I move Article 24:—"The Parliament/Oireachtas shall hold at least one session each year. The Parliament/Oireachtas shall be summoned and dissolved by the Representative of the Crown in the name of the King, and subject as aforesaid the Chamber/Dail Eireann shall fix the date of re-assembly of the Parliament/ Oireachtas and the date of the conclusion of the session of each House, provided that the sessions of the Senate/ Seanad Eireann shall not be concluded without its own consent." The principle of this Article affects the manner in which Parliament shall be summoned and dissolved. It was understood that the procedure as in Canada and the other Dominions be adhered to, but if the Deputies will consider the thing carefully they will find that the power of the Crown is reduced to what most of us would desire it to be reduced to, that is the irreducible minimum. Parliament itself fixes the date of its assembly. It is stated in Article 27 that Dail Eireann may not at any time be dissolved except at the advice of the Executive Council. So the Representative of the Crown is simply used as a vehicle for summoning Parliament, and in fact Parliament itself fixes its date of re-assembly, and the Executive Council fixes the date of its dissolution.
CONSTITUTION OF SAORSTAT EIREANN BILL (COMMITTEE). - ARTICLE 24.
Mr. KEVIN O'HIGGINS
Mr. THOMAS JOHNSON
There is nothing in the transitory clause which suggests that the Parliament shall assemble. It speaks of the fixing of the date of re-assembling. You desire that there should be a fixing of the date of assembly in the first instance. How is that to be fixed? It is a small matter, of course.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
I cannot give you an answer to that offhand. I have read Article 27, and it meets at least one of the amendments.
Mr. GAVAN DUFFY
Not altogether.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
At any rate I formally move that Article 24 stands part of the Bill.
Mr. P. GAFFNEY
I move to delete the words beginning "The Parliament" on line 2 to "aforesaid" on line 4. I do not think it is necessary for me to say very much on this. It speaks for itself. I think if it were permissible instead of having a representative of the Crown we would instead include that the Speaker should have the right of fixing the date of the re-assembling of Parliament and the dissolution of it. Of course that might be delegated from the Crown to the Speaker. I do not see the necessity for that part being retained in it, since it says in Article 27 that the Parliament cannot be dissolved except on the advice of the Executive Council. I think it is hardly necessary for it to be there at all.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
The answer to that amendment is Article 2 of the Treaty: "Subject to the provisions hereinafter set out the position of the Irish Free State in relation to the Imperial Parliament and Government and otherwise shall be that of the Dominion of Canada, and the law, practice and constitutional usage governing the relationship of the Crown and of the Imperial Parliament to the Dominion of Canada shall govern their relationship to the Irish Free State."
Mr. GAFFNEY
If it is on the Canadian lines the oath is different.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
Yes, it is explicitly provided that it be different in the Treaty.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
This is one of the tied Articles. This is a case where our hands are tied by the obligations of the Treaty. At an earlier stage Deputy Magennis with an elephantine humour quoted a poem indicating that I might be like the Vicar of Bray. I can assure him I was not a member of the last Dáil. It might apply to him. These are their processes that evolve from and follow on the obligations of the Treaty. It is unnecessary to say that no one likes any of these in so far as they are involved in the Treaty. It is necessary we should accept them. We should proceed rather to improve the machinery of the Constitution than run into conflict in these matters to which I think we are all more or less committed.
Amendment put. The Dáil divided: Tá, 8; Níl, 56.
|
Tá. |
Níl. |
|
Pádraig Ó Gamhna.Tomás Mac Eóin.Liam Ó Briain.Tomás Ó Conaill.Aodh Ó Cúlacháin.Seán Ó Laidhin.Cathal Ó Seanáin.Domhnall Ó Ceallacháin. |
Liam T. Mac Cosgair.Donchadh Ó Gúaire.Úaitear Mac Cúmhaill.Seán Ó Maolruaidh.Seán Ó Duinnín.Micheál Ó hAonghusa.Domhnall Ó Mocháin.Seán Ó hAodha.Tomás de Nógla.Riobard Ó Deaghaidh.Séamus Breathnach.Peadar Mac a' Bhaird.Darghal Figes.Seán Ó Ruanaidh.Micheál de Duram.Ailfrid Ó Broin.Seán Mac Garaidh.Pilib Mac Cosgair.Micheál de Staineas.Domhnall Mac Cartaigh.Maolmhuire Mac Eochadha.Earnán Altún.Sir Séamus Craig.Liam Thrift.Eoin Mac Néill.Seoirse Mac Niocaill.Piaras Béasalí.Séamus Ó Cruadhlaoich.Criostóir Ó Broin.Risteard Mac Liam.Caoimhghin O hUigin.Tomás Mac Artuir.Séamus Ó Doláin.Aindriu Ó Laimhín.Risteard Ó hAodha.Proinsias Mac Aonghusa.Eamon Ó Dúgáin.Peadar Ó hAodha.Séamus Ó Murchadha.Seosamh Mac Giolla Bhríghde.Liam Mac Sioghaird.Earnán de Blaghd.Seán Buitléir.Domhnall Ó Broin.Séamus de Burca.Micheál Ó Dubhghaill. |
Mr. G. GAVAN DUFFY
I propose to insert in the second paragraph "that Parliament shall be summoned and dissolved on the advice of the Executive Council." I am aware that the dissolution is covered by Section 27, but the summoning is not, and I fancy this would be accepted generally. It is better to get the expression "on the advice of the Executive Council" in here in Article 24, where you deal both with summoning and dissolution. We said in the Treaty we were going to do everything according to the law, practice and Constitutional usage of these Dominions. You have got the law, but not the Constitutional usage down here. All I ask is that that be put in. It seems to me that that should come in here, and we should delete the paragraph in Article 27. I take it the thing will be agreed to. I may say that, consequential on this amendment, I have an amendment proposing to leave out so much of Article 27 as would be made unnecessary by the accepting of this amendment.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
There are certain confusions in this matter as I looked into it now which, in view of what Deputy Gavan Duffy said, I would like to bring before the attention of the Minister for Home Affairs, because I am sure that it would not be wise to let this go further. As stated here, unless the confusion be perpetuated, Parliament shall be summoned and dissolved by the Representative of the Crown, etc., but Parliament is not dissolved seeing that the Senate is a continuing body that is never dissolved. The Senate cannot be dissolved; it is only the Chamber of Deputies. Therefore, I think this is, strictly speaking, an inaccuracy.
Mr. G. GAVAN DUFFY
I do not think so; the Senate as a Senate continues, but Parliament as a Parliament is dissolved.
Mr. THOMAS JOHNSON
I would say the same thing about the King. You are not dissolving the King.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
I think it might be better not to put that Article at all, and wo will reconsider it. You see we don't want to accept amendments hastily. If an Article as drawn up is faulty, as Deputy Darrell Figgis has pointed out, then the amendment accepted here might lead us into fresh complications. We would undertake to reconsider Article 24, and see to what extent proposals can be embodied in the new Article.
Mr. GAVAN DUFFY
If the Ministers want time to reconsider it, I do not want to rush it. Now, I take it, the matter can be brought up at the next reading.
AN LEAS-CEANN COMHAIRLE
Do you withdraw it?
Mr. GAVAN DUFFY
On that understanding the amendment is withdrawn.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
I just throw this out as a suggestion, that possibly the bulk of the last sentences might come out altogether, and be made applicable to the Chamber of Deputies, and be embodied with Article 27, forming a new Article as dealing with the whole question of dissolutioning and summoning in respect of the Chamber of Deputies to which it would more particularly apply. My amendment is to form a new Article between Article 24 and Article 25. The amendment I move now is No. 9 on the Order Paper. It is, to add the following after Article 24:—"If the Oireachtas is not in session, the Chairman of the Chamber/Dáil Eireann, or in his absence the Vice-Chairman, shall, on a requisition of at least two-fifths of the members of the Dáil summon it within fourteen days of the receipt of such requisition, and the Chairman of the Senate shall, upon notice of such requisition from the Chairman of the Dáil, summon the Senate in like manner and for the same date."
Mr. O'HIGGINS
Article 24 could be formally put subject to the undertaking that we will consider it, and bring it up again. If Article 24 is formally put, that would enable Deputy Figgis to go ahead with his amendment.
Article 24 agreed to and added to the Bill.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
The amendment I move now is the one I have just read for you. My intention was that it should form a new Article altogether. It is unncessary for me to speak many words in explanation of it. Abundant opportunities occur, and have occurred in all countries, and have occurred in this country, and will occur in this country, where urgent matters will arise that will require attention at the time when Parliament will not be actually in session, and on such an occasion the Chamber or the majority of the members might wish to meet so as to decide matters of public importance. Such a case is occurring in a country not far from this country at present, where democratic members of Parliament are desirous, and urgently moving in the Press, in order that they should be convened together to consider vital issues—war and peace. If such an Article were in the Constitution of this country it would not be necessary for them to urge in the public Press that Parliament be summoned. They would be able at once on getting the signatures of two-fifths of the members of the democratic House to requisition a meeting and they would automatically meet. And in the particular case to which I am referring it might happen that war would be actually prevented where war could be prevented, and it is right, I think, that if they do desire they could have some process at their disposal by which they could meet or cause themselves to be called together to discuss issues of public importance, and take the conduct of public affairs into their hands, at such moments especially in view of the fact that the members of this democratic House were elected for the specific purpose of looking after issues of this kind even rather than the ordinary items of legislation.
Mr. BLYTHE
This amendment will not be accepted. There are two things against it. One more of substance, the other rather a technical thing. The Dáil will dissolve, and if the main provisions of Article 24 stand the Dáil itself will fix the date of the re-assembly. That is, the majority of the Dáil will fix the date of re-assembly. Now it is not desirable that the minority of the Dáil should be enabled to overrule the decision of the majority as to when the Dáil should re-assemble and cause it to come together at an earlier date. That is one reason which makes the amendment as it stands unacceptable. The other is a technical but a genuine difficulty. The part of Article 24 which must stand is that part which says that the Parliament/Oireachtas shall be summoned and dissolved by the representative of the Crown. Now we could not accept the amendment which said that Parliament could be summoned by the Chairman, nor would it be desirable that we should say that it should be summoned by the representative of the Crown at the demand of the Chairman, who shall have received a requisition from a certain number of members. If the representative of the Crown is to act as he must act in this matter, because that is one of the provisions in the Constitution which the Government regard as vital to the Treaty—if the representative of the Crown is to do this act he must only do it on the advice of the Executive Council, and we cannot agree to any provision which would have him act otherwise than on the advice of the Executive Council. These are the two reasons why the amendment is unacceptable.
Mr. THOMAS JOHNSON
I think there is a little misapprehension on the last argument. I take it that the amendment refers not to a period between the dissolution and the re-election, but between session and session, and I do not think it is customary in other Assemblies in any country that on an adjournment from one session to another there should be a formal calling together by the Crown. Conceivably this Dáil, or any Dáil, may adjourn for three months, and it would not have to be summoned again even under this Constitution by the Representative of the Crown. The Parliament is being summoned by the Representative of the Crown, but the Dáil itself fixes the date as between session and session of that Parliament. The second argument, I think, of the Minister does not apply. I think the oath is stronger, and I think it important to us to say that the minority ought not to overrule the will of the majority in a matter of this kind. But yet, I think, provision should be made for a sufficient number of members to be able to bring pressure—to be effective enough —to call the Dáil together in certain circumstances. I think it is worth considering. Perhaps the Ministry would do so in a kind of formal way that might be acceptable to them. In regard to assembling at an earlier date than that decided in circumstances which are perhaps different, we might decide to adjourn for a month, and yet circumstances may arise within a fortnight which will call for an earlier meeting. What is the machinery? Is it the fiat of the Ministry, of the President or Ceann Comhairle, or any number of individual members, to call for re-assembly on an earlier date than what was decided? It is desirable some machinery of that kind should be set up.
Professor MAGENNIS
Is it the intention of Deputy Figgis to provide a sort of offshoot from the initiative and referendum? It struck me his reference to the democratic Constitution savoured somewhat of such a purpose, especially as he refers to what is going on in a neighbouring island, where you have a Press campaign instituted to force the hands of the Ministry to have a meeting of Parliament in order to give the members of the House of Commons an opportunity of cross-examining the Prime Minister, and forcing a certain change of policy. If I understood Deputy Figgis aright his idea is to graft the initiative and referendum in an indirect sort of way upon the re-assembling of Parliament. In other words, if an agitation can be got up in the newspapers, and the Ministry can be hammered sufficiently hard, and continuously in the papers, it shall be in the power of a limited number of the members of the House to force a session although the Ministry, thinking it desirable to escape criticism, on the policy they intended to pursue—striving not to expose their hands, so to speak, in public, or explain why they were doing what they were doing, would be obliged to come out in the open and have their whole policy circumstantially discussed. I think, if that is the purpose, and I have interpreted him rightly, this Dáil ought to join with the Minister for Local Government in rejecting the amendment.
CATHAL O'SHANNON
I think the confusion has arisen really owing to a difference over the sense of the wording of the amendment. Obviously, the Article as it stands summoning and dissolutioning Parliament refers to the beginning and ending of Parliament. According to the Constitution Parliament lasts four years, unless it is dissolved before the end of the four years. In Article 27, for instance, it is laid down that the Chamber shall meet within one month of such date, being the election date for that meeting. Article 24 would require that the summoning would be done by a representative of the Crown, and I think in Deputy Darrell Figgis's amendment his summoning is really a calling together for a session, and not actually the summoning of the Parliament at all—a calling together and re-assembling for a Session. I agree with Deputy Johnson that while the minority should not have the right to override the rights of the majority, yet a considerable body of the House or Chamber that wants to have a say on a big question, ought to be able to get it. The difficulty would be how exactly to get it. Take, for instance, the present Dáil. Of course it is not a normal one, but two-fifths. I think, would be 42 Teachtaí, and that is almost, if not quite, half those who attend the Dáil—certainly one-half of those who attend regularly. As a matter of fact you could have a majority on that. There is another thing in Article 24, the majority of the Deputies in the Parliament or Chamber can fix the date to re-assemble. That is the date of the new Session inside 4 years. If I understand the amendment rightly, what Deputy Darrell Figgis wants is that if some vital thing, a threat of war, or something like that, comes in between the date— before the date fixed by the majority— that a reasonable number of Teachtaí would be in a position to call for the re-assembly of the Chamber.
Mr. BLYTHE
I think the amendment in effect, though not, I am sure in intention, is designed to meet a contingency which will never arise. I can assure Deputy Figgis and every one of the other Deputies, as a member of a Government which had to take a big responsibility, that no Government, no democratic Government, will ever refuse to share responsibility with the Parliament, and I think it is clear—it must be clear to everyone—that it would be undesirable to give the minority of the Dáil power to bring it together. If we were to pass this clause and put three-fifths instead of two-fifths, then it is quite an unnecessary thing. If it is possible to call the Parliament, unless there are overriding reasons for not calling it, no Government which had even a suspicion that the majority of the Dáil wanted a re-assembly would refuse to call them together. It is harking back to past ages to have in our minds continually the idea that Governments, or that any ordinary Government, in these days will desire to do something which the majority of Parliament would not sanction—a responsibility in which the Government has the power in any emergency will always be sufficient without adding to it the knowledge that what it is doing would be disproved by Parliament if only it could meet. The whole thing seems to me to be based on a conception of things which have very little relation to realities in the present circumstances. I do not know whether it is prompted by anything that happened in the recent past, but if it is then I would be more firmly against it than before. I think there is no man in his senses will doubt that it would have been very undesirable if any small crowd could have called the Parliament together a month or two ago. I believe, and I suppose I need hardly go into it, but I believe if the minority of the Dáil could have succeeded in forcing the meeting of Parliament that the resistance of the Irregulars would have been doubled, that the amount of bloodshed which these operations will cause would have been greatly increased. It seems to me, as I say, that it is designed to meet a contingency that will not arise. A contingency of a Government wilfully and needlessly refusing to summon Parliament to share with it responsibility which might be thrust upon it by some sudden emergency.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
Would it be possible, and I say it in all friendliness, to get away from the tendency to interpret everything that is put forward for the bettering of this fundamental law of the Constitution as the fundamental law from the point of view of the present Ministry and from the point of view of the present circumstances? It is not the present Ministry I am thinking of at all or the present circumstances. The present Ministry I am quite willing to regard from the point of view of this Constitution—and I say it in anticipation—as the most ideal Ministry that ever served in this world—so long as we can get away from the fact that amendments that are made to this instrument, are not made from the point of view of any criticism at all, but merely as bringing in some protections that are right for the Constitution to have. It is not prompted by any bias, because it was drafted in this form a great deal earlier than the circumstances to which the Minister has referred arose. I assure Ministers that my only desire in this matter is to try to prevent some further evil occurring, which is to-day occurring in different parts of the world, and an evil which, unless prevented, is going to create trouble, as I believe, for the future of this Dáil. I need not say, also, that the Initiative and Referendum have nothing to do with it. The Initiative and Referendum are what apply to the people, and this is what applies to the Deputies. The second part of the argument brought forward by the Minister for Local Government was dealt with by Deputy Johnson. In moving this amendment I have not in mind at all the ordinary dissolution, but merely adjournments from time to time. Assemblies are in the habit of adjourning for two or three months. Circumstances are equally in the habit of arising, sometimes before they re-assemble, that should require their attention, and although it may be true that four Ministries out of five in such assemblies would be glad to meet those to whom they are responsible, it is the fifth that we have to protect ourselves against. As for the minority, I only wish to say this, that when I put in the words two-fifth, I was not thinking of two-fifth as a minority of five-fifth, but as two-fifth as a sufficiently difficult number to try to get signatures from, to get back. I am quite prepared to say they should be a majority, but I think it is the right of the Legislature to reconvene itself when it requires, and I am quite willing, if the amendment can be accepted, instead of the word "summoned"—to meet Deputy O'Shannon's criticism—to put the word "convened." I think this is an article it would be right to have in a Constitution. It would be helpful. When a Ministry was acting in a responsible way, it would not come into operation; if it desired to act in an irresponsible way, it would come into operation.
Tá
- Pádraig Ó Gamhna.
- Tomás de Nogla.
- Riobard Ó Deaghaidh.
- Darghal Figes.
- Tomás Mac Eoin.
- Ailfrid Ó Broin.
- Liam Ó Briain.
- Tomás Ó Conaill.
- Seán Ó Laidhin.
- Cathal Ó Seanáin.
- Seán Buitléir.
- Domhnall Ó Muirgheasa.
- Risteard Mac Fheorais.
- Domhnall Ó Ceallacháin.
Níl
- Liam T. Mac Cosgair.
- Uaitear Mac Cúmhaill.
- Seán Ó Maolruaidh.
- Domhnall Ó Mocháin.
- Seán Ó hAodha.
- Liam de Róiste.
- Peadar Mac a' Bháird.
- Deasmhumhain Mac Gearailt.
- Seán Ó Rúanaidh.
- Micheál de Duram.
- Seán Mac Garaidh.
- Pilib Mac Cosgair.
- Micheál de Staineas.
- Domhnall Mac Cartaigh.
- Earnán Altún.
- Sir Séamus Craig.
- Gearóid Mac Giobuin.
- Liam Thrift.
- Seoirse Mac Niocaill.
- Piaras Béaslaí.
- Séamus Ó Cruadhlaoich.
- Criostóir Ó Broin.
- Ristéard Mac Liam.
- Caoimhghín Ó hUigín.
- Tomás Mac Artúir.
- Séamus Ó Dóláin.
- Aindriú Ó Laimhín.
- Ristéard Ó hAodha.
- Proinsias Mag Aonghusa.
- Éamon Ó Dúgáin.
- Peadar Ó hAodha.
- Séamus Ó Murchadha.
- Liam Mac Sioghaird.
- Éarnan de Blaghd.
- Domhnall Ó Broin.
- Séamus de Burca.
- Micheál Ó Dúbhghaill.
|
Tá. |
Níl. |
|
Pádraig Ó Gamhna.Tomás de Nogla.Riobard Ó Deaghaidh.Darghal Figes.Tomás Mac Eoin.Ailfrid Ó Broin.Liam Ó Briain.Tomás Ó Conaill.Seán Ó Laidhin.Cathal Ó Seanáin.Seán Buitléir.Domhnall Ó Muirgheasa.Risteard Mac Fheorais.Domhnall Ó Ceallacháin. |
Liam T. Mac Cosgair.Uaitear Mac Cúmhaill.Seán Ó Maolruaidh.Domhnall Ó Mocháin.Seán Ó hAodha.Liam de Róiste.Peadar Mac a' Bháird.Deasmhumhain Mac Gearailt.Seán Ó Rúanaidh.Micheál de Duram.Seán Mac Garaidh.Pilib Mac Cosgair.Micheál de Staineas.Domhnall Mac Cartaigh.Earnán Altún.Sir Séamus Craig.Gearóid Mac Giobuin.Liam Thrift.Seoirse Mac Niocaill.Piaras Béaslaí.Séamus Ó Cruadhlaoich.Criostóir Ó Broin.Ristéard Mac Liam.Caoimhghín Ó hUigín.Tomás Mac Artúir.Séamus Ó Dóláin.Aindriú Ó Laimhín.Ristéard Ó hAodha.Proinsias Mag Aonghusa.Éamon Ó Dúgáin.Peadar Ó hAodha.Séamus Ó Murchadha.Liam Mac Sioghaird.Éarnan de Blaghd.Domhnall Ó Broin.Séamus de Burca.Micheál Ó Dúbhghaill. |