I move the following Estimates:—4 (Comptroller and Auditor-General), 9 (Commissions and Special Inquiries), 10 (Office of Public Works), 11 (Public Works and Buildings), 12 (State Laboratory), 17 (Rates on Government Property), 20 (Expenses under the Electoral Act and the Juries Act), 21 (Miscellaneous Expenses), 22 (Stationery and Printing), 23 (Valuation and Boundary Survey), 24 (Ordnance Survey), 27 (Haulbowline Dockyard), 29 (Widows' and Orphans' Pensions), 30 (Quit Rent Office), 32 (Office of the Minister for Justice), 33 (Gárda Síochána), 34 (Prisons), 35 (District Court), 36 (Supreme Court and High Court of Justice), 37 (Land Registry and Registry of Deeds), 38 (Circuit Court), 39 (Public Record Office), 40 (Charitable Donations and Bequests), 41 (Local Government and Public Health), 42 (General Register Office), 43 (Dundrum Asylum), 44 (National Health Insurance), 45 (Office of the Minister for Education), 46 (Primary Education), 47 (Secondary Education), 48 (Technical Instruction), 49 (Science and Art), 50 (Reformatory and Industrial Schools), 51 (National Gallery), 54 (Lands), 55 (Forestry), 56 (Gaeltacht Services), 63 (Posts and Telegraphs), 64 (Wireless Broadcasting), 69 (Employment Schemes).
Committee on Finance.
It is agreed and understood that these are to be given en bloc to the Government, and it is our intention to facilitate that arrangement. I wonder is there any objection to raising one particular point, directly arising out of the general election, to which the Minister for Local Government and Public Health might be in a position to reply? I believe it would be useful if the Minister for Local Government and Public Health would go on record as expressing a considered opinion, which I think might valuably contribute to the decencies of public life in this country generally, and it is this: I submit to the Government that officials who act as presiding officers or their assistants, or officials who assist the returning officer in any constituency in the counting of the votes, ought not to be persons who have taken an acrimonious part in the election on public platforms. I do not think it is reasonable to ask the returning officer to inquire into the political affiliations of every citizen in the constituency, but I think it is reasonable to make a general rule that if a man goes out, as he has a perfect right to do, and takes an active part on a public platform in the election, that person should not be entitled to act as presiding officer, poll clerk or official counter at the election. I think that should apply to all sides, no matter who is responsible for the Government. I think if the Minister expressed generally his view that that was a sound doctrine, it would strengthen the hands of returning officers all over the country who might be pressed to appoint such persons and who would feel freer to resist such pressure if they were in a position to say: “The Minister for Local Government and Public Health has condemned that practice. On the strength of his condemnation, we do not propose to appoint any such persons in this election or any other election.”
The Deputy is aware that the Minister has no power or authority to interfere with returning officers in any appointments they make on the occasions of general elections or by-elections. Since I became Minister I have had shoals of letters from all over the country from people asking that I should recommend this, that or the other person to the returning officer in connection with these appointments, pointing out that they had special qualifications or perhaps that they were unemployed persons with qualifications entitling them to seek employment from the returning officer. I have had, in every such case, to reply to them that I have no right or authority to interfere. It is a matter entirely for the returning officer.
I have had several times in the Department asked returning officers to bear in mind the fact that there were people who were unemployed and well qualified, who might be given preference in such employment. I have had also before me the point which Deputy Dillon has raised about persons, who were actively engaged on one side or another in politics, taking an official part as counters, presiding officers or poll clerks or in some cases legal advisers to returning officers. I have been asked about that more than once. I had a notorious case brought to my notice last year from a county which the Deputy knows well where a very active partisan occupied a very important position in connection with the election. Even though he was a strong political partisan on public platforms during the election, I am certain that the returning officer, at any rate, was satisfied that he would get reliable advice from the man appointed. Nevertheless, I agree with Deputy Dillon that the practice is wrong. I have, however, no power to interfere but if any word of mine in condemnation of the practice of engaging persons who are strong partisans or who take an active part in the election on one side or another, whatever side they belong to, would have any effect, I think the practice ought to cease.