asked the Minister for Local Government if, in view of the apparent ambiguity arising out of Sections 56 (1) and 63 (5) of the Local Government Superannuation Act, 1948, and the recent majority decision of the Supreme Court on test cases arising as a result of such ambiguity, it is his intention to introduce proposals for legislation immediately to rectify the position, so that the permanent servants referred to may not have to make contributions.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Local Government Superannuation Act.
The matter will be considered but I am not in a position to promise immediate legislation.
I consider the reply most unsatisfactory. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court, which was a majority decision, and as we already got a decision in favour of the employees in the High Court in 1949, what explanation has the Minister to give for not introducing the necessary legislation? I should also like the Minister to state was it the intention that the permanent employees would benefit by the Act of 1948?
Apart from the question of what was the intention or what was not the intention, the Supreme Court decision has been given and I am aware of most of the circumstances surrounding the decision and of the factors inconnection with it, but I am not in a position to say when I will be able to introduce proposals to amend the law as it stands.
Arising out of the most unsatisfactory reply given by the Minister, I propose, with your permission, to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
The Minister does not agree with the High Court.
I will communicate my decision to the Deputy.