Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Friday, 12 Jun 1931

Vol. 39 No. 3

In Committee on Finance. - Vote 1—Governor-General's Establishment.

Minister for Finance (Mr. Blythe)

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £3,341 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1932, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí Teaghlachas an tSeanascail (Uimh. 14 de 1923).

That a sum not exceeding £3,341 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, 1932, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Governor-General's Establishment (No. 14 of 1923).

Deputies will see that there is a small decrease in the Vote this year.

Mr. Aiken

I think it is a scandal in the present state of this country that we should be asked to vote, all told, £25,822 for the upkeep of the Governor-General's establishment and for his personal salary. Ministers to-day turned down an investigation into the cost-of-living bonus of the lower grade civil servants, some of whom have only £75 or £100 per year. The Minister blandly comes along after that and asks us, without any explanation whatsoever, to vote £25,822 for the upkeep of one establishment. There could be no argument put forward for the spending of that amount of money in the present circumstances of the country. Even though Ministers are convinced that this is a necessary establishment, it certainly is not necessary to spend that amount of money upon it. If we take one item alone, there is £9,305 being spent on accommodation, buildings, furniture, fuel, lighting, etc.

Some time ago the Public Accounts Committee were examining some of the expenses incurred under this Vote and they found that the Government had granted a sum of £232 towards giving the Governor-General a grand piano. When the Committee examined into the matter they discovered that this was altogether a new arrangement; that the previous Governor-General, or any person who occupied a similar post as King's representative here, never had a grand piano supplied to him. They also found that very large sums of money were spent in buying linen, cutlery and other things for this establishment. The Committee were convinced that this should not be, and certainly were convinced that a man drawing £10,000 per year in salary out of this comparatively poor country should not get £232 to supply himself with a musical instrument. He should be able to buy himself a musical instrument out of the £10,000. I think it is a scandal, considering the things that Ministers have turned down, that this waste should be allowed to go on.

When we asked for some relief for the old age pensioners it was turned down on the plea that there was no money, and, as I pointed out, an inquiry into the cost-of-living bonus for the lower grade civil servants was also turned down. Everything that might tend to alleviate distress amongst people with no wages, or people with low wages, is turned down by Ministers, but they pile on taxes on the already over-taxed people to supply men like the Governor-General, who have large salaries, with further luxuries. The Minister for Agriculture, speaking in Carlow I think it was, said that we would have to have economy at the top, in the middle and at the bottom. The Government have certainly been practising economy at the bottom. They have economised to the extent of £600,000 per year on the old age pensioners, and they are piling on further taxes on these old age pensioners to give additional luxuries to gentlemen like the Governor-General. I think it is a disgrace, and I hope the House will not pass the Vote.

Mr. Derrig

I desire to join with Deputy Aiken in protesting against voting this sum of money. The attitude of this Party is well known in this matter. We believe that this establishment, if it cannot be done away with, should at least be run in accordance with the circumstances of this country. There has been a slight reduction in the Vote, but the Minister has not vouchsafed any information of it. I wonder what is the explanation? The Comptroller of the Household is, I believe, a very important official, who looks after the entertainment of distinguished foreign visitors, in whose well-being, while they remain in this country, the Government have shown themselves to be specially interested. If the establishment can be run without the services of the Comptroller of the Household, it seems to me that economy might be effected all the way down.

As Deputy Aiken pointed out, the £3,300 that we are now asked to vote is of course, only a small proportion of the entire expenditure. The £10,000 for the Governor-General's salary is carried on the Central Fund, and £9,305 has already been voted to the Board of Works for accommodation, etc. The date of the termination of office of the present occupant of the post is in sight, and I have no doubt that the question of who will take up the position when the present occupant leaves is one that must be causing great anxiety to the Government. We have seen statements in the English Press, which seems to be in the confidence occasionally of Ministers, of the intention to fill up the post when it becomes vacant next year. I suggest to the Government that when the present holder vacates the post there will be an opportunity of going into the whole matter, and of reducing the expenditure on the whole establishment to something that the country will regard as reasonable and proper.

Deputy Aiken has called attention to the attitude of the Government in other matters. I at any rate have always stressed the fact that when we come to effect economies the place where we ought to begin is at the top. As far as I know the occupant of this post has not and is not likely in the future, to contribute anything from his income to the upkeep of this establishment, although I see under Sub-head E, with regard to motor cars, there is a note which says "All expenses in connection with the maintenance and running of the cars will fall upon the Governor-General." As far as I know everything in connection with the establishment, including items of a personal nature, have to be provided by the State. If a British peer or nobleman with substantial private income held the position and was able to carry on the establishment and to be of benefit to this country the matter would be on an entirely different plane. But here is an establishment every penny of the cost of which has to come out of the taxpayers' pocket. Even if we accept the Minister's attitude that it is necessary that a certain dignity should be preserved I submit there is great room for economy under the heads I have read out. If the Ministry feel that it is too late in the day to interfere while the present occupant holds the position, I think, when the new arrangements are being made, the matter ought to be looked into. I am satisfied, and I think there is a large body of feeling in the country that holds the view that any lead that the Governor-General is giving to the country socially is not really worth the cost. Anything that is being done in this country towards gaelicising it or for the building up of Irish industries, is very often off-set by the very bad example given here as well as in other quarters. There is no proof that in the matter of Irish manufacture or in the matter of lavish expenditure on entertainments we are getting a return for the money. I urge the Minister to go into this question more carefully so that in next year's estimates we will be able to see some more substantial reduction in the Vote than we find at present.

Mr. Cassidy

I also desire to protest against this expenditure which we are called upon to vote this morning. It is true that in this we are only asked to vote £5,041, but we should remember that that is only part of the total expenditure in connection with the Governor-General's Department amounting to £25,822. In another Vote the House will be asked for a sum of £10,000 the annual salary of the Governor-General. In view of the unemployment and poverty existing in this country at the present time I believe that money could be expended in a much better way. For instance we hear of a certain campaign launched by the Government in regard to economy and of endeavours made right through the country as far as the Department of the Minister for Finance is concerned through the secret instructions sent out to pensions officers to cut down old age pensions and to endeavour, as far as possible, to deprive old age pensioners of the pensions to which they are legally and justly entitled. But when it comes to a Vote of this description, in view of the fact that the House will be asked for a further Vote of £10,000 for the Governor-General's salary—

An Ceann Comhairle

That is not on the Estimates at all.

Mr. Cassidy

I quite realise it is not on the Estimates, and I understand it is statutory and that it was one of the stipulations laid down at the signing of the Treaty. But then it was understood that the jurisdiction of the Governor-General was to embrace thirty-two counties, whereas it turned out that it was only to embrace twenty-six counties and, therefore, the jurisdiction of the Governor-General is lessened. If that is so I think a good case could be made out why the salary which was then agreed on should be lessened. I do not think that a person with a salary of £10,000 a year should expect £5,041 for other purposes. I suggest the Government are absolutely inconsistent in their attitude. We have the Minister for Local Government refusing to allow the Donegal County Council to increase the rate of wages for Donegal road workers from 26/- to 30/- a week owing to the fact that 26/- a week is reckoned by the Executive Council as a sufficient rate for a labourer to live upon, keep his family, house, clothe and feed them. On the other hand we have the Governor-General in receipt of £10,000 a year now asking for a Vote of £5,041. I hope all Deputies irrespective of party in view of the poverty and the unemployment there is will not vote these large sums of money for that purpose. The Minister for Local Government in a speech in Kildare said that emigration was decreasing and that there is not so much poverty in the country, but the Minister knows that the decrease in emigration is owing to the regulations which prevent people getting into other countries at present. Owing to the fact that so much poverty does exist I suggest Deputies in all parties should register their protest against this Vote by going into the Lobby against it.

Mr. Corry

I object to this Vote. I think it is rather an extraordinary procedure and illustrates what is in the minds of the Ministry to have the two matters discussed to-day taken on the one day, that is, the motion in reference to the bonus paid to the lower grade civil servants, and this Vote now for £15,822 for the upkeep of the house and establishment, in addition to £10,000 for the salary of the Governor-General. I think that is a scandalous proceeding and one that should end. The more we examine this Vote the more we wonder what is in the minds of the Government. I remember in my young days, when learning my catechism, the passage: "What doth it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?" I would expect from a religious man like the President of the Executive Council, who, in Press photographs, always appears between two bishops, that he, too, would take that into consideration. The Estimate shows that for the care of the Governor-General's body we have A.D.C.'s paid £300 a year. That is a nice salary, but the poor chaplain only gets £150. The President of the Executive Council considers that the care of the Governor-General's soul is worth only half the amount allowed for the care of his body. It is a rather extraordinary thing to find that the President of the Executive Council who pretends to be such a religious man should agree to this. I strongly object to the proposal to provide £2,000 for a new aeroplane for the Governor-General. Fancy expenditure of that kind to enable the Governor-General to sail around the country over the people's heads. I think a proposal of that kind is a disgrace. Although it does not appear in the Estimate we know that the Minister for Finance sanctioned an expenditure of £250 for a piano for the Governor-General's establishment. At the same time, we have a wireless broadcasting station to supply him with music from stations all over the world. If he wants to hear music let him go out to some of the slums which are not situate too far away from his residence, and he will hear numbers of starving children crying for bread, while he himself is costing this State £25,000 a year.

This Estimate does not represent fully what the Governor-General is costing. He visited Cork recently. I was there on that day attending a meeting of the County Council. At almost every street corner in the city I saw four or five big, rough-looking customers with bulging hip-pockets. I would like to know what his visit to Cork cost? How much was spent on the transport of troops there and on these new C.I.D. men? What did it cost to send all these gentlemen to Cork to protect the Governor-General on his tour? The Governor-General is provided with a house, but in addition there is provision in the Estimate for £9,305 to meet the cost of furniture, fuel and light. Surely to goodness that is a scandal when we remember all the rows that were kicked up in this House as to the need for providing money to build houses for the people and to take the unfortunate men and women and their families who are living in one-roomed tenements in Dublin out of them. The upkeep of a house for one man costs over £9,000 a year, while you have the conditions that I refer to in the City of Dublin and other parts of the country.

I hope that Deputies on the opposite side will take courage and vote against this Estimate. I notice and it is rather strange that only the hardened sinners have remained on the opposite side. The others have cleared out so that they will not hear what is going on here. Later they will come in with cotton wool in their ears and walk around legislating with their feet. I suppose we cannot help that. I would like to have an explanation as to why there is a special army provided for the Governor-General at a cost of £746. Would this money be for special uniforms for Army officers? I notice that we are also paying £575 a year in rates on the Governor-General's house. That will be an interesting item for the poor farmer down the country who sees his last cow being driven away because he is unable to pay his rates. But provision is made to pay out of the pockets of these poor people £575 in rates on the Governor-General's house.

The expenditure on printing is not very heavy. The Post Office charges, I observe, are £85. Is the position this: that we have actually to stamp the letters of the Governor-General? We certainly should not have to do that in the case of a man with £10,000 a year. I find that the butler has been done away with in the Governor-General's Establishment. That being so, I expect he will have to cook his own grub in future. I do not think that is fair. I think that the removal of the butler is a calamity. What does the Private Secretary to the Governor-General do with the salary of £350 a year that is provided? It would be rather amusing to learn what the Private Secretary's job is. Is it to hold the rubber stamp that the Governor-General has to put on Bills that are run through here at a mile a minute? When Bills that would be of any assistance to the country are introduced we find the Minister for Finance getting up on his hind legs and saying "I object." Would the duty of the Private Secretary be to hold up the ladies' trains when they are walking about? At that rate, he must have a rather tough job. It may be that his duty is to hand around the cream to the ladies at garden parties.

I notice the Governor-General has an allowance for personal secretarial assistance. What is the meaning of that £350? Is it that there are two private secretaries in the job? I suppose that so many ladies attend the garden parties that two private secretaries are required to hand around the strawberries and cream. When we find such things in the Estimate we surely must say that this is a funny country and that it is a comical Government that puts this kind of thing before it. There is the provision of £3,000 for the maintenance of the Governor-General's official residence while at the same time buildings, furniture, fuel and light are provided at a cost of £9,305. There seems to be a duplication of services there. There is £200 a year for travelling expenses and £240 for a motor car. Is it that the Governor-General wants a new motor car every year? We have been told that all the expenses in connection with the running of the car will fall on the Governor-General. At the same time, we have this £200 for travelling expenses and £240 for the motor car. Was there ever such a fraud as to provide him with £240 for a car? Surely he does not buy a new car every year and even if he does, what is the £200 in travelling expenses for? These are matters on which I would like to have an explanation from the Minister for Finance, if he is able to give me one or if he is not going to be tongue-tied on the matter.

We also find that the telegrams and telephone calls in connection with the Governor-General's Establishment are paid for out of this Vote. What does he spend his £10,000 a year salary on? The clothes on his back are paid for by the State as well as the tablecloths and the knives and forks for his table. Everything possible is provided for him by the State and in addition he has this salary of £10,000 a year. Surely a man with that salary ought to be able to buy the clothes that go on his back without the State providing them for him. He ought, too, out of that salary to be able to provide himself with musical instruments without expecting the unfortunate people of this State to meet the cost of them.

While all that is going on we have, as Deputy Cassidy pointed out and as I know myself to be the case in Cork, unfortunate men with their wives and families trying to live on a maximum wage of 26s. a week. This is the Free State. It is a freak State all right. I think it is time this ended and I hope the House will put an end to it to-day. The only way it can be ended is by Deputies voting against the Estimate. There is no use in Deputies who have remained outside while this Estimate is under discussion going down to their constituents with a lot of soft talk about the prosperity of the country and of the money that is going to be given next year for the building of houses, and then coming in here to vote for this huge sum of money for one man and the upkeep of his house. We have been told that there is no money to give an extra shilling to the old age pensioners or to give relief to the farmers and that we cannot afford to pay more than 26s. a week to workmen. That is not the kind of economy that should be practised. The kind of economy that has been practised has gone so far as to take the shoe allowance from the Civic Guards. There is plenty of room for economy on this Vote and I hope the Deputies will come in and vote against it.

Surely no Deputy is going to be callous enough to vote for the like of that. I appeal to Deputies to end it. It is time it was ended. There is only one way of ending it, and I think it is time that we took steps to end it in that way. I should like to hear, before the debate concludes, what the Economy Committee had to say to this matter. Has there been any report from the Economy Committee for the last five years dealing with it? Surely the leader of the Farmers' Party, who is chairman of the Economy Committee, should either report to the House or get out? Otherwise let him resign the chairmanship of the Economy Committee and tell us that it never sat and never will sit, or let the House have a report about this Vote. We do not know what is being done under this Vote. Perhaps next week or the week after, when the Public Accounts Committee examine the Estimate, they will find that £50 or £60 is required for a cradle. Week after week, and month after month we do not know what demand we will have. It is time that ended. I would like an explanation about that. It appears that £252 was spent on a piano for this gentleman. I hope that the money for the aeroplane will not be passed. Perhaps the next thing we will have will be a demand for a special midwife.

Mr. Mullins

I object to this Estimate, irrespective of the incidental details for telegrams and motor cars, on the grounds that the Governor-General is a concrete symbol of the slave status of this part of Ireland. I object to voting any money, even one solitary pound, for the upkeep of the establishment of the direct representative, not alone of the British King, but the British Empire and all that it stands for. Apart from that, I remember reading some time ago in the debates that took place during 1921 that some of the Deputies at that time put forward the argument that the Governor-General's establishment would be a centre of Anglicising influence in this State, while some Deputies who supported the Treaty put forward the argument that it would not; that, on the other hand, a citizen of the Irish Free State being appointed as a representative of the British Crown would rather be a centre of a Gaelicising influence, to help the Government in the work of saving the Irish language and Irish culture. What do we find ten years after? We have very little evidence of any attempt on the part of an occupant of the office of Governor-General to help in any way in the Gaelicisation of this State, or in upholding its culture. We find the chief representative of this State, the head of the State, deputising for the British King and attending football matches under foreign auspices.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not think the Deputy can go into the conduct of the Governor-General on this Estimate.

Mr. Mullins

I am trying to show that the establishment of the Governor-General is a de-nationalising influence on this State.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not think the Deputy can do that now.

Mr. Mullins

Will the Ceann Comhairle point out why not? The very fact that we are voting money to keep up an establishment which results in the negation of the policy which the present Government even in a small way is trying to pursue, is not good for the State.

An Ceann Comhairle

This Estimate comes on every year. The Governor-General's salary is on the Central Fund and is statutory to that extent. The expenses are on this Vote, and I think we must discuss it from the point of view of expenses, rather than from the fundamental point of view.

Mr. Mullins

I presume the item "travelling expenses," the Governor-General's attendance at Rugby international matches, at which "God save the King," is played may be taken.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not think so. I do not think the action of the Governor-General can in any way be discussed on an Estimate in the House.

Mr. Mullins

Does not the fact remain that the Governor-General's establishment that we are asked to vote money for, is the establishment of a gentleman who pursues the policy I have indicated?

An Ceann Comhairle

What I want to indicate to the Deputy is that the Governor-General is in a particular position, and that his actions are not open to criticism on an Estimate. If the Deputy gives the matter some consideration, he will find that he is opening up a very wide field. I think the actions of the representative of the Crown cannot be discussed on an Estimate at all. We are discussing the provision of moneys by the Minister for Finance, as a matter of fact, and not the actions of the Governor-General.

Mr. Mullins

Is there any way under the Estimate in which we could deal with the actions of the occupant of the office?

An Ceann Comhairle

This is not the way.

Mr. Hogan (Clare):

The Minister for Finance is making provision for money which is to be spent in a certain way, and surely we are entitled to discuss whether it is justifiable to spend it in that way.

An Ceann Comhairle

If a particular thing is true, you do not make it false by looking at it from another angle. The fact remains that you cannot discuss the Governor-General's actions.

Mr. Hogan

I am suggesting that the Minister for Finance is bringing forward an Estimate which he knows will be used in a certain direction, because it has been used before in a certain direction.

Mr. de Valera

Is it not obvious that this Estimate is brought forward, and appears on the Estimates yearly for a certain purpose—so that the question of expenses may be discussed? Surely it is open to a Deputy to say that money should not be provided because it has been spent in a particular way. It seems to me it should be put on the Central Fund.

An Ceann Comhairle

The position is that the actions of the Governor-General are not open to debate on this Estimate. Subject to that, the Estimate can be debated. The Governor-General's salary is not on this Estimate. There are certain people whose actions cannot be discussed in this particular way. The Governor-General is, obviously, one of them.

Mr. de Valera

On a point of order, this expenditure is on the Estimate. It was put on the Estimate originally in order to give the House an opportunity of criticising the expenditure. If there is any sense at all in it, it seems to me that we are at liberty to say that the money shall not be provided, seeing that it is being spent in a particular way. Otherwise, there is no sense in having this Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle

A considerable amount has been said about the Estimate and the provision of money for the office. The money is provided for the Governor-General's establishment and for the upkeep of the office. My experience teaches me that there is considerable scope for discussion on the matter, but the actions of the Governor-General are certainly not open to discussion on the Estimate. There is no doubt at all about that.

Mr. Hogan (Clare):

Would it not be just as reasonable to rule out any comment on the Governor-General's action in employing one typist or two typists, as to rule out the suggestion that he should not be spending money on going to Rugby matches or in some other way?

An Ceann Comhairle

I think that it is the Minister for Finance who employs the typists.

Mr. Mullins

I object to the items in regard to the Governor-General's motor cars and travelling expenses on the ground that they will enable him to go to places and to functions which will give a bad example to our people in the country. Can I not refer to that?

An Ceann Comhairle

No, I think not.

Mr. Flinn

Then we may as well shut down the Dáil.

Mr. Mullins

Is there no means by which the Dáil can express its opinion on this expenditure?

An Ceann Comhairle

There may be a method of getting an expression of opinion from the Dáil about the actions of an occupant of the office, but this is not the way. A discussion on the Estimates is not the way.

Mr. Mullins

What is the way?

An Ceann Comhairle

A method might be found but this is not the method. I would have to give consideration to that.

Mr. Corry

Put down a motion and it will be discussed in ten years' time.

Mr. Mullins

As you have ruled out any discussion on the items I have mentioned, I do not see any sense in pursuing the subject further.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not accept the Deputy's paraphrase of my ruling.

Mr. Mullins

You have ruled out any reference to travelling expenses.

An Ceann Comhairle

No.

Mr. Mullins

Therefore, since we cannot discuss the de-nationalising influence which the voting of this money has created, there is no use in pursuing the subject further, and I can only say that I propose to vote against the motion.

Mr. G. Wolfe

Every year we have this futile discussion on this subject.

Mr. Flinn

"Futile." Yes.

Mr. Wolfe

We have heard the same thing over and over again on this subject. There is nothing new to be said.

Mr. Flinn

Hear, hear.

Mr. Wolfe

The Governor-General is part of the Treaty between this country and Great Britain, and the Treaty has to be carried out. That is all there is to be said. So long as the Treaty exists that portion of it will have to be carried out.

Mr. Corry

£10,000 and no more.

Mr. Wolfe

I am one of those who believe in a head of a State, whether King or President. It is necessary to have some one, even though he may be called a rubber stamp. He has important duties to carry out, and can do an immensity of good for the trade of a country. There is no doubt about that. In present circumstances it is worth our while to keep the rubber stamp here—if we may call him so in such disrespectful terms. We want more trade.

Mr. Flinn

More ink.

Mr. Wolfe

We can see what can be done for trade in other countries by the head of the State, and there is no reason why the same should not apply here. So long as we have a head of the State here, he must have a sufficient amount of money to enable him to carry out his duties properly. We all know perfectly well that the money which he gets is spent in the country and is not spent out of it. The house in which the Governor-General lives must be maintained unless we allow it to fall into ruin or turn it into a school. That house cannot be kept up for nothing. It would be foolish economy to allow any part of our property to fall into disrepair simply because we would not maintain it.

I think it was Deputy Derrig who suggested that, as in old times, some British noblemen and English gentlemen should be invited over.

Mr. Derrig

I beg your pardon. I did not say any such thing. What I said was a British nobleman was on a different plane since his income would largely have to maintain the establishment, and my argument was that in this case every penny that is necessary for all the expenses is provided at the taxpayers' expense. I want to make it quite clear that I am not in favour of a British nobleman.

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not arise on the Estimate.

Mr. Wolfe

As to the amount which the Governor-General gets I do not think that anyone will cavil at it. Anyone who knows anything about the cost of keeping up an establishment of that kind knows that the amount set down here is the very lowest that could be given. I have heard it said that in the old days when the Lord Lieutenant got about £20,000 a year, all of that sum used to be spent in Dublin between December and March and that the rest of the expenditure for the remainder of the year had to come out of his own pocket. I do not think it is desirable that that should occur now. We are on our own, and it is for us to see that the individual who carries out the work of the State, and is the rubber stamp of the State, should be properly maintained and put into a position to do credit to the country which he represents. So long as we have a head of the State here or a rubber stamp to carry out our official work, he should be maintained and properly paid.

An Ceann Comhairle

I think that the Deputy's reference to the Governor-General as a rubber stamp is objectionable. The Deputy might find a more suitable phrase.

Mr. Hogan (Clare):

I hope that when next we come to discuss the Governor-General's Estimate Deputy Wolfe will be able to apply some other adjective than "futile" to it and that this debate will have had some effect. We are always asked, when discussing this Estimate, to consider the dignity of the office, the dignity of the position of the person who fills that office. My philosophy is that no individual in any State can reflect anything but the dignity of the people of the State and that the greatest dignity of any State is the dignity of its people, the dignity of the citizens of the State. When we come to consider what is called the dignity of the Governor-General and his office we should try and consider what is the dignity or indignity of the 60,000 people who are in need of proper housing accommodation, the dignity or indignity of 78,000 people living in one-roomed dwellings in the City of Dublin where an endeavour is made to bring up boys and girls in a decent way. We should further consider whether the amount of money we are voting for the office of the Governor-General reflects the dignity of these people or whether we would not be giving greater dignity to the office if we were to curtail the expenses and employ that money towards the relief of these people to whom I am referring.

We are told that he is a representative of a King, that he is head of this State, in possibly a formal fashion and in possibly more than a formal fashion, but when one considers the position of the 50,000 or 60,000 unemployed, the 78,000 wretchedly housed people and the 60,000 houses needed we should ask exactly what is the position of the holder of the office of Governor-General? We find out that his salary will give him £1 5s. per hour at £10,000 per year. £1 5s. per hour! Surely if any Deputy in the House, or any citizen in the State was offered £1 5s. per hour and asked to live on it, he would pay his telegrams and his telephone bills, pay for his stationery, for his wireless set and for his grand pianos. Yet it is not £1 5s. per hour alone that is paid for this dignity that is super-imposed, for it it is a super-imposed dignity, on the citizens of the State. It is not £1 5s. per hour alone that is being asked. It is £3 per hour that the establishment of the Governor-General is costing the people of the State—£3 per hour or £72 per day. That is an enormous sum when one contrasts what could be done with the money if it were made available for other purposes.

It has been made a matter of complaint that people are finding fault with this year after year. We are finding fault with it and why should we not find fault with it when a national calamity continues year after year? Does Deputy Wolfe think that when we spoke of this last year and that when that national calamity continued into this year that we should not continue to talk about it this year? So far as I am concerned I have protested against it every year since I came into the Dáil and I will continue to protest against it as long as that calamity lasts. I suppose we can do nothing but protest and point out to the average taxpayer of the country, to the unemployed, to the houseless people, to the people living in wretched slums, that the taxpayer is paying £3 per hour for the maintenance of an office which is of no advantage to the citizens of the State, and that there is no legal compulsion on the Government to vote all that money. Let us say that you have to pay him all this money, this £10,000 a year; then we can vote something less for the upkeep of the establishment. Is it necessary to vote £26,000, £3 per hour, for this establishment? Surely the legal advisers of the Government know that it is not advisable to vote all that money and leave the other problems of the State without attention. Somebody has suggested to me that they should appoint a Crown harpist and a court jester for him. Probably the Minister will remember that.

Mr. Little

Deputy Wolfe's remarks were interesting on this matter. I agree with him that the State should have a head, but the head of that State should represent the culture of the country and should have the support of the people generally. Instead of that the Governor-General in this country is in a dual capacity. He is head of the State and he also represents the over-lordship of the British power over us. Instead of being a dignity in the eyes of the people it is an indignity and a source of ridicule. He is called by way of excuse a rubber stamp, and from that it develops into terms of abuse. If I were a supporter of the head of the State I should certainly resent his being called a rubber stamp. I should regard him as a person who was in some way or other an expression of the culture of the country and at the same time a social centre for the cultural activities of the country, but by his function he can never represent anything but British culture in Ireland. That culture is no doubt a very excellent thing in Britain, but in Ireland it is alien to the people and can never be of any value to the country, but a source of hostility, bitterness and contempt.

Deputy Wolfe also referred to this office as a chain. It is a chain. That is the way the people regard it. Not merely the supporters of the Fianna Fáil Party, but even supporters of the Cumann na nGaedheal Party look with coldness on the activities of the Governor-General, and if they could get rid of the whole office they would do so willingly. We are not in a position to discuss the abolition of the office of Governor-General on this Vote, so I will not follow Deputy Wolfe when he throws out the challenge and says that we must accept him. We cannot follow him on that argument. The only thing we can do is to cut as much as we can off this Estimate, to cut down this unnecessary and undignified expenditure of the national resources under this Vote. If we could reduce the position of the Governor-General to such an extent that he could get the dole, say 15/- a week, that he would have to queue up with the rest of the unemployed, it would represent much more nearly the general feeling of the people of Ireland, except a very small section of the pro-British people. If he was put in the position of one of the ordinary unemployed and made to queue up for 15/- a week——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is now doing what he said he would not do.

Mr. Little

I am discussing a reduction of the expenditure in regard to this office and not the abolition of the office.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is discussing a reduction of the salary.

Mr. Little

I am only suggesting that that decision would express the view of the country more than any other.

Mr. Sheehy

I rise with a considerable amount of indignation after listening to the speeches delivered from the Opposition Benches with regard to the work of the Government and the Minister for Finance. Never did they in any of their speeches refer to the fact that they are responsible for wasting millions of the money of the unfortunate ratepayers of the country, when they raised the banner of rebellion against the Government——

An Ceann Comhairle

Now, no banners of rebellion.

Mr. Sheehy

I bow to your ruling, sir. I remember the Phoenix Park and the Viceregal Lodge fifty years ago. One fine morning the students of Castleknock College walked down to the Fifteen Acres. There were 5,000 red-coats assembled there. They were just about to start a sham battle. Suddenly we heard the booming of cannon and then one of the earls about whom Deputy Derrig spoke came along with a grand crowd of scarlet and gold followers around him. They came into the ground and thousands of our countrymen and women were there. What was that gesture? It was a gesture that we were under the foot of a foreign power. I walked again up to the Phoenix Park within the last month. I took a stroll in that direction. I passed the Viceregal Lodge and I heard, not the booming of cannon, but just at 12 o'clock, as I stood right before the building, I heard the Angelus bell. I was struck immediately by the wonderful change that had taken place. A brave and glorious band of young Irishmen came along in later days who made it possible to have the Angelus bell rung at the Viceregal Lodge. Within the Lodge there was a representative of the clan, that great Irish clan that centuries ago on the Hill of Tara ruled the entire of Ireland.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must leave the Hill of Tara and come to the Vote.

Mr. Sheehy

I shall come to the Vote. Deputies opposite have sworn an oath to be faithful to the Constitution. They came in here exactly as James MacNeill went up to the Viceregal Lodge and swore an oath to the Constitution. I heard Deputy Mullins proclaiming his loud Republicanism. The Deputy took an oath to the Free State——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must come back to the expenses of the Governor-General.

Mr. Sheehy

We have to consider the fact that the Irish people were never niggardly. They were always noted for the hospitality they gave to the stranger who came into our country, and I do not think there is anybody from Donegal to Cape Clear who will lessen the hospitality that we give to the many people who visit our infant State.

The Governor-General is there as a token and a sign to all who come to the Free State that there is welcome and hospitality waiting for them. If there was a necessity, I am sure he would put them up for the night. He receives great statesmen, and the other day he received representatives of the Medical Faculty from the Golden Gate of San Francisco to New York. They came over here to admire our institutions. People came here also from other countries to see for themselves the progress we are making. Are we to be so miserable here, as Deputy Cassidy suggested, that we will not even offer them refreshments or extend to them the hospitality they deserve when they come to admire the wonderful progress that this little State has made? Deputy Flinn may jeer, but in his heart of hearts he knows that Tim Sheehy is right. He knows that we are advancing steadily with his Excellency the Governor-General at the Viceregal Lodge and President Cosgrave at the helm in Government Buildings.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is advancing steadily away from the point.

Mr. Sheehy

I will come back to it. I have only to say in conclusion that I wish every success to the occupant of the Viceregal Lodge. He is doing his part.

An Ceann Comhairle

That does not come into the Vote at all.

Mr. Sheehy

He well deserves his salary.

An Ceann Comhairle

The occupant of the Viceregal Lodge does not arise on the Vote.

Mr. Sheehy

I notice that several Deputies were having a shot at him and I consider that it is my duty to defend the MacNeill clan. They are people of our own race and creed. All this excitement on the Opposition Benches would not have arisen were it not that we have a real Irishman at the Viceregal Lodge.

Mr. Flinn

Fianna Fáil, beware of the day when Sheehy arises in battle array! When the Deputy rises we may feel sure we are going to get one of those old representations of what you might call the stage Irishman type of eloquence. We tolerated a good deal of that kind of thing and, personally, I have been a good deal amused by it, but I think it is time that it was stopped. I think that a representative of Cork should not deliberately and continuously make this House a place of ridicule. Flunkeyism is the price that we pay for the political convenience of a crown. Servility apparently is the price which we are prepared to continue to pay for the political inconvenience of a Governor-General. Deputy Hogan has called the attention of the House to the realities of the situation and to what are the dignities of a country. He drew attention to realities and not to symptoms or symbols.

What does it profit this nation or any other nation that it should have all the tinsel and ceremony of Government, that it should have the simulacra of a Court, that it should have some centre of pretended source of honour when, as was pointed out by Deputy Hogan, what you have is merely a scab upon a sore? Underneath all this ceremonial expenditure you have the poverty and the degradation of a people made poorer and made degraded by the very people whose symbol we are asked to honour. Face the realities. The best that has been said to-day for this symbol is that he is the caretaker of the Viceregal Lodge. That is the best case that has been put forward. If he were not there we would have to put in a housekeeper. Has any other case been put forward, except the case submitted by Deputy Sheehy that we are to keep a hiking hostel in the Phoenix Park for someone who may want to be put up for the week-end? Has it been suggested that the dignity of this State, the dignity of this people, has been benefited by the continued existence of that symbol or by continued expenditure upon that symbol? The case has gone by default.

Of course we have the stupidity that belongs to servility, that belongs to flunkeyism, which can find for protests of this character in the name of the people of the country nothing but the word "futile." It is futile. This House is futile and stupidly futile unless it is prepared to face up to the realities and to see that the very narrow resources of this State are turned into the channels which have been indicated by Deputy Hogan and not into channels of artificial snobbery and flunkeyish ceremony. I I have no strong feeling, and I never expressed any strong feeling, in relation to the Governor-General. To me he is merely a symbol, one of the symptoms, and I do not care twopence half-penny about symptoms. What I am concerned with is the reality which he represents. Being there, he declares to the world that somebody in this country in the name of Ireland professes to be satisfied with the manner in which those of whom that man is a symbol have deliberately divided our people into two separate and distinct legal entities.

An Ceann Comhairle

That, of course, is altogether outside this Estimate.

Mr. Flinn

I wish that the Governor-General was entirely outside the purview of this House and this people.

[Professor Thrift took the Chair.]

Minister for Finance (Mr. Blythe)

I do not think it is necessary to say anything in reply to the remarks that we have heard from the opposite side. I should like to say that Deputy Corry's exposition of the case was quite a fitting exposition. I would like to say one or two things. I have said them before, but I may as well repeat them, as repetition is the order of the day. I am satisfied that no matter what the constitutional position was here, there would have to be a representative head of the State who would undertake certain public duties, not of a political character. I believe, as I say, that no matter what the Constitution of the State was, that the expenditure would not be less than the present expenditure. I have said already, and I believe it firmly, that if we had a separate Republic here the office of the President of that Republic would, one way or another, involve more expenditure than is involved in the office of the Governor-General. When Deputies talk about lavish expenditure they apparently have no idea at all of what they are talking about. Certainly on the money that is provided here for the Governor-General there can be no such thing as lavish expenditure on entertainments. I do not think that lavish entertainments would be necessary. I think a certain amount of entertainment is necessary. All States find it necessary.

Sometimes it is difficult to find out what the exact costs of an office are. Our system enables one to calculate the costs. It enables the exact cost to be shown. In some other States you have small salaries and all sorts of things provided out of the Army and other Votes, so that it is impossible to find out in those cases what the whole cost is. Here we show it. I do not think it is unduly large. I believe myself that if the political circumstances were different and if the office of the Governor-General were not a matter of controversy that it would be in the national and economic interests of the country to look at the matter in a broad way, and that it would be desirable to spend more money than is being spent on the office of the Governor-General and of the activities connected with it.

We have to bear in mind here that we are close up against another country more populous and richer, a country which, we all know, has many attractions for large numbers of people of this country—has attractions even for those who pretend it has none and who pretend to have extreme political views. I do think myself that if the political circumstances were different and if this were not a matter of controversy that it would be for the national good to spend considerably more than is being spent now. The Governor-General is not the representative of over-lordship. The Governor-General is the representative of the full control of the people in this country. He is chosen by the Government of this country. He is responsible to the Government of this country. He acts on the advice of Ministers who have derived their authority solely from the people of this country. He has no authority of a political kind. Therefore the suggestion that the Governor-General represents over-lordship is entirely absurd. With reference to the one point of the piano: as it was mentioned by the Public Accounts Committee, in my view in an establishment of this sort that is an item of furniture that ought to be there. I think the objections that were raised to it are entirely absurd.

Question put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 58; Níl, 50.

Tá

• Aird, William P.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Blythe, Ernest.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Carey, Edmund.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Connolly, Michael P.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Good, John.
• Gorey, Denis J.
• Hassett, John J.
• Heffernan, Michael R.
• Hennessy, Michael Joseph.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Hennigan, John.
• Henry, Mark.
• Holohan, Patrick (Galway).
• Holohan, Richard.
• Jordan, Michael.
• Kelly, Patrick Michael.
• Keogh, Myles.
• Law, Hugh Alexander.
• Lynch, Finian.
• Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
• McDonogh, Martin.
• Craig, Sir James.
• Daly, John.
• Davis, Michael.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Dolan, James N.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Duggan, Edmund John.
• Dwyer, James.
• Egan, Barry M.
• Finlay, Thomas A.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• McFadden, Michael Og.
• McGilligan, Patrick.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Nally, Martin Michael.
• Nolan, John Thomas.
• O'Connell, Richard.
• O'Hanlon, John F.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Mahony, The.
• O'Reilly, John J.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Reynolds, Patrick.
• Roddy, Martin.
• Shaw, Patrick W.
• Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
• Tierney, Michael.
• Wolfe, George.
• Wolfe, Jasper Travers.

Níl

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Anthony, Richard.
• Blaney, Neal.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Boland, Patrick.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Broderick, Henry.
• Buckley, Daniel.
• Carney, Frank.
• Carty, Frank.
• Cassidy, Archie J.
• Clancy, Patrick.
• Clery, Michael.
• Coburn, James.
• Colbert, James.
• Corish, Richard.
• Corry, Martin John.
• Crowley, Tadhg.
• Davin, William.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• De Valera, Eamon.
• Everett, James.
• Fahy, Frank.
• Flinn, Hugo.
• Fogarty, Andrew.
• Gorry, Patrick J.
• Goulding, John.
• Hayes, Seán.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Houlihan, Patrick.
• Jordan, Stephen.
• Kennedy, Michael Joseph.
• Kent, William R.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Kilroy, Michael.
• Lemass, Seán F.
• Little, Patrick John.
• Moore, Séamus.
• Mullins, Thomas.
• O'Connell, Thomas J.
• O'Dowd, Patrick Joseph.
• O'Kelly, Seán T.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• Ruttledge, Patrick J.
• Ryan, James.
• Sheehy, Timothy (Tipp.).
• Tubridy, John.
• Walsh, Richard.
• Ward, Francis C.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Duggan and P. S. Doyle; Níl, Deputies Boland and Allen.

Motion declared carried.