There were three matters raised on the Committee Stage of this Bill to which I promised to have some consideration given. Deputy Johnson, incidental to another matter, raised the question as to how far the details set out in Section 2 had any limiting effect upon the general words which are inserted a preamble to these details. I am informed that there is no such effect. If the section had been set down in the reverse way to which it is—namely, if the details had come first, followed by the particular words—then the particular words would be bound, to a certain extent, by the details, but as it is here the general words retain the most general import that can be given to them, and are in no way limited by the details which follow. Deputy Johnson also raised a question on Section 13, sub-section (1).
PRIVATE BUSINESS. - STATISTICS BILL, 1925—REPORT STAGE.
If the Minister is moving an amendment I think we had better take that first, and then have the general discussion afterwards.
I propose, with the leave of the Dáil, to ask that an amendment might be taken to-day to Section 9, page 4, line 63, before the word "every" at the start of the section, namely, that there should be there inserted the words "notwithstanding any other statutory provision." This is for greater certainty. It is understood that the section, as it stands, does actually over-ride such matters as were brought to my notice since the Committee Stage. In the Dairy Produce Act and the Eggs Act there is a provision that no information given to an officer of the Department of Agriculture shall be revealed to anybody else save in the event of a prosecution. Now I am informed that this section actually over-rides that. To make the matter quite certain, and to put it beyond all doubt, I would like to have these words introduced into the section. It has also a repercussion upon a matter referred to in line 67 as to inspecting and taking copies of records or documents. There are certain documents where it is laid down by statute that a fee must be paid before copies of them can be taken. Again, I am informed that that provision there would over-ride any statutory question about the payment of fees before copies of such documents can be taken. It is suggested that the insertion of these words, which I propose, would put that beyond any shadow of doubt, and, with the leave of the Dáil, I move to insert them. If there is any objection to that course I can bring the matter on at a later stage.
Would the Minister kindly repeat the words of the amendment that he proposes to insert?
I propose to insert the words "notwithstanding any other statutory provision" and that these shall come in before the word "every" which now starts Section 9. That is the only amendment, therefore, I propose to bring in at this stage, if the House is agreeable.
Is there any objection to taking this amendment without notice?
Agreed.
Would the Minister amplify his reasons for dealing with the amendment I proposed to Section 8?
I am going on to deal with that suggestion; it will arise later.
The question before the House now is: "That the Bill, as amended, be received for final consideration."
I have dealt with one point brought forward by Deputy Johnson. In dealing with the second point, referring to Section 13, where the Deputy raised doubts as to whether this was not unduly restrictive, an examination shows that that is not the case. Sub-sections (1) and (2) must be read together. Sub-section (1) indicates that
"Neither any individual schedule, form or other document filled in, or otherwise completed by any person in pursuance of any requisition made under this Act nor any part of any such document shall without the consent of such person be published or, except for the purposes of a prosecution under this Act, be shown or communicated to any person other than an officer of statistics."
That has reference only to the actual returns furnished by the individual. But sub-section (2) reads:
"No report, abstract, summary or other publication made under this Act"—or materials supplied under sub-section (1)—"shall contain the particulars of any information" ... "supplied by any person to any officer of statistics so arranged as to enable any person to identify such particulars as relating to any individual person" and so on.
So there are these distinct words "So far as is reasonably practicable" in regard to any case or series of cases referred to by Depuey Johnson, such as Railway Companies and others concerned. I am informed that the two sub-sections are drafted with that aim. The first prohibits any order in the nature of precise returns made by any individual being published without the consent of the person, and the second provides that no abstract, report or summary shall be made public "so far as is reasonably practicable" containing particulars so as to identify him.
Deputy Cooper, on Section 8, had an amendment, but it was finally left that I should consider, in line 41, whether there should be inserted in the amended Bill the words "and reasonable" after the word "specified." Now the situation is this: I had spoken on the last day of matters analogous to a census. That raises the whole question whether a Census Bill is, in fact, required, provided that this Bill be passed. I put before those concerned Deputy Johnson's view that this Bill had been drafted really for Census purposes. There is a Census Bill actually drafted. It is in an advanced form, not actually the final form, but there is really no necessity to have such a Bill introduced now. Those concerned are definitely clear now that a Census may be taken under this Bill. If it is the case, and if it is proposed, as we would now propose, to have a Census taken under this Bill, my argument is all the greater against having no time specified. I put it to Deputy Cooper that to put in the words "and reasonable" and to leave it to some Court to decide whether the time specified was or was not reasonable, is simply putting a certain amount of impediment in the smooth passage of the Bill, especially if the Deputy takes into consideration that there will be a Controller of Statistics, a highly important officer in the service of the Government, and that he will be assisted by a Statistical Council and that questions with regard to time where unduly limited can be raised here. The Deputy may answer they can only be raised after the event and when the prosecutions have been brought, but, at all events, they can be ventilated here, and there will be the fear of such ventilation before the Controller of Statistics and the Council. I do not think that there is any reason to believe that there will be any mistakes made, or anything unduly oppressive with regard to the time limit.
I am not accordingly, moving to put in the words "and reasonable," and I put it to the Deputy to say that he will accept that. I will put another matter to Deputy Cooper also. He was rather anxious with regard to certain particulars that might be required to be taken in the Census. It may be that if he knew this was to be made use of as a Census Bill, he would have raised a certain number of points on Second Reading. If he presses that, I do not know how I can meet him, except by simply suggesting that he might move a motion with regard to particulars that he would desire to see put in for Census purposes, and we could take a discussion such as would take place upon the Second Reading on these if this were regarded as a Census Bill.
took the Chair.
The Minister has explained very plausibly why he refuses to be reasonable. I am not entirely satisfied with his argument. I do think there is a danger in allowing even the Directors of Statistics, who are supposed to be somewhat inhuman and absorbed in their peculiar studies, to impose penalties on an ordinary man of whose life they have little idea.
As regards the questions that I could raise on Second Reading, I am not worrying about that. I can raise them on the Fifth Stage. I am worried much more, however, about the things I could have raised on the Committee Stage. I think the Minister made it plain that if he had known it was intended to use this Bill instead of a Census Bill, he would have wished to make it clear to the Dáil at an earlier stage. I think it is unfortunate that we had no opportunity of reviewing this Bill in the manner in which we would have reviewed a Census Bill.
For instance, this Bill gives powers, as far as I can see, in order to obtain information form an occupier. The Census Bill gives certain definite powers for ascertaining particulars about people who are travelling at the time the Census is taken. That is to a certain extent an academic point, because there are comparatively few all-night trains in the Saorstát, and there will not be very many travellers inside the area. There are various omissions in this Bill of things that are to be found in Census Bills, and I regret that the Minister did not make his position clear earlier, and I think he regrets it too. I am myself to blame. I ought to know by now not to rely on the possibility that Ministers will bring forward amendments, and I ought to have put down my amendments in reasonable time. I blame myself for my remissness. I do not accept the Minister's reasoning. I think it is the reasoning of the bureaucrat rather than the reasoning of the statesman, but I have no method of challenging it, and I must put up with it.
There are two points. If there are any matters which the Deputy considers vital to the proper discussion of the Census Bill and which he was precluded from discussing, not knowing that the Census was going to be taken under this, I am quite prepared to have this held over, if possible, and recommitted to enable him to discuss the points. But taking the particulars the Deputy has referred to, since the matter was last discussed in the House this Bill has been very definitely under the consideration of the Department of Local Government, who have examined it in the light of things which ordinarily are asked in Census returns here, and they are quite satisfied that everything that used to be asked can be asked under this. I am not sure with regard to the point about travelling. If that is something that in olden times used to be queried, then the Department concerned is satisfied that these questions may be asked.
It was in every previous Census.
I do not expect that the Deputy will take the assurance that I give him second-hand from the Department of Local Government, but they, at any rate, have been assured that they can get any item of information which used to be given when the Census was taken before, under this Bill. If the Deputy wishes to challenge a Division I think I can arrange it for him now. I would ask somebody to insert the words "and reasonable" after the word "satisfied," in line 41. I am sure that the House will agree to let that be moved in order to have a Division on it. I would not move it myself because I do not think it is necessary. But the other matter is more serious. There is no exceptional hurry about this Bill, but in view of the fact that the Census is to be taken under it and that forms will have to be got out, it would be advisable to have it as early as possible, yet although I will urge that the Fifth Stage be taken to-morrow if the Fourth Stage be taken to-day, I am not so much in a hurry that I would not throw the whole matter back for ten days in order to have it further considered in Committee so that we could have Census matters discussed.
The Minister has met us very fairly. The obvious course would be to postpone the Fourth Stage and allow time for amending, but I am inclined to think that there is urgency about the Bill. If we are to take the Census in April this Bill ought to go to the Seanad well before the end of February, having regard to various possibilities that may befall it. I do not suppose they will take place. I am not taking up the attitude that I want to prevent statistics being collected. I do not, and I am most anxious to have full, accurate and detailed statistics on a great many subjects about which we cannot get statistics at present and about which we ought to have figures. Therefore I will not press the Minister to postpone the Fourth Stage. The points at issue can be raised in the Seanad. I can approach certain Senators, and no doubt they will be willing to get the matter more fully discussed there. I accept the assurance that the Department of Local Government consider that they can get any information which was got in any census in the past. As for a Division, the Minister has been so forsaken by his party that it would hardly be fair to call for one.