Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 10 Apr 1940

Vol. 79 No. 10

Vote 38—Circuit Court.

Mr. Boland

I move:—

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £34,868 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, 1941, chun Tuarastail agus Liúntaisí agus Costaisí Oifigeach Cúirte Cuarda, Leas-Bhreithiún gCuarda agus Udarásanna Clárathachta Aitiúla áirithe, Costaisí Taistil Breithiún gCuarda agus Costaisí Athfhéachainte Liostaí Vótálaithe agus Coisteoirí (Uimh. 27 de 1926, etc.).

That a sum not exceeding £34,868 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, 1941, for the Salaries, Allowances and Expenses of Circuit Court Officers, Deputy Circuit Judges and certain Local Registering Authorities, the Travelling Expenses of Circuit Judges, and the expenses of Revision of Voters and Jurors Lists (No. 27 of 1926, etc.).

General MacEoin

Arising out of this Vote, the Minister's predecessor, when the Courts of Justice Act was going through the House, gave me his personal undertaking that persons engaged as court stenographers would be re-employed. On that occasion I drew his attention to one particular case, and I pointed out that there was a danger that the man might not be re-employed for reasons of economy or for some other reason, but not because of inefficiency. Since then the Minister's predecessor on various occasions gave me assurances that steps would be taken to have this man re-employed. Nothing has, however, been done in regard to him. He is on the unemployed list. He was a very efficient court stenographer. He was a journalist of some repute before he became a court stenographer, and he was in receipt of a salary sufficient to maintain himself and his wife and family. He surrendered that journalistic work to become a court stenographer. Losing the position of court stenographer, he now finds himself in the ranks of the unemployed, and the Department and the Minister have taken no steps to fulfil the promise made by the Minister's predecessor.

This man was a very prominent member of the Volunteers, pre-Truce. He has given valiant service to his country, and he has been treated in the harshest manner possible by the Government which he helped to establish. In the circumstances, I think that the Minister, even at this late stage, should take such steps as may be necessary to have the man employed in a position equal to the one he has lost as court stenographer. I appeal to the Minister to see that the injustice done to this man is redressed.

Mr. Boland

This is a very difficult question. The best that could be done was done for these people, so far as I can gather. A number of them had to be disemployed. Some were kept on at full salary to the end of the year 1937, and at half salary in 1938. They were not permanent officials, and it has not been found possible to absorb them. If it were possible, I would like to do what Deputy MacEoin asks, but it is not an easy thing to do. I scarcely think the Minister for Justice at the time definitely promised anything, because he could not do that. If it is possible to do anything, I will be certainly glad to do it, but I cannot make any definite promise. I will look into the matter again. I did not expect this point would be raised, and I cannot give any definite information about this man. If it is possible to do something, without making any definite promise, I will do it. I do not want that to be taken as a firm promise. I will undertake to see if I can do anything. I know it is a great hardship on these unfortunate stenographers, but what can we do?

General MacEoin

When the Courts of Justice Act was going through, the undertaking was given. Unfortunately, I have not the Official Report beside me, but the promise was made that this official would be given employment. This man was given half pay for some time, and he was re-employed in connection with workmen's compensation cases. He gets an odd case now and then, but that is of little value to him. This is certainly a case in which there is grave hardship. I dislike advocating a case for any individual in the House, but it seems this is the only way in which I can get attention drawn to the matter.

Question put and agreed to.