asked the Minister for Finance if he will state why he dismissed the former chairman of the Agricultural Credit Corporation, the date of such dismissal, the qualifications of the former and of the present chairman, the salary paid to the former chairman, and that payable to the new appointee.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Chairman of Agricultural Credit Corporation.
The chairman of the Agricultural Credit Corporation was not dismissed. In accordance with the articles of association of the corporation, the former chairman was due to retire as from the 31st July, 1957. As provided by the articles of association, he continued in office pending a fresh nomination. Such nomination was made with effect from 1st July, 1958, whereupon the term of office of the former chairman ended.
The former chairman was a farmer and company director; he was also the first national president of Macra na Feirme and a member of the Committee and Council of the Irish Sugar Beet Growers' Association. The present chairman has had long experience as a banker. He was until recently manager of a branch of a commercial bank and in that capacity has had particular experience of banking among the farming community.
The remuneration paid to the former chairman was £800 per annum; that payable to the present chairman is £1,200, which covers a day-by-day attention on his part to the affairs of the corporation.
Is the Minister aware that the former chairman had many other qualifications besides the qualifications he mentioned? Without passing any aspersions on the present chairman or on bank managers in general, does the Minister think that a retired bank manager is a more suitable person than a farmer of wide experience and a person who has had the honour to be in charge of Macra na Feirme?
Without casting any aspersions on the outgoing chairman, I consider the present appointee the best for the position, at the moment anyway.
Will the Minister inform the House the reasons why he retained the former chairman from the 31st July, 1957, to the 1st July, 1958? Is it not a fact that the reason was that the present incumbent of the position would not, until the 1st July, 1958, have had sufficient service with the bank to earn his full pension and that the only reason the former chairman was kept on was to keep the seat "hot" until the present man earned his full pension from the bank?
The Deputy appears to have a lot of information in the matter.
I have.
The appointment was not made until I got the person I thought the most suitable. That is all.
Does the Minister consider that one of the elements of suitability that arise is that the appointee in question has been well known for a long time as an ardent supporter of Fianna Fáil and that the Taoiseach and not the Minister for Finance was the person primarily behind this appointment?
That is not true.
It is true. Ask the Taoiseach to come in and deny it.
It was I who suggested it. I know this man for many years. He was in gaol with me when we were fighting for the freedom of this country.
Is the position now that the incumbent of this post, having acquired a substantial pension from his previous employer, is now receiving 50 per cent. more as chairman of the Agricultural Credit Corporation than his predecessor and does that combined remuneration amount, in fact, to over £2,000 a year?
What does the Deputy mean by "over £2,000 a year"?
I mean what I said. Does the Minister for Finance consider it requisite to increase the fee payable to the chairman of the Agricultural Credit Corporation by 50 per cent. in order to ensure that the present incumbent will enjoy an income of over £2,000 a year?
The amount was fixed at what I thought might be suitable to the work which he intends to do. I do not know what pension he has. I know he has a pension.
Does the Minister not think there was no change made prior to his appointment?
Who appointed his predecessor?
I did. He was by far the more suitable person and much more competent than the present man.
Why did the Deputy appoint him?
I know he was a great friend of Deputy Fanning's. That is one of the reasons he was appointed. It is a public scandal.
There is no public scandal about it. He is an outstanding man belonging to an outstanding family.
Not at all. He is a very mediocre man.
Not a word can be said to him.
I did not say a word about the man. If you bring it up, he is no use as chairman.
If he had a blue shirt he would be all right.