§ No salary or wages shall be payable to any county inspector, district inspector, head constable, sergeant, assistant-sergeant, or constable in the Royal Irish Constabulary, or superintendent, inspector, station-sergeant, sergeant, or constable in the Dublin Metropolitan Police after attaining in any case the age of sixty-five years; but nothing in this Section shall affect the pension rights of any such officers or constables.
§ Clause brought up, and read the first time.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be read a second time."
§ 8.0 P.M.
§ Mr. BYRNEIt is well known to everybody in the House that as matters stand there is no compulsion on the men to retire. But there are certain duties of which men are relieved when they reach a certain age. The men remain in the force, and stand in the way of other men who are waiting for promotion. I may give an instance in the Dublin force, where there are officers at the present moment who, I believe, do not take their turn at night duty on account of the weather, and there- 533 by an injustice is done to other officers who have to undertake an extra part of that duty. These men, I believe, are entitled to their maximum pension, and I suggest that they ought to take it, especially as there are a number of men waiting their turn for promotion. Men who have done long and faithful service in the police force ought in justice to have some opportunities for promotion. As the rule that men should retire at sixty-five is carried out in a number of Government Departments, it should also be extended to the Dublin police, the duties of which force involve bringing men out in all classes of weather, day and night. If men do not take their turn at night duty, then an injustice is done to those who, as a result, have a double share of such duty.
§ Mr. DUKEOn the general principle underlying the observations of the hon. Member I have nothing to complain, but It seems to me that this question of the age at which a man shall retire is very much a matter of administration not subject to hard and fast statutory rules, and it would, on the whole, so far as this Bill is concerned, not be wise to introduce a statutory provision of this kind. Indeed, I do not know what the effect of it would be. I do know that in a general way we do not desire to keep people engaged in the police force on duties which they are not capable of performing, and the cases to which the hon. Gentleman has called my attention shall certainly be looked into.
§ Mr. FLAVINMay I point out, with reference to the right hon. Gentleman's objection to a statutory maximum age of sixty-five years, that the present minimum age for entering into the force is eighteen years and the maximum twenty-five, and if a man joins at the maximum he will at sixty-five have done forty years' active duty. Surely that ought to be sufficient for the average man. He cannot be as capable of doing active duty both day and night for the preservation of peace and the protection of life and property as men of from twenty-five to forty years of age. A man who has put in forty years' active service has done enough, and I therefore have much pleasure in supporting my hon. Friend's proposal. Younger men, more active, and fresher in life, of greater 534 physical development, ought to get opportunities of promotion after a certain period of service, and they should not be debarred by the fact of older men keeping on in the higher positions.
§ Mr. FIELDI do think the promotion aspect should be considered by the right hon. Gentleman. There are lots of young men in the force anxious for promotion who are debarred getting it by the present system.
Mr. NUGENTI should like to point out specially it is well known there are certain men allocated to soft jobs, and these men keep those positions a long time. The Chief Secretary has promised to inquire into the matter, and when he does so he will find that this is one of the chief causes of irritation in the force.
Mr. BOYLEI do not think men over sixty-five years of age should be kept in the force. There are undoubtedly some men who get soft jobs and remain on them until they are almost carried out. One does not like to apply too hard and fast a rule to these matters, but at the same time they do give rise to a great amount of irritation, for these men by being kept so long on these soft jobs spoil the chances of promotion of other men, and at the same time put upon them a larger amount of the heavier duties than they would otherwise be called upon to do. This is a matter for the serious consideration of those who administer the police. They should keep their eye on these things. Of course the Chief Secretary has to get his information from the man at the head of the force, who, in turn, gets it from his subordinates. I am afraid that the time of the Chief Secretary is too much occupied with other matters for him to know who has got these soft jobs at the various police stations in Dublin. I think sixty-five is an age at which a man might reasonably be expected to go to his own corner, rather than keep a soft corner in the police force.
Mr. HAZLETONI should like to ask the Chief Secretary who has promised to further consider this matter if he can give us an assurance that provided on inquiry it is found that a rule similar to this obtains in police forces in Great Britain he will introduce it into Ireland. There is 535 no reason why, if it obtains in England it should not be extended to Ireland, and if the right hon. Gentleman will give us that assurance it will go far to meet the case we have put forward.
§ Mr. DUKEHaving regard to what has been said, especially with regard to the Dublin force, I certainly will make full inquiry into these matters. But I should be very reluctant to introduce into this Bill a provision which might be taken to be directed against some individual persons when the matter could be dealt with by police regulations. The question shall have my attention.
§ Question put, and negatived.