I move that the Dáil adjourn until November 30th.
THE ADJOURNMENT. - APPOINTMENTS IN THE POST OFFICE.
I gave notice at Question time to-day that I intended to raise a question on the adjournment about the appointment of postmen. I consider that this is a matter of considerable public importance. An examination is to be held next month, confined to temporary and auxiliary postmen, for which a large number of candidates will compete. Some of these candidates will have as much as eight years' service. Notwithstanding that there is evidence of their educational qualifications, they will, nevertheless, be subjected to examination. I am not objecting to an examination being held: rather do I consider it the fairest method of ascertaining the qualifications of these people. But, if an examination is to be held for people with eight years' service, I see no reason why an exception should be made in the case of people who have not half that service. The Department of Posts and Telegraphs, with the concurrence, presumably, of the Department of Finance, propose to nominate, according to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, eleven persons for appointments as postmen to Grade A, and Civil Service certificates are to be issued to these people, although they are not to pass any examination or be subjected to any test as to their educational suitability by the Civil Service Commissioners. I can see no justification whatever why this exceptional treatment is to be meted out to these people.
The Civil Service Regulation Act provides that in the case of persons who have special professional qualifications an examination may be dispensed with, and the same may be done in other cases, where the Executive Council, on the recommendation of the Minister in charge of the Department, consider it in the public interest to appoint a particular person without examination. I contend that there is nothing in the public interest to justify the appointment of eleven persons without any satisfactory or impartial evidence of their educational suitability.
It is proposed to appoint eleven persons, and I am going to assert here, and I defy the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to challenge the statement. that there are grave doubts as to the educational ability of some of these people. The contrary may be the case in one or two instances, but as regards the majority of those people who are about to be nominated for Civil Service certificates and for permanent posts of an established class in the Post Office, where they will have to do responsible work, there is no evidence that they are able to perform the duties of that class in a satisfactory and efficient manner. If the Government thinks that it can exercise these rights, then the Civil Service Regulation Act might have an additional clause in it providing that, notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in the foregoing shall prevent the Government from doing what it likes, when it likes. That is the position. I would ask the Press to note what is happening in this case.
The Deputy should not address the Press.
If it is out of order I withdraw. Nevertheless, I think a note should be made of the fact that the Government propose in this instance to ride through the Civil Service Regulation Act. That is their policy. Of course, it is quite true, according to that Act, that the Civil Service Commissioners are not bound to do what the Government tells them. They are not bound to do what the Government asks them to do, and for the purity of the Civil Service I hope the Commission will refuse to accept the plea that it is in the public interest that these eleven people should be appointed.
We have been told by Ministers that there is no such thing as patronage in the Civil Service. I say deliberately. and with a full knowledge of what I am saying, that this proposal savours of patronage, that this proposal is stamped with manipulation, and that this proposal is an attempt to implement an irresponsibly-given party promise. That is not a condition of things that should be allowed. Obviously, this thing savours of something that is not right— allowing people with a few years' service, and without evidence as to their educational suitability, to get Civil Service certificates, and at the same time compelling people with twice their service and with as much, if not many times more, efficiency than these eleven persons to sit for examination. I appeal to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs not to push this matter in the direction in which it is now going. No injustice whatever will be inflicted on these people if they are subjected to an examination in order to prove their suitability. No more injustice will be inflicted on them than on the remaining candidates, and I suggest to the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs that the others should be subjected to an examination at which they can display their educational suitability before he appoints them.
When this country was undergoing the greatest trial in its brief existence four years ago the postal officials saw their way to withdraw their labour. On my call, a number of citizens came to the rescue of the Government in order to carry on the work of the country. In doing so, these citizens undertook a very grave personal risk, and I felt it my duty at the time to approach the Government and secure from it a promise that those men, who had braved so dangerous a situation, should not be let down. I got that promise, and, in the case of a number of men, it has already been fulfilled. In the case of the eleven men in question it ds now being fulfilled. In the interval, these eleven officials have been employed and have given entire satisfaction to my Department. From the point of view of the Department, their educational qualifications are satisfactory, and so are their general characters. In the interval of four years I have had an opportunity of ascertaining their general qualifications, and I am satisfied that that probationary period has enabled me to form a favourable judgment.
I have now made a proposal to the Minister for Finance whereby these appointments may, with the permission of the Civil Service Commission, if that body approves, be brought about. The Minister for Finance has agreed to that. I am satisfied that I am taking the right step. There is no question whatever of favouritism, and there is no question of party action, as the Deputy has, unfortunately suggested. There is no question of unsuitability because of educational qualifications, but there is this question, that the Government fulfilled its promise to a number of men who stood by it and by the country at a time when I have no hesitation in saying that the men should not have withdrawn their labour.
At the time of this strike I was alone in the determination to take a strong course, particularly with the leaders of the strike. But on an appeal from the Government itself, I agreed that a modification of that attitude might, in the long run, be the better course. In acting on that suggestion I was bound to nothing more than the continuance in the employment of the State of those men, but, notwithstanding that fact, in the interval many of the leaders of that strike had had promotion. That, I submit, is generosity on the part of the State. There are very few States that in the past treated so generously men who revolted against its authority, and I further venture to say that no State in the conditions obtaining here at that time would have acted as we acted. Considering that fact and the generosity on the occasion on the part of the State here, I do not consider it the best taste to have raised this matter. But apart from that, as it has been raised, I wish to say that not only has the Government power to do this thing in a particular case, but it is a duty which it should not and cannot shirk.
There are one or two points I want to mention——
The Deputy cannot make a second speech.
I should like to add a few words to the statement made by the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs. The Executive Council had the recommendation of the Minister as the judge of the public interest. The Civil Service Commission must be satisfied that the candidates for appointment were suitable in respect of age, health, character, knowledge and ability, so that it is quite impossible that people could be appointed who have no educational qualifications whatever. If men have not educational qualification, to the satisfaction of the Civil Service Commission, they cannot be appointed. They must also pass their test in regard to health. All that has happened is they are exempted from the necessity of sitting for a competitive examination. I think it is only right that they should be so exempt, but they must be fully qualified for the work before they could be certificated. We may take it that that will be seen to, and that whatever tests are necessary and suitable will be applied. It is only right that they should be exempt from sitting for a competitive examination. The public faith was pledged to these men, and rightly pledged to them, in a time of emergency, and it would be very wrong if they were not dealt with in the way in which it is proposed to deal with them. I would like to say that I agree with the Postmaster-General in admiring the nerve of Deputy Norton in raising this objection in view of the history of this matter.
Would the Minister give the same preferential treatment to the temporary officers who were under gun-fire in the Telephone Exchange in Crown Alley, and in the Central Telegraph Office in Amiens Street during the recent hostilities here?
I do not think that arises at all. These men did very great service at a time when, I think, a particularly mean attack was made on the life of the State. I am certainly in favour of carrying out the promises made to these men.
The Dáil adjourned at 11.30 p.m. till Tuesday, 30th November.