I raised the question yesterday about the Second Reading of this Bill. Since then I have had some little time to go into it and we are of opinion that the Second Reading ought not to be taken to-day. The Bill was only circulated in the last 24 hours, and in our opinion there is not such great urgency in the matter that the Bill could not wait over and be dealt with if the House wished next week. We are not prepared to give the Bill a Second Reading to-day. We would be prepared to meet next Wednesday or Thursday if the House so desired and the Government were willing for the discussion of this with other matters that might be put before the House. This House has not had a great deal to do this year. We have had five months' vacation from July last. We have had a few short days' session and now we are to have another six or eight weeks' adjournment. Taking that into consideration, we are not satisfied that it is fair to all the interests concerned that a Bill of this kind—which, at any rate in principle raises important issues— should be rushed through in this fashion. On the principle of the Bill I do not wish to say anything at the moment. It is because of the rush with which this Bill and others are being sought to be put through and bearing in mind the long vacation we have been taking, and propose to take, that we see no reason why we should go out of our way to facilitate the Second Reading of this Bill at this stage.
Supplementary Estimates. - Public Health (Special Expenses) Bill, 1930.
Did the Minister move the Second Reading?
No. The Second Reading was fixed for to-day, but Deputy O'Kelly, in view of yesterday's proceedings, is entitled to state his views as to whether or not we should proceed with the Second Reading.
Mr. O'Connell
I would be inclined to say we should. I should be glad to see this Bill passed as soon as possible. So far as I can see—I have not had time to study it—there is not much in it. It extends the powers of the county councils but it does not make anything mandatory on the councils. It gives them power in certain circumstances to extend the area of charge. The advantage I see in the Bill is that it will enable county councils more easily and more readily to utilise the £300,000 which is being issued by the Government to do necessary work which, perhaps, they would not be otherwise inclined or willing to undertake.
I think we should allow this Bill to get through with the greatest haste possible. There are grants available now, and the Bill may give a chance to the local authorities to assist in the expenditure in some way. There are several sewerage and water schemes coming up to the Government from the local authorities. With the grant from the Government, the local authorities may be able to contribute if the Bill is put into operation. Otherwise the schemes may not come to anything because of the inability of the local authorities to contribute to them. The work should be allowed to go on, and we should give the Bill a Second Reading now.
If we took the Second Reading now and discussed the contents of the Bill in a formal way, we would better understand whether the Second Reading ought to be proceeded with or not.
Does the Minister suggest that we should take the Second Reading now and then take the question of the objection at a further stage?
Yes.
Does Deputy O'Kelly agree with that?
No.
Deputy O'Kelly suggests that we should meet next week in order to deal with this Bill The Government are very anxious that at a busy time of the year—just before the Christmas work—Deputies should not be brought unnecessarily to Dublin to deal with a small volume of business. On the question as to why this matter was not dealt with earlier Deputies who have discussed with me the difficulties about the area of charge for public health schemes, as many Deputies have done since I came up against this general question will recollect that the circumstances of small areas were such that in many cases it was quite impossible to provide them with a water or sewerage scheme without extending the area of charge beyond the existing powers. I intimated to many Deputies individually that these matters could not be properly dealt with unless the board of health area was made the area of charge. To a certain extent, I have modified my opinion on that. I could not get that carried out without the agreement of individual county councils. Only one county council has adopted the county area of charge. We have been looking around for alternatives. We have been looking round for these alternatives at a time when there was a considerable amount of talk about derating and changing the incidence of taxation, so that there were many reasons why we should not press forward our ideas on these matters unnecessarily. We came to a period when it was decided to give £300,000 in relief. There were many bodies with prepared schemes for water supply and sewerage who were anxious to get a part of the cost of the schemes from the Relief Vote. Because of the present law regarding the area of charge, they could not go on with the work if the whole cost of the schemes was not borne by the Relief Vote. Since the Relief Vote was introduced, I have had representations from local bodies, and I have had deputations from different areas irrespective of the local bodies impressing upon me that even with a substantial grant from the Relief Vote the schemes could not be carried out on the present area of charge. If we are to take the case mentioned by Deputy O'Reilly——
Is not the Minister making a Second Reading speech on the Bill?
That was why I suggested that we could hardly understand the necessity for dealing with this measure now except we had a fairly long discussion.
Objection is being taken to going on with the Second Stage now. If we are not going on with the Second Stage now, we are not going on with it. That is the whole issue.
I should like to say that Oldcastle waterworks scheme cannot be proceeded with now——
Why not?
Because, under the law at present, the cost of the waterworks scheme proposed for Oldcastle, if put on the whole rural district, would be 3½d. in the £. If put on the dispensary district, it would be 6d. in the £. That would be putting very heavy charges on lands remotely connected with Oldcastle.
This will defer it until next week.
I will deal with that question again. On the town, it would put a charge of 7s. 6d. in the £. With the facilities proposed in this Bill for a charge of one-seventh of a penny on the county and a penny on the rural district, a waterworks scheme could be provided in the town of Oldcastle at a rate of about 1s. 3d. in the £. There are other places waiting for the same facilities. There is nothing complicated in the Bill. It is suggested that we should wait until next week to deal with a matter as simple as that. We think it is unreasonable to ask Deputies to come back next week to deal with one matter which might be dealt with now and thus enable the work to go ahead.
The suggestion is, I think, that it is not going to be dealt with now.
Would Deputy O'Kelly agree to the taking of the Second Stage now if we limit the life of the Bill to, say, twelve months? It would in those circumstances be bound to come up for consideration this time twelve months.
rose.
The question is as to whether this Bill is to be taken now or not. Has the Deputy anything to say on that?
I object to that.
That is sufficient. Is there still objection to taking the Second Stage of the Bill now?
Yes.
Even with a twelve months' limit?
Yes.
A number of Deputies of our Party are anxious to consider this Bill carefully and they want time to do that. We discussed it to-day, and a number of points were raised. The Deputies interested saw no reason why they should not have time to consider the Bill further—until, perhaps, next week.
Does the Deputy object to the taking of the Second Stage now even if the Bill has only a six months' life?
It is not a question of the merits of the Bill. The question is that members of our Party are not satisfied with the Bill as it is. They want to examine it carefully, and they see no reason why it should be rushed through.
When shall we take the Second Stage?
18th February.
Even if we are in a hurry with the Bill surely the President will concede that we are entitled to consider it. We could meet next week to consider it. He has stressed the urgency of it in order to deal with the present situation. He is prepared to give it a life of six months, but it is impossible to consider a Bill which was thrown at us last night.
Nonsense.
We all have not the mentality of the Minister for Local Government and have not his ability to confuse the issue, as he did in regard to the Greater Dublin Bill. Our capacity is limited, and it is limited capacities that have to deal with the Bill, and, limited as they are, we could not deal with it before next week.
The Bill is not being taken now; it will be taken at some future date, and will go on the Order Paper as from to-day.