Menu
-HOME
Baile
-DEBATES
Díospóireachtaí
-DÁIL DEBATES
Díospóireachtaí Dála
-SEANAD DEBATES
Díospóireachtaí Seanaid
-SEARCH
Cuardach
-ABOUT THIS SITE
Faoin Suíomh Seo
-LINKS
Nascanna
Previous - Lch. Roimhe Seo Up - Suas Next - Ar Aghaidh

Seanad Éireann - Volume 40 - 09 January, 1952

Garda Síchána Pensions Order, 1951—Motion of Approval.

Mr. Quirke: I move:—

That the Seanad hereby approves of the Garda Síochána Pensions Order, 1951, made on the 29th day of December, 1951, by the Minister for Justice, with the sanction of the Minister for Finance, under Section 13 of the Police Forces Amalgamation Act, 1925, and laid before the Seanad on the 5th January, 1952.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Boland): Senators will have received a memorandum [484] dealing with this Order and I think it explains the effects of the various provisions. As Senators will see, the main purpose of the Order is to provide for the Garda a lump sum pension scheme analogous to that applicable to civil servants, teachers and officials of local authorities. Those members at present in the force who opt for the new scheme, and all future entrants will, on retirement on pension, receive as well as a pension a lump sum based on their years of service and on their annual pay, subject to a maximum lump sum payment of one and a half years' salary. Likewise, the widow of a member who dies after a service of more than five years will be entitled to receive, as well as her pension, a death gratuity which will not be less than the member's annual pay at the time of his death. If the member be unmarried or a widower, the gratuity will be payable to the legal personal representatives of the deceased. The present pensions scheme provided for a payment of one-sixtieth of the annual salary for each year's service up to 20 years and then for an extra sixtieth for any year after 20 years' service.

The Order also provides for a number of miscellaneous amendments of earlier pensions Orders. These amendments have been dealt with in the explanatory memorandum and are minor in character. I think they will be quite clear to Senators. I should say that the new pensions scheme has been brought forward at the request of the Representative Body. They were anxious that the pensions scheme for the Garda should be the same as that for other State servants.

Professor Hayes: We are in complete agreement that this pensions Order should be approved but we got the Order only this morning. The Minister said, in his own gentle fashion, that Senators “of course had got the memorandum.” Senators have got the memorandum but they have not read the memorandum and have not had an opportunity of studying it. As usual, of course, this is an Order which can only be read by reference to other documents.

[485] I take it that this particular scheme has been going to and fro between the Department of Justice and the Department of Finance for years. Then the Seanad gets it on a Wednesday morning and it is supposed to become law that afternoon. Senator Quirke established an all-time record to-day by suggesting that we should pass through all its stages a Bill which has not yet come before the House. This proposal is not quite as bad as that but it is of the same order.

I do not want to object to the passing of this Order nor do I want to stand between the members of the Garda and any improvement in their pensions schemes. I am entirely in agreement with the proposal to pay a lump sum on retirement. I think that is a perfectly sound provision and I am glad that it is being proposed but I should like, as a parliamentarian, to protest against the manner in which it is sought to rush it through this House. Civil servants have been considering this proposal for years but we do not even get an afternoon to consider it.

Mr. Quirke: I think that it is quite unreasonable to suggest that Senators had not got the memorandum because the memorandum was issued this morning. If it were the Dáil it would not be quite the same. I saw a number of Senators very busy at political meetings but otherwise they would have had plenty of time to read it and I am sure that everybody has read it.

Mr. Baxter: Did you read it yourself?

Mr. O'Higgins: The Minister mentioned in the course of his remarks that the scheme had been introduced at the request of the Representative Body. It would clear my mind if the Minister would say whether the scheme meets the wishes of the Representative Body.

Mr. Boland: I may say that substantially it does. They were consulted before the thing was decided at all. They were entitled to be consulted.

With regard to the point raised by Senator Hayes, I appreciate what he said. As a rule a matter like this would [486] be introduced in the other House but we wanted it to become operative as soon as possible. The Dáil will not meet until the end of the month and the Seanad will not meet for some time after the Bill which they are going to consider now has been dealt with. It would not be fair to Senators to ask them to meet for this Order alone which has been found acceptable to the Guards and is non-contentious. Otherwise I would agree with the point to be made and I would not bring in an Order of this kind if I had not such a reason for doing it.

Mr. Douglas: I am strongly in favour of making permanent in the Order which is introduced a gratuity and pension with an option. It is a great improvement, I think. Although I did read through the memorandum I was not able to check the other references but it is very doubtful whether I would be able to check them anyway.

Mr. P.F. O'Reilly: Could we not leave it until this day week?

Mr. Boland: Personally, I do not mind at all, but I understood that it was not expected.

Mr. Douglas: We should be given some little time, a week at least, because this was only put in our hands some little time ago.

Mr. Colgan: This is not the first time that we got something in the morning and were asked to pass it in the evening.

Mr. P.F. O'Reilly: We could read it by next time.

Mr. Quirke: I suggest that the result will be the same in any case. We have no power to rule it out.

Mr. O'Higgins: That is another argument.

Mr. Baxter: The Department of Finance might take it back if we did not pass it quickly.

Professor Hayes: I agree that there is nothing we can do about this particular Order but the Minister did not [487] know when he was endeavouring to get this passed that we would be meeting on the 30th as we only decided just now, for the benefit of the Minister for Agriculture, to meet on the 30th. So the Minister might be agreeable to wait.

Mr. Boland: Sure.

Professor Hayes: I do not know if my friends would be agreeable to do that. The fact that we have been sinning constantly is no reason why we should sin again. We should reform.

Mr. Colgan: Let us sin for to-day and then decide to sin no longer.

Mr. Baxter: And begin the new year well.

Mr. O'Donnell: To postpone this Order would mean a penalty with regard to money. It would penalise people.

Professor Hayes: It would not, because it has to pass both Houses.

Mr. Boland: It cannot become operative until the Dáil passes it. If the Seanad meets on the same day as the Dáil I dare say that I could get it first thing and then come up here. I am not going to press it.

Mr. Colgan: Is there any point in not passing it? If we do not pass it to-day we are deciding, just in order to stand on our dignity, to wait until the 30th. I agree that not to give us an opportunity of studying matters is bad, but I suggest that we get many things into our hands in that way. Often we cannot complain that we have not had time to study things but still we do complain. I do not see any purpose in postponing this Order until the 30th because I do not see that any alteration is likely to be made in it. If it is a question of standing on our dignity let us decide that in future we will not have this, but over the years all Governments have been to blame in this matter. There is no purpose in standing on our dignity and saying that we will not pass it until the 30th.

Mr. O'Higgins: We do not know [488] whether there will be any objection until we have had an opportunity of studying the matter. I understand from the Minister that it will not become operative until the Dáil meets, so no one will suffer if we postpone it in order to give the Seanad an opportunity of reading it.

Mr. Boland: You cannot amend it. It is not as if it were a Bill which you could amend. It is a question either of accepting or rejecting it. If you reject it that is another day's work. That may have some effect.

Mr. Douglas: We might persuade the Minister to withdraw it and bring in a better one.

Mr. Baxter: That is not likely.

Mr. Quirke: I think that the Minister is being very reasonable.

Professor Hayes: Yes. We are all being reasonable. Put it off until 30th January and there will not be a word about it—perhaps.

Mr. Boland: I am perfectly satisfied. If it were going to keep the Guards out of their money I would press it.

Debate adjourned until Wednesday, January 30th, 1952.

Previous - Lch. Roimhe Seo Up - Suas Next - Ar Aghaidh