Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 26 Nov 1925

Vol. 13 No. 11

POLICY OF THE MINISTER FOR EDUCATION. - PRESIDENT'S MOTION.

Mr. KEVIN O'HIGGINS

The business, sir, will be taken in its order on the Paper. With reference to item No. 3, my own feeling is that it ought be withdrawn from the Order Paper. It scarcely seems useful or proper to proceed with the discussion of the policy of the Minister for Education, when, in fact, there is no Minister for Education. I gathered from the remarks of one Deputy on the last day that a division on the matter was desirable. That would be something better than a continuation of the discussion. Whether there even ought to be a division on this motion, which has no real application in the existing circumstances, is doubtful, unless we were to imagine the division as taking place the last evening when the matter was discussed. Article 53 of the Constitution contains the following:—

The President of the Council shall be appointed on the nomination of Dáil Eireann.... The other Ministers who are to hold office as members of the Executive Council shall be appointed on the nomination of the President with the assent of Dáil Eireann, and he and the Ministers nominated by him shall retire from office should he cease to retain the support of a majority in Dáil Eireann, but the President and such Ministers shall continue to carry on their duties until their successors have been appointed.

That, I think, contemplates the position of a defeat of the Executive Council as a whole. As a Council they would continue to hold office until other persons were appointed to take on administrative responsibilities. The case of one single member of the Executive Council resigning is, I think, different. I should say that the responsibility for education lies, at the moment, wholly within the Executive Council. Whether now in the circumstances it is wise or proper to proceed with a discussion on the motion couched in these terms—

"That the Dáil approves of the policy of the Minister for Education"

is doubtful. If there is a strong view in favour of that course, I would offer no opposition to the taking of a division; but I think a continuance of the discussion would be undesirable. It might be felt that it would be a pity to let so much eloquence go to waste, and that there ought at least be a vote on the matter. If that is the general view, a vote can be taken; but I think there should be no discussion.

Major COOPER

Might I suggest that we could avoid the difficulty which we see and realise, by amending the motion, if the Vice-President would be willing to amend it? I would suggest substituting for the words "policy of the Minister for Education," the words "policy of the Executive Council in regard to Education." The late Minister's responsibility was not an individual responsibility; it was a collective responsibility. The policy pursued by him was, presumably, assented to and concurred in by the Executive Council. I think that would get us out of our difficulty with regard to points of order. I agree that there is no need for a discussion on the motion. If we agree to take a division, and if the motion were amended as I suggest, we could take a division without much further discussion, if the Ceann Comhairle would approve, and if the leave of the Dáil were given.

Mr. JOHNSON

I think the position is that, if this motion is withdrawn and is not brought to issue, it means that the Executive Council is not prepared to proceed with its own motion of confidence in the Ministry of Education: that is to say, the Executive Council, through the voice of its President, proposed a vote of confidence in and approval of the policy of the Minister for Education, and now it is suggesting that it should not proceed with that motion of approval. I do not know whether the implication is that the Executive Council does not approve itself of the policy of the Minister for Education, but I take it that the office continues, even though the person is absent. The debate, as I pointed out yesterday, has been concluded. We are all agreed upon that, but to withdraw the motion of the President now, after discussion, at the suggestion of the Vice-President in respect to the policy of a Minister who was part of the same Council seems to me to be a curious procedure, and that, notwithstanding the curious circumstances, the Ministry is responsible for the policy of the Minister. That question was discussed in all its aspects, and I submit there ought to be an issue and a division taken on the motion.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

The suggestion of Deputy Cooper seems reasonable: that if the resolution could be amended by consent, so as to read, "That the Dáil approves of the policy of the Executive Council in the matter of Education," we could have a division on that.

Mr. GOREY

That is also my view. As the motion reads at present, it is absurd. I do not see how the terms of the motion as it reads on the Order Paper could be applied to the present position at all. There would be some sense in it if it were altered to read in the way Deputy Cooper has suggested, and a division could be taken on that.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I have doubts as to whether the motion, in its present form, could be put from the Chair. Whether we are going to decide on the 26th November, 1925, that we approve or do not approve of the policy of the Minister for Education, when there is no Minister for Education, seems to me very difficult; but if the motion were amended in any way the position would be altered.

Mr. O'HIGGINS

I propose that the motion be amended to read as follows: "That the Dáil approves of the policy of the Executive Council in the matter of Education."

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Is it proposed to take the motion in its amended form when No. 3 on the Order Paper is reached?

Mr. O'HIGGINS

Yes. I take it that it will simply be a question of a vote, and that to continue the discussion would not be useful.

Mr. GOOD

How would that fit in, A Chinn Comhairle, with your decision yesterday as to amendments?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

My decision was a carefully-considered one. I said that I thought the policy of proposing amendments without notice should cease, subject to the power of the Chair to take amendments or motions on the grounds of urgency.

Professor THRIFT

I desire to ask, is there not possibly this objection to the suggestion made by Deputy Cooper that once it is put in that form it immediately becomes a direct vote of confidence or of no confidence in the Executive Council? That may have been implicitly contained in the other motion, but certainly not explicitly. I think that the motion takes a totally different aspect when once it is put in that form.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The same thing is in the motion on the Order Paper.

Professor THRIFT

Implicitly, yes, but not explicitly.

Major COOPER

Does Deputy Thrift contend that a motion of this kind, put forward by the President, is not a vote of confidence?

Professor THRIFT

A vote of confidence in the Executive Council?

Major COOPER

Certainly, when put forward by the President on behalf of the Executive Council.