Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Friday, 10 Jul 1942

Vol. 88 No. 4

Central Bank Bill, 1942—Report.

I move amendment No. 1:—

In page 3, between lines 40 and 41, Section 2, to insert the words "the expression ‘Director of the Bank' does not include the Governor."

The interpretation placed on the Bill as it stands was that the governor was a member of the board of directors. He is not himself a director. Deputy McGilligan, I think, raised a point, in connection with another section, as to the advisability of leaving the matter in such a way that the governor, as a director, might vote for himself under certain circumstances. The object of the amendment is to clear up that position. The expression "director of a bank" does not include the governor.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 2:—

In page 4, line 29, Section 5 (1), to delete the word "An" and after the word "Ceannais" to insert the words "na hEireann".

We are adopting in this amendment a suggestion that was made by Deputy Mulcahy.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 3:—

In page 5, at the end of Section 5 (5) to add a new paragraph as follows:—

(f) provide in appropriate cases for the review by the board of decisions taken or things done by any such committee or persons or person in the exercise or performance of any function, power, or duty delegated to them or him under this sub-section.

On the Committee Stage there was a good deal of discussion on the subject of this amendment. Speaking on Deputy Cosgrave's amendment, I promised to see what I could do to meet him. I think that in this amendment I have gone a good bit on the road to meet the points that were made by him, leaving it to the board to decide, when delegating its functions, to provide or not to provide, as it sees proper, for review later on. Many of the things that would be done by the committee or sub-committee or persons to whom power would be delegated or to whom certain duties would be allotted, would be of a routine nature and would not necessitate a review. It is in the power of the board to decide what they wish to do in that matter and to provide in appropriate cases for a review by the board of the decisions taken. That power, in connection with the power already provided for in sub-section (e), I think, covers all the points that might arise. All the dangers that were pointed out by Deputy Cosgrave, I think, are completely covered now, whatever doubts there may have been before. I think the amendment covers the matter satisfactorily.

Amendment put and agreed to.
Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 not moved.

I move amendment No. 6:—

In page 5, line 25, to add at the end of Section 6 the words:—

"and to advise the Minister annually and on such other occasions as the circumstances may require as to the effect of State policy in relation to the safeguarding of the integrity of the currency and of credit and in particular as to the trend of the financial policy operative in the State on trade, commerce and employment."

I spoke on the Committee Stage on the terms of this amendment and I do not propose to delay the House now except to say that, if the Minister thinks that he is making any approach towards meeting what I presented on the Committee Stage, I do not accept that.

The Deputy does not accept that?

No. The Minister turns the other way. Instead of having the central bank of some service to the Government in future, the Minister has put it that he wants the bank to be of no use to him; that he is to go to the bank and question them regarding the execution of their duty. What I hoped to have effected by this amendment was that the bank would be of national advantage to Governments of the future. The Government have now been ten years in office. They are going out; there is no doubt about that. A Government does not live for ever. The two Governments have had ten years' experience of office each. There is not much more left for either of them in future. Time alone will solve that question. But why not hand on to the Governments of the future some advantage to be derived from the central bank? Is it contended that the electorate as such will throw up for all time persons qualified to address themselves to such subjects as finance, economics and so on? I think it is most unlikely. It may be that you will get one or two such members in an executive council of the future. What I had hoped to have accepted by presenting my amendment was that this central bank, if it is to be of any use at all, would advise in future on that question. I withdraw the amendment, as it is only waste of time to be talking about such things here.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I move amendment No. 7:—

In page 5, at the end of Section 6 to add a new sub-section as follows:—

(2) The Minister may, on such occasions as he shall think proper, request the governor on behalf of the board or the board to consult and advise with him in regard to the execution and performance by the bank of the general function and duty imposed on the bank by the foregoing sub-section of this section, and the board shall comply with every such request.

I thought I went a good way to meet Deputy Cosgrave's point. I know I did not go in the way Deputy Cosgrave wanted me to go. I think the Deputy himself would be loath to give to any authority other than the Government of the day the right to lay down policy. I think that is a power that, at any rate, might be given to the bank, if I adopted Deputy Cosgrave's amendment. The Oireachtas is the ultimate authority for laying down the broad lines of monetary policy as well as every other kind of policy for the country. The central bank will be responsible for carrying out that policy and maintaining and safeguarding the integrity of the monetary system. The Government are in close and intimate touch with the Oireachtas. They are the body best qualified to know the ideas and feelings of the House and to interpret them. Questions of policy I would suggest are not for a body like the board of the central bank. Despite what Deputy Cosgrave said, I am hopeful that this body will be of great use to the country as a whole and to the Government. I think this Government will have a longer life than Deputy Cosgrave seems to desire to give them. Whether I am Minister for Finance or one of my colleagues, whoever is there I am sure will maintain close and intimate contact with the board of the bank and I hope will find the governor and the board willing and anxious to help with their advice on financial and monetary matters. They will have an opportunity of studying these matters more intimately, more closely, and more efficiently than members of the Oireachtas and the Government, and I am sure that, with the facilities they will have, they will be helpful to the Government and to the country as a whole.

I should like to know in what words of my amendment there is any indication that the central bank of the future were to dictate policy in this matter.

"And to advise the Minister annually and on such other occasions as the circumstances may require...." One has to scrutinise very closely such word as "advise". "Advise" is a strong word.

Did the Minister ever get any from a lawyer?

I did and often paid highly for it and often got bad advice.

You can take it or reject it.

You can, of course.

You are trying to lead the House to believe that this amendment means that you have to take the advice.

It is putting the Government in the position of having perhaps in public or in the House to give reasons for not accepting advice for which they did not ask.

Section 6 of this Bill, in defining the general functions and duties of the central bank, puts upon them the responsibility of ensuring that in whatever pertains to the control of credit the constant and dominant aim shall be the welfare of the people as a whole. I take it that there is a certain number of aspects of the people's lives that would show whether or not things were progressing economically for the people. If the central bank is to get a picture of the welfare of the people as a whole, it will have to get it in a systematic way.

As I read Deputy Cosgrave's amendment, I take it that he considers that the central bank should report to the Minister annually and on such other occasions as the circumstances may require. That is, that with their constant review of the factors which indicate the progress or otherwise of the welfare of the people they would have systematic material to place before the Government and that they ought to place before the Government, annually or quarterly or whenever the Government would ask them, a systematised report on conditions in the country which would reflect the position as seen through the machinery of the central bank. Why the Minister should react against the getting of an annual report from the bank, I do not know.

I am not sure whether Deputy Cosgrave intended that this would be a public or a private report. I think it would be no harm if it were published. Most of the big private banking institutions across the Channel issue monthly reports, discussing the general trend of the economic situation, and these reports contain very valuable information and they give a very valuable line on the trend of things and on the actual position. I am sure that Governments find these monthly summaries of the situation by private banks very useful. We have nothing at all like that in this country with regard to our own affairs. Anyone studying the financial situation here has no kind of a regular report from any institution which would show him what the situation is.

I think it would be a valuable thing if we could get from the central bank a monthly report such as we can get from some of the private banks in other countries. I see no reason why, in the first place, it should be suggested by the Minister that this is an attempt to get the bank to dictate policy to the Government, or, in the second place, why he should be anything but grateful and anxious that the bank would furnish a report of this kind.

I agree with Deputy Mulcahy that it would be a useful thing to get a monthly report, or maybe a weekly report, full of statistics with relation to our financial affairs—all the useful statistics that could be gathered. I hope that that can be done. These statistics could be published weekly, monthly, quarterly or annually. I should like to see statistics of that sort compiled, statistics that could be helpful to public men, to citizens interested in financial matters. I hope that all these statistics will be gathered by that board and published. I quite agree with the publication of anything that can be helpful in disseminating information useful to people interested in the financial affairs of the country. I hope that we will have, as the Deputy indicated, something in the nature of what is published, say, by the Bank of England. I hope an annual report on the financial affairs generally of the bank will be made to the Minister and duly published.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 8:—

In page 5, line 44, before Section 7 (e) to insert a new paragraph as follows:—

(e) re-discount exchequer bills and bills of local authorities which have previously been accepted, discounted, or endorsed by an associated bank or any other bank or credit institution carrying on business wholly or partly within the State and which mature in not more than 12 months from their date;

Several suggestions were made from different parts of the House on an earlier stage that something along the lines of this amendment should be introduced on this stage with the object of extending the scope of the central bank, making it possible to re-discount exchequer bills and bills of local authorities. Deputy Hickey and some of his colleagues were very interested in that aspect, and so were some members of the main Opposition Party. I went into the matter very closely in the interval and I decided that we could with safety introduce this amendment. The initiative in this case is taken by the commercial banks. The intention is that the central bank shall act as a lender of last resort.

What is the amount outstanding in this connection over the past few years—exchequer bills or bills of local authorities?

So far as bills of local authorities are concerned, there were no such bills.

Will the Minister tell us whether it is intended under this amendment that some additional facilities or inducements will be offered to banks to grant loans to local authorities, say for turf development? What I have in mind are short-term loans that might be given to the local authorities at small rates of interest.

Probably the Deputy is aware that, as the law stands, the local authorities have not power to raise money by way of bills. They can raise money by way of overdraft, with the consent of the Minister. It was suggested here on the Committee Stage that we should give the bank power to re-discount bills for local authorities. If that power were given here, in order that it could be made operative the law relating to local authorities would have to be changed by some amendment of the relevant Local Government Act.

Even though the Minister's sanction must be obtained?

Yes. The local authorities have no power to raise money except, as I have said, by overdraft or by raising a loan—the issue of stock. Municipal boroughs and all local authorities, in fact, have that power.

Always subject to the Minister's sanction?

Yes. It is in order that the central bank would have power to help in this connection, and that the local authorities would be able to raise money for short terms at better rates than hitherto have applied, that I brought forward this proposal.

Am I to understand that this foreshadows the introduction of legislation that will enable local authorities—

I shall have to take that matter up first with the Minister for Local Government.

There have been quite a number of emergency Orders in relation to turf. Will the Minister say whether, under an emergency Order, it would be possible to empower local authorities to issue bills for turf purposes?

I should like to have time to look into that aspect.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 9:—

In page 5, Section 7 (e), in line 47 to delete the word "nine" and substitute the word "twelve", and in line 49 to delete the words "one hundred and twenty days" and substitute the words "six months".

This, again, is to meet certain criticisms and suggestions put up in the Committee Stage as to the desirability of extending the period for the maturity of bills re-discounted by the central bank. I think it was Deputy McGilligan who suggested that he could not see the reason why nine months was put in in regard to certain bills and suggested, in regard to other cases, we might extend the period of four months to six months. I have had that matter examined again and have gone into it very closely and I have adopted the suggestion that, in the case of bills for which we suggested nine months, the period should be lengthened to 12 months, that is, for agricultural bills, and for other types of bills the period should be extended to six months.

Has the Minister any information regarding the banks giving bills for 12 months?

It is unusual. Six months would probably be the maximum period normally given by the banks. There is renewal, of course, but in this case, as far as our amendment is concerned, we only put it in as a maximum figure.

Amendment agreed to.

I move amendment No. 10:—

In page 5, Section 7 (f), to delete all from the word "bills" in line 52 to the word "paragraph" in line 54, and substitute the words "exchequer bills, bills of local authorities, or bills of exchange as are mentioned in either of the two next preceding paragraphs".

This amendment is consequential on amendment No. 8.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment No. 11, as I indicated to Deputy McGilligan, is evidently a corollary to No. 61.

Amendment No. 11 not moved.

Deputy Mulcahy has an amendment, No. 13. I suggest a better way would be to take it as an amendment to No. 12.

If it would be convenient to do that, I am agreeable.

I move amendment No. 12:—

In page 5, Section 7 (g), in line 56, to delete the words "and issued not less than one year" and substitute the words "which have been offered for public subscription or tender", and in line 57, after the word "bank" to insert the words "and are officially quoted on the Dublin Stock Exchange and the Cork Stock Exchange".

Deputy Mulcahy will remember that, I think, he and Deputy Cogan had amendments down on the Committee Stage to remove the limitation of two years that was originally proposed and which was amended later, on the Committee Stage, to one year. A number of Deputies again urged that there should be no limitation put on the power of the bank to purchase these securities. It was pointed out that the bank would have power to purchase securities of any Government other than the Irish Government without limitation of this kind and that we were showing very little confidence in ourselves in putting this restriction on the board of the central bank in regard to our own securities. After considerable consideration and investigation, I decided to go the length set out in this amendment to meet the criticisms that were put up on the Committee Stage. Now the only limitation will be that these securities should be officially quoted on the Dublin and Cork Stock Exchanges. It would mean that there would have to be no doubt as to the genuineness of the securities that were offered. We do not want to have an opportunity for too ready access by the Government to the central bank for loans. The central bank is not intended to exist to finance the Government by buying its securities. We are anxious to secure that when securities of the Government are purchased by the bank it shall be done when the loan in the ordinary way has been floated, taken up by the public, the savings of the people brought to operate, and that the loan should be accepted and officially quoted. There will be a safeguard in that way that the Government will not be free to go to the central bank in any panic way in time of great emergency and float a loan freely with the central bank without the public being called in, as it were, to bear testimony to the reliability of the security offered by the Government, by having a loan floated in the normal way, taken up by the people and, possibly, by the banks and then quoted on the stock exchange.

There is a certain safeguard in the condition that these loans should be quoted on the stock exchanges because the stock exchanges, according to their rules—of course their rules are changeable—do not quote loans of this kind, as I understand, unless at least two-thirds of these loans have been taken up in the ordinary way by the public. There is that safeguard that, I think, it is wise to insert so that people might not be able to charge the Government or the central bank with issuing a loan, the Government going to the bank and getting money printed right off to meet an emergency that might arise or to meet some political crisis that might arise, the central bank being able to get the Government of the day, maybe under pressure, out of an awkward financial difficulty. That safeguard, I think, is a wise one. It is not an extreme one. It is not one that will hamper unduly any Government or, certainly, any bank. It is a wise condition that will enable the Government to get money in the normal way, but which will not enable it to go to the central bank in times of panic for loans that have not been proffered to the public and taken up in the ordinary course of business.

I move the adjournment.

Debate adjourned until Tuesday next.
The Dail adjourned at 2 p.m. until 3 p.m. Tuesday, 14th July.
Top
Share