Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 16 Feb 1984

Vol. 348 No. 1

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Compensation to Health Boards.

13.

asked the Minister for Health if he intends to allocate extra moneys to each health board to compensate them for their loss of income from persons in full and limited eligibility who were hospitalised as a result of injuries sustained in road traffic accidents; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

The implications of the Supreme Court judgment in relation to Article 6 (3) of the Health Services Regulations, 1971, are at present being considered in my Department. I am not in a position to say at this stage what action is proposed in the case of the consequences of the judgment.

Can the Minister say if he intends to allocate moneys to the health boards to recoup them for expanses which they will incur as a result of this decision of the Supreme Court? Is he aware that last year there were over £1 million involved? How does he expect the health boards to cope with the situation in the coming year? My second question is whether the Minister intends introducing legislation to deal with this problem.

The amount of money involved in 1983 was £1,067,000, that is arising out of the Supreme Court decision. The allocations to the health boards in 1984 have taken that decision into account. If I may make a comment, to which I do not wish to be entirely bound at this stage, it may seem now that the best way to deal with the situation would be to amend the Health Act to give the Minister for Health of the day power to impose charges in those circumstances. It looks as though that is the only way out.

Arising out of the Minister's last remarks would he not see, as an alternative, that he might consult with the umbrella group for the insurance companies and come to some arrangement whereby they might give an ex gratia payment to health boards to look after these cases? Is the Minister aware that very often where people are involved in trivial injury, they are obliged — because of having to pay small fees, such as for skull x-rays — to enter into litigation they do not want to enter into and that there might be another way out?

I will certainly examine that suggestion of the Deputy. At this stage I have not completed the review of it. I will bear very much in mind the Deputy's observations when it comes to its completion.

Barr
Roinn