asked the Minister for Defence if he will state the date when he received a claim for compensation from John Wheeler (L.D.F./276), Castlegrogan, Errill, County Leix, for injuries received while engaged at rifle practice with the local company of the Local Defence Force on September 17th, 1944; if he was admitted to and detained and examined at St. Bricin's Hospital on two occasions between the date of the accident and December 4th, 1944; whether he is still certified as medically unfit to resume his normal duties by the local medical officer; and, if so, if he will now sanction the payment of compensation at the appropriate rate for the full period of his incapacity.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - L.D.F. Man's Claim for Compensation.
John Wheeler's application for compensation was received in the Department of Defence on 21st October, 1944. The applicant received medical treatment in St. Bricin's Hospital during the period from the 19th September, 1944, to 12th October, 1944. Following on his claim for compensation, Mr. Wheeler was called to St. Bricin's Hospital for medical examination by the Army Pensions Board and as detained in the hospital during the period from the 28th November, 1944, to the 4th December, 1944. As a result of their examination the board advised that Mr. Wheeler was unfit for his normal duties for the period from the 17th September to the 26th October, 1944, due to the injury he received on the 17th September. The board advised that after the 26th October Mr. Wheeler suffered no further disability consequent on the said injury.
In view of the board's report Mr. Wheeler was granted compensation at the maximum rate, viz., 37/6 per week, together with additional compensation at the rate of 7/6 per week in respect of his wife and 16/- per week in respect of four children for the period from the 17th September to the 26th October, 1944.
Mr. Wheeler appealed against this award. The investigation of this appeal has now been concluded, but it is not possible to increase the amount of the compensation already granted.
Could the Minister say whether Mr. Wheeler was discharged as medically fit to resume his normal duties on the last occasion that he was let out from St. Bricin's Hospital; and, if so, will he explain why it is that the local medical officer of health still certifies him as being unfit to resume his normal duties with Córas Iompair Eireann by whom he was employed and where he was in receipt of a minimum wage of £3 a week? Is he also aware that this man's family were 41 weeks without any income of any kind? How does the Minister reconcile that with his own information?
As I said, the board advised that after the 26th October Mr. Wheeler suffered no further disability consequent on the said injury. A local medical officer did, in fact, furnish a certificate on a couple of occasions to the effect that Mr. Wheeler was suffering from an injury to his left eye and was, therefore, unfit for work. When the Department asked the medical officer for further information as to the pathological condition present in the left eye, the doctor said that the Army oculist would be able to supply a report. When the authorities of the Department went to the Army oculist he reported that the man was suffering from 10 per cent. disability of each eye, due to astigmatism not attributable to service, and 100 per cent. disability (transient) due to conjunctivitis for the first period of hospitalisation and for 14 days after that, due to service. The award of compensation was based on the board's assessment, and the local doctor has not given the Army Pensions Board any reason for reaching the conclusion that Mr. Wheeler is unfit for work.
How can he resume his normal duties with Córas Iompair Eireann so long as he is certified medically unfit to do so? If he was being dealt with by an ordinary, callous employer under the Workmen's Compensation Act, he would get compensation. With your permission, Sir, I propose to raise the question of the callous treatment of this man on the Adjournment.