Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 15 Jun 1926

Vol. 7 No. 8

MESSAGE FROM THE DÁIL.

CATHAOIRLEACH

The following Message has been received from the Dáil:—

Tá Dáil Eireann tar éis an Rún so leanas do rith, agus is mian leo aontú Sheanaid Eireann leis:—

"Go bhfuil sé oiriúnach Có-Choiste de dhá Thigh an Oireachtais có-dhéanta de thriúr ball den Dáil agus de thriúr ball den tSeanad agus comhacht acu chun fios do chur ar dhaoine, ar pháipéirí agus ar bhreacacháin, do chur ar bun chun a fhiosrú agus a thuairisciú, an mí-chumas a cuirtar ar aicmí áirithe daoine le hAltanna 51 agus 57 den Acht Timpeal Toghachán, 1923 (Uimh. 12 de 1923) agus ná leigeann go dtoghfí iad chun aon Tighe den Oireachtas ná go suidhfidís mar bhaill den Tigh sin, ar cheart an mí-chumas san do chur ar aon aicme no aicmí eile daoine agus, más ceart, cadé an aicme no cadiad na haicmí eile ar cheart an mí-chumas san do chur."

Dáil Eireann has passed the following Resolution, in which the concurrence of Seanad Eireann is desired:—

"That it is expedient that a Joint Committee of both Houses of the Oireachtas consisting of three members of the Dáil and three members of the Seanad, with power to send for persons, papers and records, be set up to inquire and report whether the incapacity to be elected to, or to sit as a member of, either House of the Oireachtas imposed as regards certain classes of persons by Sections 51 and 57 of the Electoral Act, 1923 (No. 12 of 1923) should be extended to include any other class or classes of persons, and, if so, to what class or classes should the incapacity extend."

I move that we concur in this resolution.

Will the mover or seconder give some reason for this motion? It is a novel and important resolution and we should have some reason for this.

CATHAOIRLEACH

There is no doubt of what the motion means and, therefore, the House being in possession of what the motion means and the motion being proposed and seconded I must accept it. If any member wishes to speak on it, however, now is his time.

Perhaps the President may give some explanation as to why he brought it here.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I do not think it is the President who brought it here. The motion was passed by the Dáil.

Perhaps the President will tell us what underlies the motion. It is very difficult to ask the Seanad to agree to a resolution like this without knowing something about it.

The resolution is sent from the Dáil to suggest that an inquiry should be held as to whether or not the list of exclusions, from membership of the Oireachtas, shall be extended. It is well known that the list of exclusions is small and refers mainly to persons in the employment of the State other than those who, by the terms of their appointment, are not expressly excluded from membership of the Oireachtas. There are other classes in which some difficulty may arise in the future. It is possible that an employee of a local authority, becoming a member of the Oireachtas, may be placed in a difficult situation in different circumstances. That employee of the local authority in one case might not be objected to where an employee in another case might be objected to by his employers. In the same way there are other classes of persons in respect of whom certain people might object, while practically the same class might not be objected to in other cases. If, on inquiry, it is recommended that any particular extension of the list should be made the necessary steps can be taken to extend it. If, on the other hand, it is not thought desirable to extend the list, then I think certain steps must be taken to make it impossible to have an objection in this case. It would be, of course, rather hard on, say, an official of a local authority in the County Kerry being objected to or not being objected to and an official in the County Cork being in a different position. What I mean is it would be unsatisfactory if, in one case, no objection were taken to an official of the local authority being in the Oireachtas and another decision were taken with respect to another member of a local authority. The position is one which requires examination. It is put up for impartial examination and recommendation and when that impartial examination has taken place and the recommendation is made the necessary steps can be taken to put the matter right in the future.

Will the President say whether any complaints have arisen?

I prefer not to answer that question.

If we have any assurance to have this confined to the class mentioned I would be glad to let this resolution go, but it is very wide and it might mean the exclusion of some of the most useful members of the Oireachtas. Is it only to apply to local officers?

CATHAOIRLEACH

The Committee cannot exclude anybody; it has simply to make recommendations.

Is it cases of local bodies or things of that sort that will be brought before them or is the resolution also to embrace dispensary doctors, coroners, national school teachers, a number of whom are represented in both Houses?

Yes, I think it would embrace all those.

Then it is a serious thing.

As it stands at present it is open to persons in certain places to object. Other objections are not urged. In certain places objections are urged so that a Minister might have to take action and draft rules or regulations which would be regarded as suitable.

Is this to apply to existing members or only to prospective members? Is it possible that under those regulations some member of either House might be turned out?

I do not think so. It is prejudicing the case to ask me what the Committee would find. The Joint Committee would have the fact of membership before their minds before taking any decision in the matter.

The words "be set up to inquire and report whether the incapacity to be elected to, or to sit as a member of either House" would seem to affect present membership.

The Committee will be asked to inquire into whether "the class of persons at present excluded from membership" should be extended to include other persons.

It is not customary to set up committees of this kind unless there has been some demand for such committees or unless some abuses have arisen. The President to-day refuses to give any information as to whether any complaint has been made. In the other House I think he said there was one case of a national teacher and the only demand he could show was a resolution passed by the Association of Catholic Managers of national schools. If there is only one instance in which a resolution has been passed I hardly think the Oireachtas should be stampeded into setting up a committee immediately to inquire into questions which may resolve themselves into very difficult and intricate ones There is no use in burking the object from ourselves. The object is mainly to exclude national teachers. That will have to be extended to country doctors and a whole host of other people whose cases will be cited before this Committee. There will be included members of the Oireachtas having Government contracts, people acting as directors of State banks, and receiving Government money for so acting, and people of that kind.

There is no member of the Oireachtas receiving money for acting as director of a State bank.

It is a complicated matter.

It is either true or false. I have said it is false.

At any rate there is no demand for this Committee except the one instance cited, and I accept the President's statement. In that one instance the person selected, offered, to the manager of his school, the whole of his Parliamentary allowance if he would pay an independent teacher to teach specialised subjects within that school. All he asked was half an hour off on each day the Oireachtas would be sitting. The manager refused it and called for the resignation of that teacher within three months. In this particular case no school time was being taken off. Yet we have a complaint in connection with which it is proposed to move the Oireachtas to set up a special commission to inquire into everybody's capabilities. I think we should wait for some greater demand or until some abuses arise.

The President has spoken of the officials on local bodies being involved. We have not heard of a single case although the Government took a rate collector, brought him down to a Western constituency and got him elected at a bye-election. He seems to have been carrying on his business attending to his parliamentary duties, and I do not think there has been any complaint from that local authority. Article 45 of the Constitution provides:

"The Oireachtas may provide for the establishment of functional or vocational councils representing branches of the social and economic life of the nation." The object for which this Committee is sought to be set up is to disqualify from such a council the very people who are qualified for it.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I do not think the passing of this resolution will affect the Article you read. That only applies to councils.

It applies to vocational councils.

CATHAOIRLEACH

This does not apply to councils at all, only to the Oireachtas.

It means absenting themselves from their ordinary avocation and that is the only objection made. It was pointed out in the other House that that is merely a matter of discipline. It is a matter for the immediate authorities concerned to see that the person elected to the Oireachtas does not attend at the expense of his ordinary duties.

I see no need for it, and I see nothing that would warrant this House in opening up a whole host of questions that would be bound to create a certain amount of controversy and bitterness. It can effect no good purpose; therefore, I will vote against the motion.

Would the President say whether it is intended to carry the recommendations of the Committee into effect by legislation?

Legislation may be necessary. For example, I will take two cases. I do not like to mention particular councils, but I will take two who are out of commission at present. If an official of the Dublin Corporation were a member of the Oireachtas and if an official of the Cork Corporation were also a member, the Minister for Local Government might be faced on any day with the position that the Cork Corporation decided to dispense with the services of their official because of his absence from his duties by reason of his membership of the Oireachtas, and at the same time the official of the Dublin Corporation would be attending the Oireachtas and no objection would lie from the Dublin Corporation. That is one particular case. Senator O'Farrell has mentioned the case of national teachers. A case might arise in which a national teacher from Limerick who was a member of the Oireachtas might attend here without any objection from his manager and a national teacher who was also a member might attend from Wexford and an objection might be lodged by his manager. Obviously, anomalies of that kind should have some sort of definite all-round settlement, which would equally affect everybody in the same way. The Dáil asks that a Committee should be set up to inquire into all these matters and it is for the Committee to say whether these anomalies are to be adjusted.

I would like to ask the President if this request would have been made if there had been no complaint from the Catholic Managers' Association?

I believe it would. Some cases had already occurred. There was one case in which a local government official was mentioned as a candidate for membership of the Oireachtas. In that case I was approached to know whether or not it would interfere with his position. I made inquiries—they were not exhaustive—and I was informed that it was quite possible that his claim in respect of a pension from that local authority would cease on the day he became a member of the Oireachtas.

CATHAOIRLEACH

That is because his whole time was not devoted to the duties of his office?

It is not so very long since we passed a Constitution. At that time and since Ministers pledged themselves to preserve the Constitution. The President said that they wanted the Constitution, the whole Constitution and nothing but the Constitution. Nevertheless they proceeded to nibble at the Constitution in a series of ways. Here again is another proposed alteration in the Constitution.

Certainly it is. The Constitution lays down the conditions governing eligibility for election to the Dáil. The Constitution makes it very wide and gives a very extensive liberty as to who shall be eligible and who shall not be eligible. The President now asks the Oireachtas to limit that eligibility. He asks them to set up a Committee with that obvious intention. No doubt the Government will use their influence and power to get what they want out of it. I think on the question of the Constitution alone, this is a very serious matter. This resolution is introduced here without giving any reasonable reason for doing so. One reason the President has given is that certain people may be objected to by local authorities under whom they are employed. He instanced Dublin and Cork. That may be the case, but once we open this question we will have all sorts of officials involved, and there will be no limit. It seems to me quite clear that if a person chooses to go forward as a candidate for the Dáil and if he is at the same time getting a salary from a local appointment he will have to face the consequences. He will say: "I am going forward as a candidate. How do I stand in this matter? If I am elected the local authority may object. Is it worth while to risk this?" It is for the candidates themselves to consider this matter and not for the Minister or the Committee to take the responsibility of ruling people out.

I knew lots of people long ago who went into the Parliament in Great Britain. They were in doubt as to whether they ought or ought not, but they went there all right. The British Parliament is so much more liberal than our Parliament that they made no objection to it. Nobody ever objected no matter what position these men held. I know lots of cases where people had to devote all their time to their duties in Parliament and to sacrifice their duties outside but nobody ever dreamt of objecting. I have the strongest objection to this Committee being set up in this indefinite way, inquiring into all cases of these employees, to see who is going to be ruled out or who is not going to be ruled out.

Ministers are seeking to get away from the Constitution in that way. General Joffre said when he was attacking the Germans that he would nibble through the German lines, and the President is going to nibble at the Constitution.

Where are we nibbling at it?

What article of the Constitution?

The Article which deals with the eligibility of persons entering the Dáil.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I think you are not quite right about that. I have that Article before me here. It states:

"Every citizen who has reached the age of 21 years and who is not placed under disability or incapacity by the Constitution or by law shall be eligible to become a member of Dáil Eireann."

Then leave it so.

CATHAOIRLEACH

It is quite within the power of the Oireachtas to impose a disqualification by law. That will be quite within the four corners of the Constitution.

There is no doubt that the Constitution can be altered.

CATHAOIRLEACH

There is no necessity to alter the Constitution. The Constitution provides for this. It provides that every citizen is eligible for election, unless by law he is placed under some disability or incapacity.

Whether we go into these legal questions or not, there is no doubt that the evident object of the Constitution was to make entrance into the Dáil as wide as possible. It was only in certain cases where it was practically impossible for people to fulfil the duties of their other offices, that they were ruled out. For that reason I object to the resolution.

Of course, Senator Colonel Moore, as a military-minded man, thinks that the analogy of General Joffre which he gave us is overwhelming. If we take the hypothesis of Senator O'Farrell, that the aim of the committee's findings is concerned with school teachers only, let me put before you the position of the school-teacher. He is a whole-time officer, and a member of one of the most responsible bodies, perhaps, in this country. If he is elected a member of either House he must first of all, in order to find time to attend, appoint a substitute. The substitute will never know when his term will end. He cannot forecast how long the Government will be in power or how long the man for whom he is acting will be absent from his place. The results will fall on the children. This distracted mentality that will ensue will prevent the efficient carrying on of one of the most onerous of the public services, and I think that this committee should not have its findings judged beforehand.

Even if one looks beyond the national teachers, the examples the President gave us will easily show what friction might arise between two cities if one were anxious to send its council's official forward as a candidate and the other would say "no." If any person holds such an office the least we would expect from him is that he should give his full time to the service. I do not think the rights of citizens under the Constitution are at all affected, but public officials are expected to give their full time to the duties of their office.

In view of what the President has said, if this resolution is pressed and if we enforce what we have in mind in regard to its application and prevent certain persons from being eligible for election as members of the Oireachtas, I think the last state will be worse than the first. I think I understood the President to say that he had not in his mind that any action that would be taken or any legislation that would follow the report of the Joint Committee would be retrospective.

Take, for example, the two particular cases mentioned to-day, the employee of a local authority, or a national school teacher; if this Committee decided to recommend and the Legislature agreed that employees of local authorities or national school teachers should not be eligible to sit in either House, then we will have the position that in the Dáil you have an employee of a local authority and a national school teacher, and also in this House you will have an employee of a local authority and a national school teacher. If the Committee recommend that these classes shall not be eligible to sit in either House of the Oireachtas then the position of the people already elected, I think, is affected as regards the Constitution. They were elected under an Article of the Constitution as you, sir, have mentioned. I do not think having been elected by the people according to the right they had under the Constitution, that an Act of the Legislature can take away from them rights they already possess. Having been elected and already in possession I do not think they can be disqualified. That being the case, would it not be a grievance to prevent people of the same type who are anxious to get in from being eligible?

I imagine it would be.

If a member of any class desires to go forward for election there is no reason why he cannot do so, but if elected he certainly should take his choice of attending to his whole-time employment, or attending meetings of the Legislature. I think it is reasonable that he might go forward for election as a national school teacher but if elected he should resign the school teachership. He certainly should not occupy the dual positions.

We have all great respect for President Cosgrave. He is not a member of this House but he comes to us and asks us to appoint a Committee which would possibly disqualify certain members of this House from the right to be elected to sit in the Seanad. I feel we owe it to the honour and dignity of this House not to permit any kind of committee or tribunal calling in question their right to be elected and sit here, unless a very strong case indeed can be made for it. We had a resolution brought forward at first without the intention of making any case for it whatever. We have to use a great effort to get any sort of statement of facts whatever. I do not think any member of this House understood the first statement made by the President.

It is most necessary that we should have the assistance in our Legislature of the best technical types. In the near future, we shall have to consider many things in connection with education, and it is most necessary that the opinions of the teachers should be represented in both Houses. In the recent debates in the Dáil one man whose knowledge and opinion were of the utmost value to the Dáil was a teacher —Deputy O'Connell. No member of either House, as far as I can make out by a careful study of his and other speeches, possesses knowledge comparable to his on the whole question of education in this country. I do not think that his position will be affected by this Committee, but where a man of such technical knowledge has been found once he can be found again. We require to have that technical knowledge in this House for the next two or three years. I hope I am a benevolent man, and I think I am an unsuspicious man, but I find it difficult to separate this resolution from some preceding events.

Some months ago an organisation of teachers passed a resolution in favour of local control of school buildings, that is to say, that these buildings should be controlled and kept in order by local committees.

Very considerable opposition arose to that object from the managers, and it is only right I should say not from the managers of one denomination only but a very considerable opposition came also from the Protestant managers, who did not like Protestant schools passing under the control of Catholic committees.

It is not a sectarian question. It is a question of the ecclesiastical mind, Protestant and Catholic on the one side and on the other a very great deal of the most intelligent lay opinion in Ireland. Then two or three weeks ago the Catholic Managerial Association passed a resolution in favour of repairs to schools and claiming that the money for the repairs should be given to the managers for that purpose, and they added to the resolution a rider that the schools in Ireland are in a fairly good condition, which they are not. They know the arrangements for the maintenance of schools have broken down, and it was admitted that the schools are now in a bad condition. I read in the papers that "Certain pressure was brought upon the President." I think that is the diplomatic and journalistic way of putting it, and then we have this resolution. As I have said, the President, a man for whom we have the utmost respect, has come and asked us to appoint a tribunal to consider the eligibility of certain of our members. I suggest that behind the President there is a certain pressure asking him to have a tribunal appointed. I think a much stronger case must be made before this House votes for the establishment of any such tribunal.

I think I had better correct historical inaccuracies on the part of Senator Yeats. The resolution which I quoted was passed on 26th June, 1924, so that the pressure must have been very long delayed.

I was speaking of one passed two or three weeks ago by the managers.

I have not heard about that. I quoted from that resolution of 26th June, 1924, in another place. What surprises me about the opposition to this motion is that it comes from people who must be entirely satisfied that there is a certain weakness in their case which they do not want to be inquired into. They do not want anomalies corrected and this matter placed on a solid foundation, so that we would not have one ruling, say, for the city of Cork and another ruling for the city of Dublin in diametrical opposition on the same thing. Is it right that a person who is elected can have his services dispensed with by a local authority in one case and kept on in another? Is there not something there that requires consideration and settlement? There has been talk about the effect of this on certain members of the House. I cannot conceive of any Committee which would deprive existing members of the Oireachtas of the right to sit, vote, and be members of the Oireachtas. In 1923, when the electoral law was under consideration in the Dáil, there were at that time at least a dozen military officers members of the Oireachtas.

That very same Dáil of which these Army Teachtai were part passed an Act disentitling members of the Army from membership of the Oireachtas, but that did not determine their own particular membership at that time. Their membership lasted for the whole of that Parliament. It is open to us now in this connection, or at least it is open to this committee, to examine this matter in a way that should please even the delicate conscience of Senator Moore, who objects to the Government coming into anything. Here is a thing which the Government does not want to come into, and the delicate conscience of the Senator is upset, and he is even in a state of excitement and panic. "What does the Government mean by this?" The Government will have no influence upon this committee. It is a committee of the Oireachtas.

What Party in the Dáil will nominate the members of the committee, and who will put them in? The Government, of course.

I would like the constitution of Committees of the Oireachtas to get very dignified consideration from members of the Oireachtas. One unhappy member of the Dáil happened in a weak moment to call a Joint Committee of the Oireachtas a corrupt body. I think on reflection he was very sorry he said such a thing. I think the Senator in his sober moments will also be sorry that he would have passed any reflection upon a Joint Committee of the Oireachtas.

I have not.

A Joint Committee of the Oireachtas is asked to inquire into this matter. This is a much more serious matter than appears on the surface, very much more serious. If this committee find that this list should not be extended, at least it is due to those who have taken the risk, that their position should be put right if it is possible to do it, and I believe it is possible. If it be considered that an official of a local authority should not be incapacitated from membership of the Oireachtas, let us go a step further and say whether or not a member of the Oireachtas is entitled to become an official of a local authority. That is a consideration that ought to be borne in mind in a matter of this sort. We consider that no fairer, no more impartial and no more competent tribunal could examine this than a Joint Committee of both Houses, and that this is a question which lends itself to examination, and a committee of that sort should be able to bring in a report which should command respect and we ought not be afraid of that report when it arrives.

Motion put.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 19; Níl, 16.

Tá.

  • John Bagwell.
  • Sir Edward Coey Bigger.
  • Mrs. Eileen Costello.
  • John C. Counihan.
  • James Douglas.
  • Michael Fanning.
  • Martin Fitzgerald.
  • Oliver St. John Gogarty.
  • Mrs. Alice Stopford Green.
  • Sir John Purser Griffith.
  • Henry Seymour Guinness.
  • Benjamin Haughton.
  • Sir John Keane, Bart.
  • Cornelius Kennedy.
  • Patrick Williams Kenny.
  • Francis MacGuinness.
  • James Moran.
  • Joseph O'Connor.
  • Thomas Toal.

Níl.

  • Samuel L. Brown.
  • William Cummins.
  • Ellen Odette, Dowager Countess of Desart.
  • J.C. Dowdall.
  • Michael Duffy.
  • Sir Nugent Talbot Everard, Bart.
  • Thomas Farren.
  • Thomas Foran.
  • James Perry Goodbody.
  • Arthur Jackson.
  • Colonel Maurice Moore.
  • John Thomas O'Farrell.
  • Michael F. O'Hanlon.
  • William O'Sullivan.
  • James J. Parkinson.
  • William Butler Yeats.
Motion declared carried.

CATHAOIRLEACH

The matter will now go to the Committee of Selection to nominate members of the Committee.

Barr
Roinn