Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 27 Feb 1969

Vol. 238 No. 13

Committee on Finance. - Adjournment Debate: Deputation to Department.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Yesterday I addressed a question to the Minister for Social Welfare, the reply to which I did not consider satisfactory and, for that reason I felt bound to raise the matter on the Adjournment. I asked the Minister:

To ask the Minister for Social Welfare if on the 20th February, 1969 a small deputation of the committee of the Clara branch of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union called to his Department for the purpose of leaving an important letter from the management of a firm (name supplied) of Clara, County Offaly, which had an important bearing on the claim of some hundreds of workers for unemployment benefit; if he is aware that they were left in the hall of his Department for three quarters of an hour and were later surrounded by at least 30 members of the Garda Síochána for no apparent reason; and if he will make a statement on this matter.

The Minister linked up his reply with the reply to a question which I also addressed to him yesterday and which, I understand, cannot be debated on the Adjournment because of the hearing of the appeal. This morning I made a plea to the Minister to have this appeal dealt with today if possible.

I am raising this matter because of the circumstances that exist in Clara, and in Banagher where the circumstances are similar, where we have the extraordinary spectacle of, at least in Clara, 300 workers—that is the figure which the Minister has given in his reply; approximately 300 workers made a claim for unemployment benefit; those 300 employees each have at least three dependants so that is a total of approximately 1,000 people—who have not received a penny piece to maintain and support them in this small country town since the 4th or 6th of February.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will appreciate that the question of unemployment benefit does not arise on the question before the House. The only matter before the House is Question No. 51 which deals with a deputation to the Minister or his Department.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

I fully agree. Question No. 51 refers to an important letter from the management of the firm. In this important letter the management, Messrs. J. & L. F. Goodbody Ltd., clearly explained that these 300 workers were paid off by the firm because of a breakdown in machinery and, due to the unfortunate existence of the strike, the maintenance people cannot put the machinery into working order. Here we find, as a result of this nationwide strike which is paralysing the country, and which neither the Minister for Social Welfare, the Taoiseach, nor the Minister for Labour seem to be taking seriously, that in the town of Clara great numbers of the population are this very day on the verge of hunger.

I was informed last night that the last penny piece has been paid out by the local conference of the St. Vincent de Paul Society. Workers have not got money for rent, rates, taxation, light or food. The communication which they brought to the Minister's office on 20th February had a bearing on this matter. The local branch of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union thought it necessary to come to Dublin, because of their economic circumstances, and because of the plight of their families, so that the Minister's Department might have this communication without any delay that might be involved in the post.

When they arrived I understand that they presented a letter of introduction which I had given them. This letter was taken to a senior official of the Department. This group of lawabiding workers who had no intention of displaying any degree of discourtesy —my information is that they were met with discourtesy—were left standing in the hall of the Minister's Department for about three-quarters of an hour. At the end of three-quarters of an hour, this deputation of people who were waiting for news, were surrounded by at least 30 members of the Garda Síochána. That leads me to believe that the Minister's Department did not courteously receive the deputation from the trade union of these workers who had travelled especially because they had not one penny piece in their pockets to buy bread, fuel or light for their families. Their wives usually shopped in a supermarket in an adjoining town, but in a supermarket it is cash down. They had not a penny piece to provide food for their children. For that reason they lost no time in coming to the Minister's Department with whatever information they had to strengthen their claim. The response they got was to be surrounded by at least 30 members of the Garda Síochána.

The Minister's reply leads me to believe that it was a smaller force of the Garda Síochána than 30, but may I ask the Minister why was it necessary to phone for the Garda to surround these decent, hard-working, honest, workers who were seriously perturbed because of the economic plight in which they found themselves? They were interested only in getting a week's money. They had been refused home assistance by the local authority because, in accordance with the regulations, the local authority could not pay them home assistance. They said it was a matter of a trade dispute. The question of home assistance was out, and the trade union of which the workers are members have not paid one penny piece to these workers because they claim it is the responsibility of the Department of Social Welfare.

This deputation called on the Minister's Department to find out if they were entitled to this money, where they were going to get money, how they were to keep body and soul together. They had already approached the local authority and been told: "No, there is nothing here for you." They had already approached the trade union and been told they were not entitled to any trade union benefit. Their only hope of getting money was from the Department and, when they came to make their case to the Department, a force of 30 Garda was called to have them removed. I think that is very great discourtesy and, in the interests of these workers, I think it should be raised here.

This is the place to protest. There are too many people protesting outside Parliament and on the streets. Parliament is the place to make a case. Parliament is the place to make a protest. On behalf of those people I want to protest in the strongest possible manner at the unreasonable attitude of the Department in not paying out those benefits to those people, without their being put to the trouble of coming up to the Minister's Department. The responsibility rests with the Minister for Social Welfare so far as this matter is concerned. He should make a very serious effort to alleviate the appalling distress that prevails in the town of Clara. He is not taking a very serious view of this matter and neither is the Taoiseach nor any Member of the Government.

People in an Irish town are hungry in the midst of prosperity. There is nobody to give them anything. We are all aware of what these people are entitled to, on their own contributions, as a result of very hard work but the only sympathy the Minister for Social Welfare has for them is to get the Gardaí to remove them from an office in which they were making a fair and just inquiry.

We had a television interview today but I cannot understand why both television and the Press have been so silent about this matter in view of all we have been hearing of late about Captain O'Neill and the Reverend Ian Paisley in the North of Ireland, whose activities do not concern us. It is appalling and certainly distressing to find little children going to school without food, and wives without a penny in their purse to buy it. Then we hear from the Minister for Social Welfare that an appeal must be heard. That was the purpose of the deputation which visited his Department. If the appeal had been heard today there might not have been any necessity for us to comment on it. Even if it has to be heard on Sunday, the Minister should ensure that the appeal will be heard as quickly as possible so that the workers and their families will at last be able to return to their normal pattern of life.

If the Minister does not make a decision this week-end, where will these people get money for food? If the strikes last for another two or three weeks then God knows what will happen to those unfortunate people not to talk of the fact that, even when a strike ends, it takes a long time to repay debts which have had to be incurred in time of want and misery.

To call in the Gardaí in order to have these people removed did indeed put the Gardaí in an extraordinary position. It was an act designed to intimidate those people. That is quite wrong. They have enough problems without having had to meet a reception of that kind. The Garda Síochána are there to safeguard life and property. I cannot understand the attitude of the Minister's Department in getting the Garda Síochána to surround a body of most respectable, decent and hard-working citizens. The Minister should apologise to the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union if there has been any misunderstanding. The men may have appeared agitated, but so would the Minister in similar circumstances, with no money coming in since the first week of February; with the trade unions disclaiming responsibility and with the home assistance authorities disclaiming responsibility. These people are in a desperate plight.

I call on the Minister, in the name of Christian charity, to give the people what they are entitled to. The reception they received in the Minister's Department has left a very bad impression on them and one cannot blame them for that. The Minister should apologise for sending in the Gardaí in this case. All that the people concerned wanted was an assurance that they would get what they were entitled to.

In the early hours of this morning, I was informed through the public representatives in Clara, that widespread sympathy is going out to those people. The Government should see to it that justice is done. Neither the Taoiseach nor the Minister for Labour is doing anything in this matter and all that the Minister for Social Welfare did was to send in the Gardaí to remove those decent people. This is a very bad way of stamping out protests. This is the most desperate situation that has ever obtained in Clara. It is a matter of life and death for the people concerned.

I do not raise this matter with a view to obtaining political kudos of any kind; I do so because I am in close touch with those people and know their families and am painfully aware of their present unhappy plight which, I hope and trust, will be brought to a conclusion without delay. Industrial relations in this country are desperate; that matter has already been referred to. The Government have a bounden duty to look after the lives of the citizens. This shocking state of affairs, which has our country in complete chaos and anarchy, and which, indeed, is driving it to disaster, must be brought to an end immediately. It is wrong, it is immoral and it is dishonest that our workers should have to suffer as they are suffering and that their families should be on the verge of starvation. Somebody must come to their assistance.

Down through the years, funds have been started and appeals have been made here for Biafra and other farflung parts of the globe. We must now turn to those among us who are hungry and try to succour them. Who will lead an appeal for those workers and their innocent families who are in this desperate plight, who are out of work through no fault of their own and who are getting not a penny piece from anybody? The Government must take action before it is too late. There is very little time left. Those people do not know where to turn to. I beg the Minister to give ear to my serious and very genuine plea.

Minister for Social Welfare (Mr. J. Brennan)

I shall not go into the merits of the case because, as the Deputy is aware, the Minister cannot interfere with the deciding officer in the matter of an appeal. He is a statutory officer in whom is vested full power to make a decision. It would not be desirable or physically possible for the Minister to take on the responsibility of dealing with appeals. One can strive to ensure that the minimum delay will take place on a decision on an appeal. Deputy Flanagan, I would say, very much dramatised the appeal. It is no different from thousands of other appeals throughout the entire country by people with an insurance record—appeals in relation to sickness and unemployment—which our deciding officers have to hear in the ordinary way.

In this case, a number of workers were employed at Clara. The appeal in question is in respect of workers who were out of work before a picket was placed. I shall not attempt to say anything that would influence a decision one way or the other but it is significant that, when the picket was placed, the remaining workers refused to pass the picket. God knows it is very easy to criticise industrial relations. Men sit up late at night trying to find solutions for people who find themselves out of work. I have a lot of sympathy with men who find themselves out of work. I have even more sympathy with those people who cannot find work and who would be glad to do it if they had it. Unfortunately, there is quite a number of that category in this country. Maybe some time sanity will return to the people concerned and such cases as these will not occupy the time of the House and people will find for themselves the nice livelihood it is possible to earn where they are fortunate enough to have factories. There are so many towns throughout Ireland, particularly along the Western seaboard, where they have not these factories and the people have to go out to work in Birmingham, Liverpool and London.

That does not mean to say that the Department of Social Welfare is callous or does not take a sympathetic view of every case and come to a decision impartially without being influenced one way or another in regard to the merits of the case. Up to 1967 anybody out of work in any way associated with a strike or industrial dispute was automatically deprived of unemployment benefit. Following some request from the Trade Union Council to the Minister at the time some suggestions were made and in my time I saw fit to make some amendments that would meet particular cases where people could show that they were not in any way associated with the dispute but were rendered unemployed as a result of it, that they could in some way be regarded as a special category. In fact, I was looking at the particular extract of the Act in question and it is a very slender line between the two categories. Let me quote from the Social Welfare Act, 1952, which made certain exceptions:

A person who has lost employment by reason of a stoppage of work which was due to a trade dispute at the factory, workshop, farm or other premises or place at which he was employed shall be disqualified for receiving unemployment benefit so long as the stoppage of work continues, except in a case where he has, during the stoppage of work, become bona fide employed elsewhere in the occupation which he usually follows or has become regularly engaged in some other occupation.

Section 15 of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1967, states:

"Provided that the foregoing provisions of this subsection shall not apply to a person who—

(a) is not participating in or financing or directly interested in the trade dispute which caused the stoppage of work, and

(b) does not belong to a grade or class of workers of which, immediately before the commencement of the stoppage, there were members employed at his place of employment any of whom are participating in or financing or directly interested in the dispute.

These are the exceptions which were made at the time and it is a very slender line making some provision in certain cases. Up to then all persons in any way associated with a trade dispute or strike were automatically deprived of unemployment benefit. This line is a fairly slender one. It is a pity that when the picket did go on the workers at Clara, the remainder of the people refused to pass the picket.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The management paid them off.

Mr. J. Brennan

There were 600 workers employed. Only 300 have put forward a claim. The last thing I would like to think is that my Department would treat any workers, union representatives or others who call to negotiate, in a discourteous manner. I deny that this happened in this case. I submit that the Deputy is completely wrongly informed. I was here in the House when these people arrived. I had no intimation of it. In fact, it was the next day before I knew what it was all about. I was on my way back after the Dáil adjourned this day week when I saw a group in the hall, quite a sizeable group, and an official discussing matters with them. I did not see any gardaí at that time. There was no commotion but it was obvious that they were discussing something in relation to matters pertaining to the Department. We have regular callers, sometimes groups. Indeed, it is on record that on one occasion one of our doormen had his arm seriously injured by a caller who was disgruntled with the decision he got but I would not say that that has aroused any animosity towards the people in question. The pity is that the letter they had with them was not sent up before they came so that it would be known they were coming. They brought a letter and it was given to somebody at the door who in turn brought it to the proper section. Eventually, the man dealing directly with it was found. He explained the entire procedure to them in just the same manner as if they had come announced and arranged for a deputation. He did not show any discourtesy towards them though they did appear to be a bit excited and expressed the opinion that they came to force a decision favourable to themselves. This is understandable. This is nothing unusual nowadays.

I should like to deny the information the Deputy has got—that they were surrounded by gardaí—which would seem to be a fairly unnecessary thing to do and absolutely pointless. This did not happen. Because of our proximity to Store Street Garda Station it is usual that one or two gardaí might be around there at any time. It is correct that on this occasion some notification went to the barracks in relation to an unannounced deputation that arrived. I would not say it went from any particularly high-up source but that is usual enough. In fact, at times it might not be unusual for 100 workers or some type of pressure group to arrive at the premises. It can happen at any time and queer things happen nowadays but there was no discourtesy, no unusual display of violence, no approach other than one of courtesy and I would not like it to have been otherwise. I can say that the Deputy is wrongly informed if he says the men were received in a discourteous manner.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Will the Minister have the money paid next week?

Mr. J. Brennan

The ordinary procedure has to be adopted. As I said, we have a number of deciding officers who go all over the country to deal with cases, all of which are urgent, and we have to get the necessary machinery set up. That is being attended to now as rapidly as possible. I need hardly say that the trade union people have been in touch with me about this and are pressing for an early decision.

With regard to home assistance for these people the Deputy who is a member of a local authority as I was for many years, must be aware that the local authority whose responsibility it is to disburse home assistance are empowered at any time to come to the aid of any group in need of money and they do not need to have a decision from us before they pay.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The county manager told me that he would not pay it because it is a trade dispute and it is for the trade unions or the Department of Social Welfare.

Mr. Lalor

He told me otherwise.

Mr. J. Brennan

He might have a point there. I do not know how they stand with regard to trade unions but it is a pity that men who are on strike are left with no money whatever.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Will you do your best?

Mr. J. Brennan

I will expedite a decision. I do not want to say anything here that would influence it or prejudice it other than to say that I hope it will be soon. I also want to say that if they felt there was any discourtesy it was certainly not intended. We always treat people who call even unannounced, with the greatest courtesy.

The Dáil adjourned at 5.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 4th March, 1969.