Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 May 1938

Vol. 71 No. 6

Gárda Síochána Pensions Order, 1938.—Motion of Approval.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Ruttledge)

I move:—

That the Dáil hereby approves of the Gárda Síochána Pensions Order, 1938, made on the 6th day of May, 1938, by the Minister for Justice, with the sanction of the Minister for Finance, under Section 13 of the Police Forces Amalgamation Act, 1925, and laid on the Table of the Dáil on the 11th day of May, 1938.

The necessity for this order arises from the contemplated change in the Commissionership of the Gárda. Articles 1, 2 and 3 are formal. Article 4—This Article is intended to ensure that the Gárda Síochána Pensions Order, 1925 (as amended by any subsequent order) shall apply to the present commissioner. The wording of Article 3 of the 1925 order left some room for doubt on this point.

Article 5.—The "requisition period of approved service" referred to in this Article is 25 years in the case of the present commissioner and 30 years in the case of any future commissioner who joined the force after the 19th October, 1925. The Article provides that when a commissioner has completed such period of service, he may retire on pension, but only with the consent of the Minister if he has attained the age of 60. Under the 1925 order a commissioner irrespective of his length of service could not retire on pension except on medical grounds before the age of 50.

Article 6.—This Article enables, in the case of the present commissioner, the period which he served in the D.M.P. prior to his dismissal therefrom in July, 1921, and the period from such dismissal to the date of his re-instatement (1st April, 1925), to be reckoned as approved service for pension. This provision is identical with those contained in Section 3 of the Superannuation and Pensions Act, 1923, and in Section 11 of the Dublin Police Act, 1924, which applied to other members of the Dublin Metropolitan Police who were dismissed for political reasons prior to the Truce and were subsequently reinstated therein. The Article also enables the Minister for Finance to add as approved service, in the case of any commissioner, a period not exceeding 10 years.

Article 7.—This Article is intended to cover the case of a civil servant appointed, without break of service, to the post of commissioner. It provides that in such a case the full period served in a pensionable capacity in the Civil Service may be reckoned as approved service, for the purpose of pension, on retirement from the Gárda. Under the 1925 order only three-fourths of such service, served after the age of 20, could be so reckoned.

The present commissioner joined the D.M.P., as it then was, on the 20th January, 1911. He was dismissed for political reasons on the 24th July, 1921. From July, 1921, to May, 1922, he was engaged on intelligence work. From May, 1922, to May, 1925, he was Secretary of the Civil Aviation Organisation. In May, 1923, he was appointed Secretary of the D.M.P., which was then a recognised post. On the 1st May, 1925, he was reinstated in the D.M.P. with the rank of chief superintendent. Under the order, it is provided that the breaks shall count and that the commissioner's service shall be regarded as continuous service from 1911. That would give him a service of 27 years, and it is proposed to add three years' service for pension purposes. Ten years is mentioned in the order, but this is merely suggested by the Department of Finance as a round figure. It is proposed to add three years, which will give him the maximum pension of two-thirds of his salary. The idea of the Principal Order is that any member of the force is entitled to full pension after 30 years' actual service. In calculating the actual pension, every year's service after the twentieth year counts as two. The effect of that is that every member of the Guards who has 30 years' service, gets credit for 40 years, which entitles him to a pension of forty-sixtieths of his salary. I should like to add, at this stage, that I recognise that the position of chief commissioner is a very onerous one, and I should like to avail of this opportunity to express my deep appreciation of the services rendered by the commissioner who is now retiring.

Mr. Cosgrave

What is the total amount of pension which he is being awarded?

Mr. Ruttledge

£866 13s. 4d. That is two-thirds of his present salary. He has 27 years' service and we are adding three years to enable him to qualify for full pension.

Mr. W. O'Brien

Can the Minister say if there is any reason for his resignation?

Mr. Ruttledge

I do not desire to go into reasons.

Mr. O'Brien

Is it usual for a public official to be allowed to retire before he has reached the full period of service unless he has specified a particular reason? Can the Minister say what is the commissioner's age?

Mr. Ruttledge

He would be aged about 51. He was born on the 22nd December, 1887.

Mr. O'Brien

Is it usual for the chief commissioner to retire at that age?

Mr. Ruttledge

The position of chief commissioner is such that we may have to change the occupant from time to time.

Mr. Davin

This is the second Bill we have had before us in five years for the provision of pensions for two commissioners who were comparatively young men. It is a question of whether the Minister and his colleagues in the Cabinet can justify that. I should like to know whether it is the deliberate intention of this Government, as long as they are in office, to confine the period of office of a commissioner to five years or less? I should also like to know if it is correct that a civil servant has been appointed a successor to the commissioner now retiring, and if so, whether it is the intention in future or so long as the Government is in office, to confine the position of commissioner to civil servants?

Mr. Dillon

I think that this motion might with advantage be made the occasion by the Minister for Justice for some statement as to what his intentions are in regard to the future of the Gárda Síochána. I recognise the Minister's peculiar position in the matter of introducing an order of this kind providing for a retiring allowance for the chief commissioner before the normal date of Civil Service retirement. I think that the Minister is entitled to ask the House to allow him a wide discretion in that matter, but on the Estimate for his Department this year his attention was directed to the apprehension that was felt I think, pretty widely, in this House that all was not well with the Gárda Síochána, that while the personnel of that force, especially of the rank and file of that force, was of very high quality indeed, there did appear to be a slackening in morale and discipline which suggested the necessity for reform. Now, I do not think it is going to be of advantage, either to the force or to this House, to seek to fix responsibility for that decline in morale and discipline. I am not concerned to go into that side of the question at all, nor to examine the circumstances under which it arose, but I would be relieved, I think the members of the Gárda Síochána would be relieved, and I think the country would be relieved if the Minister for Justice took this occasion to say that, in any appointment contemplated by the Executive Council of a successor to the chief commissioner, special regard would be had to that individual's ability to restore the force to the prestige it enjoyed some years ago. I think the impression has gained ground amongst the members of the Gárdaí, first that the same importance is not attached to discipline as used to be attached to it, and secondly, that as individual Guards and sergeants they cannot depend on the impartial support to which they ought to be entitled if they do their duty without fear or favour to anybody. The impression has grown that if, in the course of his duty, a Guard interferes with the sweet will of a supporter of the Government, instead of being complimented on his action and supported in what he deemed it his duty to do, he is quite likely to be sharply reproved, and to be told it is a useful thing on certain occasions to put the telescope to the blind eye.

An Ceann Comhairle

As stated by the Deputy himself, those matters were raised on the Estimate. The Estimate has been passed. In suggesting that the successor to the present commissioner should have certain qualities, the Deputy was in order. In debating the future of the Gárda Síochána and the alleged lack of discipline therein, the Deputy is not in order on this motion.

Mr. Dillon

Very well. All I ask, and I ask it with a sincere desire to help in the restoring of a condition which every side of this House desires to see restored, is that the Minister should take this opportunity of saying that, without regard to what may have eventuated in the past history of the force, he is now primarily concerned to strengthen discipline and morale; that the person in whom the Executive Council will repose their trust will be specially charged with that task; that he will get a categorical assurance not only of the cordial and unrestricted support of the Executive Council in that work, but an assurance that from every side of this House the full authority of the Oireachtas will support any chief commissioner who concerns himself to make the force as efficient a body as it used to be, and who concerns himself to ensure that every member of it, from the chief commissioner down to the youngest Gárda on the beat, will do his duty without regard to the prestige or influence of any person with whom he may come in contact in the course of his daily work.

Mr. Cosgrave

May I ask the Minister if the addition of the three years in this case entitles ten years to be added? If the three years are not added, the ten years may not be added?

Mr. Ruttledge

The idea is to bring it up to 40 years. Every year over 20 counts for two; that means that it is brought up to 40. Then the pension will amount to forty-sixtieths, or two-thirds. That is the maximum pension.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister to conclude.

Mr. Ruttledge

With regard to the matters that have been raised, there is no principle that a change is to be made at the end of five years. It has been the practice, I know, in other countries that people in the position of a commissioner here have been changed from time to time, but there is no decision here that he should be changed every five years. A question was asked as to whether the successor was to be a civil servant. That is so; the Assistant Secretary to the Department of Justice is the person who will succeed the present commissioner. Again, there has been no decision made—nor should it arise, I think, except in a certain set of circumstances—as to whether or not the person who occupies the position of commissioner should be a civil servant. The fact that a civil servant has been appointed in this case is not intended to create a precedent. I do not accept what Deputy Dillon says with regard to the apprehension alleged to exist as to the condition of the force. I feel that the commissioner has done his best, although sometimes under very difficult circumstances, and I feel that the force is not at all in the position which has been represented in this House. However, the Chair has ruled that discussion out of order, and I cannot go into the matter. I am anxious now, as always in the past, that discipline should exist in the Gárdaí, and I think I have got a fair amount of co-operation in that matter. I am quite sure that the successor to the present commissioner will see that discipline in the Gárdaí is preserved, and will see that the force keeps up to its usual high standard.

Order approved.