Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 18 Feb 1960

Vol. 179 No. 4

Committee on Finance. - Vote 21—Miscellaneous Expenses.

I move:—

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £58,560 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1960, for certain Miscellaneous Expenses, including certain Grants-In-Aid, Compensation for Personal Injuries and Compensation and other Payments in connection with Injuries to Property (No. 24 of 1941).

The purpose of this Supplementary Estimate is to enable a refund to be made to local authorities, under Section 15 of the Neutrality (War Damage to Property) Act, 1941, of one-quarter of the compensation recovered from the German Government for damage caused to property by the bombing incidents at the North Strand, Dublin, and Arklow, on the night of 31st May/1st June, 1941.

Compensation for damage to property as a result of these and other incidents was payable, in the first instance, by the Irish Government. It was laid down in Section 16 of the 1941 Act that one-quarter of the compensation so paid was to be recouped to the Minister for Finance by the county councils and the county borough corporations (including the borough corporation of Dún Laoghaire) in proportion to their valuations. Provision was made in Section 15 of the Act that the Minister might make a refund to these authorities, in respect of what they paid, out of any compensation the Irish Government might recover from the Government of any other State.

The Government of the former German Reich accepted responsibility for the damage caused on the occasion of the North Strand and Arklow incidents and undertook to pay compensation for it. That Government's successor, the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, entered into agreements with the Irish Governments on 25th July, 1953, and 28th March, 1958, as a result of which we have been paid £326,852 against a total claim of £481,878 in respect of these two incidents. In agreeing to the acceptance of a lower sum than that claimed, the Irish Government, in common with other Governments, recognised the reduced capacity of the German Federal Republic to meet claims against the former German Reich owing to the partition of Germany.

Approximately 72 per cent of our claim was for damage to property and, therefore, the same proportion, £234,286, of what has been recovered, £326,852, can be regarded as compensation for such damage. Since, in all these cases, one-quarter of the compensation paid by the Minister for Finance for damage to property, but not for deaths or personal injuries, was refunded by the local authorities, it is only proper that one-quarter of the £234,286 received under this head should now be recouped to them. Payments on a similar basis were made to the local authorities in 1945-46, 1946-47 and 1950-51 out of compensation moneys then recovered from foreign Governments. Some £58,570, therefore, is now payable to the local authorities and this Supplementary Estimate is, with the original token provision of £10, for the purpose of making that payment.

Provision for the payment could not be made in the original Estimate as the relevant agreements between the Irish and German Governments were presented to the Dáil only in July, 1959.

Our final claim on the Germans in respect of the North Strand and Arklow bombing incidents was computed as follows: Damage to property £345,408; Deaths (29) and Personal Injuries (102), £102,000; Administrative Expenses, £27,264; Recoupment of Irish Red Cross Society, £7,206. That makes a total of £481,878.

For each death, we claimed £1,500. For 14 of the injury cases, where the degree of disablement was 50 per cent. or over, we claimed £1,000 and for the remaining 88 cases we claimed £500. The compensation actually paid for damage to property was approximately £306,000 and that for deaths and personal injuries approximately £38,000.

At this late stage, there cannot be any question of re-examining the adequacy or otherwise of the awards paid.

The Minister refers to payments in respect of damage to property and other consequential matters and also payment of damages in respect of personal injuries. Am I to understand that those who suffered personal injuries which were evaluated in the agreement at £1,000 and those who suffered injuries which were evaluated in the agreement at £500 actually received these amounts?

Well, will they receive, or have they received, a proportion of these amounts corresponding to the proportion of the total claim agreed by the Federal Government of Germany?

No. I will put it this way to the Deputy: in making the claim to the German Government in the beginning, it was put down as a round figure, that £1,500 would cover a death, £1,000 would cover a 50 per cent disability or a disability over 50 per cent and £500 would cover disability less than 50 per cent. In actual fact, when these claims came to be examined, the total paid was £38,000; the total estimate would have been £102,000, so that the Deputy will see from that that little more than one-third was paid for these personal injuries. I think the amount paid out was just and fair in all cases.

It does seem a little odd, does it not, that if on the foot of personal injuries we have recovered by way of claim against a foreign Government a certain global sum, part of that sum should be diverted to other purposes? I distinguish between damage to property and personal injuries. I could readily consent to the proposition that after the value of property injuries had been determined by our own tribunal, substantial justice was done, but, in regard to personal injuries, would all precedent not suggest that whatever was subsequently recovered from a foreign Government should be given to the recipients of compensation for personal injuries and if we got a sum substantially in excess of what was in fact paid to these persons who suffered personal injuries, is there not a fairly strong case to be made for further payments to these people in proportion to what we actually recovered from the foreign Government responsible for the damage done?

I should like to say to the Deputy that in making this claim to the German Government, the Irish Government were not disposed to under-estimate, let us say, and they actually estimated the damage to property at £345,000. The amount paid was actually £306,000. That was, proportionately, nearer to the mark, I admit, than was the case in respect of personal injuries. The personal injuries matter appears to have been dealt with on a very arbitrary round figure— £1,500 for a death, £1,000 where there was over 50 per cent. disability and £500 where the disability was under 50 per cent. It is fairly obvious that in many of these cases of damage, where it was less than 50 per cent., there was probably no case at all for £500; there might be no case for anything like £500; there might be a case for £50 or £20. In any case, the personal injuries claims paid amount to £38,000.

Personally, as Minister for Finance, I have never heard any complaint from anybody on this score. I do not know whether I could say that everybody was quite satisfied or not, but there has not been any general complaint and, in fact, no complaint as far as I know, so that I think they were fairly well compensated on the whole.

Could the Minister say what will happen? When will we dispose of the extra money that has been received in respect of personal injuries?

As I said, the total figure we got back from the Germans was £326,000. When the State were paying these amounts in respect of damage to properties and personal injuries, they were paid, of course, out of the Exchequer but one-quarter was taken from the local authorities. Now, the State is recouping the local authorities one-quarter what they got back, not exactly the full amount. They got one-quarter of the total amount paid out, which was actually something more than the £306,000, and they are giving back now one-quarter of what they got, so that the local authorities will, in the ultimate, between them all, have to stand some few thousands of pounds —that is all—out of the total.

Will the Exchequer benefit from this?

No. Whatever the local authorities have suffered, the Exchequer has suffered three times as much.

The surplus we got in respect of personal injuries over and above what we actually paid out for personal injuries—what becomes of that differential?

We claimed one amount; we paid out another amount, but we actually got back less than we paid out, on the whole.

Of the difference between what we paid out and what we got back, the Exchequer is standing three-fourths and the local authorities one-fourth.

We paid out quite a considerable sum more than we got when the agreement was made. I remember the details of it.

That is right.

Vote put and agreed to.
Supplementary Estimates reported and agreed to.
Top
Share