asked the Minister for Finance if the post of personal secretary to the Taoiseach has been abolished and, if so, whether he will state (a) the date on which the Order was made abolishing the post; (b) the total pension to which the occupant of that office now becomes entitled, and (c) the amount of the pension, if any, the occupant of that office would now be entitled to if the post had not been abolished and if the occupant resigned from the Civil Service for personal reasons as from the 5th instant.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Abolition of a Post.
The answer to the various parts of the Deputy's question is as follows: (a) This post was abolished by the Taoiseach with the consent of the Minister for Finance on the 17th February, 1948; (b) Section 6 of the Superannuation Act, 1909, provides for the grant of compensation on retirement in consequence of abolition of office, which compensation must not exceed the amount which might be granted to a civil servant who retires on the ground of ill-health. The occupant of the post in question became entitled under this provision to a compensation allowance, at the rate of £369 16s. 8d. a year.
A military service pension of £63 6s. 8d. which under the provisions of the Military Service Pensions (Amendment) (No. 2) Act, 1945, had been abated to the extent of 80 per cent. prior to the date of the officer's retirement will now fall to be abated only to the extent of 20 per cent; (c) No award under the Superannuation Acts can be made to a civil servant resigning from his or her post before reaching the age of 60 unless the office has been abolished or resignation is caused by ill-health. Accordingly no pension would have been payable to the occupant of the post if her office had not been abolished and if she had resigned for personal reasons as from the 5th instant.
Will the Minister say what would have happened if there had not been a change of Government on the 18th February, the day after which the Order was made? Would the Order ever have seen the light of day?
I cannot answer that.
Do you not see that this matter bears on its face the suggestion——
The Deputy may ask questions, but not make charges or suggestions against anybody.
I want to ask the Minister — he is the responsible Minister for Finance concerned with public moneys — does he consider that this transaction——
Ministers may not be asked questions of opinion — of fact only.
It is a matter of fact I respectfully suggest.
The Deputy asked for an opinion.
I will put it in another way.
If in order.
Will the Minister consider setting up a committee of this House to investigate that transaction in its entirety?
I do not think it would be worth while doing that in connection with a single transaction. I would point out that if the lady had remained on until October of this year she could have retired in the ordinary way on a pension that would be some £8 or £9 greater than what she is receiving at the moment.