?
It would be just as logical to suggest that army transport should be used for the transport of civilian goods.