Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 30 Apr 1930

Vol. 34 No. 9

In Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 57—Railways.

Mr. McGilligan

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £20,053 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1931, chun íocaíochtanna fé Acht na mBóthar Iarainn, 1924, fén Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, 1883, etc., agus chun crícheanna eile a bhaineann le hiompar in Eirinn.

That a sum not exceeding £20,053 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1931, for payments under the Railways Act, 1924, the Tramways and Public Companies (Ireland) Act, 1883, etc.; and for other purposes connected with Irish transport.

This Vote almost entirely depends on statute, as regards sub-heads A, B, C, and F. There is one change which shows itself in both sub-heads A and F—a decrease of £1,400, due to the fact that the baronial guarantee in connection with the Cashel extension of the Great Southern Railways lapses, and consequently the payment under the 1924 Act comes down by that amount. Equally the appropriation-in-aid is cut down by a similar amount, that sum not being collected from the Tipperary County Council as heretofore. Sub-head D has to be regarded as a token vote and as nothing else. It is impossible to estimate what further sums will be needed, and in what further payments we will be involved in order to wipe out this old outstanding item. I think as far as sub-head E is concerned, the amount is founded on the experience of previous years, and it is not expected that either the £500 or the £1,000 will be exceeded.

Mr. Davin

Sub-head A of this particular Vote makes provision for the payment of £47,288 under the Amalgamation Act of 1924. During the discussions on the Act, which made provision for the payment of that particular sum, we were assured in a speech made by the President that the policy of amalgamation would get a period of trial, after which the Government would consider whether it was necessary or desirable for them to take the further step of nationalising the railways of the Free State. Members of this Party supported the then amalgamation policy of the Government because it was the first step to nationalisation. I am not aware that the shareholders of the Great Southern Railways Company, the workmen who were employed and who have been dismissed as a result of amalgamation, those at present employed by the Railway Company, or the trading or the travelling public are satisfied with the working of the Great Southern Railways. To that extent, I contend that the amalgamation policy of the Government has been found to be a failure by those who have any interest in the working of the railway system of the Free State. I want to know to what extent the Minister who is responsible for the amalgamation policy of the Government is prepared to admit that.

Mr. McGilligan

There is not a word about amalgamation in this Vote.

Mr. Davin

There is a sum of £47,288 set aside for the Great Southern Railways Company under the Amalgamation Act of 1924.

Mr. McGilligan

We are statutorily bound to pay it.

Mr. Davin

Yes, it is laid down in the Act. Therefore I contend I am quite in order in asking the Minister whether he feels the Government should continue to pay this amount to a privately-owned company that has proved itself an utter failure owing to the policy of the Government——

Mr. McGilligan

As long as the Act says it, we must pay it.

Mr. Davin

I contend that the amalgamation policy being a failure, it is the duty of the Government to take the next obvious step, to repeal the existing Act and to nationalise the Irish railways.

Mr. McGilligan

I submit that putting forward a demand for new legislation is outside the scope of the Estimates.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Absolutely.

Mr. Davin

I submit if this House is asked to pay £47,288 to the Great Southern Railways Company, it has got to be satisfied by the Minister that it is good policy to do so.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is already aware that he cannot advocate legislation on the Estimates.

Mr. Davin

I want to know if I am to get an answer from the Minister as to whether or not the directors of the Company recently approached the Ministry and offered them representation on the Railway Board, as a further proof of their own incapacity to carry on the services? I want to know if that is a fact, and, if so, the conditions under which the offer was made to the Government.

Mr. McGilligan

I would not be in order in answering it.

Mr. Davin

I fail to see why I should not be in order, before voting on the Estimate, to ask for certain information to enable me to judge whether I would be right in voting for the Estimate.

I think it is a pertinent point in discussing the Estimates to raise these questions and to ask that the Minister who is responsible for asking us to vote the money should satisfy us that we are right in doing so. The failure of the Minister to reply will be further proof that he is still in doubt as to whether the amalgamation policy of the Government was wise or not. Do I take it, sir, that I am not in order in referring to the conduct of the Great Southern Railways Company in connection with this particular sub-head?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy can refer to the administration of the Act by the Minister.

Mr. Davin

Would it be illegal or unlawful for me to say anything whatever that would suggest that the directors of the Great Southern Railways Company are not the best body of business men in the Free State?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy could show me whether the Minister has any responsibility for it.

Mr. Davin

The Minister, I suggest, according to your ruling, is supposed to be completely ignorant of the present conduct and government of the Great Southern Railways. That being so, I candidly admit that it would be out of order for me to pursue the matter any further.

[An Ceann Comhairle resumed the Chair.]

Mr. Goulding

I wish to raise a matter to which I referred last year. Some years ago, as the result of a special rate levied in Waterford County at the time the railway amalgamation came about, when the Great Western Railway of England got the Rosslare line built, a sum of approximately £70,000 remained in the British Treasury which was the property of the Waterford County ratepayers. Portion of that was obtained for the construction of the bridge in Waterford City, but the people of Waterford County are still under the impression that a considerable portion remains in the British Treasury. I should like to know if the Minister has any information as to the existence or non-existence of that particular sum and, if it exists, if any steps will be taken to recover it for the ratepayers whose property it was.

Mr. Cassidy

I should like to ask the Minister if he is in a position to give us any information as to when the Traffic Bill will be introduced. It may be stated that this does not come under the heading of railways, but it has a very important bearing on the matter, owing to the chaotic state into which traffic has got, and as the buses are operating detrimentally against some of the railway companies. I should like to know what is the cause of the delay in regard to the Traffic Bill for the Twenty-Six Counties. I am not referring to the Dublin Traffic Bill. Perhaps the Minister might have some information with regard to the matter.

Mr. McGilligan

There have been no points raised relative to this Vote at all. I might answer Deputy Goulding by saying that I shall get the matter he raised looked into and I can answer when the main Vote for the Department is under consideration. I do not know whether there is any remnant remaining of the sum which could be claimed. I do not believe that there is.

Mr. Cassidy

Could the Minister give any information regarding the Traffic Bill?

Mr. McGilligan

It is not under my control.

Mr. Cassidy

I quite realise that it is not, but it has an effect on the railways, for which we are now asked to vote a certain amount of money.

Mr. McGilligan

The fact that it has a bearing does not take away from the fact that I have not it under my control.

Mr. Goulding

Will the Minister have inquiries made with regard to the matter I mentioned?

Mr. McGilligan

Yes. The Deputy can raise the matter on the main Vote for the Department of Industry and Commerce.

Question put and agreed to.