I propose that Deputy Rice take the Chair.
Election of Chairman
I second that.
Agreed.
Deputy Rice took the Chair.
Question proposed—That Section 1 stand part of the Bill.
I understand that there is an agreement between the Cork Corporation and the Cork Electric Lighting and Tramway Company, and that a question has arisen between them. In the case of Limerick, I understand there is a similar position. We are undoubtedly following a precedent, to this extent, that the parties to the agreement did name the Minister for Transport, who was the Minister at the time, as arbitrator. The question of arbitrator is one that is generally left to the parties to the agreement, and the question that occurs to me is: Will the Electric Lighting and Tramways Company object to our action in this matter. I do not know whether or not they have objected to this proposal.
They have not objected.
They might say that they would prefer to have an arbitrator appointed by agreement between the parties to the contract, and conceivably it might be regarded as injurious to credit if the Legislature should step in and interfere with a contract, by imposing compulsorily an arbitrator upon them. I do not know what view the company might take.
That suggestion was made by the President—that if the company desired somebody else to be appointed they should come forward with any suggestion, and that we should consider it. They have had an opportunity of doing that, and no such suggestion has been brought forward.
Is that also true about Limerick?
I have been informed that the Minister for Transport is also nominated in the case of Limerick, but I could not say that for certain.
If Deputy Flinn and Deputy French, who represent Cork, say that there is no objection by the Company, it is all right.
Perhaps Deputy Flinn would say how the necessity arises for this Bill. I understand that under the Ministers and Secretaries Act the power vested in the British Minister for Transport is transferred to the Minister for Industry and Commerce.
We are legally advised that the Minister for Transport does not exist.
I understand that under Part 6 of that Act power is given to the Minister for Industry and Commerce to carry out the functions of the Minister for Transport.
All the powers which existed in the Minister for Transport at the time, were transferred to the Minister for Industry and Commerce.
Part 6 of the Act gives a list of particular branches of administration assigned to the Department of Industry and Commerce. These include the Ministry of Transport, excluding the Roads Department. There are, of course, reasons why the Minister for Industry and Commerce should not be appointed arbitrator in matters relating to the sale of electricity.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce is under the impression that he has not the powers provided for in this Bill.
I think it is more desirable, if we are to have an appointment provided for, that we should not nominate the Minister for Industry and Commerce. I think it is better that we should nominate the Minister for Local Government and Public Health, because the Minister for Industry and Commerce is in charge of an electricity undertaking, and some people might think it better that the Minister should not act in a dispute in connection with a matter coming within the purview of his own Department.
The Corporation merely desire the Minister to nominate the arbitrator. He is not actually the arbitrator.
Apparently, there is no objection to that point of view.
Deputy Doyle
Has Deputy French any knowledge as to whether any effort was made to bring the parties to an agreement on this question?
We had the matter up for the last six months. The last reply we got from the Electric Lighting and Tramway Company was that they had no objection to the Cork Corporation pursuing any legal powers they might have. That brought us up against the proposition that they were not recognising any particular Minister in our Government.
Has their notice been brought to this Bill?
They have full knowledge of this Bill, and they are in a position to come forward before the final stage of the Bill is reached.
I take it that they have got notice of this Bill.
I understand from Deputy Flinn and Deputy French that they have notice of it. Deputy French said they had the Bill before them.
I did not actually send them a copy of the Bill, but they have full knowledge of it.
They know about it both here and in London, but whether they have been officially informed or not, I do not know.
It was published locally.
If they have any objection to put forward, it would be only reasonable that the Committee should have an opportunity of considering that objection.
There will be no disagreement between the Corporation and the Electric Lighting and Tramway Company if they prefer some other person than the Minister.
If there were any objection, the Committee would have to consider it seriously; otherwise their action might be misrepresented elsewhere, and the suggestion might be that the Dáil was interfering with contracts affecting the rights of parties.
Would there be any possibility of ascertaining officially whether they have objection to make or not, so as to have the matter quite clear?
I will undertake to send them a copy of the Bill.
Since it received publicity in its initial stage and was published in the local papers, cannot we take it that if they were sufficiently interested to oppose the measure they would have entered into some communication on the matter?
The President asked if we would agree if the company approached us about the choice of arbitrator to consider the matter with them. Deputy Flinn and I agreed to that.
Perhaps it would be advisable to bring the present stage of the Bill under their notice.
I will send a copy to them.
They could be informed that the Bill will come up later in the House.
They could be sent a copy of the Bill before it comes up again in the House.
It will come up next week for the Fourth Stage.
I think a copy of the Bill should be sent to the Company by our Secretary.
I think it would be better if the Bill were sent by the Secretary rather than by Deputy French.
I agree.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
Title agreed to.
That concludes the consideration of the Bill. The following is suggested as the report of the Committee:—
The Special Committee has gone through the Bill and has agreed to report the same without amendment.
Draft report agreed to.
The Special Committee rose at 1.55 p.m.