Vol. 419 No. 9
4 Mr. Belton asked the Minister for Defence if he will make a statement on the refusal of an insurance company to pay the policy proceeds to the widow of a deceased soldier (details supplied); if he will outline the action being taken by his Department to resolve this problem and to rectify anomalies that exist in the system, and if he will give an assurance that a similar situation will not recur.
5 Mr. G. O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Defence if, in view of the serious concerns being expressed by PDFORRA, and rank and file members of the Defence Forces, regarding their duties and mortgage cover by local authorities and insurance companies, he will outline the Government's position, and if he will make a statement on the matter.
54 Mr. Bradford asked the Minister for Defence if he will outline the action he has taken in relation to non-payment by an insurance company of the policy proceeds to the widow and family of a deceased soldier (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter.
60 Mr. Kenny asked the Minister for Defence if he will outline the action he has taken in relation to non-payment by an insurance company of the policy proceeds to the widow and family of a deceased soldier (details supplied); and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 4, 5, 54 and 60 together.
On becoming aware of the problem encountered recently by the widow of a deceased soldier in relation to mortgage protection insurance, the Department took immediate steps to remove any possible ambiguity about the situation by arranging and paying for additional mortgage insurance for military personnel currently serving in Lebanon and whose local authority mortgages are covered by the group policy in question. The same arrangement will, if necessary, be made for personnel going overseas on UN service in future.
I am sure it is the wish of everybody that a similar occurence will never again take place but we have to be prepared for them. Is the Minister saying that if something similar happens in Ireland the same circumstances will prevail?
As I understand it the question arose because the insurance company refused to pay on the mortgage protection policy as the soldier in question was serving with UNIFIL who declared he was in a war zone. The Department do not accept that. The Department have made it clear that our soldiers abroad are in a peace-keeping role. The decision of the insurance company was taken on the basis that he was in a war zone. It would not arise here unless we were in a war.
Can the Minister say whether Army personnel serving here in dangerous positions such as Border security or, indeed, in the transfer of prisoners or cash escort duty would be covered under the same conditions as outlined? Would he agree that these Army personnel — God forbid if any of them were killed in the course of their duty — have the same problem and if killed in the course of duty would the Department fund the extra premiums needed for such cover?
The Deputy misunderstands the position. It was the insurance company that decided our peace-keeping forces abroad were in a war. It is my understanding here, unless in the last few minutes somebody has declared war, that our soldiers are covered in the course of their duty because we are not in a war here. The insurance company that covers the mortgage insurance policy referred to here, decided that the soldiers were in a war zone and because of that were subject to the hazards of war. I am not aware, and I do not think the Department or the local authorities are aware, that any other insurance company adopted this attitude and, more particularly, none of the insurance companies indicated that they would regard a soldier on active duty here — transferring prisoners or engaged in cash escort duties and so on — as being in a war so I presume the insurance policy will cover them.
I am disappointed at the Minister's flippancy about the matter. I assure the Minister it is not a funny matter. Has he not had representations from PDFORRA on this issue suggesting that where insurance companies seek a higher premium that the Department of Defence would pay that premium?
I regret very much that the Deputy thinks I am being flippant——
The Minister was flippant with the answer.
I do not regard the answer I gave as in any way flippant.
The Minister said that if war was declared in the last few minutes.
I was only giving the Deputy an example.
Let us not enter into argument on the subject.
I have given my answer to the question. I am not aware of any of the other insurance companies who offer mortgage protection insurance for any of our Army personnel having adopted the same attitude as this company. As I replied on 13 April, if the need arises, or if some of the insurance companies are changing their attitude, it is essentially a matter between the local authority and the Department. The Department moved quickly when this matter became clear and arranged for the extra premium to be paid and the same would apply in any future cases.
Deputy G. O'Sullivan rose
Let us have regard to the time factor in dealing with these questions, please. The Deputy has had a fair innings.
May I put one final question.
If Deputy Belton is not going to intervene again I will call Question No. 6.
