In reference to this motion, since our discussions yesterday I have had consultation with certain members of the House. There seems to be a general desire that as much latitude as possible should be given to the discussion of this Bill. For that reason, I am asking the permission of the House to defer consideration of this motion until to-morrow. If that permission is given, and if it is necessary to move the motion to-morrow, then I may have to ask the permission of the House to modify it to meet the circumstances that will then arise. I, therefore, ask that the motion be postponed until to-morrow.
Juries (Protection) Bill—Allocation of Time Motion.
The following motion appeared on the Order Paper in the name of Senator Milroy:—
"That, during the Committee Stage of the Juries (Protection) Bill, 1929, the time given to the consideration of the following sections or groups of sections shall be as follows:—Sections 1-4, 1½ hours; Section 5, 3 hours; Sections 6-7, 1 hour; Section 8, ½ hour; Sections 9-13, 1 hour."
Do I understand that what is intended is that the motion is to be kept over as a sort of guillotine to come down whenever the Senator chooses to bring it down, or is it suggested that it be withdrawn?
Cathaoirleach
Permission has been asked to postpone the motion until to-morrow.
I do not think that is satisfactory.
Cathaoirleach
I will take the opinion of the House, whether permission is given to hold over the motion until to-morrow.
I suggest to Senator Milroy that it might be better if he withdrew the motion altogether. That, I think, might help to improve the feeling in the House. We are all very much against having to closure a debate on an important measure like this if it can possibly be helped. We can go on sitting until 7.30 this evening and, if necessary, with an interval, could sit late to-night and start again to-morrow morning. There is a motion down to sit at twelve o'clock to-morrow. I think it would be in the interests of the House that the motion should be withdrawn altogether. If that were done it is probable that we would get through more business to-day.
Cathaoirleach
I would like to know from Senator Milroy if he is prepared to ask the permission of the House to withdraw his motion.
I am not adamant on this matter, but at the same time I recognise that while we spent five hours on this Bill yesterday we disposed of only twelve amendments. Amongst a certain section of the House there is no indication of a desire to expedite business on the Bill. In some cases divisions were called for which seemed to me to be unnecessary. There are 74 amendments, and so far only twelve of them have been disposed of. If the same rate of progress is to be made on the remaining amendments, it means that the Committee Stage of this Bill is going to occupy at least a week. I ask, is that reasonable. The retention of this motion on the Order Paper in no way interferes with the freedom of discussion, and I think that as a precaution against certain contingencies it ought to be retained. However, as I have said, I am not adamant on the matter, and if it is the wish of the House that it should be withdrawn I am quite prepared to accede to that request. At the same time I do so with a certain amount of reluctance, because I see the possibility of an unnecessarily protracted discussion on the Bill.
I suggest that if the motion is withdrawn that we are really not going to lose time by doing so. If the motion had to be moved to-morrow, it is probable that two hours would be lost in debating it. I think it is better that we should proceed with the discussion of the amendments that are really important. I think Senators will see that some of the amendments that are down are merely repetitions. If the course that I suggest is followed, then we will have practically no debate on the Report Stage of the Bill, because all the important amendments will have been discussed now, and in that way no time will really be lost.
Motion by leave withdrawn.