asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether the repeated applications for re-instatement from Mr. Thomas Dalton, on behalf of the Ordnance workers who lost their employment as a result of the transfer from the British authorities of the various barracks and works to the Free State Government in December last, has been considered; if he is aware that letter M. 735, of 7th December, 1922, sent by his Department to Mr. Dalton, promised preference to members of the Ordnance staff; if he will state whether the men's claims for re-instatement is still under consideration if not, will he grant them pension or gratuity for loss of employment.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. [ORAL ANSWERS.] - UNEMPLOYED ORDNANCE WORKERS.
I have been asked by the Minister for Industry and Commerce to reply to this question, which properly concerns the Defence Department.
Several communications were received by me indirectly through the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and also directly from Mr. Dalton on the subject of employment for persons employed by British authorities at the Ordnance Depot, Island Bridge. They received due consideration. I think eleven such men have been employed by us on Ordnance work.
As regards the letter from the Minister of Industry and Commerce referred to, I am afraid that this was issued under a misapprehension. It was intended that as opportunities for employment arose the claims of former Ordnance workers for re-employment would be kept in mind. These services have, however, with us been run by military and not by civilian personnel, and only such persons, therefore, as could be accepted for Army service could be employed.
The question of re-instatement in the proper sense of the term does not arise. We are under no obligations in that respect.
It is not possible to entertain any suggestion of granting pensions or gratuities. That would be a matter for the British Government who, I understand, have given gratuities in certain cases.