asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he is aware that James Smyth, of Blackloon, Mantua, Co. Roscommon, was refused an old age pension on appeal on the grounds that he had not attained the statutory age necessary for the receipt of a pension, namely, seventy years; if he is further aware that the same applicant was refused sickness benefit by the Co. Roscommon Insurance Society on the grounds that he was over seventy years of age; and if in view of the hardship inflicted on this man he will order an immediate investigation by the Departments concerned into the case.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Roscommon Pension Applicant.
An appeal was decided in this case on the 11th June, 1929, when it was determined that the claimant was not entitled to an old age pension. The evidence included a letter stating that the County Roscommon Insurance Society had disallowed a claim for sick benefit on the ground that Mr. Smyth was over 70 years of age. It appears that when joining the Insurance Society Mr. Smyth gave the date of his birth as 20th June, 1856. He did not, however, apply for an old age pension until May, 1928, and he did not then furnish any definite evidence as to his age. He stated he was married on the 4th of April, 1882; but, on the particulars furnished, no record was found of his marriage in the official Marriage Register. He was visited by an inspector of the Department of Local Government and Public Health on the 12th of March, 1929, who went thoroughly into his case. On the evidence submitted, and in view of the terms of the inspector's report, it could not be held that the claimant fulfilled the statutory condition as to age.
What is to become of this man? The Insurance Society, which comes under the Department of Industry and Commerce, declares that the man is over seventy, and therefore they refused him sickness benefit—they say he is too old to get benefit to which he would be otherwise entitled—and, on the other hand, the Department of Local Government and Public Health say that the man is not old enough to qualify for an old age pension. There really should be some consultation between Departments in a case of this nature. The man is either entitled to an old age pension or else he is eligible for benefit under the National Health Insurance Acts. It is not fair to this man to allow him to fall between two stools. Has the Minister anything to say on this matter? Is he prepared to have a consultation with the Department of Industry and Commerce with the object of seeing that this man does ultimately receive the benefit he is entitled to?
It is not a question of arranging between one Department and another. In so far as the question of a pension is concerned, that is entirely one matter, and the man's age must be proved, at any rate, to my satisfaction. In so far as this man has a complaint that the Insurance Society will not pay him benefit because they considered he was over seventy, the attitude of the Society in that case is based upon the man's statement when he joined the Society that he was born in 1856. So far as I know the Society have not had any examination into the accuracy or otherwise of the statement. As far as the pension is concerned, it has been fully inquired into and, to the satisfaction of the different inspectors and myself, it has not been established that the man is seventy years of age now.
If it has not been definitely established that he is seventy, surely the other Department cannot refuse to pay him on the grounds that he is over seventy?
It is not a question of another Department. It is a question of the Insurance Society to which the man is attached, and he can take it up with the Society in the normal way. I have no information as to whether he has taken it up.