Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 6 Dec 1962

Vol. 198 No. 6

Committee on Finance. - Oireachtas (Allowances to Members) Bill, 1962—Second Stage.

Minister for Finance (Dr. Ryan)

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time.

This Bill may be regarded as an attempt to relieve certain members of the Oireachtas of burdens which would appear to weigh too heavily on them and which do not affect the majority. Members who live a long distance from Dublin and who are obliged to stay overnight in Dublin when the Houses are meeting are therefore, in a worse position comparatively than those who are within reach of their homes. While it is true that for years they have had to pay their hotel expenses, it must be admitted that, in recent years, the cost has increased considerably for those who have to stay overnight. I am satisfied that there is a strong case for the present proposal to recoup them for such expenses. A claim can only be considered when a member claims expenses for a night before or a night after a meeting of either House of the Oireachtas—the House, of course, of which he is a member—or a meeting of a Committee of either House on which the member is serving.

Regulations will be made from time to time by the Minister for Finance which will fix the amount of the allowances and will also lay down the member who is eligible for payment, having regard to the geographical position of his residence, and also fix the area within which he may stay during his time in Dublin.

Members of the Oireachtas have always had free telephone facilities for the metropolitan area but they had to pay for trunk calls. It is desirable to have dial phones installed both for the convenience of Deputies and for the relief of the staff in the House exchange here. When the dial phones are made available, new regulations will be necessary to deal with trunk calls especially. It is not intended to give free trunk calls except in a few cases, where they might be regarded at present as trunk calls, but where they are available on the dial telephone. Members will be free, of course, to dial any number the dial phone may give them, where they do not request the intervention of the exchange. In that case, of course, there is only a nominal benefit for members but they will at least have a quicker service and, as time goes on, and the system becomes more automatic, they will gradually become entitled to a wider range of free calls. Further consideration will have to be given to this question of trunk calls but that is a matter for discussion and for regulation.

For many years, the question of free postage has been under consideration. There was always general agreement on the desirability of such a scheme but there was never agreement on a satisfactory method by which this free postage could be given, and it was difficult to discover a method which would run smoothly from the administrative point of view. It is proposed now to frank letters from Members to their constituents. They will be franked in the Dáil Office at Leinster House and this will mean a good deal, indeed, to Deputies who have a very large mail to deal with, whether the extra work is due to a more exacting constituency or a more willing Deputy. It will mean very little indeed to others who have a small mail for whatever reason.

I cannot give any sort of firm estimate of the cost of this Bill but it will be necessary to take a Supplementary Estimate for the first quarter of 1963 and then we shall have an idea of what the cost may be. I should say that although the Bill comes before the Dáil at the end of the season, it is by no means a rushed measure. I have been discussing these matters, the matters included in the Bill, over a long period with the Committee of Procedure and Privileges. While I was in full agreement with the Committee that the proposals were acceptable, the delay arose from a desire on their part to produce a scheme that would benefit those, but only those, who had a compelling reason for relief and that would, on the face of it, show that no unfair or unforeseen advantage could be taken of it.

The members of the two Houses are competent to settle their own salaries and allowances by legislation. I think it can be truly said that they have never abused that power. The duties of a Deputy are always increasing and, while his occupation is officially regarded as part-time, it is not feasible for many Deputies to engage in other occupations or supplement their incomes from any source of employment. When the question of increased remuneration or higher allowances comes up for consideration, the time given is prolonged, not in a wrangle with those who look for more, but always with those who are reluctant to agree to any increase. I commend the Bill to the members of the Dáil.

Mr. Sweetman

I want to underline what the Minister has said in relation to the long consideration that has been given to this Bill. The matter has been considered for a very considerable time by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and only comes to the House now when, as the Minister said, that consideration has been completely exhaustive.

We are informed by members of our Party, just as the Minister is informed by members of his Party—and, no doubt, other Parties also have the same experience—that the additional high costs of maintenance when Deputies come to Leinster House is such that it was placing an impossible burden on Deputies who are endeavouring to discharge their duties to the best of their ability. There is no doubt in my mind that for the Deputy who really does his work, the allowances given to him are not anything like what he would be able to get in outside life. There is without doubt an element in public life of sacrifice by those who really endeavour to serve the public. Not every one serves in the same way; not everyone is able to serve the public in the same way. For those who make a real effort to fulfil their duty as public representatives, the task has become more and more onerous and more and more expensive. This Bill makes an effort particularly to meet those people who are doing that and doing it from the far-off places. For that reason and because we are clear that it is necessary that the assiduous Deputy should be enabled adequately to carry out his work, we support this Bill.

It has now become commonplace for Deputies, particularly from the country areas, to receive letters from their correspondents about every phase of life. They are not restricted entirely to public Bills and legislation going through here. Every phase of life is concerned. Whether that is desirable or not does not enter into the question. The issue here is whether the public want that and clearly they do. If the public want the facilities that will be given under this Bill for dealing with that correspondence, they are necessary and desirable.

The Minister explained in relation to telephones that what is being done here is merely an extension for administrative convenience because if you have a dialling system and trunk dialling is in operation, it is physically impossible to separate one from the other and have the telephones operating efficiently. In fact, I believe that what are called free telephone calls from Leinster House will cost less than the manual systems would cost ultimately carrying on as the position is at the present moment.

The Committee on Procedure and Privileges considered very carefully the safeguards necessary to prevent any abuse of the privileges being afforded. They made their views known to the Minister. He realises, of course, as we all realise, that it is the duty of the Minister for Finance for the time being to ensure that in the administration of any service, be it for the Oireachtas or anywhere else, the appropriate safeguards are put into operation.

Finally, in relation to Section 3 of the Bill, may I say that I think it is essential that any Bill dealing with the Oireachtas should be exactly the same as any Bill dealing with any other matter. This Bill provides that the arrangements will be carried through by regulation. I can see the Minister's reason for doing that. It provides for the tabling of those regulations as is appropriate but it does not provide—and it should provide as is always provided—in relation to any regulations tabled, the appropriate annulling subsection without prejudice to what is done before annullment.

It is essential that in any legislation we may enact affecting ourselves, we be scrupulously careful to ensure that such legislation will follow the exact pattern followed in respect of other Bills. The annulling subsection is commonplace in all Bills dealing with regulations and I suggest to the Minister that it is desirable that that subsection be added on Committee Stage next week.

Mr. Tully

On behalf of the Labour Party, I want to express our support of the Bill, I can, I suppose, do it better than anybody else because I happen to be one of the Deputies least affected. As far as the allowance is concerned, I go home at night. Therefore, I am not affected at all. As far as the telephone facilities are concerned, I live in an area where there are at present no dial phones. Therefore, again, I am not affected by the Bill at all. Thirdly, while I claim to have as high a postage bill as anyone else in this House—it may, perhaps, be higher than most Deputies—the fact that I live 30 miles from Dublin would make it inconvenient for me to come to Leinster House to post my letters. Therefore, unless the Dail is sitting, the facility is not of use to me.

I welcome the Bill. It remedies a real injustice in relation to those who have to come to sittings of the Dáil and Seanad and who have to sit here and stay in town for a period of nights and days at their own expense. It is all very well to talk about the Dáil allowance. Anybody who has the experience of trying to exist on the Dáil allowance and carry out his duties will realise that a Bill of this sort is long overdue. We know of people who have been trying to live on what they get from the Dáil. We know they have a very precarious living, no matter to what Party they belong. The one feature that does need to be highlighted is that most of the people throughout the country are under the impression that Dáil Deputies have had for years free postage and free telephone facilities.

Mr. Corish

Cheap cigarettes.

Mr. Tully

Cheap cigarettes and beer, too. Again, that does not affect me. They believe that Dáil Deputies, when they come into the House, have practically everything free. However, this Bill will bring home to these people that, in fact, it is necessary for the Oireachtas to pass a Bill into law before certain limited facilities can be allowed.

I welcome the Bill. We hope that, as time passes, the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs may be able to help out with the dial telephones all over the country so that we may all avail of the facilities. We hope the Minister for Finance at a later date will consider some way by which posting can be done from a person's constituency rather than at Leinster House because there is one thing which we fear. I hope we are wrong. We all know how at Christmas time the post offices are cluttered up with letters. We fear that every day will turn into a Christmas mail day at Leinster House. That would be too bad if it occurs. Perhaps the Minister would make provision whereby there will be sufficient staff to deal with the big rush during the first few weeks. On behalf of the Labour Party, I offer our support to the Bill.

Mr. Sherwin

I welcome the Bill, although it relates to the country Deputies. There is no assurance that the city Deputies will be considered. I think I am the only Dublin Deputy on the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. Therefore, I advocated the point of view of the Dublin Deputy but the Bill, as it stands, gives us no facilities. That is what I want to refer to. I agree that the Dáil allowance is not enough, although in many cases members get too much because they do not give the time to the House. They spend a good deal of the time at their private business. We must not, however judge all Dáil members by those members. We try to judge the active members and see how they are affected. The Dáil allowance, as such, does not compensate in any way the active members, whether from city or country. This measure helps the active country member as well as the fellow who gives little time to the House. If he is poor and lives in moderation, the fact that he gets travelling and lodging allowances will enable him to make ends meet. He might be able to do things a bit cheaper, and I do not object to that.

Dublin Deputies will not get any extra allowance as far as I can see. The conscientious Dublin Deputy who is here most of the time is not half paid. I know a number of Dublin Deputies are quite well off, that many of them have good businesses, but they give most of their time to those businesses. I am concerned with those of us who are without means otherwise, and there are quite a number of us here. The Labour Party are the group who should be most concerned with this because, if they ever hope to be a very large Party, it will be brought about because they will have in their ranks tradesmen and labourers who cannot keep on their jobs. It was that aspect that gave rise to the Allowances Bill in Britain in 1911 when Lloyd George said that the emergence of the Labour Party meant that a number of miners and other working-class people would be returned to Parliament. That is the type of person I have in mind when considering this measure.

Of course in Britain, up to that time, there were the big shots who said they did not want allowances. All they wanted was to have a sort of cartel or club of their own, but, even the great Edmund Burke made sure that his son and his other relations were put into damn good jobs. Do not kid yourselves that they did not make money of it. There was a nice bit made out of corruption and it was that kind of thing that first gave rise to the idea of subsistence allowances. As I have said, the Labour Party are vitally concerned here because, if they hope in the future to have up to 40 members in the House, they will find that one-third of those men will be labourers or tradesmen who will be unable to continue in their jobs. The Minister should realise that that type of Deputy must look after his family as well as serving in this House.

I studied the views of British Labour Party members in a recent issue of the Sunday Times. It was stated there that, if an MP is not paid sufficiently, he will have to neglect either his family or his work in the House and, of course, his constituents. I have no objection to the Bill as it stands but I do want an assurance that something will be done for Dublin Deputies. The assumption is that country Deputies have to pay digs and so on. I accept that, and even if some of them can do it on the cheap, I do not mind that either. But let us consider the Dublin Deputies in the same context.

A Dublin Deputy must eat in this House. I do not. I go home because I could not afford to eat here. Dublin Deputies have to get a taxi here, there and everywhere, and they get nothing in respect of that. They have an enormous call on their time which most country Deputies do not. If they are members of municipal bodies, they are kept going all the time. Country Deputies are relieved of these duties while they are here. We are not. I called at the Corporation offices this morning at 10 o'clock, as I do every morning. I then rushed here at 11 o'clock. As soon as I finish now, I must rush home to eat; then I must rush back here and when finished here, I must rush to a meeting at James's Street where I will be until 10 o'clock tonight. I am fortunate in that I do not smoke, drink or gamble because if I did, I could not exist on what I am getting. And, mind you, I should be entitled to do those things. There are certain little entertainments which no Deputy can avoid and these cost money.

Look at the case of the former Deputy John Murphy who had to do the unheard of thing of resigning his membership of this House. He had to resign, because he could not afford to continue here. If he wanted to drink a pint, he had to hide in the hallway of the pub in case there was somebody he could not avoid and for whom he would have to buy a drink. He rented a hall for the unemployed but he was not able to pay the few bob for it and the hall had to go. He should have been given an allowance for that sort of thing. If he were to provide for a wife and family, he could not continue to serve here, even living in moderation.

I am asking the Minister to remember that the poorer Deputies in Dublin cannot avoid holding little entertainments from time to time, but such things are not provided for in their allowances. I am, of course, talking about the active men, not those who come here only when they are tipped off that a division is imminent. These people say: "The public will not know whether I am here or not", so they stay away most of the time. I hope the Minister will keep those few points in mind.

Mr. Booth

I want to deal with only one aspect of this Bill, the question of telephones, which is not a matter of any personal interest to me. I had hoped the Minister would regard this matter of free trunk calls for country Deputies as a matter of elementary right. It appears to have been approached as a matter of administrative convenience only, as if the only point at issue were that, if we cannot catch up on who makes the phone call from a dial telephone, we might as well give it to him free.

That is not the way of dealing with it. The point at issue is that a country Deputy cannot discharge his duties to the maximum ability unless he has a chance of keeping in touch with his constituents and the local authorities of which he may be a member. To burden the country Deputy with the cost of trunk calls is an unjust imposition on him and almost an encouragement to him to fail to do his duty. When we get our dial phones in the House, it then becomes administratively impossible to prevent Deputies from dialling trunk calls to any exchange on the dialling trunk system and a concession will be made that those calls will be free.

In my view, that is a very mean approach and I think the Minister should seriously consider at this stage making all trunk calls from the House free immediately or from 1st January. I know some people may say this would cost a lot of money. I do not agree for a moment. The actual cost of anyone making a call from here to Galway, Cork, Limerick, Sligo or anywhere else is infinitesmal. Nobody would seriously suggest it is costing the Department of Posts and Telegraphs 3s. 6d. to connect me to an exchange in Cork. It does not cost them anything like that at all, never has done and never will. The trunk charges are simply a contribution towards the overall expenses of the telephone system but, if these calls were to be made freely immediately or from 1st January, as I do not imagine for a moment there would be any loss of revenue to the Department.

At present, country Deputies who wish to make trunk calls think more than once before doing so and nine out of ten times, they say they will not do it because they cannot afford it. Therefore the Department have not got that money anyway. It is not a question of the Department suffering a reduction in revenue. I hope the Minister will reconsider this and that instead of delaying the introduction of free trunk calls, until dial phones are available generally, he will do so at once as a matter of elementary justice to most Deputies.

Dr. Browne

The easy thing to do in a position of this kind where Parliament is voting to its members increases in their remuneration or allowances of one kind or another is to avoid taking sides, to say nothing, and in that way escape the opprobium which might come from people because they appear to be voting themselves increases. There is the possibility that one's actions might be adversely criticised outside by members of the public. It is quite possible that the decision of the House to vote itself increases brings a certain amount of adverse criticism. For that reason, and to explain our attitude to it, I should like to say that I support the proposals.

It is only on a very superficial examination of the whole function of Parliament in society that a person could say of it that the Parliamentary representative, whoever he is, whatever Party he stands for, is in the position that the labourer is not worthy of his hire, that he is not worth paying properly or that it is not worth facilitating him in his work. Anybody who looks around Europe today, whether you look at Moscow, de Gaulle, Adenauer, Salazar or Franco, will note that in any of these dictatorships or semi-dictatorships—I am not using it in the pejorative sense but in the realistic sense— they are not accepting the principle of democracy, that they are accepting it less and are beginning to do so more and more.

Democracy, as we see it in Ireland and as we see it in the British Parliament, is on trial and is, one might say, on its last legs. Whether it can be made to work at all, whether these strongman types of Government are the only effective types of Government that can create prosperity, is the question that faces us. Looking back over the years here, I think a good case can be made against Parliamentary democracy as an efficient unit, as a unit likely to create prosperity, full employment, health services, educational services and so on. One has to try to examine the reasons for this.

There is no doubt that the whole idea of representation in Parliament, the consideration of proposals by the Government, their discussion in Parliament and their eventual implementation is one that appeals to most people but if the price one has to pay for it is too high—as so many countries have decided it is too high—then there is the question of its complete rejection. Why is it that, in certain instances, Parliament has been found not to have achieved the objectives for which it was established? It is quite reasonable to suggest that it has been made very difficult—more and more difficult—to attract the very highest level of administrative ability or intellectual capacity into the whole of the machinery of Parliamentary democracy. There are various reasons for that situation. One is the inadequacy of our educational system whereby there are relatively few people to choose from: it is no fault of the public. The other is the tremendous counter-attraction of industry and other administrative posts which are available to the able person in life outside public life as we know it. Then there is the fact that, over the years, the Parliamentary representative has felt that if he appeared to inflate his value in the public eye, he would be told he suffered from delusions of grandeur, that he over-estimated his abilities and that he was over-paying himself for these limited abilities.

That, at any rate, is one reason why there has been a decline in the influence of Parliamentary democracy in western European countries. We should have the courage to examine this whole question and try to decide whether this could be one of the factors which has led to the decline of what was, in theory, a very fine idea. I personally believe that very many more considerations are involved but this is one of them. Because of this fact, we should try to have examined or to examine ourselves in a completely fearless and courageous way the whole question of the position in a Parliamentary democracy such as ours.

The day of the dilettante politician is long past. Parliament did not work at its most efficient level when there was the extreme case of the dilettante. As we have advanced, it has presumably become more efficient. As more people have taken positions in Parliament, then Parliament has become more efficient. Nevertheless, it is still very inefficient for the creation of prosperity and social justice generally in society. Anybody looking around to-day must accept that. Because of this, I think one is faced with the proposition whether there should not be the professional politician, the person who is a full-time politician, the person who dedicates his whole life to organising society on behalf of his fellow citizens in a particular way, and one is also faced with the examination of the various theories and proposals for the betterment of the life of the community as a whole.

It seems to me that the suggestion that there should continue to be the dilettante type of businessman or industrialist, with the present level of very high competition that exists in industry and in administration generally, would be completely discounted. Everybody knows that there is now the development of the highly trained businessman and executive. He must be highly trained. He can no longer drift in and do an hour's work and expect to be paid at the end of the year and keep his business prosperous during that year.

The time has come when, if we are to continue to believe in and to try to foster the idea of parliamentary democracy, we have to accept the idea (1) that the professional politician is essential and desirable and (2) that there is nothing discreditable in the vocation. It is probably the highest vocation of all because you are concerned with trying to create a just society for the rest of the people in your community. In that way, the sneers at politicians which we come across so often in other sectors of society are completely unjustified. The level of integrity and behaviour in political life in our community and in Great Britain is certainly as high as you will get in ordinary industrial practice. Therefore, we should be the first to try to establish a high level of integrity in politics and to see that others recognise that it does, on the whole, exist.

Naturally, we are not without our defects and deficiencies but, generally speaking, I suppose the level is as high as you will get in any other sphere in society. We should not subscribe to the idea that we have anything to be ashamed of. People will take us at the value we put on ourselves, on our merits and on our work. We should be courageous about it. We should educate the public into the realisation that if we are the most satisfactory politicians available then, just as in business the business prospers, so in parliamentary democracy society prospers. We are able to provide better health services, better education, to see that people are looked after and that there is no unemployment and consequently no emigration. It gives great dividends back to the public who pay the bill in the end.

This proposal does not make much difference to me but I have never understood how the country Deputy paid his way with the allowance or why there was this discrepancy between the effective allowance of the city Deputy and that of the country Deputy. The conscientious Deputy who might spend two or three days in town has to pay his hotel expenses. This represents a very considerable drain on his income. It is a matter of relative unimportance to some Deputies but to others, it is a significant expense. The more conscientiously he does his job, the more it costs him in personal outlay.

Deputy Booth referred to telephone expenses. It would be desirable if some system could be devised whereby the country Deputy was able to use the telephone for trunk calls. The greater part of a Deputy's work is devoted to ringing Government Departments and I wonder if any system of reversing the charges could be devised so as to make it possible for a Deputy to have this advantage.

The whole question of the allowances of Deputies is a particularly difficult one. I often wondered whether it would not be possible to establish some sort of a commission outside Parliament to investigate the whole position. In that way, we should be removed from the criticism which follows from people outside who may not understand the position very clearly. On further examination, I think it is quite clear that will not work in so far as, for better or for worse, we are the highest authority in the land and, for that reason, nobody can arbitrate for us. Some people might say we like to establish the Labour Court, the Agricultural Wages Board, the Civil Service Commission and arbitration boards of one kind or another and we do not do it for ourselves. That is an over-simplification of the matter. It would derogate from the powers and from the dignity of Parliament if we were to accept any investigation by an outside body. This is work we must do for ourselves and in so far as this is a definite advance on the existing position, I welcome it.

Dr. Ryan

Deputy Sweetman raised the question of these regulations. I see no objection to having an annulment clause put in. It is unlikely that any Minister for Finance would make a regulation that he did not think had the support of the House but there might be a minority who might object. It is only fair, therefore, that they should be heard and this is the only way they could be heard.

Deputy Tully said he hoped the Minister for Finance would think of a way by which a Deputy will be enabled to post letters free from his house. I do not know about that, but if any Deputy can devise a system that would be not only foolproof but would appear foolproof to everybody, I certainly would be glad to consider any such scheme that might be put up. I do not think Deputy Sherwin is altogether right in saying there is no benefit in this for the Dublin Deputy. The Dublin Deputies will have free postage. Dublin Deputies will be in the same position as rural Deputies because I would say that perhaps more than half the rural Deputies will go home at night. They will get the free postage of course but in that case the overnight allowance is of no benefit to them.

There seems to be a little confusion on this question of the telephone. What I tried to explain was that the dial telephone will be put in and calls will be free as far as dialling is concerned but if a Deputy has to contact the exchange to make calls then it is a different matter. He will have to pay for that call.

Mr. Tully

But he can diál Cork or Galway and get it free.

Dr. Ryan

Can you? We shall have to consider that.

Mr. Tully

But you cannot dial Navan or Trim.

Dr. Ryan

That will come eventually.

Mr. Tully

If we live long enough.

Dr. Ryan

Deputy Booth and Deputy Dr. Browne spoke of free calls by a Deputy to his constituency. There may be something to be said for that and it is a matter that could be considered. Going back to Deputy Sherwin, he says Dublin Deputies have to pay for their meals, but so have the country Deputies, and so will the long distance country Deputies, even when this overnight allowance is provided. Therefore we are all in the same boat in that respect.

Deputies mentioned some misunderstanding in regard to phone calls. I think some time ago there was a misunderstanding even about the bar here. As long as I have been Minister for Finance, I have always insisted that the same prices must be charged in that bar as are charged elsewhere and I must confess I am not a bad customer myself.

Mr. Sweetman

That has always been the practice.

Dr. Ryan

Yes, that the price there is as high as elsewhere.

Mr. Tully

It is as well the public should know that.

Dr. Ryan

The only other matter is Deputy Dr. Browne's view on democracy, that democratic governments and parliaments have not done what they should have done for social betterment, and so on, in the various countries. All I can say is that the dictators, whether Nazi or Communist, have not done any better in that regard. I do not know how the professional politician could be chosen. I take it the professional politician wants to be there for life and people are not prepared to leave him there for life.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

If he is doing his job, he will be there for life.

Mr. Sherwin

He should do it while he is here.

Dr. Ryan

I do not think any other question was raised.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

One point should be made clear and I am not quite satisfied that the Minister's explanation has made it clear. The people in the country will think that Deputies have free telephone calls, whereas, according to the Bill and according to the Minister, Deputies have not got free telephone calls.

Dr. Ryan

No.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The impression might get out to the people that Deputies had free telephone calls. That would be a very serious matter. Country people go to a Deputy and ask him to ring up the Custom House or the Department of Social Welfare. Most of my time in the constituency goes in making telephone calls from my home to this city. If the idea gets abroad that Deputies have free telephone calls, constituents will expect them to use the telephone. I hope that the Press and the radio will make it clear that Deputies have not got free use of the telephone.

Dr. Ryan

There is no change. I pointed out, as did Deputy Sweetman, that the position is that we are bringing in this dial phones procedure for convenience. Deputies will be able to get their calls more quickly by the dial phones and it will relieve a great deal of congestion in the exchange in the House. It was ridiculous to have all these local calls going through the exchange.

Mr. Sherwin

Is the Minister still considering the question of some sort of travelling allowance for city Deputies? It is a point that was brought to his notice on each occasion on which he met the members of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.

Dr. Ryan

If the Deputy can induce the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to put up a proposition, I shall consider it.

Mr. Sherwin

I am the only member from Dublin on the Committee.

Mr. O'Sullivan

No.

Mr. Sherwin

Well, one of the few —I will say one of the vocal members. Being on my own, I could not kick up a row. There were too many against me. I would ask the Minister to consider it. There is a five mile limit, as the Minister knows. There is no allowance unless a Deputy lives beyond five miles from Leinster House. Deputies have to travel the five miles back and forward. The Minister was to consider the point.

Dr. Ryan

That came into it.

Mr. Sherwin

That is all right.

Question put and agreed to.

Committee Stage ordered for Tuesday, 11th December, 1962.