asked the Minister for Finance the purposes and bodies in respect of which he has issued letters of undertaking for bank overdrafts; and the extent of the State's liability in respect of each such undertaking.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Overdraft Letters of Undertaking.
32.
Apart from the Economic Research Institute referred to in my reply to Question No. 33, the National Building Agency is the only body for which I have requested overdraft facilities, pending the voting of the necessary funds by Dáil Éireann. The facilities were requested to cover the Agency's commitments on houses for State personnel within a limit of £100,000. Recoupment is made periodically from the Vote for Public Works and Buildings.
33.
asked the Minister for Finance the statutory authority under which he issued a letter of undertaking in respect of the bank overdraft of the Economic Research Institute; and the extent of the actual and possible liabilities of the State on foot of such undertaking.
The letter of undertaking referred to in the question was simply a request to the Institute's bank to provide temporary finance within a limit of £30,000 pending the taking of a Supplementary Estimate which was passed by the Dáil on 7th December, 1966. No statutory authority was required for the making of such request.
Are we to understand then that the letter was not an undertaking but merely a request?
Yes, a letter of undertaking.
Then it is more than a request; it is a letter of undertaking. Does the Minister consider it desirable to give an undertaking when there is no statutory authority for doing so?
I think the Minister is perfectly entitled to give any undertaking he deems necessary to enable the affairs of bodies for which he is responsible to be carried on.
One does not question the merits of it but simply the practice of presuming that the House and the Oireachtas are going to give authority. That is the negation of democracy. It is a sin of presumption and should not be done.
It is a simple practical device availed of day in day out since the State was established.
It is basically wrong. It is not merely the Minister for Justice who should respect the law. There is such a thing as a rule of law.