Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 31 Jan 1934

Vol. 50 No. 6

Order of Business.

Order of Business?

Perhaps you would allow me, before I announce the Order of Business, to refer to an incident that occurred in the House a while ago. I think it is due to the honour of the House that a suggestion that any Party or that any Deputies to-day laughed at the death of any Irishman should not be allowed to pass. I think it would be a disgrace if that were allowed to go out uncontradicted. It is a falsehood. I suggested that the Chair might ask the Deputy who made the suggestion to withdraw it, but the Chair did not do so. I now ask the Chair to permit me to read the official record of the question and the reply which at the time gave rise to this misrepresentation. I have the official report in my hands of the question and the reply which gave rise to this incident.

Here it is. This occurred at the end of questions:—

"Mr. Burke: Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply, I beg to give notice that I intend to raise this, and kindred matters, on the Motion for the Adjournment.

"An Ceann Comhairle: This matter only.

"Mr. Burke: I would like to raise kindred matters; perhaps the phrase ‘matters pertaining thereto' would be more appropriate."

Everybody who knows the rules of the House knows that is why there was a smile.

A smile?

Yes. When he asked to raise "kindred matters" there was a smile—it was more of a smile than a laugh, in any case.

What were the kindred matters?

The point is that it was the Deputy's naïveté in pretending that he could raise kindred matters that caused the laugh. Everyone knows that that is the fact.

Deputy Dillon should know that for many a year I defended the Irish Party when a thing like that was thrown at them.

Because it was a lying charge.

And this is a lie, and it comes very badly from Deputy Dillon to make such a charge.

Deputy Dillon would not make it unless he had witnessed it.

The evidence of what happened is there for everybody who wants to see it.

On a point of order, may I point out that the President said he proposed to ask the permission of the Chair to do this. Has he got that permission?

Yes, the President is in order.

Then it was that Deputy O'Neill asked this question:

"I would like to ask the Chair if two terrible murders should form the subject matter of amusement in this House."

It is there for any reasonable person to read. There is the evidence of the stenographer, and every decent person knows why there was a laugh.

Mr. Dillon rose.

Next business.

May I ask——

Deputies

Chair, Chair. Sit down. Interruptions.

Next business.

May I ask the protection of the Chair in this?

Deputies

Sit down.

I do not think Deputy O'Higgins should be heard. He has made a contemptible allegation and has not the moral courage to withdraw it.

That is a matter for the Chair.

No Deputy bearing the name of O'Higgins has any right to talk about murder in this House.

The Deputy must sit down. Most of the trouble arose out of an irrelevant supplementary question. It is not for me to pronounce on what the smile was about, but I certainly smiled at the suggestion of Deputy Burke that kindred matters could be debated on the adjournment. That is all I have to say.

I do not rise to discuss anybody's smile or the President's interpretation of anybody's smile, but I rise to challenge a statement or charge that has just been made by the President, namely, that a Deputy was guilty of a lie.

So you were.

I was the person who made the statement that there was a laugh over there.

A Deputy

It is not the first lie.

The President came in and read the official report recording a laugh which he read to us as a smile. There was no lie. I stated nothing that I feel called upon to withdraw.

Sit down; you are not fit to be here.

The statement I made I stand by.

The Deputy has made a statement and that should suffice.

On a point of order.

You were not here at all at the time.

Deputy O'Higgins said he was accused of stating a deliberate lie, and the Minister for Industry and Commerce stated that Deputy O'Higgins did state a deliberate lie.

Yes, it has been proved.

If the Chair had taken notice of all the remarks bandied about in the last 10 minutes there would be 20 Deputies outside the House. The next business.

On a point of order——

I have dealt with the point of order and I am not dealing further with it.

The order of business will be Nos. 2 to 15, as on the Order Paper, with the exception of No. 10. No. 3 will be taken in its appropriate place. The Dáil will adjourn this week when that business has been completed. Public business will be interrupted at 9 p.m. this evening to take Private Deputies' business.

In view of the smallness of the business and of the President's statement that the Dáil will adjourn for this week when that business is done, might I ask if the President will give Government time for the discussion of motion No. 19, with regard to the cattle quota, as soon as the business he has referred to is finished and before the House adjourns?

The motion with reference to the cattle quota is fairly high up amongst the private members' motions. We think that we have been quite generous with the Opposition in the past session with regard to votes of censure, and we do not propose to do that.

Does the President realise the urgency of the position with regard to the cattle quota from the point of view of the farmers?

I do not see any urgency in the scaremongering that I am sure the Opposition would like to indulge in.

Might I call the attention of the President to the fact that recent developments lead us to believe that the cattle quota will come up for revision from time to time. It would seem, so far as the public can see, that our Minister seems to take very little interest in what the revision is going to be. He seems to do very little to try to influence the Government in making the revision to revise it in our favour. It is necessary that at the earliest possible opportunity the Government's position with regard to the matter should be fully explained to the House and the country, and whether they are prepared to enter into trade negotiations with Great Britain in order to secure an adequate quota for our cattle exports, so that the earlier this discussion takes place the better. I respectfully submit that the President ought to give us time to question the Minister for Agriculture on that matter and to afford the Minister for Agriculture an opportunity of answering questions directed to get that information.

Is the President satisfied with the quota system as fixed, and, if not, will he say why he will not take the views of the House on the matter?

It is absolutely irregular to debate the merits of the question now.

I am not debating the matter; I am only asking a question.

The Chair has decided that matter. It has been stated that time will not be given, and no further time will now be given for a discussion of it.

Can we not divide the House on the question of whether Government time will be given to this?

Certainly not. It is not on the Order Paper.

Does the President refuse——

The Deputy must resume his seat.

If we are——

(Interruption).

The Deputy must resume his seat.

Might I ask for a direction on the matter? The President made a statement giving a reason for refusing Government time for the motion. May I question that statement?

I have called the next business, and the Chair having so ordered, the matter stands.

It is going to become a second edition of the Military Tribunal.

I have to ask Deputy Belton to withdraw from the House for the remainder of this day's sitting for such a reflection on the Chair.

(Interruption and “withdraw.”)

I want to understand the position. What is the request?

(Interruption and “Chair.”)

The Deputy asked what is the request.

I have been asked by the stall-feeders to put down this motion. When I ask to be allowed to propose the motion I have been requested to leave the House. I will leave the House and go to the country.

I submit very respectfully, sir, that you misunderstood Deputy Belton's remarks, and that the remarks were directed to the attitude of those on the Government Benches rather than to the Chair. I submit that that is so, and I ask you to give Deputy Belton an opportunity of explaining that that is so, and making any apology that may be necessary, because I submit that he did not intend to do it.

If the alleged offence is any reflection on you, sir, it was not intended. On principle, I am not afraid to take any punishment that comes my way, but if you, sir, think that I reflected in any way on your ruling I would apologise, but I did not. We know the President better after to-day than we did before.

You should apologise to us.

I will apologise to you for nothing.

Surely Deputy Belton is utterly disorderly now.

What about the Deputy's withdrawal from the House?

I am accepting the Deputy's apology.

Top
Share