Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 16 May 1924

Vol. 7 No. 9

DÁIL IN COMMITTEE. - DÁIL IN COMMITTEE.

The charges in force on the 3rd day of April, 1924, shall remain in force as maximum charges unless and until altered in accordance with this Part of this Act.

Amendment 1:—

To delete the section and to substitute therefor a new section as follows:—

The rates, fares, tolls and dues charged by the Amalgamated Company shall until the appointed day be such as were in operation on the 3rd day of April, 1924; provided that at any time after the said 3rd day of April, 1924, and before the appointed day,

(i) the Amalgamated Company may from time to time make such reductions as it may deem expedient without application to the railway tribunal;

(ii) any representative body of traders may apply to the railway tribunal to reduce the aforesaid charges or any of them;

(iii) any trader interested in any particular charge may apply to the railway tribunal to reduce that charge;

(iv) the Amalgamated Company may apply to the railway tribunal to increase the aforesaid charges or any of them,

any such application shall be published in such manner as the railway tribunal prescribe and the tribunal, after hearing all parties whom they consider entitled to be heard may make such modifications in the said charges or any of them as to the tribunal may seem just, and shall fix a day upon which the modifications are to come into force.

Mr. HEWAT

This amendment is one of Deputy Alfred Byrne's children, but he has deserted me. I do not think it needs any words of mine to commend it to the Dáil. It asks that the amalgamated company shall be in the same position under the Bill as the unamalgamated companies are. At all events, if the amalgamated company, in their wisdom, find they are in a position to reduce the rates under the Act, as it stands, there is no provision for putting that reduction into operation. I think everybody will agree that in the event of their being willing to reduce their charges, there will be no objection on the part of the people generally, who will receive something in the direction of relief from the charges that are at present prevailing. I take it that I can count on the support of the Labour Party, as far as that is concerned. And now that the Whips have been taken off, I expect a modicum of support from the Government benches. Sub-section 2 states: "Any representative body of traders may apply to the Railway Tribunal to reduce the aforesaid charges or any of them." That is provided for but, you see, clause 23 deals with the appointed day, and really, in connection with that matter, clauses 23 and 24 go together. A further amendment that is down dealing with Section 24 clears up this amendment to some extent. Sub-section 3 says "Any trader interested in any particular charge may apply to the Railway Tribunal to reduce that charge." In other words, the holding up of the operation of the reduced charges will not be so strict as to prevent any obvious case of a just claim being considered and adopted by the companies. In other words, it is to take it out of the hard and fast scheme of the appointed day. I think that that also would commend itself to everybody. If in any particular case a trader was able to put up a good and proper claim for a reduction, it ought to be considered and relief given, if possible in the period that will elapse between the passing of this Act and the arrival of the appointed day.

No. 4 is "The Amalgamated Company may apply to the Railway Tribunal to increase the aforesaid charges or any of them." That does not appeal with so much force to my friends. Of course, after all, we have to be just in these matters. Whereas, on the one hand I put forward a one-sided claim on behalf of the traders and on behalf of the users of the railway, with due apologies to the Dáil, and only owing to the great regard I have for just treatment, I put in that last clause. I am sure I am speaking Deputy Byrne's sentiments, because this is his amendment: "Any such application shall be published in such manner as the railway tribunal prescribes, and the tribunal, after hearing all parties whom they consider entitled to be heard, may make such modifications in the said charges or any of them, as to the tribunal may seem just, and shall fix a day upon which the modifications are to come into force." The main thing in that section is—

Mr. DAVIN

No. 4.

Mr. HEWAT

Very well, Deputy Davin, if you support No. 4, I will support the rest of them. It is quite obvious that I am not going to get support for the whole of them. In any case, this is only reasonable. In fact, it is so obviously right and proper, I think before I continue any further arguments in its favour I would like to hear what is against it.

Mr. GOREY

Nothing is specifically mentioned in the Bill to prevent the railway companies doing these things. Perhaps Deputy Hewat might tell us whether there is anything in the Bill to prevent the railway companies from doing any of these things.

Mr. HEWAT

The clause in the Bill says the charges shall remain in force as maximum charges. It does not say they cannot be put into operation. I think it ought to be clear. The section as it stands would appear to be mandatory that the charges in operation on the 3rd day of April, 1924, shall be the charges which the railway company will charge for the intervening period. I ask that it should be specifically stated in the clause that they are at liberty to reduce rates.

Mr. JOHNSON

Until now I did not understand why Deputy Hewat proposed the last amendment. It is quite clear that Deputy Hewat does not want any reduction in charges, and will insist that there shall be no reduction until the amalgamated company is complete; that is to say until the end of December. Then the amalgamated company will have the option of reducing charges, or the traders will have the option of going before the tribunal to have charges reduced, or companies will have the option of going before the tribunal, but there will be no reduction in charges until this tribunal has either decided that there must be, or the amalgamated company is pleased to make reductions. There is an attempt in the Bill as it stands, however defective the machinery may be, to reduce some charges, but now Deputy Hewat tells the commercial community that the railway company will look after them.

Railway companies will look after the charges and you need not have any fears. You are not going to have any reduction in charges until the amalgamated company is perfectly formed and condescends to make reductions. That would be quite understandable from one like Deputy Hewat, if he had not intimated several times to the Dáil that he was not speaking on behalf of railway companies. He is speaking on behalf of the commercial community. He tells that commercial community that they must be satisfied with existing charges until at least the company is very well formed as an amalgamated company. After that you can make your case and prove to the Tribunal that such reductions should take place. Then there may be reductions. I wonder will Deputy Wilson now support this amendment? The motion which it is sought to amend intimates that the charges in force on the 3rd April shall be the maximum, but this amendment makes it possible to have increases. Again, Deputy Hewat is talking for the commercial community. I hope the commercial community will be thankful to him.

Mr. HEWAT

Might I ask Deputy Johnson to refer to Clause 30. It is a little bit ahead, but he will see in that that there is provision in this Bill for non-amalgamated companies. All that this amendment, so far as I can see, does is to extend what you provide for the non-amalgamated companies to the amalgamated companies. In essence, that is what it amounts to.

Mr. DAVIN

Deputy Hewat is assuming—I think wrongly, according to the Bill—that the powers of the Tribunal over non-amalgamated companies are nil. That is not so. The Bill gives the Tribunal such powers as the Tribunal may wish to use in order to exercise control over non-amalgamated companies inside the area of the Free State. The non-amalgamated companies are not so free as he thinks from the activities of this terrible Tribunal, which he is trying to knock out of every clause of this Bill. Deputy Hewat and Deputy Good have already stressed the point—and no doubt there is a good deal in it—that a good deal more consideration has been given to the traders in the area served by the non-amalgamated companies than has been given in the areas served by the companies constituting the amalgamated company, which it is proposed to form under the terms of this Bill. I can understand the position of the companies that it is now proposed to bring within the terms of this amalgamation Bill and their general attitude to the traders and others who may be concerned with railway working.

The Free State Government, or the Provisional Government, before the Free State Government, told the railway companies of this country—all and not a section—that they were not satisfied with the present system of organisation of the Irish railways. They gave them a certain time to make up their minds and to see if they could agree upon a scheme of re-organisation within certain lines that were apparently laid down by the Provisional Government at the time and subsequently by the Free State Government. The companies knew perfectly well who were to come within the meaning of that Bill, and the companies that it is now proposed should come within the amalgamation scheme naturally did all they possibly could to put as much money as possible into their Exchequer before amalgamation would come into operation. The other companies, knowing they would not be interfered with or interfered with only to the extent that this Bill provides, did of their own free will what they possibly could to reduce their rates. That is the real explanation, and Deputy Good should be quite prepared to admit that. Of course, it is quite clear to anybody who opens his eyes and sees the real meaning of the amendment that Deputy Hewat is moving in order that the amalgamated company may apply to the Railway Tribunal—in this he is prepared to recognise the Railway Tribunal—to enforce these charges. If Deputy Wilson, who has supported him on a previous amendment, with his eyes already open, is prepared to support him in this, let him explain to the agricultural community why he is prepared to support it.

Motion to Report Progress agreed to.