I think this Bill will be generally looked upon as a non-controversial measure, and will be welcomed by the Seanad as a whole. The great surprise has been that it has been delayed for such a long time. During the past two years more civil servants have resigned than in the same period within the experience, I think, of any living person, and their places have been filled, as far as I am aware, without any competitive examination.
CIVIL SERVICE REGULATION (No. 2) BILL, 1923.
Motion made that the Bill be read a second time.
I stand corrected if I have made an over-statement, but I think it is safe to say that the great majority of the posts have been filled without any examinations. That is a very serious consideration, and this generation is going to pay for it at the expense of efficiency. When we see a state of affairs of that kind obtaining, we need not wonder at the terribly chaotic state of such departments as the Army Accounts and Finance Department, where accounts are transferred from one department to another, and from one officer to another until the unfortunate creditor does not know where to look for his money.
I had a case some time ago in hands, and I was amazed to find that an absolutely accounting matter was being dealt with by an ex-engine driver—a man who might be an excellent engine-driver, but certainly knew nothing about accounts. One of the officers also, who was concerned in the matter, stated that the matter was in his hands only six weeks. How he could be expected to give a reply in six weeks baffled the imagination of that officer.
I had occasion to write to the Secretary of the Post Office some four or five weeks ago, at the request of some persons whose children wished to go in for the competitive examination for the Post Office. I asked him when, in his opinion, the examination would be held for female learners, and other such positions. He replied to the effect that the subjects for the examination had not yet been decided upon, and consequently he was unable to say when the examination would be held. I hope that some progress has been made in that respect by now. It is a very serious state of affairs, at a time when resignations are so numerous, to have the Civil Service built up by people who cannot, and in many cases, it is well known, have not the qualifications that are necessary for these positions.
I do not want to pursue that matter any further because it is so obvious to everybody, but I want to draw attention to two matters of constitutional importance in the Bill. Sub-section 4 of Section 4 provides that regulations made by the Commissioners regarding the admission of people to the Civil Service shall be laid before each House of the Oireachtas, and if only one House disapproves of such a regulation that it shall prevail. That would mean that a regulation framed by the Commissioners, of which this Seanad approves, and of which the Dáil disapproves, shall still prevail.
In other words, the Seanad can overrule the Dáil, and vice versa. That is a very unsatisfactory position. Instead of putting down in this particular Section "both Houses," it should be "either house"—that if either House disapproves of any regulation made, then that regulation shall be nullified. Otherwise you can have either assembly nullifying the act of the other, and leaving the Commissioners in absolute control. Naturally, as the Minister is responsible to the Dáil, that is the body that will probably prevail in most cases, and the functions of the Seanad will be absolutely wiped out. It is quite possible, however, that the reverse may obtain. The Dáil can turn down a regulation of this kind, but unless the Seanad sees fit to do likewise, then the regulation stands.
In Sub-section 2 of Section 9, the very same principle arises, and I intend when this Bill is in Committee, to move amendments providing that it shall only be necessary for one House to pass a resolution disapproving of any regulation in order to nullify the regulation.
This Bill has been described as a non-controversial measure. To my mind, it is by no means a non-controversial measure. Following what Senator O'Farrell has said, I have several times here given instances of scandalous cases of corruption in the country. When this Bill was before the Seanad on a former occasion, we were pressed to pass the Bill, and not to be in any way uneasy about it, because it was only to last for a few months. I suggested an amendment to one Section—that when local bodies were making appointments these appointments should only be made through the medium of the Civil Service Commissioners. I gave a number of very outrageous instances of corruption which I had known to exist. The Minister for Local Government and the President were here, and I certainly understood from them that they quite approved of the suggestion. In fact, the President said that they had a very comprehensive scheme for dealing with the matter, when the Bill came up for reconsideration, and that all these amendments would be adopted.
The Bill has come up for reconsideration, and I find that it is verbatim the Bill that we were asked to pass on the plea that there was a great hurry about it. This Seanad has been described elsewhere as a cooling chamber. It certainly exists to enable improvements to be introduced into legislation. If Bills are to be hurried through, as they were on the last occasion, by suspending Standing Orders, I certainly must protest in the strongest way possible. We owe a duty to the State to see that the administration of public affairs is as pure and uncorrupt as possible. We know cases of men down in the country getting returned so that they may make a living out of these jobs. It is notorious that doctors in the past have had to buy their jobs. Unless something is done to prevent such things as that in the future, I certainly must protest in the strongest manner against this Bill being pushed through without the amendments promised on the last occasion when it was brought up being introduced into it.
I should like to join with the Senators who have spoken in what they said on this matter. It is very late to bring forward a Bill of this kind when the whole Civil Service, from top to bottom, has been not only filled but over-filled.
It should have been done long ago. Everyone will approve of these matters being put into the hands of the Civil Service Commissioners. There are things here connected with the Schedule, however, which I do not understand. There are a number of classes of persons included in the Schedule who do not come into the Bill at all. That may be all right, because I quite understand that there are some appointments that must be made without examination. You cannot have porters and door-keepers, and people like that, appointed by competitive examination. There are also some very high positions which would not properly come under competitive examination. But we would like to know who those people are who come under some of these designations which are very general and very uncertain. With regard to No. 4, while it is clear that we cannot have examinations for the persons referred to, I would like them to be appointed by some method other than political influence.
It came to my knowledge some time ago that practically every appointment was made by the Whip of the political party in power. I know that is so. We were told by the President on one occasion that the reason he appointed certain very important people in the Ministry of Finance, and other places, was because they were recommended by the heads of the departments to which they belonged. That certainly was a very good reason. No one can doubt it. On the other hand, when I was told by the head of a Department that every single appointment under him was made by a political Whip I was somewhat taken back. I think it is very improper that the Whip of a political party should have power to appoint door-keepers, messengers, night-watchmen, charwomen, cleaners, and other persons in subordinate positions. That puts into the hands of a political party power for wholesale jobbery. I am not saying any particular political party commits this wholesale jobbery, but some political party may come in and commit wholesale jobbery. There should be some means of appointing these people which would not allow of jobbery. Who all the people are described in No. 2, I do not know. Perhaps the Minister will help us by explaining. I join with Senator Barrington in saying that the Bill should extend further and apply to all public bodies in the country. The less influence Ministers or political parties have in these appointments the better. There will always be a certain amount of influence, but the less the better for the general credit and honour of the country.
As far as this Bill provides for competitive examinations for the Civil Service, I am in thorough agreement with it. I go further and say that any people who got positions in the Civil Service, other than by the door of competitive examinations, should not be regarded as permanent officials. I entirely agree with the remarks that were made by other Senators, and regret that the competitive system was not enforced sooner and before all the positions had been filled. However, better late than never. With the passing of this Bill I hope it is by competitive examinations these offices will be filled, and that the rule will be rigidly adhered to. Otherwise, we might adopt the system here of having each political party when it comes into power appointing its own supporters.
I think that would be an unfortunate thing for the country. By that method certain classes in this country who do not see eye to eye with the Government would feel that they are ostracised in their own country. Once the competitive system is established, they would have no reason to grumble, as they will be eligible if worthy and efficient to secure the highest marks. There is one Section of the Bill which I question will be to the advantage of this country. That is the Section which states that candidates for appointments must be born in Ireland. We must remember that a very large number of Irishmen have got positions through competitive examination in Great Britain, and a very large number of the schools have been training their pupils for the purpose of enabling them to compete at these examinations.
If this Section is adhered to in its present form, I fear that it may induce Great Britain to retaliate by excluding Irishmen from competing in the Civil Service in that country. I throw out that suggestion so that the matter may be considered, and so that those in charge of the Bill might try and ascertain how many Irishmen got employment in the past through these examinations, and how many in the future might be deprived of a livelihood if the Bill passed in its present form.
Like Senator Barrington, I am somewhat concerned that the amendments promised, when this Bill went through before, have not been included. My chief anxiety is on the question of appointments under local authorities, and that it is not mandatory on the Civil Service Commissioners to hold examinations in these cases, but is left to the discretion of the Executive Council. You cannot deal with these matters from the point of view of generalities. You have got to deal with them in the light of local knowledge. Things being as they are, the appointments made by local authorities generally have been of an unsatisfactory character, and made with little or no regard to the qualifications of the candidates, very often on a purely parochial basis.
It was only the other day that I saw an appointment in Tipperary where applicants were confined to that area, even the county being excluded. I believe that anyone living outside the town was excluded from being an applicant. Bearing in mind those facts, which I think are notorious, it does seem necessary to tighten up the whole matter and for this purpose to make these examinations mandatory and to approach them from a different angle and then perhaps to state certain exceptions. It should not be left entirely to the discretion of the Executive Council, in a permanent Bill of this kind, to hold only if it thinks fit competitive examinations for an important position in the Defence Forces, the Dublin Metropolitan Police, or the Civic Guard and all the appointments under local authorities, when we know that in the latter case undesirable influences are the most potent. I hope the Minister may deal with that point and perhaps save time by preventing amendments which are unnecessary being put down.
Senator O'Farrell led off with the parrot cry we have heard so often of late about the filling up of the Civil Service during the past two years. There is no truth whatever in that. No permanent appointment has been made to the Civil Service since the change of Government. It was impossible to make any permanent appointment. Certain temporary appointments have been made. A considerable number have been made in special offices like the Army Finance Office and the Compensation Department of the Ministry of Finance, where a huge volume of work came in on account of the emergency. Apart from that there has been no great number of appointments, and any that have been made have been temporary. They cannot be converted, any of them, into permanent appointments except in accordance with the provisions of this Bill. The cry Senator O'Farrell allowed himself to be deceived into repeating was one without foundation. This Bill is practically a re-enactment of a previous Bill that was introduced four or five months ago. Before that things had not reached the stage when it was possible to set up a Civil Service Commission, and have recruitment for the public services by the methods provided in this Bill.
Up to that time the State was actually fighting for its life, and it would have been a great danger to have appointed, say, a well-known Irregular, even if that Irregular had passed an examination. I am speaking of a theoretical Irregular. Even if the person had done nothing that would bring him within reach of the law, it would have been a danger to the State to allow such person to get in by competitive examination. There were considerations which made it impossible to set up the ordinary Civil Service machinery. It was only possible to pass a temporary Bill, and that was done. This proposal is to re-enact these temporary provisions. I do not think that it was promised that amendments would be introduced into a permanent Bill, obliging the Civil Service Commissioners to hold examinations for local authorities.
As I see the matter, it is undesirable that that should be dealt with in this way. A Local Government Bill is in preparation, which will reform a great number of local government matters. That will prescribe how local government appointments are to be made, which are to be held by competitive examination, which by a qualifying examination, and which are not to be the subject of examination at all. When we are making rules for local authorities under the Local Government Bill, it can be prescribed that the Civil Service Commissioners can hold examinations where examinations are to be held. It would be useless to require the Commissioners to hold examinations when the local authorities might ignore them. This Bill is to set up a Civil Service Commission, and there is nothing in this Bill to prevent whatever changes we may desire in regard to the filling of local appointments. I think we have done sufficient here when we have enabled the Civil Service Commissioners, if required, to hold an examination for local authorities. I think it will be going too far to make it obligatory on the Commissioners to hold examinations which local authorities might ignore.
The appointments under the Schedule include Judges and District Justices. In Section 2 they include the Heads of Departments. It is felt that there should be some possibility of going outside the ranks of existing civil servants, if necessary, to get the head of a department. That would probably arise only where some new section of work is being taken on. For instance, when the National Health Insurance Act was set up, the Government of the day went outside the Civil Service to get a man to place at the head of the Insurance Commission. It is felt desirable that in the case of the heads of Departments there should be freedom for the Executive Council to choose the best men. It would be undesirable, of course, to go outside the ranks of the Civil Service, unless it was necessary, because, if you do not promote to these important offices, the type of candidate you get to go into the Civil Service, it would not be as good as otherwise it would.
With regard to No. 4 in the Schedule, I do not know how that matter could best be arranged. At present, if it is a case of men being employed, they will be confined to, say, men who served in the Army. If you do not do that, you might as well do it by lot as any other way. I assume it is not impossible to devise a satisfactory system. In any case, you will not have political jobbery in the appointment of charwomen, and it will not damage the State. This Bill provides for the setting up of a Civil Service Commission somewhat similar to that which exists in England. It provides for the remuneration of the Commissioners, and for the giving of certificates, and it provides also that in normal circumstances there shall be open competitive examinations.
There is power in certain cases to confine competitive examinations to persons belonging to a specific class. That has been done recently. We are demobilising large numbers of men from the Army, and we have already demobilised, I suppose, something like 20,000. When we thought it was of advantage to the State and fair to the men themselves, as many as possible were absorbed into suitable appointments in the Civil Service. An examination was held recently for fifty minor posts in the Customs and Excise which was confined to men who served in the National Army. I think it is desirable to have power to make such regulations. I think it would probably not be used very much except in circumstances such as we have at present, but there might be other reasons for confining examinations to a particular class. Clause 6 deals with professional appointments chiefly. As regards the matters that Senator O'Farrell raised as to a particular class, I think I need hardly discuss them at the moment. I am prepared to defend them in the present form when we come to the Committee Stage.
I must say that I desire to be rid of any power to make any appointments myself, or influence any appointments. There is nothing that would relieve me from trouble more than to be absolutely powerless to influence any appointment, and I think that is the opinion of other members of the Government. We have recently extended the system of competitive examination to classes which did not come within the scope of competitive examinations in Great Britain—for instance, temporary typists. These are generally appointed by getting on to a list and being asked for by some Department. We have arranged that from time to time examinations shall be held for a list of persons for appointments as temporary typists, and the Departments requiring typists must take them from that list in the order of merit. Wherever we can have the competitive system, we are desirous of having it.
I can assure the Seanad there was no holding back in this Bill, no desire to stuff people into the Civil Service and then bring in a Bill after that has been done. The people appointed since the change of Government held temporary positions. They can be deprived of them. One or two hold permanent positions such as the Comptroller and Auditor-General. The others hold temporary appointments, except those who came in in the old Dáil service. There was a Dáil Civil Service running to 120 or 130 people before the Treaty. That has been incorporated in the regular service and except the people who were brought into service by a special Act, the Superannuation Act, no other persons have been appointed. I am satisfied that this system will work well. There is no doubt the British Civil Service is really a very excellent machine. I do not say we could not make changes that would improve it and adapt it better to the conditions prevailing here. It has produced a magnificent machine. It has got good material. It has got a Civil Service where there is integrity and impartiality, and, I think, all the zeal you can have in a Civil Service. I believe in adopting a system something the same, we will get good results for this country, and can make any changes desirable. At the present moment we do not want to make any specific changes.
My criticism of this Bill was not that the Bill was bad but that it did not go far enough. I would like to ask whether the Government would be prepared to accept an amendment something on the lines of what I suggested. It is said that this is not the place to do it, that we are not introducing a Bill to deal with local government, and that it is a big question and it must be a long time before the Bill will become operative. In Section 8 I notice that the Commissioners are to hold examinations for the army, police, county surveyorships, and various appointments by local authorities in the country. If they are prepared to hold those examinations for a certain number of those limited appointments why not extend the principle to the few others and enable us to have the improvement effected at once pending the perfection of it by a Local Government Bill?
Are we to take it from the Minister's statement that all those recruited from the Civil Service without examination, omitting old Dáil Civil Servants, will have to submit to an examination before being permanently appointed? A great deal will depend upon the nature of his answer.
Might I ask the Minister to state why the position of porters, door-keepers, messengers, night watchmen, charwomen, cleaners and all those who perform subordinate duties shall not be established? The reason I raised the question is, some months ago there came under my notice the case of a person who had been in the employment of the State for 36 years, a woman who had torn the heart out of herself carrying buckets of coal from the cellars to the offices in the Four Courts. After a whole life time's service, she was dismissed on a fortnight's notice. I never imagined that when this country would have the management of its own affairs it was going to treat people differently because they were charwomen. I do not think that was intended. I heard the Minister for Finance saying repeatedly that he does not believe in class legislation. We do not believe in class legislation. We want to do away with class legislation, but there has been nothing but class legislation. When a man has given service for three or four years as a judge, he is entitled to a pension. Surely a woman who has given 36 years of her life is also entitled to one. Therefore, I want to know why these positions are unestablished. Where is the Minister going to draw the line? I want to know why a woman who happens to be only a charwoman is refused a pension.
Senator Lenihan said that there was a clause in the Bill whereby all the competitive Civil Service appointments should be reserved exclusively for those of Irish birth.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
That is in Sub-section 2 of Section 4.
The Minister has not replied to that point. Personally I think it is lamentable that other subjects of the Dominions of the Crown should be excluded from examinations in this country. When the United Kingdom was a United Kingdom, any British subject or any subject in the Dominion of Great Britain had full right to compete in any Civil Service examination. I think it would be lamentable that we should exclude other British subjects from this examination. As Senator Lenihan remarked, it might lead to retaliation which would be disastrous. Many of the coming generation will be anxious to compete in England for Civil Service appointments open to young men of British, Irish, Canadian and Australian birth.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
I think we are getting rather into Committee criticism. It is obvious that the Bill will have to be considered in Committee, and no motion for the suspension of Standing Orders to-day will apply to it. If that is the view of the Seanad I think we should omit any further minute criticisms until we get to the Committee stage.
That is my view. I think I should answer Senator Guinness on the Committee Stage. It is really a matter of this clause, and any Senator who likes can move an amendment.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
I did not interpose, Senator Guinness, with reference to your point at all. I think your point is of far-reaching importance, but I thought it would be wiser to adjourn until we reach the Committee Stage.
Question: "That the Civil Service Regulation No. 2 Bill, 1923, be read a Second Time," put and agreed to.