Garda Síochána Pensions Order, 1950.

Minister for Justice (General MacEoin)

I move:—

"That Dáil Éireann hereby approves of the Garda Síochána Pensions Order, 1950, made on the 25th day of May, 1950, by the Minister for Justice, with the sanction of the Minister for Finance, under Section 13 of the Police Forces Amalgamation Act, 1925, and laid before Dáil Éireann on the 13th June, 1950."

The main purpose of the Order is to grant increases in respect of widows' pensions and children's allowances similar to those granted to other State pensioners by the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1950. It also provides for a number of miscellaneous amendments in the Garda Síochána Pensions Orders.

A memorandum which explains fully the effect of the various provisions of the Order has been circulated and I do not think it is necessary for me to go into the details of the Order at this stage.

Mr. Boland

On the whole, this Order is to be welcomed but it is a pity the Minister did not make provision for some outstanding cases. I refer to those cases where Guards were injured in the performance of their duties. I understand there are only four such cases. The position formerly was that a Guard who retired compulsorily because of injuries received while on duty was treated in the same manner as a Guard who voluntarily retired through illness or who himself asked to be allowed to retire. It has been pointed out to me that a man who voluntarily retires is generally in a position to maintain himself and his family; he would not otherwise ask for permission to retire on pension. The man who compulsorily retires has to look out for some employment. Now, when he produces his discharge certificate, there is a statement on the certificate to the effect that he is medically unfit. Those who made the representations to me in this matter maintain that this acts as a barrier to his obtaining employment. As these might be fairly young men with families it is essential that they should supplement their small pension by means of some other employment. Section 41 of this Order deals with these particular people. Sub-section (2) of that section deals only with widows and orphans:—

"...The amendments effected by this Order shall not apply in relation to the members of the force who retired from or died while serving in the force before the making of this Order."

I think the Minister would be well advised to try to rectify the position because I am told it is causing a lot of anxiety at present and a certain amount of discontent. It will spoil the whole purpose of the Order if he does not do something to rectify the position. I know the difficulty the Minister is in; he has to collaborate with the Department of Finance. As I have said, there are only four cases and I think he should try to do something about them.

Sections 12 and 27 deal with the case of a Guard injured on his way to duty or on his return from duty. Up to this if a Guard was injured on his way to or from duty, he was considered to be injured while actually on duty. Under this Order it is no longer proposed to count the time during which a man is either going to or coming from duty as time actually spent on duty. As far as the Guards are concerned, I think that is a retrograde step. I do not know the reason why these two Articles have been introduced here. Generally, the Order does improve the position. For the future it will be all right. I have no doubt at all about that. I understand that it has been well received and the only drawbacks are the particular cases I have mentioned under Article 41 and Articles 12 and 27.

Mr. McGrath

I should like to support the case made by Deputy Boland. It seems to me a strange thing that a man who is injured in the course of his employment will get only the same compensation as a man who voluntarily retires for some reason such as sickness. The man who retires as a result of an injury received in the performance of his duty is further prevented from seeking employment because the certificate which he receives states that he is incapable of undertaking employment. In regard to the question of a Guard being injured while going on duty, on yesterday's paper there was a report of a statement by a district justice, in reference to a case where a Guard was summoned for being on licensed premises, that a Guard is always on duty and had a right to be there. I hold the same view myself. I feel that if a Guard is going through the streets, no matter whether he is regarded as being on or off duty, if he is called upon he will always endeavour to carry out his duties in every way possible. I would appeal to the Minister seeing that there are only a small number of cases concerned, only four in fact, to reconsider his attitude and to include such men within the scope of the Order. I have never known a case, where when a Guard was called upon, he was not always available.

Mr. Briscoe

I should like if the Minister would consider the case of ex-Guard Clifford, the details of which are well known to every member of the House. He was retired but it was suggested that he was not entitled to any compensation, even in the form of a small pension. I should like to know if the Minister has had that case under review recently in connection with this present development.

Captain Cowan

All the House has to do with an Order introduced in this form is either to approve or reject it. Clearly the Order has met with the substantial approval of the Garda Síochána. At least, I am quite sure that if it did not meet with their approval, many Deputies in this House would have been consulted with regard to it. I agree with the views expressed by Deputy Boland and Deputy McGrath in regard to the case of a Guard who is injured while proceeding to or coming from his station. If a Guard observed any breach of the law, either when going to or coming from his station, that Guard would be clearly bound to deal with the matter on the spot. It may be that when the Minister comes to explain this matter he may be able to allay the apprehensions that are felt in regard to it. Certainly the rules relating to workmen's compensation in the case of an ordinary workman should not be applicable in the case of a Guard. I think a general rule might be laid down that a Guard is deemed always to be on duty except when actually in his own home or on holidays. With these two exceptions, a Guard should be considered as being on duty all the time. The Minister is to be congratulated on the improvements he has made. Perhaps this particular point may not be as serious as it appears and the Minister may be able, as I say, to allay our fears in regard to it. I think the House can rest assured that if an examination of this Order does bring to light cases of hardship, the Minister will be the very first to introduce whatever amendments are necessary to put these matters right.

Mr. Lynch

The Minister in introducing this Order said that the explanatory memorandum circulated by him was sufficient to disclose the nature of the changes brought about by the Order without calling for any elaborate explanations from him. I made an attempt this morning to go through the mass of legislation by Order which governs the payment of pensions to Gardaí and to widows and orphans. I find that the Orders go back as far as 1922 embracing I think five different Orders, and I think it about time that the Minister should codify these Orders.

General MacEoin

I am having a gallop at that.

Mr. Lynch

Certainly, even though the ordinary Guard receives a certain amount of legal training, no Guard of average intelligence would be able to interpret these Orders properly and intelligently. Deputy Boland has dwelt on the hardships which will be created on four or five men by reason of the Minister not making the Order restrospective to cover them and I think that the Minister could hardly contest the case made by Deputy Boland with any fair argument. Firstly, he has gone back over a whole period of years to modify these Orders in so far as they affect widows and orphans. I know that in the Minister's own Department and in the Department of Finance very serious objection is taken to making retrospective provision for pensions improvement, but as has been pointed out, only four men are affected. I cannot say whether they have any wives or children but these men will not benefit in any way by the increases made in the case of widows and orphans. I should say that if provision were made for these men the cost to the State would be comparatively trifling. If the men were deceased at this stage, their widows and orphans, if thy had any, would benefit by the increase but because the men are fortunate to be alive to-day, they are unfortunate enough not to come under these Orders. The case has been very adequately put already by a number of Deputies and I think the Minister should try to meet it. I know the alternative to approving of the Order now is to withdraw it and to reintroduce it to cover these cases but since there is such a mass of Orders covering the pensions of Gardaí, I think another little one would not add appreciably to the volume.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would the Deputy move the Adjournment of the debate.

Mr. Lynch

I shall finish in a few minutes.

Mr. Lemass

It is not opposed business and it would be as well to conclude it.

Mr. Lynch

I want the Minister to reply as fully as possible to the debate. The question of Guards going to and coming from duty is a big one and I consider that the deletion of the provision which covered Guards heretofore is completely unjustified. The Minister is probably taking a line on the Workmen's Compensation Act. There has been a lot of legislation in regard to the Workmen's Compensation Act and it is even yet fairly difficult to draw the line as to when a man begins work and when he leaves off. Generally speaking, I think the law is that once a man comes under the supervision of his employer's orders, directly or indirectly, he has commenced work. Surely a Guard even on his way to the Garda station to report for duty must come under the purview of orders? He is bound either in duty or at least in conscience to apprehend any criminal he may meet or to put down any illegal action.

General MacEoin

And the very minute he does so he is on duty.

Captain Cowan

And if he is injured the moment before that?

Mr. Lynch

Even if he should meet no evildoer on his way, he might have an accident. Am I to take it that he is not covered until such time as he goes in and signs the book, or meets a wrongdoer?

Mr. Briscoe

The wrongdoer might see him first and hit him.

General MacEoin

Take, for instance, a police officer who is on holidays and who gets tight——

Mr. Briscoe

Surely that would never happen.

General MacEoin

——and has an accident. Are we to give him a special pension in that instance? Or take the case of a police officer going from the barracks for a week's holidays. As things stood, that was the way here. Any time the police officer starts to do anything in the discharge of his duties he is on duty and the special matter applies. If we make that retrospective for these four, why not for all the rest? There are any amount of cases. These four were there during the Fianna Fáil régime also.

Mr. G. Boland

I am not denying that.

General MacEoin

If I took in these four, why not the widows also?

Mr. G. Boland

You are doing that for the widows and orphans.

General MacEoin

I mean retrospection. It would be opening the door very wide.

Mr. G. Boland

It has been done. We have had it all the time. There is a case there.

Mr. McGrath

What did the judge say? — that he is on duty all the time.

General MacEoin

This Order is a good Order and I propose at the earliest possible moment to have it so that it can be read by anybody. I admit that it is rather difficult at the moment. We have to have it brought into a form that is easily understood. If, in its administration, there are any defects found in it the Dáil will not have gone out of existence and we can easily amend it. I am anxious to do everything we can to make the thing right.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Thursday, 15 Jun 1950

Garda Síochána Pensions Order, 1950.

Mr. Boland

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 15 Jun 1950