asked the Minister for Local Government and Public Health if he will state (1) the grounds on which he dissolved the Dublin Board of Assistance; (2) the names of the persons appointed by him to administer the affairs of the board; (3) the ages and qualifications of the persons so appointed; (4) the salaries, allowances and other remuneration of such persons and the conditions of their appointment; and (5) the fund or funds out of which such salaries, allowances and other remuneration are payable.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Dissolution of Dublin Board of Assistance.
The members of the Dublin Board of Assistance were removed from office as the evidence at the sworn inquiry disclosed that the duties of the board were not being duly and effectually performed.
As regards the latter part of the question the commissioners appointed for the board of assistance are Mr. Séamus Murphy (chairman), Mrs. Mary J. McKean, and Mr. Edward M. Murray. Mr. Murphy has had wide experience of local administration. He was chairman of the Dublin Union Commissioners appointed in 1923 and of the Dublin City Commissioners from May, 1924, to October, 1930. Mrs. McKean has had long experience of social work in Dublin and has taken an active part in the administration of the Dublin Infant Aid Society. Mr. Murray has been attached to the chief accountant's staff of the Electricity Supply Board. He is an accountant with experience of the organisation of many of that board's activities embracing control of stores. Their remuneration is as follows: Mr. Murphy, chairman of the commissioners, £1,100 a year; Mrs. McKean, £700 a year; and Mr. Murray, £700 a year. The remuneration of the commissioners will be payable out of the revenues of the board of assistance as part of the general expenses.
For the further information of the Deputy I am arranging to circulate in the Official Report an extract from a letter I addressed to the commissioners, calling attention to certain aspects of the board's administration.
Following is the extract:—
" The inquiry on oath which the Minister directed into the performance of the duties of the board was opened on the 12th February last. The hearing of evidence lasted eight days. The full minutes of evidence at the inquiry will be made available later for the information of the commissioners. At present the Minister desires to bring to their notice evidence bearing upon the growth in expenditure since 1936 and the limited control exercised by the board over expenditure on home assistance.
" In evidence at the inquiry the following particulars were given of the estimated total expenditure of the board of assistance in each of the eight years indicated in the table:—
|
Year Ended |
Estimated Total Expenditure |
|
31st March, 1936 |
£352,447 |
|
31st March, 1937 |
£377,340 |
|
31st March, 1938 |
£393,747 |
|
31st March, 1939 |
£405,624 |
|
31st March, 1940 |
£420,768 |
|
31st March, 1941 |
£498,973 |
|
31st March, 1942 |
£502,291 |
|
31st March, 1943 |
£550,422 |
"The expenditure on home assistance was £279,000 (approx.) in 1933. The Unemployment Assistance Act which made provision for the relief of unemployed persons became law in November, 1933. In 1934 expenditure on home assistance fell to £177,000 approximately. In 1935 the Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Act, which made provision for pensions for certain widows and orphans, was passed. In 1935 the expenditure on home assistance was £165,000 (approx.). The expenditure in the next three years showed slight increases over the amount expended in 1935. In the financial year 1939 the expenditure rose to £205,000 (approx.) and in 1940 to £227,000 (approx.). The total expenditure for the year ended the 31st March, 1942, was estimated at £252,000 (approx.). For the present financial year the board made provision in their estimate and demand for a sum of £278,000, which approximates closely to the total amount expended on home assistance before the Unemployment Assistance and Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Acts were passed.
"The evidence at the inquiry indicates that the board of public assistance exercised little control over expenditure on home assistance. Very few applications for assistance were considered by them. The majority of the applications were dealt with by relieving officers on their own responsibility. How lax the administration of home assistance by the board had become is exemplified by the following evidence of the superintendent relieving officer:—
‘How many cases did you have in fact this week that came to the notice of the board?
Witness—Nine.
And you had 10,389 on the books yesterday?
Witness—Yes. That was the number relieved.
So that out of 10,389 cases which appeared on the bill of £5,270 4s. 0d. last week only nine cases were brought to the notice of the board?
Witness—Yes.
What was the amount in the nine cases—would the amount be more than £20 because the maximum is £2 10s 0d?
Witness—It was only £6 or £7.'
"As regards able-bodied relief the need for supervision was clearly borne out by evidence at the inquiry, but the following question addressed to the superintendent relieving officer and his answer thereto given on oath, show that no effective control was exercised:—
‘Inspector—Am I making a mistake or am I taking you up properly when you say there is no supervision over the able-bodied relief?
Superintendent Relieving Officer— No. There is nobody going out in the districts to make inquiries and to see these cases at home and making full inquiries.'
"Practically no steps were taken by the board of assistance to assure themselves that the relief afforded was being justifiably given. So openhanded in fact had the system of distribution of relief become that there has been a tendency on the part of many recipients to regard assistance from the board as a form of permanent income. When it was pointed out at the inquiry to one of the superintendent relieving officers that a stage had been reached where the hard-working industrious man will become envious of his neighbour who is unemployed, his reply was—‘We are bordering on it already.'
"The demoralising effect of all this looseness has been intensified by the fact that though attempts to secure public moneys, in the form of home assistance, by false pretences have been frequently detected, in not one instance did the board take legal proceedings to have the offenders punished or to act as a deterrent to others. There is little doubt that this tolerant attitude has encouraged attempts to defraud.
"Further, it is within the knowledge of the Minister that the board of assistance have afforded relief to supplement unemployment assistance to such an extent that it was in the interests of the recipient to refuse work on employment schemes. The action of the board in this matter was quite indefensible. By giving relief to a person who would not work the board were not only subsidising idleness but were acting with a complete disregard of the interests of the community. If an individual in receipt of public assistance refuses to accept employment on an employment scheme he has no longer a genuine claim to unconditional public assistance. While no person should be refused relief who, owing to age, infirmity, physical disability or inability to secure work, is entitled to be assisted, no person who is able to perform manual labour and refuses work on employment schemes should be placed in a position to live in idleness at the expense of the ratepayers.
"In the course of the inquiry evidence was tendered in regard to irregularities in the issue of stores, shortage of petrol and purchase of petrol for private persons. It is clear from the evidence that the present method of issuing and accounting for stores is very unsatisfactory. In the case of the petrol shortage the storekeeper was held responsible by the board and was required by them to make good the shortage but no subsequent action appears to have been taken to make him do so. The system of ordering, receiving, issuing and accounting for stores will require to be completely reorganised so as to ensure that with reasonable supervision on the part of the resident medical superintendent and such other responsible officers of the board as may be concerned there will be no recurrence of irregularities such as the evidence disclosed.
"The Minister also desires that the commissioners should examine further the circumstances under which an alteration was made in a printing tender for the supply of books of diet dockets. The evidence at the inquiry showed that the accepted tender, following personal representations on behalf of the contractors, was altered from 14/6 per 1,000 books to read 14/6 per 100. The Minister is not satisfied with the investigation which has already taken place into the alteration of the tender. The matter should be re-opened by the commissioners with a view to determining who was responsible. The Minister is also far from satisfied with the explanations given at the inquiry on behalf of the contractors. The original tender received in the board's office appears to have been altered in consequence of improper representations made to officials by or on behalf of the tenderer. No contractor to the board should stand in such a relation to any member of the board's staff that he may by personal representations secure an alteration in a tender lodged with the board and accepted by them. The commissioners should investigate the circumstances of this case very fully and acquaint the Minister in due course of the steps which they propose to take to prevent any similar action in future.
"It emerged at the inquiry that tenders for supplies were not invited by public advertisement in every instance. There appears to have been a practice of inviting quotations from selected firms. The commissioners will no doubt review the position generally as regards supplies and satisfy themselves in regard to the manner of obtaining them.
"Finally, it will be necessary for the commissioners to investigate in detail the entire administration of the board of assistance. One of their principal duties in this connection will be to revise the present procedure in regard to the administration of home assistance and able-bodied relief so as to ensure that the circumstances of each applicant for assistance will be carefully investigated and that there will be instituted in this important sphere of administration proper supervision and such other checks on expenditure as actual experience of the working of the system will suggest. The Minister requests to be furnished in due course with reports from the commissioners on their administration with particular reference to any special measures which in their view are required to remedy the defects and abuses which the evidence at the inquiry disclosed.
Mise, le meas.
J. HURSON,
Rúnaidhe.
Séamus Murphy, Esq.,
9, St. Mary's Road,
Ballsbridge,
Dublin.