Deputies will recollect that I gave notice yesterday that I would raise a matter on the adjournment motion in connection with widows' and orphans' pensions. I addressed a question yesterday to the Minister for Finance asking whether it is the intention of the Government to introduce proposals for legislation to provide pensions for widows and orphans; and, if so, when it is intended that such proposals will be introduced. The Minister for Finance, in reply, said that the investigation of this matter had not yet been completed, and it had therefore not been possible for the Executive Council to arrive at a decision. Deputies will recollect that on 17th October, 1928, over two years ago, a motion was moved in this House which read:
That this House is of opinion, having regard to the inadequacy of the provision at present made for widows and for orphans bereft of their breadwinners, and to the desirability of removing all stigma of pauperism in such cases, that the establishment of a scheme of insurance to provide pensions and allowances for widows and orphans would be desirable, and accordingly requests the Executive Council to prepare and present to the House a report upon such schemes of insurance and estimates of the cost.
That motion was moved from the Labour Benches, and an amendment was moved and passed which read:
To delete all words after the word "House" and insert the words "requests the Executive Council to take special consideration, whether, without imposing an excessive burthen on productive industry, further provision can be made for widows and orphans bereft of their bread-winners; in what manner (by insurance or otherwise) this can best be achieved; and what may be the net cost of such provision."
Speaking in the House during the discussion on the original motion on 17th October, 1928, the Minister for Finance said:—
"I think it would be quite proper that the Executive Council should conduct that examination and should lay the result of it before the House so that a motion or a Bill dealing with this matter could be more satisfactorily discussed by the House."
In the course of a further statement he said:—
"I would have no objection to having the matter examined by the appropriate civil servants, and such information as was available obtained and set out in proper form, having estimates prepared and explained and the whole matter laid before the House in a White Paper."
He also stated:—
"In the matter of actual expenditure we cannot afford to ignore what is done in other countries."
Without desiring to go into the whole question of the principle of widows' and orphans' pensions, I would point out to the Minister for Finance that a scheme of widows' and orphans' pensions is in operation in Scotland, England, Wales and the Six Counties. As I have pointed out, this question has been already before the House. A period of two years and three months has elapsed, but notwithstanding that fact, when the Minister was asked how matters stood yesterday, he stated that the investigation of the matter had not yet been completed. "Has not yet been completed," although two years and three months have elapsed since the question was first addressed to the Minister! Since the matter was before the House in the form of motion and amendment thereto, it has been raised in this House on at least five occasions. It was raised by a question on the 25th April, 1929, and in the course of his reply to that question the President stated that "Figures are being compiled, and when the results of the actuarial investigation have been examined by the Departments concerned and by the Executive Council the views of the Government on the whole question will be communicated to the Dáil."
The matter was again raised in the form of a question on 30th October, 1929, and the reply which was again given by the President was to the effect that the "collection of data necessary for the proper consideration of any scheme for the further provision for widows and orphans is still proceeding. A considerable amount of information has been collected, but some time must elapse before it will be possible to come to any final decision on the matter." In reply to a supplementary question on the same date the President stated that "the matter is being expedited as much as possible." That was on the 30th October, 1929. The question of widows' and orphans' pensions was again raised in the Dáil on 19th February, 1930, and the Minister for Finance replying on that occasion for the President stated that "the present position is that an actuary's report on the whole matter is being obtained and when the report is obtained the question will be considered by the Executive Council." Again the matter was raised by way of question on the 19th November, 1930, and the Minister for Finance in the course of his reply again stated "The investigation of this question has not yet been completed."
The matter was raised yesterday for the fifth occasion since it was first raised when the motion and the amendment were before the Dáil, and the Minister in the course of his reply stated that it was still under consideration. In reply to a supplementary question the Minister became rather flippant on a very serious subject. He became flippant not to say discourteous because in reply to a supplementary question he stated that "I think that if the inquiry is repeated at regular intervals it may probably result in getting the desired information." May I point out to the Minister that that reply is both flippant and discourteous? I do not mind if the Minister is discourteous to me personally because I happen to be a person who is prepared to meet courtesy with courtesy and, if necessary, discourtesy with discourtesy, and at the same time meet flippancy on a serious subject with the contempt which it deserves. I put it to the Minister why should it be necessary that these questions should be raised at regular intervals in the future in view of the fact that it has been under the consideration of the Minister's Department for two years and three months? Still, we were told yesterday after two years and three months that the matter is still under consideration. I want to know from the Minister what is the cause of the delay which has taken place. Have the figures or the statistics been compiled? If they have not been compiled and instructions had been given two years and three months ago to civil servants to compile them, I suggest it is a slur on the competency of the civil servants. Speaking generally, I believe that we have competent civil servants, and I believe that it would not have taken that length of time to compile the necessary data. If they were not compiled in that time, what is the cause of the delay? Is the delay deliberate on the part of the Executive Council? I suggest it is.
I suggest to the Minister that the Executive Council are at the present time holding the whole matter up. They have not told us what their decision is in regard to the matter. They should have laid that matter before the House. I would like to know from the Minister now why it is that the statistics, together with the decision of the Executive Council, have not been laid before the House in the shape of a White Paper. As I have pointed out, a system of widows' and orphans' pensions is already in existence in Britain and the Six Counties. I suggest that as far as this country is concerned we at least should have as good a system of widows' and orphans' pensions as is in operation in the Six Counties. I hope the Minister will reply to these points, and let us know what is the cause of the delay. I have mentioned that the matter has been under consideration of the Executive Council for two years and three months. I would point out to the Minister that even before the motion was discussed in this House it was on the Order Paper for almost a year, so that I would be correct in saving that the matter has been under the consideration of the Executive Council for three years, but neither the data, statistics, nor the decision of the Executive Council have yet been communicated to the House. When the matter is raised in a serious way the Minister endeavours to treat it in a flippant manner. I suggest to him that it is not me he is treating in a flippant way, but the widows and orphans of the Free State, who are holding out their hands to the Executive Council to get at least the same treatment as the widows and orphans in other places. I would like to hear what the Minister has to say as to what caused the delay, and when he expects to be able to communicate the decision of the Executive Council to this House.
