Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 May 1927

Vol. 8 No. 30

MEDICAL PRACTITIONERS BILL, 1927—SECOND STAGE.

Motion made and question proposed: "That this Bill be now read a second time." (Cathaoirleach.)

I believe I am expressing the opinion of practically everybody interested in the matter of medical education in the Free State when I say I welcome Clause 2 of this Bill. The great outstanding feature of the Bill is contained in this clause. It ensures that every medical student or practitioner educated or qualified in the Free State will have equal rights and equal privileges with those educated and qualified in other parts of the kingdom. It removes once and for all anxiety as regards the future, and I think it cannot, therefore, be too loudly proclaimed or too often reiterated that medical students will be under no disability in entering the medical schools here in future. There are one or two points that I would like to mention, if I may. I notice Section 10 reads, with regard to the nomination of members of the Council—"not more than two months nor less than one month before every expiration of the term of office of the nominated members of the Council." I think there ought to be an extension of that term. The time is very short. Some of these bodies, in the summer time, do not meet very often, and I think if the Minister could see his way to extend the period of time to perhaps three months and two months it would be a good thing.

Section 24 deals with foreign practitioners, but there is no mention of reciprocity. It differs in this respect from some other Acts, such as the General Registration and the Central Midwives' Board. These two bodies largely have reciprocity, and those registered in the Free State can claim registration in England and vice versa. Dealing with foreign countries, it is very important that there should be reciprocity. In Canada, for instance, although there is a certain amount of reciprocity, there are two provinces in which there is no reciprocity with England. If the Free State wishes to have reciprocity they might give reciprocity to foreign countries, or to some of the Colonies in return for the same right being granted to the Free State. It would be very desirable if the Free State could get reciprocity with foreign countries, for instance, in the case of France and Italy, because there are good openings in the South of France and along the Italian Riviera for medical men.

Section 29 deals with the removal from the register of persons guilty of "infamous conduct." I suggest to the Minister that at the end of the first portion of the section he might insert the words "if it sees fit."

CATHAOIRLEACH

That is purely a Committee point.

Very well, I shall reserve it for Committee. Section 30 deals with the question of inquiring into the allegations of "infamous conduct." I noticed that those who have to carry out the inquiry are the Council, and that the Council will have power to summon witnesses and to examine them on oath. These provisions are not contained in the English Act, and I am not sure whether they are quite desirable provisions or not. If cases are to be examined into on oath, and that they have a right to summon witnesses, it might mean they should have a legal assessor just as the General Medical Council, but the General Medical Council has no power to examine witnesses.

Section 31 provides that the Council shall, in every year, cause to be printed and published the Medical Register for the year. That would be very costly. I suggest to the Minister that after the first year's register has been published additions made might be in the form of lists of qualified persons, so that it may not be necessary to republish the costly register every year. If there were a very large number of practitioners from England and the Colonies and other places qualified and entitled to come in and be put upon the register, and if the register had to be printed every year with these new lists added, it might be very costly and I am not sure that it would be worth it. Section 40, sub-section (2) reads:-

"For the purpose of the performance of the duty imposed on the Council by the foregoing sub-section the Council may with the approval of the Minister appoint such and so many fit and proper persons as the Council thinks necessary to be inspectors of examinations and may pay to such persons such remuneration as the Council with the sanction of the Minister for Finance shall determine."

I think that the approval of the Minister is quite right so long as the Minister or the Government are committed to defraying the cost, but after the first two years it is presumed that the cost will be defrayed by the Council's own funds. That being so, it is quite unnecessary that they should appeal to the Minister when there are eleven members of the profession of high standing capable of doing it——

What section does the Senator's last observation apply to?

Section 40, line 50. A very important duty is cast upon them under Section 44. That section deals with the adaptation of Section 5 of the Midwives (Ireland) Act, 1918. That is a very important part of the functions of the Council. It will be more important as time goes on, especially in cases where unregistered midwives are acting illegally with the assistance of medical men. Cases of that kind are constantly coming before the General Medical Council in England. The Midwives Act in England was passed in 1902. The Irish Act was passed in 1918. A year's grace was allowed to midwives, who were unqualified, before it became illegal for them to act. The Irish Central Midwives' Board have five medical men on it. I suggest that the Minister might possibly see his way to appoint one of them on the Council. Such an appointment would, I think, make the work run smoothly. I regret to see under the Schedule that that portion of the agreement gives Northern Ireland the right to appoint the Crown representative for Ireland. This is one of the highest positions open to members of the medical profession, and it is one that has always been held by Dublin men. Henceforth it will pass for all time to a representative nominated by the Government of Northern Ireland. There is no mention of the Pharmacopoeia, of which the General Medical Council has charge. It will, I suppose, continue to act in regard to that. With these few observations I am otherwise pleased with the Bill and heartly approve of it.

I should like to see the provision in the Schedule giving the right to the Northern Government to appoint the Crown representative for Ireland in the future eliminated.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I should like to point out to the Senator that the point he has raised, as well as the points raised by Senator Bigger, are all Committee points. They do not touch the principle of the Bill, and so long as Senators accept the principle of the Bill they should support its Second Reading. If there are any points in the Bill to which Senators take exception, then it is open to them to put down amendments and to have these discussed on the Committee Stage.

I take it that the principle underlying the Bill is this: that medical practitioners registered here shall have an equal right to practise in England with medical practitioners registered in England and vice versa?

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share