Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 23 Nov 1923

Vol. 5 No. 16

LOCAL ELECTIONS POSTPONEMENT (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1923. - SECOND STAGE.

MINISTER for LOCAL GOVERNMENT (Mr. Burke)

I beg to move the Second Reading of the Local Elections Postponement (Amendment) Bill. This Bill, as is obvious to everybody, does not necessarily of itself postpone the Local Government elections beyond January 1st: all it does is to give power to do so if circumstances make it necessary. The fact that the new register will not be in force by that date, the fact that a large portion of the current rate is still outstanding, and that an election held at present would give an excuse to defaulters for withholding payment still longer and thus put an unfair burden on newly elected bodies, and also the fact that several emergency measures, such as the Local Authorities Indemnity Bill which, amongst other things, protects local authorities from surcharges for acts done under the authority of the old Dáil are reasons why this Bill should, if possible, be passed before asking people to incur the responsibility of seeking election to these public bodies. All these facts constitute, I believe, a sufficient argument for not having the Local Government elections before January 1st, even if Deputies were agreed that the Christmas holidays is a convenient time to hold such elections. One Deputy complained that this election is hanging like the Sword of Damocles over the heads of the representatives of local bodies, but it might be well for all of us occasionally to reflect that that is a condition incidental to public life in general, and is not confined to representatives of local bodies.

Another Deputy has complained that in this Bill no mention has been made of a change in the franchise. Now, such a change is one of the most fundamental and revolutionary acts that any Government can undertake, and would cut right across the whole field of local government administration. Before making such a change, it should certainly be very well weighed and long considered. For me, at this stage, to introduce such a revolutionary measure in this perfunctory manner, after being scarcely a month in office, would amount to little less than an insult to every Deputy. This Bill is a purely emergency measure. It is not intended in any way to be contentious, and I hope to get it through without any opposition. That being so, it would be very illogical for me to confuse the issue by introducing any contentious matter.

Mr. D. FITZGERALD

I second the motion.

Mr. CORISH

Would the Minister, at this stage, give any indication when the elections might be held, and as to whether it is his intention to have County Council, Urban District, and Corporation and Rural District Council elections on the one day? That appears to be the interpretation taken by the people in the country. If that were so, I think it would be disastrous, and confusion would arise. These elections heretofore were held on different dates.

Mr. BURKE

I do not think that really fits conveniently into the discussion. I have not been able to fix on any period for holding these elections. It depends on how I fare after getting certain Bills through. It is generally admitted that local government at present is not in a satisfactory condition. Some people blame the personnel, and some the system. It is not much use holding an election until we are sure that the bodies returned will give satisfaction. If in the meantime we find that it will be necessary to change the system and to find some means of changing the personnel we will be obliged to do so.

Mr. CORISH

I am quite prepared to admit that this does not arise at the moment, but in this Bill the Minister is given certain powers. I do not think it is too much to ask whether or not it is his intention to hold the County Council and Urban Council elections on the one day, because I believe it will lead to a lot of confusion if he does.

Mr. BURKE

I will consider the representation. I presume the usual procedure will be carried out in this case.

Mr. WILSON

I can plainly conceive that the reasons given by the Minister are sufficient for the postponement of the elections, but when passing the Local Government (Temporary Provisions) Bill we passed Clause 14, which specified that no person should hold an office of profit under a local authority until after an election held after the passing of that Act. At the time we passed that provision we understood an election would have taken place in September or October, but now, for reasons which it is not for me to state, the election is to be postponed for probably another year. I contend it is not right that any member of a public board should be at present in a position of holding an office of profit when he is at the same time a member of the board, in a position of master, an employee of himself, and in a position to grant the man who is supervising him a rise of salary. That is what is taking place. If the Minister would amend Clause 14 of the Local Government (Temporary Provisions) Act No. 9 so that no person shall hold any office of profit under, or be employed for remuneration by, any local authority of which he is a member, then we would be quite satisfied.

Then it goes on: "from and after the holding of an election or appointment of members of such local authority next held after the passing of this Act." That is the law at the moment, so that at present a person can be a member of a local body and, at the same time, receive payment from that body. I do not think that is right. While this Bill legalises a number of irregularities, we never conceived that that sort of thing would be continued for such a long period.

Mr. BURKE

The Deputy's question opens up a very wide field of discussion, and I think it would fit in better in a Bill that I will be bringing in later-on for remedying the whole system of Local Government. I do not think that it is quite true to say that this Bill postpones the election for twelve months. It does not give that power, and I do not believe that it will be anything like that period.

Mr. WILSON

Does the Minister not agree that a condition under which a man can be a member of a public board and still be employed by that board should be put an end to at the earliest possible moment?

Mr. BURKE

That actually cannot happen.

Mr. WILSON

I have not got a legal mind, but I think if I read it again the Minister will see that it can happen. It is happening at present, and I can give instances of it. I know several members of local boards working for local authorities of which they are members. The Section reads: "No person shall hold any office of profit under, or be employed for remuneration by or under any local authority from and after the holding of an election or appointment of members of such local authority next held after the passing of this Act." Does that not mean that he can hold it until the election after the passing of this Act? There has been no election since.

Mr. GOREY

I think this is a case for the Attorney-General.

Mr. BURKE

I do not think the Deputy has read the whole Section.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

We ought not to hear the Section any more. We know the Section well enough.

Mr. WILSON

What is the position then if a person is the holder of an office of profit under an authority of which he is a member? How does it come that the Local Government Department do not remove him from the office of profit if it is not permissible under this Section?

Mr. JOHNSON

My complaint in this matter is just the contrary. The Local Government Department has, as a matter of fact, been disqualifying members, at least workmen employed by one local authority from being members of another local authority, notwithstanding the fact that there is a saving clause in the Bill.

It seems to me that in view of the attempt to postpone the elections still further the operation of the law as it stands — not the law as Deputy Wilson reads it — is depleting the local boards of useful members without being able to put others in their places. The Government are, as a matter of fact, by the carrying out of the law as it stands, interpreting it as they are doing, depriving the local authorities of the assistance and help of qualified members and postponing the chances of replacing those members by others who may be as competent to carry on their operation. I would suggest that the proviso in the Act that is referred to should be made to read that until the new franchise and the new Local Government Bill is passed the present members of the councils should be allowed to continue to sit.

Major COOPER

I wish to ask you, a Chinn Chomhairle, whether it would be in order for Deputy Wilson to put down an amendment on the Committee Stage dealing with this question.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I think I had occasion to remark a few days ago that it was a very unsafe thing to give one's ruling in advance. I should have to consider this Bill and Deputy Wilson's amendment very carefully before I could say that the amendment would be in order on the Committee Stage. I think the Deputy's proposed amendment aims at amending the existing Electoral Act.

Mr. WILSON

Exactly; it does. But I have shown the Minister the necessity for this amendment, having regard to the fact that the elections are to be postponed. I know that the register will not be ready for six months, and we will be having the elections probably next June or July.

MINISTER for HOME AFFAIRS (Mr. O'Higgins)

Deputy Wilson has succeeded admirably in causing a certain amount of confusion. At no time could a member of a public body, a member of a local authority, be in the employment or be in contractual relations with a public body of which he was a member. The provision in the Act went somewhat further, and stated that a member of a local authority could not be an employee of another local authority in the same or an adjoining county. That means that an official of the Dublin County Council could not be a member of the Dublin Corporation, and vice versa. Not in my memory, at any rate, has there ever been the position in which a member of a specific local authority could be in the employment of that local authority or be in contractual relations with that local authority.

Mr. WILSON

It exists at the moment. I can give instances.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

If it exists, it exists outside the law, and there is a remedy for it.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

I would like to ask the Minister for Local Government if I am to understand from his statement, that in the event of the Local Government elections being postponed until September 30th, some steps will be taken by his Department to prevent the mal-administration and waste of public money that is going on at the present time owing to the inefficiency of the present boards in control of the different Councils throughout the country?

Mr. BURKE

If the Deputy was keeping in touch with the daily Press, I think he would see that very drastic remedies are being adopted in some cases.

Mr. HEFFERNAN

I do not think it is right to refer me to the daily Press for my information. I would like if I could get a more definite statement from the Minister for Local Government.

Question put and agreed to.

Third stage ordered for Wednesday, December 5th.