Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 May 1927

Vol. 19 No. 22

THE ADJOURNMENT—LOCAL APPOINTMENTS.

I wish to raise a question as to unreasonable delay on the part of the Local Appointments Commissioners in filling two vacancies in my county. These vacancies are for dispensary doctors. One position became vacant last December and the other fell vacant last January. If these positions were filled in the ordinary way, as was the custom before the establishment of the Appointments Commission, the appointments would have been made in one case about 3rd January, and, in the other case, about 1st March. Since these vacancies occurred, we have been compelled to pay substitutes in those districts double the salary we would have had to pay to a medical man permanently appointed. This delay has caused the ratepayers of County Wexford about £100. I should like to know who are responsible for the action of these Commissioners. Will the Commissioners, or the people responsible for the delay, contribute towards the loss to the ratepayers caused by their inaction? It is most unfair that it should take six months to fill these vacancies. It seems to me that the Local Government Act and the Act establishing these Appointments Commissioners should be scrapped immediately. If every appointment is to cost the ratepayers £50 or £60 owing to delay, I think there is a good case for reverting to the old method of appointment.

I do not know their reason for doing this. I have tried in every way to get an explanation. I raised the matter at the County Board of Health meeting at which those doctors should have been appointed. We put it on the minutes two or three times. No notice was taken of it. I next raised it at the County Council meeting two months ago. It came before the Local Government Department on the minutes but no notice was taken of it.

At the last meeting of the County Council I also raised it and, when I gave notice here last Thursday of my intention to raise this question, we got a reply at the County Council meeting. That reply was full of red tape. There was no explanation for the long and serious delay and the big loss caused to the rates through the action of the Appointments Commissioners. I now see that my motion has borne some fruit. The advertisement for one of the positions appeared in last Saturday's "Irish Independent." The Commissioners seem to have got moving. I hope the second position will soon be advertised and filled and thus prevent this loss of £3 a week on each position to the ratepayers of Wexford. It is only to have the matter redressed that I bring it before the Dáil. I could not get it redressed elsewhere. I also asked the Minister a question but I got no satisfaction. I got some trifling information which did not meet my case. I bring the matter now before the Dáil in the hope of getting it redressed and having the loss to the ratepayers stopped. If we had been the cause of this loss of £100 I know that the auditor would have surcharged us. I hope that he will now surcharge the proper parties and make them pay for our loss. I do not know whether they were waiting for the qualification of their own friends, but we could get no satisfaction up to the present. That may be one of the causes for the delay.

Deputy Doyle has raised this matter with regard to the attitude of the Local Appointments Commissioners in not making two appointments in Wexford which should have been made two months ago, and he gave notice of doing so a couple of days ago. Following that action, an advertisement appeared in the Press two days later to fill one of the vacancies. I think that is an indication that the Local Appointments Commissioners or the Local Government Ministry want to be shaken up in this matter. The fact that they have only gone as far as advertising one of the posts, although both have been vacant for two months, requires some explanation. Deputy Doyle's complaint is common to other counties as well. I think it is an indictment of the Ministry. We were led to expect great things when these Appointments Commissioners were set up, and we have been prepared to give the system a fair trial. It has been in existence for some months, and a legitimate complaint like this is only one of many which are being alleged against the method of filling vacancies by the Local Appointments Commissioners. We are at a loss to know who is responsible, whether the Ministry or the Commissioners. Undoubtedly this matter should not have occurred. As a result of it, the efficiency of local administration has been impaired to a considerable extent. Then there is the other outstanding fact, namely, that if men on public boards are prepared to give this new method a fair chance, the action of the Commissioners is, to some extent, destroying whatever confidence the people have in it as a method of making appointments.

I much regret the last observation of Deputy Doyle, and I think that on consideration he will probably regret that he permitted himself to make the allegation which he has made. I do not believe that anybody, except the Deputy himself—and I do not believe even he, although he committed himself to that statement— believes that there is any keeping open of these appointments for any nominee or nominees of Ministers or of the Commissioners.

Mr. DOYLE

I did not say Ministers.

The Commissioners are just as honourable as Ministers and as the Deputy, and they are not in a position to answer for themselves here. It is an unworthy observation of the Deputy. The first request to fill the vacancy for a medical officer of health at Newtownbarry was made to the Commissioners on the 21st January last. Before the Commissioners can proceed to make recommendations for the filling of vacancies they must have before them the sanction of the appropriate Minister, in this case the Minister for Local Government and Public Health. Local authorities have been made aware of that position. The sanction of the Minister in this case was not submitted by the local authority until March 4th. Are we to expect the Commissioners to do the work of the Minister for Local Government and the local authorities? The Commissioners do their work when a case is in order. An advertisement had been prepared for issue in this case when the Commissioners were informed by the Local Government Department that the Clonegall dispensary district in Carlow was to be linked up with the Newtownbarry dispensary district and that the same person was to be appointed to both districts. I am sure that Deputy Doyle knew that and he should have told the House that. I am sure that he learned it since.

Mr. DOYLE

I learned it last Monday at the County Council meeting, but not until then.

Any question in connection with the Commissioners should have been put, not to the Minister for Local Government, but to me. The Deputy could have written to me, and I could have made inquiries. After the Adjournment the last day I had all this information in my office, but it had not come up here. On the 9th April the County Carlow Board of Health were asked to submit a request to the Commissioners in respect of the Clonegall Dispensary. That was received on 28th April. The matter is in order, and an advertisement has now been issued. The Local Appointments Commissioners could only act on the receipt of the statutory request, and the delay was not occasioned by them but by the fact that the joint request of the two separate authorities had to be obtained before steps could be taken to fill the vacancy. As to the allegation made by Deputy Doyle, I may say that I had a conversation early in the proceedings with reference to influence being worked on the Commissioners, and I may say that the Commissioners are prepared to resign rather than submit to that. They will disqualify any person using influence. The same cannot be said of local authorities when dealing with these cases.

Mr. DOYLE

I deny that there was any influence used by the local authority on the Commissioners on behalf of anybody.

I did not say there was. The Deputy made the allegation that the job was being kept open. It was unworthy of him.

Mr. DOYLE

How could I hold any other opinion, seeing the delay and that there was no satisfaction, either from the Local Government Department or from you? The Minister knew that the question was before him. If it was not his job, why did he answer?

The Deputy had the same information then as he has now, but he kept back the information that the Carlow Board had been written to. The first information was conveyed on the 21st January, and the sanction was not submitted to the Commissioners until 4th March. Who is responsible for the delay there? Again, on 9th April, another Board of Health was asked for a recommendation and it came on 22nd. No delay occured here in dealing with the matter. The Deputy had better reconsider what he said about jobbery.

Mr. DOYLE

I have not the least intention of doing so.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.45, until Thursday, 12th May, at 3 p.m.

Top
Share