Michael Ring
Question:4 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the compensation to be put in place for the people that used dental services and had to pay for them during the recent dispute. [8532/03]
Ceisteanna – Questions. Priority Questions. - Social Welfare Benefits.
Dental benefit is provided to insured workers through a panel of dentists who enter into agreements with my Department to provide treatments under the scheme on a contract basis and at fees specified in the agreements. Under these arrangements, and with limited exceptions, treatments are provided to the patients either free of charge or at a reduced fee and the Department pays the balance of the cost directly to the dentist at the agreed rates.
From the beginning of August 2002 my Department ceased to accept claims from dentists who were imposing increased patient charges in breach of these arrangements. Patients were advised at that stage to check that their dentist was continuing to operate within his contract with the Department and, in cases where this was not so, they were advised to use my Departments LOCALL service to get details of dentists adhering to the agreed fees for treatments.
Patients were also advised that the Department would not be in a position to refund any costs arising from treatment provided to them as private patients. The LOCALL service was operated to ensure that patients could secure treatment from dentists still operating the scheme.
Patients had the choice of using an alternative dentist where their own was in dispute, or deferring treatment where possible pending a settlement, or being treated by dentists who had ceased to operate the scheme. There is no provision for payments under the dental benefit scheme in respect of patients who chose to take treatment from dentists operating outside the boundaries of the dental treatment benefit scheme. The fee which is payable to dentists by patients is the net amount taking account of the Department contribution which is to be subsequently recouped by the dentist. In the course of the dispute, some dentists charged fees which were considerably in excess of the agreed levels. This was in clear breach of their contract and there could be no question of the Department's contribution being paid to dentists who acted in that way. The position in this regard was made clear at the outset, as was the fact that the Department could not make refunds directly to patients in these circumstances.
Patients who received treatment from dentists who were not participating in the scheme did so outside the scope of arrangements for the provision of dental benefit and are not entitled to compensation under the scheme.
How many people applied to the Department for a refund? Has the Minister received legal advice on this issue? These people paid their PRSI and obeyed the law of the land. The Minister is the insurance broker but when they claimed their insurance she did not pay it. Has she received legal advice on this?
I put down a parliamentary question on this, asking the Minister's Department to identify the dentists taking part in this scheme. She refused to give me that information and I have now requested it under the freedom of information legislation. Why did she not give me that information? Most people have complained to me that the dentists they had to attend were too far away from them, which is wrong. It is wrong that people will have to take legal action against the Government. They paid their dues and insurance and the Minister failed to honour her commitments. She is only the broker who collects PRSI from the people and when they wanted their money back, she did not pay them. That is wrong according to any law. Has the Minister taken legal advice as to whether people can get what is due to them? She should compensate these people.
It seems difficult to get clarity on this issue with Opposition Members. In press releases, interviews, letters and advice to people I have stated that there was a dispute with the Department and I was not in a position to pay dentists outside the scheme. A LOCALL service was provided and used extensively by people who were facilitated with information regarding dentists. I appreciate that their own dentists may have been outside the scheme so they may have had to travel.
A PRSI payment by someone is not an automatic entitlement to anything and it never was. One pays one's PRSI and depending—
An Leas-Cheann Comhairle
We must now conclude questions as it is 4.45.
—on the scheme, one's entitlement may be determined.
We will leave it there but we will return to this.
Will my Priority Question be answered?
Yes.
Written Answers follow Adjournment Debate.