asked the Minister for Finance if persons in receipt of R.I.C. pensions under the Superannuation and Pensions Act, 1923, are liable to reductions of their pensions in the event of their being in receipt of wages from the British Government.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - R.I.C. Pensioners.
The Royal Irish Constabulary (Resigned and Dismissed) Pensions Order, 1924, provides for the reduction or suspension of pensions payable pursuant to this Order in the event of the appointment of a pensioner to an office remunerated out of moneys provided by Parliament, the word "Parliament" being defined by the Order as including the Parliament of Great Britain.
Suspension or reduction is, of course, determined by reference to the rate of remuneration received in the office in question.
Does it not seem an unreasonable thing, in an Order made under the authority of this Oireachtas, to interpret the word "Parliament" as including the Parliament of Great Britain? If a man was in receipt of wages from the Parliament of Canada, Australia or New Zealand, would we also include those Parliaments in the definition of "Parliament" used in an Order made by this House? If the Parliamentary Secretary agrees with me that such a strict interpretation of the word "Parliament" would be unduly to the detriment of industrious men who have received pensions from this Government for services rendered and who work in England, will he consider reviewing the existing interpretation of the word "Parliament" and, if he accepts the view that "Parliament" in an Order made by this House should mean the Dáil and Seanad, will he restore the pensions to those men, pensions which have been taken away because they were in receipt of wages from the British Government?
The Order has been there for 21 years. The definition of "Parliament" is as I have stated and I do not think I am called upon to express any opinion on the matters raised by Deputy Dillon.
Am I not correct in saying that the first time the Order has been brought into force with this new interpretation, that the word "Parliament" includes Great Britain, was in the case of a Mr. Gormley, who is the first of these pensioners to receive wages from the British Government since the pensions were awarded?
I am not so aware.
If the Parliamentary Secretary is made so aware, will he call for a review of this definition of the word "Parliament"?
I do not see what bearing it would have in relation to the Order. The Order is there, the definition is there, and it could have no bearing when it came into effect.
Does not the Parliamentary Secretary realise that, while the Order has been there for 21 years, and the word "Parliament" in an Order made by a Minister in this Oireachtas includes the British House of Commons, the British House of Commons is a very recent definition, made only when the case of Mr. Gormley arose, when he got employment under the British Government during the present emergency; and, if it is deemed undesirable to define "Parliament" under an Order of this House as including the British House of Commons, will the Parliamentary Secretary consider recasting the definition or reviewing the definition and restoring to Mr. Gormley the pension to which he is entitled?
It is not correct to say the definition is a recent one. Section 5 (c) of the Order defines "Parliament" as the Parliament of the State and also the Parliament of Great Britain.
Then, perhaps, the Minister will review it, and consult the Taoiseach when he is reviewing it?