Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 12 Nov 1936

Vol. 64 No. 3

Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 75—Compensation to the Dublin Greyhound and Sports Association, Ltd.

I move:

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £560 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh Márta, 1937, mar Chúiteamh don Dublin Greyhound and Sports Association, Ltd.

That a sum not exceeding £560 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1937, for Compensation to the Dublin Greyhound and Sports Association, Ltd.

This Estimate arises out of the report of a committee of inquiry which was appointed on 20th April, 1932, to inquire into, among other things, the desirability of granting licences to greyhound racing track companies to set up and maintain totalisators. The committee reported that it had come to the conclusion that it was not desirable, in the public interest, to grant licences of this nature. In their report the committee also pointed out, however, that, although there was no completed contract between the Minister for Finance and the companies owning greyhound tracks in the city, it was clear that a totalisator licence was promised to this as well as to the other company, on certain specified conditions which the particular company concerned in this Estimate was prepared to accept. The committee also considered that the company, acting on the strength of that understanding, incurred certain expenditure, and that, therefore, their case merited special consideration. This Estimate arises out of the consideration which has been given to the company on the basis of the report of the committee of inquiry, and represents the sum which has been agreed upon in settlement of the issues between the company on the one hand and the State on the other.

During last session we had a Vote for another purpose of the same kind?

This is the second track.

Does this dispose of all the claims which may be anticipated to arise?

This disposes of them, and, we hope, winds up the whole matter.

Was this alleged promise made to the second company?

I shall read what is virtually a quotation from the report of the committee. The committee reported in regard to this case that although there was no completed contract between the parties it was clear that a totalisator licence was promised to this company, on certain specified conditions which the company were prepared to accept, and that, consequent upon that, the company had incurred certain expenditure which merited the special consideration of the Minister. This consideration, as I have said, has now been given, and, as a result, it has been agreed between the Minister and the company, subject of course to the overriding authority of the Dáil, that a sum of £560 should be paid to the company in full discharge of all the equities.

Does that mean that the company had installed the machine?

No, but they had incurred certain expenditure. They had not actually installed the totalisator, but I think they had erected buildings and done other things.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share