We propose to take Items 1 (Public Charitable Hospitals (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2 (Secondary Teachers Superannuation (Amendment) Scheme) and 4 (Finance Bill on Report).
Order of Business.
I take it that Item 3 (Supplementary Estimates) is not being taken to-day?
After the Finance Bill.
The President did not mention that when he was reading out the order of business. These Items 2 and 3 were not in the agreement, and we proposed to afford facilities for them, having heard this morning from the Parliamentary Secretary that the order of business was Items 1, 2, 3 and 4. It is now proposed to put in No. 3, and what I would like to ask is if that particular allocation of business was arrived at after information had been conveyed that it was proposed to raise certain questions on Item No. 3?
It follows that facilities will not be given for raising these matters. Are we to have an understanding in regard to Government time that No. 4 will be taken so that opportunities will be afforded of raising this question on No. 3?
They will be raised in any case. The Vote on Account will give an opportunity of raising them in full.
We quite understand that. It is easily understood but it restricts the time and to-day is and ought to be the day on which that particular discussion ought to arise, and early facilities ought to be offered in connection with it.
In ordering the business, we have to arrive at a certain order for the convenience of Ministers as the Deputy well knows and, considering that, we have not been able to arrange that No. 3 would be taken in the sense it was suggested it might be taken.
It must be clear that, while taking three Supplementary Estimates which were not mentioned, when the business to be concluded before the adjournment was mentioned last week—we are prepared to take that extra business—but we do object to taking the extra business of which we had not notice, and, as well as that, allowing an arrangement to be made which will prevent us to-day from getting any adequate discussion on Estimate No. 52, which gives an opportunity of raising certain matters of urgent public importance. If the President could make any arrangement whereby the Finance Bill would be rapidly disposed of so that we could reach the Supplementary Estimates, say, at 5 o'clock, that would be all right.
That depends on the Opposition.
Mr. Hayes
I know it is difficult for the President or anybody else to make an arrangement. The President will realise that there is a possibility that not only are we giving him extra business, of which we got no notice, but also giving up the right which we have now to discuss certain things. In the circumstances, and seeing that facilities are being given the Government, they might do their best to see that we might get an opportunity.
The Government, as a matter of fact, did their best. I have been trying for the last half-hour to get this thing arranged so that it could be done. It cannot be done, and that is all I can say. It cannot be done in the order in which it was on the Order Paper.
Could the President explain why it was that this morning at 11 o'clock we were informed that the order of business was to be Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and that was subsequently upset at 1.30, when all arrangements had been made in connection with those with whom I am in touch to have the order of business in the other form, Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4?
Perhaps the Deputy will let me explain. I got in touch with the Opposition office and stated that the order of business was as on the Order Paper. I did not realise that there was likely to be a major debate on the agricultural Estimate. When I found there was, I asked the Department concerned were they prepared to take that in the order indicated. They said no, but after the Finance Bill. I immediately got in touch with the Opposition office but I understand most of the people concerned had gone away. At the earliest moment after I found out what the position was, I got in touch with the Opposition office to let them know we were not taking the business in the order I had indicated already. That is the explanation.
Might I ask what is the Departmental business which is going to be so intricate on Estimate 52? As far as I know it is a matter of general policy that arises on Estimate 52.
The Deputy knows that there are matters of general policy as to which a number of details have to be inquired into before they can be dealt with.
In view of the fact that the amendments to the Report Stage of the Finance Bill show promise that, with a certain amount of co-operation, the Report Stage could be dealt with inside two or three hours, might I ask that there should be no objection to taking Estimate 52 after that?
On that question, the Minister is prepared to take them in that order, that is after the Finance Bill amendments have been disposed of. Of course we are near the end of the Session, but I think this whole question of the arrangements with the Opposition will have to be very carefully considered before we tie ourselves up again. It is necessary for the Government, as provided in the Standing Orders, to have the arrangement of time.
It so happens that there was a very different point of view when the positions in the House were different, but business then was in competent hands.
In competent hands! Well done!
That word has changed hands.
The only explanation which has been offered for the change in the order of business, which was first suggested by the Parliamentary Secretary having the control of business is that the Department are not ready to discuss departmentally items which may arise on Estimate 52. Taking Item 3 in its order, the Departmental items that arise in Estimate 52 could be dealt with easily on the Appropriation Bill. It is not Departmental items that fall for consideration on Estimate 52, in the main. It is a matter of general policy.
Why not leave it until the Appropriation Bill?
Because the general policy is more urgent to-day than it will be to-morrow—only for that reason. That is the all-sufficient reason. I still think it is possible to have that without the aid of the Department which has been introduced as the only explanation for the change. It is possible to have a debate on general policy on No. 3 while still keeping to the agreement made as to getting the Finance Bill through in a certain time.
The Order of Business then will be Nos. 1, 2, 4, 3, public business not to be interrupted at nine o'clock?
Yes.
It will then fall for consideration whether No. 3 can be taken at all as it does not come within the agreement.
The House can sit on.
An agreement has been come to as to the date, having done certain business, and Item No. 3 was not in the business mentioned. The President can, of course, break any agreement.
A Deputy
Be careful.
That should not arise.
Government business is going to be done.
Possibly, whether there is a breach of agreement or not. There is an agreement to finish at a certain time.
There was an agreement to dispose of the Oath Bill in an hour and a half yesterday.
We did the business yesterday. (Interruptions.)
The President spoke for an hour and a half himself.
We delivered the goods. (Interruptions.)
On a point of order. One of the Ministers on the Front Bench has been interrupting the ex-President of the State. Is that fair play?
On the question of the order of business, I must say I was so disappointed with yesterday's business that I do not know whether I will ever again come to an arrangement of that kind—rushing through a Housing Bill in a few minutes.
Might I ask whether there was any departure from the exact terms of the agreement in connection with the business to be transacted?
Yes, it was departed from altogether in the spirit yesterday, when five hours were taken over the Oath Bill.
I undertook to have the business discharged yesterday and it was discharged.
By muzzling your own Deputies' amendments.
It would not be necessary to muzzle them if the Minister for Education, who was deputising for the Minister for Local Government, knew his Bill.
I knew my Bill, but you took jolly good care not to give me an opportunity of explaining what the Bill was.
Mr. McGilligan rose.
I have been on my feet and I ask for precedence. Deputy Cosgrave has stated that I did not know the Bill. I want to point out to the House that Deputy Cosgrave took jolly good care that nobody should know anything about the Bill and his tactics last night were a disgrace in a legislative assembly.
Might I suggest that this discussion is completely out of order? Might I ask the President, in view of the importance of Estimate No. 52, and the discussion which may arise upon it, if he will set some particular hour at which the matter might be taken up to-night?
I have indicated that the moment the Finance Bill is finished we will be able to take it.
Mr. Hayes
The moment the Report Stage is finished.
I suggest that the House should fall in with the President's idea, because the matter referred to in Item No. 3 is agriculture, and there is nothing more to be said for agriculture except the prayers for the dead.
If the President will say that at the conclusion of the Report Stage of the Finance Bill we will then proceed to take Estimate No. 52, personally I would be satisfied.
Yes, after the Report Stage.