34. Colonel NEWMANasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether a Chairman of the Shaw Commission has yet been appointed; and is he aware of the feeling that the new Chairman should be, like his predecessor, a gentleman of the highest judicial ability and standing and himself unconnected with Ireland?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREThe answer to the first part of the question is in the negative. In considering the question of a successor to Lord Shaw, I have no doubt that the two Governments will have in 1488 mind the desirability that whoever is asked to accept the appointment should be duly qualified to discharge the duties and responsibilities thereof.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREYes.
35. Colonel NEWMANasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will say how many assessors to assist the Shaw Commission in the rehearing of pre-truce undefended awards have been appointed; by whom have these gentlemen been appointed; are they British subjects or citizens of the Free State; what qualifications is it necessary for them to possess; what is their salary: and do they sit as a sub-commission of the Shaw Commission, or do they merely endeavour to arrange with the holder of the award what sum he should accept to obtain early settlement of the amount due to him?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GORETwenty-seven investigators have been appointed by the Compensation (Ireland) Commission, 17 of whom lived in Ireland at the time of their appointment, the remaining 10 living in Great Britain. Thirteen of them are permanent civil servants who have been seconded for service with the Commission. All except four possess recognised professional or technical qualifications as lawyers, valuers, architects or engineers, and include representatives of the Bar, the Surveyors' Institution, the Royal Institute of Architects and the Institute of Civil Engineers. They have all had practical experience which qualifies them for the position which they hold. Their salaries are at various personal rates. Their duty is to investigate claims and to report thereon to the Commission. In a substantial number of cases they have been able to report cases as agreed with the claimant subject to confirmation by the Commission.
Colonel NEWMANIs it not the fact that they appointed a Sub-Committee to make judicial inquiry, but that they did not hear evidence?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREI believe it is their first duty to try and arrive at agreed facts for settlement and payment; failing that the matter goes before the Commission.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERDo these assessors hear evidence from the claimants that will enable them to arrive at their decision?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREI will look that up.
36. Colonel NEWMANasked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he will inquire into the payments and recommendations for payment;, made by the Shaw Commission and the assessors assisting it in the Granard district of county Longford; whether he is aware that an hotel keeper, whose hotel was burned by forces of the Crown, was awarded by the Commission more than £25,000 of an original decree of £28,000, while in the same district assessors are endeavouring to force those who hold decrees for damage done by republican forces to accept about one-half of the original decree; and will he say by whom were the assessors in question appointed, and are they British or Irish?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREThe Compensation (Ireland) Commission are engaged in circumstances of great difficulty on a responsible and delicate task, and the reports which I have received afford no reason to suppose that they are performing it otherwise than in a judicial manner. Their duty, as laid down in their Warrant of Appointment, is to determine and report what compensation ought in reason and in fairness to be awarded on the merits of each case referred to them, and it would be surprising if in the execution of this duty the variation between their awards and the original decrees were constant. The statements in the second part of the question do not, therefore, seem to me to afford any justification whatever for the insinuation which they appear to convey, namely, that the Commission discriminates between classes of claimants; but if the hon. and gallant Member is dissatisfied on this point, it is of course open to him to bring the facts to my notice in greater detail. In reply to the third part, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to my reply to his previous question.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GORENo. I have said that I do not admit the insinuations.
§ Captain W. BENNBut does the hon. Gentleman admit the facts? If so, will he say what Minister it was that permitted destruction of property valued at £25,000 for which we have to pay?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREI will look into the matter. If hon. Members can bring me further facts I shall be glad to look into them.
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREI will.
§ Mr. J. JONESWill the hon. Gentleman agree to give the victims of the Silvertown explosion similar opportunities?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREThat is not within my Department.
54. Major Sir GEORGE HAMILTONasked the Prime Minister whether a final Report was received from Lord Shaw, regarding compensation for malicious injuries in Ireland, before his resignation of the chairmanship of the Commission; and, if so, whether it will be laid upon the Table?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREI have been asked to answer this question. The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. In reply to the second part, I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the last part of the reply which I gave on 27th November to a question addressed to me by the hon. and gallant Member for Finchley (Colonel Newman).
Sir G. HAMILTONDid Lord Shaw give any reasons for his resignation? Is the House not entitled to know his reasons for resignation, and what were his recommendations?
§ Mr. ORMSBY-GOREI am not aware of the latter fact, but I think that in view of Lord Shaw's services on this Commission it would be rather hard to ask him, unless he wishes to do so, to make a statement as to why he resigned.