As originally planned the Bill was to have contained only one section, namely, a provision to permit of the establishment subject to certain conditions of the existing unestablished District Court clerks. It was later decided to take advantage of the opportunity to include in the Bill a few other provisions of a technical character aimed at remedying defects in previous Court Officers Acts that time had brought to light. Therefore, the Bill, as it comes before you, is in the nature of a Miscellaneous Provisions Bill but, nevertheless, I think that the Seanad, like the Dáil, will be chiefly interested in the section that concerns the unestablished District Court clerks which is Section 3 of the Bill.
Under Section 3 of the Bill, it is proposed to take power to enable clerks, who are regarded as being employed whole-time, to be established without the necessity of undergoing a competitive or even qualifying test at the hands of the Civil Service Commissioners. Furthermore, power is being taken to enable certificates of qualification granted under the section to be ante-dated so that unestablished whole-time service may be reckonable for pension purposes. Provision is also made for the payment of gratuities on retirement to any whole-time District Court clerk who may for any reason not secure establishment under the section, as, for example, in the case of a clerk who might be considered ineligible for establishment on account of his age or for reasons of health.
The section follows generally the lines of Section 62 of the Court Officers Act, 1926, with one very important difference. A serious defect in the 1926 Act provision was that it stopped short at providing for persons who were employed in a whole-time capacity at the date of the passing of the Act. Since the Act was passed, a number of clerks have become whole-time, but it was not possible to establish these clerks because of the defect to which I have referred. In Section 3 we now propose to provide that any clerk who is at present only a part-time clerk may be established under the section if at any time subsequently he becomes a whole-time clerk.
I am sure that Senators will wish to know how exactly the provisions of the section are going to work out in practice. One thing I want to make clear is that the enactment of this provision is not going to mean that every District Court clerk is going to secure establishment automatically because there are some clerks who cannot possibly be regarded as fulfilling the requirement of whole-time service. Thus, there are in some parts of the country, clerks who have only one court a month to attend to, dealing with no more than a couple of hundred cases a year—most of them trivial. However, I can say that the powers under the section will be operated in as generous a spirit as is consistent with the preservation of the idea that whole-time service is an essential condition for establishment— an idea which it is necessary to preserve because of the reactions which any departure from that principle would have on the Civil Service generally.
The administrative details will have to be worked out between my Department and the Department of Finance, but I feel I am warranted in saying that the majority of the existing unestablished clerks will secure establishment under the provisions of the Bill and that in all cases establishment will carry with it recognition for pension purposes of some, at least, of the clerks' unestablished service.
When the Bill was before the Dáil, I had to say that previous service, where reckonable, would count only from the first of January, 1927, but I am now in a position to say that in appropriate cases and subject to the fulfilment of the requisite conditions previous service will count from 27th March, 1923, that is to say, from the date of the coming into operation of the District Justices (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1923.
With regard to those clerks who may not secure establishment under Section 3 of the Bill, I have two observations to make. First, it is possible that some of these will secure establishment later on as a result of the policy of amalgamating clerkships that is being pursued by my Department with the object of doing away with part-time clerkships altogether so far as may be practicable. Secondly, I am authorised by my colleague, the Minister for Finance, to say that sympathetic consideration will be given to a request for retention beyond the normal age of retirement from any existing clerk who fails to secure establishment under the provisions of the Bill and it may be taken that, in practice, any such clerk will be continued in office so long as he is capable of the efficient discharge of his duties.
So much for Section 3 of the Bill which, as I say, is the really important section.
The remaining sections deal with technical matters which I do not propose to go into in detail unless the Seanad wishes me to do so. Section 2 of the Bill is intended to remove any possible doubt as to the liability of a county registrar to surrender to the Exchequer any fees which he may receive in respect of duties that were formerly performed by the under-sheriff. Section 4 of the Bill is self-explanatory.
Section 5 is to remedy a technical defect in the existing law relating to district probate registries, which leaves these offices, as it were, in the air, that is to say, unattached to any particular court, although everyone is agreed that they ought to be attached to the High Court, which is what the Bill provides.
Finally, Section 6 has a double object; first, to remove doubts as to the boundaries of the bailiwick of the county under-sheriff in Dublin and, secondly, to enable the present sheriff of the county borough of Dublin, who will be 70 years of age next month, to be continued in office for a further two years, that is to say, to grant him a concession that has already been made to the county under-sheriff, who is due to retire this month, having already reached the age of 72. Both of these officers have given distinguished public service, and it is felt that it would be invidious to treat them differently. The reason why there has to be legislation in the case of the sheriff, which was unnecessary in the case of the under-sheriff, is that the latter was appointed by an Act of the British Parliament which imposed no absolute age-limit. These, then, are the provisions of the Bill. I think I have given the fullest information with regard to them, but if there are any points which Senators wish to raise, I shall be glad to deal with them.
