Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 8 Feb 1968

Vol. 232 No. 5

Social Welfare (Insurance Inclusions and Exclusions) Regulations, 1968.

Minister for Social Welfare (Mr. J. Brennan)

I move:—

That the Social Welfare (Insurance Inclusions and Exclusions) Regulations, 1968, proposed to be made by the Minister for Social Welfare and laid in draft, sanctioned by the Minister for Finance, before Dáil Éireann on the 31st day of January, 1968, under subsection (6) of Section 4 of the Social Welfare Act, 1952, be approved.

The purpose of these regulations is to bring the employment of managers of employment offices within the scope of the social insurance scheme. Hitherto the employment was not insurable under the Social Welfare Acts or under the former National Health Insurance, Widows' and Orphans' Pensions and the Unemployment Insurance Acts. The method adopted is to include the employment among those specified as insurable in Part I of the First Schedule to the Social Welfare Act, 1952.

The question of the insurability of the employment of managers was raised by their Association at a conciliation council comprising representatives of the Association and representatives of the Department of Labour. The agreed recommendation of that council is that the employment be brought within the scope of the social insurance scheme. Since managers are not pensionable and have no sick pay privileges, I consider that they should be fully insurable under the Acts and accordingly, the draft regulations provide for the inclusion of the employment in Part I of the First Schedule to the Act. Where the employment is of a subsidiary nature or the manager is not mainly dependent on the remuneration for his livelihood it is proposed to exclude it from the effect of Article 3. This is being achieved by Article 4 of the draft regulations which adds this type of employment to the list of employments specified in Part II of the First Schedule to the Act as being excepted from insurance.

I recommend the motion for the approval of Dáil Éireann.

Mr. Ryan

We are grateful to the Minister for his explanation of the position because this is a typical example of regulations which do not obviously explain themselves. We should be grateful, too, because this is one of the rare occasions on which a Minister makes a regulation of which a draft must be approved by the House before it can come into effect. We have all too often complained of legislation which provides for the making of regulations which stand and are the law of the land until such time as they are amended by motion tabled here in the House. This is one of the rare occasions on which a regulation cannot come into effect until specific approval is given to it and we are, therefore, glad to have this opportunity.

The Minister has explained the necessity for this but I wonder if he would be good enough to let us have some information as to the mode of recruitment of the people whom it is sought to provide for in these regulations. One would have thought that they would be classified as persons in the employment of the Government and as such would come within the scope of paragraph 3 of the First Schedule of the Social Welfare Act, 1952, and that they therefore would not need any further coverage. Apparently there are other views on that but I would be glad if the Minister would be good enough to put us wise on that specific issue. From the Minister's remarks it would appear to be done because the people concerned are regarded as being in the employment of the State under contract for service rather than under contract of service which of course is provided for in the 1952 Act.

For a considerable number of years past, we on the Fine Gael benches have been pressing the Minister to introduce a similar regulation to the one which he is introducing today to provide for insurance agents who make their livelihood out of commissions earned on premiums and life policies and so on which they collect, but so far the Minister and his predecessor have hesitated to introduce this amending legislation to provide for those insurance agents who, I would consider, are probably much greater in number than the people to be covered by the regulations for which approval is sought today. I should like, therefore, to hear the Minister's comments on these employees.

Having said that, we wish to agree in all respects with the regulations as drafted. We consider it proper that they should be made and when we say that, we say also that any other classes of people in the community who are in a similar position should also have regulations made in respect of them and it should not be confined to those persons who are termed employment officers under the Minister for Labour.

Mr. Carter

The motion on the Order Paper does not cover the point I am about to raise but it is a matter connected with social insurance and it covers the ESB meter readers.

An Ceann Comhairle

That would not arise on the motion before the House.

Mr. Carter

It does not come directly under it but on a point of information——

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not come under it at all. It does not seem to have any relevancy to it.

Mr. Carter

It is the same subject matter in fact as is covered by the motion but it is not directly related to the motion. If you say that I have not the power to raise it, Sir, then I accept your ruling.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not think the Minister for Social Welfare would have any responsibility for or any interest in this particular point.

Mr. Carter

Yes, of course the Minister for Social Welfare is solely responsible for those who are covered by social insurance and this is the context in which I am raising this point. I shall be very brief. I should like to ask the Minister at this stage what prompted the ESB and the Department of Social Welfare to notify those men, who have been employed down the years as meter readers with the ESB and who were covered in fact by insurance, that they were no longer subject to insurance and that the Department proposed to refund the amount those employees had paid into the insurance fund. It seems to me to be an injustice to this group who are employed by the ESB to read meters. Without having had time to look up this matter and purely off the cuff, I am asking the Minister to explain briefly the position at this stage because I propose to raise the subject matter of this question later on.

Mr. J. Brennan

I have not much to add to what I have already said. Subsection (5) of section 4 of the 1952 Act makes provision to cover new categories and that is what we are doing in this case. It has been done as a result of a conciliation council, representative of the association representing the branch managers, and the Department of Labour, the Department by which they are employed, and agreement was reached requesting me to have them made insurable. This is a case where I am glad that decision has been taken because these people, while we may quibble about the question of a contract for service or of service, do work irregular office hours and most of them depend entirely on that as their main, if not their sole, means of livelihood and they were not pensionable. I think it is fair that the benefits of insurability should be extended to them.

In reply to Deputy Ryan, I should say that the same applies to any other section who might request that they should be made insurable. Their case will be considered if they make a case. I can see a difficulty with regard to insurance agents whose hours of work would be pretty difficult to determine because they are acting as agents and might work only a few hours per week or very long hours. I can foresee a difficulty there. However, if any person wishes to make a case, I shall be glad to have it considered.

I do not know whether we should plunge into this question, which is sub judice at the moment, of meter readers. I had a couple of questions here yesterday or the day before and the House will remember that in my reply I pointed out that one of those aggrieved persons or one of those applicants has appealed this case and the decision in that case, which will come before an appeals officer, will determine the insurability or otherwise of similar persons in that category. It will then be open to each individual to make a separate application if he feels that he comes within the category.

Mr. Carter

That is to hang them separately. What I want to know from the Minister——

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not arise on this particular motion.

Mr. Carter

It does arise. It is in the same category.

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not arise.

Mr. Carter

It is covered by social insurance and I submit that I am entitled to raise it.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Deputy would please pay attention to the Chair—I am pointing out that this is a very narrow motion and the Deputy is extending and enlarging it considerably.

Mr. Carter

With respect, the Deputy is not extending or enlarging the motion. The Deputy is merely referring to a group of people who are employed by the ESB and who were covered——

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Surely the Minister is concluding?

Mr. Carter

The Minister is making provision to extend the provisions of the Act.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Chair.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister is concluding on the motion and the Deputy should not interfere in this disorderly fashion.

Mr. Carter

The Deputy is not disorderly. He is confining his remarks to what is on the Order Paper.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Are we in Committee then?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister, concluding.

Mr. J. Brennan

I was making reference to the category to which Deputy Carter referred, relevantly or otherwise. I do not like the remark about hanging them separately. My Department are most generous with regard to the treatment of every category. That fact is proved by the almost universality of coverage that has been reached in recent times. It would be necessary to have them apply individually. For some of these meter readings, which is only one of the jobs, some of them are very few hours on the job; others have long hours. It is specifically stated in the Act that under 18 hours is not insurable. It is not to hang them separately. I resent that remark.

Mr. Carter

It is my submission that it is to hang them.

Question put and agreed to.