Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 29 May 1941

Vol. 83 No. 10

Committee on Finance. - Vote 15—Commissions and Special Inquiries.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná ná raghaidh thar £5,953 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, 1942, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí eile Coimisiún, Coistí agus Fiosrúchan Speisialta.

That a sum, not exceeding £5,953, be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending the 31st day of March, 1942, for the Salaries and other Expenses of Commissions, Committees and Special Inquiries.

Mr. Davin

I move that the Estimate be referred back for re-consideration. This motion has been put down because the members of the Labour Party are not satisfied that the money asked for in this Vote will be spent for the purpose for which it is intended by the House at any rate. If this House is to be asked, as it has been from time to time, to agree to the establishment of commissions of inquiry, it certainly should not do so except on the very distinct and definite understanding that the reports of such commissions, for which the taxpayers have to pay, will be furnished to the Deputies and to the public for their information. I realise probably as well as anybody sitting on these benches that the present Government is a Party-minded Government. I was listening to the head of the Government when he said here some time ago that he welcomed constructive and helpful criticism from the Opposition. I say that it is impossible for the members of the Opposition to give useful advice or advance constructive criticism unless they are furnished with the information which they are entitled to receive as members of the House.

In that respect I consider that it is very unfair on the part of the Government to hold up the publication for a long period of reports of a number of these commissions. It is nearly two years ago since the House agreed, on a motion moved by the then Minister for Industry and Commerce, to set up the Transport Tribunal. I am not going to repeat what I said in this House before concerning the case made for the establishment of that tribunal by the then Minister for Industry and Commerce. He indicated to the House that the question to be considered by the tribunal was of such urgency and importance that he expected the report of the tribunal would be furnished to the House at the beginning of 1939, two months after it was established. That very valuable report is still locked up in some secret pigeon-hole in the Department of Industry and Commerce or some other Government Department. I contend that it is very unfair to expect this House in future to agree to the establishment of tribunals of that kind and to spend the taxpayers' money in conducting the inquiries when the Government refuses to give the information contained in the report of that tribunal to Deputies and to the public.

The Minister for Finance was responsible a number of years ago for setting up a Drainage Commission. According to a reply given to a Parliamentary question by the Minister for Finance, that Commission submitted its report in October last. Although we are asked by the Head of the Government to submit constructive proposals for the solution of the difficult pressing problems that require to be dealt with by the Government and by the representatives of the people, we have been so far denied the information which would enable us to submit those constructive proposals and suggestions. I ask the Minister for Finance, who was responsible for the establishment of the Drainage Commission, to tell the House why he has held up the publication of that report since last October; or to give any good reason why Deputies should not have access to the report of a public commission of this kind, or why the public at large, who are more deeply interested probably than any Deputy in the report of that Commission, should not have the information at their disposal. I assume that many civil servants have access to the reports of these tribunals and commissions. I personally deny the right of any civil servant to have access to these reports while Deputies, who are the representatives of the people, and who, in the name of the people, have agreed to the establishment of these commissions and tribunals, are refused access to them.

There is another and much more serious case in which the Government have up to the present withheld the publication of the report of a certain body which was set up under the Industrial Courts Act. It is a long time ago since the Dublin Bakery Trade Inquiry was set up as a result of a motion submitted by the Minister concerned. I understand that the report of that body was submitted to the responsible Minister in February last. I also understand that there is an obligation on the Minister concerned, or, at any rate, on the Government, under the Industrial Courts Act to publish the report of that inquiry.

Mr. Flinn

I think there is nothing in this Vote to cover the third of these commmissions which the Deputy has in mind. I am afraid we would not be able to deal with it.

Mr. Davin

There is nothing in this Vote to cover the sins of the past, but certainly there is an opportunity now to make a protest against the failure or refusal of the Government to publish the reports of the tribunals and commissions which have been set up and for which the taxpayers have already paid. On this Vote, and before any further moneys are voted for this purpose, we are entitled to get the reasons why the representatives of the people cannot have access to the information contained in these reports. I personally, and the members of my Party, will not agree in future to spend the taxpayers' money on setting up commissions of inquiry or tribunals on motions moved by the Ministers concerned until we get an assurance here and now that these reports will be available to Deputies and will be published and circulated, so that the information contained in them will be supplied to the people who are expected to pay the cost of those inquiries. I should like to hear from the Minister for Finance or the Parliamentary Secretary the reasons for the refusal to publish those reports, particularly the refusal of the Minister concerned, to publish, as required by law, the report of the Dublin Bakery Trade Inquiry.

General Mulcahy

I should like to support Deputy Davin's motion on the general principle that he asserts. There are two other points which I should like to raise generally. We voted a certain amount of money for the Commission on Vocational Organisation. That commission has now been sitting for a very long time and not a scrap of the very voluminous evidence given before that commission has been made available in any way for Deputies. Some day, I suppose, we will get a report as big as the Banking Commission's report, accompanied by a couple of volumes of evidence more voluminous still. If the Government attach to the work of that commission the importance that they seem to attach to it, and if they want to be supported in whatever they may do as a result of that commission, they are not doing their duty in regard to helping those who are interested in the evidence given before the commission and the lines on which thought is travelling so far as the witnesses and the commission itself are concerned.

At the same time, while the commission has been sitting a long time and taking a lot of evidence which must bear on the question of trade union organisation, we have had presented to the House an important Bill, and I understand we are to be presented with others, dealing with trade union organisation. I think it is most unfair to very important interests that the matter of vocational organisation of any kind should be treated in this particular way. Personally, I think that we should not be asked at this particular time to consider a measure dealing with trade union organisation without being told whether the Commission on Vocational Organisation has been dealing with that matter and proposes to report on it.

I raise the question, principally, to say that it is high time the evidence that has been given before the Vocational Organisation Commission, if it has ceased taking evidence, should be published so that we may have a chance of reading it before the commission's report reaches us. If the usual practice that Deputy Davin has spoken about is going to be followed, it is likely to be a couple of years before we see the report from the Government's hands.

We set up an Agricultural Commission a few years ago. The Estimate before us shows that the cost of it last year was £1,020. The members of the commission have not yet been chloroformed, but the whole commission idea seems to have been chloroformed, without being put out of existence. As far as we can judge from the Estimate before us, it is not the Government's intention to reassemble this commission during the present year. I think it is of much greater importance that the Agricultural Commission should sit this year than any of the other commissions mentioned. I pointed out the other day that the annual gross production per person engaged in agricultural occupations in this country is £77 a year. In Great Britain and Northern Ireland the figure is £194. We have heard enough from the Government Benches recently to understand that they realise how important the agricultural industry is to the general economy of the country and of how much more important it is likely to be in the future; how necessary it is not only to work hard at the present moment, but to keep a look out for developments in the world of the future in which our agricultural products will have to fight for a market. There is no more important commission that we could have sitting at the present than the Agricultural Commission, and I want to know why it has been chloroformed.

Mr. Keyes

I want to support the protest that has been made by Deputy Davin against the delay of the Government in publishing the reports of the tribunals and inquiries to which he made reference. In the old days in this country, the setting up of tribunals and royal commissions provided abundant material for comedians. Their setting up was regarded as an easy method of shelving awkward questions by those who then ruled this country. If one drops the prefix "royal," one can say that the setting up of tribunals and inquiries here has now become part of the stock-in-trade of political comedians. The purpose seems to be to humbug the people, and to sidetrack important issues. A very serious position has been reached here, due to the attitude adopted by responsible Ministers with regard to the publication of the reports of commissions. The members of the House or the people generally have not been treated properly. Deputy Davin referred to the reports of some important commissions, and to the failure of responsible Ministers to give any satisfactory reply with regard to them. I understood the Parliamentary Secretary to say that the report of the bakery inquiry does not come within the scope of this Estimate, and that, consequently, he is not in a position to answer any questions concerning it. The question this inquiry dealt with is a very important one. We ought to have some information with regard to this body's report since we are being asked to vote money for it in this Estimate. Why is the report being held up?

Mr. Flinn

I want to tell the Deputy quite definitely that that inquiry does not come within this Vote.

Mr. Davin

Will the Parliamentary Secretary say under what head money is being voted to meet the expenses of the inquiry?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Vote for the Department of Industry and Commerce.

Mr. Davin

I was informed that it was to be voted under this Estimate.

Mr. Flinn

I am informed otherwise.

Mr. Keyes

Am I to take it, therefore, that if the position be as the Parliamentary Secretary has stated, I am to be precluded from discussing the report of the Bakery Committee?

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes, if there is no money in this Vote for that commission.

Mr. Davin

The Minister for Finance has referred to the Vote of the Department of Industry and Commerce, but there is no sub-head in that Vote providing for the payment of the expenses of the bakery inquiry.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am informed officially on this Vote that there is no money provision in it for this particular commission. Consequently, it cannot be discussed.

Mr. Davin

Perhaps the expenses will be borne out of the Contingency Fund.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Are the expenses being borne out of sub-head F of this Vote?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

No. I am told they are being borne on the Vote for the Department of Industry and Commerce.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Deputy Davin says there is no sub-head in that Vote dealing with this inquiry.

Mr. Davin

There is no specified sum.

An Ceann Comhairle

In that case the Deputy might raise the matter on the Vote for the salary for the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. Keyes

I desire to give a short résumé of some of the other commissions that have been set up. The Fruit and Vegetables Commission was set up on the 21st March, 1935, and we are still awaiting its report. The Town Tenants' Tribunal was set up in February, 1936. We have been told that we are to get this report some time in the future.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The not too far distant future.

Mr. Keyes

What the Minister has said indicates a big improvement. The Drainage Commission was set up in 1938. Of course, we could not expect that all the drains of the country would have been cleaned up since that date. That Commission was set up to deal with a most important question, and it is time that we had its report.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I announced, in reply to a question this week, that it was hoped to publish the report of that Commission soon.

Mr. Davin

Before the turf is cut?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

Yes.

Mr. Keyes

The Transport Tribunal, which has really become historic, was, as Deputy Davin has pointed out, set up following an urgent appeal made to the House by the then Minister for Industry and Commerce. Its report has been the subject of many questions in the House. The Government and the Ministers have not been allowed to fall asleep on this report. Questions, dealing with it, have been tabled time after time. The report has long since been presented to the Minister, but so far it has not been made available to the public. As a matter of fact, the then Minister for Industry and Commerce, when moving for the setting up of the Tribunal in the month of December, said that he expected to have its report in the following February. I appealed to him not to proceed with undue speed since the question to be examined was such a serious one. I said that while we did not want urgency we did not want chaos either.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

The Deputy was facilitated in his desires.

Mr. Keyes

When the Minister said that he wanted to have the report on the following 8th February, I suggested to him that he should give more time for an examination of the question. I asked him to slow himself up.

Mr. O Ceallaigh

I have hopes that, at no far distant date, it will be published.

Mr. Keyes

I wish the Minister would use another adjective. I do not propose to make any further remarks on the question of the transport report, because I have expressed myself fairly freely on it, and so have Deputy Davin and others. Matters of that kind cannot, however, be over-stressed if we take the Minister's own setting out of the case. The problem has not improved with the hatching. I hope that that "no far distant date" will come immediately. The Dublin Housing Commission was set up early in 1939, and there are some other commissions which may not come within the category of "old crocks." We have the Vocational Organisation Commission, the Agricultural Commission, the summer Time Commission, and the Soldiers' and Sailors' Land Trust Commission, which are comparatively modern.

One of the really serious points in connection with these commissions was the attitude taken up by a Minister as to whether or not he had responsibility to this House to make a report back to it concerning them. The Minister for Industry and Commerce, in dealing with the question of releasing the Transport Tribunal Report, said he doubted that he had any responsibility to furnish that report to the House. I am sure the Minister for Finance would not take that line of action. If he does not agree with it, I hope he will communicate his view to his colleague, the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and make clear that he does not agree with the contention that, when this House gives authority for setting up public inquiries, the reports of these bodies are intended only for use in the Minister's Department. These inquiries are set up for the guidance of the people of the country and for their education. They are intended to enable them to come to a sound opinion on matters of public interest. The obvious channel for conveying that information to the public is the Parliament elected by the people. The Minister for Industry and Commerce felt that he had no responsibility to the House in this connection. That raises a really serious question which must be considered by Deputies if we are to be asked to set up inquiries, tribunals and commissions. Ministers must be told in advance, and educated if they are in ignorance of this point, that they are not the masters but the servants of the House, as we are the servants of the people. If there is any misconception on that, we should not add to the dangers of Government dictatorship by giving them additional commissions, the results of which they will refuse to furnish to Deputies.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I should like information regarding a certain committee of inquiry which the House agreed to set up on the Government's own motion. It had to do with unemployment. Has that committee of inquiry ever been set up?

Mr. O Ceallaigh

No.

Mr. Davin

If it has, it will sit for ever.

Mr. D. Morrissey

If it is not set up, it cannot finish.

Mr. Flinn

If it has not been set up, no question concerning its activities can be raised on this Vote.

Mr. D. Morrissey

The Parliamentary Secretary is getting a knowledge of Standing Orders which is really astounding.

Mr. Flinn

I shall submit it as a point of order to the Chair, if the Deputy so desires. I merely want to be helpful.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary would tell me on which Vote I could raise this question.

Mr. Flinn

I am merely pointing out that you cannot raise it now.

An Ceann Comhairle

Having asked the question——

Mr. D. Morrissey

And having got the answer I expected, I do not see that there is any use in going further.

Mr. Flinn

Commissions are optimistic bodies in their origin, in their intention and in their procedure. They lay themselves out to get a great deal of very valuable information, as they hope, in a great hurry. As a rule, these anticipations are not realised. Difficulties of one kind or another present themselves, other aspects of the question appear in evidence, and the result is that the report is delayed. You had in the case of the Transport Tribunal a very excellent example of that. It was believed that it was possible to regard that as rather a simple question which could be dealt with upon simple and rapid lines. That proved not to be possible. The same thing has happened in relation to the Vocational Organisation Commission. Some people thought that inquiry would be a very simple process in that case, but, when they came to the facts, the number of institutions with a vocational character of one kind or another and their permutations, combinations, inter-relations and reactions seemed to stretch out into a vista which almost reached eternity. You can make commissions very short by deliberately cutting out a great many of the subsidiary issues, but, if you take these subsidiary issues, they stretch out into longer periods than those who initiated them expected. That is the explanation why commissions last a long time.

As to why reports of commissions are not published immediately, the same amount of attention and examination given to coming to a decision on the evidence is required on the part of those whose business it is to use public funds for the purpose of carrying the reports into effect. It would be quite simple for the Government simply to take a very rough look through the report of a commission and say: "We, generally, agree with that." That would be a very brief way of doing it but, very often, when such a report comes to be examined, it is found that its interaction on other activities of the State requires very definite consideration.

General Mulcahy

The period is lengthened by reason of the fact that evidence, as given, is not circulated or published by the Government and that Deputies are not given an opportunity to read it.

Mr. Flinn

Take the reports of the Banking Commission. I do not know how many members of this House can put their hands on their hearts and say they have read the reports of the Banking Commission.

General Mulcahy

There are Deputies who could do that.

Mr. Flinn

I am not dealing with this matter in any sense polemically. I am dealing with this as a discussion between men who are prepared to recognise the evidence. How many of us could say that we have read the evidence upon which the Banking Commission Report was based? It is a very heavy document. I have delved into the whole of it and I have never read documents so sluggish or so painful in my whole life.

General Mulcahy

Would you not have a better chance of reading them if you did not get them all together?

Mr. Flinn

I think it would be a deplorable thing to read a part of the evidence of the Banking Commission and then have to look forward to the second volume of it.

General Mulcahy

It would be all in one volume.

Mr. Flinn

If the Banking Commission report is to be considered seriously by an individual, he should read the report with the whole of the evidence in front of him.

General Mulcahy

Why not read the evidence as it becomes available?

Mr. Flinn

That would be to form half an opinion on half the evidence, then change that and try to co-relate it with the remainder of the evidence. I should prefer to get the whole of it. That is one of the difficulties. The second difficulty is that the authority in relation to the procedure of these commissions, unless otherwise decided in advance by the Dáil, rests with themselves. It is up to them to decide whether the evidence shall be put forward in public or in private and at what rate they shall furnish it to the Government. Take the case of the Vocational Commission, a very interesting commission, with extremely detailed information, a great deal of which would be profoundly uninteresting in itself, but, co-related, might be of extraordinary interest. No portion of that evidence has been submitted to the Government, no interim report has been submitted, and they are not in possession of one word or one portion of it. Until the Commission exercises its own jurisdiction nothing can be done.

Arising out of this discussion, the House may say in future, in relation to commissions, that they will lay down precise standards which will remove that discretion from commissions. In relation to a particular commission, the House may say that they must publish evidence and that they must make an interim report, but until that is done the discretion must be left in their hands. To take the Commission on Vocational Organisation as an example—in respect of which there is a complaint that there has been no publication of their report or of evidence submitted to them—the House is in possession of all the information which the Government has in relation to that matter.

General Mulcahy

That makes the situation more disgraceful.

Mr. Flinn

That is a matter of opinion. I am prepared to say it is an open matter that, in relation to the setting-up of a commission, the Dáil shall say specifically what its procedure shall be; but if it does not—and it must be remembered that the whole Dáil is responsible for these commissions—unless and until it does, the discretion remains with the commission, and we cannot furnish information when they have not provided the material for us to do so. As regards the reports of the principal commissions—transport and drainage—one of them has been fully considered by the Government and the other has been considered by both of the Departments and, I think, by the Government.

Mr. Morrissey

Which one has been fully considered?

Mr. Flinn

The Drainage Commission report.

Mr. Davin

The other one was published twenty months before that.

Mr. Flinn

In all probability, those two reports will be published at an early date.

Mr. Davin

Is that an assurance?

Mr. Flinn

If I say it is, the Deputy would ask me to define "early date."

Mr. Davin

The Parliamentary Secretary said "in all probability."

Mr. Flinn

It is an assurance that these reports will be published at an early date. I think that is all I can say on that matter.

An Ceann Comhairle

Does the Deputy wish to press the motion to refer back?

Mr. Davin

On the assurance given by the Parliamentary Secretary here, that the principal reports referred to will be published at an early date, I do not wish to press the matter to a division.

General Mulcahy

I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether the Trade Union Bill introduced here has been introduced by the Government without paying any attention to any evidence that was given before the Commission on Vocational Organisation? I understood the Parliamentary Secretary to say that the Government had not seen a scrap of the evidence given before that commission.

Mr. Flinn

That is so. It is clear that the Government cannot have taken into account evidence which they have not seen.

Mr. Morrissey

We can take it from the Parliamentary Secretary that they have not seen it?

Mr. Flinn

Yes.

Vote put and agreed to.