asked the Minister for Health the number of people who have lost their limited eligibility status for hospitalisation due to changes in overall earnings since July 1976.

It is not possible to give this figure with any accuracy. The number is likely to be quite small, however, because persons insured under the Social Welfare Acts, who constitute the great majority of those with limited eligibility, do not figure in it. All insured persons who were eligible because their earnings came within the £3,000 limit in July 1976 are still eligible, irrespective of any subsequent change in their earnings. I should add that any person who no longer satisfies the standard criteria of eligibility may still qualify for services without charge if the chief executive officer of the relevant health board considers that payment for the required service would involve hardship.

For the edification of some of the officials in the health boards would the Minister define the term "manual worker"? This would simplify the problem.

I would not be prepared to do that at this stage. The only thing I can say is that it will have to be resolved in the context of the new arrangement that will come in in April 1979.

Does the Minister intend that the working party which reported in May or June 1977 should meet again?

The working party who were charged with the arrangements for the introduction of the payrelated scheme are under orders to report by the end of this month.

This is the working party set up at the end of 1975 to consider the anomalies and how to resolve them.

That was an interdepartmental group. I am not clear on the exact position.

It did not work.

The working party have not met since June 1977.

I would regard the work of the group as having been subsumed into the work of the working party.

Is the Minister prepared to recommend to the health boards that they treat more sympathetically those people who have lost eligibility under the health services? There are many cases of hardship at the moment.

They are under an obligation to deal with any cases where hardship is involved.

If I bring any cases to the Minister's attention would he be prepared to intervene?

In extremis the Deputy may bring them to my notice but preferably he should bring them to the notice of the chief executive officer.

I am calling Question No. 24.