I move:—
"Section 10, sub-section (6).— After the word ‘as' in line 8, to delete the words ‘the Council with the sanction of' inserted in Committee."
The section as passed by the Dáil provided that the remuneration of the manager should be such as the Minister shall from time to time determine. The amendment passed in the Seanad in Committee provided that the amount should be determined by the Council with the sanction of the Minister. Now that makes a very material consideration, and one which I am sure that at least Senator Johnson was not fully cognisant of when he moved the amendment, because in doing so he used the words: "The Council should have at least a voice in what the salary of the manager might be and to prevent the Council making a fool of itself and paying either too little or too much the Minister will have the right to veto." As far as I can see, the only veto left with the Minister under the Section, as amended by Senator Johnson's amendment, is that he will have power, if he considers the remuneration high, to veto it. But, where the Council fixes inadequate remuneration the section, as altered by Senator Johnson's amendment, gives the Minister no effective remedy. The deletion of these words that were inserted in Committee and giving the Minister the power that was originally assigned him is not investing him with any new powers. In regard to many services the Minister already has full power to decide the remuneration of officers.
For the information of those who have not studied the matter closely I would like to call attention to a few sections of various Acts. Section 31 of the Poor Relief (Ireland) Act, 1838, gives him such power in regard to officers concerned in the administration of poor relief. Section 8, Poor Relief (Ireland) Act, 1851, gives him the power in regard to all medical officers of dispensary districts. The latter section is extended by Section 21 of the Public Health (Ireland) Act, 1878, so as to apply in the case of all sanitary officers, including the County Medical Officer of Health. By Section 15 of the Local Government (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1923, the Minister is enabled by order to acquire in regard to any officer powers similar to those which he has in regard to the remuneration of officers of Boards of Guardians under Section 31 Poor Relief (Ireland) Act, 1838. That section has been applied by the Local Offices and Employments Orders, 1924, to practically every office except those of minor importance by the Order issued in 1924. The effect, it appears, of the amendment inserted in Committee is this: that a specific provision in an Act of this kind passed after the Act of 1923 would be taken as overriding the provisions of the latter Act, so as to prevent the Minister from himself determining a salary which the new Act expressly requires to be determined by the Council. Under the amended section, therefore, the Minister's power to fix the manager's remuneration certainly ceases when the Local Government (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1923, ceases to be in force and almost certainly does not exist even under that Act if this section passes.
I referred in the beginning to Senator Johnson's statement in moving the amendment that the Minister should have power to veto, if the Council make a fool of themselves, by paying either too little or too much, and it appears if this section as amended in Committee stands, it would only be in the case of the payment of too much that the Minister would have power to act, and that unless and until that situation would arise the Minister would be powerless to secure that adequate remuneration would be paid to the manager. I think that there is an opinion in existence, which is becoming more and more articulate, that seems to consider that while the services of public servants should be rigorously exacting, the remuneration should be merely nominal. That opinion seems to be very much in existence at the present time. I have before me a couple of cases where the remuneration of public servants was deemed by the Minister to be inadequate, and where the public bodies concerned disagreed with the Minister. I am not going to argue which was right or which was wrong, but I say that it is conceivable that in matters of this kind the public bodies might be wrong, and might fix salaries or remuneration which were inadequate for the positions, and for the duties of the officials. Under the circumstances, where such an inadequate scale of remuneration was decided on, it is right and equitable that the Minister should have power to veto the action of the Councils concerned. I do not like mentioning cases, but there are a couple of specific ones in which this matter has been recently brought to a very definite issue between the public bodies and the Department. Members of public bodies are not immune from certain human weaknesses, and it is quite possible that, for political or other reasons, they might be actuated by niggardly ideas with regard to the remuneration of their servants, and on the idea that it would be popular and secure strong support at some impending elections they might attempt to insist upon an inadequate remuneration to the official concerned, and it would certainly be bad, at this first attempt at setting up city management the success of this scheme, which has met with commendation from practically every section of the Oireachtas as a great step which is deserving of the support of the whole community, to risk the success of such a scheme by not making provision for the contingencies that I have referred to, and which almost are bound to arise, if the section as amended in Committee is not revised now. For these reasons I move the amendment.