Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 12 Dec 1934

Vol. 54 No. 6

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take items No. 7 to No. 16; item No. 5 to be taken in its proper place. Estimate No. 49 (Science and Art) is not to be taken to-day. Private Deputies' Business is to be taken to-morrow (Thursday) at 9 o'clock instead of to-day. It is expected that the Dáil will require to sit on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday possibly, of this week. If it is not possible to get to the Report Stage of the Citizenship Bill —I understand there is some objection to taking it this week—then we meet on Tuesday next week and continue until the business is completed. The business expected to be completed before Christmas is: all Stages of the Carriage by Sea Bill; the Imposition of Duties Bill; the Citizenship Bill; the Rates on Agricultural Land (Relief) Bill. It is not proposed to take item No. 18, Constitution (Amendment) No. 26 Bill; item No. 19, Aliens Bill and item No. 20, Courts of Justice Bill, before Christmas.

I should like, sir, to ask your ruling on a matter arising out of the announcement made by the President. Certain amendments to the Citizenship Bill have been circulated, and I want to submit to the Chair that the nature of those Government amendments, particularly in the light of amendment 29, which penetrates the long title of the Bill, are of such a kind as to alter materially the character of the Bill. My submission to the Chair now is that these amendments have created a situation under which the Bill ought to be withdrawn and a new Bill introduced which would correspond with the revised intentions of the Government.

The Deputy might postpone that matter until the Bill is before the House. All the amendments have been considered by the Chair and, with two exceptions, they are in order. The exceptions are not Government amendments.

The reason I raised the matter here was that the President purported to provide time in the remainder of the session in order to dispose of this legislation which might involve your reconvening the House for an abortive purpose as might have happened if the matter was not now raised. Am I to take it that the Chair, having considered the Government amendments, with special reference to amendment 29, and other amendments standing in the name of the Minister for External Affairs, now rules that the Bill has not been fundamentally altered and that it is capable of such amendments as those proposed in the name of the Minister for External Affairs?

The Chair rules that the principles of the Bill have not been departed from and that the amendments are in order.

Top
Share