asked the Minister for Health if he will accede to the demand of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions for the abolition of the £3,000 per annum limit on the incomes of non-manual workers for the purposes of the health services.
12.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Health Services Income Limit.
11.
asked the Minister for Health if he will agree to increasing the £3,000 per annum upper income limit for eligibility of non-manual workers to hospital inpatient services.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 11 and 12 together.
The revision of the present limit of £3,000 per annum referred to by the Deputies is being considered in the light of the proposed introduction in 1979 of a scheme of pay-related contributions concerning health and social welfare.
The Minister does not intend to make any change in the £3,000 income limit until 1979?
Probably not.
Does the Minister not agree that in the light of present day wage levels the limit is quite inadequate, that people who are non-manual workers earning more than £3,000 are not entitled to service whereas manual workers who are earning much more are entitled to it?
That anomaly has been there during the past five years.
Does the Minister intend to continue it?
I do not. I have told the House on a number of occasions that I intend to introduce the pay-related scheme in April 1979.
Does the Minister propose to continue the anomaly in the coming 12 months?
Twelve months compares favourably with the four years during which the Deputy's party allowed the anomaly to continue. I have initiated the necessary machinery to introduce pay-related contributions in April 1979. I reject Deputy Browne's earlier suggestion that I have been doing nothing about it. I am actively engaged in initiating a pay-related scheme which will come into operation in April 1979.
A sum of £3,000 was a much greater amount three or four years ago than it is today.
The position is that this does not affect any substantial number of people because the carryover provisions will serve the over-whelming majority until April 1979.
Why not abolish the anomaly?
Is the Minister saying it is his plan to introduce free hospitalisation for everybody?
I am not.
Is that not his plan if he intends to get rid of the anomaly?
I was interested to see a comment by the Deputy recently in regard to a statement by the ICTU in which he said he wanted priority in regard to the extension of the general medical service and free hospitalisation. I agree with him.
I made that statement but this does not eliminate the numerous anomalies. Neither does it eliminate the position that if you resolve the anomalies you introduce free hospitalisation. Can the Minister tell us how many letters he has received since he became Minister protesting against these anomalies?
I accept it is a matter of widespread dissatisfaction.
Is it the Minister's aim to remove the distinction between manual and non-manual workers?
In the light of the introduction of the new scheme the anomalous element is being removed. If it was so desirable to remove the anomalies why did the Deputy's party not remove them long ago?
Times are changing.