asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he intends to review the list of prescribed diseases for occupational injury benefit; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Occupational Injury Benefit.
3.
I have decided to include additional diseases in the list of diseases prescribed under the occupational injuries benefit scheme. The additional diseases are occupational deafness, occupational asthma, occupational vitiligo, angiosarcoma of the liver, osteolysis of the terminal phalanges of the fingers, infection by streptococcus suis and non-cirrhotic portal fibrosis.
I also propose to remove certain restrictions which apply at present in the case of some diseases and to broaden the categories of employments in respect of certain other diseases. I expect to sign regulations to give effect to these decisions within the next few days.
Is the Minister aware that if a person suffers from a disease contracted at work, or dies from a disease contracted at work, unless the disease is on the prescribed list he will not get occupational injury benefit if he is ill, or if he dies his widow will get no widow's pension. Does he not consider this is a grave injustice to somebody who contracts a disease at work?
I am aware that the scheme provides that a person who is insured against personal injury caused by an accident arising in the course of his employment is also insured against any prescribed disease. Naturally there is a list of prescribed diseases. I have been revising and extending this list fairly considerably. I expect to sign the revised regulations next week. This will also give me an opportunity to replace previous regulations with more comprehensive regulations. I will take the opportunity to change the format of the presentation. The diseases will be grouped into four categories by broad causative agents in line with EEC and ILO practice. The improvements will be broadly welcomed and the restrictions will be eased.
Rather than adding new diseases to the prescribed list, should not the Minister ensure that anybody who suffers from a disease as a result of his occupation, or any widow whose husband died from an occupational disease or occupational injury, is catered for in the social welfare code? If outside medical officers and medical officers in the Department are satisfied that a person suffered from a disease as a result of his work he should receive occupational benefit irrespective of whether the disease is on the prescribed list. Now that he is reviewing the list, would it not be better for him to do away with it and accept medical opinion outside and inside his own Department?
I could not in any circumstances accept a proposition of that nature. That would be a licence to print money to be handed over to the medical profession. The list of diseases is prescribed and to the new list I propose to add decompression sickness which may be contracted by people using gaseous mixtures. These illnesses must be verifiable to my Department, otherwise anybody could claim on the basis of a medical certificate that he suffers from an occupational illness.
I resent that.
We are getting into the field of policy. It is not possible to have a broad discussion on policy on every question.
I also resent the allegation against medical officers in the Minister's Department. A patient in my constituency died as a result of wood dust contracted at work, accepted by the medical officers in the Department and by the consultants in one of the larger hospitals in this city. Is the Minister satisfied that the widow of this man should not get an occupational injury widow's pension, in spite of the fact that her husband died from a disease contracted at work, just because it is not on the Minister's list?
The question of wood dust has been under particular attention by my Department, particularly red cedar wood dust, which was classified as an irritant in relation to occupational asthma, and detailed discussions have taken place between our medical advisers and their UK counterparts. There is a liaison. The list is quite comprehensive. I have added no less than six new diseases, all medically determined. Everybody from the ICTU to the FUE accepts that the occupational injuries benefit scheme is related to illnesses occurring in the course of and arising from a person's employment.
I would ask Deputies to bear with me while I pose a question which I think will demonstrate how Question Time should not be conducted. There is a question to the Minister asking if he proposes to revise the list of prescribed diseases. Is it not absurd to list off up to 25 diseases and debate the merits and demerits of including each one?
The Deputy is proposing the principle that there should not be a list.
He should have put down a question to that effect.
Can we take it now that if a person contracts a disease at work or dies as a result of such a disease, occupational injury benefit or a widow's pension will not be paid unless the illness is on the prescribed list?
I confirm that benefit will be paid if a person contracts what is recognised internationally by the ILO and the EEC as a prescribed occupational illness arising during the course of his employment and related to that employment.
What about the man who suffers from wood dust?
Of course he would qualify. The ILO, the EEC, the Department of Labour and the Departments of Health and Social Welfare have drawn up a comprehensive list of occupational diseases which qualify for benefit. There is nothing unusual about it.
Questions Nos. 4 and 5 are for written reply.