Committee Reports > List of Committees > Dáil > 1951 > Committee of Public Accounts > Report - Appropriation Accounts 1948 - 1949

MIONTUAIRISC NA FINNEACHTA

(Minutes of Evidence)

Déardaoin, 15ú Feabhra, 1951.

Thursday, 15th February, 1951.

The Committee sat at 11 a.m.

Mr. W. E. Wann (An tArd-Reachtaire Cuntas agus Ciste), and Mr. P. M. Clarke (An Roinn Airgeadais) called and examined.

VOTE 34—PRISONS.

Mr. T. J. Coyne called and examined.

619. Chairman.—Paragraph 35 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General is of an informatory nature and states:—

“The statement of the manufacturing and farm accounts appended to the appropriation account has been examined, and local test examinations of the conversion books and other records dealing with manufacturing operations have been carried out with satisfactory results.”

620. I think we will now turn to the Vote proper. As regards subhead C— Clothing, Bedding, Furniture, etc.—do you provide your own storage? Is there a central body that looks after the stores, or does the administration connected with the prisons look after this matter? —These are manufacturing stores. We purchase our raw materials, I think, through the contracts committee or by independent contract. Our raw materials are primarily yarn for making clothing, for weaving, and flour for bread, and material for mail bag making which we do not weave.

621. Deputy Sheldon.—As regards this manufacture in advance, will that enable you to have a saving in the following year on the manufacture?—I would expect so.

622. Chairman.—On subhead D—Medicines, Surgical Instruments, etc.—there is a reference to St. Patrick’s. Which is St. Patrick’s?—It was formerly known as the Borstal Institution, Clonmel. Its name was changed some years ago to St. Patrick’s.

623. Deputy Sheldon.—Subhead G refers to Escort and Conveyance. What exactly is meant by “public conveyances are unsuitable?” That was not any now discovery; I presume you were forced to use public conveyances during the emergency, or is it a change over to buses from trains? It is one thing to take prisoners in trains, but it is different to take them in buses.

Deputy Briscoe.—The practice in the past used to be that prisoners were conveyed under escort, whether handcuffed or otherwise, in buses and trams and now it is thought better to take them in an ordinary private car. Is that not so?— That is true. Objection was taken in the Dáil and elsewhere to the conveyance of prisoners in a public way, particularly if they had to be handcuffed, and where we feel there is a risk that the prisoner may be exposed to needless humiliation we have to hire cars, and that is particularly so with young offenders.

624. Chairman.—But young offenders would not be handcuffed?—No, but even so, the spectacle of young offenders accompanied by a policeman has given rise to criticism.

625. The escort in that case is generally in plain clothes?—That is so’, where possible, but it is not always possible.

I imagine it must be rather costly if a boy were being brought from the other end of the country up to a Dublin industrial school.

626. Deputy Briscoe.—It does not apply just to boys, it is a general practice with all prisoners.

Mr. Coyne.—I am talking about the conveyance of people to St. Patrick’s. The conveyance of children to industrial schools is another question. They are frequently and even usually accompanied by women, if they are female children or even young children.

627. Chairman.—On subhead H— Maintenance of Buildings and Equipment —is this work to go on?—I am not sure what the position is at the moment, or whether the boilers have actually been installed. There was a delay in delivering the boilers, but it is necessary they should be installed. We propose to go ahead with the installation. I understand it is not completed yet. There is actually provision in next year’s estimate for it.

I suppose there would be improvements necessary in kitchens, laundries and other places in a big establishment of that nature.

628. As regards subhead M—Maintenance of Criminal Lunatics in District Mental Hospitals—you are responsible for the cost of maintenance, whatever the local district asylum charges?—Well, it depends. It is slightly more complicated than that. It depends on the type of lunatic or insane person. There are five classes of criminal lunatics. I think I explained this last year. For instance, there are persons found insane while on remand; then there are persons found insane while awaiting trial; next you have persons found insane and unfit to plead on arraignment, and you have persons found guilty but insane and finally persons who become insane while they are serving sentences. The Prison Vote bears the cost of the maintenance of the criminal lunatics transferred to district mental hospitals. For prisoners found insane and unfit to plead and persons found guilty but insane, this liability continues: during the whole period of detention, but for persons found insane while serving sentence the liability continues during the duration of the sentence only.

629. Chairman.—If a criminal lunatic is discharged from our custody, what procedure is adopted?—He is committed to one of these mental homes and, dependent on the particular type of lunatic he is, the Minister has or has not functions in his respect. If he is a person who has been found guilty but insane, and is ordered to be detained during pleasure, then he cannot be released without an order from the Minister for Justice. Similarly, if he goes insane while serving. a sentence, he cannot be released without the authority of the Minister for Justice-until after the expiry of his sentence but once his sentence expires—that is to say if he gets a five years sentence and is still insane at the end of that period—he ceases to be our responsibility and his release is a matter for the mental home in which he is detained.

VOTE 35—DISTRICT COURT.

Mr. T. J. Coyne further examined.

630. Chairman.—What exactly does subhead D cover?—It relates to an institution called Our Lady’s Home, Henrietta Street. It is a Home which receives girls and young women who are discharged by the Court on the understanding that they will enter the Home for a longer or shorter period. They are under no legal obligation to enter the Home but the majority of them do. Those who run this home receive what we might call a Grant-in-Aid by way of a capitation grant of 15/- per week in respect of each woman or girl so long as she resides there.

This is a recognised place?—Yes. It is a purely voluntary arrangement after the girls are discharged from the Court. If they enter the Home a sum of 15/- a week is paid in respect of the period they stay there. It is a charitable arrangement.

631. Does anybody take any further steps about these girls?—Usually they are put in charge of, or under the control of, a probation officer in Dublin, whose duty it is to keep in touch with them, try to get them employment when they-leave the home, generally to look after them and if necessary, report to the-court. Not all of them are placed on probation, but where they are placed on probation, they come under the supervision of the probation officer.

632. Deputy Sheldon.—Having regard to the phraseology in the Estimate, we have a curious definition of the word “voluntary”?—What is your point?

You referred to their going voluntarily to the Home while the. Estimate says: “On being discharged by the Courts on recognizances, which require them to reside for a specified period in such an Institution.” That is scarcely voluntary.

Deputy Briscoe.—I think, having witnessed what happens in Court, that I can say it is voluntary. A person is before the District Court and gets the option of being discharged if she agrees to enter the Home, otherwise the Court may have to deal with her differently.

Mr. Coyne.—I think the point is well taken and that the phraseology of the Estimate is not strictly and technically accurate. It may be that in rare cases they are actually under a recognizance that can be legally enforced but, to my personal knowledge, the majority of them are not. I do not think that there was any intention to mislead the Dáil in the Estimate.

633. Deputy Briscoe.—If you change the word “require” to “agree” it would meet the situation?—We shall consider that. I do not go so far as to say that none of them is under recognizances and there may be cases in which recognizances could be enforced.

VOTE 36—CIRCUIT COURT.

Mr. T. J. Coyne further examined.

634. Chairman.—The note on subhead A—Salaries, Wages and Allowances— states that “the provision for a staff reorganisation was not fully utilised owing to postponement of portion of the scheme and the resultant saving was offset in part by increases in remuneration.” Can you tell us something about this staff reorganisation?—The situation of the staff in the Circuit Court offices has been somewhat unsatisfactory for years inasmuch as no permanent staff has been recruited since the coming into operation of the Court Officers Act of 1926 until quite recently. As vacancies arose or we required staff, it was recruited locally on a purely temporary basis, at the local rates prevailing in many cases, and, in other cases, at the minimum of the scale sanctioned by the Department of Finance for temporary clerical assistants. In consequence of that situation, there were clerical employees in the several Circuit Court offices doing very similar work on various rates of remuneration, dependent on the particular bargain that had been made with the individual at any particular time. Perhaps I might illustrate the matter, because it is slightly complicated. An under-sheriff would die in a particular county and his duties would automatically be transferred to the county registrar. We would be faced with the problem of providing the county registrar with some clerical assistance to perform the former sheriff’s duties. He, naturally, being human, would wish to take over the clerical staff employed by the former under-sheriff. We do that with the sanction of the Department of Finance in the majority of cases, taking over the employees of the former under-sheriff at whatever rate of remuneration their former employer was paying them. That illustrates how Mr. X in a certain Circuit Court office came to be paid Y pounds a week and would explain how there are employees doing the same work in the same office at different rates of pay. Further, none of them was established or had pensionable rights. We thought it proper to reorganise the staffs of these offices so as to provide uniformity of rates of remuneration for people doing similar work and to give them a pensionable status. We prepared a scheme of staffing, grading and remuneration which we submitted to the Department of Finance for their approval. Ultimately we got their approval to such a scheme and I think it is now in a fair way of being brought into operation.

635. Would it have any advantages to the public from the point of view of economy in expenditure?—We made provision for the rates of remuneration envisaged by our scheme and, as the scheme was not fully brought into operation, we did not spend all the money that we had estimated for.

636. So that when the scheme is fully in operation more money will be spent. Will there be any compensating advantages?—First of all, there will be the inestimable advantage that we shall have a more contented staff. That, in itself, I have no doubt, will be conducive to greater efficiency and zeal in the public service. It is an advantage to have settled remuneration and grading and a clear avenue of promotion. I think that that is a more satisfactory arrangement than the haphazard arrangement we had in force up to the present.

637. Will this mean promotion in the local offices or will it be a general thing? —Many of these employees do not like to leave their local offices but, in practice, we have transferred them pretty freely with their consent. Where a better job offered in some other county, we have given existing officers an opportunity of taking the vacancy and in many cases they have done so. There will also ’be promotion in the local offices because the reorganisation includes the re-grading of the work so that there will be higher and lower posts, particularly in the bigger offices, thereby opening up avenues of promotion.

The fact that it is going to be run on Civil Service lines and as a Civil Service office will mean that it is going to be a great deal more expensive, I suppose.

638. Deputy Pattison.—Is there any likelihood that an unestablished officer with very long service might find himself as a result of reorganisation in an established minor post which would mean the worsening of his week-to-week conditions? —I do not think there is any likelihood of a worsening of anybody’s conditions. I should imagine that, should such a likelihood arise—that is to say if an existing officer did not want to accept the new arrangement—he would be given the other arrangement. If a man were to say: “I do not wish to be taken over as an established officer at my age”, I think the Department of Finance would probably allow us to keep that man in an unestablished capacity on his present terms, but it all depends on the general merits of the case. If he were an elderly man and said he did not want to be established but that he would like to work for the rest of his natural life as an unestablished officer, I imagine they would agree if he had substantial merits. They would not, of course, agree if a young fellow said: “I do not want your scheme; I do not want to be established”. They would probably say to him: “You will have to go and make way for somebody who does want it”. If, however, an officer with long service said: “I do not want to be established”, I think the Department of Finance would probably agree to allow him to remain in an unestablished capacity. I cannot, of course, say that with certainty.

639. Chairman.—On subhead B— Travelling Expenses—what travelling expenses have the county registrars? Are these expenses in connection with the revision of the register?—Yes.

640. Have they any other travelling expenses?—It depends on where they are. For example, in the case of the county registrar in Cork, the Circuit Court sits in five or six places during term. These county registrars also go out on the registration sittings. They have likewise to go out with the High Court on circuit when the High Court on circuit sits in more than one place in a county.

641. Are there any other persons attached to the Circuit Court, other than judicial personages, the county registrars and stenographers who are paid travelling expenses?—Judges’ Criers. I think that is all. I think that summons servers and court messengers recover their own expenses. Occasionally, some of the clerical staff employed in a Circuit Court have to accompany the county registrar when he is going out.

642. Does this subhead also include transport expenses for the judges?—Yes.

643. The note to subhead E.—Sheriff and Under Sheriffs—refers to the appointment of a sheriff for Cork City. Was this an entirely new appointment?—Yes. It was the first appointment and was made in the middle of the year.

644. Deputy Shledon.—As regards No, 3 of the Appropriations in Aid, what is meant by the reference to “receipts in connection with local bankruptcy proceedings?”—There is a local bankruptcy court in Cork. It is the only place where there is a bankruptcy court, outside of Dublin. As the members of the Committee will see, it did not do much business. The estimate was purely conjectural, and we seem to have realised no more than £4 9s. 6d. I do not think there is anything more I can say on that, except that there is a local bankruptcy court in Cork.

645. Where are the Dublin fees brought to account. You mentioned, I think, that there was a bankruptcy court in Dublin?—Probably in the High Court Vote. The arrangement in Dublin is different. Before we leave this, perhaps it might be as well to put on the record what the position is. The local bankruptcy fees to which Deputy Sheldon has referred are receipts from fees fixed by the Lord Lieutenant in former days by an Order in Council, made in 1888 in connection with local bankruptcy proceedings. Under the Local Bankruptcy Act of 1888, all fees are paid by stamps, except those on office copies, which are taken in money and “shall be accounted for by the local registrar in such manner as the Treasury shall direct”.

Are they cash receipts?—Yes.

646. Stamp receipts would not appear? —No. They appear in the Finance Accounts. I simply want to put the matter on record so that it may save trouble next year.

Chairman.—You are sending something in?—No. but I have read something which will appear on the record.

VOTE 37—SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.

Mr. T. J. Coyne further examined.

647. Chairman.—On subhead F.F.— Purchase of Law Books—is the sum set out the total provision that has been made for the purchase of law books and are these for the library?—Yes. The judges have not been particularly well supplied with reports and books, and for a number of years past we have been trying to assemble a judges’ library. This will be a feature that will occur from time to time. When a prominent member of the Bar or a former judge dies, his library often comes on the market. Indeed, there is no other way of acquiring many law books except when some man who has a good library dies. We are still short of some sets of these books that we require, and we are always in the market for them if they can be acquired at a reasonable price.

648. Have you an agent who makes the purchases for you?—No. What usually happens is that the executor of a deceased makes us an offer or we hear about the matter in some way. Then we get an expert to value the books and we buy them if we can come to an agreement with the other side. They have their own expert. If the price seems to us a fair one and that the purchase would be a favourable one, we make it. Otherwise, we do not.

649. Deputy Sheldon.—As regards Extra Receipts, the note refers to an amount of fees collected in cash in the District Probate Registry in Mullingar. Are these fees which were not estimated for, or is there anything unusual in the matter?—Yes, there was something unusual in that. In these offices which were established under an old statute, or a reasonably old statute, we discovered, late in the day, that the fees in the District Probate Registry at Mullingar were being collected by cash which was the former practice in District Probate Registries everywhere. We had power then under the relevant statute, to make an order altering that arrangement and requiring that the fees should be taken by stamps. In fact, we have since made an order so that this is no longer of direct relevance because the county registrar is now the probate registrar. We made an order for Mullingar Probate Registry—Collection of Fees Regulation, 1948—which brought that registry into line with other district registries where fees are collected by stamps. These registries were originally manned by, if I may so describe it, or under the control of the District Probate Registrar who was really appointed by the judge under an official of the High Court, and he was entitled to retain the fees for his own remuneration. In that way it was not a matter of any great interest to him how he took the fees. The district registrar in Mullingar died. Then we began to take an interest in the fees and changed the arrangement, so that they are now taken by stamps. Apparently. this was a sum that inured to us, and so to-day the Exchequer became entitled to it following the death of the former District Probate Registrar.

650. It does not necessarily represent one year’s fees?—No. It may be more, but I do not know.

651. Chairman.—You had no supervision over these before?—We had no supervision formerly.

652. And it is the only case that is outstanding?—I think so. I think it is the last of the local probate registries. I think the last registrar was Mr. Carr Lett. We certainly have no more now, but whether there was somebody subsequent to this year, I am not sure. I think not.

We may take it that you have now effective control and supervision over all these matters relating to fees, and in the accounting for them?—We have. There is now no official of ours who is allowed to retain fees for his own profit.

VOTE 38—LAND REGISTRY AND REGISTRY OF DEEDS.

Mr. T. J. Coyne further examined.

653. Chairman.—On subhead C—Compensation for losses payable under Section 22 of the Registration of Title Act, 1942— what, exactly, is the meaning of the note on the Estimate: “Provision to meet payments under Section 22 of the Registration of Title Act, 1942, of Compensation agreed upon or awarded by the Court to claimants in respect of loss sustained through errors, etc., in registration”?—Formerly, there was an insurance fund under the original Registration of Title Act. The fund was established to meet cases in which there was an error in the register. It has the force of law and if, through inadvertence or the negligence of a clerk, some error was made in the register it would be binding against all comers, and, consequently that might work out as a positive injustice to the person who was prejudiced by the error. Under the former system, if he succeeded in a legal action in recovering damages, or otherwise there was an insurance fund out of which he could be paid whatever he was awarded or whatever might be considered to be just in the circumstances, if it was not the subject of legal proceedings. At the instance of the Department of Finance, or, rather, in consonance with general Government policy as regards insurance, we abolished the fund, and the Department of Finance said that they would carry the insurance. If anybody is now prejudiced through an error of that kind, the Exchequer pays up. That is what it amounts to.

654. How do you assess the amount of compensation to be paid?—I think it is done by the courts, but I cannot tell you offhand. I think in the case of a man, portion of whose holding has been credited to somebody else, he not merely kicks up a row in the office, but he issues a writ. The court determines what he should get, and we have to pay up.

655. Deputy Sheldon.—I take it that you do not give compensation for delays? —No, but perhaps delays are offset by the helpful attitude of the officials in every case.

656. Chairman.—There are no Appropriations in Aid on this Vote. Are there no fees?—Yes, there are any amount of fees. You will find them in the finance accounts. The amount is £61,000.

657. What is the position about delays in the Registry?—The position is improving, shall I say. The expression “delay” covers a whole variety of different sorts of transactions. Some of the delay is quite unavoidable and inevitable; that is to say, a solicitor or individual forwards documents for registration and he does not forward all the documents required and supply all the information needed, or his application raises some points of law or matter of doubt and he has to be written to. Then the reply that is received in such cases is often far from satisfactory and there has to be another query raised. In a complicated case, most of the delay that arises in that way and which may extend to three, four, five or six months is absolutely unavoidable. Then there is the straightforward case where, if we had a streamlined organisation, there should not be any delay; but the trouble was that the policy of the Land Commission with respect to vesting was changed shortly after the recent emergency and they embarked on an intensive policy of vesting so that the number of vesting orders rose from about 2,000 a year to about 12,000 and our staff was flooded out by the acceleration in the rate of vesting by the Land Commission. It is not a simple matter by any means to increase your staff pari passu with the increase in business, because of delays, which I have no doubt were unavoidable also, in getting replacement of staff or recruiting staff. For example, it took us over a year, in fact 18 months I think, to get legal assistants that we required. I am merely citing this as an illustration. That was because the Civil Service Commissioners. had their own difficulties in selecting a candidate. The post has to be advertised and often unsuitable people apply. For that reason we found it extremely difficult to replace staff promptly. In this matter, the Department of Justice has one view and unfortunately the Department of Finance has another view. My Department and myself personally have the view that replacements should be as freely available as tap water, but that is far from being the view of the Department of Finance who would regard the availability of staff like tap water as involving unnecessary extravagance. I am not saying that they are wrong. The whole point is that replacements are not available like tap water, and it takes a longer interval than it should take to get replacements. That is the position in a nutshell. We are providing more staff and the Department of Finance have been most helpful in the matter. There is an investigation of the staffing position going on at present in which the Department of Finance are associated with us, and they have been extremely helpful. We are making real progress, and I trust that the passage of time will result in a substantial improvement, if not in the complete elimination of delays.

658. I am sure the Committee would like some assurance that this extra work from the Land Commission has not meant that other persons using the service are placed at a disadvantage?—You may have that assurance. Their work is primarily with the Land Commission. Perhaps that is an inaccurate or compressed statement. So far as the first registration is concerned, 99 per cent. of the work is with the Land Commission and with nobody else. The number of voluntary registrations is infinitesimal. With regard to what we call dealings, that is to say the transfer of part of a holding already registered or the discharge of equities on a holding, all holdings, as no doubt you know, are registered in the first instance subject to equities. That is to say, the Registry does not delay fully to investigate the title and the title is registered with all its faults. If a person wants to get a clean title, he has to discharge the equities. In these matters, the ordinary citizen is affected apart from the Land Commission, though even in the Land Commission cases it is ultimately the ordinary citizen who is affected. But in these dealing cases we are not concerned with the Land Commission at all but with the individual, and it is there of course that the delay is more serious. It is there that it is occurring because every title you add to the register increases proportionately the number of dealings you are likely to have and, as the register rises in volume, the volume of dealings increases. There is that intrinsic difficulty that no dealing is exactly like any other dealing, and it is not easy for the staff to determine when they get a bundle of papers whether it is a straightforward case or not until they read all the papers. That takes up a certain amount of time. We are as anxious as the Committee that the public shall not be needlessly or unduly inconvenienced by these delays and we are doing our best to remedy the situation which we admit is not satisfactory.

The witness withdrew.

VOTE 63—DEFENCE.

Lieutenant-General P. MacMahon called and examined.

659. Chairman.—Paragraph 66 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads as follows:—

“Subhead A.3—Expenses of Equitation Teams at Horse Shows.

Expenditure amounting to £605 8s. 7d. was incurred on the transport of grooms and horses in connection with a continental horse show which was abandoned. The show authorities had intimated their willingness to recoup the expenses incurred and I inquired whether any refund had been obtained. I was informed that when application for recoupment was made it was found that no moneys were available for the purpose, and that the matter will be pursued in connection with a proposal to send a team to compete at the same centre in 1950, the show authorities having agreed to reconsider the matter in the event of a team being sent.”

Have you anything to add, Mr.Wann?

Mr. Wann.—This Show was to have been held in Nice in April, 1948. Particulars of the expenditure involved were furnished to the Department of External Affairs for transmission to the Show authorities in July, 1949, but the annual town budget from which the Show was financed had been closed in January, 1949. I understand a team was sent to Nice last year and perhaps the Accounting Officer can say how the question of recoupment stands.

General MacMahon.—A team was sent to Nice last year, but the weather was very wet and they made no profit. A team is going again this year and, if they make a profit, they promise to refund. As far as it is possible for them to make sufficient profit to enable them to refund the full amount, they will do so.

660. Chairman.—That is the Show authorities?—Yes. It is only fair to add that when we applied first to the Show Committee to refund our expenditure, they said they had no money. We asked the Department of Finance to let it stand as a charge against the Vote, but the Department refused and asked us to pursue the matter. We are doing so and hope to recover the money or part of it this year and the balance next year.

661. Paragraph 67 of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s report states:—

“Subhead C—Pay of Civilians attached to Units.

Subhead S—Barrack Maintenance and Minor Works.

The sanction of the Department of Finance was obtained in January, 1945, for expenditure of £4,300 on the purchase of materials for works which are being carried out at a military aerodrome. Expenditure on civilian labour was also incurred in connection with the project and I am informed that owing to a misunderstanding sanction was not obtained for this expenditure, which has amounted to £3,720 5s. 7d., but that covering authority has now been sought.

The sanction accorded in 1945 also covered the provision of plant and equipment, including a sum of £2,200 for the purchase of one mile of light railway track with bogies and locomotive. It appears that the locomotive was not put into service and that the use of the bogies, which had been hand-operated for a short period, was discontinued. I was informed that the equipment could not be operated owing to lack of sufficient labour, and that the question of the use to which it will be put in future is under consideration.”

Have you anything to say, General MacMahon?—We have received the Finance sanction now.

Have you anything further to add?— Yes, when we undertook this particular job we had a construction corps and it was our intention to have the work carried out by members of that corps. Recruiting for the corps dropped off and men became time-expired and left and, eventually, we found ourselves with a very small number. In fact, the numbers in this corps became so small that we had to disband this corps. As a consequence we then had to employ civilian labour to do the work.

662. Chairman.—As to the second paragraph of the note, have you anything to add, Mr. Wann?

Mr. Wann.—When the machinery was purchased it was anticipated that large working parties of construction corps personnel would be available to provide work for the plant. The strength of the construction corps fell off very considerably, as the Accounting Officer states, and as a result the equipment proved unsuitable for the purposes for which it was acquired.

663. Chairman.—What happened to the plant and equipment?

General MacMahon.—It is used at the Curragh at the moment bringing supplies, to the ranges. The equipment is very useful to the Army. It can be used in connection with repairs at the artillery range at the Glen of Imaal and at the rifle range at Kilpedder.

664. Deputy Sheldon.—Why was not the locomotive used?—The locomotive was not used as a driver was not available.

665. It is an odd way of saving labour that the bogey should be pushed by hand? —The use of hand-operated bogies was discontinued when construction corps labour was no longer available, as it was more economical to use the civilian labour attending on the excavator and dumper.

It is a mechanical dumper?—Yes.

Is the locomotive being used now?—Yes.

666. Chairman.—Paragraph 68 of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s report reads:—

“Subhead K—Provisions and Allowances in lieu.

Statements have been furnished to me showing the cost of production of bread at the Curragh bakery, and of meat at the Dublin and Curragh abattoirs. The unit costs are as follows:

Bread—Cost of production: 1948-49, 2.7 pence per lb.; 1947-48, 3.1 pence per lb.; cost delivered in Dublin: 1948-49, 3.1 pence per lb.; 1947-48, 3.5 pence per lb.

Meat—Dublin: 1948-49, 20.1 pence per lb.: 1947-48, 18.3 pence per lb.: Curragh: 1948-49, 21.6 pence per lb.; 1947-48, 18.3 pence per lb.

The average price of cattle purchased for the Dublin and Curragh areas was £53 6s. Id. and £51 lls. 6d. per head, respectively, as compared with £47 11s. 1d and £45 18s. 2d. in the previous year, while the average production’ of beef per head was 664 lbs. and 617 lbs., respectively, as compared with 641 lbs. and 618 lbs.

As noted in item 8 of the statement of losses appended to the account, a sum of £139 6s. 5d. was written off in respect of three cattle which were condemned as unfit for human consumption. This loss involved a weight of 2,344 lbs. of meat and further losses amounting to 5,687 lbs. of meat arose mainly through contamination due to lack of storage facilities. I understand that particulars of these losses have now been reported to the Department of Finance and that the sanction of that Department has been sought for an expenditure necessary to install cold storage facilities.”

Have you anything further to add with regard to this, Mr. Wann?

Mr. Wann.—The losses of meat through contamination were apparently due mainly to lack of cold storage facilities at the Curragh. Such facilities are available in Dublin, where losses of this kind are negligible. I do not know whether the expenditure necessary to install cold storage facilities at the Curragh has been sanctioned.

General MacMahon.—It has.

667. Chairman.—The cold storage facilities in Dublin were in use?—Yes.

At the Curragh?—No, because the Curragh meat had to be stored at the abattoir in the Curragh.

668. What was the cost of this installation?—£1,600.

All the meat purchased for the use of the Curragh can be stored there then? —Yes.

669. Paragraph 69 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General is as follows:—

“Subhead M—Clothing and Equipment.

A contract for the supply of 24,000 yards of serge lining at 5s. 4d. per yard was placed in September, 1947, in connection with the provision of greatcoats. The adoption of a new pattern greatcoat was under consideration at that time and as the new specification provided for a lining of cotton italian cloth efforts were made to cancel the contract for serge. These efforts were unsuccessful as the serge was in process of production but the contract was short-closed on delivery of 16,703 yards and it was decided to use the serge as lining for the new pattern coats instead of the lighter material specified. As the price of the latter was approximately one-half that of the serge, I inquired regarding the purchase of materials whilst the question of specification remained undecided and was informed that it was not known, when the demand issued, whether or when the new pattern greatcoat would be approved and that in fact approval was not given until December, 1947.”

Have you anything to add to that, Mr. Wann?

Mr. Wann.—A demand for 18,000 greatcoats was issued to the Department of Posts and Telegraphs in July, 1947, and a contract for 24,000 yards of serge for lining in accordance with the then existing specification was placed by that Department in September, 1947, at 5/4 per yard. The adoption of a new pattern greatcoat had been under consideration for some time prior to the issue of the demand and, when finally approved, the new pattern specified for a lighter lining of cotton Italian cloth which could be obtained for approximately half the cost of the serge. The demand for the greatcoats was, accordingly, withdrawn in November 1947, and unsuccessful efforts were made to cancel the contract for serge but the order was short-closed on delivery of 16,703 yards. I understand that the serge is being used in connection with subsequent orders for new pattern greatcoats instead of the specified material and, of course, at considerably greater cost.

670. Chairman.—What will the additional cost be?

General MacMahon.—It would be very difficult to answer that question. We set aside sufficient of the serge for blouses and trousers for the F.C.A. for a period of three years. The balance was of no use for any other purpose except for lining of greatcoats, and, on the advice of the Controller of Stores in the Post Office, we continued to use it for that purpose. At that particular time there was no doubt that the cotton was much cheaper. It was ⅔ a yard for a width of 28 inches whereas the serge was 5/4 a yard for the same width. The cotton has not been available for a considerable time and we would not have been able to get it for some of the recently-made coats. It would be very difficult—if not impossible—to estimate what the additional cost might have been.

671. Chairman.—How did it come that the serge was not made for the greatcoats?—It was made and was used in greatcoats but the new greatcoats specified that cotton lining be used instead. It was cheaper. We had the serge lining and there was no other purpose to which we could put it.

672. The original contract was for these greatcoats and then, at the same time, the specification was being changed. Was there a lack of co-ordination?—We did not know when the new pattern greatcoat would be scanctioned when we ordered the 24,000 yards of serge.

673. Deputy Sheldon.—Where was the order placed for the 24,000 yards of serge? —The Post Office Stores made the purchase.

674. Has the specification of the greatcoat been changed again?—No, we can use either lining.

675. The two dates seem to be very close. You would think that if the decision was going to come in December, in September there might have been some indication it was about to come?—The question of changing the pattern of the greatcoat was under consideration for years and we did not know when it would be sanctioned.

676. Chairman.—Was it not for the Minister to decide it? What prevented the Minister from coming to a decision? It seems an extraordinary thing that we should be told that a certain purchase was made and that it was not known whether something which has been hanging fire for years, apparently, was going to reach the point of decision; and then, presumably, it was because of the change of Minister that a decision was come to.

Deputy Sheldon.—The one thing that strikes me is that before this contract would be given in September, 1947, the Minister would have been asked to sanction the contract?—Several contracts had been placed in the interval. If we had waited, the Army would be without greatcoats. These coats were for the F.C.A. It is well to explain that the new pattern greatcoat was for the Army and any of the old pattern were transferred to the F.C.A.

677. Chairman.—Could you give us the date on which the order for the new greatcoats was given to the manufacturer or supplier?—June, 1947.

And when were they supplied?—In July, I imagine.

Deputy Sheldon.—The serge was ordered only in September and you could not have the greatcoats delivered in July.

678. Chairman.—You are not in a position to add anything, are you?—I would like to clear up that point raised by the Deputy. The order was placed on the 19th July, for the old pattern.

And the new pattern?—The following December.

679. Could you tell us what the nature of the order was in each case? You had one order in July and the other in November?

680. Deputy Sheldon.—The first order was cancelled?—We tried to cancel it but did not succeed in cancelling it completely. The order had been placed and we had to take 16,703 yards.

681. Chairman.—The only point that strikes one is whether there is some machinery by which from time to time these matters can be co-ordinated and planned?—These changes take place very infrequently.

682. Chairman.—Paragraph 70 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:—

“Subhead P—Warlike Stores.

4,128,568 rounds of ammunition, purpurchased in 1940, which were found to be defective, were returned to the suppliers, and 4,000,500 rounds were received in replacement free of any charge other than the cost of transport. As noted in the account, the value of the balance of 128,068 rounds was written off with the sanction of the Department of Finance. It appears that whilst the ammunition returned as defective had been packed in chargers and bandoliers the replacements were not so packed and I have been informed that inquiries are being made regarding the supply of these items.”

When was the ammunition returned?— The War Office forwarded replacement ammunition in January, 1948, and we returned the defective ammunition in September, 1948.

683. Is it that there was not an opportunity of dealing with the matter in the interim?—They were found to be defective on examination—only then. It might be well to explain that this ammunition was American ammunition and was not subject to the same tests as the British apply. The Americans supplied it to the British and the British gave us our requirements. They did not give us any guarantee whatever with it, and, if they had wished to do so, they could have told us: “You have so many defective rounds. We may have ten or 20 times that number and we cannot do anything about it.” Instead of doing that, they replaced 4,000,500 rounds free of charge. We took up the question of the bandoliers with them and they explained that the ammunition and bandoliers we returned were sent to a dump where they lay in all sorts of weather. As a result the bandoliers were valueless and would not be worth trying to rescue, I think it would be unfair to press the matter so far as they are concerned. They acted in a very decent way so far as were concerned.

684. Will the matter be pursued?—I do not think we should pursue it, and, unless the Department of Finance insist on it, we will not do so. My recommendation is that we do not pursue the matter.

Deputy Sheldon.—In effect, this is a payment of 4,000,500 rounds ex gratia?— —Exactly. They need not have given it to us at all.

685. Chairman.—What would be the value of these items, chargers and bandoliers? Would it be very substantial? —No. They are only cotton bandoliers in which the ammunition is put for easy transport. It can be put on a man’s shoulders, if necessary, or dumped into wagons.

686. Still, you might find it difficult to replace them?—No. We will not have to make any purchase to replace these, though it would have been convenient to have them.

687. Chairman.—The first sub-paragraph of paragraph 71 of the report to the Comptroller and Auditor-General:—

“Subhead P.1—Air-raid Precautions.

It was stated in paragraph 75 of the previous report that proposals for the adjustment of discrepancies in the accounts of air-raid precautions stores had been submitted to the Department of Finance. I have asked for further information regarding the discrepancies disclosed.”

Is there any further information with regard to this matter?

Mr. Wann.—I understand that revised proposals for the adjustment of the discrepancies have been submitted to the Department of Finance. I do not know how the matter stands at the moment.

General MacMahon.—We agree with the Comptroller and Auditor-General that there were inaccuracies. To make the position clear, it might be well to remember—it was mentioned to the Committee before—that our records so far as A.R.P. stores are concerned were destroyed in a fire at St. Anne’s, Clontarf. We had to reconstruct our records and naturally they could not be expected to be perfect. So far as these discrepancies are concerned, we are rectifying them, and have reached agreement with the Department of Finance as to how we will furnish the details to that Department. We hope to submit them soon for authority to write off.

688. Chairman.—The second sub-paragraph reads:—

“Reference was made in paragraph 84 of the report on the accounts for the year 1945-46 to the arrangements made for the disposal by local authorities of stores towards the cost of which State grants had been paid, and for accounting for the amounts realised. It appears that quantities of such stores remain unsold and I have been informed that the matter is under consideration.”

General MacMahon.—We propose to retain these. They will be very useful, and, in view of the international situation, it would be madness to dispose of them now.

689. Chairman.—Paragraph 72 of the Comptroller and Auditor-General’s report reads:—

“Subhead P.2—Naval Service.

Four motor torpedo boats which had been recommended for disposal by boards of survey were sold in the year under review for the sum of £1,000, which was the highest offer received after tenders had been sought by public advertisement, and by invitation.

One of the boats sold had been delivered in 1943 with two similar vessels, which remain in service. I inquired regarding the circumstances in which the third vessel became unserviceable and was informed that a detailed survey revealed that it would not have been economical to effect repairs to it, and that the condition of the other two vessels was such that major repairs enabled them to be kept in service.

Considerable stocks of spare parts are held in store and are surplus to requirements as a result of the sale, and I understand that the question of their disposal is under consideration.”

The price seems extremely low?—Not if you knew the vessels. Even a motor car depreciates very rapidly over that period, and this type of boat was not made to last. It’s life is very short. The hull is made of wood and the engines are very high-powered. The hull does not last long. In this case dry rot set in after some years and the engines reach a stage when it is uneconomic to recondition them.

690. Deputy Sheldon.—What age were they?—About 10 years old.

691. What did they cost?—£40,000 each.

692. And you got £250 each?—We were very lucky to get £250. As a matter of fact, we were very lucky to get a purchaser at all. I do not know what use they can be put to.

One of them was not as old as ten years —the one bought in 1943?—No.

693. Chairman.—Is that the vessel which was sold for £1,000—The four were sold for that amount. All six have now been sold. The other two were sold and we got only £200 each.

694. Were they advertised outside the country?—Yes.

695. And there was no possibility of having used them for training or other purposes?—No. It takes over £2,000 to recondition the engines of one of these boats alone.

696. Deputy Sheldon.—And that is more or less throwing good money after bad?—Definitely, apart from the fact that the hulls became infected with dry rot.

697. Did anything particular happen to the boat bought in 1943?—Three of the boats—the M. 4, M. 5 and M. 6—were launched in 1940 but were not delivered and put into commission until 1943, which meant that the period of over two years during which they were afloat prior to commissioning must be regarded as part of their serviceable life.

698. But there are wooden-hulled boats in water for far longer periods than that?—Yes, but that is a different type of boat. These boats were built for speed. The hull is just a shell and when dry rot sets in, it is impossible to counteract it. There is nothing abnormal about this. It merely happens that we spent a lot of money on boats that had a short life. You could raise the question of policy—why we purchased them—but we retained them as long as they were worth holding.

And during these years there would not be very much chance of buying whatever you liked?—That is so.

699. Chairman.—Is there a question of changing the type of boat? There has been a change of policy in the matter?— We bought corvettes instead. It is a question whether the corvette is the ideal boat, but it was the only one we could obtain at the time. It is very much more useful than the motor torpedo boat, which is really designed for harbour protection.

700. What about the stocks of spare parts?—We have been trying to dispose of them. We thought we would get the Ministry of Supply on the far side to take them over, but they have authorised us to get in touch with the maker of the boats, and I think we will be able to dispose of them. In fact, we will be able to dispose of them—it is a question of how much we will get for them.

701. Chairman.—Paragraph 73 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:—

“Subhead R—Fuel, Light and Water in kind and Fuel Oils.

Defence Force Regulations issued in 1942 provided for the supply of electricity for lighting and for certain domestic purposes to married officers’ quarters in which electric meters were installed, and for the recovery from the officers of the cost of electricity consumed in excess of the amounts allowable under the scales laid down. In a number of cases meters were not available for installation until 1946, and, accordingly, consumption records could not be obtained prior to that date. Accounts rendered to certain officers in respect of excess consumption in the period since 1946 remain outstanding, and I understand that collection is not being pursued pending a decision on proposals for increases in the consumption scales which were recently submitted to the Department of Finance. Some accounts in respect of excess consumption prior to 1946, in cases in which meters had been installed, are also outstanding.”

There is a question there of excess consumption since 1946. Have you anything to add, Mr. Wann?

Mr. Wann.—I do not think so. I do not know whether the new consumption scales have been authorised?

General MacMahon.—There has been a reassessment and we are collecting the outstanding money.

702. Deputy Sheldon.—Are the new scales accepted?—This cannot arise again as in future married officers will have to pay for all current consumed in their quarters.

703. Will this subhead disappear?—No; I am only referring to officers. It will appear so far as N.C.Os. and men are concerned.

Chairman.—It is thought that they may turn the lights off a little earlier?—I would not be surprised if they do.

704. Chairman.—Paragraph 74 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads:—

“Subhead B.B.—Medals, etc.

In connection with the provision of emergency service medals for the Regular Army two samples of ribbon were submitted by contractors at prices of 1s. 0⅓d. and 4s. 4d. per yard, respectively. The cheaper ribbon was reported on favourably after test and its adoption was agreed to by the Department of Defence. A contract was, however, placed for the supply of 5,000 yards of the dearer ribbon in January, 1949, and in reply to my inquiry I was informed that there was no alternative to this purchase as the contractors who quoted at the cheaper rate intimated in January, 1949, their inability to deliver satisfactory material for three to four months. I have asked for further information on the matter.”

Would three or four months, if they had been able to fulfil it in that time, have made a great difference?—The Controller of the Post Office Stores does not believe they could ever have done so. They attempted to foist on the Post Office an inferior ribbon and the sample was not up to standard. It was merely an ordinary dye whereas a fast dye was necessary.

705. Deputy Sheldon.—You do not mean the original sample?—Yes. He quoted first for the type of ribbon the Post Office Stores advertised for but when he produced the sample it was altogether inferior.

706. Chairman.—I suppose these materials are examined when delivered?— Yes. The Post Office Stores have an expert who examines them to see that the material is up to sample.

707. Are you solely dependent on this officer for a judgment?—The Post Office Stores purchase all our uniforms and they have an expert there.

What about your own side?—We do not regard them as experts, but if they thought an article was not up to specification they would draw attention to it.

708. Is there not a great danger at present of getting inferior-quality articles when you think you are getting the better-quality article? It seems to me that that is one of the great troubles of the times?—We never had any fault to find with the Post Office Stores on that heading. It is a highly organised department.

I am not finding fault with the Post Office Stores, which I know is a very efficient organisation, but in an organisation like the Army one would imagine that they would have some testing machinery of their own?—Finance would not agree to that duplication. The Post Office buy for the Guards, for postmen and for the Army.

Deputy Sheldon.—The paragraph says that the cheaper ribbon was reported on favourably after test, so that there must have been a sample produced at that stage. It was not just a matter of specification?

Chairman.—Of course, they can produce samples all right.

709. Chairman.—The first sub-paragraph of paragraph 75 of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General states:—

“Stores.

The sanction of the Department of Finance was obtained for the write-off of £36 0s. 6d. being the loss due to damage caused to articles of Army pattern clothing through deterioration while stored at the naval depot. Stocks of naval clothing were also held at the depot, and it appeared that, having regard to the strength of the naval service, they would not be exhausted for a considerable time. I understand that difficulty has also been experienced in preserving these stocks from deterioration and I am in communication with the Accounting Officer on the matter.”

This refers specifically to naval clothing?

Mr. Wann.—Yes. The Accounting Officer is satisfied that all reasonable precautions have been taken to preserve the stocks from deterioration.

Is that the position, General MacMahon?—The loss since the beginning of the emergency is £36 0s. 6d., which, in my opinion, is marvellously low. That is over a number of years and not one particular year.

710. The second sub-paragraph reads:—

“It was noted that considerable stocks of certain articles of Army clothing and necessaries surplus to current requirements, were held in store, and having regard to the strength of the Army I inquired whether any decision had been taken regarding the continued holding of these stocks. I was informed that the question of disposing of some of them was under consideration and that deterioration in store was unlikely.”

Have you anything to add to that?—In view of the international situation we propose to hold on to all this material.

711. Chairman.—The final sub-paragraph of paragraph 75 reads:—

“Defence Force Regulations provide for the holding of Boards of Survey for the purpose of reporting on stores set aside for condemnation and making recommendations on their disposal. The regulations further provide that normally only stores which have become damaged or deteriorated through fair wear and tear, or articles of minor value, should be submitted to a board. Certain items of medical stores were written off store charge, having been recommended by Boards of Survey for destruction owing to deterioration in storage. Having regard to the circumstances in which the articles became unserviceable, and to the quantities involved, I considered that the approval of the Department of Finance should have been obtained before the stores were written off and I have communicated with the Accounting Officer accordingly.”

Have you any comment to make?—Since the Comptroller and Auditor-General suggested that we should go to the Department of Finance in the matter, we did so, and we now have their sanction.

712. How do you deal with the articles? When you say “damaged or deteriorated through fair wear and tear, or articles of minor value” they have reached a very low stage and are absolutely useless?— Yes, absolutely useless for Army purposes though they may be useful for other purposes.

713. On the Vote iself, there is a note on page 240 regarding subhead A—Pay of Officers, Cadets, N.C.O.s and Men— which reads:—“The average strength was below that provided for”?— It would save a considerable amount of time if I explain that in this particular year there was a change of Government and while the Estimates prepared were submitted to the Dáil and passed by them the Minister for Defence promised the Dáil that he would save at least £750,000 on this particular Vote. He insisted on economies and this is the result.

714. There is a note on subhead A.1— Military Educational Courses abroad— which states that courses were availed of to a greater extent than visualised. Is this the desire for the latest military knowledge?—That is so.

714a. On subhead C—Pay of Civilians attached to Units—what is the position regarding this problem of the number of civilians you have to employ? Is it the position that arose through loss of tradesmen? Would it be possible to get over these difficulties?—That is one of them. We have not got over that difficulty, I am sorry to say.

715. Is there any training scheme for apprentices?—We tried to introduce one, but the unions will not recognise our tradesmen when trained and consequently they will not be admitted into a union when they leave the Army. There is one exception, apprentices in the Air Corps, where the unions agree as there is no other establishment in the country where aeronautical fitters and riggers could be trained.

716. On subhead J—Mechanical Transport—the note says:—

“The purchase of a number of vehicles was not proceeded with; partly offset by increased expenditure on maintenance of vehicles.”

How does that matter stand? Do you purchase vehicles for a period in advance or just for current requirements?—We purchase usually to replace vehicles no longer worth keeping. When they become uneconomic to keep, we dispose of them and we provide for money to purchase vehicles to replace them.

716a. The Army may not be ever as effective as we would wish, but is it not very ineffective if its transport service is not first class and arranged so that, in an emergency when transport is not obtainable from outside, you will have adequate supplies?—As far as ordinary transport vehicles are concerned, we purchase only sufficient to cope with our everyday needs. If an emergency occurred we would commandeer transport, the consumption of petrol would be restricted and we would either purchase or acquire in some other way vehicles normally used for civilian purposes.

717. On subhead O—General Stores— the note says:—

“Aircraft were not purchased to the extent provided for; certain accounts in respect of stores delivered did not come in course of payment in the year, and workshop equipment was not purchased to the extent anticipated.”

As regards the first part of the note, I take it that the explanation is what you have already given?—That is correct.

717a. On subhead P—Warlike Stores— is it the same explanation here?—No-That is an exception. We could not get the equipment. We would have purchased warlike stores if we could get them, but we were not able to get them. I am sorry to say that the same applies still.

718. On subhead P.2—Naval Service— is there any explanation? That is an economy also? Did it derive from action taken within the Department?—Yes. One of the corvettes was put out of commission and two of them were used for fishery patrols. All three now are engaged in fishery protection.

719. On subhead W—Insurance—you are responsible for the entire insurance contributions?—Yes.

For both employer and employee?—In the case of national health, we pay the full contribution. In the case of widows and orphans, the soldier has to contribute his share.

What would that be?—6d.

720. What would the total contribution be on his pay? Could you tell the Committee what is the pay and what is the contribution?—He pays that 6d. for widows’ and orphans’ pension and he contributes 6d. towards haircutting and laundry. Those are the two deductions made from his pay.

721. Deputy Davern.—With regard to Y.2—The Reserve—I notice that there was a saving of approximately £250,000. It looks an extraordinary sum for one year. I wonder if it would be in order for me to ask whether that saving has been detrimental to the Reserve?—Yes, in that particular year the Reserve was not called up for training.

With a view to economy, I take it?— Yes.

Has this had any detrimental effect on the Reserve?—They would have had a month’s additional training had they been out that year. I am afraid that that is the best answer I can give you.

722. Had the savings any bad effect on the numerical strength of the Reserve when they were called upon subsequently?—No, not on the numerical strength but possibly on their efficiency.

723. Chairman.—With regard to the Appropriations in Aid I see that the sale of surplus stores brought in substantially less than was anticipated. One would imagine that clothing and such like; would fetch the price that had been estimated?—Now yes, but not in that particular year.

724. Deputy Sheldon.—What are the receipts from dental workshops?—Dentures supplied on repayment.

Deputy Davern.—Are the soldiers not entitled to the additional benefits of the National Health Insurance Society?— Soldiers are catered for by Army dentists and dentures are supplied free of charge, but in the case of officers there is repayment and that accounts for this figure.

725. Chairman.—I notice that the treatment of civilian patients in military hospitals brought in more than was anticipated. In the notes lower down I see that tricolour flags valued at £2 6s. 8. which were lent for the ceremonial dressing of the U.S.S. “Fresno” were retained as souvenirs. Have you any general responsibility for providing flags? —No, except that we are the only Department in the State that have them on charge.

726. On special occasions such as when visitors come or when they are needed for dressing up, would you feel called upon to do a certain amount?—We would not use flags for dressing up; bunting would be used in that case, but if flags were required for any other purpose by any other Department we would lend them to them. On this particular occasion it was done at the request of the Department of External Affairs; the ship asked for the flag and we lent it.

VOTE 64—ARMY PENSIONS.

Lieutenant-General P. MacMahon called and examined.

727. Chairman.—Paragraph 77 of the Report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General reads as follows:—

“Subhead C—Wound and Disability Pensions and Gratuities, etc.

A pension of £30 per annum for the period 19th May, 1948, to 18th May, 1950, in respect of disablement due to a wound attributable to military service, was awarded under Section 10 of the Army Pensions Act, 1932, following a report dated 28th May, 1948, by the Army Pensions Board. The case had been considered by the board in 1942, when the disability was assessed at less than 20 per cent., and payment of a gratuity of £40 under Section 10 was sanctioned by the Minister for Finance on the 27th January, 1943, notification of the award being issued to the claimant on the 29th March, 1943. The award of pension followed an appeal made on the 10th March, 1948, by the applicant under Section 18 (2) of the Act, which provides, inter alia, that a person to whom a gratuity has been awarded may, within five years of the date of the award, apply to have the case reconsidered. It appeared that the appeal was regarded as’ having been made within the prescribed statutory period, the date of the award for the purposes of Section 18 (2) being deemed to be the date of the issue of notification to the claimant. As the law officers, in another case, had previously expressed doubts whether the commencement of the five year period could be delayed until actual notification I inquired if the legal position on the interpretation of Section 18 (2) had been clarified and was informed that legal advice was being sought on the matter.”

Mr. Wann.—I do not know whether the legal opinion has been obtained.

General MacMahon.—The legal opinion agreed with that of the Comptroller and Auditor-General. We thought that the date of effect should be the date on which we notified the applicant but the Comptroller and Auditor-General decided that it should be the date on which the Minister for Finance agreed to the award of a gratuity. The matter was referred to the Attorney-General who agreed with the opinion expressed by the Comptroller and Auditor-General. As a result, we have had to recover the money and we have recovered the full sum from his military service pensions.

728. Chairman.—Paragraph 78 of the Report reads:—

“Subhead G—Military Service Pensions.

The Military Service Pensions Acts, 1924 and 1934, provide for the abatement of pensions awarded under these Acts by reference to any remuneration payable to the pensioners out of public moneys. In the case of members of the Gárda Síochána who were in receipt of military service pensions, it had been the practice to regard as remuneration certain allowances which the members received in addition to pay, but sections 2 and 4 of the Military Service Pensions (Amendment) (No. 2) Act, 1945, provided, with effect from 1st April, 1945, that these allowances should be excluded in the calculation of remuneration. The sanction of the Department of Finance was obtained for the refund of amounts over-deducted from pensions prior to 1st April, 1945; and refunds amounting to £10,584 18s. 11d. have been made, of which £10,236.10s. 10d. was paid in the year under review and the balance in the following year.”

What exactly does this mean?

Mr. Wann.—Certain allowances received in addition to pay by members of the Garda Síochána, who were also in receipt of military service pensions, were regarded as remuneration for purposes of abatement of pension. The legislation referred to provided that as from 1st April, 1945, these allowances are not reckonable as remuneration. It was decided to refund amounts over-deducted from pension prior to the date mentioned and as a result refunds amounting to the figures stated in the paragraph have been made. The paragraph is informatory.

729. Chairman.—It goes back to the 1st April, 1945. Why that date?

Mr. Wann.—It goes right back from the award of the pension.

730. Chairman.—Can any further change of that nature take place now? These things are constantly cropping up. A further adjustment could, in fact, be made later on?

General MacMahon.—I do not think so. In, I think, 1924, the then Treasury Solicitor said that boots and plain clothing allowances should rank as pay and we acted on that. A Civic Guard then consulted a solicitor who got the opinion of senior counsel and it was forwarded to our Department with a statement that legal proceedings would be taken if this position was to continue. The matter was submitted to the Attorney-General and he decided that boots and plain clothing allowances should not rank as pay and should not be subject to abatement. The Department of Finance in those circumstances agreed that in the case of this particular Guard we would refund what was due to him. Very soon afterwards other Guards similarly affected applied, and the Department of Finance agreed that in any case where an affected Guard applied we would refund the money. All applied and we have refunded the money.

731. As a matter of interest, are there other allowances?—I think that completes the matter. They may have other allowances, but if they get additional pay it is subject to abatement.

These are allowances in kind?—Yes.

The witness withdrew.

The Committee adjourned.