Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 29 Nov 1944

Vol. 95 No. 8

Public Business. - Transport (No. 2) Bill, 1944—From the Seanad.

The intention is to ask the Dáil to agree with the amendments inserted in this Bill in Seanad Éireann. If there is no objection, I shall take them now.

No objection?

Agreed.

The Dáil went into Committee to consider amendments inserted by the Seanad.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 1:—

Section 28. In sub-section (1), page 15, lines 27 and 28, the words "on the request of any holder of stock of the company, to that holder" deleted and the words "to every holder of stock of the company" substituted therefor.

The effect of the amendment is to require the company to circulate the annual accounts in the prescribed form to every shareholder. The Bill merely required the company to supply a copy of the accounts on request. Although this is the first time upon which that statutory obligation has been put on any company, so far as I know, I have decided not to object to it, because it has been the practice of the Great Southern Railways Company and the Dublin United Transport Company in the past.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 2:—

Section 39. In sub-section (7), line 36, after the word "reasons" the words "and shall, if the chairman contravenes (by omission or act) any of the provisions of sub-section (9) of this section" inserted.

The effect of this amendment is to require the Minister to remove the chairman from his office if he fails to conform to the requirement of disposing of any ordinary shares which may come into his possession within the stipulated period.

Are we to understand the chairman is permanently debarred from having any shares in the company?

Any ordinary shares.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agreed with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 3:—

Section 43. Sub-section (1) deleted and the following sub-section substituted therefor:—

(1) (a) Where

(i) a person was, on the 1st day of July, 1944, an officer or servant of either dissolved company, and

(ii) that person has not, before the established date, become a pensioner or annuitant by reason of his service in that company, or voluntarily retired or been removed from the service of that company by reason of misconduct or incapacity, and

(iii) that person's office or situation is abolished after the said 1st day of July, 1944, and whether before, on or after the establishment date, and

(iv) the said office or situation is abolished directly and solely in anticipation of or as the result of the amalgamation effected by this Part,

that person shall be paid by the company compensation calculated in the manner set out in the Fifth Schedule to this Act.

(b) If any dispute or difference shall arise between the company and any person entitled or claiming to be entitled to compensation under paragraph (a) of this sub-section as to whether that person's office or situation was or was not abolished directly and solely in anticipation of or as the result of the amalgamation effected by this Part, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved by the company, that the office or situation was so abolished.

(c) Where a person is dismissed from the service of the dissolved railway company or of the company in such circumstances that he is entitled to compensation under sub-section (4) of Section 9 of the Railways Act, 1933 (No. 9 of 1933), then, notwithstanding anything in paragraph (a) of this sub-section, he shall not be entitled to compensation by virtue of that paragraph.

This is a new sub-section relating to a matter which was discussed at considerable length in the Dáil. It determines the circumstances in which compensation will be payable to officers of the dissolved companies whose employment may be abolished by reason of the amalgamation. It simplifies the provision and gets rid of certain phrases used in the original sub-section, which were the subject of considerable controversy.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Eireann in amendment No. 4:—

Section 47. Sub-section (3) deleted and the following sub-section substituted therefor:—

(3) Every open competitive examination held in pursuance of this section shall be open to all persons who are ordinarily resident within the national territory or who are Irish citizens or the children of Irish citizens and who pay the fees and possess the qualifications as to age, health and character prescribed by the regulations relating to the examination.

This merely makes a drafting change to the extent that it clarifies the definition of persons who are entitled to sit for competitive examinations held in connection with employment in the clerical grades of the company.

What exactly is the clarification? What was the ambiguity?

It extends the right to persons of Irish citizenship or the children of Irish citizens, whether or not they are resident in Ireland.

Have we actually put a section in this Bill prohibiting Córas Iompair Éireann from employing immigrants — persons who have come into the country?

I think the Deputy should read the new sub-section. Persons who are normally resident in this country are entitled to sit for these examinations.

The Minister says an ambiguity arose which required amendment and now he tells us that not only may citizens be employed, but the children of citizens.

No matter where resident.

Does that imply that the Bill, as amended, will operate to exclude from employment in Córas Iom-pair Éireann immigrants—that is, foreigners, non-nationals, who have come to reside in this country? If that is the purpose, then I say that this amendment is insufficient.

The Deputy has not got further opportunity of debating the section. He is confined to the amendment that is before us and the section only as affected by the amendment.

Can we not debate this amendment?

I suggest that the amendment that comes from the Seanad is insufficient. The amendment was designed to widen the class of persons who might be admitted. We see here in the amendment:—

"Every open competitive examination held in pursuance of this section shall be open to all persons who are ordinarily resident within the national territory or who are Irish citizens or the children of Irish citizens and who pay the fees and possess the qualifications as to age, health and character prescribed by the regulations relating to the examinations."

Would the Minister be good enough to say if the words "all persons who are ordinarily resident within the national territory" include a person who is not a national of this country but who has resided here for six or eight months, or does the word "resident" imply an intention permanently to reside or a protracted past residence in Éire?

The word "resident" means principally domiciled.

If a person came here and became domiciled here, he would automatically come within this provision, so this does not operate to ignore persons coming to this country in search of employment? It would ill become us to do so, bearing in mind the millions that we have sent to other countries and who have been hospitably received there.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 5:—

Section 62. Sub-section (3) deleted and the following sub-section substituted therefor:—

(3) No person lawfully crossing the railway of the company at any level crossing or by means of any accommodation works maintained in pursuance of Section 68 of the Railways Clauses Act, 1845, shall be liable to any fine under this section.

This is a technical amendment, designed to preserve more specifically certain rights-of-way over abandoned lines.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 6:—

Section 91. In line 34, page 37, the word "conditions" deleted and the word "particulars" substituted therefor.

This is a drafting amendment.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 7:—

Section 104. In sub-section (1)—

(a) in line 43, the word "amended" deleted and the word "altered" substituted;

(b) in line 47, after the word "schedule", the following words and brackets "(as so settled or altered)" inserted.

This also is a drafting amendment.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 8:—

Section 110. In sub-section (8) at the end of the sub-section the words "to any person, including such owner" inserted.

This also is a drafting amendment.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 9:—

Fifth Schedule. In page 64, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph (2) clause (c) lines 23 to 29, inclusive, deleted and the following clause substituted therefor:—

(c) if that person was suspended or dismissed from the service of a former transport undertaker on or after the 1st day of April, 1916, and before the 6th day of December, 1921, but was subsequently reinstated, and the Minister certifies that his suspension or dismissal was due to his national sympathies, such period (not exceeding the period between his suspension or dismissal and his reinstatement) as the Minister may direct shall be included in the period of his pensionable service;.

The House will recollect that I indicated a certain difficulty in phrasing a section which would secure that, in the calculation of period of service for the purpose of compensation under the Bill, credit would be given for a period during which a worker had been dismissed from the service of the Great Southern Railway by reason of his national sympathies and prior to his reinstatement. Subsequent to the Bill leaving the Dáil, I had the Parliamentary draftsman make another effort to frame a section covering the point; and this sub-section does, in fact, achieve what the Dáil, I think, had in mind when the matter was under discussion here.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 10:—

Fifth Schedule. In page 64, in paragraph 1, before sub-paragraph (3) the following sub-paragraph inserted:—

(3) For the purposes of this Schedule the number of years of pensionable service of a person shall be taken to be the result obtained by dividing the number of days of his pensionable service by the number three hundred and sixty-five, any fraction of a half or over being treated as one and any lesser fraction being disregarded.

The purpose of this amendment is to provide a more equitable method of calculating the length of service than that which was provided in the Bill as originally framed.

Question agreed to.

I move that the Committee agree with Seanad Éireann in amendment No. 11:—

Fifth Schedule. In page 65, in paragraphs 2 and 3, the word "completed" where the word occurs in lines 10, 18, 20, 22, 25, 29, and 32 deleted.

This is a consequential amendment.

Question agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 1 to 11, agreed to.
Amendments reported and agreed to.
Ordered: That the Seanad be informed accordingly.

The Minister appreciates the courtesy of the Dáil in giving him this business so promptly.

I hope the Deputy is referring to the amendments now before the House.

I know how much he appreciated it when we were discussing the Bill and would appreciate it again, if that were possible.

Mr. Corish

Especially when on the hustings.

Top
Share