Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 26 May 1925

Vol. 11 No. 20

ORDER OF BUSINESS.

The PRESIDENT

As to the order of business, I propose that No. 1 (Dundalk Harbour and Port Bill, 1925 —Report) be not taken to-day, but that it be taken on Tuesday of next week. As regards the other items, No. 2 will be taken first, No. 3 second, No. 4 third, No. 5 fourth, and No. 6 fifth, I apologise to Deputies who made inquiries as regards Item No 7 (Industrial and Commercial Property (Protection) Bill, 1925—Second Stage) for not taking it next. I propose to take item No. 11 as the sixth item. Item No. 7 will be taken as item 7, and so on for the remainder.

I beg to move that the House sit later than 8.30 p.m., and that the motion for the adjournment be taken not later than 10.30 p.m.

MINISTER for DEFENCE (Mr. Hughes)

In view of the importance of item No. 1 (Dundalk Harbour and Port Bill), will the Minister say if it will be taken definitely this day week? The reason I ask the question is that there are a good many interests involved, and if it were not taken on this day week it would probably necessitate a postponement of the work for twelve months.

Mr. GOOD

Before the President replies, I would like to remind him that Tuesday next will come, so to speak, within the Whitsuntide holidays. If it is proposed that the House should sit on that day, it may not be convenient for a good many Deputies to attend, and in these circumstances the President, perhaps, would agree not to take this Bill until to-morrow week (Wednesday).

The PRESIDENT

I hope that their sense of duty will bring all Deputies here on this day week. As regards the question asked by the Minister for Defence, I may say that we have strong hopes that we will be able to take the Bill this day week.

Mr. JOHNSON

Can the President say whether there are any imperative reasons why the Bill should not be taken to-day? I understand the conflict of interests is not a very great one, and that if the Bill were taken now it might be possible to pass it within twenty minutes or half-an-hour.

The PRESIDENT

It has been found necessary to examine the Bill very carefully. There was one certain danger to obviate in connection with which I gave notice of an amendment myself, and there are other parts of the Bill that still require examination. In the meantime, I will see whether it may not be possible to put the Bill down for Friday.

Mr. HUGHES

I should say that there is practically only one amendment down which will create any discussion at all. The remainder of the amendments are practically all agreed ones. I am speaking for the promoters when I say that there is only one amendment, perhaps, which may not be accepted without a division.

The PRESIDENT

I would be willing to put the Bill down for Friday, but I could not promise to take it on that day.

Mr. GOOD

If the Bill cannot be taken on Friday, will the President undertake not to put it down for Tuesday as there are many Deputies who may not be able to attend that day. I suggest that it be taken instead on Wednesday.

The PRESIDENT

I agree to that.

Mr. JOHNSON

That raises the question of the agreement already arrived at as regards Wednesdays and Thursdays being devoted to finance.

The PRESIDENT

I do not think this Bill will take more than half-an-hour. In that case, I would have to waive the request I made, that the House would not sit late on Wednesday of this week or Wednesday of next week.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

Can the President tell us whether he thinks it likely that we will be able to reach item No. 7 on the Orders of the Day for this day's sitting? It is an item with which we have been threatened for about three weeks. There are one or two items which arise on it of which, I think, Deputies would like to have some notice.

The PRESIDENT

That is a question, I think, that might more reasonably be put to other Deputies than to myself. I do not think that I delay the business here to any unreasonable extent.

Question—"That the House sit later than 8.30, and not later than 10.30"— put and agreed to.