It is, perhaps, too late to attempt to revive the discussions upon which we entered with so much verve and zeal when the question of the salary and emoluments of the Governor-General were debated as an Article of the Constitution. We had to accept this functionary by an Article of the Agreement. We were obliged as a consequence of that to agree to pay him the salary that is set out here, as measured in the way set out here. But what at the time I think most of us were inclined to resist, had not party allegiance interfered with the voluntary actions of so many, was the impositions upon the Free State of all the cost of the maintenance of his establishment. Equity would suggest that as he is in a large measure the official of the Commonwealth of Nations of which this Saorstát forms a constituent part that some, if not all, of the expenses of the establishment should be borne as an Imperial charge. However, we were defeated in our representations in this regard, and I think it ought to be obvious to us now that inasmuch as provision for this office and its maintenance is one of the essential charges or impositions upon the State by virtue of the Treaty, it is only reasonable that provision in this Bill should be made to have it a charge upon the Central Fund. But when it comes to a question as to determining how much from year to year shall be expended on the upkeep of the official residence, the pomp and other things incident thereto, it becomes of the last importance that the money should be voted by the Parliament, so as to be kept under constant scrutiny and liability to revision by the Parliament. In making the provision there in Article 2 for a different method of raising the money from that, or at any rate indicating a different source from that out of which the payment of the annual salary of £10,000 is to be drawn, I think the Bill is to be commended and supported. There is one feature in it, however, objectionable. Clause 2 says:—
"There shall be paid by the Minister for Finance out of moneys to be provided by the Oireachtas such yearly or other sum or sums as the Minister for Finance may from time to time determine to be suitable provision."
It would be meticulous criticism to say that there is a certain inconsistency in that provision, but my objection to it is not on any verbal grounds; my objection is that it appears to leave to the Minister himself the free discretion to determine how much shall be appropriated for this purpose. In other words the function seems to be divided between the Parliament and the Minister in this fashion, that the Parliament, when invited by the Minister for Finance, is to provide yearly a sum or sums, and it is for the Minister to determine the measure of such sum or sums. With all respect and deference to the Minister for Finance I would suggest it would be better if it were left with him to advise the Oireachtas as to the amount that he deems necessary and appropriate and to leave it finally to the determination of the Parliament instead of taking over to himself the determination. It may come to the same thing in the end. But as a matter of policy, as a matter of constitutional practice it would seem to me to be better that he should advise that the Dáil should determine.
The Preamble, as Deputy Johnson points out, is in slight measure defective also, inasmuch as it fails to recite that this office is created by the Treaty. The first recital should be: "Whereas in accordance with the Treaty provision is required to be made for a Governor-General," and it should then proceed to recite these other things. It is on the records of this Dáil that we do not do this thing freely, or even with a measured amount of enthusiasm. At the same time technically I think what ought to be the second recital is fairly correct in its phraseology that "Dáil Eireann has resolved." It has passed a resolution; that undoubtedly is a historical fact. The Bill leaves itself open I think to no serious criticism except that the Minister for Finance is given a larger amount of discretion in the matter than I think the Dáil ought to accord.