I move amendment No. 48 :—
To delete all after the word " meeting " in line 43 to the end of the section.
There is a series of amendments on this subject. They are not very important. In connection with them you may take amendment No. 62.
SECTION 78.
(1) Where an ordinary members (election) order made in an election year declares that a number (in this section referred to as the appointed number) of ordinary members shall be elected by persons whose names are entered in a panel of curers at a meeting of those persons to be held on the date specified in that behalf in such order, the following provisions shall have effect, that is to say :—
(a) the appointed number of ordinary members shall be elected at such meeting, and
(b) immediately after the said election there shall also be elected at such meeting a number of persons (in this Part of this Act referred to as substitutive members) to act, if so required, during their term of office as substitutes for such ordinary members, and the number of substitutive members to be so elected shall be twice the appointed number of ordinary members.
(2) References in this Act to substitutive members representative of the same class of curers as an ordinary member shall be construed as references to the substitutive members elected at the same meeting as that at which such ordinary member was elected.
Does not this amendment raise the whole question of substitutive members ?
There is a number of amendments dealing with substitutive members. In amendment No. 62 it is proposed to cut out substitutive members and method for dealing with vacancies when they occur is suggested. In the ordinary course one would not expect, out of seven members of a Board, more than one or two vacancies in a period of two years. I do not see why it should be necessary to have fourteen substitutive members waiting their turn. Members would be inclined to make room for them from time to time even though they could afford to attend themselves. It is natural to expect that they would make room for them. If there was any criticism the natural thing would be for them to stand aside and to allow a substitutive member to be brought in. They would be drawing salaries, and there would be unnecessary expense.
Minister for Agriculture
I should like to make it clear to the Deputy that the Board first of all recommends allowances or expenses for members of the Board. It is laid down in the amendment we are putting in that different rates of remuneration may be appointed for ordinary members of the Board who are members of the Pigs Marketing Board and for other ordinary members of the Board. The Board will recommend a certain amount. That has to be sanctioned by the Minister before it becomes operative. In the same way they can recommend certain allowances for substitutive members. I am quite certain they will not give a salary and I am certain that no Minister will sanction expenses except for actual attendance at meetings. I do not think there is anything to be feared in the way Deputy McGovern suggests. Supposing we leave out substitutive members altogether. We will have to make some provisions for filling vacancies if members are genuinely unable to attend. A member may get ill or be away for two or three months. Supposing the three producers could not attend, the three bacon members could be unanimous, and the Chairman could not interfere. They may fix a disastrous price for that period. We have got to provide some machinery for substitutes—either to allow the panels themselves to elect substitutive members or to let the Minister or the Chairman of the Board nominate them.
Has the Minister looked up amendment 62 ?
Minister for Agriculture
Yes.
That is Deputy McGovern's suggestion for an alternative method.
Minister for Agriculture
There is this difference. Consider that we will take it that there are two types of factories. You will have bacon curers who are members of co-operative factories and proprietors. Suppose there is a conflict of interest between them and for co-operative you have substituted proprietary representatives, it would not be desirable. You want a substitutive member who would really represent the interests of the person who leaves.
If the Pigs Marketing Board be allowed to fix their own salaries it might lead to abuse.
Minister for Agriculture
With the approval of the Minister.
And to appoint as many substitutes as they think necessary. There should be some check on the number they think necessary.
The Marketing Board members will have no salaries.
Minister for Agriculture
They will. It is hard, however, when you come to consider amendment 62 with amendment 49, to follow Deputy McGovern's arguments. He argues that a member may stand down for a month in order to give some person on the list a chance. Would not it be more likely to occur under amendment 62 where the person next on top of the list comes in. In the substitutive member arrangement there are 14 on the list.
Give a chance to one.
Minister for Agriculture
The chances are 14 to one against any particular person being taken on as a substitutive member. I am not tied to the substitutive member arrangement at all.
I think there are too many substitutive members.
Deputy Maguire
I can see Deputy McGovern's point of view but if there was only one substitutive member the matter would not be eased in any way.
It is more or less a suggestion.
Deputy Maguire
If the Directors are paid is it not reasonable to assume that they will have to give a reasonable explanation of their absence.
It seems to me that the Board, when fixing the allowances for members, could, if they liked, stipulate that where a substitutive member was called upon they could deduct his salary or allowance from that granted to the member whose place he took.
Minister for Agriculture
From what would be that man's expenses ?
Yes.
Minister for Agriculture
I think that could be done.
I think it would meet the case more effectively than any other arrangement.
What about a medical certificate ?
Does not the Bill provide for a substitute attending ?
Minister for Agriculture
Yes. If you take the Pigs Board—it does not arise there as a matter of fact—but take the Bacon Board, suppose two representatives of the large curers were both ill and absent from meetings, the middlemen and the small men could combine and say we will cut out the big men and of course the Chairman could not intervene if it was a unanimous decision.
But I suppose there would be standing orders and the Chairman could see that that was not done.
Minister for Agriculture
They might be able to rescind it, but it might take three months or more to upset the decision. Anyway you must have some way of filling the vacancy.
I agree. But I do not see any reason for paying another man for what the substitutes do.
If he is paid he should be paid in the way I suggested.
Is there any objection to an absentee nominating a substitute ?
Minister for Agriculture
As a matter of fact we did discuss that but I think a big objection there would be that there could be great pressure used on a man ; one man might say : " Give me a chance, you are not going up for election next time, and I want to show that I am doing something." There would perhaps be a lot of that sort of thing.
My view is that the man they represent would not go outside his own firm. I think there is a danger in this section of one or two firms trying to get a monopoly.
Minister for Agriculture
No, it is rather difficult. If you take the large curers there is only to be two representatives of that class and if they are going to elect two curers, they cannot elect two unless they elect one each. Otherwise they cannot elect at all.
Might I submit, we are now discussing substitutive members and we ought to dispose of that before embarking on a general principle of the methods of election to the Board ?
Am I to take it that amendment No. 49 is now withdrawn ?
Yes.
Minister for Agriculture
I do not say I shall make any change in the system of substitute members.
Deputy Maguire
The suggestion was made that some arrangement might be made for the payment of the substitute members by the absentees.
Minister for Agriculture
I am afraid it is hard to bring that into a Bill, but I quite agree with it, and I might perhaps personally suggest to the Board that that is how it ought to be done. That is about all I could do.
Deputy Smith's suggestion is the best.
Minister for Agriculture
I will try to impress that view on the Board. I cannot put it in the Bill though.
It is possible that if you leave it as it is a man might attend only four meetings and would be qualified to draw his salary. It is possible that he would draw £100 for each meeting.
Minister for Agriculture
The Board cannot pay a substitute member even his expenses without the Minister's approval, and you know what the Minister's approval means. It will have to pass seven or eight officials of the Department, who will all have a go at it before it comes to me.
Amendments 48 to 53, inclusive, withdrawn.
Sections 78 and 79 agreed to.