Constitution is a salary-free zone

We have been repeatedly reminded that the 2008 financial meltdown has resulted in the worst economic crisis since the foundation of the state.

That being so, how is it that the political leaders of all parties have not reflected this position in their salaries and allowances?

This discrepancy prompted a look at our constitution for some guidance. Puzzlingly, the Constitution makes no mention of salaries whatever. However, It does use such words as ‘emolument’ and ‘remuneration’.

Article 15.15 makes provision for the “payment of allowances to the members of each House thereof in respect of their duties as public representatives and for the grant to them of free travelling and such other facilities (if any) in connection with those duties as the Oireachtas may determine”. The foregoing article was codified by an Act of the Oireachtas in 1938.

The Oireachtas (Allowances to Members) Act, 1938, specified that “the salary for the time being payable to any member of the Oireachtas by virtue of his holding any appointed office shall be deemed to include the allowance to such member under this Act, and accordingly no member of the Oireachtas shall, while he is in receipt of a salary of any such office, be entitled to any further allowance under this Act.” I have yet to see where this part of the Act has been rescinded. There have been a number of amendments over the years but these have principally been matters detailing increases in salaries andallowances.

The Report of the Constitution Review Group of May 1996, recommended that Article 15.15 of the Constitution be amended by dropping the word ‘the’ preceding ‘payment’ and the words ‘of allowances’. The purpose was to clarify that this section of the Constitution, “relates not simply to expenses but to the total emolument of Deputies”. ! Clearly the review group anticipated a problem with the notion that the membership of both houses receive both salaries and allowances.

Of all the amendments to the (Allowances to Members) Act, 1938, the most significant, I believe, has been Number 33 of 2001. In this, Section 2 of the 1938 Act is amended by substituting ‘salary’ for ‘allowance’. Could this be an effective amendment of the constitution without a referendum? After all, the original Act reflects the constitutional word ‘allowance’ and now we have on statute the word ‘salary’.

Michael Power

Glounthaune

Cork