Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 9 Mar 1961

Vol. 187 No. 3

Committee on Finance. - Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Bill, 1961—Second Stage.

Aire Cosanta (Caoimhghin Ó Beoláin)

Tairgim: Go léifí an Bille ath-uair anois. Tá soláthar a dhéanamh le hAlt 1 de'n Bhille seo chun pinsin sheirbhíse agus pinsin mhíthreora is iníoctha faoi na hAchtanna Um na Connaught Rangers (Pinsin), 1936 go 1960, a mhéadú cúig faoin gcéad, is é sin an céatadán ceadhna a údaróidh, le haghaidh pinsinéiri seirbhíse míleata, ag an Aire Airgeadais ina Ráiteas ar an gCáinaisnéis in Aibreán, 1960. Tá éifeacht ag na méaduithe ón lú Lúnasa, 1960, agus tá siad á n-íoc ón lá sin i leith ar údarás Mheastacháin Bhreise a ritheadh sa Teach seo ar an 20ú Iúil, 1960.

Tá foráil in Alt 2 den Bhille a údaraíonn aisiriú phinsin a chúlghairmeadh fé Alt 16 den Act Um na Connaught Rangers (Pinsin) 1936 i gcás phinsinéir a daoradh chun priosúntachta ar feadh aon teárma is sia ná trí mhí, iar chiontú i gcoir. Ceaduigheann códanna phinsean eile pinsin a chúlghairmeadh ins na toscaí sin a aisiriú ach ní raibh gá go dtí seo pinsean Connaught Rangers d'aisiriú. Tá mé tar éis cás den chineál seo a thabhairt fé ndeara le déanaí agus is féidir liom déileáil leis faoin bhforáil seo.

Mura mian le haon Teachta tagairt a dhéanamh do phointe áirithe, ní dóigh liom gur gé a thuilleadh a rá i dtaobh an Bhille.

Section 1 of this Bill provides that service pensions and disability pensions payable under the Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Acts, 1936 to 1960, shall be increased by five per cent., that is, the same percentage as was authorised by the Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement of April, 1960, in the case of military service pensioners. The increases became effective from 1st August, 1960, and they are being paid since that date on the authority of a Supplementary Estimate for pensions passed in this House on 20th July, 1960.

Section 2 of the Bill contains a provision to give authority to restore a pension which has been forefeited under section 16 of the Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Act, 1936, in a case where a pensioner, convicted of a crime, has been sentenced to a term of more than three months' imprisonment. The power to restore pensions forfeited in such circumstances is contained in other pension codes but the occasion for the restoration of a Connaught Rangers pension has not hitherto arisen. Such a case has now, however, come to my attention and this provision will enable me to deal with it.

I do not think that the Bill calls for further comment unless any Deputy wishes to raise a point.

General MacEoin

As the Minister has stated, the purpose of this Bill is to give legislative effect to what has already been done. I am glad that the Minister has taken power to restore a pension where the recipient has been disqualified from holding it but I am disappointed that he ties himself up, that the pension will be payable "from such date (not being earlier than the date of the order restoring it) as the Minister may determine." Is the Minister not tying his hands very much in that provision? If the Minister is satisfied that the pension should have been restored 12 months or two years earlier, why tie himself so that he cannot do it no matter what the merits of the case might be? I feel that it is neither fair to the pensioner nor to the Minister because it means that the Minister can simply plead: "I admit it should be done but the Act says so and so." Here the Minister is tying his hand without providing any alternative.

I do not know, Sir, whether I would be in order or not in asking the Minister if he is satisfied that all the persons who are entitled to pensions under the Connaught Rangers (Pensions) Act are in receipt of the pension. I have had various complaints, letters and claims within the last year or two from persons stating that they are entitled to a pension under the Act but have been denied it. I should like to know from the Minister, subject to the rules of order on this Stage, if he could say what the position is regarding the restoration of a pension that has been forfeited and the granting of a pension so that we can get a picture of the whole situation.

Mr. Davern

I take this opportunity of thanking the Minister sincerely for introducing this legislation. It is quite some time ago since I explained fully in this House why a person who was in receipt of a pension lost it. I stated then and I state now that the men who laid down arms in India when we were fighting for independence here were as brave as any of those who took up arms in the Independence movement here. One can appreciate how men in those circumstances might become mentally ill as a result of having to endure the rigours of imprisonment in India.

Like Deputy MacEoin, I am rather disappointed that payment is not retrospective. The person I have in mind was convicted of a very trivial offence, taking a bicycle, as far as I remember, and bringing it a few miles. Being mentally ill and being alone in the world, he was unable to make the defence which it was absolutely necessary for him to make. I am sure that if the learned justice had been informed at that time that the man would forfeit his pension he would have considered it altogether too severe a sentence to be so deprived of his pension in addition to serving four months in prison.

I know the poor man very well indeed. He, with the rest of us, at one period was worshipped by many people because it was fresh in their minds then that we had accomplished something, that we were one generation in 700 years. It might appear strange to the young men in this House to be told that neither the person concerned in this Bill nor any other person was paid during that time, that on the contrary, which might appear even amusing, the soldiers of the I.R.A. had to pay for being soldiers.

I know that the man concerned is very badly off in the winter of his life. If the Minister would consider some retrospective payment that would give him even an opportunity of providing himself with decent clothes and boots it would be very helpful. I can assure him that I would appreciate it as much as I appreciate his thoughtfulness in tempering justice with mercy.

I appreciate what the Minister has done. It is good that in public life we have men who will honour their bond. Ministers, above all, have a very important role to play and in this instance, the Minister is to be congratulated. The person concerned is now a poor, insignificant man and it is good to think that a man of his state is to benefit and to have restored to him a measure of happiness which I feel he richly deserves.

In view of the position in which these men found themselves, their actions and this man's action earned them honour and admiration. They laid down their arms in faraway India to give help that was very much needed at that time when, in one generation, something was accomplished which the previous 700 years had failed to achieve. This man was one who contributed to that and he deserves consideration and sympathy, although perhaps he acted wrongly. His contribution to the struggle for freedom must be remembered. As time goes on, I hope other old soldiers who are badly off and in need will be remembered by the Minister and given some measure of comfort. That can be achieved straight away by further increasing their pensions, especially in the case of those who have no other means. Again, I thank the Minister. County Tipperary knows the individual concerned very well and will greatly appreciate the Minister's action in this case.

Mr. Manley

As a matter of interest and for sentimental reasons, would it be possible for the Minister to give us the number of survivors of the Indian mutiny? I happen to be familiar with the circumstances of some of these men and I must admit that what Deputy Davern said about them is correct. They were serving the British Empire thousands of miles from home and the spirit of the national movement motivated them to take certain risks. Any generosity the Irish people can display to them through the Government, is merited. It is in keeping with our ideals that those people should get whatever increases are to be given to those who served the State. Our aim should be to ensure that these men will be as well off as if they had served the full time without the mutiny. In view of that, this gesture can be very well justified.

The present generation, I believe, are not aware of the stand and the sacrifice these men made and the risk they took at a time when they were serving in a foreign army.

Mr. K. Boland

As far as the number surviving is concerned, 25 pensioners survive at present. I do not know of any others who may have taken part in the mutiny. I am tied under this Bill to restoring the pension from the date of the order. While there is only one case involved here, the principle is of much wider application and it is a principle which I fear cannot be departed from. The person concerned was eligible to apply for a special allowance at any time.

The only other point raised is whether I am satisfied that all those who are entitled to these pensions are covered and in fact drawing these pensions. To qualify for a Connaught Rangers' pension, what had to be established was that the person concerned took part in the mutiny and the criterion adopted was whether the person was sentenced by the British court martial that tried the people accused of taking part. That was accepted as proof and it is hard to see what other proof we could get or in what other way it could be established that a man took part in the mutiny, if he was acquitted by the court which tried him for the offence. I think it is true that, so far as it is possible to establish, all those who qualified for pensions have got them.

Question put and agreed to.

Agreed to take remaining Stages to-day.