My question on the Order Paper to the Minister for Social Welfare to-day was:—
"To ask the Minister for Social Welfare if he will state the dates and occasions of each of (i) the several lectures or talks delivered by, (ii) the conferences or discussions engaged in, (iii) the interviews given by, (iv) the articles or other publicity matter or statements published in the daily and weekly papers or other periodicals by the Information Officer in his Department; if he will give the subject matter of each of these and state where each of the lectures, talks, conferences or interviews took place, whether in Dublin or elsewhere, and in what papers or periodicals the articles or other published statements appeared.
The answer which I received to that question was as follows:—
"As regards (i) I would refer the Deputy to my reply of the 1st March, 1951, to Question No. 5.
In connection with the remainder of the question, records are not kept in such detail as would enable the information sought to be readily given, and I do not feel that the matter is of sufficient importance to justify the considerable use of official time which would be involved in its compilation."
Now, I would like to make quite clear to everyone at the outset that this question was not put down in order to attack the civil servant who is referred to in it. That officer has no responsibility in the matter. He is not responsible if public money is paid out and no return is given for it to the State. He is not responsible if he is paid out of the public funds to serve the narrow aims of a political Party. He is neither Minister nor accounting officer.
I put the question down in order to expose one little instance, one trifling example, of the manner in which the public moneys are being misused at the instance of the Minister concerned. It is necessary for me to say that the officer referred to in the question was long absent from the normal work of the Civil Service. His rank when he was engaged otherwise than in the service of the State was that of a junior executive officer. It is generally believed that he was anxious to be recalled to duty in the Department of Social Welfare as private secretary to the Minister.
For reasons best known to himself, the Minister refused to have him in that capacity, so another job had to be found for him. He was so powerful, so influential, that, as I have said, an other job had to be found for him. Accordingly, in October, 1948, almost two and a half years ago, the post of information officer was created in the Department of Social Welfare and he was appointed to it. I perhaps may comment in passing that this is only one of the many instances since the Government took office that henchmen of the Labour Party have been quartered on the public purse.