Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 19 Jul 1949

Vol. 117 No. 9

Committee on Finance. - Ministerial and Parliamentary Officers (Amendment) Bill, 1949—Second Stage.

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. The purpose of this Bill is to enable widows' pensions and children's allowances to be granted to the widow and children of any Minister, Ceann Comhairle or Parliamentary Secretary who dies in office irrespective of whether or not he has qualified by having been in office for a certain period. The amendment is directed to Section 20 of the Act of 1938.

Under that Act, payment to a widow or to children is restricted to cases in which the holder of the office at the date of his death would himself have been entitled to a pension if he had ceased to hold such office. The existing statutory minimum period required for qualifying is three years. A widow's pension is fixed at half the rate which her deceased husband would have got had he remained alive. Where the husband's pension is based on a minimum of three years, the widow's pension would be £150 in the case of the widow of a Minister or Ceann Comhairle and £100 in the case of the widow of a Parliamentary Secretary. If the amendment is passed, the widow's pension will be payable at a minimum rate; in the case which has a definite relationship on this matter, it will be a sum of £150. If it applies to the widow of a Parliamentary Secretary it will be at the rate of £100. The normal rate of children's allowances, which are £30 if the widow is still alive and £50 if she is dead, will be payable in the new circumstances. The provisions are made retrospective to take effect as from the passing of the main Act; that is, 22nd December, 1938. These pensions payable to such widows and to a certain number of children—I think it is likely to be two children, and I have not got the ages at the moment—will be increased if in the autumn the Dáil agrees to what I forecasted to-day, namely, specific provision to increase them. They will be the only Central Fund payments that will be increased— that is, the pensions and allowances to the widows and children of Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries. No increased payment will be made until such legislation is brought before the House. Prior to the passing of the Act, payment at the old rate will be made in respect of such widows and children.

Some days ago the Government Whips approached us and informed us of the Government's desire to introduce and enact this Bill before the Summer Recess. We were supplied with a copy of the Bill. The Government Whips requested that we should consider it. We were given to understand that the Government's action might depend upon our decision and we were requested to inform the Government whether or not we would oppose the Bill. The Bill was considered at a meeting of our Party. I think it is right I should say that at the beginning of our consideration of the Bill there was considerable divergence of viewpoints amongst us. As our discussion and consideration of the Bill proceeded, however, towards agreement, it was decided to seek information from the Government Whips as to the attitude of the various Parties comprising the Government Coalition. We were informed by the Government Whips that all of the Parties in the Government Coalition were supporting the Bill and on that assurance we decided that we would not oppose it or seek to divide the Dáil on it.

This legislation, which provides for the payment of pensions to former Ministers of State and other retired Parliamentary officers and their widows after their deaths, has been the subject of considerable and often unfair comment at political meetings. I think that it is not out of order for me, on the occasion of the introduction of this amending Bill, to give a very brief synopsis of the history of the principal Act.

The idea of providing pensions for Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and other Parliamentary officers was under consideration here for many years. I think I am correct in saying that it was considered by a Committee of the Dáil during the period of the Cumann na nGaedheal Government, on the initiative of that Government. The Committee, however, did not produce an agreed report and no action followed from its deliberations. Later, when the Fianna Fáil Government was in office, the matter was again taken up by the Fine Gael Party. Representatives of the Fine Gael Party discussed the idea with representatives of the Fianna Fáil Government and urged on the Fianna Fáil Government that legislation to provide for such pensions should be enacted. The Fianna Fáil Government was impressed by the case that was made and, although it fully realised that responsibility for the introduction of such legislation would carry political penalties, nevertheless it decided to proceed towards the establishment of an all-Party Committee to consider the form that the legislation should take. That Committee met and reached agreement. It was composed of the representatives of all the Parties then in the House, the Fianna Fáil Party, the Fine Gael Party and the Labour Party. The conclusions of the Committee were reached with evidence of complete agreement amongst all three Parties but, as is now well known, when the report of the Committee was drafted not all the members of the Committee signed it, certain members from the Labour Party not being available for that purpose. When the legislation based upon the Committee's report was submitted to the Dáil, I must say, in tribute to the Fine Gael Party, that they loyally supported here the recommendations which their representatives on the Committee had helped to frame. I think the present Minister for Defence acted as spokesman for the Party and proclaimed himself as proud to sponsor the measure in the House.

To our astonishment, however, a similar line was not taken by the Labour Party. The leader of that Party announced that it had been decided to leave the action of individual members to their individual discretion and he himself, despite the encouragement he had given to the preparation and the introduction of the Bill, voted against it. Later, the action of the Fianna Fáil Government in introducing and securing the enactment of that Bill was subjected to considerable misrepresentation. It was, as I have indicated, accepted by us as a political burden that we had to carry. Other Parties which have since emerged joined in the campaign against our Party, which was initiated by a section of the Labour Party, on the grounds of having introduced that Bill. It is, I think, reasonable for me now to express the hope that the decision of all these Parties to support this amending Bill indicates the termination of that campaign; indicates their acceptance of the desirability of having legislation of the character of the Ministerial and Parliamentary Officers Act on the Statute Book and that there will not be, either in relation to Fianna Fáil or any other Party, any misrepresentation of their motives in supporting that legislation. If the introduction of this Bill, with the support of all the Parties comprising the Government Coalition, serves that purpose then it will effect not merely what is, in my view, a desirable amendment of the law but another purpose perhaps equally useful.

I feel that perhaps the Bill before the House might have been discussed without Deputy Lemass's historical review.

I used the term "historical review".

You can never please the O'Higginses.

It is regrettable that that note should have been introduced. There are matters in connection with Ministerial pensions to which a very big section of the electorate take exception. The form of speech which we have just heard, which was delivered in an effort to stifle individual opinion in this House, will serve no useful purpose. I do accept that when the Fianna Fáil Government introduced this pensions legislation, they did so on a general request from the House. I accept that the all-Party Committee which was formed had before it strong evidence to justify the proposal but, in spite of that, I feel, and I have always felt, that this House is not the place in which matters of Ministerial pensions should have been decided. This House is vested with certain powers which are operated on behalf of the people. We are trustees of the people and we should carry out our duties in accordance with the wishes of the electorate, but when it comes to a matter of awarding ourselves pensions, in my view that is a matter which should be submitted to a referendum of the people. If we had the people's decision on that matter there would be no scope for criticism, good, bad or indifferent in regard to it.

This Bill introduced by the Minister has apparently the support of all Parties in this House. It affects one particular case. It affects the case of a man who was Minister for a short period but we must remember that, although he was Minister for only a short period, he served in this House for a long number of years and that he had devoted himself, in the interests of his constituents and of the country, to the work and the business of this House. Shortly after the general election, when he became Minister, I discussed with him this problem of a Dáil Deputy who after many years of service might find himself in the position of being defeated or who might die and leave a widow. The late Minister was of opinion that, we as a Parliament, should have a fund to which each and every one of us should subscribe, whereby we would make provision for a case of hardship such as that. I think this Bill gives the opportunity to refer to that matter. In the normal way, I would take exception to the Bill but because of certain matters that arose over the last year or for more than a year, any objection by me might be misinterpreted. Once we have, as apparently we have, the unanimous wish of the House that this Bill should be passed, I take it that as far as this particular measure is concerned there will be no scope for criticism at least within the House.

As I said in the beginning, I deeply regret that Deputy Lemass, speaking to the Bill, did not confine himself to the question before the House. So far as I am concerned, opportunities may offer when I may have to discuss this matter of Ministerial pensions in public. I shall be quite prepared to do that and the attempt that was made by Deputy Lemass tonight to close the lips of Deputies or others in regard to that matter will not succeed. The Bill proposes a very small pension for the widow of a person who has given to the State very long and very satisfactory service and, because of that I am quite sure that every Deputy irrespective of Party, whether he belongs to a Party at all or not, will give the Bill his full support.

I have only three points to make in relation to the Second Reading of this piece of legislation. I am not accepting the accuracy of the historical review which Deputy Lemass gave nor any of the implications which he has tried to put forward in regard to the approval of this measure. The second is that this piece of legislation puts the widow and children of a person holding qualifying office exactly in the same position as that which is given in another regard under the Presidential Establishment Act, 1938. The third is in regard to the matter raised by Deputy Cowan of the fund, which goes outside Ministers or Parliamentary Secretaries. I understand that that matter is under consideration by the Committee of Procedure and Privileges.

Question put and agreed to.
Agreed to take the remaining stages now.
Top
Share