The statements of the President and Deputy Johnson have more or less disposed of the amendments for this election at all events, because it is quite obvious that local authorities are not in a position to finance such a scheme at the present moment, and it would require a Money Resolution if it were to become a charge on the public funds. This proposal, as a matter of fact, was debated for quite a long time on the Electoral Bill of 1923, and it was turned down. We should be rather slow to reverse the considered opinion of the House on that particular occasion. I think this proposal is unnecessary. No matter what steps the State takes in this matter the candidates will supply this information to the electors in any case, and it would be only so much public money thrown away. The information that it is desired to convey in this matter, as a result of this amendment, can be found in the Gárda Síochána Barracks and the Post Offices. Very elaborate precautions are taken in the way of putting up posters to inform electors where they are to vote.
This question of the number is, I think, unduly stressed. The number is not really a vital matter in elections at all. The name and address arc very much more important. In fact, the official instructions to presiding officers read as follows: "It is not sufficient for you to be told the elector's number on the register. That is how personation is carried on. As each elector applies to you for a ballot paper, ask him his name and address." As a matter of fact, I am afraid these cards would lead to personation. The tendency would be to regard the possession of these cards as prima facie evidence that the person who had one was the person described on the card. I am afraid that would lead to very great abuses. It would also be very expensive on the State, the local authority, or whoever would be charged with the responsibility of supplying these cards. Before 1918, candidates paid the full cost of the election. Section 2 of the Parliamentary Expenses Act, 1875, reads as follows:—
The returning officer shall be entitled to his reasonable charges, not exceeding the sum set out in the Act, in respect of services rendered and expenses incurred. The amount of such charges shall be paid by the candidates at the election in equal separate shares.
Now, the State is shouldering this burden, and the cost of this election, apart from the register altogether, will be over £60,000. I think it is unreasonable to expect the State to go any further in the way of footing the bill for candidates at the election. If we were to agree to this proposal, probably the next proposal would be one to foot the bill for the transport of voters, for printing election literature for candidates and covering all expenses in connection with the election.