Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 18 Jun 1925

Vol. 12 No. 11

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - VOTE 39.—NATIONAL HEALTH INSURANCE COMMISSION.

I beg to move:—

Go ndeontar suim na raghaidh thar £186,058 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1926, chun. Tuarastail agus Costaisí an Choimisiúin Arachais agus chun Ilsíntiúisí agus Ildeontaisí mar gheall ar chostas Sochar agus Costaisí Riaracháin fé sna hAchtanna um Arachas Sláinte Náisiúnta, 1911 go 1924 (maraon le Deontaisí áirithe i gCabhair).

39.—That a sum not exceeding £186,058 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1926, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Insurance Commission and for sundry Contributions and Grants in respect of the cost of Benefits and Expenses of Administration under the National Health Insurance Acts, 1911 to 1924 (including certain Grants in Aid).

Deputies have the interim report of the Committee of Inquiry into Health Insurance and Medical Service. That places them practically on a par with me as regards information for formulating any general policy regarding the question of National Health Insurance. Until the full report is published, and until I have an opportunity of getting the views of all parties concerned, I will not be able to formulate any definite conclusive policy in regard to National Health Insurance as a whole. Accordingly, I will just go through the sub-heads and make a few comments upon them.

With regard to sub-head (a), salaries, wages and allowances, the increase in this sub-head is due to the ordinary normal incremental increases and an increased rate of bonus. The figures are reduced to those required for normal work in the Free State in all branches, except certain sections of the accounts branch, in which a full staff is required until the division between Northern Ireland and the Free State, and also the separation from Great Britain, is finally effected. A portion of the amount provided under this sub-head, estimated at £3,800, is chargeable to the Government of Northern Ireland for work being done by this Department preliminary to the apportionment of the funds of Approved Societies. A sum estimated at £2,000 is recoverable from the British Government for work done by this Department on behalf of the British Ministry of Pensions. There is also a sum which is chargeable to the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, amounting to £11,200, in respect of work performed in securing compliance with the Unemployment Insurance Acts, while a sum of £2,300 is paid to officers on loan to other Departments.

Sub-head (b) deals with travelling expenses. A sum of £9,200 is required for travelling expenses, etc., of the outdoor staff, which includes 63 officers. A portion of this sum, estimated at £4,820 represents travelling expenses incurred by officers of the Department in securing compliance with the Unemployment Insurance Acts on behalf of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce. The cost of travelling expenses is swollen by the cost of car hire, which has increased very considerably since 1914. A sum of £360 is provided for the travelling expenses of the Commissioners and staff attending conferences and attending Approved Societies and Insurance Committees. £90 is also provided for expenses of members of the Advisory Committee when attending conferences.

Sub-head (c) touches special inquiries and services. This is an amount of £10 only, and it is provided merely as a token-sum to keep the sub-head open. Sub-head (d) deals with insurance stamps. The Revenue Department has been approached on the question of reducing the estimate for the manufacture of stamps for the year 1925-26 from £550 to £500. They state that the expenditure for the past year will not approach the estimated figure, because the printing of new stamps has not yet begun, and the only cost will be for the overprinting of old stamps. As soon as the work in connection with the manufacture of the new stamp begins, they consider that the figure of cost given is a correct one. As regards sub-head (e), the item of £80 under it is made up of £20 for washing towels for central office and £60 for the purchase by the outdoor staff of necessary articles of stationery not supplied from headquarters. These are railway guides, ink, gum and local newspapers, and matters of that kind.

The next important sub-head is (g) (1). Prior to the establishment of the Free State there was a small item for administration under (g) (1), which represented the State grant of medical benefit received in Great Britain by stray members of Irish societies. This has now disappeared, and the words "including expenses for administration" are no longer required in the note. Under (g) (2) I may say that the estimate for this sub-head was, up to the year 1923-24, always prepared by the Government Actuary in London. His figures, which were presumably based on the expectation of sickness and on the estimated number of insured persons, were usually much in excess of the expenditure. For the past two years the Commission have endeavoured to bring the estimated figure as low as possible, having regard to the actual sickness experience, but in view of the uncertain factors governing expenditure under this head, a reasonable margin has to be allowed. An increase in employment and greater compliance with the Insurance Acts are likely to increase the expenditure under this sub-head during the coming year, while provision has also to be made for the possible occurrence of an epidemic. A margin of £10,500 to meet these increases does not seem excessive, and it would not be safe to take a lower figure.

The only other point that may arise is that Deputies might be anxious for some information as to how the Medical Referee scheme set up last February is working. I introduced a Bill to-day which is intended to give legal sanction to the setting-up of this scheme. The new Medical Referee scheme for the provision to Approved Societies of second medical opinions in respect of members claiming or receiving sickness and disablement benefits was put into operation by the Commission as from the 1st February, and is authorised to be continued up to the end of this year. Three temporary District Medical Referees were appointed for the making of examinations under the scheme, their headquarters having been fixed at Dublin, Cork and Oranmore, Co. Galway. The examinations of insured persons are made by the Referees at various centres throughout the Saorstát and in the overwhelming majority of cases in premises—for example, dispensaries and hospitals—under the control of local authorities who, in most instances, have given the use of their premises free of charge. Forty-two such centres were set up during the period under review and negotiations are in progress for the setting-up of additional centres in counties including Tirconaill.

The number of applications for reference received from approved societies, from the 1st February to the 30th April, 1925, was 1,733, twenty-eight societies having availed of the scheme. Medical certifiers under the National Health Insurance Acts are also entitled to apply for second opinions in respect of cases in which they are issuing certificates for incapacity for work; but during the period mentioned only twenty-one such applications were received. Of the total number of applications—1,754—451 were considered to be unsuitable for examination on medical grounds, and the remainder were promptly forwarded by the Commission to the respective referees for the necessary action at centres where the arrangement for the making of examinations had already been completed.

The total number of applications sent to the referees during the period in question was 1,049, and I will give you some particulars relating to those. The number of applications for reference received by the Medical Referees amounted to 1,049. The number of cases actually examined by the Medical Referees was 628. The number of cases reported by the referees to be incapable of work was 218. The number of cases reported to be capable of work was 410. The number of cases in which the insured persons did not present themselves for examination, including persons who declared off benefit before the date fixed for examination, and the persons who were certified as unfit to attend was 421, or 40.1 per cent. of the number of cases summoned to attend for examination. I do not think there is anything else I can say now.

Deputies may desire to ask questions under the various sub-heads.

The information that was supplied to me to-day in response to questions I put down was, of course, received too late to enable me to digest and understand it. That precludes me from raising matters now which I might otherwise desire to raise. I want to have confirmed my impression of the Minister's statement regarding the attitude of the Ministry on the question of the amalgamation or the unification of societies. The Minister is, of course, aware that the opinion is widespread in National Health Insurance circles that decisions have been arrived at. That opinion is based partially upon the report that has been circulated and partially upon alleged evidence of some kind or another. I take it from the Minister's statement that all these assumptions are inaccurate and baseless and that, notwithstanding the issuing of the report of the Commission, the Ministry has not gone to the extent of committing itself in any way and is not going to do so until it has had evidence, even beyond that of the Commission, as regards the views of interested parties, whether they be societies or insured persons. I think it well that it should go out quite authoritatively that I am rightly interpreting the Minister when I say that that is wrong. I think it should go out that it is wrong to say the Ministry have decided, or have even come to the point of deciding, upon the recommendations of the Commission, either in the direction of accepting them wholly or partially, or not accepting them at all. Do I take it that that is a correct interpretation of the Minister's statement?

Deputy Johnson has correctly interpreted my statement on this matter. Until we have given all persons with any interest in this matter an opportunity of expressing their views and giving us any opinions at their disposal, there will be no question of coming to any decision. I have a perfectly open mind on this matter at the moment. There is no doubt the publication of the report will have its own influence. It is a very important document. At the moment, however, I have an absolutely open mind on the matter.

Then I may deny the allegation that there is in existence a draft Bill based on the Commission's report—a draft Bill in the Departmental offices?

If there is such, it has certainly never come under my notice. I never heard anything about it.

As regards sub-head (g), in connection with sanatorium contributions, is the Minister satisfied that all that could be done in this connection has been done? Is he satisfied that under the present sanatorium system the arrangements are as good as could be secured for the money and that proper precautions are being taken to isolate cases? Is he satisfied that proper enquiries are made to discover this class of patient? Is it only when they report themselves, or when they apply for relief, that these consumptives are discovered in the country? I know it is somewhat difficult to discover those people except they report themselves. There are several families in parts of the country and they seem never to come in contact with sanatoria. They are dying and the condition of their houses is not all that could be desired. I do not think that the people who are supposed to deal with this question are reaching the object, or are trying to reach the object for which this portion of the Act was instituted. I am not satisfied that the best is being done, or that there is enough isolation. There are numbers of families dying from this disease and they have never been visited.

I am aware that our measures for the prevention of consumption are not, in all respects, all that is to be desired. Dealing with this question generally in so far as it is affected by this particular Vote, it is a matter that will be considerably affected by the appointment of a county medical officer of health, who will be responsible for all these services in the future, as well as for the prevention of other forms of disease. This is a matter that will have to be dealt with by a commission generally, and until they have reported and proposed some scheme for the improvement of this particular system I do not see that I could serve any useful purpose by making any recommendations or altering the present system, except in so far as it will be altered under the provisions of the Local Government Act, which makes a county medical officer responsible for all these health services, preventative as well as curative.

Are the ordinary medical practitioners who are called in in these cases bound to notify the medical officer in charge, or the staff in charge of the sanatorium that these tubercular cases are there?

Yes, in some particular cases. It is a matter that I went into very fully on the Local Government Estimate. I forget now how far medical officers are entitled to go. There is a certain limit; they are not allowed to broadcast the fact that a person is suffering from tuberculosis. It is only in cases where the disease is absolutely contagious and highly infectious that they are under an obligation to report.

Is it a notifiable disease?

It is in certain places, where portion of the Act of 1908 has been adopted. In Dublin city it is notifiable, but I do not think the Act has been adopted generally throughout the country.

I can see no other way in which this would come to the knowledge of people who are supposed to look after it except through the medical officers, because people themselves do not deal with it and their neighbours do not like to deal with it. Nobody can deal with it except a medical officer. I do not mean to broadcast it publicly by any manner of means, but to convey the information to the doctor in charge of the county or whoever is the proper authority to communicate it to. I really think that ought to be done.

As a matter of fact, it is always done in the case of insured persons, but in the case of other persons the disease does not come under the heading of a compulsorily notifiable disease. It is in a kind of intermediate stage. There is a particular Act governing this whole question of tuberculosis which leaves it in a different category to highly contagious fevers.

What I mean is, where the only members of the family are not insurable, and where they are delicate and die in many cases. In that case I do not know how you are to have it dealt with.

It is really more a matter for administration. If you have good administration those cases are dealt with, if you have loose administration, no information that you can give will assist.

You are to look at the case from the point of view of the individual and the danger of infection. There are a great many different varieties of tuberculosis, some of which would not be transferable to anybody else and some of which might be.

It is pulmonary tuberculosis that is notifiable.

But not in all cases.

No. Certainly in Dublin it is.

It is a very big question.

I should like to ask the Minister if he is satisfied that the salaries paid to the tuberculosis officers will enable them to pay the necessary visits to persons suffering from tuberculosis. There is scarcely a parish in any county where you will not get twenty cases of tuberculosis, and they require a lot of visiting if the medical officer is to supervise his work properly. The salary, including all travelling expenses paid to the tuberculosis officer, is something about £620. My idea is if he did his work properly, and if he supervised each case properly and gave it a decent chance to recover, he would spend all that money, and more, in travelling expenses. I think it is quite obvious from the salary paid that he cannot do his work efficiently, and I doubt that he is expected to do it efficiently. I think a lot of this expenditure, simply for the reasons that it is not sufficient to give a man an opportunity of doing his work properly, is a great drawback in these schemes. I saw recently where Medical Referees were appointed to revise the work of medical certifiers. Also they have some connection with the administration of sanatorium benefit. These men are allowed £600 a year. I should like to know is the Minister responsible for recommending that, or does it go to the Department of Finance, and has the Department of Finance the last word to say to it? These men are not properly paid for their work, and I believe the work is not being properly done.

That question should come under subhead (a) (Salaries).

I want to say a word on this question of tuberculosis. It is not necessary, with all due respect to Deputy Hennessy, that doctors should attend regularly tubercular patients. I was a tubercular patient. After the disease was discovered certain treatment was ordered, and the treatment had its effect. It was not necessary to have a medical doctor coming to me. Mainly it was a question of good food and fresh air; it was a question of treatment more than medical advice. Once a doctor pronounces a patient ill of this disease, it is a question of treatment, and it does not require medicine. That is my experience.

Deputy Hennessy seems to be actuated by one concern, and that is as to whether the doctors are paid enough, considering that they have to go around the country. He mentioned that there are twenty cases in every parish. That is a thing that I am not prepared to admit. This continuous travelling is only in his own imagination. I thought when the Deputy came into the Dáil that he was a representative of South Dublin, but I find now that he is a representative of the medical profession.

I might explain that I do not care how much the doctors are paid. It is good enough for them if they accept £200 a year. But I want to know are these men paid sufficient to secure that they can put their services at the disposal of those requiring them. In fact, I will go so far with Deputy Gorey as to say that there are a lot of these men paid so little that you could further economise and wipe out their offices altogether for all they can do.

I do not think the Deputy was in order in raising this whole question of the tuberculosis officers, because it does not come either under this Vote or this particular subhead.

A point that does strike one about this is as to whether we are dealing on the proper lines with this particular difficulty. The President has pointed out that in one area it is a notifiable disease. As far as I know— he can correct me if I am wrong—outside that area it is not a notifiable disease. What occurs to the ordinary lay mind is that if the disease is of such importance as to make it notifiable in one area, surely it is equally important that it should be made notifiable in other areas.

The Act was permissive.

The President pointed out that it was permissive in the other areas, but as I understood him, it was compulsory in Dublin city. The point that has been raised by Deputy Gorey is a very reasonable one. How can you deal with this particular disease, how can you bring the advantages of sanatorium treatment before those affected with this disease, except you go where they are and get your officers into touch with them? That appears to me to be a reasonable attitude, and in order that the officers of this particular Department should be put in touch with all those who are affected with this disease, I think it would be essential that it should be made a notifiable disease all over the country, instead of limiting notification to one particular portion of the area. That appears to be an aspect of the question that one would like to consider more fully than there has been time to consider it in the past, but as I said, if notification is essential in one area, I do not see why the other area should be excluded from the benefits that notification would undoubtedly bring to those afflicted with this particular disease.

It rather appears that Deputy Good is making a case for the nationalisation of the health insurance system because this vote is a grant-in-aid of the existing Health Insurance Fund. Of course it is through the present system of organisation that it will have to be administered. The case that Deputy Good is making of course is one which might well be made if he were arguing in favour of the abolition of the present system and advocating centralised control of a State scheme.

My object in drawing attention to this is that I recognise and the medical profession, I am sure, recognise, that except this disease is taken in the very early stages and prevention used before the disease develops you will not get adequate results. What I want is to try to impress on those in authority to get at it in its very early stages when it can be effective and not to be dealing with cases where the disease has been contracted, especially with extreme cases. This is of immense importance, and that is my object in drawing attention to the matter.

This discussion has become very general in a Vote of this kind. In the Local Government Act we made tuberculosis a compulsorily notifiable disease in all areas. It was permissive previously but now it is compulsory.

That is in the new Act?

When does that come into force?

It should be in operation now. The particular Tuberculosis Act is in a different category to that dealing with ordinary compulsorily notifiable diseases. It is one of these cases where you have to reconcile the rights of the individual with the rights of the public. Irish people are very seni sitive about tuberculosis and about having it known that it is in their family, and you might do more harm than good by allowing inspectors to go in and investigate whether people are suffering from it or not. In order to get over this difficulty this Act is restricted to cases where the disease has reached a serious stage. I think there has to be foam from the mouth, or the spittle has to be infected, or there must be other symptoms before the doctor is justified in insisting on the patient undergoing treatment and on compulsory notification.

Vote put and agreed to.
Sitting suspended at 6.55 p.m. and resumed at 7.30 p.m.
AN LEAS-CHEAN COMHAIRLE in the chair.
Barr
Roinn