Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Jun 1930

Vol. 35 No. 7

International Conventions. - Electoral (Dublin Commercial) Bill, 1930—Second Stage.

General Mulcahy

I beg to move the Second Reading of this Bill. The Local Government (Dublin) Bill provides that a register of commercial electors shall be prepared in accordance with the franchise enacted in that Bill, that the election shall be held on that register, and that while such election shall be held as a separate election it shall be held approximately at the same time as the election on the ordinary register. The Bill provides machinery under which the register will be prepared and such election carried out. It deals principally with three points. First as regards the franchise. It clears up under Section 2 for the registration officer the persons who shall be entitled to vote in respect of different classes of premises. The registration officer and the returning officer will be the Dublin City Manager and Town Clerk.

In the second place as regards the register, the Bill makes provision by which the register of the commercial electors shall be prepared in practically the same way as the ordinary register. The register will only be prepared in those years in which there will be an election. The register will be published not later than the 1st June in any year and will contain the names of persons who were qualified to be on that register on the 15th November previously. The register will be formed in the same way. There will be the same house-to-house inquiry and the registration officer will have the same responsibility for having a full and proper register as he has in the case of the ordinary local government register. There will be the same publication at suitable dates and the same dates for receiving fresh claims and for hearing objections. In the matter of appeals there will be an appeal to the Circuit Court against any decision of the registration officer that is objected to, and any such appeal will be heard by the Circuit Court on a case stated by the registration officer.

It will be clear that in respect of the first register it will not be possible to have the same period for the preparation of the register. The Bill provides that the first register shall be prepared to contain the names of those who were qualified on the 15th July, 1930, and that for the purpose of making out that register the Minister for Local Government will specify the dates upon which a notice will be given by the registration officer, so that those people entitled to be on the register may claim to have their names put on it. There will be specific dates by which the preliminary list of electors will be published, by which further claims will be made and objections stated, by which the register must be published. The main point is that there will not be in the case of the first register the same house-to-house examination of the position as there will be in subsequent years, and that persons entitled to be on the register will have to claim to go on the register, but they will get a suitable published notice of the fact that it is being prepared.

As regards the election the second schedule refers to the conduct of the election—that is, the reception of nomination papers and the issue of ballot papers. The ordinary rules which apply to elections of this kind for the Oireachtas where postal voting is involved, will apply to this election. Schedule 3 is taken from the Electoral Act, and deals with the counting of the votes.

Mr. O'Kelly

The purpose of this Bill, as the Minister has stated, is to implement certain sections of the Local Government (1929) Bill recently passed through the House. If I might say so, the dirty work having been done by the Minister in that Local Government Bill of 1929, this Bill is merely to implement it, and to secure that that work will be accomplished to the satisfaction of those who keep the Minister in power—the moneyed classes and the reactionary elements in the City of Dublin. There is not much, therefore, in the Bill now before us to discuss. It is a matter of rules and regulations. There is, however, this much I would like to say about it. I do not think there is time between now and the date provisionally fixed for the holding of the municipal elections in which to prepare a proper register. I think that that is more or less admitted in the Bill itself. The Minister admits that there will not be a house-to-house canvass for the first register. He provides for the making of such a canvass in future years when the register is being compiled. It is probably correct to say, therefore, that almost anybody who makes a claim can get on the register this time.

Everybody knows that the officials have not time. I do not want to blame the officials. I do not want to say that there will be any corruption so far as the officials are concerned, but I do say that anybody who thinks that he has a claim, whether he is right in thinking so or not, has a good chance of getting on the register, whether he be a trader, a professional man or anything else. Therefore I think it is unwise that such a register should be permitted this first year.

I think, if necessary, the time for the election should be postponed, certainly long enough to enable the house-to-house canvass that the Minister recognises as necessary in order to provide a proper register, a reliable register, and a register on which the name of everyone appearing can be vouched for. That you cannot have so far as this first register is concerned. Therefore it would be within reason for people to claim that those who would be elected as a result of the first register, or on the first register, might be people who would not be properly on that register and that the register itself might be anything but a just one— one that could be packed, and probably efforts will be made to pack it. I say that the Minister would be responsible for that, because he is not giving time for the compilation of a register such as should be insisted upon in a matter of this kind.

On principle, of course, we on this side, as we stated during the time the Bill was being discussed, are opposed to a special franchise of this nature. We object to setting up class distinctions of this kind in the government of the municipality. Probably what was recently done for Dublin in the Local Government Bill, 1929, will be sought to be extended elsewhere. We object not alone on principle, but we object to setting up a headline here which might be copied and introduced into other municipalities and other franchises. It is thoroughly reactionary, and, therefore, in our opinion, a thoroughly bad proposition. However, we went into that in detail and at considerable length in the discussions on the main Bill, and I do not propose to go into it any further.

I will just repeat the argument I have made, that it is not wise to introduce a Bill making provisions for a hurried register, a register that will be largely a bogus one and upon which bogus members may be elected; bogus members upon a bogus franchise will be elected to the new municipal body. For that reason alone the Bill is bad and will have bad results. Therefore we will not take any responsibility for it.

Mr. Davin

This is a rotten measure, one of the rottenest measures introduced into this House during the lifetime of the present Government. Anybody who can bring himself to realise, as most of us on this side of the House do, that the Minister who is introducing this Bill was largely responsible for creating the revolution which set up this Parliament, could hardly even assume, let alone believe, that he would be responsible for bringing in a measure of this kind.

General Mulcahy

Is the Deputy unable to deal with the Bill on its merits?

Mr. Davin

It only goes to show the extent to which the Minister and the members of the Government are in the hands of people who keep them in office. This is, in my opinion, only part of the price which the Ministers have to pay for the consistent support of Deputy Good and those of his Party who keep the Ministry in power.

Dr. Hennessy

Ah, nonsense!

Mr. Davin

I fully realise that Deputy Hennessy never claimed to be a democrat.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is outside the scope of the Bill.

Mr. Davin

We will leave it to democrats such as Deputy Peadar Doyle and Deputy MacEoin to justify by their votes this Bill in the division lobby, because they will have to go through the division lobby in support of this Bill. If I said as much as I would like to say about this Bill, you, sir, would have to deal with me. There is only one type of language in which this Bill could be properly described——

Mr. Lemass

Real bad language.

Mr. Davin

Yes, really bad Parliamentary language. I want to know from the Minister if there is any section in this Bill which deals with the prospective commercial voter who, on the 15th November would be qualified to look for a vote and who, between the 15th November and the date of publication following on the 1st July would become bankrupt? It is quite possible that some antique furniture type of businessman who may claim to be included in this register may be bankrupt of money as well as of brains between the date of the application and the date of the publication of the register. What steps, therefore, does the Minister propose to take to see that the names of so-called businessmen of that kind will not be included in the register of commercial voters? The Minister and his colleagues will have to register their names for the information of generations to come and afterwards justify themselves for producing and introducing a measure of this kind.

Mr. Lemass

I agree with Deputy Davin that this is a rotten Bill. It is so rotten that it is not even printed right. Those printers who were asked to prepare it in a form so that Deputies could read it, were so astounded at its terms that they could not get the words right. However, the printer's errors can be easily rectified. Its other errors, which I might describe as errors of principle, are more serious and the Dáil only can rectify them. The most objectionable feature in the Bill is that it enables those commercial voters to exercise the franchise by post. I can see no reason, nor has the Minister given us any reason, why the special privilege of postal voting should be given to those whose names will be recorded on the commercial register. Postal voting has only been used in the past to give a privileged franchise to special classes such as University graduates voting for the election of members to represent the University; and members of the Army voting for Cumann na nGaedheal candidates. In both these cases it is quite obvious that no form of voting other than postal voting would be possible. But in the case of the City of Dublin, in the case of the election of a municipal council for Dublin, these special circumstances do not apply and there is no reason why the privileged members of a commercial register should not be asked to go, like the ordinary members of the community, and cast their votes in person. No doubt the purpose is to provide machinery to see that there will be a 100 per cent. or almost a 100 per cent. commercial vote.

The Minister is not at all anxious that the poor sections, the non-commercial classes, should vote in full, because if they did, of course, the adherents of his Party would have no chance. The objection to the introduction of a system of postal voting, however, is not merely that it increases the privileges which have been given to a special class in the community, but also that it opens the way to considerable abuse. I have no doubt that the Minister is well aware that the system of postal voting has been widely abused in the past, so as to make the representation that results from it farcical. We have pointed out here that on the occasion of the General Election in 1927 a very large number of well-known supporters of the Fianna Fáil Party who were entitled to vote did not get ballot papers. They were somehow intercepted in the post.

General Mulcahy

Where has the Deputy ever drawn attention to that?

Mr. Lemass

In this House. I have mentioned it to some members. Deputy Fahy is one of them. I have a recollection that when I stood for election in South City in 1925 or 1926 a postman came to me with a bundle of postal votes, envelopes containing 27 votes to be delivered to the voters, and offered them to me. He asked would I like to have these votes. I refused to take them from him. I myself thought it was a trap to get me entangled. I thought it was a trap by some Cumann na nGaedheal agents. Obviously the postman went to some other member of my Party, because when the votes were counted I got 27 postal votes. These were the only postal votes I got when the votes had been counted. It is well known to anybody having anything to do with election machinery that postal voting is capable of being abused, and has been abused, and I have no doubt whatever that in the City of Dublin the same abuse will prevail unless special safeguards are taken to prevent it. Deputy O'Kelly thinks that the machinery devised for the compilation of the first register will result in a large number of people getting their names on the register who should not be there. Personally, I think that a large number of people entitled to be on that register will not be there at all.

I cannot see why a house-to-house canvass cannot be carried out for the purpose of compiling the first register. Certainly the insertion of a notice in the Press asking persons claiming to be registered in the commercial register to communicate with the registration officer will not produce anything like a full register. It will result largely in that section of the commercial community which is organised in the Chamber of Commerce or in one or other of the political parties being on the register. The unattached member of the community will take no notice of anything appearing in the Press even when he sees it. Those to whose notice the opportunity to claim a vote is brought either by a political party or by some other organisation interested in the result, will undoubtedly get their vote. The net result is likely to be that the first register will be most incomplete, and it is likely to be made less complete than it otherwise would by the amazing powers which it is proposed to give to the registration officer to lodge and decide an objection without notifying the person that he intends to make an objection to him.

It always was, and still is, the rule in relation to any individual objecting to a person claiming to be registered as a voter, that he must notify that person that he intends to lodge an objection against him. Apparently, in this instance, the registration officer can make an objection without so notifying the person and the case can then presumably be decided without the voter being aware that any objection has been made against him or, in fact, that the matter has come before the registration officer at all. The matter is dealt with in Section 12 (2) of the First Schedule. The Minister has not given us any estimate of the cost of preparing the register and I think he should do so. No doubt the fact that the register will have to be prepared only once in three years will be an economy. However, the fact that it has to be prepared at all involves expense. If we could dispense with the register and with commercial representatives on the Council, in my opinion, not only would local government in the City be more efficient but it would cost much less. We are anxious to know what it would cost to prepare this commercial register.

General Mulcahy

Deputy O'Kelly thinks that the date on which the election for the new Council will be held will render it impossible to enable a proper register to be prepared. I am anxious to have the election held in Dublin City at the earliest possible moment. I am anxious that the Council would be elected as long as possible before they have to deal with next year's Estimates. I hope to have the election taking place about September or October—say October. Suitable notice, widely given, will draw the attention of people having claims to the fact that they should make their claims to be on the register. The rate-books will be a fairly good index to the Town Clerk, who will have the preparation of the register under his control, as to whether the claims are or are not bona fide. Apart altogether from the careful way in which I am sure the work will be approached by the Town Clerk and a very efficient staff, they will have very considerable assistance in the rate-books in seeing that only bona fide claims are entertained. If there is not a widespread application for these claims—well, it will be very interesting. We, at any rate, are doing our part to see that the register is properly made up. I am not at all filled with the same kind of doubt as that with which Deputy O'Kelly is filled.

As far as the postal vote is concerned, I am hardly impressed by what Deputy Lemass has to say with regard to the University register. I would very much like to know what kind of representations were made to the registrar at the University and what took place there.

Mr. Lemass

The registrar cannot do anything. He merely stated that the votes were issued, and that ended the matter as far as he was concerned.

General Mulcahy

I suggest that the commercial register in Dublin will be founded on a much more stable address basis than the address basis upon which the University register is founded.

Mr. Lemass

No fixed residence.

General Mulcahy

The Deputy will probably find that there is something in that point. On the general question of the postal vote, it is simply nonsensical talk to say that we are not anxious to have all classes of people, poor included, poll their votes. I think, as a matter of fact, if we want to speak in party terms, that this is the only Party in the country in regard to which there is some kind of demand that there ought to be compulsory voting.

Mr. Lemass

Try it.

General Mulcahy

I am talking purely of attitude on the matter. We are most anxious that everyone will vote. We are anxious that there would be the greatest possible facilities to enable people to do their work and to enable them to cast their votes.

Mr. T.J. O'Connell

You are giving some people as many as six votes.

General Mulcahy

There is nothing to prevent the putting up of additional polling booths if they are wanted. Personally, I would not be the least bit averse to having a general postal vote if I could be persuaded that it was a reasonable and efficient way of having an election, with a large number of people in it, carried out. We have pointed out that the electorate on this register will be anything up to 7,000 or 8,000 persons. It is also a fact that there will be a large number of companies which will vote by seal and suitable counter signature. I have not seen many of the seals, and I do not know whether it would be possible to hawk them around to polling booths. I know it would not be possible to have the seal of the Local Government Department.

Mr. Lemass

Some other method could be devised by which corporations could vote.

General Mulcahy

Some other method could be devised, but I could not imagine a more convenient or more economic way of voting in this particular election than by the postal vote. I am not able to give the Deputy an estimate of what it would cost to prepare the register. Once it is prepared it will be a very small cost afterwards. When you compare its cost with what it would cost if you had to have separate boxes at every polling booth in the place you will more readily appreciate the difference.

Mr. Lemass

Why would there have to be a separate box at every polling place?

General Mulcahy

Because if there are electors there has to be a register and there has to be at least one box in each booth to take their votes.

Mr. Lemass

There has to be one box, not one in every polling place.

General Mulcahy

There would have to be one box at every polling place in which there is a commercial register. I submit to the Deputy that, apart altogether from waiting for experience in the matter, common sense would suggest that the postal vote, as well as being more convenient, will be more economical. With regard to the point raised on the First Schedule by Deputy Lemass, on the question when the registration officer becomes the objector to a claim for admission to the register, the Bill sets out: "Whenever an objection made by the registration officer under this rule is not included in a list of objections published under these rules the registration officer shall send notice of such objection by post or otherwise to the person to whom such objection relates." I take it that an objection having been made in this particular way the claimant's appearance before the registration officer will take place just as if the objection were made by some other person. I think the Deputy will find that in every case where an objection takes place before it is entertained the registration officer must be satisfied that the person objected to has been notified. I think you will find that Section 12 (2) of the First Schedule meets the point.

Mr. Davin

Will the Minister answer the point raised by me? I asked if it would be possible to have the name of a commercial voter who is qualified to apply for a commercial vote on 15th November, but who becomes bankrupt later, entered on the register? Will his name appear on the list of those who will get more than one vote?

General Mulcahy

Bankruptcy is a disqualification for appearing in the Dáil or in the Seanad or in a local council, but it is not a disqualification for appearing on the register and exercising a vote.

Mr. Davin

Are we to understand that the Minister proposes to give more than one vote to a bankrupt on the commercial register and only one vote to a man who pays his way?

General Mulcahy

The Deputy is simply raising a most hypothetical point.

Mr. Davin

It is quite possible.

General Mulcahy

The fact is that bankruptcy, as far as I know, is not a disqualification for exercising a vote or for getting on the register, either the Local Government Register or the Parliamentary Register.

Mr. Davin

This is a register for slum owners and bankrupts.

General Mulcahy

The Deputy continues to keep his ears stuffed against all that has been said on this point.

Question put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 60; Níl. 38.

Tá

• Aird, William P.
• Beckett, James Walter.
• Bennett, George Cecil.
• Blythe, Ernest.
• Bourke, Séamus A.
• Brennan, Michael.
• Brodrick, Seán.
• Byrne, John Joseph.
• Carey, Edmund.
• Cole, John James.
• Collins-O'Driscoll, Mrs. Margt.
• Fitzgerald-Kenney, James.
• Good, John.
• Haslett, Alexander.
• Hennessy, Thomas.
• Hennigan, John.
• Henry, Mark.
• Hogan, Patrick (Galway).
• Holohan, Richard.
• Jordan, Michael.
• Kelly, Patrick Michael.
• Law, Hugh Alexander.
• Leonard, Patrick.
• Lynch, Finian.
• Mathews, Arthur Patrick.
• McDonogh, Martin.
• McFadden, Michael Og.
• McGilligan, Patrick.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Murphy, James E.
• Conlon, Martin.
• Cosgrave, William T.
• Daly, John.
• Davis, Michael.
• Doherty, Eugene.
• Dolan, James N.
• Doyle, Peadar Seán.
• Duggan, Edmund John.
• Dwyer, James.
• Egan, Barry M.
• Fitzgerald, Desmond.
• Murphy, Joseph Xavier.
• Myles, James Sproule.
• Nally, Martin Michael.
• Nolan, John Thomas.
• O'Connell, Richard.
• O'Donovan, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Higgins, Thomas.
• O'Leary, Daniel.
• O'Mahony, Dermot Gun.
• O'Reilly, John J.
• O'Sullivan, Gearóid.
• O'Sullivan, John Marcus.
• Reynolds, Patrick.
• Rice, Vincent.
• Sheehy, Timothy (West Cork).
• Thrift, William Edward.
• Tierney, Michael.
• White, Vincent Joseph.
• Wolfe, George.

Níl

• Anthony, Richard.
• Boland, Patrick.
• Brady, Seán.
• Buckley, Daniel.
• Carty, Frank.
• Coburn, James.
• Colbert, James.
• Colohan, Hugh.
• Cooney, Eamon.
• Corish, Richard.
• Davin, William.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• De Valera, Eamon.
• Everett, James.
• Fahy, Frank.
• Flinn, Hugo.
• Gorry, Patrick J.
• Hogan, Patrick (Clare).
• Houlihan, Patrick.
• Kent, William R.
• Kerlin, Frank.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Kilroy, Michael.
• Lemass, Seán F.
• Little, Patrick John.
• Maguire, Ben.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Morrissey, Daniel.
• Murphy, Timothy Joseph.
• O'Connell, Thomas J.
• O'Hanlon, John F.
• O'Kelly, Seán T.
• Powell, Thomas P.
• Ruttledge, Patrick J.
• Ryan, James.
• Sexton, Martin.
• Sheehy, Timothy (Tipp.).
• Tubridy, John.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Duggan and P.S. Doyle; Níl, Deputies Killilea and P. Hogan (Clare).

Question declared carried.

Committee Stage to be taken on Wednesday, 18th June.