It is proposed to take business on the Order Paper in the following order: Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 8 and 4; No. 7 to be taken at 7 o'clock. When No. 7 is completed the interrupted business will be resumed.
Order of Business.
Could the Minister indicate whether the promised statement in connection with turf production and distribution will be made next week? The Parliamentary Secretary, as you know, is turning out orders as fast as the printer can get them ready for him, without consulting or hearing the views of anybody. I suggest, before he turns out any more, he might hear the views of the members of the House in connection with this very important matter.
I will inquire.
I gave notice to the Whip that I intended to raise this question.
I will inquire.
Will you allow me to raise a matter of Parliamentary privileges so far as this House is concerned? You recollect that when the Emergency Powers Act was being passed through this House we received an assurance from the Taoiseach that the debates in this House would not be subject to censorship. So far as I know, no effort — no overt effort at all events — was made to prohibit the publication of proceedings which took place in this House. Yesterday, some members of this Party, particularly Deputy Corish and myself, made references to the Trade Union Bill and expressed some views on the Bill. In accordance with the assurance which we received from the Taoiseach, we had every reason to believe that the Press would not be prevented from publishing any portion of the speeches so made, but to-day The Torch, a weekly Labour paper, received a telegram which, I think, is an outrage on the privileges of this House and a wanton breach of the undertaking given by the Taoiseach. The Editor of The Torch has received this telegram:—
"Re Dáil debates Tuesday on Trade Union Bill you are hereby prohibited from publishing in your paper any reference to declarations by Deputies Norton and Corish of their intention in the event of the enactment of the Bill to advocate non-recognition of the law.
Michael Knightly,
Chief Press Censor."
I have not yet seen an official report of my speech yesterday. The Chief Press Censor, however, is privileged to see it and has apparently acted on what he has already seen though I am normally prohibited from seeing a report of my speech yesterday and in fact have not seen a report of my speech yesterday. But this is surely a gross breach of the assurance which we received from the Taoiseach. This surely is an invasion of the rights of this House. If we speak in this House now and criticise measures, unwanted, despicable measures, then the Chief Press Censor is being used as an instrument of the Government Party to prevent the public outside knowing what in fact is said in this House. This is not democracy. This is the law of Tammany Hall and with as little morality as that.
Can you say, Sir——
The matter may not be debated further now. It is a matter that might be raised by way of a specific motion. The Deputy has been allowed to make his protest, and that ends it.
Can you say. Sir, as Ceann Comhairle, how this information came into the possession of the Chief Press Censor?
The Chair is not prepared to say. Deputies can get copies of their speeches within reasonable time after they are made. Deputies of all Parties do so.
This House should not be muzzled in this fashion.
May I call your attention to the fact that the Deputy has stated the subject matter he is referring to was not a criticism of the Bill but a declaration that he proposed to pursue illegal methods?
Humbug, in excelsis.
Revolutionary methods.
The teapot revolution.