Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 12 Jul 1928

Vol. 25 No. 3

CORK CITY MANAGEMENT BILL, 1928—SECOND STAGE.

Question again proposed: That the Bill be now read a second time.

Debate resumed.

Mr. BOLAND

Since this debate was adjourned our Party have considered the Bill, and we are going to bring in several amendments. We object to a good many provisions in this Bill. We think, first of all, that the idea of bringing in five people at a time to make a start is very bad, and that there is no case whatever for not electing the whole council together. If it is said you will have too large a panel, the obvious thing is so to divide the city as to make a convement size of panel. Then we will be told that there will be all sorts of ward-heeling going on, but it will work itself out the same way in practice. If there are a certain number of seats to be filled there will be a fairly rough idea of what the quota will be, and it will work out in practice that candidates will select particular areas in which to get their No. 1 preferences, so that there is nothing in the objection to dividing the city because it will be divided in practice.

We also objected when the debate was on before to the amount of power given to this manager. We maintain that there should be local control all the time, whereas in this Bill the idea is that the control is to be centralised in Dublin. As I said before, if this were only to be confined to Cork it would be all right, it would be a matter for the Cork people, but it is not. It is setting a headline to municipalities all over the country and is going against the tide. It should be the policy of the Government to give as much local control as possible and to encourage what they say is lacking in the people, that is the civic spirit, and to get the people to take an intelligent interest in the management of their own local councils and corporations.

When they talk about giving concrete instances of jobbery, the Government themselves have proved very little against the old bodies. They had to admit—at least they did not contradict it—that when these things did happen the public knew about them and there was a chance of stopping them. There will be no such chance if we revert to the system that obtained before the Local Government Act was forced out of the British Government. The Irish people revolted against the grand jury system and got this system of local government. It may have needed certain modifications. I believe it did. But certainly we do not want to revert to the old grand jury system. That is what this means. I am not going to monopolise the time of the House in discussing it further. I said enough on the last occasion. I only want to add that this Bill needs to be withdrawn and redrafted before it will suit us, anyhow.

Mr. ANTHONY

rose.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputy has already spoken on this Bill. With the leave of the House he may speak again.

Leave granted.

Mr. ANTHONY

I rise to move the rejection of this Bill. I indicated in a previous speech, on its introduction, the reason for my objection to the Bill in its present form. I do not want to repeat what I said on that occasion, but I would like to amplify, in some respects at least, some of the things I said. We have heard a good deal during this discussion, and I suppose we shall hear a good deal more, about democracy and the principles of democracy. As I have said, I want to amplify in some measure what I said on a previous occasion. The strict observance of the democratic principle, it is conceded, is necessary for the growth of human freedom.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

took the Chair.

Mr. ANTHONY

These so-called economic administrations, in my view, are not an adequate substitute for self-government. I suppose, as the debate proceeds, we will hear a good deal of the rights of citizens and of the dignity of citizenship. In my view, citizenship is just as important as nationality. I very much regret that coincident with the dissolution of the old Cork Corporation we had the loss of civic pride amongst our citizens. I suggest that any sound scheme of local government should not merely place the final responsibility of government in the hands of the citizens, but that it should be also designed to develop a civic responsibility. The determination of policy, which I submit should come within the purview of the reconstituted Corporation, will work out, according to this Bill, to be purely and solely in the hands of a City Manager. Another defect in the Bill, in my view, is that some of the clauses provide that the City Manager shall have absolute control in some matters. I want to submit that the controlling influence of the citizen is through the council and that the council should have effective control of permanent officials, which is not conceded in this Bill. So far as the determination of the city's future is concerned, which I submit is the exclusive right of the people, it, too, is taken from them in this Bill. Some of the clauses provide that the Manager shall confer with the council and that he shall act as adviser, but the Bill seems, in the view of many citizens of Cork at any rate, to go farther than that. It suggests that upon the Manager should be placed the rights of dictator.

I want to submit to this House that surely after having achieved a certain amount of freedom we are not now going to cancel and negative everything we have fought for and suffered for by putting into the hands of any one individual the arbitrary powers suggested in this Bill. It is also conceded that there is a close relationship between policy and finance. Yet in this Bill these financial provisions appear to be exclusively placed in the hands of a City Manager, which, again I submit, is not right. Assuming for a moment that a Corporation of Cork decided on the extension of the municipal trading, town planning, an extension of the borough boundary, or any of the other things they could have done under the old regime, the Minister certainly would be giving me some information if he would let me know would the Manager in that case have power to veto this policy or policies of a somewhat similar character. There is no indication in the Bill that the Manager has not these powers. Again, some of the advocates of this Bill talk about economy, that it is more economical to govern by means of a City Manager. I could very easily prove that it would be more economical for the city of Cork and for this country, if all goes to all, to be governed from Westminster than in the way it is governed now. I submit that for consideration. If we are out for economy let us not economise in small things. Let us be honest. Let us have that much common decency. If you are going to compel the citizens of Cork, because of your economic theories, to this course let us develop that argument a little further. Let us be just and honest and say to John Bull: Come and govern us again, because government was more economic under your rule than it is under our own. I submit that for the very serious consideration of this Dáil. I want to say, in this connection, that I hope that Deputies discussing this Bill will separate the City Manager from the existing City Commissioner. I do not want to have the name or the personality of the Commissioner introduced into this matter at all, but I do suggest it would be far better to continue the present system of City Commissionership than to set up what to me would appear to be a sort of "Pooh-Bah" for the City of Cork, who would have in his hands the administration of the whole city, the directing of its policy and everything else connected with the city's welfare. I do know that there are many people in Cork who pretend at least to have the city's interest at heart, but who are actuated by no other motive than a class motive. People who preach to you that we should have no class warfare are the very people to-day who are at the back of this Bill. These people are waging class warfare in the city of Cork. I defy anyone to contradict that statement. They succeeded in disestablishing the Cork Corporation. I believe that 56 was too large a number. It was an unwieldy number. There might have been some things done that should not have been done, but, at any rate, there was no corruption proved against the old Cork Corporation. I have already suggested that nepotism might have existed. As long as human nature is human nature nepotism will continue to exist. It exists in Government Departments and it will continue to exist. It exists in commercial and industrial undertakings and it will continue to exist. It is one of the things you cannot get rid of by an Act of Parliament. Human institutions will continue to be human and they will have all the human defects, limitations and faults. I move the rejection of the Bill in its present form.

Mr. FRENCH

Knowing that there is an anxiety, and I think an almost unanimous anxiety, on the part of the people of Cork to have local government restored to their elected representatives as soon as possible, I suggest that the House should give this Bill the very closest possible attention and should look at it with a view to getting, as nearly as possible, a Bill that will meet the requirements of every individual opinion in the House, while at the same time not rushing its consideration. To my mind, if we were to take the difference between the old system and what is proposed now, we would get a very good Bill. The essential difference is the introduction of the City Manager system. Offering an individual opinion. I say that I am prepared to accept that as a step in the right direction, and in stating that I would like it to be definitely understood that I want a City Manager appointed and not a city master. I believe that there is in this Bill a basis on which we could all meet one another's wishes, and I would suggest that the Minister should, if possible, meet the views and the criticisms that will be expressed on this Bill, allow the people of Cork to vest full authority in those that they will elect and give them the right and the authority to administer the city's affairs. My objection to transferring that authority to a manager is exactly the same as it would be if it were transferred, we will say, to the Minister for Local Government. I do not mind the Minister having a check on and a certain amount of authority over the proceedings of the Council, but he should not be in a position to suggest or to recommend particular activities in the city, at any rate, without making these suggestions through the elected representatives. In speaking of the City Manager, I would also like to be satisfied that there is a necessity for existing officials, particularly the Town Clerk. I would like to get an assurance that the body elected will have authority—I think they actually will under this Bill—to suggest, if the occasion arose, that only one official would be acting in that capacity. To my mind, the functions of the City Manager and of the Town Clerk are similar.

I am of opinion that the first election should be for the entire number of members for the future body. I admit that there may be an argument for the annual election of a portion of the number, but I suggest that the Minister should give weight to that point. I firmly believe that in Cork it would be more popular than an annual election would be. Again, there is the expense of annual elections. While agreeing, personally at any rate, that the appointment of a manager is a good one, I think it was a wrong principle to name a particular individual. I hope I will not be misunderstood in making that remark, because I am not going to enter into any controversy as to whether Mr. Monahan is or is not the most capable manager that could be found for Cork. The Bill states that "there shall be paid by the Council to the Manager such remuneration as the Minister shall from time to time determine." I think that that is absolutely wrong in principle, that the elected representatives are really the people who are most competent to judge what additional remuneration the Manager may be entitled to. As far as I can see the Manager is being brought up to the level of the elected representatives, and beyond that level. I am prepared to give the Manager every authority possible, provided that that authority comes from the Corporation. In my opinion they should have the same authority as the board of directors of any business concern, and the City Manager should simply take his orders from them and carry out their policy. Another point is that the Manager and the Town Clerk can themselves pay accounts, and admit any expense or accounts or any liability incurred by the Council. I think that at least another name should be added to theirs, that is the chairman of the meeting at which those accounts were passed. Again, I would suggest that, in the formulation of the actual policy of the Corporation, the Town Clerk should give at least the usual reasonable notice of the intended working of that policy, at periods of one or two months, so that the Council would have an opportunity of advising and making suggestions to the Manager. I do not quite understand what machinery will be substituted for the twelve standing committees of the old council. whether they will simply be suspended and the work done by the Manager, so that committee work will no longer be necessary and that the council will simply meet fortnightly or monthly but will not have an opportunity of discussing the actual carrying out of their policy. I would like the Minister also to consider seriously Section 19, which places in the hands of the Manager the absolute right of acting for the Corporation "in every action or other civil proceeding, whether civil or criminal, instituted in any court of law or equity by or against the Corporation." I am perfectly satisfied that there is in this Bill a basis on which we could construct a good system of government for the city, after an exchange of ideas by Deputies and an endeavour to meet their different points of view.

It has been stated that this Bill will be applied to other boroughs in Ireland. That may be right or it may be wrong. Possibly the principle could be applied, if accepted by the other boroughs and by this House, but I do not think— and I do not think there is a Deputy here who will disagree with me—that the actual details which could be suitably applied to Cork could at the same time be suitably applied to Dublin, particularly the greater Dublin which is now in the air. I am perfectly certain that there are many activities that are peculiar to Cork and that could not be applied to Waterford, Limerick or Dublin. The real essential I think the Minister ought to meet is to vest the full authority of the people in the representatives. It is only a question of trust. The Manager will have his actual position defined, giving him every authority that is absolutely essential for the efficient administration of the city. I believe that in time it will really develop in such a way that he must be really influenced by his directors, who are elected representatives, and that they will guide him in a policy for the future government of the city. I ask the Minister why not concede those points now? In making that right, while the amendments that would be necessary would be many— some from myself—they would simply be a change of words.

For instance, I cannot understand what objection the Minister could have to having the cheques in settlement of accounts which are sent in signed, in addition to the two servants of the Corporation, by an elected representative. Is it that his signature is not as good as those working under the city authorities? I quite understand that small accounts might be dealt with in the way they were met in the old days, when a limited sum was voted for the payment of such accounts. That money would be at the disposal of a City Manager. But I certainly think it is essential that the new body should have absolute right to deal with the spending of every penny of the rates. They are responsible for striking the rates, and for the estimate. I cannot see the reason for not granting power to criticise expenditure and safeguard their responsibility. I saw that reference was made in the debate that took place last week to a public body and Irish manufacture. I think it was wrong. I remember the incident, and I say that Irish manufacture got a preference from that body, and that Irish manufactured articles were purchased. I am sure the same would apply in the future. In this Bill I think that the elected representatives will have authority to control the Manager to that extent.

As to the authority over the staff, speaking personally, I think it is a step in the right direction, provided the Corporation have full authority over the Manager, and that if any victimisation takes place the elected body will have an opportunity of bringing him to book. If his explanation is satisfactory, it is for that body to say so. But the essential thing for the good government of Cork lies only in one direction and that is the question of authority. If you take authority out of the hands of the elected representatives, you are not going to get a decent type of public representatives into these bodies, because they will not stand for election. Perhaps, for a year or two, if this Bill passes as it now stands, you would get a certain representation, but, if it is going to be a close borough, and if the Manager will be the actual master of the elected representatives, I think it will be found that in a few years you will get no decent representation in local government. I am perfectly prepared to stand by that statement. The difference between giving the Corporation full authority and the authority given them in the Bill is so small that I cannot see any reason why the Minister should not grant the little but more that is required in order to have a really good Bill, and get the good-will of this House and the good-will of the people of Cork. In this Bill the absolute authority of the Corporation over policy has not been clearly defined with regard to future expenditure. The Bill says: "The Manager shall cause to be prepared in each year at the prescribed time and in the prescribed form an estimate." At what date prior to that do the Corporation have authority to suggest, say, a scheme of housing or improved methods of sanitation?

General MULCAHY

Prior to what date?

Mr. FRENCH

Prior to the rates meeting of the council.

General MULCAHY

They have authority to go ahead with plans, to give instructions to have plans drawn up long before, and to take decisions on what they will do with the plans.

Mr. FRENCH

That the policy of the elected representatives must be carried out by the manager in his estimates?

General MULCAHY

The manager is as absolutely the servant of the council in respect of those things which are the functions of the council as any other person in the employment of the council.

Mr. ANTHONY

The reserved functions are very limited.

Mr. FRENCH

I want to see clearly that the elected representatives can discuss, say, the future half-year's policy and that the manager will not be in a position to say, "I will not have a housing scheme this year; I will have it in two years' or three years' time." Or if the elected representatives say, "We will build a dozen houses," that the manager can say, "You will not build a dozen the next half-year, but six this half-year and six the next half-year."

Mr. ANTHONY

Is it not a fact that we would like to have it that if the people pay the piper, they should call the tune? If the Cork people ask for "The Top of Cork Road," and the manager says, "they will have a Beethoven Sonata," where are we? When we ask for a tune and pay for it, we want to get it.

General MULCAHY

You may all adjourn to the mental home then.

Mr. FLINN

It has been already filled up with many members of the Front Bench, or it should be.

Mr. FRENCH

I take it that the elected representatives will, as previously, be elected to the outside committees, and that it will be no longer essential that these representatives will be members of the newly-elected body —that they will have authority to select members from outside their own body. I think it is a wrong principle that the manager should have authority within this, for instance, to attend outside committees—extern committees of the Corporation. I cannot see how a measure is going to succeed that will bring to the level of the elected representatives even their chief executive officer.

I think, however, that the essential differences of opinion when boiled down are very trifling. I believe that under this Bill there is an almost solid foundation for an agreed measure, and I trust that while the Bill is before the House every Deputy will look at it from the point of view that authority should be vested in those whom the people select as worthy of it. The manager will have his authority preserved within the definition of manager. As the Local Government Department has its veto, in so far as it receives the minutes and approves of almost every act of every public body, that is protection enough. At any rate, the manager will get sufficient authority from the elected representatives to carry out his position efficiently. The authority of the manager, to my mind, should be interpreted in the same way as you would interpret the authority of a manager of any business concern.

I would appeal to the Minister to give serious consideration to this matter and, if possible, meet the objections to the Bill, which, to my mind, would not seriously alter it. You have given perhaps 70 per cent. of authority to the elected representatives, and you have held back 30 per cent., which, to my mind, does not lead to efficient administration. If you are afraid to transfer that to the elected representatives, would it not be within my right to say that on my part I am afraid to transfer it to two individuals? You will have greater security, at any rate, in a reasonable number than in one or two. Many of the powers set out in the Bill for the Corporation would not provide matter for discussion for even one meeting per year. You should allow the newly elected body full authority to define policy and make it clear that their Manager will carry it out. There is a very strong feeling in Cork that the full number of members should be elected the first year. I can see a lot of arguments in favour of the other system, but I think greater security would result from such an election as that. I would appeal to the Minister to try and get this Bill passed as soon as possible by accepting the recommendations, which are not very essential, and will not change the Bill materially.

Mr. CORRY

As one who has personal experience of the proposed Cork City Manager on another board for some time past, I think the sooner Cork City gets rid of this political partisan the better. I wonder who are going to be the new representatives of the Corporation on the South Cork Board of Assistance and on the Asylum Committee?

General MULCAHY

They are going to be members of the Council. That is definitely provided for in the Bill.

Mr. CORRY

Is the Manager going to be allowed to interfere with money operations?

General MULCAHY

The Manager will have nothing to do with the voting of money.

Mr. CORRY

My experience of that Manager on the Board of Assistance for the past twelve months is that on every occasion I have found an extreme anxiety on his part to increase the salaries of already over-paid officials. Of course, that is only a natural outlook for him. I object strongly to the fixing of the salary of the City Manager by the Department and the Minister instead of by the Corporation. I think it is the duty of the Corporation, who are the best judges of what they can pay, or what the ratepayers can pay, to fix the salary they can afford to pay, and that it should not be the duty of any Department in Dublin. I can give definite instances, if the Minister desires them, of interference by the present Commissioner, who is to be the future City Manager, in connection with officials' salaries, even salaries which were fixed by Inspectors sent down by the Department.

Mr. T. SHEEHY (Cork)

I rise to a point of order. In the absence of the Commissioner, I think it is unfair to make this attack in a place where he cannot defend himself. It is not an honourable or a fair thing to do.

Mr. CORRY

The same attack that I make here I made in the Commissioner's presence. I am neither afraid nor ashamed of it. I suppose the next thing we will have will be Commissioners coming in here to make laws. In fact that is the whole gist of this Bill. It is the hidden hand, to set up the puppets as a cloak for dictatorship just as we have the puppets in here acting as a cloak for the dictatorship of the Executive Council. It is about six of one and half a dozen of the other. This Bill is setting up in Cork merely a lot of puppets without any power whatever. The manager is going to do the paying, and between the manager and the Minister they are going to fix the salary. The cloak is going to be there in the shape of the Corporation to fix how much is to be paid. I think it is nonsense. Interference by the City Manager should be put an end to. The Corporation should at least have the fixing of his salary. I think the present Commissioner is the wrong man to be kept in as manager of Cork city owing to his attitude there, which has been a political attitude and nothing else but a political attitude.

Mr. O'HANLON

I am not a Cork man, thank God, and this is not a Cork Bill. This Bill has been described by Deputy French as a step in the right direction. I do not know what direction he means, but to my mind it is a very long step towards bureaucratic government. Deputy Anthony said that when the Cork people asked for a tune they got a Beethoven Sonata. I think when they asked for a tune they got a comic opera, because if this Bill was placed in the hands of W.S. Gilbert he would produce a comic opera that would beat the "Pirates of Penzance" for absurdity. It is not in the City Hall that they should meet, under this Bill, but in the Cork Opera House, where the ratepayers might instal the Lord Mayor with a chain of office, while the manager would put the shackles on his feet, and lead him round to the public boards to which he was nominated. The Lord Mayor may talk himself, but the purse strings will be held by the manager, and we are preparing a comic opera not only for Cork but for other cities also if this Bill is passed.

The first few sections of this Bill are all right. These sections lead the Cork Corporation to believe that they are going to get some powers, but what is built up in the first two sections is knocked down in the others. If we were starting a Corporation in some "shack" town in Central Africa or America and gave this as a charter of liberty to administer there for the first time, we might then be on safe ground in saying these people have no experience and no local control and we are going to test them. Deputy de Valera said that at the start he would rather favour the idea of separating the deliberative from the administrative functions. I do not know if there are enough slaves in Cork to go to the trouble of getting elected to sit down to exercise deliberative functions with the manager beside them with the purse strings to do the administrative work. That is not local government.

General MULCAHY

What does the Deputy mean by the manager with the purse strings?

Mr. O'HANLON

The manager will have the purse and the key of it according to this Bill.

General MULCAHY

It is not in the Bill. The reverse is in the Bill.

Mr. O'HANLON

It is not the reverse in the Bill. The fact remains that the Corporation of Cork, as constituted under this Bill, cannot pay a penny except for one purpose, and that is that they can vote a gratuity to the manager. That is the only sum they are allowed to pay. No matter what they deliberate about, the gentleman with the purse, that is the manager, the gentleman who goes around with the halter round—I was going to say the bear of Cork, but really the Mayor of Cork—to the public boards in Cork. will tell him he can take part in any discussion, or he can talk away as long as he likes, but "you will not get any money from me, no matter what you decide." That is a humiliating position to put any town or city into: to elect a council to be managed by an official. It is the first and a very long step towards bureaucratic government, and one which the representatives of the people here should see is not started in Cork. Even if the Cork people want it, we, as representatives of the people, should at its earliest stage see that that policy is not pursued in other places later on.

Mr. DE VALERA

It will be remembered that when the motion for Second Reading was on, on the last occasion, I indicated I had no opportunity of discussing this matter with our Party. I expressed my own individual views and indicated, as far as I was concerned, the belief that if the amendments I wanted personally could be got within the scope of the Bill we would be prepared to give it a Second Reading. Since then I have had an opportunity of getting the matter discussed by our members, and what I said on that occasion holds good, I think, for us as a body—that is, that we are prepared to give this Bill a Second Reading, provided that the amendments we wish to introduce can be covered within the scope of the Bill.

The amendments are rather numerous and they deal with almost every section. Our anxiety to facilitate the Second Reading was to enable this Bill, if possible, to be dealt with before the recess. We think it is advisable that the control of their city should be given back as quickly as possible to the representatives of the people, and accordingly we are anxious to facilitate the passage of the Bill. It might be helpful if I indicated the amendments to the Minister at this stage, so that he might be able to indicate in return his attitude towards certain points that we are raising in Committee. First of all, we believe that the number of the council should not be less than 25. We have chosen the number 30 for our amendment. When I state that it should not be less than 25, you will see why we have chosen 30 for our amendment; the reason will be obvious in a moment. The next point is that they should be all elected at once for the three-year period.

Now it becomes obvious that under proportional representation the city would have to be divided into certain areas, and for the division of the city into suitable areas you would want to have some Commission to settle the boundary. Possibly that could be done by the Minister and his assistants. If he were prepared to accept that particular amendment it could, perhaps, be done here and put into the Bill itself. There is one division of the city which is obvious. One should look at the wards and divide the city into two parts, where the population and the valuation are practically equal. The trouble, however, is that it is not sufficient to divide it into two parts. You would probably have to divide it into about four parts, so as not to have too much in each particular area and so as to get a reasonable panel. We consider that more than ten vacancies would give you a panel too large for the convenience of the electorate. Therefore, in dividing up any number between 25 and 30—30 might not be the best— we would be prepared to take any suitable number. Next we propose that the aldermen should be elected yearly by the whole council, just as the Lord Mayor is elected; that the first manager should be appointed by the city council with the sanction of the Minister, but only for one year; and that subsequent managers should have a five-year period of office and be eligible for re-election.

I do not know whether it is necessary to give our reasons for that suggestion, but we, at any rate, thought that plan advisable. The main thing is that in regard to the powers of a manager we propose to give you an official who in practice would differ very little from a Town Clerk, so that if you want an expert you would deal with him, not as a permanent and pensionable official, but as one who would be frankly regarded as an expert to do certain work for five years, and at the end of the five year period it would be possible to re-elect him if it were considered advisable. As regards the powers of the manager and the reserved powers of the Corporation, our purpose is to put in amendments which will add to the reserved powers indicated in the Bill two further sections providing that regulations concerning contracts for and on behalf of the Corporation should be made—that the actual carrying out of these regulations should be in the hands of the manager, but that the general regulations should be made by the Corporation. There would also be provisions in regard to regulations for the appointment, promotion, and removal from office and the minimum and maximum rates of remuneration to be paid. In other sections, where the manager acts on his own authority, the intention is to bring in amendments which would mean that the manager would act in consultation with the Board of Aldermen, and in one or two instances he would have to get the express sanction of that Board. Then there are minor matters, such as the affixing of the seal. In general cases the seal should be affixed in the presence of the Lord Mayor as representing the elected body. I have indicated roughly the general scope of the amendments and I do not think any of these amendments would be outside the scope of the Bill if we give it Second Reading. I think that all these amendments could be brought in in Committee without going outside the general scope of the Bill.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

I would like to make it clear to the Deputy that one could not say that right off without seeing the amendments and comparing them with the Bill. I could not give the Deputy any guarantee in that regard.

Mr. DE VALERA

I know you cannot give a definite ruling on a thing you have not seen, but I think that as the main purpose of the Bill deals with the government of Cork City these amendments would fit in with the various sections in the Bill. Undoubtedly they would mean alterations in various parts of the Bill, but I am anxious at this stage to get an assurance that these amendments can be discussed, and I would like the Minister, in his reply, to indicate his attitude towards the main ones.

Mr. J. WOLFE

I have listened with much interest to the various Deputies who have spoken, particularly those who have spoken the views of the citizens of Cork. Since this Bill was introduced I have been almost deluged with representations from citizens of Cork as to what ought to be done in respect of it. In deference to their views I would put before the House what I think is the consensus of opinion in the city of Cork, and that is, that this scheme is a courageous, honest and able attempt by the Minister for Local Government to grapple with a very difficult situation. The first point I gathered from Deputy Lord Mayor French was in reference to the number of elected representatives. I respectfully suggest to the Minister that he should carefully reconsider that question and see whether it would not be possible to increase the number of elected representatives from 15 to, say, 21. I do not for one moment suggest as Deputy de Valera suggested, that the Minister should take steps to turn the Corporation into a second Bedlam, like the county council at present. We want to see in this Bill, when it becomes an Act, that every section in the city is represented on the new council that would be for the benefit of Cork. If the proposed system is carried out there might be some question as to whether that would be arrived at or not.

I am in favour of the Lord Mayor's suggestion, that the first election should be for the entire number of vacancies. You have in Cork a great many interests. We would like to see the Government Party, though keeping as far aloof from politics as possible, represented on the Council. We would like to see Fianna Fáil represented also, as the Corporation would not be full without them. It is ably represented there at present. We want to have the group which I represent also there. There is, in fact, no group in the city of Cork which needs that representation more badly than that one. If the Minister gets his view carried into operation. I am afraid that the first result would be to knock out of existence the most useful group which Cork has at present—namely, the Independent group. We would also like to find room for the Commercial group. I would like to go one step further and say that Labour ought to be represented, and very well represented, in the Corporation. As the Bill stands, however, you will not have a Corporation that will appeal to all the citizens. I think the ex-servicemen—I am not making any particular reference to Deputy Flinn—ought to be represented in the new Corporation. The next question which the Minister will have to consider will be whether the new election is to be annual or triennial. One hinges on the other. They are intertwined. If he holds an election he must make up his mind whether he will increase the groups. I suggest that he should. I do not, of course, know as much about the matter as he, because he has gone to the trouble of visiting the city and interviewing every section and every interest represented there in his efforts to give them all a fair trial. I put it to him to try and see whether he could increase the number of representatives from 15 to 21. If he does, he will be met with the question whether he will elect them all together or have triennial elections.

Everyone who has studied the past history of this country, particularly the past history of Cork, knows that elections are events that are of very little use to the general commercial prosperity of the country. Other things being equal, if you have an election every three years, instead of every year, it will be better for the country, and, in this instance, better for Cork. The other question which the Minister will have to consider is whether he will have in this Corporation a number of representatives only of the large parties of the country, and whether he will have a Corporation from which you will drive out the smaller groups to which I have referred. I do not suggest that the group that I belong to is one of the smaller groups. It has been abundantly proved that where an Independent did stand he belonged to the largest group. It is a matter which the Minister will have to consider, because it might mean that one of the smaller groups might be driven out of existence, and, if so, so much the worse for the Corporation of Cork. The Lord Mayor told us that there is in Cork at present—and I am afraid he is right—a fear that if the new Bill comes in as it stands you will get no decent representation. That danger and fear exist. The people of Cork are anxious that, in so far as Cork and the Corporation of Cork are concerned, we should have none but Irishmen, and that the day should never dawn when we would have anyone but citizens of our own city and country, and that none but illustrious citizens should serve. There is that danger and fear in Cork, and the Lord Mayor thought it necessary to draw attention to it. It was as an outcome of that fear at the last election that we had the great honour thrust upon us of having as our representative the President of Saorstát Eireann.

General MULCAHY

I think the House is very glad to have the advantage of the additional statements by Deputy Anthony and Deputy de Valera. They have cleared the air and have shown what is generally thought about the different aspects of the Bill after mature consideration. What I feel is the trouble, after much of the thought and much of the discussion that have taken place on the Bill, is that people are desperately frightened of clear-drawn lines. They shy at them. They realise the fact that if a man is put into a managerial position and has to carry on the duties of that position, the lines for him are very clear, but when you put down in cold print the straight lines with regard to the position of a manager, as distinct from an elected council, it gives you a magnificent opportunity of talking about democracy, the things that are against democracy and a lot of nebulous stuff like that. Really the only thing we are quite clear about at the moment is the extent to which there is a difference of opinion on the point of view of numbers for the Council, but until Deputy de Valera gave us the particular point upon which he is prepared to move amendments there was nothing but suggestions, obscurity and fighting shadows. Probably when we come to consider Deputy de Valera's amendments we will find that they also are built around shadows and nowhere come down to really practical principles. In the first place we have the question of numbers. I did not put down the number 15 for the Council as a figure to be fought step by step until I came to the stopping point. I came to that conclusion in consultation with those in the Department and outside the Department with whom I had discussions on the matter. I came to it as being a number that would give you a Council in Cork of very representative citizens, and as being such a number as would enable the Council to carry out its discussions in a systematic way and arrive at decisions without unnecessarily long discussions.

There is no use in saying that if you make the Council too small you are going to rule out small and important interests. If small and important interests do feel that they should be represented in the Council, what is the use of having them represented if giving them representation there means that the Council will be swollen to such an extent that it will not be able to discharge its business without dragging in nonsensical and extraneous matters in its discussions? On the other hand, these interests have to depend upon the efficient carrying out of the deliberations of the Council, the efficient carrying out of the work of officials, and if you swell the number of your Council to an excessive extent you cannot have efficient discussions and clear and satisfactory decisions. I would require to hear very much more said with regard to the numbers before I would agree that 15 is not the more suitable. On the question of the division of the city, you have to balance, as Deputy Wolfe says, the annual elections against the division of the city. I have looked at the city, at its divisions and different wards, and I am convinced that the interests of the city are very much bound up with getting representatives each one of whom is returned with reference to the city as a whole.

I think that to divide Cork up into four divisions for the election of the council of the Cork Corporation would be to blemish the future of your administration in Cork. It would be simply getting back to a very definite ward system. If, after considering all that may be said on the matter and all that may be embodied in the different amendments that are going to come before us, it should be the fate of the Minister for Local Government that he has to draw a line through Cork, I certainly would not draw it along any particular line that was drawn there before. I would be prepared in the circumstances to draw such a line through it that something would have to be done to remove that line in some way or other. I personally would not have it on my own conscience to draw any line in Cork that would remain there and be the root from which ward interests of one kind or another would arise at some time in the city because it seems to be particularly important——

Mr. ANTHONY

On a point of information, the reasons for suggesting that Cork should be divided into one, two or three wards are because of the Minister's own objections that if an election took place for all the candidates, the ultimate number that he mentioned of fifteen, there was the possibility of a long ballot paper. To obviate that difficulty, it was suggested that the city should be divided into two wards. The Labour Party are prepared to withdraw any objection they may have had to making the city one electoral area. I would like the Minister to bear in mind that the reason I suggested two wards was because the Minister himself thought that the ballot paper would be too large. I suggested that it would not be because of any anxiety on the part of the citizens to go forward for election.

General MULCAHY

If there are details to be discussed it would be better that they should be discussed in Committee. I feel that it is so terribly easy to go off into generalities on the matters we are discussing that they could best be discussed on definite amendments. I personally found amongst every section of the people with whom I have discussed this matter in Cork a very strong desire to get away from wards. As far as I am concerned, I am very definitely against the division of the city into wards. A long ballot paper would not frighten me away from that, so convinced am I of the disadvantages that are likely to accrue.

Mr. G. BOLAND

Do you think that you can possibly get away from the ward system?

The PRESIDENT

Oh, yes.

General MULCAHY

In this Bill I propose getting away from them by annual elections. I think in Cork you can get away from the ward system by having annual elections. Any further discussion on that matter would more properly arise on the Committee Stage. All I wanted was to be clear in regard to my attitude. As to the question of the manager and the council, we have to be clear also in that connection. There is no use in falling back on the type of reflection that Deputy Anthony fell back on, speaking here to-day, that the policy was to be purely and solely in the hands of the City Manager; that he was to have the rights of a dictator. That is simply getting away from the actual facts stated in the Bill. I want the Dáil to be definitely clear on the powers, duties, and responsibilities that are to be vested in the Cork Corporation. The Bill proposes that some be exercised through the council and some through the manager. Those that will be exercised through the council are the important ones that are stated here and that, in my opinion, give complete control over the whole policy of the city, over the whole administration of the city, in so far as it is desirable or necessary that it should be controlled by a body which is simply deliberative and decisive. The Bill contains, in addition, the powers necessary further to transfer from the manager to the council such powers, duties and responsibilities as a certain majority of the council, after full experience of the position there, consider should be transferred to the council, and that the Minister, with or without a local inquiry into the matter, is prepared to agree to.

Even to suggest, as Deputy de Valera suggests, that additional powers should be put in there enabling the council to frame regulations dealing with appointments and to frame regulations dealing with contracts; to put into the Bill that the new Cork Council when it is appointed, or after it is appointed, or after it has had some experience, can of itself make such representations to the Minister as will transfer an additional responsibility to them or a power to them in this respect, seems rather out of proportion and it seems asking a body here to do what might more efficiently and satisfactorily be done by the council below. In so far as the manager has responsibility thrown on him under Section 13 (2) he is subject to the regulations made from time to time by the Minister for dealing with these matters in the same way as any other local body. It may be stated in too flagrant words for the purposes of a general discussion on democracy. The words here are: "That the decision of the manager on any such question shall be final and conclusive." These words may be too flagrant.

Mr. ANTHONY

There are the words in Section 13 (1) "absolute control."

General MULCAHY

The manager having been put into the position of chief executive officer to the council and to himself, in so far as he is exercising responsibility for which the council is not responsible, is put into the absolute control of the machinery for carrying out the wishes of the council. He has absolute control over that machinery. I do not know of any section of the people in Cork who do not want a chief executive head for carrying out their work.

Mr. ANTHONY

I do—not one with absolute control, and I have an amendment down for that.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputy Anthony has made two speeches already.

General MULCAHY

In so far as there are matters—and there are many —dealing with the conditions of service, pay and superannuation of the staffs, in so far as there are regulations made by the Minister in respect of these, the manager is subject to these things. With regard to the position of the manager, it is dual. In the first place he exercises, on behalf of the Corporation, those duties, powers and responsibilities that are not vested in the council. Then he is the chief executive officer carrying out the wishes of the council in the matters that the council have responsibility over, and carrying out his own decisions in those matters in which he has power of decision. As regards the manager, the question has been raised of the appointment of the first manager, the term of office of subsequent officers and the remuneration of the manager. I would like to put to Deputy de Valera on the proper occasion what kind of an expert, fully qualified to carry on the managership and the very intricate and difficult work of the management of a modern city, he is going to get, if he asks him to come along and take up a five years term of appointment? It is not like a person in certain kinds of technical business who can go from one business to another. There are not very many cities here.

Mr. G. BOLAND

He will go to America when he is trained here.

General MULCAHY

If, after further considering the matter, he thinks he can get a proper type of man on a five years' contract, I would like to know what he is to pay per year, and what the retiring allowance would be that he is to give him.

Mr. DE VALERA

Expert pay, by all means.

General MULCAHY

The Bill as it stands at present puts the manager in the same kind of position as any officer of a local body with a special provision as to his removal by the Council and Minister. In regard to the question as to why the Minister rather than the Council should fix his salary, in fact it is only stating explicitly in the Bill the powers that the Minister has in respect of officers of local bodies. I would like to say in this regard that from the experience that we have had of certain local bodies, who cannot distinguish between the importance of getting a good man and paying him well in a pivotal position, where so much depends on efficiency and economy, I think that the Minister's judgment in this particular matter is a sounder thing to rely on in our present inexperienced position with regard to the fixing of salaries for managers than to rely on the local bodies. I think it is not unreasonable that it should be stated that the Minister should fix the salary in this particular instance, because he would fix it actually in any case; if a satisfactory salary were not proposed by the local body he would step in. My own position with regard to the officer in the position of manager is that so much for efficiency and so much for economy depends on him that he should be paid a substantial salary which should be fixed by the Minister. Harking back to what Deputy Anthony said with regard to the development of civic responsibility and civic pride, and that if your working of city government is not carried out in such an efficient way as to show results around the city, is not carried out in such a way as to stimulate civic pride—well, all the democratic theory that is going to be at the basis of the election of your council, all that is not going to be any avail to you, because you cannot develop character and civic pride in theory, except that theory is going to work out and show something in actual practice.

Various small matters have been dealt with as regards the manager having responsibilities with the Town Clerk for such things as the making of payments. There is no payment that will be made that will not be made as a result of a contract for which, if it is a matter within the sphere of the council, the council will have authorised the entering into. In the first place there must be the current knowledge as to how different payments generally are being made. but in any case such payments as are made will have to run the gauntlet of the auditor, and if there is anything wrong with these particular payments it is a matter for the auditor, and it is a matter in very different circumstances from the old circumstances. Under the old regime responsibility was not properly fixed, nor properly focussed, and when he came after two years or so to examine accounts, certain action was taken, and it was found that a certain payment was made that was unsound or irregular. From the point of view of the auditor, the auditor surcharged, but from the point of view of the Minister who had to uphold that surcharge or not uphold it, it was very often found that the responsibility in the matter was so diffused that it was impossible to stand over the surcharge or to get the money refunded. But where irregular payments are made under the new circumstances, where you have a manager responsible for all these matters, and the responsibility sinks right down along in a very fixed way, you can have none of that loose responsibility in the making of payments that you might have before, and such payments as are irregularly or wrongly made can be made fully and effectively the subject of surcharge.

The question has been raised with regard to the use of the seal. May I say in connection with that that in reply to some question of Deputy Lemass the other day I spoke of the manager acting through sealed orders where he took action that otherwise would have been taken by the council. I should have said he would act through signed orders. As far as the use of the seal is concerned, there are certain regulations with regard to the use of the seal, and if it is clear when we go into it, and if it is necessary for someone representing the council to be present when affixing the seal—well, that can be done. The affixing of the seal is a simple business matter. I do not see at all why any elected representative should come in and be present at the affixing of the seal any more than an elected representative simply should come in and put his name to cheques. Someone spoke of the manager, I think it was Deputy French, as the managing director of an ordinary business. Well, I think it will be found to be a very silly practice in ordinary business that one of the directors should be called in to sign cheques going out, possibly to pay bills, or that he should be called in to affix the seal, the affixing of which is an ordinary business matter.

Deputy de Valera introduced the idea of a council of aldermen. I must wait until I hear the subject developed to see what their particular functions will be. There may be a number of other points that require to be dealt with, but there is the one I would like to be clear and emphatic about, and that is the control of the purse Deputy O'Hanlon speaks about. The council is given complete power of making a rate and of borrowing money, and they are given complete power, in the ultimate, of deciding what the estimate is to be, and in so far as plans have to be made beforehand, such as Deputy French spoke about, of necessity if you are going to have a housing scheme and going to repair roads and make improvement in your water works, you are not going to wait until you make your estimate and strike your rate to get ahead with your plans. The completest power of policy and of planning beforehand to carry out that policy and then striking a rate for the carrying out of that work is vested in the council.

Mr. ANTHONY

Would the Minister state how that reconciles with sub-section 8 of Section 16?

General MUUCAHY

Sub-section (8) of Section 16 reads:

"Where the council at any rates meeting of the council propose to make any amendment or modification in or of the estimate of expenses considered at such meeting which in the opinion of the manager would, if carried into effect, seriously prejudice the efficient or economic performance of the duties of the Corporation the manager shall at such meeting make his objections to such proposed amendment or modification and shall state the reasons for such objection and, upon such objection being made, the council shall not make such proposed amendment or modification in or of the estimate of expenses until after the expiration of fourteen days from the date on which such objection was made and the council may for that purpose adjourn such rates meeting."

Mr. ANTHONY

What happens after that?

General MULCAHY

The council, after fourteen days, may pass the estimate in the way they think it should be passed.

Mr. ANTHONY

That is not stated in this section.

General MULCAHY

It is plain English. I am relieved to find that Deputy Anthony misunderstood that, because otherwise I could not understand his speech to-day. It is a fact that that particular section gives complete power to the council to strike a rate and to pass an estimate they think is right. They are only required under that section to wait for fourteen days in case the manager puts up such a definite objection as is stated there, so that the thing will not be done in a hurry, so that the council and the manager sitting down to discuss the matter will not take a decision that might be a hot decision and might require to be amended. Fourteen days on each side would see how the difference of opinion would be met and then the council could take its own decision.

Mr. ANTHONY

Could not the Minister embody that in this section and make it clear?

The PRESIDENT

It says "shall not until after" that is pretty clear.

General MULCAHY

When a person whose business it is to put the intention into words says that is the intention put into words, it is very hard even for a Minister to say "Can you not add this that or the other thing to it?" It is, I submit to the House, perfectly clear.

Mr. G. BOLAND

If the council objects to the salary fixed by the Minister and other impositions like that have they still power to refuse to strike the rate say for the full salary of the manager? You have said they have full control of the purse.

General MULCAHY

If the Minister says that the salary of the manager shall be £x per annum then the council must include that amount in their estimate.

Mr. G. BOLAND

They must do it?

General MULCAHY

Just as to-day if the Minister says that the salary proposed by the Galway County Council for an accountant is not the salary that will get the council the type of accountant they need, the Minister issues a sealed order and says the salary to be paid the accountant shall be such and the salary is such and the money is paid by the Galway County Council and is included in the estimate.

Mr. BOLAND

Put in simple language that means the council has not control of the purse. There is no question about that.

General MULCAHY

If you call that not having control of the purse, in that respect yes, but I want to get the Deputies to realise that in dealing with local government you are not dealing with a matter that is entirely affecting the local people themselves and you are not dealing entirely with money provided by the local people. The amount of money spent by local authorities throughout the country at present is about six million pounds per annum. That is out of rates, but three million pounds or an amount equivalent to fifty per cent. of what is spent out of rates comes from the Central Fund to the local authority.

Mr. CORRY

Where is that got?

General MULCAHY

It is got from the taxpayer.

Mr. CORRY

That is the same person.

General MULCAHY

The Minister is responsible to the taxpayers for seeing that their money is spent upon efficient lines. If the Minister is insisting that in certain pivotal offices salaries shall be paid that will secure that properly qualified persons are got for these pivotal positions he is not only securing proper and better spending of the taxpayers money but I am convinced that he is securing better spending of the ratepayers' money as well.

Mr. CORRY

I would like to call the Minister's attention to Section 13, sub-section (2).

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

The Deputy can do that in the Committee Stage. This is developing into a Committee Stage discussion.

Mr. CORRY

The manager is going to settle the remuneration of every official. I know what it would have cost in the last twelve months if Monahan had power in the case of the Cork Board of Health.

General MULCAHY

Generally the Minister has certain responsibility for the way in which the finance of local government is transacted. As far as this Bill goes, the Minister is interfering in the business of the Cork Council in the least possible way. In so far as there are general regulations and standards expected to be kept by local bodies in the discharge of their work, the Cork Council and the manager of Cork will be as much subject to the control of these regulations and practices as any other local body.

Mr. CORRY

As you are going to control the manager, the manager is going to control you, as he has done in other cases.

AN LEAS-CHEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputy Corry will have to restrain himself.

General MULCAHY

A question was raised by Deputy de Valera with regard to the Minister. The Minister does not appear in this Bill except in a very limited number of cases. In Section 3, sub-section (3), he has the responsibility for fixing the appointed day.

Mr. DE VALERA

The Minister misunderstood the sense in which I used the word "Minister." My question was: What was the attitude of the Minister for Local Government to the Deputy who was speaking—his attitude on the various amendments?

General MULCAHY

I hope I have made it somewhat clear that in so far as the control of the Minister is brought particularly into this Bill, he is brought in in no way that he is not brought in under the scheme of local government generally. So far as he appears particularly in the Bill he appears as a suitable agent for the transfer from the manager to the council, and vice versa, of such reserved functions as the majority of the council think should be moved in that particular way. That is not interference. He fixes the manager's salary. That is simply a definite policy in regard to the Minister in this particular matter. In no other way does he appear in the Bill except in such a way as his ordinary responsibilities with regard to any local bodies would bring him into contact with them.

Mr. CORRY

I would like to know from the Minister whether it will be a case like the one in Cork where, when a sworn inquiry was held by his own inspector and a certain definite salary was fixed for an official, the Commissioner afterwards proposed to increase that salary by £194 per year and the Minister acquiesced. Is that a case of the tail wagging the dog?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

took the Chair.

Question put: "That the Bill be now read a second time."

The Dáil divided: Tá, 93; Níl, 32.

Tá.

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Alton, Ernest Henry.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Bourke, Séamus A.
• Brennan, Michael.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Buckley, Daniel.
• Byrne, Alfred.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Carey, Edmund.
• Carty, Frank.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margaret.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Connolly, Michael P.
• Cooney, Eamon.
• Cooper, Bryan Ricco.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Craig, Sir James.
• Crowley, Fred. Hugh.
• Crowley, James.
• Daly, John
• Davis, Michael.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• De Valera, Eamon.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Dolan, James N.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Dwyer, James.
• Egan, Barry M.
• Esmonde, Osmond Thomas Grattan.
• Fahy, Frank.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Flinn, Hugo.
• French, Seán.
• Gorey, Denis J.
• Gorry, Patrick J.
• Hassett, John J.
• Heffernan, Michael R.
• Hennessy, Michael Joseph.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Hennigan, John.
• Henry, Mark.
• Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
• Jordan, Michael.
• Kelly, Patrick Michael.
• Kent, William R.
• Keogh, Myles.
• Killane, James Joseph.
• Kilroy, Michael.
• Lemass, Seán F.
• Leonard, Patrick.
• Little, Patrick John.
• Lynch, Finian.
• Maguire, Ben.
• Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
• McDonogh, Martin.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• McFadden, Michael Og
• McGilligan, Patrick.
• Mongan, Joseph W.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Murphy, James E.
• Myles, James Sproule.
• Nally, Martin Michael.
• O'Connor, Bartholomew.
• O'Donovan, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Leary, William.
• O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
• O'Reilly, John J.
• O'Sullivan, Gearoid.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Powell, Thomas P.
• Reynolds, Patrick.
• Rice, Vincent.
• Roddy, Martin.
• Ryan, James.
• Sexton, Martin.
• Shaw, Patrick W.
• Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
• Thrift, William Edward.
• Tierney, Michael.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Francis C.
• White, John.
• White, Vincent Joseph.
• Wolfe, George.
• Wolfe, Jasper Travers.

Níl.

• Anthony, Richard.
• Blaney, Neal.
• Boland, Patrick.
• Cassidy, Archie J.
• Clancy, Patrick.
• Colbert, James.
• Colohan, Hugh.
• Corkery, Dan.
• Corish, Richard.
• Corry, Martin John.
• Crowley, Tadhg.
• Davin, William.
• Everett, James.
• Fogarty, Andrew.
• Hayes, Seán.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Brady, Seán.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Broderick, Henry.
• Holt, Samuel.
• Jordan, Stephen.
• Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
• Killilea, Mark.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• Morrissey, Daniel.
• Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
• O'Hanlon, John F.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• O'Reilly, Thomas.
• Sheehy, Timothy (Tipperary).
• Smith Patrick.

Tellers:— Tá: Deputies P. Doyle and M. Conlon. Níl: Deputies Anthony and O'Hanlon.

Motion declared carried.