Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 1 Jul 1947

Vol. 107 No. 5

Great Southern Railways (Superannuation Scheme) Bill, 1947— Second and Subsequent Stages.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Lemass)

I move that the Great Southern Railways Company (Superannuation Scheme) Bill, 1947, be now read a Second Time. The object of this Bill is to enable a superannuation scheme to be set up in this country for certain employees of the former Great Southern Railways Company who up to the present have been covered by a British scheme entitled the Railway Clearing System Superannuation Fund. This scheme was set up by statute in 1873 and most of the railway companies in these islands were members of it. The affairs of the corporation were reorganised in 1914 and again in 1941. The reorganisation involved substantially increased contributions and guarantees of solvency by the railway companies concerned. Most of the Irish railway companies refused to assent to these provisions at first, but all these companies eventually agreed except the Great Southern Railways Company. That company decided it would be preferable to set up its own scheme. When the fund was reorganised in 1941 the Great Southern Railways' members were placed in special sections—named "C" and "D"—of the fund. The benefits provided for members of sections C and D were less than those applicable to other members, but the Great Southern Railways Company made good the loss to their employees by granting ex gratia supplementary benefits.

There are about 1,300 former employees of the Great Southern Railways Company in the scheme at present. The assets appropriate to Sections C and D of the fund total approximately £1,000,000. The corporation have now agreed with Córas Iompair Éireann to transfer the assets, members and liabilities to trustees in this country so that a new superannuation scheme may be established.

The new scheme will apply to all salaried officers and clerks of the former Great Southern Railways Company who are members, active or superannuated members, of the corporation scheme. It will also apply to any former employee of the Great Southern Railways Company who is subsequently transferred from a wages grade to a salaried grade, if such a person would have been entitled to become a member of the corporation scheme if the Great Southern Railways Company had not been dissolved.

The corporation have been advised that legislation in both here and in Great Britain is required to effect the transfer of the assets so that the new scheme may be established, and to indemnify the fund corporation against any claims from the former members of the fund. The corporation have agreed to sponsor in the British Parliament a supplementary Bill to which the scheme in the Irish Bill will be scheduled.

Mr. Dillon

Who is the corporation?

Mr. Lemass

If the Deputy had been listening to my speech he would know. The Deputy was engaged in an intimate private conversation with a colleague, and I am not now going to give him the information he ought to have heard.

Mr. Dillon

That is untrue.

Mr. Lemass

This Bill which I am introducing will not come into effective operation until three months after the passage of the British Act. This will allow ample time for the formalities necessary for the transfer of the assets and members to the new fund. The British Bill should be introduced by November next and certain formalities—meetings of members of the scheme and so forth—will be necessary between the passing of this Bill and the introduction of the British legislation. This measure is, therefore, urgent, and I propose to ask the House to take the various stages this week.

As members will recollect, I gave an undertaking during the debate on the Transport Act, 1944, that arrangements would be made to secure for the clerical staff of the Great Southern Railways Company benefits at least as good as those to which they would have been entitled if the company had assented to the 1941 reorganisation.

The scheme in this Bill fulfils that condition. It further provides that certain members can exercise the option of obtaining either the benefits provided in the scheme—or, alternatively, the benefits to which they are entitled under existing practice, i.e., benefits made available to members of non-assenting railway companies, plus the supplementary benefits provided ex gratia by Córas Iompair Éireann.

At an early stage in the negotiations a booklet containing the proposed superannuation scheme was circulated to all the former Great Southern Railway members of the scheme and was approved by them by an overwhelming majority. At a later stage it became necessary to make certain drafting and other minor amendments, but the scheme as now scheduled to the Bill is unaltered as regards contributions, options and benefits.

Since the Bill was circulated to the House, I received a request through Corás Iompair Éireann, conveyed from some members of the fund to amend the schedule in one further respect. I was very reluctant to accept any amendment of the scheme at this stage, but in view of certain opinions that were expressed, I decided to insert this amendment which is being circulated on a white sheet to-day. I should make it clear that the scheme came to me as an agreed scheme and I do not think it desirable that any further amendment should be proposed. It was, however, suggested by some of the members of the fund that Rule 54, which provides for a possible amendment of the scheme by Ministerial Order, might conceivably be used for the purpose of worsening the position of members. That is so unlikely that the amendment would hardly appear to be necessary but, having regard to the fact that the possibility was adverted to by some members of the fund, I asked the Parliamentary Draftsman to prepare an amendment to the scheme which rules out that possibility completely. That is the only amendment to the schedule which has emerged since the Bill was circulated. I understand it is necessary to refer to that amendment at this stage, as otherwise there might be objection on grounds of order to its being moved at a later stage. I assure the Dáil that the Fund Corporation, the body which governs the Railway Clearing System Supperannuation Fund, the clerical workers concerned, as employees or former employees of the Great Southern Railways Company, and the management of Corás Iompair Éireann are satisfied with the terms of the scheme as now settled and that all these interests are anxious that the Bill will be enacted as soon as possible. The sole purpose of this Bill is to give legal validity to the scheme set out in the schedule.

General MacEoin

If the Minister's statements are correct I think we can accept the matter.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

As I happen to be in the peculiar position of representing the interests affected, may I be permitted to amplify somewhat the statement which has been outlined to the House by the Minister. This Bill affects the interests of 1,376 workers formerly attached to the Great Southern Railways and now in the employment of Córas Iompair Éireann. They are members of the fund which the Minister has named, the Railway Clearing System Superannuation Fund, which is administered in London by a committee representative of both British and Irish interests. Membership of that fund over a number of years has been confined to the clerical staff of certain British Railways and the clerical staffs of almost all the Irish railways. As the Minister has indicated, in 1941 there was a re-organisation of the fund calculated to give better conditions and improved pension scales. It was, however, a condition of the carrying into effect of that improvement that the contributing companies should pay an increased contribution on their part. The Irish companies refused to do that and kept up their refusal until the beginning of 1943, presumably on the grounds of the amount of finance that would be incurred. All the Irish companies withdrew their opposition to the Bill which meant, of course, that their staffs would get the benefits of the improved rates of pensions except Córas Iompair Éireann. Córas Iompair Éireann decided, by reason of policy rather than of financial interests, that they would still refuse their assent on the grounds, it is understood, that they would prefer to have a fund here. As a result of a suggestion which was thrown out here during the debate on the Transport Bill negotiations followed for the transfer of the assets of the Irish members which, as indicated by the Minister, amount, as per the last balance sheet, to a sum of not less than £1,095,000. These negotiations have been brought to a very satisfactory conclusion between the committee of the fund representative, as I tell you, of the Irish interests, and the authorities of Córas Iompair Éireann to the extent that the way is now clear for the transfer of those assets to the amount I have indicated. As a result, the new pension rates will flow to the staffs of Córas Iompair Éireann formerly attached to the Great Southern Railways.

There is, however, one fly in the ointment which I wish to bring especially to the Minister's notice. The reorganised conditions operate since 1941, that is, the improved conditions of pensions. It will be a condition of this settlement that the new rates or improved conditions will also operate from that date. This means an increased contribution, so far as the individual members of the staff are concerned, which will bear exceedingly heavily on about 300 of them personally. On the staff as a whole an amount of arrears to a sum of £9,000 has accumulated through no fault of their own but due entirely to the length of time it has taken to bring about this settlement. In fairness to Córas Iompair Éireann may I say that while they were not giving the assent to the new conditions as from 1941 they were giving what the Minister describes as "supplements." These supplements were in the nature of ex-gratia payments and since they were of a varying character they were, obviously, unsatisfactory. However that position has now altered. Since the chairman of the company has indicated his ready disposition to bring the matter to a satisfactory conclusion may I ask the Minister to use his good offices with the company to ensure that these arrears to the amount I have indicated will be remitted by the company. There is precedent for that in the case of the Great Northern Railway which took similar action. I may say that a very good case could be made for that remission on the grounds that, in other circumstances, this question of transferring the assets could have been rather an expensive matter so far as Córas Iompair Éireann is concerned. It is usual when members are withdrawing from the Railway Clearing System Superannuation Fund for the committee of that fund to impose a heavy fine—sometimes in excess of £10,000. No fine is being operated in this particular case. I would like to pay tribute to the committee of that fund for the helpful manner in which they have brought about the position which has led to the introduction of this Bill. The company are getting away with it nicely in the sense that they are responsible only for a sum of £751 plus what it will cost to effect the introduction and the passage of the Bill in the British Parliament. I therefore plead with the Minister to use his good offices and to see that this amount of £9,000 will be remitted.

I was prepared, by reason of the element of urgency in this matter, to assent to this Bill which is merely the clearing of the way for a number of technical details to which effect has still to be given so as to facilitate the introduction of the Bill in the British House and to close down this question once and for all. However, the introduction of the amendment which has only come into my hands a few minutes ago leaves me in some doubt as to what precisely its effect will be. The amendment is technical in its phraseology. I had hoped that the Bill would be passed in the manner in which it was presented—particularly as I hold a certificate from the Irish representatives of the fund in the following terms:—

"We have closely examined the Bill and the Schedule and have no objection to find with any of the clauses or rules. Everything seems to be quite in order. We hope it will go through without any delay and that the necessary steps will be taken by the company to print and circulate the rules so that the result of the ballot of the members will be available to the committee of the fund in good time to enable them to proceed with the British Bill."

As I am in the peculiar position of speaking for the members concerned I would like, on their behalf, to express appreciation of the Minister's action in this matter of superannuation and, incidentally, for the introduction of this Bill which is in fulfilment of an undertaking he gave when he introduced the Transport Bill.

If it is in order I should like, too, in a very special way, because I know the amount of work involved, to pay a personal tribute to the lady officer of the Minister's Department who has been closely associated with the work on this Bill. I should like if the Minister at this stage would indicate again in detail the effects of the amendment he has introduced and if he would take note of the representations that I have made in connection with the question of arrears.

Mr. Dillon

This Bill is one which intimately affects the parties to it primarily, and, so far as I know, in most Parliaments it would be disposed of by way of a private Bill promoted by the interested parties. I suppose the procedure here adopted is designed to spare the parties expense, as the promotion of a private Bill can be a costly thing. I am not at all sure, however, that the parties have been wise to save themselves that expense at the cost of bringing the Minister into their superannuation scheme. So far as I know, the trade union representatives, whether clerks or railway men or anybody else, have preferred dealing directly with the corporation in whose service the members work. Deputy O'Sullivan will remember that Mr. Deakin, a fairly experienced trade unionist, spoke very frankly to some of his colleagues at the Trade Union Congress at Margate when it was proposed that the British Government should intervene in the supervision of employers and workers and said that he would be very grateful if the British Government would keep their noses out of trade union contracts with employers, that trade unions knew their own business and wanted no instructions from civil servants, no matter how well intentioned, as to how they should do it.

Mr. Davin

It was the Labour Party Conference.

Mr. Dillon

Yes. But Mr. Deakin, representing the trade union interests, clashed very vigorously with some of the theorists who took the view that, inasmuch as they had a Socialist Government in England, a Government more or less usurping the functions of the trade unions, they would protect, according to their way of looking at it, the interests of the working men. Mr. Deakin took the view that trade unions were much better able to do that than the Government. I am not at all sure that Deputy O'Sullivan may not yet feel that Mr. Deakin was very wise. Once you invite a Minister into your business he comes very readily and you have to burn midnight oil and candles before he calls his carriage to drive away. He is one of those guests who always arrive at the stroke of the clock, but he seems to forget that he has a home of his own as the evening progresses.

This fund is founded on an actuarial valuation and we are told in one paragraph that the assets are being conveyed from the Railway Clearing System Superannuation Fund Corporation. Incidentally, that is the name of the corporation that I asked the Minister for and which he so graciously eschewed responsibility for telling me. Although there are a number of articles in the scheme setting out the basis for superannuation for the hereafter and any variety of contingencies, I cannot find in any readily perusable paragraph any clear definition of the existing liabilities that the Irish fund will undertake in respect of the assets which are being handed over.

I want to sound this note of warning. When we were considering an Insurance Amalgamation Bill, which amalgamated a series of industrial and insurance offices in this country, we provided machinery whereby the industrial business of a number of mixed offices would be taken over by the Irish Assurance Company. I should like to get some time on the floor of this House the valuation of an independent actuary of the assets and liabilities we took over from the Prudential Insurance Company of Great Britain, because, so far as I now know, we find ourselves in the amalgamated company with a large actuarial deficiency on the funds, which it will take years to work off. I would not be surprised if the truth were that that actuarial deficiency arises from a very serious error of judgment when estimating the liabilities we accepted from the Prudential Insurance Company, with the result that we took the thing over from them without stipulating for the transfer of an adequate sum to finance the liabilities which the new Irish company had undertaken.

I am rather surprised that Deputy O'Sullivan has not told us that the Railway Clerks' Association, the trade union representing one of the sections of railway employees who will be catered for by this fund, employed an independent actuary to advise them as to whether this scheme has taken over from the British fund, the old joint funds, a volume of assets sufficient to meet the liabilities.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

On a point of explanation, may I say for Deputy Dillon's information that, not alone has the Minister not butted in, but in fact the trade union representing the interests concerned has been at every stage of the negotiations and are in fact mainly responsible for the Schedule to the Bill and they have in fact employed the highest legal advice.

Mr. Dillon

I know Deputy O'Sullivan is not cross with me, but, if I thought he was, I would not give two straws, because this will be a Statute of this House and we are perfectly entitled to examine it. I am not talking about legal advice.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

Actuarial advice.

Mr. Dillon

Who was the actuary?

Mr. Davin

The experts of their own staff.

Mr. Dillon

Exactly. Before Parliament is asked to give statutory effect to a superannuation scheme which affects a number of trade unions in this country, Parliament has the right to ask what actuarial examination has been made, where is the certificate that solvency is assured when the taking over takes place and what signature is at the foot of the certificate, so that we may judge this Bill. In illustration of that, I called attention to the effect for want of circumspection when the amalgamating insurance companies took over. I think we made a bargain with the Prudential Insurance Company which was legal, which was binding, which involved no double dealing, but which, I think, on the whole was disadvantageous from our point of view, and one which might have been improved had we been given as big a surplus in our actuarial valuation as we should get. Therefore, I say with great emphasis, before the Minister asks the House to give statutory effect to this, either he or Deputy O'Sullivan, who represents the Great Southern Railways, albeit officially, should furnish us with that information. If the Railway Clerks' Association were promoting a private Bill, which I imagine they would have to do in the British House of Commons, the first question the chairman of the committee to which that private Bill would be referred would ask would be to produce that information and I venture to think the actuary would be very exhaustively examined by the committee to ascertain whether he had appropriately valued the assets of the fund and made due allowance for the acknowledged actuarial fact that the length of life in this country is ordinarily on the average longer than the life in industrial experience in England. Maybe all that is done.

I observe that Corás Iompair Éireann undertakes liability for the expenses of the private Bill which is to be promoted in the British House of Commons. What will the expenses of that private Bill be?

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

It is expected to be less than £1,000.

Mr. Dillon

If that anticipation is fulfilled, I think the provision may be made in safety and without controversy. But, if that is the full cost of promoting this private Bill in the British House of Commons, there has been a great change in private Bill procedure since I had a vicarious acquaintance with it.

I direct the Minister's attention to another facet of this matter, on which I think a rational member of the House may ask reassurance. The form of this Bill is largely controlled by men who have been in the habit of studying legislation of this character enacted by the British House of Commons in private Bills. I am not for a moment suggesting that our own draughtsman has not given it careful attention, too. I expect that the general framework has been taken from analogous measures in Great Britain. I hope nobody has overlooked the fact that in Great Britain there is no written Constitution which is reviewable in its impact on any Statute of Parliament by the Supreme Court. I invite a practising member of the Bar, like Deputy Cosgrave, to give us his opinion on the Constitutional validity of paragraph 32:—

"Whenever it shall be needful for the committee to decide a question of fact they shall be at liberty to act upon such proofs and presumptions as they shall deem satisfactory, whether the same shall be legally admissible as evidence or not and their decision shall be final."

Did anyone submit that paragraph to the Attorney-General? Of course, what it clearly means to say is whether the same shall be within the limits of the established law of evidence or not. But for this Parliament to enact that something should be done whether it is legal or not, is something on which. I think, the Supreme Court will have a word to say. Here we have it that a tribunal in this country, deciding on the conflicting interests of two citizens, and the decision of which is final, shall be deemed to act, not only on such proofs as are submitted to them, but upon such presumptions as they shall deem satisfactory. Can you imagine the Minister for Industry and Commerce, if you were a railway clerk, and Deputy Corry, with the Minister for Agriculture, functioning on this committee and my coming before them with a grievance? Can you picture the presumptions that would start rolling around the room and the committee deciding I was a dishonest cut-throat and the best way to deal with me was to throw me down the stairs and break my neck? If they were called on to answer for that before a court of law, they could point to this Bill and say: "Dáil Éireann authorised us to found our decision on any presumption, so we did not let him talk at all; we threw him down the stairs before he could open his mouth, because we presumed him to be what we knew him to be, a pest". Can you suggest that that proviso will be approved as conforming to the requirements of a written Constitution, when the President of the High Court has expressed his opinion on a very much less succinct procedure?

Look at paragraph 58:—

"Any question as to the meaning of any provision of this scheme or any matter arising thereout shall be determined by the committee and their decision shall be final."

That might not render the Bill unconstitutional, but it has no meaning, because you could enact sections of that kind for ever in Parliament and, as far as I know, the courts will step in and deny the rights of Parliament to arrogate to itself functions reserved to the judiciary, such as the determination of disputes arising between citizens. It is quite a different thing if you go as a trade union to a railway company and say: "In consideration of the railway company bearing two-thirds of the cost, we will concede that the railway company, sitting with trade union representatives, can take a decision on any matter of fact, and we undertake in advance to be bound by it, not only for ourselves but for the members for whom we speak with full authority." That is a contract freely entered into between two parties and you can put any condition you like into it, given that the parties to it understand what they are doing in advance and that the party making a concession has made it freely in exchange for a substantial concession from the other party. We are not doing that. I think that this will result in a situation arising, wherein any member of the trade union, becoming involved in a dispute under the new fund, can go to court and possibly get the whole of this statute condemned as unconstitutional, just for want of a little direction at the beginning by having this matter scrupulously examined by a competent constitutional lawyer with a view to ensuring, in so far as it is possible, that no provision under it will be voidable because it conflicts with the Constitution.

The last question I want to ask is addressed exclusively to the Minister for Industry and Commerce. I heard going about town an elaborate story that the scheme here was adopted as an alternative to a very much larger scheme which was at one time contemplated by Córas Iompair Éireann for the provision of pension rights for all its employees. The story I heard was that a scheme had been submitted for implementation by a group of insurance companies, in exchange for an annual premium payable by Córas Iompair Éireann and that the firm that had devised the scheme would earn, perfectly legitimately, in commission, at the standard rate payable to any agent who gets business for his insurance company, an income of about £1,000 a year in perpetuity, that at some stage of the negotiations that whole arrangement was jettisoned but that as part of it, this plan was introduced. I should like to know now if any such proposals were made.

An Ceann Comhairle

What relation has it to this Bill which is limited in its scope?

Mr. Dillon

That is what I am asking.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is what the Chair is asking.

Mr. Dillon

I am asking why this Bill has been substituted for it.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is not before the House.

Mr. Dillon

But this Bill is before the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not see what it has to do with rumours around the town.

Mr. Dillon

I am merely mentioning this story to get correction or confirmation of it. Is that not what I am here for? Is it not my business as a Deputy to bring into the House what the Minister has not brought into this House—statements made outside in regard to this pension scheme? This is a pension scheme and the Minister has told us what the purpose of it is. Deputy O'Sullivan has told us what his views on it are and I am telling the House what I have heard about it and giving my own views.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy told us of rumours but this Bill deals with a very definite scheme and is limited in its scope. What alleged rumours about other schemes have to do with it, I do not know.

Mr. Dillon

I suggest to you, Sir, that it would be quite legitimate for me to mention the terms of the other proposal with a view to showing whether it was or was not a better proposal than that before the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has not done so.

Mr. Dillon

I can start but it will take a terribly long time.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy has been irrelevant since he started.

Mr. Dillon

Perhaps the Minister doubts my right to propose a scheme?

Mr. Lemass

If the Deputy knew the slightest thing about the Bill, he would know what an ass he is making of himself.

Mr. Dillon

Do you observe that the Minister is becoming not decomposed, but discomposed? One way to provide for a superannuation scheme is by the plan set out in this Bill but there are alternative methods. It is a very common practice which is operating in a number of industrial enterprises in this country and in a large number of enterprises in Great Britain and the United States of America. Instead of formulating a scheme operated by a committee of the board of directors and representatives of the employees, to approach one or more insurance companies, and to invite their experts to prepare a plan for the superannuation or such other insurance protection as may be required by the company, and, having calculated to their own satisfaction the liability which the fulfilment of that plan would involve, the insurance company would propose to the industrial corporation an annual premium——

An Ceann Comhairle

I pointed out to the Deputy that that is not relevant to the scheme which the House is at present discussing—that this scheme is connected with a limited class.

Mr. Dillon

No. Surely to God there is a better way of superannuating railway clerks than the one proposed in this Bill? Otherwise, why is this scheme brought before the House at all?

Mr. Davin

It is an agreed Bill.

Mr. Dillon

Let us get it into our heads, once and for all, that there is no such thing as an agreed Bill, and no power on earth can bring before Dáil Éireann an agreed Bill. That Bill will be an agreed Bill when I agree to it, or when I am outvoted by a majority of the House. That is as clear as crystal. The simplest Deputy of this House can discuss that Bill, and it is not an agreed Bill until he agrees to it, or until the House outvotes him. Let there be no more talk about an agreed Bill.

Mr. Davin

It is agreed by the people concerned.

Mr. Dillon

There is no such a thing as an agreed Bill. As I have said, no Bill can be agreed until this House assents to it, or until it is put to a division, and the majority defeats the minority. Until that is done, there is no agreed Bill.

Mr. Davin

Why do you not move its rejection?

Mr. Dillon

Because I do not want to. On the premium being paid by the company, the insurance company will not only pay the benefits to the superannuated men for the time being, but would also——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is outside the scope of this measure.

Mr. Dillon

I want to suggest a different scheme from that suggested in this Bill. May I not do that?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy can speak on the scheme that is in this Bill.

Mr. Dillon

Surely on the Second Stage I can ask the House to consider an alternative scheme?

An Ceann Comhairle

Relevant to the particular class, yes.

Mr. Dillon

An alternative scheme "for the provision of superannuation allowances for or in respect of certain employees of the former Great Southern Railways Company, some of whom are or are entitled to become members of the fund of the Railway Clearing System Superannuation Fund Corporation, and to provide for certain other matters connected with the matters aforesaid." For that purpose, and for no other, I want to propose an alternative scheme. Not only will the insurance company undertake to pay superannuation as it falls due, but they will also, with their own staff, carry out the administrative day-to-day details required for the operation of the scheme designed to provide for former employees, some of whom are entitled to benefit.

Mr. Lemass

Twice you have ruled. Sir, that Deputy Dillon was out of order when he was using the precise words he is using now. I think the Deputy is showing disrespect for the ruling of the Chair.

Mr. Dillon

Is this a point of order?

An Ceann Comhairle

It is a point of order.

Mr. Dillon

It is fantastic to suggest that a Deputy of this House cannot propose an alternative method of achieving the end of the Bill submitted to the House.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy started with certain rumours of schemes to be drafted and he is repeating exactly what he said earlier under the guise of putting up an alternative scheme. That is not in order.

Mr. Dillon

I want to bring before the House an alternative method of providing the superannuation.

An Ceann Comhairle

The method which the Deputy suggested was, according to him, rumoured around town.

Mr. Dillon

I cannot help that. I am prepared to leave that aspect of it, whether it was rumoured around town or not.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not know. I am only taking the Deputy's word for it.

Mr. Dillon

I will drop that and I will recommend the calling in of the services of an insurance company.

An Ceann Comhairle

But surely it is not in order to deal with their day-to-day office work.

Mr. Dillon

I am merely informing the House that the insurance company undertakes the administration of the scheme on behalf of those who pay their contributions to it. Such profits, such actual surpluses, as may from time to time accrue, would in that event become the property of the insured people and not the property of the railway company as is provided in Clause 56 of Part II of the Bill, the difference being that in determining a surplus under the insurance scheme, an annual allowance would have to be made running on occasion into four figures, but the agent——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is out of order.

Mr. Dillon

This scheme does not add anything to the surplus. Clause 56 provides that the actuarial surplus shall become the property of the company.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is dealing with agents—that has nothing to do with it.

Mr. Dillon

In this Bill, the surplus goes to the railway company. It will be for members of the union to determine which is the better. There may be other alternative methods of financing this business with which I am not familiar. If some other Deputy is familiar with them, I think he will do the House a service if within the strict letter of the law and the rule of order he would let us know what those methods are, because, mind you, Sir, there is all the difference in the world between a Government Bill and a private Bill. This is statute law made by Parliament. When this comes to be reviewed by the courts, the courts are not going to go into the question as to what the trade union wants, what the company wants or what the Minister for Industry and Commerce wants. All they are going to look after is what is written in the Act.

Given that we have adequate reassurance that the actuarial value of liabilities is correct, given that we have the guarantee of the Attorney-General that the provisions of the proposed Bill conform to the Constitution, especially in the two specific points I have mentioned, I have no objection to this scheme. I assume that all the alternatives have been adequately considered by the officers of the men's union and the officers of the company, and by such prudent advisers of the men as I consider Deputy O'Sullivan to be, I believe that that aspect of the question has been carefully surveyed. If I have directed his attention to the necessity of securing expert advice of a very special kind in respect to certain actuarial and constitutional aspects, I should be gratified and rewarded for my intervention in this discussion which has so seriously irritated the Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Minister for Industry and Commerce (Mr. Lemass)

With regard to the point raised by Deputy O'Sullivan on the question of arrears, while I will direct the attention of the company to his remarks, I could not undertake to make any observations concerning them to the company. This scheme has come to me as a scheme agreed by the three parties directly concerned.

I must assume that all matters associated with the Railway Clearing System Superannuation Fund and the transfer of that fund to this country were fully discussed and the net result of that discussion is the agreement which this scheme signifies.

With regard to the amendment, I can understand Deputy O'Sullivan's objections to the production of an amendment at this stage. I objected, having received the scheme as one which was agreed to by all the parties concerned. I was annoyed to receive a proposed amendment from some of the parties after the Bill had been circulated. However, I did not feel that that annoyance of mine should induce me to refuse to amend the Bill, even though I felt the necessity for the amendment was very slight, when it was represented to me that some of the clerical officers of the company thought that it was desirable to do so as a protection to their interests.

Rule 54 of the scheme to which the amendment relates concerns the possibility of an amending scheme. It provides that, if there is an amending scheme submitted to the Minister for Industry and Commerce, the Minister may, after consultation, confirm the amending scheme without modification or with such modification as he may think proper. The only limitation imposed by the rule is that the amending scheme may not relate to Rule 3 of the scheme which defines the classes to whom it refers. It was argued that, theoretically at least, the Minister might use his power under Section 54 by amending the scheme or modifying the amending scheme so as to worsen the position of some of the beneficiaries under the scheme. The amendment is designed to remove that vague apprehension by making it clear that no modification of an amending scheme or no amending scheme itself may so alter the scheme as to affect either the classes to whom it refers or the provisions of Rule 26 which ensures that nobody will be worse off by reason of the introduction of the scheme; or, in the precise manner set out in the amendment, so as to make it clear that the amendment of the scheme will not be such as to prevent a member being entitled to benefit from the fund not less in value than that to which he would have been entitled from the old fund in the company.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

Am I correct in thinking that the main result of the proposed amendment is really an anticipation of Rule 3 with the addition of or incorporation of Rule 26 governing the interests of named employees?

Mr. Lemass

No, not named persons.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

Of a particular type?

Mr. Lemass

The scheme itself states it will apply to certain persons and in any event it shall not operate to make any person worse off than he now is. That is Rule 26.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

It is of a quite definitive nature.

Mr. Lemass

Rule 54 states the scheme may be amended. The parties to the scheme may ask the Minister to amend and the Minister may amend the scheme with or without modifications. The possibility of amending the scheme with modifications created in the minds of some people the possibility of the Minister using such modifications as to offset Rule 26 and make them worse off. The purpose of the amendment is to make it clear that no amendment can have that effect.

Mr. M. O'Sullivan

I may be wrong in my interpretation but to me it appears to be a tightening up of Rule 3 and Rule 26.

Mr. Lemass

That is right, if and when an amending scheme is presented.

Mr. Dillon

Would the Minister tell us what actuarial certificates were presented to him?

Mr. Lemass

I did not pay much attention to Deputy Dillon's remarks. I know he spoke for the purpose of delaying the Bill and punishing me for resenting his unmannerly interruption when introducing the Bill. The Deputy has an advantage over me in that he apparently knows what he is talking about; I do not.

Mr. Dillon

Surely, the Minister will be kind enough to tell us whether he got any actuarial certificates.

Mr. Lemass

There were a number of actuaries employed by all the parties concerned—the corporation, the railway company and the clerical officers' association.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister has overlooked the effect of Rule 55 because they become a charge on the revenues of the railway company and, ultimately, the State through the debentures of the railway company. Should the railway company become so embarrassed by any insolvency of the funds that guarantee is given and the charge will ultimately fall back on the Exchequer through the debentures. It is an unlikely contingency.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy has not grasped the meaning of Rule 55. Rule 55 is a rule designed to limit the guarantee of the company—not to guarantee the fund. It is designed to limit the guarantee in such respect that it shall only operate to place on the company the obligation of ensuring that sufficient money shall be available at all times to meet the immediate cash requirements of the fund.

Mr. Davin

It is a first charge on revenue.

Mr. Dillon

Yes. That is what he is trying to deny.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister is in possession.

Mr. Dillon

I thought he sat down.

An Ceann Comhairle

To listen to Deputy Dillon he sat down.

Mr. Lemass

The Deputy asked me about actuaries. I am aware that for a long time past discussions concerning the transfer of this fund from Great Britain to this country have been proceeding between the management committee of the fund, the clerical officers' association and Córas Iompair Éireann. All three parties employed actuaries and they had legal advice of the highest quality. Ultimately a scheme was produced which was satisfactory to all three. That is the scheme which is now the Schedule to the Bill. I have accepted that scheme as meeting the undertaking I gave the Dáil on the Transport Act, that if and when this change was effected no clerical employee of the Great Southern Railway Company would be worse off than if the Great Southern Railway Company had consented to the reorganisation of the fund in 1941.

Mr. Dillon

Surely this House is entitled politely to ask the Minister if he will indicate to them the actuarial certificates which satisfied him so as to ensure that, under the guarantee mentioned by Deputy Davin, of the funds of the railway company no charge will ultimately come back as a result of a deficiency through the debenture stock on to the Exchequer. I ask the Minister not to leap down my throat but to consider that matter, and if he thinks it reasonable he can mention it at the Committee Stage. Purely, for his own convenience, would he not ask the Attorney-General to look at the two points I have mentioned so as, if necessary, to get them into line with constitutional law.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the Deputy asking a question now?

Mr. Dillon

It is natural that the trade unions would not think of that when they were drawing up this domestic arrangement between themselves, never realising that once you put it into a statute legal difficulties arise.

Mr. Lemass

The legal form of the scheme has been fully examined by the Government's legal advisers and they are quite satisfied.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take the Committee Stage now.

Sections 1 to 10, inclusive, agreed to.

SCHEDULE.

Mr. Lemass

I move the following amendment:—

In Rule 54 of this Schedule, to delete paragraph (4) and to substitute the following new paragraph.

(4) No amending scheme shall relate to either Rule 3 or Rule 26 or operate so as to prevent a member of this scheme who has been a member of Section C or Section D of the old fund or a person claiming in his right from being entitled to benefits from the fund not less in value than those to which he or such person (as the case may be) would (whether legally or by customary practice) have been entitled from the old fund and the company if this scheme had not been enacted.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Dillon

So far as I am concerned you can have forty stages of the Bill. If the Minister's mind is made up and Deputy O'Sullivan's, nothing further needs to be done. I have no objection to the Bill, if passed, but in common prudence, I think it would be wiser to call off the Report Stage until tomorrow.

Mr. Lemass

There can be no amendment to the Schedule on Report.

Schedule, as amended, agreed to.

Title agreed to.

Question—"That the Bill be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.

Agreed to take the Fifth Stage now.

Question—"That the Bill do now pass"—put and agreed to.