Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 18 Oct 1939

Vol. 77 No. 5

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, on the Order Paper—No. 5 to be taken in its appropriate place. With regard to No. 24— a motion in the name of Deputy Cosgrave-an arrangement has been arrived at by which a procedure, to be explained later by the Ceann Comhairle, will be followed. If the business, as ordered, is completed, the Dáil will adjourn until Wednesday, 15th November.

Before you proceed with the order of business, Sir, I want to make a suggestion. I understand from the Tánaiste that it was proposed that the House should adjourn until the 15th November. At this stage I want to urge that the House ought to be convened by the Tánaiste before the 15th November. I think there is considerable value, at a time when emergency powers are being used and when there is a censorship in operation, in giving the House an opportunity of meeting regularly so that members of the House can put forward the views of the people and extract information about matters of which the people are thinking. It seems to me that a month is too long a time to elapse without having a meeting of the Dáil, and there should be more frequent opportunities for the House to meet in order to get vital and valuable information which would help to allay the anxieties of the people and which, at all events, would offer the safeguard that, through sittings of this House, the people will be able to get information on any matter about which they are concerned. Therefore, I would urge the Tánaiste to convene another meeting of the Dáil not later than a fortnight from this time. I believe that it would be valuable to have frequent meetings of the Dáil and it would certainly help to allay public apprehension.

Is it proposed to suspend further consideration of all the other Bills mentioned on the Order Paper, from No. 7 to No. 15, inclusive; or is it proposed, on or after the 15th November, to go ahead with the final stages of these Bills? What is the reason for refusing to give the further consideration to which these Bills are entitled, between now and the 15th November?

With regard to the question asked by Deputy Davin, the reason why further consideration has not been given to certain of these Bills that are on the Order Paper is that, unfortunately, they are not ready. Other business has been occupying the attention of members of the Executive Council for the last couple of months, and these Bills, with some of which I myself am acquainted, and others of which are connected with other Departments, have not been gone on with as rapidly as would normally be the case. Some of them should have been ready and circulated before the 18th October, but unfortunately the staffs were not able to reach them because they were taken for other work. That, again, is another reason why we propose to have a month's adjournment. I, personally, have tried, and I know that other Ministers have tried and have pressed on the staffs, to get certain of these Bills ready and circulated in time for discussion earlier than the 15th November, but we were unable to get any satisfactory assurance that the Bills would be ready in time. With regard to Deputy Norton's point, I would say that, if anything should necessitate an earlier meeting of the Dáil or if there should be any special reason for calling the Dáil, I would certainly guarantee to the House that the Taoiseach would ask the Ceann Comhairle to call the Dáil sooner than the date mentioned.

I think, Sir, that Deputy Norton's demand was somewhat different from that. I think Deputy Norton's point was, not that the Dáil should be called together in the case of some extraordinary event, but that in the ordinary course of events an interval of a fortnight would seem to be enough time to allow to elapse between one meeting of the Dáil and another. His point was that the Dáil should meet more frequently than once a month so that there should be regular statements from Ministers on important points, which occur from day to day, in which the country is interested. In the changing situation existing at the present time a month is a long time for the country to have to wait without any guidance whatever, and there should be more frequent meetings to enable certain views to be put before the House and so that Ministers could state to the Dáil exactly what the position is in regard to certain important matters which must arise, in the ordinary course of events, in times like these.

I would put this point. There is a considerable amount of Private Members' motions on the Order Paper, and, in any case, members of the House are receiving emergency powers orders from day to day. Now, the House has been given the right of annulment of these orders, but that right of annulment becomes meaningless if, in fact, the House is not sitting to consider any of these orders. For instance, I might put down for next week a motion for the annulment of a particular emergency powers order, but if this arrangement is agreed to I cannot do anything about it for a month, and therefore the right given to the House is nullified by the action of the Government in preventing the House from sitting for another month. There is nothing static in the existing circumstances of emergency. Every day there are emergencies arising and Orders being made under the Emergency Powers Act, and I think the Tánaiste should convene the House at least once a fortnight. I think it will be found, as it was found to-day, that the happenings and events that occur in the meantime will probably provide a substantial agenda. I would urge the Tánaiste therefore, to agree to convene the House once a fortnight. The House has no desire to be obstructive and only wants to co-operate with the Government.

I quite understand the Deputy's point, but there is an extraordinary amount of work being done at the present time by the members of the Executive Council—work which arises out of the emergency and which requires all their attention. Perhaps that is not an argument on which you could base the closing down of the Dáil for a month, but from what I know of the state of business on the Order Paper and the Bills that are there to be discussed, I am absolutely reliably informed that they could not be got ready in time for the assembly of the Dáil in another fortnight.

The House is not in Committee and the Deputy has already intervened.

There is a remedy for the whole thing, but they do not want to take the remedy. We will be asked to pass five stages of one Bill to-day. That is asking for co-operation from us, but there should be co-operation on the other side.

Are we to understand that the motion before the House is that it will adjourn until the 15th November?

That is the understanding.

I think we might have avoided debating the matter if we could have got some assurance or promise from the Minister even now. May I put it to the Minister that it is not a question about Bills. I do not think Deputy Norton raised that. I certainly did not. It was an opportunity for the Government to state the position of the country, at least, once a fortnight. We gathered from the Government that it is harder to run a country neutrally than one that is at war, but we see that Parliaments in countries that are at war meet once a week notwithstanding the work they have. To meet one day in a fortnight will not unduly interfere with the hard work—and undoubtedly it is hard work —of Ministers, and in an emergency like this I suggest to the Minister the other way would amount, in fact, to the abolition of Parliament. There is no good in asking for co-operation if the opportunity is not presented, and there is no good in saying co-operation for all when all you want is what the Government wants, and that all the rest of the country must keep silent.

Is it not a matter of urgency from the point of view of the Government that item No. 7, the Ministers and Secretaries (Amendment) Bill should be passed through all stages, seeing that important Ministries were recently established by Cabinet decision, and without opposition, so that their activities should be legalised, and that on their consideration an opportunity should be given Deputies to review the work of Ministers in the meantime? I submit that that particular measure is a very important one.

It is an important one and unfortunately it is not ready. Would November 8th satisfy the House? November 1st happens to be a holyday.

Before taking a decision I suggest in connection with the Ministers and Secretaries Bill and with the Defence Bill that if the House meets earlier than November 8th it should be possible to get these two Bills ready. The Government should welcome an opportunity of offering them to the House, to discuss generally the supply question and any matter arising out of Defence or the Co-ordination of Defence. While the debate might be somewhat outside the details of the Bills, from the point of view of the Ceann Comhairle wanting to safeguard the rules of debate, notwithstanding that, the Government should welcome the opportunity for discussion of these two Bills and it should be possible to have them ready in a fortnight. I do not want to suggest that the House should meet earlier if there is general agreement to meet on November 8th, but both from the Government point of view and that of the House and the country, discussion on these two measures might provide plenty of work for debate. Running as we are towards the end of the year, and the Adjournment, I think the Government should face up to the question as to what should be done about the six motions on the Order Paper since last March in the names of Private Deputies. It is inevitable that the present Session will bring its own crop of motions from Private Deputies and that they will be of greater importance than those on the Order Paper.

I hope when we do meet on the 15th November that these Bills that are on the Order Paper will be ready, and that we will then meet continuously, as we used to, and not on one day a week.

Is the Minister agreeing that the House should meet on November 8th?

The Minister probably means as we used to meet some years ago.

Up to recently.

Top
Share