Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Jul 1928

Vol. 25 No. 6

IN COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - TEACHERS SUPERANNUATION BILL, 1928—SECOND STAGE.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I beg to move the Second Reading of this Bill. As the House will see, this is simply an enabling Bill to enable the Minister for Education, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, to prepare certain schemes. This will, of course, involve the expenditure of public money, and, in the ordinary case of bringing forward a Bill that will involve a charge on the State, possibly in the present condition of affairs some justification would be necessary. But the demand has been so universal, even from those who demand economy on all sides, for a pension scheme, especially for one class of teacher, I find it unnecessary to debate the wisdom of bringing in a Bill of this kind, even at the present moment, and even though it actually will involve some burden on the State.

The principal agitation in connection with pensions for teachers, those teachers who do not at present enjoy pensions, has been in connection with secondary teachers. It would have been possible for us to have brought in a Bill specifically dealing with secondary teachers alone, but there are other cases in which it may be necessary or advisable if circumstances permitted to deal with pensions for other classes of teachers. Hence, after a certain amount of consideration it was thought advisable to proceed in this particular way. That is, simply to introduce a Bill that would enable a scheme to be drawn up and, so far as the Oireachtas is concerned, instead of presenting it with a Bill in every individual case and every individual scheme, to provide that the scheme shall get the actual sanction of both Houses, not merely that it will lie upon the Table of the House, and, if not objected to, come into force, as the Deputies will see by reference to paragraph 4, but that it will lie on the Table and have to be actually confirmed by a resolution of each House.

So far as the secondary teachers are concerned, I think I announced well over a year ago that the Minister for Finance and myself had agreed that the principle ought to be accepted that secondary teachers ought to get pensions. We felt it was necessary in the interests of education, leaving out any other consideration; that is, leaving out any consideration in which an appeal might be made on what might be loosely called humanitarian grounds. There was the other consideration, that at present, largely also on humanitarian grounds, teachers are being kept on by schools beyond the period in which they could give useful service simply because the heads of the schools do not care to dismiss them as there is no pension for them.

Even from the strict economic interest of education alone the Minister for Finance and myself agreed that a pension scheme for secondary teachers should be introduced, but when it came to the discussion of the details there was considerable delay experienced. We thought first the obvious way to proceed would be to get an actuarial investigation into the case. After that had gone a certain distance and we had more time to consider the various aspects of the case and accumulate the information with regard to the numbers of teachers and the different types of schools and the great irregularity of the services of those teachers—teachers dropping out for a year or two and coming in again—we were convinced that an actuary in the strict sense could not give us much useful information on which to base a scheme. Therefore, we determined to frame a scheme as best we could. The Bill makes provision for schemes of that kind, for the setting up of a fund for any teacher who wishes to enter a scheme by his paying a portion, as in the case of national teachers—a certain percentage of his salary—into the fund. There is the provision also that in the case of the schools any teacher who wishes to enter the scheme shall pay a certain contribution and also that there shall be paid in such moneys as the House may choose to vote for that particular purpose. That is the main principle of this particular Bill.

As I indicated, it will be a contributory scheme in which there will be three principal contributors, the teachers, the schools and the State. As in the case of the national teachers, you have two principal contributors, the teachers themselves and the State. The position is somewhat different in the case of the secondary teachers. Strictly speaking, neither primary or secondary teachers are in the position of civil servants. Neither class of teacher is a servant of the State; they are not direct employees of the State. Strictly speaking, they are private employees of the manager in the one case and the heads of the school in the other. Undoubtedly they are performing national work and, in the case of the secondary teachers, in some ways the secondary schools are more of a private concern than the national schools. The State does actually make itself responsible for the payment of the increments.

There are many reasons, therefore, why the State should undertake the setting up of a scheme of this particular kind. They will have to make arrangements not merely for what I may call the normal working of the scheme—that is, when the scheme has become fully contributory—but also for the transition period. We realise that there are at present a number of people in the service who want to retire. Some of them are retiring, if they have not retired already, and contributions in their case will be out of the question. That has been met in various ways. Under the scheme in Northern Ireland there is practically a lump sum mentioned in the case of the maximum and so many years' service. We have tried to adopt what we regard as a fairer plan—namely, a certain fraction of the years of service. There are some details of the scheme which yet require to be settled between the Minister for Finance and myself. The main outlines of the scheme are ready, and when this Bill becomes law the scheme will, I hope, be submitted to the House. I do not pretend that the scheme is overgenerous, and I am far from pretending that it will satisfy everybody. That is out of the question. I think that any scheme that we adopt will be such as the resources of the country will permit. When speaking on this matter before, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, I made the statement that in case of any retirements, with due notice and with the consent of the Minister after the date of the announcement referred to, the scheme could be made to date back to that retirement. That is to say, if there was delay, there would be, as far as possible, no injustice to any person who wished to retire. We were delaying not because we were anxious to save any money by such a delay, but because of the complications which the scheme involved. and we were anxious that in the case of any teacher who wanted to retire after the date of that statement, made in 1927, the pensions could be dated back to that date. By that statement the Minister for Finance and myself will stand.

Mr. DE VALERA

I am sure that most Deputies felt as I did when leave was asked a few days ago to bring in a Teachers Superannuation Bill. I am sure we all thought that at last justice was about to be done to a section of public servants, if not in the strict sense of the term, at least to men and women who have devoted themselves to a most important social service and who are doing public and national work. I felt also that my disappointment in opening this Bill was shared by everybody who had an interest in this particular subject and who was acquainted with the very proper agitation which has been going on for a superannuation scheme for secondary teachers. We have had that agitation for a quarter of a century. When I looked at the Bill I found, to my amazement, that it was full of emptiness. Instead of having a scheme which could be put into operation when this Bill became law at once, we have what appears to me to be a very empty Bill. If we look through its paragraphs we find that the Minister may prepare a scheme, may do this, and may do that. I am not aware that the Minister had not those powers already without bringing in this Bill. A year ago he gave us to understand that he was preparing a scheme.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I say so now. It is practically ready.

Mr. DE VALERA

Why not have the scheme along with the Bill, so that we could go into details and examine it carefully? My first impression on opening the Bill was that the Minister just wanted to calm the impatience of these people, who have been ill-treated by the nation all the time. It seems to me that it was intended simply as a sop to them, to give the Minister another year, or any time he cares to take, to formulate the scheme. No explanation has been given by the Minister as to why we should not have this scheme, if it is ripe. A year ought to be sufficient to prepare it. Why could we not have the scheme here now so that when we pass the Bill we should have the scheme ready to put into operation at once? As I say, I can imagine that it was prepared only as a sop to show that the Minister had not completely forgotten the matter. Perhaps, however, there is another reason. Perhaps when this scheme is presented we will have to take it en bloc, take it or leave it. It seems to me that the ordinary procedure concerning Bills would have been more satisfactory in this case, and that we would have a scheme presented as a whole and be passed through the various stages necessary for legislation, so that Deputies would have an opportunity of criticising it effectively. Instead of that it is going to be put through by means of a simple Resolution. We are disappointed that this matter, which has dragged on so long, has not been even at this stage brought to a head. Only one class of teacher has been mentioned. There is no reason why the Minister should not have dealt with other classes in the Bill. I would be glad to hear from the Minister that this Bill is not intended as a mere postponement of the question and that it is intended to bring in the scheme at once.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I thought that my remarks made it clear that immediately this Bill is passed the scheme will be introduced.

Mr. DE VALERA

Before the Recess?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

No, the Bill cannot be passed before the Recess.

Mr. DE VALERA

What is in it that would take more than an hour to discuss? The Minister spoke of Northern Ireland, and I would like to ask him whether he intends, either in this Bill or at any other time, to do another act of justice. During 1922 it was the policy of the Ministry to ask teachers in the Six Counties not to recognise the Belfast Government. During that time a portion of their salary was deducted for pensions. When they changed their policy they did not think it wise to do an act of justice even to those people and make good to them the money deducted from their salaries. This Bill is really so empty that there is no reason why we should not pass it almost without discussion. So far as I can see, it does not give the Minister any powers which he has not got already. It is simply putting off this act of justice until after the Recess, and goodness knows how long after that, and it is something about which I think we all feel disappointed.

Mr. T.J. O'CONNELL

I agree with Deputy de Valera as to the delay which has taken place in the introduction of this Bill. I believe that that delay has been inexcusable. No justification has been made for delaying in a matter on which there was general agreement from all sections of the House on any occasion on which it was discussed here. So far as the form of the measure now before us is concerned, I think it is usual to bring up a Bill of this kind enabling the Minister to formulate schemes, because any pension schemes or rules with which I am familiar are formulated by the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Education by virtue of the powers given them in a Bill of this kind. So far as form is concerned, this is the right procedure. I was not here for the Minister's opening remarks, but I note here the significance of the title. It is generally understood that this is a Bill to provide pensions for secondary teachers. That, I presume, is its first object.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

One object.

Mr. O'CONNELL

That is just the point I want to have cleared up. I want to know is the word "secondary" intentionally left out in order to enable the Minister to deal with other classes of teachers and to prepare schemes for them? I am specially interested in these cases. There are two classes of primary teachers who have not got any pensions. It is an arguable question as to whether or not legislation would be necessary in order to formulate schemes for them. I take it, and I would like to know if I am correct, that if this Bill is passed, then that question will be settled. If they want to formulate schemes for convent teachers and junior assistant mistresses, this measure gives power to do that. There are professors in the Training Colleges whose claim is a strong one, and there are other classes of teachers in industrial schools who will be putting in a claim for pensions. I am just anxious to know whether these classes of teachers can be dealt with under the Bill. My reading of it is that they can, and I would like to have it confirmed by the Minister. There is one matter that I would like to put before the Minister which he should have power to attend to. That is to deal with the case of ex-teachers which has been put forward in this House for a number of years, and which is undoubtedly worthy of the attention of the State. I got an answer from the Minister for Finance about a year ago, in which he stated that there were 629 ex-national teachers in receipt of pensions under £52 a year and whose average service is thirty years. That is, that there are 629 teachers who have served an average of thirty years and who have pensions of less than £1 per week. That is not a creditable thing for the State. Under the Bill as drafted at present, I do not think the Minister will have power to deal with that particular class, or to treat them even as generously as they have been treated in Northern Ireland. Special concessions were given to them in Northern Ireland, but here we have neglected them. and I do not think it is right that we should continue to neglect them. That is a point of view, I think, that will be supported in every part of the House. I would urge on the Minister to consider this question and see if he could not insert a section enabling him to deal with this matter, as the whole question of teachers' pensions would then be covered in the Bill.

I was particularly interested in Section 3 of the Bill. It has my strong approval. It is a matter which we have asked for on various occasions that when teachers are appointed to the inspectorate they should not lose their pensions. I take it that that will apply not only to secondary teachers but to national teachers appointed to the inspectorate. I know the case of national teachers who had served fifteen or twenty years as teachers and then became inspectors. They lost all rights to pension which they had acquired by their previous service. That had one effect, in any case, that was rather bad for education, namely, that teachers of experience, men who had ten to fifteen years' service and who would make excellent inspectors. because of their experience and ability, refused to take up positions as inspectors as they would lose their pension rights. I would like the Minister, to assure me that this section covers not only those men who are secondary teachers and who go into the Civil Service, but also covers primary teachers and that in cases where primary teachers become professors in training colleges, their case will be covered also. They are all different branches of the same profession, and I think the pension rights should be continuous. Of course, we have to wait until we see the scheme to know what the terms are, but I would be inclined to support Deputy de Valera's view that if it were possible this Bill should get through this session. I do not know whether it is possible, but if it were I would like that that would be done, so that there would be no delay in formulating a pensions scheme. I have my doubts as to whether the Bill, having been introduced only two or three days before the end of the session, can be passed before the Recess. It is regrettable if it cannot be passed, but if the Minister gives an assurance that nobody will suffer as a result of the delay that will go some distance to relieve the anxiety of those who have been waiting many years for the Bill.

Professor THRIFT

Taking the remarks of the last speaker first I desire to say that I have often asserted myself in urging the claims of what I might call the older teachers. It does not seem, and never did seem to me, that the Minister required any further powers to deal with the matter, and I doubt if he gets them under the provisions of this Bill. With the previous speaker, also, I take it as certain that other classes are included. Those at least for whom Deputy O'Connell spoke, for example, professors in training colleges, should also be dealt with under a pensions scheme as soon as we are able to persuade the Minister that such a course is advisable, if he requires persuasion. We would like to have a further assurance from the Minister when he comes to conclude the debate. We all share Deputy de Valera's and Deputy O'Connell's disappointment that the delay in providing this scheme for secondary teachers and other classes of teachers has been so great. I recognise that the subject is a big one and a very difficult one. Nevertheless the delay has disappointed many people and has been a great cause of difficulty to those in charge of secondary schools in their attempt to carry out their work efficiently and well. I would suggest to the Minister that even though we do not decide it now, we ought with the leave of the House to pass the Bill through all its stages this session, notwithstanding that there is not much to be gained by that if the Minister would go so far as to indicate to those in charge of secondary schools the kind of pension which older teachers, teachers say of sixty-five or seventy years of age, who have been serving for twenty, thirty or forty years as secondary teachers, may look forward to, when he proposes to bring before us this scheme about which he tells us that he and the Minister for Finance are agreed upon.

The delay has been harmful and everything. I think, ought to be done to make that harm as small as possible. I think a good deal will be gained if, even to-day or to-morrow or before we break up the Minister gives an indication to those in charge of schools as to what kind of pension the State will be prepared to give to those teachers I have mentioned, so as to enable those in charge of schools to make their preparations even this month with reference to the coming session, because to continue many teachers in service for the next year, as many boards are forced to do, through the delay in this scheme, will undoubtedly damage the educational standards of these schools in the coming year. With Deputy de Valera, I do not see any reason for our not being able to pass this Bill within an hour. There is nothing in it except giving the Minister power to prepare schemes, and to ask for our consent and the consent of the Seanad to these schemes. It seems to me that we can pass it quickly, but I do not think it would much expedite the Minister, provided the Bill gets its Second Reading. It would be carried through in a day after the Recess. The Minister, however, could help those in charge of schools very much by giving that indication as to the sort of thing he has in mind to provide for secondary teachers when they retire.

Mr. G. WOLFE

I would like to back up what Deputy O'Connell said about the condition of a number of ex-national teachers who have retired on starvation pensions. I came across a good many of those cases in different parts and heard of others. Their positions is very bad and they certainly ought to have their necessities looked into. I hope the Minister will be able to do something in this Bill for this most deserving class. Many of them gave the greater part of their lives in the service of national education and they are receiving pensions that are lower than the wages of labourers. I hope the Minister will see his way to do something for them and I hope also that this Bill will be passed as quickly as possible. It has been looked forward to so long that it will be a great disappointment if it is not law this session.

Mr. FAHY

I should like to support Deputy O'Connell in his plea for the small number of ex-teachers who have pensions of some fifty or fifty-two pounds a year and also support Deputy Thrift in appealing to the Minister to give us some idea now as to the pensions that might be given to retiring teachers, so that arrangements could be made during the summer recess. I would like to know what would be the pensionable age? Would it depend on age or on the years of service? And what amount of pension such retiring secondary teachers would be likely to get. It would affect the schools in many ways. The teachers, of course, may not like to retire and the schools may not like to urge them to do so until they know what pensions they will get. The Minister says this scheme is optional, that the schools may contribute.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

No. It is optional so far as individuals are concerned. If an individual teacher in a school decides to join, the school must contribute for his particular case.

Mr. FAHY

That is one point I wanted cleared up. The Minister said that the delay will not prejudicially affect those teachers who will be going out on pension now, but the sooner we have the exact terms the better. This scheme will be drafted and laid on the table of the House. Will it be open for discussion here?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

Certainly.

Mr. FAHY

Will the full scheme be open for discussion?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

Yes.

Mr. FAHY

I would be glad if the Minister would inform us what are the different classes of people referred to in sub-section 2 of Section 1? For instance, would teachers in trade and industrial schools come in? There are only about sixty of them, I understand. I think they should be considered, and also whether that might apply to any class of technical teacher? I would like the Minister to tell us what arrangements have been made for this transitional period. Would the pension be a hundred a year for those who would be retiring now, or in a year's time, and could not contribute anything? These are the few points on which I would like the Minister to dwell when summing up.

Mr. A. BYRNE

I wish to join in the appeal for consideration of the old pensioned teachers. I remember in another House, over ten years ago, raising this case for the old pensioned teachers. We were always put off by those who received deputations with the reply: "Wait, you will shortly have your own home government to deal with this matter, and they will remedy whatever grievances exist." We have our home Government now, and I can certainly say that the conditions of these old pensioned teachers are not a credit to any country. I believe that there are at least a hundred of them with pensions of less than £32 a year. They have had from thirty to forty years' service. I believe there is a number of them with £25 a year, and I am informed that these pensions are taken into consideration by the old age pensions authorities when the apply for old age pensions. A pensioned teacher with £32 a year gets no old age pension. I would ask the Minister specially to give this matter the sympathetic consideration that we would expect the conditions of these people would receive from a home Government. With Deputy O'Connell, I raised this question in the House many times. I asked many questions on it and submitted many cases to the authorities. I could get them a number of cases of pensioned teachers of practically seventy years of age who are existing at the moment on a miserable pension of £32 a year. I join earnestly in the appeal for consideration for these people.

Professor ALTON

I, like the other speakers, am sorry that a Bill of this sort did not come before this, but I am glad to see it here to-day, and I am glad it is of a wide nature. It is an enabling Bill. It will allow the Minister to provide for the many classes of teachers who now have to face an unpensioned old age. It also allows him to provide for the complex situation of the transitional cases. I mean such cases as that of the secondary teacher who has perhaps retired already, or who is on the point of retiring and who cannot possibly contribute to the scheme. I hope the Minister will be able to indicate, and the hope has been expressed by the other speakers, some of the classes of teachers to whom his scheme will apply as well as the secondary teachers. I hope the Minister will find some means of enlarging the scheme so as to include the staff of the training colleges. I hope this Bill will be passed through all its stages before we part for the Recess. It would be almost impossible to expect that the actual scheme could be laid before us immediately, but I do trust before the turn of the year the scheme will be perfected and operative.

Mr. DERRIG

I do not know whether it is in order to discuss this Bill at all, because it seems to me there is nothing in it; but as the Minister may be glad to have the opinions of members before he produces his scheme it is no harm to let him know what we think of this Bill. We have been told that the one thing you cannot economise in, and have no right to ask for economy in, is education, and when Deputy de Valera or somebody else on those benches stated there ought to be certain economies made there was laughter from the other benches. And even from a representative of the university to-day there was a jibe about the hair shirt of economy which this party wants to put on the shoulders of the Minister. Now, I hope he will come along and defend the Minister for Education, because it seems to me if he were tackling this question in the bold, generous way which teachers expect there would be no necessity to deal with it in this hesitant manner. We would have all the facts before us in this Bill and be able to come to certain conclusions. For example, the Minister tells us the actuarial investigation which we were led to believe had gone on for a year and half——

Professor O'SULLIVAN

You were not led to believe that.

Mr. DERRIG

In replying, not to members on this side of the House, but to Deputy Thrift or Deputy Alton, I think it was stated not long ago, at any rate during the past three months, that investigations were proceeding. I think it was the opinions of members that the actuary had not completed his investigations. We now see that the actuary completed his investigations long ago, and that the whole matter was not held back by reason of that, but simply that officials had not made up their minds. They have not yet made up their minds. They want to come in with as mean a scheme as they can. They think they will be able to carry it through, and this thing is simply a kite to see what we have to say about it. If, as Deputy O'Connell said, we will have ample time on the resolution to put in amendments and discuss the thing as an ordinary Bill well and good. I hope that is so, a Chinn Comhairle.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I would not like to say that was so.

Mr. DERRIG

Very well. You would not like to say that was so. If we are to be placed in the position that we have to accept the scheme as it stands, without being in a position to make any changes in it, the situation will be a very serious one. The Minister says the schools are to participate in it, and I quite agree that the schools ought to be rich enough and are being subsidised sufficiently to enable them to take part in this, if it is such a heavy burden as the Minister makes out. He has not, however, given us any figures to show exactly what the liability of the State would be in the matter. He tells us it will be optional, so that the teacher in the school will be in the position that he may become a part of the scheme. It will be optional with him, even if it is and he becomes part of it, then, I suppose, it will be obligatory on the school. I think that does not really solve the question, and that it ought to be obligatory on both teachers and schools, and that we ought not to put the teachers in the position of having the school on their flank as well as the State. If the amount is a rather small one, I think no new complications, such as managers, school grants and all that kind of thing should be introduced into it. If the amount is not terribly large then the scheme ought to be gone on with, and if the Ministry afterwards want to recompense themselves for a certain amount of the State contribution by taking something away from the school grants, let them do so. The Minister has, in fact, indicated that the scheme will not be like what it is in Northern Ireland. He stated, I think, that in Northern Ireland a lump sum was granted and a certain amount for each year's service.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

No. "Or a certain amount."

Mr. DERRIG

"Or" a certain amount. Well, the total number of years, I understand, is allowed for service in Northern Ireland, but the Minister definitely stated that he will only give a percentage of the number of years for the older teachers who want to go out. I do not think that is quite fair for those teachers. Are we going to have the same position that has been referred to in connection with old national teachers perpetuated again in regard to secondary teachers? We are going to have a new pension scheme, but the teachers who happen to be old in their profession, who have spent a long time in it, have to go out in worse circumstances. Surely to goodness, if there is any balance, it ought to be in favour of the older teachers going out now.

I wish to add a word of support to Deputy Fahy's request that the industrial school teachers should be dealt with. There are only a small number of them, and there seems to be special difficulties in connection with them. The Minister ought to indicate what other kind of teachers he proposes this Bill should apply to, and ought definitely to tell us, so that we will not be in a false position in voting for the Second Reading of this Bill, exactly what he will do for the teachers who are now going out on pension, if that can be reasonably told.

Mr. ANTHONY

I simply rise to make an appeal for the second time in this House on behalf of the old pensioned teachers. For some reason, they seem to be nobody's children. I do know I had the support here of some leading members of the House in making the appeal I made. Many of the old teachers are in very indigent circumstances. Most of them are on the borderline of poverty, and they must now be very few indeed. I will submit to the Minister that he should take it into his serious, if not sympathetic, consideration to introduce something into this measure, to make some provision for those old and valued servants of the State. One of the Deputies referred to the question of the teachers who may go out on pension under this new scheme, and he has suggested that they may go out on pension and that they have paid very little towards the pension scheme. I do not know what is in the mind of the Minister with regard to them, but I would respectfully submit to the Minister and the House that some attempt at relieving the old pensioned teachers should be made now.

They are knocking at the door for a long time. They have given very valuable services to the State. I am sure that it will be acknowledged by every Deputy that the old national school teacher has turned out some of the very best talent that this country has ever produced, or is ever likely to produce under any system. I do suggest for these reasons, apart altogether from the humanities of the case, that the Minister should take into consideration the cases of these old deserving pensioned teachers.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I must confess that the speech I found most difficult to understand was Deputy Derrig's. I wonder whether other Deputies were in the same difficulty. He referred to the actuarial investigation in connection with secondary teachers, and he referred to questions which were asked here, apparently unaware that these questions had to do with primary teachers. When the Minister for Finance gave the answer that the actuarial investigations were still in progress, he gave an answer to two questions asked by Deputy O'Connell with regard to the junior assistant mistresses and the lay teachers in convent schools. Still, Deputy Derrig finds an inconsistency between that and my statement about the secondary teachers.

Mr. DERRIG

It is quite possible that I have made a mistake.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I am showing that you did.

Mr. DERRIG

However, I think Deputy Thrift did ask a question. But surely the Minister will not deny that the teachers as a body have believed that this whole question was held up awaiting the report of the actuary.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I think Deputy O'Connell asked questions of that kind.

Mr. T. O'CONNELL

The questions I asked had reference to the actuarial investigation into the National Teachers' Pensions Fund.

Professor THRIFT

I think the Minister forgets that I asked a question a good many months ago about secondary teachers.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

Several months ago, yes. I indicated that we had proceeded a certain distance with the actuarial investigation. Owing to the extraordinary complications of the situation—it was very often extremely difficult to get information from secondary teachers—we found that the material that we could put at the actuary's disposal was not such that an estimate from him would be much help to us. We, therefore, determined to go on with the scheme. Another statement was made by Deputy Derrig about percentages that I confess I did not understand. Deputy Derrig may not be aware that it is usual to base pensions on service. Take the usual scheme of the national teachers: if a man has thirty years' service he gets 30/80ths, and if he has forty years he gets 40/80ths. The Civil Service pension is calculated in the same way. I suggested that as a difference from the Northern Ireland scheme this would be more favourable to the teachers. Whereas they get £120 in Northern Ireland, or £3 a year of non-contributory service—I am speaking of the transition scheme—whatever is the lesser. I said that I thought a fairer scheme would be to get a percentage, to take so many years' service and to give them credit for a certain percentage of their salary per year's service. As that question has been raised, I say that I think—I am speaking now of the transition scheme—that it will work out, so far as the teachers are concerned, not less favourably to them than the Northern Ireland scheme would. Of course it will depend on the number of years' service. I do not pretend that a person who has ten, twenty, or thirty years' service will get the same pension as a person who has forty years' service. That is quite reasonable. But a person who has given his life, as has often been said, to secondary education, I think on the whole he will get somewhat slightly better terms than in the case of the £120 in Northern Ireland. That is so far as the transition scheme is concerned. It is quite easy to say that a person who has gone on and paid his contributions all along should get more. I think that was also said by Deputy Derrig. Remember that the scheme is a contributory scheme. We intend, even though there is no contribution whatsoever to a person's credit, to give him this particular transition scheme arrangement when he goes out, although he may not have contributed a single penny to the fund or he may have contributed very little. The most he would have contributed is a year. Deputy de Valera complained that he was disappointed in the Bill. I think, in answer to a question, the Minister for Finance clearly indicated that the Bill would be an enabling Bill, and the discussion that has gone on shows the wisdom of making the Bill an enabling Bill. Teachers in training colleges have been referred to. It is often said that they are in the position of university teachers, but the universities provide their own pension schemes. They are in a sense more private employees than any of the other teachers to whom reference has been made. I do not think it would be well to embark on a State scheme of pensions where they are concerned without an investigation and full consideration of the whole financing of the training colleges. I think that would be a first essential. If I were to put all these things into a Bill I would have to hold up the Secondary Teachers Bill until I had them all ready.

Mr. DE VALERA

Why not go on with those which you have ready?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

This is an enabling Bill. The Deputy has objected to this, and he says why not include them and introduce a Bill? Nothing would be easier from the point of view of the Minister for Finance than to introduce one scheme and one Act and to have for every other scheme a new Act. If I simply introduced a scheme of pensions for secondary teachers that was practically ready it would stop at that, and then, if there was a demand to deal with another class of teacher, a new Bill would have to be introduced, and so on, over and over. I know that the Deputy sees no difficulties in anything like that.

Mr. DE VALERA

I see no difficulty in that, anyhow.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

So far as economies are concerned, I appreciate the fact that everybody in the House wants money spent. I have always said that I did. So should I like it, and in education there ought not to be economy. I would remind Deputies that in the interrupted debate on the Estimate, so far as it had gone, suggestions were made to me that would involve the State in certainly well over £1,000,000 a year, expenditure that would probably improve conditions and help education, though it would be an indirect improvement to education, so to speak. What would be the cost in the case of direct improvement is another matter, but certainly the expenditure of money in various ways that, indirectly, would react on education would probably come to anything between a million and a million and a half pounds. Unfortunately we are not in a position to plunge so easily into the expenditure of public money as that. We have followed what I said we could do by introducing an enabling Bill. I think the Minister for Finance made that quite clear. We have followed the usual way in dealing with matters of this kind, and if there is disappointment we cannot be responsible. So far as the Bill is concerned, I say that when it becomes law after the Recess there will be no delay on our part in introducing our scheme. Once the Bill becomes law we will certainly be in a position to introduce the scheme.

There are, as I say, some details that still need to be settled. They are not details that need delay us very long. The one point upon which Deputies need to be quite clear, and it is the most pressing point, involves the future in connection with the schools and the employment of the older teachers. I have tried to make that fairly clear, that they will not, on the whole, taking into account the number of years' service they have given, be worse off than their colleagues under the Northern Ireland scheme.

So far as the Bill itself is concerned, any class of existing teachers can come within the scheme. A scheme can be prepared for them under this Bill, but remember that all this demand for the expenditure of public money will have to be considered in every individual case. I am quite aware that I could do nothing more easily, and nothing more popular, than to propose increased expenditure for any service, certainly for education, and get it through the Dáil. It would have the unanimous support of the Dáil. I have not the slightest doubt about that. Whether I would have the unanimous support of the Dáil or whether I would have the unanimous support of the Minister for Finance in getting money to meet the obligations undertaken is, unfortunately, a different question. So far as the scheme is concerned, there will be a State contribution. It is on that a debate might take place. So far as a State contribution is concerned, the only persons I think that could move for an increased State contribution are the Executive. That is as far as the Bill is concerned, and quite as much so far as the scheme is concerned. There were a number of points raised about the older teachers and the ex-teachers who do not come within this Bill. I doubt if there is such a necessity. I think the pensions were actually increased some years ago, that some fifty per cent. was added.

Mr. T. O'CONNELL

That was under the Pensions Increase Act of the British Parliament.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

This Bill deals with teachers alone. Deputy O'Connell wanted to be quite clear that the omission of the word "secondary" was deliberate. Of course, it was deliberate. And also as far as (3) is concerned, the word is omitted there for the same reason. As to a primary teacher who becomes an inspector, that can be dealt with under that particular section, so that the bad effect on education that Deputy O'Connell says has resulted in the past from the slowness of national teachers to put themselves forward for the position of inspector can certainly be remedied in paragraph (3). In the course of the debate I was asked whether, so to speak, the scheme would be retrospective. Roughly, that is what it came to. I said in my introductory statement that the Minister for Finance and myself stand by the promise already made, and that to any retirements that took place with my approval after the date upon which I made that statement, which I think was some time in the beginning of 1927— that holds. This Bill is not intended as a sop. It is intended for what it is the first necessary step in the provision of a scheme for pensions for different classes of teachers, in the first stage anyhow, so far as time is concerned, for the provision of a scheme of pensions for secondary teachers.

Mr. DERRIG

The Minister has not told us what he intends to do with teachers who want to get out immediately after the Recess, and he has not told us what he estimates the cost will be to the State.

Mr. A. BYRNE

Can the Minister not hold out any hope that the old pensioned teachers will get consideration?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I have nothing to do with that.

Mr. A. BYRNE

It brings me back to the old days when we made promises to them, that when we had a Government of our own in power these poor old men would get consideration.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I have nothing to do with the ex-teachers.

Professor THRIFT

Would the Minister say whether it is principally because of the retrospective nature of the scheme he has in view that it is likely the scheme will cost anything for the first year or so of its operation? When an old teacher goes out he loses the increment in most cases. I could not say in what percentage, but in far and away the greater number of cases it may be that the pensions will not be as much as the increment they get under the present scheme. When he calculates this scheme will cost money in the first place is it principally because of the retrospective nature?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I should not like to say that, because we intend to set up a fund and to pay into it from the start.

Mr. AIKEN

Could the Minister arrange to give back to the teachers in the North the money he deducted in 1922?

Professor O'SULLIVAN

That does not arise on this Bill.

Mr. AIKEN

Might I ask the Minister if he is going to arrange to pay back to these teachers the money he took from them in 1922?

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for October 10th.