Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 16 May 1946

Vol. 101 No. 2

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Incidence of Silicosis.

asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he has received a communication, from the trade union representing the miners in Castlecomer, stating that some of those men are believed to be suffering from the industrial disease, silicosis, and requesting him to make provision, under Section 79 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934, for such cases; whether he has caused inquiries to be made into this matter, and, if so, what was the nature of the report he received; whether the doctor who attends these miners was interviewed in connection with the matter, and if not, if he will now make further inquiries, so as to obtain the necessary proofs of the existence of silicosis amongst the miners in the Irish anthracite coal industry.

I have received a communication from the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union stating that some of its members employed as coal miners in the Castlecomer area were believed to be suffering from silicosis and requesting that a scheme be established under Section 79 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1934, for the payment of compensation in respect of this disease.

This matter has been fully considered, although I did not regard it as necessary to interview the doctor who attends the Castlecomer miners.

I am advised that there is little likelihood of silicosis being contracted in coal mines in this country. Silicosis is a miner's industrial disease in Great Britain, but that is due to the fact that coal workings there are very deep and necessitate boring through silica rock, which contains more than 80 per cent. of free silica. In this country coal mines are shallow and any boring is done through shale, which is practically free of silica.

The number of alleged cases of silicosis from all causes reported during the past ten years was four.

I am satisfied that conditions do not require the taking of action as proposed by the Deputy.

Would the Minister not consider it worth while to make further inquiries? The doctor who is attending many of the miners is a man of very wide experience in the Welsh coalfields. Of the 28 deaths in this mining area in the last seven years, almost one-half have been certified as being due to bronchitis which, of course, the Minister knows, has been a bad description in this country for some years past for silicosis in the mining industry. I should like the Minister to be fair to these men. Will the Minister not agree that it is difficult to get men for coal-mining in this country and that it is becoming increasingly difficult? If he fails to make fuller inquiries as to the effect of the work on the young men there, he is not likely to have the industry carried on. The men feel very strongly about the Minister's action in the matter. They are anxious that he should make further inquiries.

I am advised that the circumstances that could produce silicosis do not exist in Castlecomer, certainly not in such manner as to justify making silicosis an industrial disease under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

In view of the fact that the doctor has certified in recent times at least one definite case of silicosis at the Castlecomer mines, would the Minister not consider making further inquiries? The Minister will not compromise himself in any way by making all the inquiries which would appear to be necessary.

The total number of cases of deaths alleged to be due to this disease in ten years was four and, in the circumstances, there does not appear to be need to institute an insurance scheme such as is contemplated.

Is it not only a matter of the Minister scheduling this disease? It does not involve the State in any expense.

Oh, no, but it is making the employer liable for compensation where death is attributable to that cause.

Surely the Minister does not want more than four deaths in ten years before he schedules a disease as an industrial disease?

It is not fair to put upon an employer an obligation to pay compensation on the death of a workman unless it can be clearly shown that the death was due to a disease associated with the workman's employment. There is nothing associated with coal-mining employment in this country which would make this disease one which should be regarded as an industrial disease associated with that industry under the Workmen's Compensation Act.

Is it the Minister's intention to be more considerate for the employer than for the miner, the workman?

It is not a matter of being considerate; I am trying to be fair.

Where does the Minister or his advisers believe that the miner inhales silica, if it is not in a coalmine? He does not inhale it walking down the street in Kilkenny.

There is a number of diseases and people die of diseases of various kinds but they are not industrial diseases for the purpose of the Workmen's Compensation Acts. In Great Britain this disease is an industrial disease for the coal-mining industry because of the circumstances under which that industry is carried on there. These circumstances do not exist here.

Suppose the Minister finds that there is a number of cases of chronic pulmonary congestion resulting from the ingestion of silica and that these occur amongst persons who are coal miners, does he propose to base his refusal to schedule this as an industrial disease on the assumption that by coincidence a coal-miner in this country did what no human being ever did in the history of the world before, that is, ingest into his lungs, while walking down the main street of Kilkenny, a quantity of silica sufficient to give him silicosis?

It seems obvious to me that Deputy Dillon does not know what he is talking about.

I know very well.

Coal-mining in Great Britain involves boring through silica rock. That is why this disease is scheduled under the Workmen's Compensation Act there. That does not apply here.

Has the Minister ever examined it?

Certainly.

How many inspections has the Minister carried out there in the last 12 months within the meaning of the Factory Acts?

Were the dependents of the four persons who died paid compensation?

No, nor were those persons employed in the coal-mining industry.

Barr
Roinn