Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 19 Nov 1947

Vol. 34 No. 12

Civil Service (Transferred Officers) Compensation (Amendment) Bill, 1947—Committee and Final Stages.

Bill passed through Committee and reported without amendment.
Agreed to take remaining stages to-day.
Question—"That the Bill be received for final consideration"—put and agreed to.
Question proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."

I should like to explain to the House that I did not move any amendment similar in character to the recommendation that I moved to the Superannuation Bill. This Bill is not a money Bill and I was under the impression, its character being different from the other one, that an amendment would be ruled out of order. It is important that it should be made clear, if and when the Minister or his successor feels the justice of the case, that it will be necessary to introduce another Bill, which would deal with a class of persons not affected by the Superannuation Bill, but whose position, had it been amended, would be adjusted under the Civil Service Compensation Bill. This Bill amends the Civil Service Compensation Act, 1929. According to my information a number of persons retired as transferred officers before 1940 because their conditions had been worsened. If there was to be an adjustment there is no doubt but that they would have to be taken into consideration, because it seems to me their position is for all practical purposes the same as the others. Where a transferred officer retired because it was accepted that his conditions had been worsened what he received was called compensation. The lump sum payment and the pension were, according to my information, calculated in exactly the same way as if he had been a retired civil servant.

I do not want to redebate the matter. I only want to make it clear that I was aware of the fact that this class of civil servant existed, and that if one was to be dealt with it was almost certain that the other would have to be dealt with at the same time, even though their positions might not have been identical. It might have been that there was a difference in age at the time they retired, but the fundamental position would seem to be the same. I did not deal with this on the Committee Stage, but I do want to make it clear that the arguments that I put forward on the Superannuation Bill would have applied if I had put down an amendment to this Bill. I consider it sufficient to make that clear.

There is another point. This Bill concerns people whose rights were guaranteed between two Governments. I think the Bill, by unilateral legislation, deprives them of those rights. I have not been approached on this matter, but I think that is the position. I am not sure that the rights of an individual under such an international agreement can be taken away by such legislation, that is, assuming he had any rights, nor do I think that the majority of his colleagues who, I think the Minister said, were consulted, have any right to deprive him of his rights even by a majority decision of theirs.

Question put and agreed to.
Ordered: That the Bill be returned to the Dáil.
Top
Share