Before proceeding with consideration of the Estimates, will the President say whether or not reasonable facilities will be given for the discussion of Deputy Cassidy's motion, or what further arrangements have been made for discussion of the Estimates?
PUBLIC BUSINESS. - BUSINESS OF THE DAIL.
Before we proceed further, there is a matter of importance to which I would like to refer. There is a motion on the Order Paper in my name with reference to the letting or leasing of portion of the workhouse premises at Scariff. County Clare. As you, A Chinn Comhairle, are aware, the Department concerned can proceed with the letting after a certain number of days if the Dáil has not expressed any opinion pro or con on the matter. The necessary number of days will have passed before that matter can come up for consideration, and I want to know what is the position— whether the fact of its being on the Order Paper is taken as holding the matter up until the discussion would come on, or whether time will be accorded for discussion of the motion within the necessary period. I should like a direction on the matter.
As far as the last query of the Deputy is concerned, it seems to be clear that the fact that a motion appears on the Order Paper has no legal effect. With reference to the question as to whether the motion could be taken other than in Private Members' time, that would seem to be a question between the Deputy and the President.
I think the two Deputies concerned have now an opportunity of appreciating some of the difficulties I have with my Ministers when pressing for time for certain legislative proposals.
Mr. HOGAN
Will the Minister for Local Government give me an indication as to what his position is with regard to the motion in my name?
I should like the Deputy to give me notice of that question.
Mr. HOGAN
The notice is on the Paper for some time, and I asked the Minister a question a few weeks ago regarding it.
I presume the Deputy got an answer.
Mr. HOGAN
It did not satisfy me.
The President has just made a statement to the Chair which we did not hear.
I cannot afford the Deputy any time. The Estimates are down in the order in which Deputies asked them to be taken. If longer time than that arranged for is spent on the consideration of other matters, then I cannot help the Deputy.
Are we to understand, then, that there is unlimited time at the disposal of Deputies, and that this motion will come on in the course of the next two or three months?
I would not be inclined to say that.
I suggest that the matter is susceptible of arrangement. It was agreed in a general way that the Estimates would be finished in Committee by the end of this week. It remains to be seen whether or not that is a feasible proposition. As to the motion on the Order Paper in the name of Deputy Cassidy, I think that the Whips might take that matter into consideration and see if they could come to an arrangement about it. It is a matter that must arise. The question to be decided is: How long will the debate upon it last? That is not a matter, I think, that can be decided in the House now.
According to the Standing Orders, it is provided that the House can meet on Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays. Up to the present, the Government have only arranged for the House to meet on Wednesdays, Thursdays and Fridays. This question, in regard to relief schemes affects thousands and thousands of the unemployed throughout the country. We are now asked to make an arrangement as to how long the discussion on this question is to take. I think that is treating the unemployed in the country in a very unfair way. On one occasion during the present year, the House sat all night to discuss one of the Constitutional (Amendment) Bills. As far as the unemployed are concerned, the question with which this motion deals affects them to a far bigger extent——
The Deputy cannot make a speech on this now.
I say that it is treating the House most unfairly if Deputies on these benches and on other benches in the House are to be asked to curtail discussion in regard to this particular motion.
I have not asked the Deputy to do anything of the sort. The Deputy probably misunderstands the position. The Committee on Procedure and Privileges considered this matter last week. They outlined a certain programme, and I am asked now, without consulting the Committee, to alter that. I cannot do it. The Committee came to a certain understanding and I abide by that understanding. One proposal which was put to my Parliamentary Secretary in connection with the consideration of the Estimates was, that we should sit all night one night last week and one night this week. Probably the Deputy never heard of that.
I understand that the arrangement to which the President refers was come to on the condition that reasonable facilities would be given to the Opposition Parties to bring forward certain matters which they wish to have discussed. That arrangement, so far as it affects this Party, was come to on the understanding that reasonable facilities would be given for a discussion of the motion. Vote 71 is the one on which a discussion of the motion in the name of Deputy Cassidy could take place. We now find that Vote 71 is the last one on the Order Paper that will come up for discussion. That is a nice way of trying to shelve the whole discussion.
I think the Deputy has been misinformed. Vote 71 was not mentioned at the Committee at all. I want to say again, at the risk of being misunderstood, that if this matter is to be raised an arrangement ought to be made about it as to when it is going to be raised. I think that an arrangement about it cannot be made across the House any more than an arrangement about other matters can be made across the House. I want the Deputy to understand that Vote 71 was not mentioned at the Committee at all.
As far as our Party is concerned, we would be willing to give place to Deputy Cassidy's motion by dropping one of our own motions. We are not going to stand in the way of having the Deputy's motion discussed.
The Estimates on the Order Paper down to Vote No. 66 (External Affairs) appear in a specially arranged order mentioned at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, but from that point onwards they appear in numerical order. It so happens that Vote 71 is the last, but that Vote, as far as I recollect, was not mentioned at the meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
Would the President be prepared on to-morrow and Friday to give reasonable time for the discussion of this motion?
I have already told the Deputy that I am abiding by the agreement come to by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I am not going to depart from that.
Does that mean that no time will be allowed for the discussion of this particular motion?
The Deputy had better go to the Committee and ask them for time.
I would like to have a definite understanding with regard to this. We do not want to be jockeyed into the position of having no discussion on this motion.
Might I point out that it was clearly indicated to the Parliamentary Secretary to the President that our Party were anxious, either on the Vote for the President's Office or on the Vote for the Office of the Minister for Finance, to raise this question of relief schemes. We were told that this was the Vote under which the matter could be raised. That is why I would like to make a request to the President and to the Leader of the Opposition Party that reasonable facilities should be given for a discussion on the motion appearing in the name of Deputy Cassidy.
Another way of wasting time.
Does the President mean to suggest that a discussion on a motion for the relief of unemployment is another way of wasting time?
I say that, as far as the comments on this matter are concerned, it is another way of wasting time. If the Deputy had gone in the ordinary way to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and asked the Committee to arrange about this matter, there would have been no objection. I have none.
The President apparently does not know what takes place at the meetings of the Committee.
I was not at the meeting.
We do not want Deputy Cassidy or his colleagues to feel that they are in any way being side-tracked in the matter. We are prepared to give them every possible facility. We are prepared to agree to Vote 71 coming after No. 5 if that would suit, or, if they want it, we are prepared to meet here on Tuesdays. There is no sense whatever in talking to this House about meeting unnecessarily for all-night sittings. That is a very different thing from saying that there should not be time given for a motion of this kind. If there is any difficulty, we, on this side of the House, are prepared to meet here on Tuesdays for the purpose of giving extra facilities and extra time for a discussion of this motion. Meantime, we make the offer of having Vote 71 taken after Vote No. 5.
The question with regard to my motion is much simpler.
We had better finish first in regard to this motion in the name of Deputy Cassidy. Let there be no misapprehension. The matter must arise. There is no doubt at all about that. Deputies can be absolutely certain that they themselves can insure that it will arise. The question to be decided is, how long it will take, and surely that can be decided in some way.
If the House could agree?
The House could hardly ever agree on a matter of this kind. It is not for the House. It is a matter for arrangement outside which will be subsequently reported to the House. Deputy Davin will realise that from his own experience. So much for that. I will now hear Deputy Hogan.
An arrangement about my motion would be a simpler matter. Do the rules of procedure prevent me getting the opinion of the House upon proposed leasing or lettings under the State Lands Act except a post factum opinion? It is clear the Department can act before the Dáil can decide, if the motion is only taken according to the order in which it appears on the Order Paper. Lands which are acquired for disposal can be disposed of before the Dáil has an opportunity of expressing an opinion on them by means of this motion. That is my point.
As far as the Chair is concerned, the only answer the Chair can give is that the Government is entitled to a certain amount of time of the House, and Private Members are also entitled to a certain amount of time. The Deputy, being a Private Member, is only entitled to make a motion in the time allowed to Private Deputies, and in the order in which the rules and practice of the House would seem to indicate. I can go no farther.
Mr. HOGAN
Then it reduces the State Lands Act to something of a farce. A Deputy puts down a motion at a certain time, but there are so many motions to be reached before his on the Order Paper that the statutory period would have elapsed before his particular motion came up for discussion, and the lands can be disposed of any way the Department likes. This is an important question so far as the appropriation and disposal of lands are concerned.
I can see no way by which the Deputy can move his motion except by arrangement with the President, who has control of the time of the House, or by arrangement with other Private Deputies who have motions on the Order Paper.
Has the question of bringing forward this motion been mentioned to either of the other two parties to whom the Ceann Comhairle referred? Has the Deputy raised the matter of this motion being brought forward, except to-day?
I can answer that in the negative.
Mr. HOGAN
In what fashion does the Minister want me to raise it?
If the Deputy wants to bring forward a motion the Ceann Comhairle has indicated two ways by which he can do so. Has the Deputy tried either of these, or is he likely to do so?
Mr. HOGAN
I did not hear of these two methods before now.
The Deputy has his own intelligence to go on.
Mr. HOGAN
The Minister ought to make his remarks, even if they are impertinent, so that they can be heard.
Better not sometimes.