asked the Minister for Health if he is aware that the Eastern Health Board decided in the case of a person (name supplied) in County Kildare who transferred her lands to her son and reserved to herself the right of residence and maintenance, that maintenance in this context includes all necessary medical expenses and that therefore the person concerned was not entitled to a medical card; if he agrees with this policy; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Health Board Decision.
30.
I am informed that the circumstances of this case are as set out in the Deputy's question. The interpretation of the provisions governing eligibility in any case is a matter for the chief executive officer of the health board.
Is the Minister aware that in my county this is considered to be a new departure and to be a penny pinching type of policy? Does the Minister not agree that it undermines a system that enabled a person to hand over the reins of office without the danger of being sent to an institution? What would the attitude of the Minister be if in future in legal documents such as this it was stated that "residence and maintenance" does not include medical expenses? How does the Minister reconcile this decision with a decision of the Eastern Health Board, and the other health boards, which enables a 16-year-old student, irrespective of the means of the parents, to automatically qualify for a medical card while an aged parent who hands over does not qualify?
I should like to inform the Deputy that there has not been any change in policy and no direction has been given by me or by my Department to change the policy or the procedure in respect of the investigation of the means of applicants for medical cards. The case the Deputy has in mind is one where a pretty large farm was transferred to a son with the proviso that she, the person who handed over the farm, was entitled to live in the family home and to be maintained by the son. The interpretation of the CEO was that maintenance in this particular case meant also medical care, medical attention, drugs and medicines and doctors visits. As I have said no direction has been given by me to change the system that has been in operation since the introduction of the medical card system.
There are two levels of expenses involved in this, middle income group and higher income group, and I should like to know if the health board is entitled to decide what expenses this person would be covered by?
In view of the fact that the health board refused to give a medical card she would be regarded as being in the middle income group.
From the reply given by the Minister I understood that the health board decided that maintenance included health maintenance. In my view this is a new interpretation. However, having decided that it was health maintenance can the board also decide that it is higher income group maintenance as well even though it may be middle income group maintenance?
I have no information on that but I have no doubt that in this particular case the person in question would be deemed to be a member of the middle income group.
This is all news to me. I was always under the impression that when a person signed over his place he was entitled to medical maintenance. If old people hand over completely the next place for them is the county home and for that reason they must have the authority to insist that they be maintained in their own house.
The Deputy is embarking upon a speech and I am calling the next question.
As a matter of clarification——
I have allowed the Deputy a lot of latitude and I request him to obey the Chair so that we can make some progress.
The Minister's answer did convey that all necessary medical expenses should be borne by the family involved.
Why not?
Is that the policy of the Deputy's party? That never happened before.
Does the Deputy suggest that after a person has been handed over a big farm he should put his mother in the county home? Shame on the Deputy.
We would not electrocute her, anyhow.
We know the Deputy's form, starve them to death.
Arising out of the supplementaries of Deputy Power I should like to state that I would not be entirely satisfied that maintenance would necessarily mean medical care as well. I am afraid I could not give a legal interpretation myself as to what it is. The person concerned should endeavour to have that defined.
Deputy Coogan has already defined it.
We must pass on to the next question. I have allowed a big number of supplementaries on this question.
Does the Minister feel that the CEO in this case made a right decision?
It is not for me to make comment on a decision taken in this matter.
The Deputy is the Minister for Health and I am sure that the CEO, and others, will be guided by him.
The Chair has called the next question on a number of occasions and must be obeyed.
(Interruptions.)
Is the Minister unwilling to give an answer to my question?
The Chair has called the next question and is seeking to restore order to this House.
That gets the Minister out of his problem.
It was Deputy Power's question and I do not believe that Deputy Power was entirely dissatisfied with the answer I gave.
The Chair has called the next question. Can we please have regard for the rulings of the Chair?
The ranchers will now put them in their box.