The next item is "Miscellaneous Expenses." It amounts to £10,295. I beg to move it.
DAIL IN COMMITTEE. ESTIMATES. - MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES.
There are one or two questions I should like to ask the Minister. With my colleague, Deputy Johnson, I think there should be, in the moving of these Estimates, some explanation, because, after all, this Dáil is a young Parliament, and a good many Deputies do not know what all these things are. What, for instance, is meant by item D, "Grants to students in Ireland"? What kind of students, what kind of grants, and for what purpose? I am not objecting at all to the grants to the students. I would like to see ten, fifteen, or one hundred thousand pounds, and much more, but I want to know exactly what kind of students and what kind of grants. There is another item, F, "Refund of candidate's deposit forfeited." I do not know what £150, I do not know what candidate got the deposit, and why the forfeit, why the refund, and all that sort of thing.
Before the President answers that, I would like to ask if he would explain one little matter that I think is always unsatisfactory in financial items. It is at the end of line C. What is the exact meaning of etcetera?
It certainly does not mean any more there than it does anywhere else it is put down. I should explain with regard to this estimate that it is one of the departments of the Ministry of Finance that I have not yet been able to overtake. There are several others, and I would want to live very much longer to be able to overtake them. If there is any particular question the Deputy would like me to answer with regard to it, and if he gives me a line, I will get the answer. With regard to the deposit two or three such cases came before me. I could not say now whether this is the return of a deposit of a person who had been up for election and died, but in one case that came before me in which it was established to our satisfaction that a nomination had been put in and was withdrawn, some dispute arose as to the exact minute at which it was withdrawn, and on representations being made I was satisfied that a bona fide case of withdrawal had occurred, and I believed I ordered the return of the deposit in that case. It was no loss to this extent that the fact that the candidate had not withdrawn did not occasion any expenditure on our part. For example, if there were three vacancies and four candidates, and that this was one of the four, and that was the case in dispute, then we would have lost money. But it was not such a case as that. It was a case where there were thirteen or fourteen candidates for eight seats, and I was satisfied on the evidence put before me, or at least the officers were satisfied, that it was a case in which the return of the money should be ordered. I cannot say at the moment if that was the precise deposit or a case in which some person who died, but who was elected in 1918 and his deposit returned. If any particular question is put down I will have it answered.
I can quite understand it has been very difficult for the Minister to keep right up with all his obligations and responsibilities. There were just one or two or three things that seemed queer and one could not understand. I presume fuller statements will be made in future estimates.
In connection with this refund of candidates' money—will the Minister for Finance please explain when it is intended to refund the deposit of candidates at the last election who were not elected, but who gained the ?th necessary that entitles them to the return of the deposit?
Another Deputy asked me about that matter, and I gave a decision some time ago that the deposit money in such cases should be returned if an application was made for it.
I made an application to the Sheriff, and he said he had a communication from the Treasury to say that he was empowered to refund to those who were successful at the election. The letter was dated September.
Yes; but a further decision was given since that date.
I was speaking to the Sheriff two days ago.
If you give me the name of the Sheriff, I will undertake to have that matter seen to.
With regard to the refund of candidates' deposits, perhaps the Minister will explain if the case he referred to was the case of one who withdrew, so as to assist in a public conspiracy known as the Pact?
I believe not, sir. I believe it is quite the opposite. I believe, as a matter of fact, he was a very independent candidate.
Not to say a farmer.
Motion made and question put: "That the Dáil in Committee, having considered the Estimates for `Miscellaneous Expenses ' in 1922-23, and having passed a Vote on Account of £7,800 for the period to the 6th December, 1922, recommend that the full Estimate of £10,295 for the financial year 1922-23 be adopted in due course by the Oireachtas."
Agreed.