Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 25 Jul 1924

Vol. 8 No. 20

COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. - VOTE No. 1—GOVERNOR-GENERAL'S ESTABLISHMENT.

I move:—

That a sum not exceeding £5,458 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1925, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Governor-General's Establishment under the Governor-General's Salary and Establishment Act, 1923.

I am going to move that this be reduced.

How much are you going to take off?

I move that the Vote be reduced by £3,000, the amount of the allowances to the Governor-General for expenses. I think that the amount voted in the other portions of this volume and the pickings that may be available in the various sums granted, would be quite sufficient without this new sum of £8,208 for the Governor-General's establishment. I do not mind of course how or from where the £3,000 may be taken but I suggest that out of £5,208 sufficient will be available for the upkeep of this establishment. I therefore beg to move the reduction of this Vote by £3,000.

I may observe that this Vote is £3,215 less than last year. With regard to the particular item B, it was part of our bargain. It represents the establishment, and it was one of the conditions regarding this particular service that that establishment and the expenses of it would be provided. This is a particularly expensive institution, the Viceregal Lodge as it is known. It is not the fault of the immediate occupant that that is the case. I suppose that any of the other residences would be very much less expensive, but while that particular one is there and the Governor-General is in occupation, I think it is the duty of the Oireachtas to provide that the place will be kept up in a manner befitting the institution itself, to say nothing of its occupant. As I said it is expensive but it will be observed that there has been a very considerable reduction in the estimate and consequently I do not think it is fair to reduce it further.

I do not think Deputy Johnson can move to reduce the sub-head by £3,000 that is the whole amount, because the Constitution states——

I only used that as an illustration.

The Constitution states that "suitable provision shall be made out of those funds"—that is public funds—"for the maintenance of his official residence and establishment." The word "suitable" may be construed any way that may be thought fit but it means that some provision must be made and if the Deputy moves to reduce the provision altogether it seems directly against the Constitution.

I move that this whole sum be reduced by £3,000, my contention being that suitable provision should be made out of the £5,208.

Amendment—"That the Vote be reduced by £3,000"—put.
The Committee divided: Tá, 12; Níl, 27.

  • Seán Buitléir.
  • Henry J. Finlay.
  • Alásdair Mac Cába.
  • Séamus Mac Cosgair.
  • Tomás Mac Eoin.
  • Risteárd Mac Fheorais.
  • Aodh O Cúlacháin.
  • Eamon O Dubhghaill.
  • Seán O Laidhin.
  • Domhnall O Muirgheasa.
  • Tadhg O Murchadha.
  • Pádraig O hOgáin (An Clár).

Níl

  • Seoirse de Bhulbh.
  • Bryan R. Cooper.
  • Máighréad Ní Choileáin Bean
  • Uí Dhrisceoil.
  • John Hennigan.
  • Liam T. Mac Cosgair.
  • Maolmhuire Mac Eochadha.
  • Patrick McGilligan.
  • Seoirse Mac Niocaill.
  • Liam Mac Sioghaird.
  • Liam Mag Aonghusa.
  • Martin M. Nally.
  • John T. Nolan.
  • Peadar O hAodha.
  • Mícheál O hAonghusa.
  • Ailfrid O Broin.
  • Seán O Bruadair.
  • Partholán O Conchubhair.
  • Eoghan O Dochartaigh.
  • Séamus O Dóláin.
  • Pádraig O Dubhthaigh.
  • Donchadh O Guaire.
  • Séamus O Leadáin.
  • Fionán O Loingsigh.
  • Pádraig O hOgáin (Gaillimh).
  • Seán O Súilleabháin.
  • Patrick W. Shaw.
  • Liam Thrift.
Amendment declared lost.

Before you put the Vote, I would like to know if the President could give an explanation of what I may call this extraordinary amount of £900 that is down for telegrams and telephones in this Estimate. I wonder does the Governor-General make all his communications by telephone and telegram? Turning over to the Vote for the Oireachtas, I find that the Seanad and Dáil spend only £500 on telephones and telegrams. I would like to know if we could get some explanation. This seems to be a very large amount.

The number of telegrams which go out is very considerable, and they are very lengthy. A considerable amount of the time of one of the officers of my establishments is devoted to dealing with those telegrams. There is a private telephone to my office from the Viceregal Lodge. The amount that is down, it will be observed, is £40 under that of last year. It is possible that it will be a decreasing amount. The Deputy will recollect that quite a number of questions are asked on such matters as the Wood-Renton Commission and other matters like that and until there is a general clearance of all those outstanding items, that particular amount in this Vote must be very considerable.

I am rather in the dark about this. Would the President tell us what the Wood-Renton Commission has to do with the Governor-General's establishment?

All communications passing between the British Government and this State go through the Governor-General's establishment.

I wonder would the President consider the advisability of having separate accounts for telegrams and telephones? We want to be sure that telephones are not used for racing matters, as in other Government Departments.

They are already separate. The telegrams cost £200 and the telephones £700. You will find the items at the end of page 2.

Vote put and declared carried.
Barr
Roinn