Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 7 Jul 1936

Vol. 63 No. 8

Committee on Finance. - Vote 71—Repayment of Dáil Eireann External Loans.

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £4,200 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1937, alos caiteachais a bhaineann le hIasachtaí Coigríche Dháil Eireann d'Aisíoc.

That a sum not exceeding £4,200 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, 1937, for expenditure in connection with the Repayment of the Dáil Eireann External Loans.

Perhaps the Minister will tell us on what work the staff is going to be engaged that is going to cost £6,500 this year?

Well, as the House is aware, the Dáil Eireann Loans Act, 1933, provided that the final date for lodging a claim should be 31st of August, 1934, and that subsequently, in view of the number of late applications which were received, it was decided, by statute, to extend the date for lodging applications to the 30th June of this year. That Act, which extended the date, also provided that no payment should be made after the 31st of March, 1937, and that an account of the repayments, with all the necessary vouchers and records, shall be rendered to the Comptroller and Auditor-General. The purpose of this Estimate is to provide the necessary staff to enable the Administration to give effect to the purposes of that Act.

So that, in addition to all the cost that this country has been put to as a result of changes of the President's mind, this other little change of his mind with regard to the date on which these applications will come in is going to cost this country £6,500 this year, not counting other claims in which it may involve us.

The Minister, in his Budget statement a couple of years ago, assessed the amount that would be required to liquidate this External Loan at £1,000,000, and lately I saw it written down at something like £400,000. Can the Minister tell us whether, in the intervening period, any of the money was paid, and can he give us an estimate of what the cost of redeeming the whole External Loan would amount to?

Yes. The Deputy will understand that these are estimates and, with regard to the figure of £1,000,000 which was originally given, of course we were not then in a position to make any very exact estimate of the number of people who might come forward for repayment. In addition to that, I think that that figure of £1,000,000 was given in my first Budget statement and, if my memory serves me correctly, sterling was then standing at a very heavy discount to the dollar, whereas to-day it is at par. The loan is in dollars, and if sterling were at a discount, as it was in 1932 and up to the earlier months of 1933, our sterling obligations would be very much heavier than they are to-day, when sterling and the dollar are very nearly at par. The total number of claims which we received so far are of the order of about 90,000. I give these figures with reserve because, since the extension of the date to the 30th of June of this year, other applications may have been lodged. However the number of applications is of the order of 90,000 and the total amount involved in those disbursements has been calculated at about $2,000,000; that is approximately £400,000. I think that the figure of £400,000 or £450,000 will meet all our obligations in regard to that matter.

Will the Minister say what was the sum which was loaned?

I am afraid I cannot give that figure.

Just an approximate figure?

I am afraid I cannot give that information. After all, the question which the Deputy is putting to me now was a matter which was really discussed on the two Bills passed.

Was it not $6,000,000?

I should say it was of about that order but, quite candidly, I have not got the information at my disposal at the moment.

At any rate, we are this year being committed to further expenditure of £6,500 on staff, wages, office accommodation and so on, that the Minister did not expect we would have to meet. Will the Minister say whether, in view of this continuing expenditure in connection with the Dáil loans, he has had a calculation made as to the amount of money that would have been saved this country if Mr. de Valera had not contested in the American courts the right of this State to repay these moneys?

That question does not arise on this Vote.

We are apparently going to vote money in 1936 and 1937, for this matter.

This payment has been authorised by an Act of the Oireachtas.

It could have been satisfactorily concluded more than ten years ago, at a very great saving to the State, and it might help us to economise a little in the expenses, if we could have in front of us the figures showing what we lost through the action of the President at that time, in contesting the right of this State to repay these moneys.

Could the Minister say, in connection with the extra date, March 31st, 1937, if any cases in dispute will be finally settled before then? What I want to get is information, so that if any cases are not settled before that date, or are still under consideration, they will not be decided against the persons who are claiming, but that opportunities will be afforded those whose cases are not decided to have them settled later than March 31st. We are getting out of this debt at a very big discount, and even though a determining date must be fixed sooner or later, if people who in all good faith present cases which are not settled at the precise date fixed by the statute, it would be an act of grace not to deprive them of the money simply because the date had run out.

As the statute stands I do not think we would have any power to deal with cases which might not be disposed of on March 31st, 1937.

Does the Minister refer to cases in dispute or lodged?

The Act provides that no payments shall be made after March 31st, 1937. Under the terms of the Act the accounts and the necessary vouchers have to be referred to the Comptroller and Auditor-General within a statutory period after that date. The Deputy may take it that it is very unlikely that any applications which have been lodged within that date will not have been disposed of by 31st March, 1937, because, as Deputies are aware, the position in regard to the American Loan is very different from the position that existed in regard to the Internal Loan. We have very complete records in America and as they have been preserved, claims can be expeditiously investigated. As Deputy Cosgrave knows from experience, that did not, unfortunately, apply to the Internal Loan, so that very often claims presented great difficulty in their validation. I do not think these difficulties are going to be experienced in the United States. I agree with the Deputy that it would be a graceful thing. If it were found that claims which were the subject of dispute or examination, lodged prior to June 30th of this year, were still the subject of dispute or examination on March 31st, 1937, I feel that, we should be bound by the spirit if not by the letter of the law, to ensure that these claims would not be regarded as finally disposed of in favour of the Exchequer as against the claimants, simply by reason of the fact that the statute states that no payments shall be made after March 31st, 1937. I can give the Deputy now a more exact figure for the total amount of the Loan subscribed—£5,200,000, approximately.

In view of the responsibility that rests upon the Minister, could he not issue an order in his Department indicating that every dispute arising would be finally disposed of in March of next year or immediately thereafter would be referred to the Minister so that nobody's claim would be put out of court on March 31st?

I would have some hesitation about that, because the Comptroller and Auditor-General might have something to say if I were to deal with the matter in that way. I am bound by statute the same as the Deputy or any other officer, but if I happened to occupy my present office in March, 1937, and if such matters were then to be in dispute, I should certainly approach them from the point of view that Deputy Cosgrave has expressed.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share