Vol. 80 No. 16
Sub-section (2) provides that—
"on the appointed day the area of the urban district shall be detached from the county and from the jurisdiction and powers of the county council and shall be added to the city and shall thenceforward be included in and form part of the city for all purposes."
Does that mean for all local government purposes?
Yes.
Is there any danger that the appointed day would happen before the next elections are held for the corporation?
I do not think so.
Because, if that did happen, it would mean disfranchising the people of Howth.
That is not intended.
Is it proposed to set up Howth as a separate area without any increase in representation?
I do not know how the representation will work out. Howth itself might not be considered. You might have to add some other area between it and the city. The population of Howth is 4,800.
On the section, there appears to me to be a certain amount of conflict between sub-section (2) and paragraph (d) of sub-section (3). Sub-section (2) says that the under-sheriff will continue to hold office until he ceases either by death or otherwise to hold the office, or until the appointed day, whichever is the later. If he lives over the appointed day, he continues to be under-sheriff for the county until he dies or ceases to be in office. Paragraph (d) of sub-section (3) refers to the jurors books which, I take it, will likely fall in before the under-sheriff dies. I do not know who he is, so that I can be quite impersonal on the matter. That paragraph says that so long as there is an under-sheriff for the city he shall be the empanelling officer for the area as extended by this measure. It appears to me, therefore, that you are going to have two under-sheriffs acting for the same area, one under sub-section (2), the county under-sheriff; and the second, under paragraph (d) of sub-section (3), where the city under-sheriff becomes effective.
I do not think that there will be any overlapping such as the Deputy fears. The present under-sheriff will continue to act until he dies, resigns or vacates office just in the same way as the coroner for the county. When that happens, then an under-sheriff will have to be appointed.
Sub-section (2) definitely says that the present under-sheriff will carry on until he dies or ceases to hold office, while paragraph (d) of sub-section (3) says that immediately on the new jurors books coming into force the provisions of this Act shall take effect. Therefore, I think that the city under-sheriff will become effective under that sub-section. It appears to me that taking the two sub-sections together you will have two under-sheriffs functioning for the one area.
The matter is not as definite or as clear as I would like to have it. If the Deputy leaves it over, I will have it looked into before the Bill goes to the Seanad.
On the section, would the Minister say why it was necessary to insert in this Bill this section dealing with the office of the Dublin City Manager in view of the fact that it appears already in two other Acts?
To make it clear that the appointment of the city manager would be made in the same way as that of county manager.
It seems to me to be superfluous.
Would the Minister say what was the purpose of sub-section (3) of Section 53 of the Principal Act?
Sub-section (3) of Section 53 of the Principal Act provided:
On and after the appointed day the appointment of a person to be a manager shall be made by the council, and the office of manager shall be an office to which the Local Authorities (Officers and Employees) Act, 1926, applies.
And Section 101 deals, I take it, with the setting up of a further tribunal?
Yes.
On that question, may I ask the Minister by what number will the membership of the Corporation be increased in order to give Howth representation?
Section 7 (b) says: "the area of the urban district shall, for the purpose of the said city election, be added to and be deemed to form part of that borough electoral area in the city which adjoins the urban district". I am not able to tell the Deputy from the documents I have here at the moment how that exactly works out. The population of Howth is 4,500. That might not be considered big enough for a ward here in the city. It would be joined in with the adjoining area already represented in the corporation.
Surely the residents of Howth, with a population of nearly 5,000, should have at least two representatives who know their requirements. The city men will not debar them from getting any representation that is necessary.
There is at the present moment somebody representing the area very near Howth, and the people representing it should be very conversant with the conditions in Howth, so that it is a small matter that can be looked into.
The Minister will give it consideration?
There is no question of leaving Howth without representation. Howth will have its urban council until the appointed day under the Bill.
Will the Minister say whether the officials who are at present administering the area of the Howth Urban Council will have their interests safeguarded under the Bill?
So far as permanent officials are concerned, they will be entitled to compensation if not continued.
Is that the safeguard under the 1930 Act?
I think it is.
