I wish to inquire about a particular issue and whether it is going to be dealt with in the context of the health (general practitioner medical service) Bill. Deputy Martin referred on Leaders' Questions to medical cards. When people apply for medical cards, disability allowance or illness benefit, they are asked to supply medical evidence from their doctors. If they do that, their applications are automatically refused. That is a fact. What they must do is provide medical evidence from a consultant. In many instances, consultants do not-----

The Deputy is going into the detail of the legislation.

-----want to provide patients with letters and they inform them that they should go to their GPs. This is one of the great unknowns in-----

The Deputy is debating the content of the Bill.

I ask my colleagues on the Opposition benches or even those on the Government benches to tell me if they think I am wrong.

The Deputy is right.

Other Members will be familiar with cases where, if people provide evidence supplied by their GPs, their applications will automatically be refused. That is a fact. The medical evidence must come from a consultant. In the context of the Bill I referred to, will it be made clear that people should not provide medical evidence from their GPs but that such evidence should come from a consultant?

We will debate the Bill at a later stage.

The Deputy seems to be suggesting that the evidence provided by GPs is either not trusted-----

It is not.

That is not what I said.

-----or that they are just writing medical reports on a whim. If he is stating that applications are automatically refused because the evidence accompanying them is supplied by GPs, then there is certainly something wrong. Either the GPs are not trusted or there is a belief that they are writing certificates which are not accurate. The health (information) Bill is due for publication early next year.