asked the Minister for Health the reason for the present delay and if he will expedite the conclusion of negotiations on the General Medical Service.

I am anxious that negotiations on the future of the GMS should be completed as soon as possible. As the Deputy will be aware, detailed proposals for a new structure were worked out in discussion with the Irish Medical Organisation but were rejected by their AGM in 1985. Since then negotiations have continued. The IMO have placed prime importance on the issue of superannuation. This has required further reference by me to the Government for policy decisions. I expect to be in a position to resume negotiations shortly. I am hopeful that there will be sufficient flexibility on both sides to enable a satisfactory outcome to be reached.

Is the Minister prepared to concede public sector benefits to those working in the GMS?

Not on a unilateral basis. The GMS scheme is extremely expensive and, as the Deputy knows, I am strongly of the view that within the framework of drug expenditure substantial savings could be made. Part of those savings could be availed of with a view to bringing in a particular pension arrangement. If the Deputy wishes me to give an explicit undertaking on a pension scheme as such the answer would be in the negative.

Is the Minister prepared to accept under any circumstances a pension scheme and sick leave for those working in the GMS?

I am prepared to accept it under certain circumstances. The scheme has been costing a great deal. Visitation rates are well up, dispensing rates are well up and for every £1 in terms of visits there is £3 in respect of drugs prescribed. Within the limitations of resources available for the scheme I am prepared to co-operate and to negotiate. Unfortunately, that position on my part has been rejected time and again by the IMO. I think and hope now that they will have second thoughts about it.

Have the Minister's Department made any estimate of what it would cost to provide pensions and other benefits in that?

We have made detailed costings and we have had detailed talks with the IMO on it. We have produced various formulae which have been available to the negotiators but so far the response has been that we must introduce without any of these preconditions a public service pay arrangement. That would be extremely complicated and would not be in the best interests of the scheme because there is a need to change several aspects of the scheme.

Will the Minister say what it would cost the State to provide the——

I do not have the costings and the working papers are extremely——

Surely there must be some specific figure in mind?

The Deputy knows from long experience that one does not disclose one's negotiating position in public.

Question No 5.

Do I take it that the Minister knows, but is not prepared to reveal this figure to the House?

What?

Is the Minister implying that he has the figure and knows what it would cost but that he is not prepared to give these figures?

If the Deputy puts down a question relating to any aspect of current——

It is in relation to pensions under the GMS. Have the Department worked out what it would cost the taxpayer?

Yes.

Will the Minister state what that figure is?

No. I have no intention of giving the Deputy negotiating data which my Department have in terms of various options.

I must move on. I am calling Question No. 5.

Has the Minister made arrangements to meet the IMO again?

I have. I have agreed to meet the incoming president and the current secretary general of the organisation in the next few weeks when I hope to discuss the matter.

We have resolved to make some progress at Question Time, so I must move on now.