|
|
|
Dáil Éireann - Volume 30 - 27 June, 1929 In Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 58.—Railway Tribunal. The President The President The President: I move:— Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £4,790 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1930, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí eile an Bhínse Bhóthair Iarainn a bunuíodh fé Acht na mBóthar Iarainn, 1924. That a sum not exceeding £4,790 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1930, for the Salaries and other Expenses of the Railway Tribunal constituted under the Railways Act, 1924. Mr. Lemass Mr. Lemass 2003 Mr. Lemass: I wonder if the Minister could give us any information as to the present position in respect of standard charges. I thought it was intended that the standard charges would have been in operation at the beginning of this year, and that this year would be “A” year, within the meaning of the Railway Act. The possibility of having standard charges in operation was undoubtedly prevented by the action of the Railways Company in appealing to the courts from the decision of the Railway Tribunal. But is there any prospect that standard charges will be in operation next [2003] year, or towards the end of this year, or when are we to expect them? It is now five years since the Railway Act was passed, and as the principal function of that Act was to fix standard charges, and as we have no standard charges yet, I think that the Minister, on a Vote of this kind, should take the opportunity of informing the House as to what the position is. Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan: The question is still being considered. I do not know when the hearing will finish or when the award will come. I am not at all sure that we would not be better off as we are without standard charges. Mr. Lemass Mr. Lemass Mr. Lemass: If the Minister is not at all sure that we would not be better off without standard charges, I want to know what action his Department is taking in the matter. Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan: The Department appears before the Railway Tribunal every time it sits. Mr. Moore Mr. Moore Mr. Moore: What has the Railway Tribunal been doing while they have been waiting for the decision of the High Court on the appeal case? Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan: Obviously they had to wait for the decision. The Railway Tribunal cannot proceed to decide matters which are sub judice on appeal. Mr. Moore Mr. Moore Mr. Moore: Have they been unemployed during that time? Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan: To that extent, yes, but they were thinking of matters that will come before them afterwards. Mr. Moore Mr. Moore Mr. Moore: They were not drawing unemployment benefit? Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan: No, it does not extend to them. Mr. Corish Mr. Corish Mr. Corish: That is not an insurable occupation. Mr. Davin Mr. Davin 2004 Mr. Davin: Can the Minister say what reduction, if any, he hopes to effect in the amount provided under Sub-head A following the passing of [2004] the Bill which is now before the House giving him power to reduce, if he considers it necessary, the number of members on the Railway Tribunal? Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan Mr. McGilligan: That is highly speculative. If the Tribunal was reduced so that it would consist only of the Chairman, obviously his salary would be only £2,000, and the other two salaries, amounting to £3,000, would be dropped. Incidentally the expenses of the Tribunal would drop more or less in the same proportion, as also would the salaries of the clerical staff and shorthand typists. The registrar would still have to remain. Vote put and agreed to. Dáil Éireann 30 In Committee on Finance. Vote No. 58.—Railway Tribunal. General Debate 19290627
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
