Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 22 Mar 1961

Vol. 53 No. 14

Central Bank Bill, 1960—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Minister for Finance (Dr. Ryan)

The Central Bank Bill is an amending Bill dealing with superannuation. When the Act was passed in 1942, the superannuation scheme included at that time was not capable of being amended. The aim of this Bill is, in the first place, to give the board of the central bank power to amend the scheme set out in Section 2. It then goes on to limit their power of amendment. The scheme can be amended to deal with a chairman who has been in the Civil Service. It gives them power to aggregate the service of the particular person in the Civil Service and as chairman of the central bank. The amendment of the scheme can be retrospective to 1st December, 1960, and it lays down that rules of superannuation in the Civil Service will apply to the governor of the central bank.

It does not apply beyond 1st December. It applies to the person who was governor of the bank at that time or since. When this scheme comes into effect, no pension will be payable to him from the exchequer as a civil servant. He will be paid by the central bank. If it should happen that he has received any amount by way of pension from the Civil Service from 1st December until the scheme is made, then that amount will be taken into account. In other words, it will be deducted from the amount which would be due to him if the scheme had applied from 1st December. That is the scheme visualised under the Bill.

The same procedure has been adopted with the chairman of other State companies: the chairman of the E.S.B. and the chairman of C.I.E. It has been thought well to follow the same pattern here. I want to make it clear to Senators that if the Bill is passed and the scheme is made as outlined here, then the central bank will be responsible for the chairman's pension. He will receive his whole pension from Central Bank funds and will not receive anything from the civil service. That is what has applied already to the chairman of the E.S.B. and the chairman of C.I.E. I ask the Seanad to adopt this Bill.

Dr. O'Donovan

It is certainly most astounding that the first amendment of the Central Bank Act passed in 1942 should be in the nature of a pensions Bill for one or two people. The long title to the Bill is one of the most extraordinary ever put on any Bill coming before either House of the Oireachtas:

An Act to enable the scheme made pursuant to paragraph (c) of subsection (1) of Section 33 of the Central Bank Act, 1942, to be amended.

That certainly is guaranteed to limit discussion on the Bill. If it had been introduced simply as a Bill to amend the Central Bank Act of 1942, we might have had a much more interesting discussion, but, even as it is, I think one can say one or two things about the Bill it self.

It is extremely objectionable that Parliament should be asked to pass legislation to benefit one or two people and I would quote to the House the case in Britain of a proposal that Lady Louis Mountbatten should receive a part of her own money, money that had been entailed, a huge sum of money which she had been left by her grand-father's will, because she felt she could not live on the income. The British Houses of Parliament rose up in their wrath and threw it out. They said: "If this kind of legislation is brought in, we have no objection if it has a general application." They threw the Bill out and, in my opinion, they were right.

Let us just think of the equities of this matter. The Minister refers to people with long periods of service in the Civil Service. They could get their Civil Service pension under the 1914 Act, but of course the purpose of this Bill is to increase the pensions that are probably due to one or two people. Let me make myself clear. If the Central Bank wants to pay its Governor—the Chairman of its board of directors—a big salary, as is paid to such people in other countries, I have no objection at all, none whatsoever. They can pay their chairman, so far as I am concerned, £24,000 a year, if I mention a figure that has created a good deal of discussion across the Irish Sea. I think this Bill is the wrong way to tackle this problem and it is no use for the Minister to come in here and quote for us two other cases.

I ought to say that were it not that the name of a particular man was mentioned in the E.S.B. Act we passed, I certainly would have made the same objection as I have made here tonight. But I think that is more objectionable —that a particular person should have provision made by legislation for a pension when the General Services conditions apply to him.

There is reference in the Minister's brief, and particularly in the brief he read out in the Dáil, as reported at column 146, to the Act of 1914. Of course, one of the difficulties about the Act of 1914 is that its administration has not been uniform at all. At one period of its years, one form of administration has obtained; in another period of years, a different kind of administration has obtained and instead of having it liberalised, as other forms of legislation are, it has not been liberalised. It has been restricted.

Now, the result is, of course, that the Act of 1914 is almost, to all intents and purposes, a dead letter. It has been so restricted that its original purpose is lost. The fact is that, if the Act of 1914 had been properly administered, the plain meaning of the Act would have been applied, but it was not so applied.

There is another objection to this legislation, that is, that it is retrospective.

We all know that retrospective legislation is extremely objectionable. There is nobody but will agree with me that the Superannuation Acts require amendment in relation to much more serious matters than are covered in this piece of legislation and therefore I am opposed to the enactment of this Bill.

Mr. O'Quigley

Perhaps in nothing more does the stern stuff of which a Minister for Finance is made dissolve into a flood of sympathy and compassion than in relation to superannuation. The Minister for Finance has the duty of providing for the payment of superannuation to a wide variety of people and I think that a Minister for Finance does not, at all times, give himself the opportunity of allowing his humanity to remain manifest itself as perhaps he, himself—and certainly the recipients of superannuation—would like. For that reason, I have the view with regard to this Bill that it is a great pity it does not embrace a great many more people than, apparently, the one or two people it is intended to cover.

Senator O'Donovan referred to the inadvisability of having legislation enacted to provide pensions out of public funds for one or two people. It strikes me as extremely odd that an Act, in 1942, was so haphazardly framed and drafted without the assistance of people like Senator O'Donovan and myself. This legislation is brought about by the lack of foresight on the part of those who were, at that time, responsible for the enactment of the Central Bank Act of 1942.

Presumably, the Currency Commission of the day was consulted with regard to the many provisions of the Central Bank Act of 1942 and it speaks for their disinterestedness and self-effacement that they paid so little attention to the superannuation provisions.

The Minister has indicated that this piece of legislation is retrospective to 1st of December, 1960. I am beginning to wonder where do we stand in regard to the pronouncements made by various Ministers in this House. This evening we had the Minister for Health terrorising us, almost, into enacting the Mental Treatment Bill of 1960, because, he said, if it were not enacted before Easter, the superannuation provisions would not come into operation on 1st April.

I venture to suggest that there was nothing that Parliament could do in relation to the superannuation provisions coming into operation on 1st of April, 1961. The Minister for Health was not having any of that kind of legislation; but here we have set down by the authority on super-annuation—the Minister for Finance —that legislation can be enacted with retrospective effect in relation to superannuation. On the other hand, the Minister for Health tells us it would be gravely wrong, a very undesirable thing, for anyone who had any mind to do so, to oppose the Mental Treatment Bill: that in the interests of people retiring they should be in favour of the early passage of the Bill, from the point of view of facilitating senior members of the Civil Service taking up employment outside the Civil Service, and there should be no discouragement by reason of the inadequacy of the superannuation provisions of people from taking up such employment. Apart from the wide experience they have and the great knowledge they can bring to bear in their outside employment, these outside employments for higher civil servants are very desirable for a variety of reasons into which it is not necessary to go.

Consequently, it is regrettable that those responsible for this Bill did not, long ago, have the foresight to see that it would be necessary and did not bring it in, in anticipation of its application to specified individuals. If that had been done, I think one would not have the misgivings one must have about special legislation to provide pensions for lone individuals. I trust that, when this Bill is passed, it will have been passed in such a way that it will not require further amendment.

It does strike me, however, that subsection (3) of Section 2, as it stands, is not adequate and will require further amendment in this House. It is provided in the first part of the section that the scheme may be amended and it provides that every amendment shall be effected by means of an amending scheme. Then it goes on to say "every scheme under this section shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas". "Every scheme", to my mind, does not include an amending scheme.

We had a difficulty like that in the Electricity Supply Board Bill recently which the Minister for Transport and Power said, if my recollection is correct, warranted amendment, and had to be amended to make it clear that amending schemes as well as the original scheme would be laid before each House of the Oireachtas. I have not had an opportunity of looking up the provisions of the Electricity Supply Bill, but I believe it might well be worth looking into to ensure that this Bill will not have to be further amended in a few months' time to give proper authority and validity to any amendment of the existing scheme that might be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Section 3 of this Bill.

Dr. Ryan

This Bill is of general application, of course in a small way, to all chairmen of the Central Bank, and for that reason it would be wrong to name a person at this juncture because it will apply to future chairmen as well. There are certain defects in the present system. If a man becomes chairman of the Central Bank and leaves the Civil Service before he is 60, he does not carry his pension rights with him. Another difficulty is that if he dies within five years of becoming chairman, then he gets no death gratuity. There is therefore necessity to amend the scheme laid down in the Central Bank Act to the extent at least to which we are doing it now.

There is, of course, technically speaking, an element of retrospection in this Bill, but it is the type of retrospection which we get in many Bills. Many a Bill is brought in relating to superannuation and other matters which dates back the superannuation to the first of the year. In the past two years, for instance, I brought pensions Bills before the Seanad in respect of the Civil Service. I think that each time I brought the Bill here around the month of August but the pension dated back to the first of April, so it is not unusual and nobody objects to retrospection where we are giving benefits.

Dr. O'Donovan

That would be provided in the Budget. What is the use in the Minister trying to make that kind of point?

Dr. Ryan

Surely to goodness, I am making a sensible point.

Dr. O'Donovan

That is not a sensible point.

An Cathaoirleach

The Minister must be allowed to speak without interruption.

Dr. Ryan

I do not want to be educated in good sense by the Senator. With regard to the application of the 1914 Act, some Senators might consider that it is not as liberal as it should be, that it was restricted. My experience has been that it has been applied wherever it was considered right and just that it should be applied, and more and more as the years went on. It has been, therefore, liberalised as the years went on, contrary to what Senator O'Donovan said.

Dr. O'Donovan

That is not true, either.

Dr. Ryan

It is true.

Dr. O'Donovan

The statement is false.

Dr. Ryan

The number of people to whom it was applied over the past ten years has been increased.

Dr. O'Donovan

It has been restricted.

Dr. Ryan

It may have been restricted in certain cases where it should not apply, but where, in the opinion of the Department——

Dr. O'Donovan

It has been restricted in its application.

Dr. Ryan

It did apply where it should apply. The only other point was that raised by Senator O'Quigley with regard to amendments to the effect that every scheme will be laid on the Table. Actually, the word "scheme" is used in the Bill itself, so that I do not see any point in Senator O'Quigley's argument in that respect.

Mr. Lahiffe

There never is.

Mr. Donegan

We are wrong as usual. We are not always wrong, of course.

Dr. Ryan

Nearly always.

Question put and agreed to.

An Cathaoirleach

Next stage?

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

Now.

Dr. O'Donovan

There is a technical amendment required, apart from anything else.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

What objection is there to taking it now?

Dr. O'Donovan

There is every objection, because it was agreed on another Bill that this form of drafting is wrong and I am not going to agree to it on this occasion.

An Cathaoirleach

Does the Senator wish to put down an amendment?

Dr. O'Donovan

We do wish.

An Cathaoirleach

In that case, further consideration will have to be deferred.

Dr. O'Donovan

So we are not always wrong.

Mr. Lenihan

Nearly always.

Dr. O'Donovan

Nearly always right.

An Cathaoirleach

Perhaps we could take the Bill next Tuesday.

Dr. O'Donovan

With respect, we met here after Christmas. There is no reason why this Bill should not wait three months, if necessary. We certainly will not meet in Holy Week to pass this.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

I understand that the House is to meet tomorrow, and if there is any legislation hanging over from today, could we not take it to-morrow?

Dr. O'Donovan

That is an absurd suggestion. The amendment would not be tabled.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

Could the amendment not be put down before tomorrow?

Mr. O'Quigley

There would not be time to draft it or to consider it.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

It would not require that amount of consideration.

Dr. O'Donovan

The Seanad certainly will not meet in Holy Week.

Dr. Ryan

It will have to be next week, if it is not tomorrow.

Dr. O'Donovan

Does the Minister intend to take this little Bill next week? In that case, the Minister will have it stage by stage.

Dr. Ryan

Then we will meet next week, so.

Dr. O'Donovan

It is absurd to bring the Seanad together at great public expense for this miserable Bill.

An Cathaoirleach

The House will decide the issue.

Mr. O'Quigley

We met on 4th January and again on 10th January and then a long silence ensued. We are only back again a short while and this is what is going to happen again. We are to meet in Holy Week and perhaps not for months again. It is quite wrong.

An Cathaoirleach

The House will indicate when it will take the Bill.

Mr. O'Quigley

It would be a great waste of public money if we were to meet solely for the purpose of dealing with this Bill.

Dr. Ryan

This is only obstruction.

Dr. O'Donovan

The Minister wants us to accept dictatorship.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

This is a matter to be decided between both sides of the House in the ordinary way.

Dr. Sheehy Skeffington

The subject matter of this amendment is simple. It means taking a word or two, something like "or an amended scheme". The principle is quite clear and I personally see no reason why it should not be accepted tonight. It has been done previously. On one occasion, I was allowed to propose an amendment and it was agreed by the House to take it there and then. I do not think this a complicated amendment. It is simply adding two or three words, the purport of which we all understand, and it could be done immediately.

Mr. Donegan

Why should there be slot machine legislation? Why should the slot machine be prepared for Holy Week so that if the Bill is put in, it will come straight out?

Mr. Carter

The Senator might wait.

Mr. Donegan

Is this Bill not one which will obviously wait for a fortnight?

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

The amendment the Opposition have in view is very simple and could be drafted in two or three minutes, if they want it.

Dr. O'Donovan

Will the Senator draft it?

Dr. Ryan

It is not necessary.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

The Minister does not consider it necessary, if the people opposite consider it is.

Dr. O'Donovan

I think we should be consistent.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

The question we have to decide is whether this should be taken tomorrow. We are meeting tomorrow, in any case, to take the Central Fund Bill. My suggestion is that we take this tomorrow or, if not tomorrow, next Tuesday. The House will have to meet on Tuesday; there is no way out.

Mr. Donegan

Why must we be a slot machine?

Dr. O'Donovan

It is an outrageous suggestion that the House should meet next week to put through this miserable Bill.

An Cathaoirleach

The Deputy Leader of the House has suggested to-morrow or Tuesday. Which do Senators desire?

Mr. O'Quigley

Certainly we are not going to meet next Tuesday.

Éamon Ó Ciosáin

Let the House decide whether we will take the Committee and remaining Stages to-morrow or not.

Dr. O'Donovan

In accordance with Standing Orders, there can be no question of agreeing to take the Committee and remaining Stages to-morrow. We can pass the Committee Stage to-morrow. I have no objection to that. To-morrow, we will draft the amendment.

An Cathaoirleach

The Bill will be ordered for to-morrow and the Senator will be facilitiated in lodging an amendment.

Committee Stage ordered for Thursday, 23rd March, 1961.