On behalf of Senator Sweetman and myself I move amendment No. 1:—
In sub-section (3), after the word "reasonably" in line 27, to insert the words: "in the opinion of the committee of agriculture".
The insertion of the amendment would make the sub-section read:—
The amount of the expenses paid under this section to a person in respect of a meeting shall not exceed the amount of the expenses which would reasonably in the opinion of the committee of agriculture have been incurred by him in travelling from and to his ordinary place of residence to and from the place of that meeting.
The object of the amendment is to clarify the present situation, and to make it clear that the people who will determine whether or not the expenses incurred by any member of the committee making a claim for expenses are the members of the committee. The position at present is rather obscure because it is not clear under the sub-section who is to determine whether the claims for such expenses are reasonable or not. There is a considerable amount of displeasure, and some confusion in all the counties with regard to this question of travelling expenses to local committee meetings. There is difficulty in determining what is "reasonable". In my view the members of the county committees of agriculture who have responsibility for disbursing all the moneys entrusted to them, the moneys which come to them out of the local rates and the grants made by the Department of Agriculture, are the most competent people to decide whether or not a claim for expenses made by a member is a reasonable one or not. In my county some of the members have to travel a distance of 30 miles in order to attend a meeting of the county committee of agriculture. In order to do so in a reasonable way they have to hire a car to take them 25 miles of the journey. At that point they can get a bus to complete the remaining five miles. They get the bus back for the same distance, and then finish the journey home in the hired car. I am certain that in all the counties there are difficulties of that kind to be overcome.
I can say from my own personal experience, that this sub-section, dealing with travelling expenses, is not operating satisfactorily in the county that I come from. The question was discussed at the last meeting of the Cavan County Council. The chairman made the point as to whether or not he was entitled to travel by car to the meeting. My view is that the position ought to be made clear and definite. I want to put it to the Minister that his acceptance of the amendment would put beyond all question who is to determine whether a claim made by a member for travelling expenses is reasonable or not. I think that the insertion of the amendment would provide the very best possible safeguard that one could have, because if a member makes the claim that he has had to travel 30 or 40 miles in order to attend the meeting his colleagues will know whether, in fact, he had to travel that distance. No member of a committee can, therefore, put forward a claim for expenses that, to the knowledge of his colleagues, is not reasonable. I think it is the perfect safeguard against any extravagance with regard to the amount that can be claimed by way of expenses, and if the matter is left to the committee to determine, I see a possibility whereby it could be arranged that one car would come along and take two or three members. I think the House will agree that at present nobody could say who is going to determine whether the expenses which members claim are reasonable or not. I do not think it should be the responsibility of the executive officer of the committee to determine whether the expenses claimed by a member of his committee are reasonable or not. If that should be the position I think it is not exactly satisfactory.
The Minister will appreciate the difficulty of an executive officer in that matter, and I suggest to the House that the amendment ought to be accepted and inserted in the section.