Public Hospitals (Amendment) Bill, 1990: Second Stage.

Minister for Health (Dr. O'Hanlon)

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

The purpose of this Bill is to amend the Public Charitable Hospitals Acts, 1930 to 1932, and the Public Hospitals Acts 1933 to 1976, so that any unclaimed prize money, and accrued interest, arising from the operation of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes may be vested in the Minister for Health and disposed of by him in respect of service by certain former employees of Hospitals Trust (1940) Limited, the private company which promoted and operated the hospitals sweepstakes.

Deputies are familiar with the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes. When they were operating, the governing legislation required that in relation to each individual sweepstake, sufficient funds were deposited to secure the total value of prizes in that sweepstake. Trustees were appointed to be responsible for these deposits.

Inevitably some prizes — mostly small ones — were not claimed and the parties entitled to these prizes were never identified nor did they submit valid claims. Over the years these funds remained on deposit and now, with interest, amount to approximately £480,000.

As the House will be aware, Hospitals' Trust (1940) Limited was placed in voluntary liquidation in March 1987. In effect, this signalled the demise of the sweepstakes. The last sweepstake was run in January 1986 and all the company's employees were made redundant in March 1987. Following that, the trustees of the prize fund deposits indicated that they wished to be relieved of their trusteeship, largely because they felt that few, if any, of the unclaimed prizes would become legitimately payable in the future. In the circumstances, the Government decided that the unclaimed prize money, together with accrued interest, should be taken over by the State and used for the benefit of former employees. Basically that is why I am sponsoring this Bill.

I should like to briefly run through the main provisions of the Bill. Section 2 provides that the deposit funds will be vested in the Minister for Health. Section 3 authorises the Minister for Health to disburse these funds, with the consent of the Minister for Finance. Section 4 indemnifies the trustees against future claims. Section 5 provides for the audit of accounts and their presentation to the Dáil and Seanad. Section 6 covers any future liabilities which may arise — these will be met from the Exchequer. Section 7 provides that future claims against the funds must be made within four years unless some legal disability is established.

Further sections provide that the expenses involved in disbursing these funds will fall on the Exchequer, that the sweepstakes Acts may be repealed if there is no longer any need for the legislation and in that event, any moneys payable into the Hospitals' Trust Fund shall instead be disposed of for the benefit of the Exchequer.

As Deputies will see, the Bill has emerged as a short one which provides a simple and easily managed system to take over and disburse these funds and one which will not give rise to any drain on these funds to meet distribution costs. I am very anxious — as I am sure every Member of the House is — to have the legislation enacted during this session to ensure that these funds are paid out before Christmas.

In that context I would like to make two points. It has been suggested that additional funds be made available to assist the former employees, specifically from receipts from the sale of the Hospitals' Trust Board's premises in Ballsbridge or indeed grants from the Exchequer. It is not open to the Hospitals' Trust Board or to the Minister for Health to direct that the proceeds of the sale of the premises in Ballsbridge be diverted for the benefit of employees of the private company which rented it. Indeed, virtually all the proceeds of that sale have now been used up, the bulk of it supporting the public health capital programme. In relation to Exchequer assistance, many people have suggested that funds should be provided to help the liquidator meet additional redundancy payments which have been recommended by the Labour Court. Here again I have to point out that as Hospitals' Trust (1940) Limited is a private company I have no function in this matter and there is no action I can take to ensure the recommendations of the Labour Court are implemented. While I have every sympathy with the position of these workers I am sure the House will appreciate from what I have said that there is no way open to the Minister for Health to assist them.

In all there are about 650 former employees and the vast majority were in receipt of non-contributory pensions or were in full-time employment on the date of liquidation. Unfortunately, the ex gratia element attaching to the pensions of these former employees was withdrawn when the company was placed in voluntary liquidation and those in full-time employment who might reasonably have anticipated similar pension arrangements also lost out. These people have certainly been disadvantaged.

It is my view that people who were in permanent full-time employment when Hospitals' Trust (1940) Limited was placed in voluntary liquidation in March 1987 are, in fact, the most seriously disadvantaged of all the former employees and that consequently they should receive a greater portion of the funds available. I would welcome comments from the House and will take them into account when deciding how best to distribute the money arising from unclaimed prizes.

I recommend the legislation to the House.

Mr. Yates

We support the Bill and the proposal that it be enacted as soon as possible. It is only proper that the Minister for Health and the Government should step in to ensure that this element of the affairs of the former Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes is finalised. I should say at the outset that the former employees of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes in particular the full-time employees, were very harshly treated when the company went into liquidation. I believe it is the view of this House that these employees should now be paid whatever ex gratia or severence payments they may be entitled to, which was the recommendation of the Labour Court. This House should pay tribute to the staff and the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes for the very valuable contribution they made to the health service and in particular for providing capital funding. The proper way to recognise that contribution is to look after those staff.

When the staff lobbied the liquidator and public representatives at the time the very valuable property belonging to the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes at Ballsbridge went on sale, greater regard should have been paid to the requirements of the staff. It is my understanding that they only received their statutory redundancy payments and nothing else. I ask the Minister to ensure that a pro rata arrangement is agreed to after a process of consultation with the staff representatives, bearing in mind the Labour Court recommendation, whereby the moneys will be paid out perhaps on the basis of a flat rate payment for each year of service.

I would like to make two further points which are slightly extraneous to the Bill before going on to deal with the content of the sections. First, we are all aware that the national lottery has displaced the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes as a major fund raiser and that the advent of the national lottery signalled the demise of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes. It is a matter of some concern to me, given that we have moved from a situation where all the proceeds of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes went to the health service that now only a small proportion of the revenue of the national lottery goes to the health service.

We must bear in mind that the voluntary fund raising activities of many organisations concerned with the handicapped, the disabled and the health sector generally have had their income reduced by 50 per cent to 70 per cent. We have to look at a situation where I understand £10.6 million of national lottery money this year went to the health sector. That is less than the fall in revenue they have had from their voluntary fund raising, some of which is only substituting mainline health expenditure that would have already reached its way to the health sector by virtue of mainline Exchequer spending. I do not wish to delay the House on that point but the health sector as a whole and the voluntary health sector have lost out badly because of the demise of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes and the new arrangements of the national lottery.

The second point I would like to make is slightly extraneous to the Bill. It relates to public voluntary hospitals, as distinct from health board hospitals, which received money under the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes and by way of annual budgets. I am concerned that the Minister has no representative on the board of some of the major hospitals — the Mater, St. Vincent's and so on. This is wrong. He should make arrangements to appoint immediately a representative, either from his Department or his own nominee, to the board so that he is directly briefed in relation to what is happening. Because he has stepped in to tidy up this area there is a principle here that he should now establish clear representation of at least one member on all the boards of voluntary public hospitals.

Regarding the Bill itself I would like the Minister to give some details on exactly how the administration will work, whether it will be his own staff or others who will administer it and what its lifetime will be. Perhaps he will clarify the matter of indemnity. In other words if, say, the grand-daughter of the winner of one of the unclaimed prizes comes out of the woodwork next year and says: "My grandfather — and I am his only remaining descendant — won £100,000 in 1954 and I have not any of the money," what is the legal position in relation to her rights? I am aware that section 4 attempts to deal with this issue but I wonder whether, under the rules which prevailed at the time of purchase, there would be that type of indemnity conferring on trustees, and whether that could now extend to the Minister. I would like to hear the Minister's proposals on how he intends the money to be spent between pensioners and former full-time employees at the time of the liquidation. When the Minister is summing up on Second Stage perhaps he would let us have an explicit outline as to his intentions.

In summary I have to say that it was a sad day that the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes met their demise in the way it happened. It is important that their affairs be wound up in an orderly fashion and in doing so the overriding concern must be for those who lost out so heavily — the former employees. I hope the Minister will be able to ensure that they get their full entitlement at the earliest possible date.

Mr. Howlin

At the outset on behalf of the Labour Party I welcome the legislation before us. It is a short enabling Bill to begin to provide something, however inadequate, for the former employees and pensioners of Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes. We all realise the role the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes played in the formative years of the health services in this country when the State was trying to establish a comprehensive health service. They recognised the need for capital funding to build a hospital network in the fact of major health problems such as tuberculosis. The Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes was a very important arm in giving the then Minister for Health the freedom to take a dramatic initiative and solve the scourge of tuberculosis. The Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes which, for many decades, was a reason for making Ireland noted throughout the world, particularly in the United States, have an honourable record of service to this country. For that reason we have a responsibility — those of us who have a concern for our health services — to recognise the role of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes and, more especially and more importantly, to recognise the role played by the former employees of the sweepstakes. Quite frankly most of us would agree that the treatment meted out to those former employees was shabby. While the Minister may say that neither he nor the Government has responsibility for them we all have a moral responsibility in recognition of the role they played over the years. Workers were disenchanted to be paid merely the statutory requirements once the company went into liquidation. The company went into liquidation primarily because their day had passed and the national lottery came on stream and because the type of sweepstake that was in vogue in the forties and fifties no longer held its sway and no longer had a role to play.

The notion of dispersing the unclaimed prize money of some £480,000 is welcome. If you divide that among 147 workers and all the other pensioners it will amount to less than £3,000 each which is a very small sum indeed and will be poor compensation to those people. However, it should be paid and we should give a fair wind to this legislation to enable the money to be paid as expeditiously as possible.

The pensioners who lost out on their ex gratia pensions must also be taken care of to some degree. When the Minister is responding I would welcome his thoughts on this matter because obviously his Department will have worked out some mechanism for the payment of the funds. As I have said, the funds are inadequate but at least they are something and I hope those involved will have the money in their hands before Christmas. Perhaps the Minister can share with us in the House his thoughts on the mechanism for distribution of the funds, the rate of payment to the ex-pensioners who lost out and the former employees, many of whom are now totally dependent on unemployment assistance rather than benefit as their stamps are exhausted at this stage. I am very concerned about thoses two categories and I am anxious to see how the money will be distributed to them.

It is very important to underscore to the Minister — perhaps he has given some thought to this — that any payment made must be maximised and must be regarded as a severance payment. I do not know how that can be done legally. In essence it would be an extra act of heartlessness if out of a sum of money paid to these people a significant chunk of it was clawed back by way of taxation by the Revenue Commissioners. I appeal to the Minister to find a mechanism — perhaps this can be done by way of amendment on Committee Stage — to enable any payment made to be regarded as a severance payment and not subject to the clawback in taxation which would be a severe blow to the already meagre sum of money that will become available.

Deputy Yates indicated that the national lottery has supplanted the Sweepstakes in relation to funding for the health services. That is true but, as he rightly said, while the bulk of available resources and profits from the Sweepstakes went to the capital programme for hospitals obviously the same cannot be said of the national lottery when only a small percentage of lottery funds go to the health services. During 1990 the sum will be about £10.6 million. The Minister will be aware of the serious concern among voluntary agencies, in particular those involved in health, about the double effect of this, (1) the immediate effect it has on their fund-raising efforts because the lottery sucks up so much money on a twice weekly basis and (2) the actual distribution of money.

For the benefit of the House I want to give a rough estimate of the disbursal of money from the national lottery this year: some £2 million will be spent on hospital buildings; £3 million on services for the elderly; £1 million for the National Social Services Board and National Council for the Elderly; £800,000 towards the mentally handicapped; £500,000 for child care services; £500,000 on child abuse services; £100,000 on AIDS prevention and £2.7 million in block grants to health boards. The voluntary groups are not well served by that allocation of money and there is great concern that the distribution mechanism runs counter to the recommendations made by the all-party committee on the lottery.

I want to take issue with Deputy Yates and say that, as a matter of principle, I do not regard, nor have I ever regarded, any lottery as an acceptable core funding element for the health services. I feel very strongly — the Commission on Health Funding and the all-party committee on the lottery agreed with this — that there should not be any dependence, or even a significant dependence, for core funding for essential services on any lottery which is subject to the vagaries of people's inclination to gamble.

If we are to have a health service it must be funded virtually exclusively from the Central Fund. It is only then that this House can make a determination on the level and quality of the services provided and then live up to the responsibility of providing, from taxpayers' money, the funding for those services. The Commission on Health Funding were strongly of the view that the national lottery was a supplement and should not be regarded as a core element of health funding. I want to make this point very firmly in case the view would be allowed gain momentum — this happened during the last general election — that somehow one could depend on the lottery or a mechanism like that for funding. I understand that in times of desperation people look for funding from areas like that but I want to emphasise that core funding for essential health services must come from the Exchequer.

I welcome the Bill, a measure which will enable the Minister to determine how this sum of £480,000 should be distributed. It is clearly enabling legislation; there is no detailed mechanism involved in the Bill. The Minister should indicate to the House his thoughts in relation to that mechanism which clearly was worked out in his Department before the Bill was presented to us. I re-emphasise my wish that the meagre sum of £480,000 will be maximised by ensuring that there is no Revenue clawback from the recipients who get it and that they will receive it as expeditiously as possible. Certainly the Minister will have the goodwill of the Labour Party in ensuring that the Bill passes expeditiously through this House.

Mr. Sherlock

The Workers' Party welcome the Bill which is long overdue. The treatment of the former workers of the Irish Hospitals' Trust was appalling and I am glad that at last there has been a change of heart on the part of the Government.

The Irish Hospitals' Trust, which was established in the thirties, was one of the great success stories of this country for several decades. The Sweepstakes provided badly needed funds for the development of hospitals but there was a great contrast in the returns it delivered for those who effectively owned it and those who worked for it. It made millionaires of the McGrath family but the wages paid to the staff, a large number of whom were women, were poor and generally below the rates paid to people in similar employment.

Time and changing fashions caught up with the Sweepstakes by the eighties and it was already in decline when the final nail was driven into its coffin by the decision to establish the national lottery. The Irish Hospitals' Trust applied to the Government to run the national lottery but the then Fine Gael-Labour Administration wisely decided that it was preferable that the lottery should come under the umbrella of An Post. Given that the decision by the then Government contributed to the collapse of the Sweepstakes there was clearly an obligation on the Government to ensure that the interests of those who had served the Irish Hospitals' Trust so well, and for so long, were looked after. It is deplorable that the Fine Gael-Labour Government who took that decision did nothing in that regard and that the later Fianna Fáil Administration refused for so long to do anything for those workers. As recently as February of last year the Minister told my colleague, Deputy Tomás Mac Giolla, that this was a private company, the responsibility for making payments to former employees rested solely with the company and, consequently, it was not possible to provide Exchequer or national lottery funds to finance the suggestions by Deputy Mac Giolla.

I am glad there has been a change of heart and that the Government have come up with this formula to assist former employees of the Hospitals' Trust. Much of the hardship and distress experienced by the 147 former employees who were made redundant would have been avoided if this decision had been taken three years ago. The closure of the Hospitals Trust not only affected those who were made redundant but also former employees whose pensions were slashed because the pension fund was not a contributory one but funded on an ex-gratia basis with payments being made from current funds. I want to give some examples of this. A woman cashier who spent 40 years working for the Hospitals' Trust got a miserable £3,337 for such loyal service. This amounts to about £80 for each year of service. A boilerman who had 27 years service got a sum of £2,500 while a former employee with 34 years service had his pension of £107 per month slashed to £31.25 per month. They are examples of how people who had given loyal service were disregarded in a brutal and heartless way. The fact that they had given such loyal service and helped to build up the Hospitals' Trust counted for nothing.

Without the staff, the Hospitals' Trust and the sweepstakes they ran, would have been nothing. The McGrath family did not suffer at all. They had their land, horses, an interest in Waterford Glass, trust funds and tax havens such as the Isle of Man to fall back on while the staff had nothing. In their claim to the Labour Court the staff association sought three weeks pay for each year of service. However, the Labour Court in its judgment recommended two weeks pay for each year of service. While section 3 of the Bill does not specify the amount which will be paid to the former employees, I hope the Minister will in the circumstances be generous and meet the original claim and also provide the actuarial sum necessary to put their pension scheme on a sound basis, while restoring the value of the pensions paid prior to the collapse. I understand that the cost of the claim would be around £1.1 million. This has to be viewed against, for instance, the revenue from the sale of the Ballsbridge site which amounted to £6.6 million, insurance compensation of some £500,000 arising from Hurricane Charlie and the money raised by the liquidation sale.

With regard to the Bill, my only concern is that it does not specify exactly how the funds will be applied and what sums will be made available to the former employees. Section 3 is very vague and loose. There is no guarantee under the section that all the redundant employees will be covered. On the other hand, a loose interpretation of it could mean that ex-employees who had left 20 years ago and who were not victimised by being made redundant or losing pension rights could benefit. If this were the case clearly the amount available for those who were made redundant when the trust closed would be significantly decreased. I would ask the Minister to consider the matter and to come back on Committee Stage with a precise amendment which spells out in clear detail exactly who will qualify and how much they will be entitled to receive.

At a time when we are discussing a welcome Bill designed to undo to some extent the terrible injustice done to the former employees of the Hospitals' Trust we should spare a thought for another group of workers who have also been treated in an appalling manner. Many of these employees have also given 30 or 40 years of loyal service to their company. In this case the employer was not a private company but the State. I am, of course, referring to Irish Shipping which was put into liquidation by the Fine Gael-Labour Coalition Government six years ago yesterday. The Irish Shipping workers, like those in the Hospitals' Trust, were thrown on the scrap heap and found that loyalty and commitment counted for nothing. They have also found that the lavish promises made by the present Government prior to the 1987 election were worthless. The betrayal of Irish Shipping workers by Fianna Fáil is one of the most shameful episodes of Irish political history. I hope they will not lose heart but will continue to struggle for fair play and draw inspiration from the final success of the Hospitals' Trust workers.

Mr. Callely

This Bill provides that the sum of £480,000, made up of unclaimed prize money and accrued interest arising from the former Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes, should be used for the benefit of former employees. I want to put on record my support for this move. It is encouraging that all the previous speakers have also supported it. I am sure the Minister would be very happy if every Bill he introduced received similar support.

Mr. Howlin

Would that they were all so welcome.

Mr. Callely

Keep up the momentum. Most of the previous speakers referred to the Minister's desire to have payments paid prior to Christmas, which I wholeheartedly support. Some questions have been asked about the exact timescale of the payment. Perhaps the Minister could clarify the vehicle he proposes to use to dispense the money to the former employees.

It is not necessary to go through the various provisions of the Bill but the Minister stated that he would welcome comments from the House regarding the division of funds. The employees belong to three categories. In the first category are those who are in receipt of a pension. I understand that those in the second category had a pension which they lost. The third category consists of people who were in full-time permanent employment when the Hospitals' Trust was put into liquidation. I suggest that the Minister might look favourably at the second and third categories, namely, the former employees who lost their pensions and those who were employed full-time and are now most seriously disadvantaged.

I congratulate the Minister on this Bill, which I fully support.

Mr. Durkan

I also support the Bill and the proposals in the Minister's speech. We all remember the work done by the Hospitals' Trust, which filled an important role in years gone by when services were heavily dependent on funding from that area. While many people have been critical of the operations of the Hospitals' Trust in its latter years, this is somewhat unfair. Unfortunately, as time passed the trust became less efficient and there was a lesser pay-out while administration costs increased. That same trend is not unknown in many similar agencies and warnings should be taken from what happened in that case. It was not because of malpractice by any members of the organisation but because the system became inefficient and costs increased and, as a result, the net benefit to potential beneficiaries became less and less.

Quite a number of Hospitals' Trust employees are constituents of mine and I welcome the suggestion to dispose of residual funds. It would be a way of making up to those people for the disappointment and hurt caused when they became redundant. That has happened in countless other concerns, both public and private, and employees have always been very much the losers. In this case many people had given long years of service and they found it difficult to get similar or alternative employment. Those people were particularly vulnerable because they were thrown out of their jobs and also because their long service in a particular niche made it more difficult for them to obtain other employment. The funds proposed to be distributed under the provisions of this Bill will be of some little recompense to them. I notice the Minister did not say he would dispose of all of the funds in that fashion. No doubt all Members will have many suggestions as to what should be done with them, but, bearing in mind the amount of money involved, if one chops and changes or breaks it up, it would become worthless. The obvious thing to do is dispose of it in the manner proposed by the Minister, which is by way of making up the losses by one means or another to former employees, pensioners and so on.

A Bill like this should not go through the House without our raising one question — which I know arose before and to which I used know the answer: what happens to all the residual funds that must remain in various accounts of insurance companies, banks, dare I say, building societies, indeed with every conceivable financial agency, public and private, in the country? Amazingly, occasionally, one hears of some proposal in relation to some of these funds. I would put it to the House that those sums are huge in comparison with what we are talking about under the provisions of this Bill. Anybody who works in such agencies worldwide will tell of the unclaimed benefits of one kind or another. There is the case of the person who dies with no immediate relatives and huge amounts of interest accrue to the relevant account over a long period. There is a good case for introducing legislation some time so that the amounts standing in such unclaimed accounts over long periods could be put to some good use. If the agencies themselves want to do so, that is fine but that matter should be examined.

Under the system which has replaced the Irish Hospitals' Trust — in terms of funding of voluntary hospitals, there is felt a certain amount of disquiet that, with the gradual, accepted demise of the Hospitals' Trust on account of diminishing efficiency, the funds being allocated from the national lottery appeared first to be of greater potential help than is now apparent. My view is that the method of funding the voluntary health services has been under strain for some considerable time past and, as time progresses, will be subjected to even greater stress. Then there are the VHI scheme and the direct public hospital services. There was the "in between" service, which used be assisted by the Hospitals' Trust which no longer exists. As time goes on I predict we will see the development on a large scale of the luxury-type hospital establishments that have come on stream over the past couple of years. I predict that, simultaneously, we will see a diminution of investment in the public health services; by that I mean total investment in terms of staffing, equipment, technology and so on. Obviously those establishments to which the public will resort most frequently will be those appearing to be best equipped, providing the best, most efficient services and so on, establishments to which they have easy access.

Although this is a matter for another debate I would hope the Minister would bear that overall development in mind in the future; I know he has done so to date. I know that has been raised at various discussions over the past couple of years since the spotlight focused on the health services generally. It is an aspect that will bear much attention in future years. If it does not receive such attention I predict we are likely to see the development of a new system and the total disappearance of what we had come to accept as a public health service. Otherwise we will have to incur much greater expenditure than we do at present.

I welcome the Bill. I hope that the moneys accruing to the former employees of the Hospitals' Trust as a result of its passage will go some way towards helping them and repairing any damage that may have been done as a result of their unfortunate, untimely cessation of employment. It would be my hope also that the lessons to be learned from the demise of the Hospitals' Trust will be taken on board and kept in the forefront of the minds of the people who will operate a similar system.

Mr. Fitzpatrick

I welcome this badly needed Bill. I note that it is the Minister's hope to have the Bill passed and the relevant moneys paid out before Christmas, which is greatly to be welcomed. We would be remiss in our duties here if we did not avail of this opportunity to thank the former employees of the Hospitals Trust for the great work they did over many years in improving our health services generally. It can rightly be said that in the forties, into the fifties, they took up much of the slack not taken up by central Government, providing hospitals, institutions and money for their running. I can name one such hospital in my area — Blanchardstown Hospital — at that time built to combat the ravages of TB, built mainly out of Hospitals Trust funds.

I concur with Deputy Howlin when he said that our health services should be funded out of central funds and that we should not rely on national lottery allocations to constitute the main thrust of their financing. Nonetheless it has to be said that national lottery allocations do provide money where it is badly needed. For example, in Deputy Yates' constituency there is the day centre for elderly in Gorey and the Dawn Centre for mentally handicapped in Wexford, where it will be seen to be a useful topping up exercise. In my constituency there is the establishment known as St. Michael's House for Mentally Handicapped which has benefited enormously over the years from national lottery funding.

I would be anxious that the moneys to be distributed under the provisions of this Bill would be done on the basis of need. We are not talking about a large number of former employees of the Hospitals' Trust. I would assume many of them would be in receipt of means-tested entitlements. It would be my hope that any moneys they might receive as a result of the passage of this Bill would not diminish their present incomes, in other words, I would be anxious that we would not be seen to give with one hand and take with the other. That is an important principle to be observed here and my sole worry is about its distribution.

I congratulate the Minister on the introduction of the Bill and wish it a speedy passage.

Mrs. Fennell

I congratulate the Minister on introducing the Bill comparatively quickly. It is good to see a measure of such great importance being treated expeditiously, welcomed and pushed through the House. It marks the end of an era in Dublin. We all grew up seeing as the ideal in life a win in the Sweepstakes. We considered that all our problems would be solved if we won. The feeling was similar to that about the lottery. The sale of Sweepstakes tickets was more relevant to the US than to Ireland. We knew about the big wins from the publicity they got. The demise of the Sweepstakes was due to the fact that some states in America developed their own lotteries and this led to a reduction in the sale of tickets in the US. People there opted for their own state lotteries.

With regard to the distribution of the money, I understand the doling out this money will be a matter for the Exchequer. I am concerned that the expenses involved be kept low and do not eat into the money. It will be a substantial fund. However, when divided among 650 former employees it will amount to nothing more than a nice little nestegg. Will the Minister give us an idea of how much he thinks each employee will get? It will make a huge difference to the people who came to see me. Six women who live in my constituency called to see me at my clinics and told me of their tremendous distress and how they were thrown into total disarray when they realised the Sweepstakes was finished and their jobs were being faded out. At the time nobody could tell them what was happening, what was likely to happen to the building or what they would be entitled to.

It is wonderful that their sadness and disappointment at that time has been turned around. The money will be very useful to them at Christmas. The Minister said that in his opinion the most disadvantaged group were the permanent full-time employees at the time of the liquidation of the company. I hope all former employees who have a social need will be identified, their plight recognised and they will benefit from this fund. The Sweepstakes offices in Ballsbridge became a sort of social service. Legions of widows were employed there. The way many families were reared, fed and looked after is a testimony to the work and the pay their mothers got in the Sweepstakes offices. The pay was very small and in present day term, very inadequate, but it was a lifesaver for many widows. I do not know what the staff breakdown was even among the 650 people we are talking about in the Bill, but I am sure a huge proportion were widows who were taken on to do fairly menial work but work they did well.

I am happy to support this Bill and I am pleased that it is getting the support of all sides. I hope the money to be divided will make Christmas, and the future, happy for the people who felt they were badly let down a few years ago.

Mr. T. Kitt

It is pleasant to contribute, albeit briefly, to a good news Bill, and that is what we have today. As previous speakers have said, we are talking about the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes which was part of our culture, heritage and recent history. It was set up in 1930 and the Hospitals' Trust was set up in 1940. I join with previous speakers in paying tribute to the employees of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes and the contribution they made directly to the development of our health services and health care.

In 1987, shortly after my election to this House, I was on what has become a very famous TV programme, "Questions and Answers". It was my first appearance on such a programme and one of the questions that came spontaneouly from the audience was one of the "what about" questons, "what about the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes workers?" I admit my answer was not very substantial, but I said I was aware of the predicament — I was — and I would take the issue up at Government level. Subsequently I did so. I raised it first with the Minister for Labour and then with the Minister for Health. Subsequently a number of my constituents contacted me.

Deputy Fennell referred to the number of our constituents who have a direct interst in this issue. My one concern at the time was, how quickly we could get something done for those people. One of the participants on that programme was Deputy Alan Dukes, who was then seeking leadership of the Fine Gael Party. How time moves on. However, since then there have been delays and we have had an election. From the Minister's speech I can understand why those delays occurred. The procedures were very complex and that was the crux of the matter.

Now we have the good news and I welcome it greatly. I compliment the Minister on setting up what is really a simple management system to distribute the not huge amount of money but the £480,000 will be very much appreciated by the people who have come to me and to many other Deputies about this. The Minister's ambition to have this paid out before Christmas is most praiseworthy. It is a very humane approach to the matter and we should co-operate with him, as I know we will.

Reference was made to the lottery. One of my colleagues referred to St. Michael's House, which is in my constitutency, and other very worthy beneficiaries of the lottery money. That is filtering through to the sectors in our society that need assistance, particularly in the area of health care.

The Minister, in a practical way, has done something feasible within his remit. As he said, there are 650 former employees. Reference was made to the possibility that the Minister could get some of the proceeds from the sale of the premises of the Hospitals' Trust to benefit the employees directly. This has been cleared up. It was a private company and the bulk of the proceeds went to supporting the health programme. The Minister has done all be can. I agree with him that the people who were in permanent full-time employment when the Hospitals' Trust (1940) were put in voluntary liquidation are those most in need of assistance. That is something with which I would totally agree.

In conclusion, I very much welcome what the Minister has brought before us today. I think the most important thing now is that we allow the Minister to ensure that the procedures are set in place so that these people will benefit directly before Christmas.

Dr. Hillery

I want to make a few brief comments. Like others, I would like to pay tribute to the national institution of Hospitals' Trust which for a number of decades provided valuable funds for our health services. I would like to link the tribute to the former company to the work and commitment of the former employees.

The focus of the Bill is on those former employees and, like others, I welcome this amending legislation which provides the legal mechanism to transfer the unclaimed prize money and the accrued interest arising from the operation of the Irish Hospitals' Sweepstakes to the Minister for Health.

The Minister has underlined, of course, that Hospitals Trust was a private company and this immediately sets legal limits on what it is possible for the Minister or any other Minister to do in relation to the former employees. The company went into voluntary liquidation in 1987 and all of the employees at that time became redundant. I, like other speakers in the Dublin area in particular, have met some of these former employees in my own constituency and they feel aggrieved about the deal they received. It is to the credit of the Government, therefore, that the unclaimed prize money and the accrued interest which has made the sum that much larger, will now be taken over by the State and used for the benefit of those former employees. I view it as an enlightened and imaginative approach to a deserving group of 650 people.

The sum involved is obviously modest but nonetheless it could make an important difference especially to the elderly pensioners on very modest means. It is particularly important that the legislation pass as quickly as possible so that the sums that will be paid to individual former employees will be paid out before Christmas. There is no question but that those employees — as in any liquidation of this sort but especially here — are particularly vulnerable. They did receive the statutory entitlements that applied in their cases.

Rather than repeat what other people have said, I want to make one general point before concluding. It relates to the pension schemes. This case of the former employees of the Hospitals' Trust underlines the need for secure well funded pension schemes where contributions are made to fund such schemes. There are still too many companies where pensions are paid out of current payroll leaving employees particularly vulnerable when these companies go out of business.

In conclusion, I too join in the welcome for the Bill and wish to commend the Minister for his enlightened approach in using these unclaimed prize sums.

Mr. Carey

I, too, would like to join with my colleagues in welcoming this Bill. The Minister has made an effort to relieve a lot of distress which the Hospitals' Trusts employees have endured since the collapse of that company. The Minister outlined why he could not make additional funds available and he spoke about the health capital programme. I do not know how the health capital programme is devised but in my constitutency there are two particular difficulties which have not been addressed. In Shannon Airport, which has the largest young population, there is an extensive programme of health given by the Mid-Western Health Board. However, the clinic facilities available in Shannon Airport are something like one would experience in Vietnam with the building falling down. While the Minister might take some pride in the way he has disbursed capital in his own constituency of Cavan-Monaghan, I do not think he can take any pride in what he has done in County Clare, with the disaster he has left us down there.

The Minister has had this proposal on his desk for some time and, like the Hospitals Trusts employees, the people in Shannon are very frustrated with the lack of decisiveness in the Department of Health. I would like to appeal to the Minister to at least fulfil the promise that was made on his behalf by the Fianna Fáil campaigners at the last general election who said that the clinic at Shannon would be erected within days.

I sympathise with the Hospitals Trust employees who were not paid immediately. Deputy Hillery spoke about the accumulating sum. Of course the employees should have benefited from that and there will still be some shortfall because the interest would have gone directly to them had they been paid immediately. This delay has brought hardship so the Minister should dispose of the funds as quickly as possible.

Dr. O'Connell

I support the Bill but the sum involved is trivial. The ex-employees would each get about £1,300. It is a damning indictment of that company that so many of these former employees are in receipt of non-contributory pensions. As employers that company represent, in my opinion, the worst in Irish life. They treated their employees very badly. They resisted any attempts by these employees to join unions and the conditions of those employees were far from satisfactory. I would hope that we might highlight this and make it known to employers that the conditions under which those employees worked and what was given to them in the end would not be tolerated in present day society.

We may think that the Hospitals' Sweepstakes benefited our hospitals but they also greatly benefited the organisers and the people who controlled them. I condemn a Minister in the Fine Gael Coalition Government who decided, in the latter years of the Hospitals' Sweepstakes, to increase the moneys that would be paid to the directors to the disadvantage of the employees. The percentage given to them was increased, unreasonably in my opinion at the time. It is a sad reflection on us that we could not have devised a means to pay these employees from the sale of those premises. I know the Minister says he can do nothing about it but in the absence of that company taking responsibility, there was an obligation on the State to help these people. Because the funds realised from the sale of those premises were enormous the employees should have got some contribution from the sale. I would like to make it absolutely clear that I condemn the organisers of the sweepstakes for the way they treated their employees. To think that those employees will get a miserable, maximum sum of £1,300 each is a disgrace.

Minister for Health (Dr. O'Hanlon)

First I, would like to thank the number of Deputies who contributed. I thank them for their support for the Bill and for their very constructive remarks.

I will deal briefly with a number of points that were made. Deputy Yates suggested that the demise of the sweepstakes was as a result of the national lottery. His colleague, Deputy Fennell, was closer to the mark when she spoke about lotteries being established in other countries around the world such as the United States, Canada and Australia. I understand that a state lottery in California established in the mid-eighties was the deathknell for the sweepstakes in this country. The loss of the sweepstakes was not in anyway related to the establishment of the national lottery here.

A number of points were made about the national lottery. Most of the national lottery fund that goes to health is additional and is used for community-based voluntary organisations to pursue their activities in a whole range of areas. Deputy Carey was flying far away from the substance of this Bill. His own county might well be a good example of how lottery funds have been spent for the benefit of people in a number of areas. For example, Kilrush has received £45,000 in each of the last three years towards the provision of a community facility for the elderly, supported enthusiastically by their own community. It would be well worth Deputy Carey's while going to see that facility. A day care centre in Ennistymon has been supported to the tune of £40,000 a year for the last three years. A workshop for the disabled in Shannon has been supported by the national lottery as has Busby Park treatment centre for alcoholism while a cardiac ambulance service in the Mid-Western Health Board area has been supported to the tune of £25,000. That is just an example, in one county, of a range of facilities that benefit the elderly——

Mrs. Owen

They should be there anyway.

Dr. O'Hanlon

——and those with mental and physical handicap which are supported by national lottery funds. As the Deputies are aware, this year the national lottery funding for health services at local level is distributed by the health boards, and it is the health board members who decide what projects will benefit. That is as a result of an all-party committee decision. I am glad that has been implemented by my Department and has worked very successfully in the current year. Of course, I stipulated to the health boards that they could not use the lottery money in substitution of section 65 grants. It had to be seen to be additional to what the health boards were already providing. I do not accept that the lottery funding from the health services is used as substitution for money that should be provided from the Exchequer. It has been of great benefit to numerous people and voluntary organisations around the country.

Another question raised by a number of Deputies is that of the administration of the unclaimed prize funds and its distribution to former employees of Hospitals Trust. It will be administered by my Department and of course we are very anxious to keep the administration costs to a minimum. The administration costs will be paid by the Department and not out of the prize money that is available.

The question of future claims was also raised. There is provision in the Bill that there can be no claims after a period of four years unless by a person who has some disability and is unable to claim within the four years. I would expect that in all probability there will be no claims. Some of the prize money that is there goes back to the year 1930. I understand two prizes were unclaimed in that year. Much of the £480,000 that is available for distribution is interest on the prize money. Most of the prizes that were unclaimed were small prizes, as I have said, going back 60 years. Most of them are from over 20 years ago and therefore it is highly unlikely that people will claim them now, but if a valid claim is made the prizes will be paid from the Exchequer. What we intend to do is to distribute all the money at our disposal, the unclaimed prize money and the interest accruing, to the former employees of the Hospitals Trust.

Deputy Howlin, Deputy Callely and a number of other Deputies outlined who they would like to see benefit from this fund. There is general agreement that the most disadvantaged group are those who were full time employees at the time of the liquidation, who received just the statutory redundancy and did not receive their entitlement from the company. There is also a group of pensioners who were in receipt of a very small pension from the company but when the company went into liquidation they lost that element of their pension and now receive just social welfare benefit. We are in consultation with the Irish Pensions Trust, who were involved in the payment of pensions and indeed have the register of pensioners, with Craig Gardner, who were involved with the unclaimed prize money, and also with representatives of former employees of Hospitals' Trust. Following those consultations we will decide exactly how we will distribute the money, what groups will benefit and in what proportion they will benefit. I hope to have that information for the Deputies when we come to Committee Stage.

Deputy Sherlock said there was a change of heart on the part of the Government but that is not the case. Deputy Kitt made the point very clearly that he had made representations to the Minister for Labour who has spoken on a number of occasions about trying to do something for the former employees of Hospitals' Trust. Deputy Sherlock, in speaking about a question from Deputy Mac Giolla, to which I replied, referred to providing Exchequer funds for these employees. I pointed out in my opening speech that it was not possible for me as Minister for Health to provide Exchequer funding for these former employees. Neither could we provide national lottery funding to compensate these employees for what effectively was a difficulty with a private company. The point was made very strongly by Deputy O'Connell that that private company did not discharge their responsibility. There was no avenue open to me as Minister for Health or indeed, in my view, to any other Minister, to provide moneys from the Exchequer. What we did, because of the concern referred to by Deputy Kitt and many other Deputies — my colleague, the Minister for Labour, referred to this a number of times — was look for some way in which we might be able to help. It was at that stage that the Government decided we should set up a fund in my Department comprising the unclaimed prize money and the accrued interest and distribute it for the benefit of those former employees of Hospitals' Trust. I want to assure Deputy Sherlock that there was no change of heart on the part of the Government.

I am glad the Deputies agree that the course we took to use the funding that has been there, some of it as I have said dating back for 60 years, was the right and proper one. I accept that £480,000 is not an exorbitant amount of money, particularly when it is divided among a number of employees, but at least it shows a concern for the plight of these workers. I am very pleased that we were able to find a way to assist these people. I would like again to thank the Deputies for their very constructive remarks on Second Stage.

Question put and agreed to.

Acting Chairman

It has been agreed to take Committee Stage——

Mr. Howlin

The Companies Bill is scheduled to be debated on 21 November 1990 so it is important to find a slot for this Bill as quickly as possible.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday 21 November 1990, subject to agreement between the Whips.

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 15 Nov 1990