5. Mr. MACLEAN
asked the Minister of Pensions whether he is aware that Thomas Ryding, who served four years seventeen days in the War, has been refused treatment allowance by the medical referee; that the parish doctor and his own panel doctor examined him and both reported him as suffering from valvular disease of the heart and general debility; whether the medical referee, on examining him afterwards, marked him fit for work and to receive treatment from his panel doctor on the 15th June, 1922; 652 whether two days later his panel doctor examined him and confined him to bed suffering from valvular disease of the heart, and requiring special treatment at the hospital; whether on the same day he again applied for a medical referee and, though confined to bed, received a form stating that he had to attend at the Adelphi Hotel, Argyle Street; whether he is aware that the medical referee examined him at his house on 19th June and marked him fit for work and treatment by his panel doctor; whether his panel doctor examined him on 19th June and again marked him unable to work and recommended him to the parish authorities for special treatment in hospital; whether he is aware that application was made to the parochial authorities on 20th June, and the parish doctor, after examining him, also marked him unable to work suffering from valvular disease of the heart and requiring hospital treatment; whether Ryding sent a medical certificate to the local war pensions office and they refused to send a medical referee to see him on the 23rd June; whether this man was admitted to the parish hospital in Stobhill on the 26th June suffering from the disability for which he was discharged from the Army; and whether, in view of these circumstances, the Minister is prepared to have an inquiry into this and similar eases in Glasgow that are being certified as fit for work and who are compelled to throw themselves on the Poor rates, either by treatment by the parish doctor or treatment at the parish hospital?
§ Mr. MACPHERSON
This man was instructed to attend at the Cardiac Clinic for examination on the 19th June. Information was, however, received on that day that he was confined to bed and, on a domiciliary visit being made on the following day, the man was found to be not at home. There was no later application for treatment, but on learning that the man was in Stabhill Hospital the Ministry had him examined there by a medical officer of the Department who found that he was not in need of any treatment for his service disability. I understand that he left this hospital of his own accord on the 8th July. I cannot accept the hon. Member's statement that men who are examined by medical officers of my Department in connection 653 with applications for treatment are certified as fit for work. That is directly contrary to official instructions which have been carefully observed in this case.
Is the statement correct that this man was out when the medical officer called? My information is that the man was in bed, and that he was examined by the medical officer, who marked him fit for work. Will the right hon. Gentleman cause further inquiries to be made into this case in order that the points which have not been answered may be cleared up, and we may know whether or not the statements are correct?
§ Mr. MACPHERSON
I thought that I had answered my hon. Friend. I am quite prepared to inquire further.