asked the Minister for Labour if the Labour Court have received instructions to treat the Prices and Incomes Bill, 1970 as if it were in fact an Act which had been passed by the Oireachtas; if so, who gave the instructions; and why the instructions were given.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Prices and Incomes Bill, 1970.
7.
The Labour Court has not been given any such instructions.
Is the Minister aware that officials of the Labour Court have indicated that they cannot negotiate on claims before the court either at conciliation level or at full court level because of the fact that the Prices and Incomes Bill has been introduced in this House?
I am aware that the Labour Court has made some recommendations and in certain cases has appended to them a statement to the effect that account must be taken of the possibility of statutory restrictions applying in regard to wages and salaries but no instructions have been given. Indeed, neither the Minister for Labour nor the Government are empowered to give instructions to the Labour Court.
Would the Minister say from whom did the Labour Court get the advice that they should in fact put those stipulations in recommendations they have made and would the Minister say if there is any precedent for the situation where people working on labour relations are required to treat as an Act a Bill the Second Reading of which had not been passed in this House at the time?
I do not know where the Labour Court got the idea of doing this—I would presume from their own discretion. It seems to me to be entirely a matter of commonsense in the existing circumstances. As for there being a precedent, there is, of course, ample precedent for this kind of situation.
Can the Minister say from what date the Prices and Incomes Bill is applicable?
The Deputy will be aware from the contents of the Bill that it is intended to have it operate as from 16th October.
Can the Minister say where he gets his authority to advise this?
The authority will be given in due course presumably by the Oireachtas.
In other words, there is no authority?
I have not ever said——
There is no authority. The Minister cannot do this either by regulation or by legislation because he has not got any.
I have never claimed that——
The Minister is chancing his arm.
Would the Minister be able to say—I asked him this question on the Second Reading and he did not reply—whether or not he considers that any legislation brought in here either at the end of this year or early next year will be able to interfere with wage increases between 16th October and the date of the passing of the Bill by the Oireachtas?
If the Bill is passed as it is before the House at the moment, it will operate as from 16th October. Therefore, if any agreements are entered into subsequent to 16th October which would contravene the terms of the Bill which would then be an Act they would of course be so affected.
Would the Minister not agree that there is no law nor can there be a law which will punish somebody for breaking a law which did not exist? No law now exists to prevent this from happening and will the Minister say in what way does he propose to tie this up so that people will be punished at a later date for doing something which is not a breach of the law now?
And it may never be if the Bill is amended.
This is a matter of legal interpretation of the Bill.
So the Minister has doubts?
It seems to me that anybody with any commonsense in existing circumstances would have regard to the terms of the Bill and to the position which would arise on the passing of the Bill and anybody who does not can take the consequences.
There are no consequences.
What will happen in the case of wages and salaries that have been increased since 16th October? When this legislation is enacted, will the Minister have power to take back the increases?
That is what I said. Anybody who considers that, on the advice of Labour Deputies, he should go ahead irrespective of what is in the Bill is entitled to do so but he must take the consequences and those who advise him would be responsible accordingly.
What would be the consequences?
The Deputy will appreciate that this is a matter for legal interpretation.
Will the Minister not accept that this Bill is open to amendment while being put through the House as is the case in respect of any other Bill?
Yes, that is possible.
It seems that people are being put in a position whereby they may be punished for doing something which they did not know was illegal.
As any sensible or prudent person would do, one would of course have regard to the terms of the Bill.
It is unconstitutional.
If it is unconstitutional lots of other similar precedents in the past have been unconstitutional but these have been supported by Deputies on the other side of the House. Furthermore, there are others coming up that will be supported by Deputies over there because these precedents happen to suit them.
Could the Minister say——
I am calling Question No. 8.
——if he received advice from the lawyers in his Department in relation to this Bill?
Of course, as case with all other Bills.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I shall quote from Article 25 4.1º of the Constitution which reads:
Every Bill shall become and be law as on and from the day on which it is signed by the President under this Constitution, and shall, unless the contrary intention appears, come into operation on that day.
It says "unless the contrary intention appears".
This may be the Minister's way out.
The Bill says it will operate as from 16th October.
I would advise the Minister not to try enforcing that.
I advise the people not to pay too much attention to the advice being given by Deputy Tully. The Deputy will not carry the can if it goes wrong.
(Interruptions.)