I beg to move the Second Reading of the Local Elections Postponement Bill, 1925. It is a short emergency Bill, and it has been necessitated by the number of Postponement of Elections Acts we had during the last few years. The first, the Principal Act, was in 1922. At the time that that Act was passed the local elections were due to be held in January and June, 1923. At that time the register was not complete, and it was considered advisable to wait until we had the new register. As it was believed at that time that the elections would be held very soon, it was considered advisable that we should retain the ordinary triennial sequence for the periods of holding office, which ran, 1920, 1923, and 1926, and accordingly Section 7 of the Act of 1922 provided that the date from which the period of office should begin should be the same as if that Act had not been passed. As we know, it became necessary to postpone these elections for a much longer period than was originally anticipated. They were not held until last June, and we are now faced with the position, as a result of that, that the period of office of the elected bodies will conclude in January and June of next year unless a Bill of this kind is passed. It accordingly becomes necessary to pass this Bill before next January. The Bill also affects the election of mayors.
SHOP HOURS (DRAPERY TRADES, DUBLIN AND DISTRICTS) (AMENDMENT) BILL. - LOCAL ELECTIONS POSTPONEMENT BILL, 1925—SECOND STAGE.
When will the next stage be taken?
As this is an emergency Bill I would ask to have the Committee Stage put down for next Tuesday, and I now give notice of my intention to move for leave to suspend the Standing Orders to take the remaining stages on that day.
The Minister, of course, has his power under the rules, but to treat a Bill of this kind at this stage as an emergency Bill and rush it through will be opposed to the utmost. The question of the principle involved has more or less been let slide. I am not sure that it was wise to do that, but give us the time that is necessary to consider the Bill in proper relation to the facts of the case. There may be a good many communities affected by the proposal, and I think we must ask the Minister to give us the ordinary time that the rules of the Dáil allow for a Bill of this kind. The Minister, surely, foresaw the necessity. We had one week's adjournment he will remember, when there was no business. Here was a Bill, surely, that should have been introduced at that time, and he should not come now and say that this is an emergency Bill that must be rushed. I tell the Minister that I shall endeavour to prevent the passing of this emergency measure.
Am I to understand from the Minister that if this Bill is not passed before January the ordinary municipal elections should be held again in January, although they had been held last June?
Yes.
There are a number of things that I would like to say on this matter. I would like to know if it is the Minister's intention to hold future elections in June, because I am of the opinion that it would be far better to have the municipal elections in the winter months. I believe that the Minister would get better results and get more people to vote then, because in June a great many people go on holidays, and voting then does not give you a true reflex of the situation. It is entirely different in the case of rural elections, and I would ask the Minister to consider that aspect and to try to get us back to the old system, at least as far as municipal elections are concerned.
These questions will come up on another stage.
The Bill has nothing to do with the date of the holding of the elections at all. I quite agree with Deputy Corish that the dates, both for county council and urban elections, are unsuitable. I would be inclined to think that October would perhaps be more suitable for both, but that question does not arise on this Bill, which is merely to provide machinery to prevent the holding of Local Government elections in January when they had been held in June, and which otherwise would be placing us in a ridiculous position. As regards Deputy Johnson's attitude I think it is rather indefensible. I am giving ample notice——
A discussion on that matter is not in order at the moment.