asked the Minister for Local Government the date on which Mr. John B. Lynch, solicitor, was appointed as law agent for Laois County Council, the date on which he was suspended by the county manager; if an appeal was lodged against the suspension; if so, on what date a decision was given; if it is a fact that the law agent is still a member of the Laois County Council staff; if so, the date on which he was last at his work in the council's offices; and if he will make a statement concerning the present position in regard to this appointment, the alternative arrangements made by the county manager since Mr. Lynch was suspended, the cost of such arrangements to the ratepayers of County Laois, and the terms of the Minister's order on the County Manager's suspension.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Laois County Council Law Agent.
Mr. Lynch was appointed law agent to Laois County Council on the 1st July, 1950. He was suspended from the performance of his duties on 16th October, 1959, and the local authority requested the Minister's consent to his removal from office on 13th December, 1960. It is understood that he last attended the local authority's office for duty on 14th October, 1959. Mr. Lynch availed himself of his statutory right to submit his observations on the request for his removal from office on 28th March, 1961, and there was subsequent correspondence between his solicitor and the local authority up to 27th November, 1962. Examination of the matter has been unusually protracted because of the nature of the grounds advanced in support of the request for my consent to his removal from office. It is hoped that the matter will soon be brought to finality. In the meantime Mr. Lynch is still an officer of the local authority but is suspended from the performance of his duties and is not in receipt of remuneration. I understand that the local authority have engaged a firm of solicitors on a taxed costs basis to discharge the legal business of the local authority. I have no precise information as to the cost of the alternative arrangements but I understand that the total bill of costs in respect of the four years ended October, 1963, was approximately £8,600, including outlay and expenses.
Is the Minister continuing to leave this matter hanging indefinitely so that Mr. Lynch will be on the list of permanent officers for a further number of years and so that he will therefore qualify for pension purposes? Having regard to the fact that the Minister lost no time in removing a rent collector and a rate collector from office within six months after the offences were reported to him by the county manager, has he any explanation to give as to why a man last in office on 14th October, 1959, is still on the list of permanent officers of the council and as to why he has not made a definite decision on the matter? Why can he act so quickly in the case of the rent collector and the rate collector and take no action in the case of the solicitor?
In reply to the Deputy's allegations, what he says about my haste in removing anybody from office is not true. That is one of the things I do not do with haste. If these persons were removed from office within six months, all I can say is that it shows the case put forward for their removal was clear-cut and that it did not take any time to investigate it.
Is there any other case in the Custom House for any other county in Ireland of an officer who has not been on duty since October, 1959, and in whose case no decision has been given? Would the Minister make inquiries in the records kept since the State was established to see if there has been any other case in which there was such a long delay in giving a decision?
The request for removal was in December, 1960. That is not to be related to the day on which this officer last attended the council office, which was in 1959. I have not got the information as to whether there has ever been a longer drawn out case, but I can assert without question that this case is regarded in the Department of Local Government as one of the most difficult and complex cases they have ever had to deal with since records began to be kept.
Does the Minister not consider £8,600 an extraordinary sum for the county council's legal costs?
There is just one observation I want to make on that. Had the officer in question been in office since the date he has ceased to act and had he been drawing the full salary to which he is entitled, it would have cost the ratepayers £500 more.
Is that not a reason why the Minister should give a decision?
It would have cost them more.