Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 5 Jul 1933

Vol. 48 No. 13

Approved Investments Bill, 1933—Second Stage.

This Bill is designed to give wider powers of investment of Government funds and moneys and to make some minor changes in the law relating to moneys in court and trust funds. Up to the present, the powers of investment of Government moneys have been confined to Irish and British Government securities issued directly or guaranteed by Parliament. It happens that, in practice, for the investment of the greater part of funds under the control of one or other members of the Executive Council it has virtually confined their powers of investment to British Government securities issued either directly by the Government or to securities guaranteed by the British Parliament. The disadvantage of these restricted powers was probably best illustrated in the case of the Dublin Corporation issue, made in the latter part of 1932, which, although a trustee security under the Trustee Act of 1893, was not available for the investment of any of the moneys under the control of the Minister for Finance. As a result, particularly, of the situation which was brought to light then, and of a further examination of the problem since, it has been considered desirable that the Minister's powers of investment should be widened and that, as well, a similar enlargement of power should be given to other Ministers who may have funds under their control.

The Bill which has been introduced is mainly intended to give effect to that decision, and it might be asked why we have not thought it advisable to go further and to deal with the whole of the position in regard to trustee securities as it exists in the State to-day. As a matter of fact, that question has been under consideration for a very long time, not merely by ourselves but by our predecessors. It is a matter which would require a great deal of investigation and a great deal of consideration, and would possibly result in a very cumbersome Bill. On the other hand, as against that, it is felt that an enlargement of the powers of the Ministers to make investments is urgently necessary. It has been decided to introduce this measure of somewhat limited scope and not to wait until such time as more comprehensive proposals for dealing with the whole question of trustee investments may be brought before the House. In that connection I should like to point out also that advantage has been taken in Section 12 to withdraw the trustee status at present afforded to securities approved for court investment. However, I should like to emphasise also that that withdrawal will not have any retrospective effect, so that any investment made up to the passing of this Act under the Rules of Court and hitherto regarded as trustee investments under the Act of 1893, will still continue to retain, for the purpose of the funds invested in them, the status of trustee securities. As to the reason why it has been felt necessary that some withdrawal of the general power of the Rule-making Authority to determine what securities are suitable investments for trustees generally should be made—I do not want to go into the details of the accounts which are presented from year to year in respect of funds in courts—but if they are consulted by any Deputy he will see there a most extraordinary list of securities which have been approved of from time to time for investment by the court, mainly, I should say, before the establishment of Saorstát Eireann. He will see, for instance, that the Carlow Golf Club, because it has been approved of for the purpose of court investment, would seem, under the Trustee Act of 1893, to have secured the status of a trustee investment because paragraph (o) of Section 1 of the Trustee Act of 1893 states that "any of the stocks, funds, or securities for the time being authorised for the investment of cash under the control or subject to the order of the High Court" may be properly regarded as a trustee investment.

Could the Minister tell us the date of the establishment of the Carlow Golf Links?

I do not know. I am merely citing that as an example.

There are quite a number of other instances that I might cite to substantiate my contention that it is desirable that these wide powers to constitute trustee investments should be to some extent limited or controlled. Accordingly, as I have said, Section 12 is being introduced for the purpose of imposing that control henceforward without having any retrospective effect in relation to existing investments. The Bill proposes to set up machinery for approving of securities, and the Minister will, as required, seek the advice of an advisory body which is to be established under the Bill as to what securities they regard as suitable for the investment of particular funds, or he might ask them to advise whether a particular fund may be suitably invested in any particular security. A list of the securities approved by the Committee and additions and withdrawals from that list will be published from time to time in Iris Oifigiúil.

Naturally, a great deal of importance will be attached to the composition of this body, and as to how it will be constituted. We have endeavoured to secure that all those who would be in a position to give valuable advice, on the one hand, and who might be affected by any declaration to the committee should be represented upon it. The Committee will consist of five members, including the chairman, who will be the Chairman for the time being of the Currency Commission. The remaining four members will consist of a Judge of the High Court nominated by the Chief Justice, a person to be nominated by the Minister after consultation with the Committee of the Dublin Stock Exchange; a person to be nominated by and on behalf of the shareholding banks; and a person to be nominated by the Minister and directly representing him.

I have already referred to the effect of Section 12. In order that the Rule-making Authority might, if it so desires, add to the list of trustee investments from time to time, it is proposed in Section 11 that on the request of the Minister for Justice, with the concurrence of the Rule-making Authority of the High Court, the Minister may by order sanction for court investments any security which is for the time being an approved security under the Act, and court moneys under the section may be invested in such securities notwithstanding any existing rule of court to the contrary.

These are the principal provisions of the measure, which I should like to emphasise is a tentative one, and to the operation of which it has been agreed to set a limit. Accordingly, under the Bill provision is made for reference by the Minister to the committee only up to two years after the passing of the Act, and under Section 8 (3) of the Bill it is provided that "No approval under this section of the whole or any part of a list of securities nor any approval under this section of a particular security shall be given after the expiration of two years and six months from the passing of this Act." This gives the Minister an additional six months only to approve securities. It is felt that that should be given in order to enable both the committee and the Minister time for consideration as to whether the Act should be further continued, whether it should be amended, or whether it should be allowed to lapse altogether. As I have already explained the purpose of the Bill, I should like to say that it is felt vitally necessary that something should be done to enlarge the powers of investment which the Minister already possesses. As I have already stated, in practice the existing legislation restricts the exercise of those powers to investment in British securities or securities approved by the British Parliament. It is felt that there may be some Irish securities in which suitable investments could be made and that there may be securities issued by other Governments in which it would be desirable from time to time to invest funds which are under the control of the Minister for Finance or any other member of the Executive Council.

It is not very clear from the Minister's statement what this Bill exactly attempts to achieve. He says that the Minister ought to have a wider scope for the investment of Government funds. I do not think anybody will find any fault with that statement. He goes on to say, however, that the list of trustee securities is too wide, and includes investments such as the Carlow Golf Club. I do not know how many millions the Carlow Golf Club is capitalised at. Most people, I think, would say that the list of trustee securities is too narrow and that some widening of the scope of the investments might be desirable. I should like to ask the Minister if the effect of the passage of the Bill will not be to turn the investment of trustee securities into investments approved under the Approved Investments Bill. Is that the legal position when this Bill becomes an Act? The Minister spoke as if the Bill is only intended to deal with funds directly under the Minister's control. But surely it really means that in fact the term "trustee securities" will be done away with after the passing of this Bill; that the effect is that all funds in regard to court and trustee securities will be brought in under this Bill.

Trustees securities other than funds in court.

Apparently they are doing away with the term "investment trust funds." The Minister has not made the relation between Sections 11 and 12 very clear, but it appears, as I said earlier, as if the term "investment in trustee securities" were going to disappear and that we were going to have investment under the Approved Investments Bill. The Minister has mentioned Section 8 (3), under which, apparently, two years after the passing of this Bill the list will be closed, and then after a further six months nothing can be added to the list. I should like the Minister to explain how that is to take effect. Does he mean that there will be a list of Approved Investments Bill securities, and that nothing can be added to that after two years and six months have passed?

There is another matter to which I should like to draw the Minister's attention—Section 9 (3): "when an approval of a security is withdrawn under this section ... all holdings of such security ... shall, unless the Minister otherwise directs, be sold forthwith." Does that mean that the trustees who had given their approval to investments under the Approved Investments Bill must be watching the official notices, and that if the Minister's sanction is withdrawn they must be ready to change the security, or that they will be liable to have this afterwards drawn to their attention? I think the Minister has not made the position clear when he talks about wishing for a wider scope for the investment of Government funds which, as I said, I take that nobody would quarrel with, but he appears to have somewhat altered the status of the trustee securities without making it very clear as to whether this is going to take its place, except in a tentative way, or whether there is a further Bill that the Government have in contemplation.

I do not know whether I am mistaken in my understanding of this Bill, but I read it as not referring to trust funds in the ordinary sense at all, except as regards Section 12. As far as ordinary trust funds are concerned, as distinct from money actually in court, this Bill narrows instead of widens the scope. Section 12 narrows it somewhat?

What about Section 11?

Section 11 does not affect it at all; Section 11 affects money in court. I take that as not covering, for example, moneys in a marriage settlement. I do not know whether it would be possible for trustees of a marriage settlement under this Act to go to the court and get an order that would enable them to come under the Act. Short of actually going to the court it appears clear that trustees would not be given any liberty under this Act. I think it is a very sensible thing to widen the powers of those concerned with the investment of Government Funds, but I also think that it is sensible and that it is essential that the powers of people concerned in handling Trust Funds should be widened, and that it should be done promptly. At the present moment people who are compelled to invest only in Trustee Securities are in a most dangerous and unenviable position. The devaluation of currency that is going on in America may be imitated in other countries, and where that is taking place it is a measure of ordinary prudence and ordinary insurance against what may happen that moneys belonging to such people as widows and orphans be taken out to some extent of fixed income-bearing securities and invested in ordinary shares—equity stocks. The Minister has perceived, I have no doubt, that that is desirable in the case of Government Funds, or may become desirable in the case of Government Funds, but it is equally desirable in the case of private persons. I think that that measure of relief ought to be extended to them promptly. I do not quite see why it has not been done under this Bill, and why similar powers should not have been taken with reference to authorising investments for ordinary trustees as are taken for authorising investments for money actually in court. I appeal to the Minister to give serious consideration to the question of whether something could not be done promptly in that regard, because it has really become a matter of urgent importance.

I think the Minister is to be congratulated on the committee which he proposes to set up under this Bill. It is thoroughly representative, but the Minister did not give us very much information. He was more or less inclined to follow his procedure of yesterday, when at the end of the day, in concluding, he let us into the general position of affairs which he had in his mind. The Minister referred to the fact that under the present law he would be unable to participate in the Dublin Corporation Loan. Surely the public in this country would be very hard pressed to find an outlet for gilt-edged securities within the State if comparatively small issues, as in the case of the Dublin Corporation Stock, were to be competed for by the Minister for Finance. The same thing applied in Cork, and would have probably the splendid result of having stags coming in and getting out on two or three points quickly. Deputy Dockrell, I think, suggested cutting ourselves adrift from having anything to do with British Government securities, and going further afield into Europe or America or some place else to find a home for public funds. We cannot in reason quarrel with that, considering the policy of the Government, but, as Deputy MacDermot said, international currency at the present moment removed from the sterling, is sea-sawing all over the place, and unless stocks were taken up in those countries that are on the gold standard it is very hard to see what real security the Minister would have, or this committee would have, when recommending going into stocks outside those we are in already.

There is one point I am interested in, and that is how the Carlow Golf Links come to be trustee stock. The Minister made a statement that this list which he read out referred to the pre-Saorstát Government period and that it was probably under the British régime that the Carlow Golf Links became a trustee stock. I do not think the Carlow Golf Links were established during the British régime. I would be interested in that because a lot of the Carlow people would be anxious to know how they got this wonderful advertisement, and how they came to be looked upon as organisers whose property is in the same category as big Government stocks existing throughout the world. I have nothing more to say but I would be anxious before the Minister concludes to see that he would give more attention to this matter.

I think the Minister is wise in setting up a committee to inquire into trustee stocks. I agree with the other Deputies who have urged that the list might be widened in some circumstances and perhaps narrowed in other circumstances. I think in that connection if the list were inquired into at regular intervals it would be eminently desirable, particularly where such an important committee as is being set up now under this Bill would have the matter in hands. Perhaps the Bill could be extended so that the committee would report at intervals of so many years so as to have the wisdom of that committee applied to the particular object in view. I think that would be desirable. The point on which I would require information is the point on which the Minister was somewhat silent. I am not sure what discretion the judge or the court has as regards the investment of court funds coming within the jurisdiction of the court. I am not sure as to the extent of the jurisdiction. If the Minister could give us some information on that point as to whether it is his intention to interfere in any way with that discretion I would be obliged. Occasionally, of course, the judges use a certain amount of discretion in the investment of funds. I would be glad to see that discretion left in their hands. I was rather alarmed at one particular sub-section in this Bill, that is, sub-section (3) of Section 9 referred to by Deputy Dockrell. That sub-section refers to the withdrawal of the approval of a security in which a volume of trustee funds may have been invested. The Bill by this sub-section (3) directs that these particular securities from which approval is withdrawn should "be sold forthwith." The Minister is aware that in any withdrawal of a security from the trustee list such sale is bound to depress that security. If a large volume of what were formerly trustee funds was to be "forthwith" thrown on the market, a market in which a sale of that stock had been already depressed, there is a danger that those funds may then be reduced to a comparatively small value. First of all I would like to have some information from the Minister along the lines suggested by the direction to have these trustee investments sold forthwith. I think it would be desirable to eliminate the word "forthwith." Of course that would be a matter for the Committee Stage. But the direction given by the words "be sold forthwith" would be dangerous and these words ought to be deleted and something in the way of giving discretion to the court substituted. Otherwise certain trustee funds might suffer very severely and I do not think that would be desirable. If the Minister can at this particular stage give us some information on this matter I think the House would be glad to have it.

The Minister to conclude.

I think there has been some little confusion in the minds of Deputies Good and Dockrell as to the exact scope of this Bill. This Bill except in the limited way to which I have referred under Sections 11 and 12, does not propose to interfere with the custody of trustee securities at all. It does, however, give me power and gives power to other members of the Executive Council under Section 10 to invest Government money in "any security which is for the time being approved of under this Act for the investment of that particular Government fund or particular Government money."

Court funds of course are different from Government funds?

Yes, court funds are different from Government funds. The real effect of Section 11 is to enable the courts to take advantage of the machinery which I am setting up for my own advice to guide and advise them. Consequently so far as the Bill is concerned, except in a limited way in Section 12, there is no interference at all with the custody of trustee funds. I think it will be conceded that that is so if we read the Trustees Act of 1893 particularly the paragraph which confers trustee status upon any of stocks, funds or securities to be invested. Some limit should be imposed upon that general power at least until such time as the whole trustee position has been investigated and we are able to clarify the situation and form our own ideas as to what should be the position appertaining to that in the future. Section 11 is designed to some extent to compensate for the limitation which would be imposed by Section 12. There would be no interference with the jurisdiction of the court. The court would still go ahead and for the purpose of the funds in its own control it can still determine upon what security these funds should be invested. Section 11 is for the purpose of enabling the court to take advantage of the same machinery as we are setting up for our own guidance in this matter. I agree with all that has been said about the present unsatisfactory position of trustee securities in this State. Investigation into that position must be somewhat long. There are many interests to be considered before we can come to anything like a final conclusion. I do not think there is anything to be gained by deferring the introduction of this Bill until one of a wider scope could be introduced. We are trying to restrict and limit the stocks and funds even under the control of the State and when we have some experience as to how this committee will operate we will then be able to determine before the period mentioned elapses as to whether similar procedure should not form part of a new Bill. We hope to introduce this Bill within 12 months or so, that is a Bill to deal with existing trustee funds.

The Minister has not expressly answered the question I asked him as to whether a trustee under a marriage settlement or a public trustee could take advantage of Section 11 by going to the court and placing the money for the time being under the control or subject to the order of the court?

No, Section 12 would, I think, debar him from doing that. That point has been put to me before and I shall have to consider and deal with it on the Committee Stage. There is not, as far as I can see, except under the operations of the court under Section 12, anything anywhere by which this existing trustee settlement could be enlarged.

I take that to be the intention of the Bill. Is this Investments Advisory Committee going to receive remuneration?

I anticipate that the members of the Committee will not receive remuneration.

Will the Minister explain what is meant by clause 6 (1)?: "The Minister may, whenever he thinks proper within two years after the passing of this Act request the committee to prepare and submit to him a list of securities suitable for the investment of a specified Government fund or specified Government money." It seems to have a very wide application, rather wider than one would imply from the Minister's remarks.

I do not think so. The purpose is to ask the committee to advise me as to how Government funds might be invested. It may happen that one security would be suitable for the general investment of all Government moneys, no matter to what fund they belong, whereas another security may be suitable for the investment of only one particular fund. The purpose is to enable the committee to advise me as to which particular security is best suited for the investment of a particular Government fund.

Section 7 (2) states: "Whenever the Minister receives an application under this section he may, as he shall think proper, either refuse such application or refer such application to the committee for their advice thereon." That confers on the Minister power to reject an application to have included a certain security without referring it to the committee. Is that the position? The question of new securities may be created, and this may possibly fill the bill for trustee securities and securities suitable for the investment of money at the disposal of Ministers. Is it not putting complete control into the hands of the Minister? Is it not giving him power to brush this committee aside, this committee that he has been complimented on because of his impartiality in the matter of selection?

I was called upon to conclude, and now Deputy Belton seems to be making a speech.

I am not; I am asking a question which the Minister did not think it worth his while to answer, and then I made a comment on the question. I think it had a snag in it, and the Minister did not want to see it.

The Deputy will have an opportunity of speaking on the Committee Stage.

And I will avail of it.

Question—"That the Bill be now read a Second Time"—agreed to.

Committee Stage fixed for Tuesday, 18th July.

Top
Share