I move:—
"That, pursuant to Article 21 of the Constitution, Seanad Eireann hereby resolves that, as and from the date of the adoption of this resolution, the remuneration of the Cathaoirleach shall be at the rate of £750 per annum and that of the Leas-Chathaoirleach at the rate of £400 per annum."
The proposal with regard to the reduction of the remuneration of the Cathaoirleach and the Leas-Chathaoirleach was already before the House, and we are all aware of the purpose of it. There has been a good deal of discussion and talk with regard to economy. I, personally, and my colleagues in the Party that I represent, feel that the practice of economy ought to begin at the top, and that it is desirable an example should be shown by the higher officials, and by those who are remunerated on a very generous scale indeed. They should show a spirit of sacrifice, and we in this House should bring the remuneration of the Cathaoirleach and the Leas-Chathaoirleach more into proportion to the services they render in the House. Looking back on the past six years, and reviewing the services of these officers of the Seanad one is struck by the fact that the Seanad is a very costly organisation indeed. However we might wish to dignify the occupants of the positions we have to remember that economy in the strictest sense is now being preached. It is not easy to preach economy to the people of the country, or to civil servants or members of the teaching profession, if we do not practice it with our officers in both Houses. Various rumours are going about as regards economy that is going to be effected.
The teaching profession suffered a reduction some time ago of 10 per cent. in their salaries. It has now been discovered that the 4 per cent. of their salaries which go to their own pension fund is not adequate to make up the pension fund to the desired amount, and that there is, in addition, a very serious deficit. I do not know what truth there is in the rumour, but I believe it is suggested that a further cut of 8½ per cent. is intended in the teachers' remuneration, which, with the original 10 per cent. and the 4 per cent. already contributed by the teachers to their own pension fund, will, I think, make a total reduction of 22½ per cent. I submit that is one service where we simply cannot afford to economise if we are going to have citizens who will be competent to think or act intelligently and be educated either for home use or for export abroad, which is one of our main industries. We must be prepared to remunerate the teaching profession properly. It is rather significant of the outlook of the Executive at the moment that one of the first efforts as regards economy is going to be applied to a body which might give us some reason to hope for the future. If we have no reason to hope from our educational machinery and organisation, then I cannot see where we are going to turn for hope. I mention this because it is a cynical sidelight on the economy spirit. There are many services, no doubt, which can be reduced, and there are many officials that might be dispensed with, but we cannot afford to dispense with the educational forces in this country, nor can we afford to risk a position whereby we would not induce the best elements in the country to follow that profession. I leave that for a moment and I come to the other proposal, namely, that economy is going to be practised by the abandonment of continuation or night schools. That suggestion has been definitely made and has been announced in the Press. I am afraid there is a great deal of reality behind both suggestions. There, again, we are striking at what is absolutely necessary for the country.