This Bill is designed to make restitution and to give to the citizens of this State their just dues long withheld from them. When I was speaking on this Stage of this Bill on 30th March last, I dealt at length with the various disabilities which had been imposed on good citizens merely because of their political opinions. I do not know whether I should read that speech to the Dáil again because it would seem that, if I did so, there is some possibility that I might have to read it a second time.
I should like to recall briefly to the members of the House what the two main blots upon the existing Damage to Property (Compensation) Acts are.
First of all, in the Principal Act, there was Section 9, the effect of which was to debar Republicans and Republican supporters from the receipt of compensation in respect of post-Truce losses. Similarly, under Section 15, sub-section (9), Republicans were prohibited from receiving payment of compensation in respect of goods given voluntarily to Republican forces. A number of claims were dismissed by the court under one or both of these sections, and in addition, in a number of cases, notwithstanding the awards made by the court, my predecessor in the Cumann na nGaedheal Government refused to honour those awards. Apart altogether from those who were treated with such manifest injustice, there was another considerable section of the people who thought that it would be fruitless to appeal to the courts because of the penal provisions in the Compensation Acts and who, consequently, did not bring claims. The principal purpose of this Bill is to repeal the two provisions in the Principal Act, to which I have referred, so far as new claims are concerned, and it also will enable me to make payment on foot of the reports where payment was refused by my predecessor. It also provides that parties, whose applications under the Act of 1923 were dismissed by the court on political grounds, or those who did not previously make application because their applications would have been refused on political grounds, may now put forward claims. It will be seen, therefore, that, as I said at the outset, the principal purpose of this Bill is to mete out the justice which has been long deferred.
It will also be seen that the Bill relates mainly to post-Truce events. Neither the Compensation (Ireland) Commission nor the Indemnity Act Committee ruled out claims on political grounds, and the latter Act, as I intimated on the last occasion, permitted the Committee to take under consideration the taking of goods, whether the taking was with or without the consent of the owner. It is possible, however, owing to the feeling which ran high at the time when these bodies were sitting, that some people may have declined to prefer claims before them, while others, owing to the peculiar circumstances of the time also, may not have lodged claims until after the prescribed date. In the case of the post-Truce applicants this Bill affords such parties a further opportunity of presenting their claims.
Accordingly, the losses which will fall to be dealt with under this measure embrace, first of all, damage to and destruction of property between the 21st January, 1919 and the 12th May, 1923, and secondly, the taking away of chattels by Republican forces between the 21st January, 1919, and the 12th May, 1923, whether such taking away occurred with or without the consent of the owner; provided in each case that, first of all, a claim, with the exception of claims for chattels taken, was not duly made to the Compensation (Ireland) Commission; secondly, that a claim was not duly made under the Indemnity Act of 1924; thirdly, that a claim was not duly made under the Damage to Property (Compensation) Act, 1923, and, fourthly, that if such a claim were made it had been dismissed on political grounds.
The admission of claims, which were dismissed either by the Compensation (Ireland) Commission or the Indemnity Act Committee, or for reasons other than political reasons under the 1923 Act, is not intended. The Government takes the view that the parties concerned in these cases have already had an ample opportunity to establish their claims, and that the people should not be saddled with the expense of opposing them for the second time.
The main items of losses excluded from the Bill are, first of all, consequential losses; secondly, claims arising out of the billeting of troops; and thirdly, claims for cash taken, levied, or otherwise expended, save where it was expended in restoring or replacing lost or injured property. In that connection, I may point out that none of these items was the subject of compensation under the Criminal Injuries Code which was the original foundation of all this legislation. Furthermore, neither the Compensation (Ireland) Commission nor the Indemnity Act Committee awarded compensation in respect of these and no compensation was paid for them under the Compensation Act of 1923.
As to the merits of excluding these particular classes of claims, it may be pointed out that, as regards consequential losses, it would be quite impossible, obviously, to provide compensation in cases of this nature which were suffered on so substantial a scale by many sections of the community during the Anglo-Irish and Civil Wars. Again, with regard to billeting, it was excluded specifically from the scope of the 1924 Act, and I think properly excluded, because, first of all, we all know that the basis of service rendered, whether in the Volunteers or in any ancillary or subsidiary capacity, was a voluntary basis and, consequently, to deal with the question of billeting would be quite against the principle under which the whole of the national struggle had been sustained. Apart altogether from that, there is a very practical consideration—even in 1924— that it would be exceedingly difficult to investigate these claims and, if the principle were once admitted, to assess them on their just merits. That difficulty, of course, has become very much greater after the passage of so many more years. The same might be said with regard to cash taken, levied or expended. It would be quite impossible at this time to ascertain whether, in fact, losses of that nature had been sustained and, for these reasons, therefore, all claims of this class have been properly ruled out.
I move the adjournment.