I move:—
That it is expedient to authorise the payment out of money provided by the Oireachtas of any expenses incurred under any Act of the present Session to make provision for controlling the prices of commodities.
Control of Prices Bill, 1932—Money Resolution.
The Dáil went into Committee.
This Resolution has been moved without explanation. I should like to find out from the Minister what is his best estimate of the expenditure that is likely to be incurred under this Bill. Under the measure the Minister has power to set up a Commission. This is to be composed of five ordinary members, defined in various ways. Thereafter in Section 9 the Minister is given power to appoint "such and so many persons (not being ordinary members) to act as additional members of the Commission as he thinks fit." Later, under Section 11 "any member of the Commission may, if the Minister for Finance so directs, be paid such remuneration and allowances as the said Minister shall determine." Further, the Minister is given power in Section 14, in fact he is ordered, to appoint a person "to be known and styled as the Controller of Prices." That Controller is to hold office "upon such terms and be remunerated at such rates and in such manner as the Minister for Finance shall direct."
In Section 15 permission is given to the Minister to appoint "such and so many persons as he shall consider necessary to be officers of the Commission and such persons shall hold office upon such terms and be remunerated at such rates and in such manner as the Minister for Finance shall direct." There may also arise expenditure under the powers of the Commission to summon witnesses. Again the Commission is empowered to certify offences which would lead to an appearance in court. There is a further provision whereby the Commission must give notice of the making of an investigation, to be published in Iris Oifigiúil and “in such other manner as the Commission may think suitable.” That would be presumably by advertisement in the daily Press. These are the sections which relate most specifically to the expenditure which may be incurred under the Act. There are other things also, such as complaints made by inspectors, the reference of these complaints in various ways and certain outcome of these complaints. Various proceedings may take place under certain sections.
To understand properly the Money Resolution, it would be a good thing to have an indication from the Minister how many salaried members he intends to appoint, and if he has in mind any salary at which he will appoint these people, also whether it is his intention to appoint a civil servant as Controller or to appoint an outside person. If he is to be a civil servant we should like to know if he is to get extra remuneration, because it may be contended that he will be doing something in addition to his ordinary duties as a civil servant. Of course, if an outside person is appointed clearly that person must be remunerated. I am assuming all the time that the Inspectors will be the civil servants, Trade Board Inspectors and such Inspectors as are under the control of the Department of Agriculture, and that they will carry out the work as part of their official duties. It may also lead to certain expenditure in the way of outdoor allowances, because these officials will occasionally be kept away from their homes in a manner that would not be entailed by their normal duties. Consequently that will be part of the expense. There may be some approximate estimate of the financial sacrifices the State will have to make in order to have the provisions of the Bill carried out.
It is not easy to make anything like an approximate estimate of the cost to the State of the operation of the Bill. The Deputy has, I think, fairly enumerated the various headings under which cost is likely to arise. There are first the members of the Commission, their travelling and subsistence allowances, and possibly the payment of part-time remuneration.
We hope that we shall be able to get people of the right calibre to come to the Commission without any remuneration, but that may not be found to be practicable. In that case some part-time remuneration will arise to be paid. There are also the salaries of the Controller and his staff. The intention is that these should be members of the Civil Service, and the cost that would arise under that heading might be off-set by reductions in other quarters. There are then the salaries and expenses of the Inspectors to be appointed under the Act. It is much more difficult to estimate what cost is likely to arise there. It will depend very largely on the extent to which complaints arise, and in which inspectorial work has to be carried out. The intention there also is that civil servants will be utilised for that work. There is also the cost of legal proceedings, of printing and advertising, etc. A rough estimate of the cost would be something about £4,000.
Does that £4,000 mainly contemplate the Commission holding its investigations in Dublin, that information may be collected through the country, but that the main proceedings will revolve round Dublin?
Undoubtedly.
The Minister referred to an off-set against the cost of the Controller of Prices?
I was referring to the possibility of utilising on the staff of the Commission, members of the Civil Service who would not necessarily have to be replaced if appointed to it.
I did not catch that.
Who would not necessarily have to be replaced in whatever Department they at present occupy.
Does that mean that civil servants who might have retired will be retained?
No.
I am sorry. I misunderstood.
It refers to some junior civil servant or clerical officer who could take on this work without necessarily having to get someone to replace him.
Which means that there would be a vacancy in that office on which there might be retrenchment?
Possibly.
I was going to ask the Minister about that, because it might be leading to the economy of £2,000,000 about which we heard so much at one time.
Resolution agreed to.