Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 2 Dec 1925

Vol. 13 No. 12

SHOP HOURS (DRAPERY TRADES, DUBLIN AND DISTRICTS) (AMENDMENT) BILL. - REPORT OF THE SESSIONAL COMMITTEE OF SELECTION.

Mr. SEARS

I beg to submit the following report:—

The Committee met on Friday, 27th November, 1925, for the purpose of nominating eleven Deputies to serve on a Special Committee to consider the Shop Hours (Drapery Trades, Dublin and Districts) (Amendment) Bill, 1925.

The Committee made the following nominations which are recommended to the Dáil:— Deputies B.R. Cooper, E. Doherty, Dr. T. Hennessy, T. Johnson, P.J. Mulvany, T. Nagle, J.T. Nolan, B. O'Connor, M. O Conalláin, Mr. Roddy, and W.E. Thrift.

I move the adoption of the report

Mr. GOOD

Might I ask what is the interpretation of Standing Order 63: "Committees shall, as far as possible, be representative of all parties of opinion in the Dáil"? Seeing that a division was taken on this measure on Second Reading, do these words "all parties of opinion" mean parties as represented on that particular division?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I do not think so. The interpretation of the Standing Order is that as far as possible all parties in the Dáil shall be represented on any committee appointed by the Dáil for the consideration of any matter, but it does not mean that when a division is taken on the Second Reading of a Bill the Committee to be appointed shall be in the same proportion as regards the parties as the voting on the Second Reading division.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

Might I suggest with regard to this Bill, which is not a Party measure, but one brought in by a private Deputy, that the ordinary interpretation of the words "parties of opinion" simply as parties as recognised in the House, should not hold, and that there should be some attempt not so grievously to overload the Committee as to have on it eight people who are in favour of the Bill and two who are in opposition?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

That is a question altogether for the House to decide.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

Would it be in order to propose that the Report of the Sessional Committee of Selection be referred back with an instruction that they pay some attention to the Division List and not so much attention to the actual parties as recognised in the Dáil?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

If the Minister would frame an amendment in words to that effect, I would be prepared to consider it.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

Would it be in order to move that the Report be referred back?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Yes.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

I move accordingly.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The question proposed is: "That the Report of the Sessional Committee of Selection be agreed to." The Minister for Industry and Commerce proposes as an amendment: "That the Report of the Sessional Committee of Selection be referred back to the Committee." Does anybody second the amendment?

Mr. GOOD

I beg to second.

Mr. ESMONDE

On what principle is it to be referred back to the Committee of Selection? Are we to give no directions to the Committee?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

A direction can be given if necessary.

Mr. ESMONDE

Surely if Deputy Good had any objection he should have raised that objection when it was proposed that the matter be referred to the Committee of Selection. It is rather late after the Select Committee has been appointed to come along with an objection to it. The objection should have been made at the time the motion was carried.

Mr. GOOD

My objection could not have been made at that stage.

Mr. SEARS

I submit that the point might well have been raised before the Committee of Selection. There was no strong desire to follow the rule at the Committee meeting, and if these representations were made to the Committee I am sure they would have been given effect to.

Mr. GOREY

The only thing that I see wrong with the selection of the Selection Committee is the proportion. The proportion seems to be eight to two.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

Eight to two, and one Deputy who did not vote.

Mr. GOREY

The division disclosed seventeen voting one way and fifty-one voting the other, or three to one, exactly. The Committee works out at four to one, and the only thing that is wrong is the difference between one-third and one-fourth. In other words, it is proposed to send back the Report to the Committee of Selection to make good the difference between one-third and one-fourth.

Professor THRIFT

I think that there is force in the Minister's objection. If you take the point of view of those who would like to make changes in the Bill you will see that their task would be exceedingly difficult if there are only two or three of them, and it is likely that the Bill would get a much better discussion, I do not say if there was an exactly equal division of Deputies, but if the Committee was more representative of those who opposed the Bill.

Major COOPER

With reference to Deputy Gorey's point in regard to the Deputy who did not vote, if I had voted——

Mr. GOOD

It does not refer to you.

Major COOPER

Then there are two who did not vote.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

I made a mistake in the count.

Major COOPER

If I had voted I would have voted against it.

Mr. NOLAN

I wish to say that if it is desired I would give my place on the Committee to some other Deputy, though if I were asked my opinion on the Bill, I would have it repealed.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The proper procedure is to send the report back for re-consideration. If the Chairman of the Committee thinks it will get consideration and it is agreed to send it back, the report will be presented again to-morrow and it will be seen if the objections have been met.

Mr. McGILLIGAN

There is another point which arises apart from this Bill. Undoubtedly I think we may assume that the Standing Order was drafted in view of ordinary legislation and that the parties as recognised in this House, should have a representation on a committee equal to their proportional representation here. This Bill is of a totally different kind. It was brought forward by a member of the Government Party but there was open voting. There was not a single Party which voted as a Party on it. There should be some recognition of that fact, and that recognition should stand as a precedent for future Committees of Selection when they are appointing a Committee on a Bill of a similar type to this.

Amendment put and agreed to.