asked the President (a) if, in connection with the recent appointment to the post of Chief of the Fire Brigade for the County Borough of Cork, a certain candidate was recommended for appointment by the Local Appointments Commission; whether the candidate thus recommended was duly appointed; further, whether the advertisement asking for applications stated that applicants with a knowledge of Irish would be given a preference; whether the applicants were examined in Irish, and, if so, what was the result of that examination, in the case of all the candidates; (b) whether one candidate only had a knowledge of Irish; whether any examination was made as to the proficiency of candidates in ambulance work, and, if so, what proofs of such proficiency were furnished by the successful candidate; whether the advertisement calling for applications fixed any limit as to age, and, if so, what the age of the candidate appointed was.
CEISTEANNA—QUESTIONS. ORAL ANSWERS. - CORK FIRE BRIGADE APPOINTMENT.
Yes. A candidate was recently recommended by the Local Appointments Commissioners to the local authority for the appointment of superintendent of the Cork fire brigade, and it is understood that this candidate has been appointed to the post. The particulars of the appointment sent to all the applicants for the vacancy stated that a preference would be given to qualified candidates with a knowledge of Irish, and in assessing the qualifications of applicants due regard was had to this condition. In fact, the preference did not operate, as the Local Appointments Commissioners satisfied themselves, with the assistance of a competent board of selection, who personally interviewed the candidates, that the man recommended for the post was the only one whose technical qualifications and experience were sufficient. Proficiency in ambulance work was taken into account in assessing their relative merits.
The advertisement stated that candidates must be under 40 years of age. In accordance with practice an extension of age was allowed to existing members of the Cork fire brigade. The candidate recommended is 47 years of age, and was an existing member of the brigade.
Might I draw the President's attention to the fact that he has not answered the question I put to him relating to the proficiency of the candidate? I asked what proof of proficiency in ambulance work had been furnished by the successful candidate. Will the President answer that question?
Mr. ANTHONY rose.
On a point of order——
Deputy Anthony.
Is the President aware that the man appointed is, from the point of view of proficiency as a fire fighter, the most capable man in the brigade? Is he also aware that, over a considerable period of time, this man acted as driver of the ambulance van at Cork station, and proved his efficiency in that respect? Can the President further say whether the ability to use the fire hose or a knowledge of a language is the more potent factor in extinguishing a fire, and will he also say whether a fireman, using a hose, is more effective than a man who can say Tá sé fliuch with a Cork accent?
On a point of order——
The President.
On a point of personal explanation——
The President.
The man recommended for the appointment, and who has been appointed, entered on his duties on the 1st instant. He has been attached to the Cork fire brigade for twenty years. For ten years he has been in charge of the Fire Station at Grattan Street, Cork. During that time he has frequently deputised for the Superintendent. He has had practical experience of driving and working motor pump, tenders and ambulances, and in addition has a very good knowledge of buildings. He has had considerable experience of first aid work.
First of all, I think I am entitled to protest against the unwarranted intervention of Deputy Anthony. I do not see why the ordinary rules of courtesy should be departed from, that the Deputy who puts down a question has the right to ask the first supplementary. I was awaiting an answer. The next point is that I wish to ask the President this question definitely: In fact had the candidate who was appointed no knowledge of Irish, was he over the age limit, and did he fail to furnish proof of proficiency in ambulance work—not in motor driving, but in ambulance work?
What I stated was that the man appointed had practical experience of driving and working motor pump, tenders and ambulances, and that in addition he has a very good knowledge of buildings and considerable experience of first aid work.
What proofs of proficiency did he furnish? In this case the advertisement did not ask that a candidate should be proficient in motor driving, but it did ask that he should have a knowledge of Irish and that he should be proficient in ambulance work, which, in this case, I take it, means first aid work.
I did not mention motor driving. What I said was that he had practical experience of driving and working the motor pump.