DOMINION SERVICES. (Hansard, 18 February 1941)

§ Mr. Ammon (Camberwell, North)
As we are passing Votes for millions of pounds without any proper discussion, it is as well to know what money is being expended in regard to this Vote. Am I right in saying that the supplementary sum of £ 10 in this case is not a token Vote, but is actually the amount of the new money required? I note that £ 2,790 is unexpended money on another account, and, therefore, perhaps the hon. Gentleman opposite can give the Committee some information. Will he tell us how it is that the expenditure of this extra money arises? Is not the settlement with the Government of Eire on a fixed basis or is there an understanding whereby it varies according to changes?

§ The Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs (Mr. Shakespeare)
As to the first point raised by my hon. Friend, it is the normal way to devote savings under one sub-head to that which is over-expended on another sub-head, but this compensation is described as a grant-in-aid, and for that reason Parliamentary sanction is necessary before we can spend more than has been authorised. As to the second point, the Committee would like to be reminded perhaps of the history of the matter. When the Irish Free State Government was established by the Treaty of 1921 it took over a large number of transferred civil servants, and the conditions of their pensions on retire- 52 ment were to be the same as the conditions of pensions on retirement of the ordinary civil servants under the United Kingdom Government. That was to be a charge to be met by the new Irish Government to be established. The Committee will remember that a year or two later there was a legal judgment— I need not go into the technicalities of it— by which more generous terms had to be offered to these civil servants, and there was agreement between the two Governments concerned that the Eire Government should meet the standard contribution and the United Kingdom Government the extra compensation which usually arises if there is an increase in the cost of living. In normal years there is a small sum payable in respect of the increased compensation, but in the year ending 31st March this year, when the Estimate was £ 4,200, we require £ 2,800 more, but, as the hon. Gentleman suggests, we are meeting the bulk of this out of savings under another sub-head and are asking Parliament for £ go to regularise the position.

§ Sir Patrick Hannon (Birmingham, Moseley)
I should like to know whether this Supplementary Vote includes the compensation or pensions payable to members of the Royal Irish Constabulary who were discharged or transferred owing to the interchange of Government after the Irish Treaty? If so,] would like to direct the attention of my hon. Friend to the unhappy position of a great many of the retired officers and men of the Royal Irish Constabulary, who have received only very small compensation. I do not know whether I am in Order in raising this point, but if the Supplementary Vote includes the compensation and pensions, I would like to call the attention of the Committee to the fact that the pensions awarded are now wholly inadequate in the circumstances in which these men retired from the service. There is nothing more deplorable in the relations between this country and Eire than the treatment of men who retired from the Royal Irish Constabulary on completion of the Irish Agreement. I would ask whether the consideration of His Majesty's Government could not be given to the unfortunate plight of a great many of these men. They rendered great service to the community in time of great difficulty, and they have not received 53 adequate compensation, retiring allowances or pensions, and many of them are, therefore, in a state of destitution. I would urge my hon. Friend to take such steps as he can not only for the recognition of these services to the country when these men were employed in dangerous work in Ireland, but to include in this Vote or some subsequent Vote some increase in the present remuneration appropriate to the services of these men.

§ Mr. Creech Jones (Shipley)
I would like to put a question to the Minister with regard to savings under this head. Do I gather that, in respect of Newfound land, social progress is being made? We were all considerably alarmed —

§ The Chairman
I would remind the hon. Member that the Committee cannot discuss the question of savings, used as an appropriation in aid, on these Supplementary Estimates.

§ Mr. Shakespeare
This Vote does not apply to the Royal Irish Constabulary but only to the ex-civil servants who retired or elected to retire before 1929.

§ Sir P. Hannon
There are numbers of officers of the Royal Irish Constabulary at that time who were civil servants, and why should they be treated differently from men in other services?

§ The Chairman
I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman has given an answer to the effect that the subject does not come under his Department, and so it cannot be discussed now.