Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 26 Jun 1941

Vol. 84 No. 3

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take business on the Order Paper in the following order:— Nos. 3, 4 and 2; Nos. 7 and 1 (Vote 41) 10 be taken at 7 o'clock. When Nos. 7 and 1 (Vote 41) are completed, the interrupted business will be resumed.

There is a motion on the Order Paper in the names of Deputies of this Party relating to the annulment of Emergency Powers Order No. 83. That order may be annulled within 21 days after its issue. The 21 days will expire to-morrow. I can hardly imagine it is the policy of the Government to burke discussion of this order, which has such widespread ramifications so far as the masses of the workers of this country are concerned. Would the Tánaiste, therefore, indicate when it is proposed to make time available for the discussion of this motion, so that we may have an opportunity in Parliament of reviewing the operations of that order, and of directing the attention of the House to its unfavourable repercussions on the workers? It must be done by to-morrow.

I think it is a very unworthy suggestion from the Deputy that the Government has any intention of burking discussion.

I said I could scarcely believe it.

That was the suggestion behind the Deputy's statement, that the Government wanted to burke discussion, when, at the Deputy's own request, after a day was fixed for it at the Deputy's own request, the discussion was adjourned. Is not that a fact?

I will reply to that in a moment.

The Deputy asked that the discussion should not take place on the date that was fixed. Therefore, I think the Deputy's suggestion is an unworthy one. I would like, and the Government would like, to facilitate the Deputies and the House in having a discussion on this matter, but I do not see, as the business now stands, how it is going to be done. We would like to do it. If there is any way in which time could be arranged for it, I would be very happy; so would the Government.

The Tánaiste is apparently unaware of the circumstances surrounding the case. A discussion took, place between the Trade Union Congress and the Taoiseach and the Minister for Industry and Commerce on the question of the Trade Union Bill and of Emergency Powers Order No. 83. It was arranged at that discussion that a further conference between the parties concerned would take place. The Trade Union Congress at that stage hoped that, as a result of the further discussions, and as a result of the instances of hardship which they quoted at the discussion, the Government might see fit to alter their policy in respect of this particular order. At the request of the Trade Union Congress we agreed, therefore, not to have a discussion on Emergency Powers Order No. 83, in the hope that on further consideration of the matter the Government wouldalter its policy. It was in those circumstances, because that discussion was pending and because we thought some fruitful results would flow from it, that we agreed to the postponement of the discussion on the matter.

That you asked for it.

"Asked" if you like. While the matter was still undecided between the Trade Union Congress——

That had nothing to do with it.

Well, the Minister may think it had nothing to do with it.

I do. Yes.

We know now that the Government were just as obdurate in the end as they were in the beginning, but we thought that the Government might consider the wisdom of abandoning that policy. In order to give them an opportunity of discussing the matter with the Trade Union Congress, therefore, we asked that the matter should be allowed to remain over pending that discussion, but we did not assume that that would automatically strangle our right to have this matter raised in the Dáil. There is no difficulty in providing time for the discussion of this motion. We are dealing with a Trade Union Bill which nobody wants, and which nobody has asked for. Not a single member on the Government Benches has been allowed to speak on the matter.

That might be relevant on the Bill.

I am not going to argue the Bill at all. I will do that in its own good time. We are discussing a Trade Union Bill on which not a single member of the Government Party has any view, or, if he has any view, he has not been allowed to express it.

The Deputy is quite wrong.

That is the first time you spoke.

I will speak when I choose.

We hope we will hear the Deputy this evening, and we hope we will hear Deputy Meaney too. Nobody wants this Bill at all. What is the difficulty in leaving over this Trade Union Bill until next week? It does not matter when it is passed. Nobody wants it. What is the difficulty in proceeding to discuss Emergency Powers Order No. 83 let us say this evening at some agreed time? We will agree to any reasonable time limit on the discussion, but we certainly ought not to be deprived of an opportunity of discussing this Emergency Powers Order. The Tánaiste mentioned that we asked for a postponement in those circumstances. Might I remind him that the Minister's Department was also anxious that there should be a postponement and agreed that we would have time to discuss it this week? Are we now going to get that time?

I do not see any chance of getting time to-day, Sir.

To-morrow will do.

Surely it will not be argued that this Emergency Powers, Order should have irrevocable legislative effect without giving the Dáil an opportunity of discussing it, if discussion is wanted? I think time ought to be provided this evening at whatever cost, because it is a very grave thing to let an order become irrevocable without a discussion in Dáil Éireann, if somebody wants to discuss it. I submit that the Tánaiste ought to give time this evening, and that, if he does not give time, this Emergency Powers Order ought to be cancelled and a fresh order made, with time provided for discussion of it on Tuesday next. Something of that kind ought to be done.

I agree. What riled me, if I may use the word, was the suggestion — I think an entirely unworthy suggestion — that the Government wanted to burke discussion.

Will the Tánaiste allow me to say this——

The Deputy knows all the facts.

When I heard it to-day, at ten minutes to three, for the first time, I was amazed that we would not get time to-morrow.

Even though the Deputy was amazed, he should not have made an improper suggestion of that kind, and he ought to withdraw it.

I said I could hardly imagine it.

The Tánaiste lays great stress on the fact that we asked for a postponement. Has he been made aware of the point to which Deputy Norton referred in passing? I had been discussing this matter with the Whips. A fortnight ago, the Private Secretary to the Minister for Industry and Commerce came down to me, after I had been discussing the matter with Deputy Smith, asking that it be postponed to this week.

We have witnesses.

He asked whether I would be agreeable to have the motion postponed until this week, as it was hoped to have further conversations with the Trade Union Congress delegation. I said that, provided it fell within the 21 days, there was no objection. We agreed to that. On checking up, we find that to-morrow is the last day. The Tánaiste objects to the particular phrase used by Deputy Norton, but I think Deputy Norton prefaced that by saying he was amazed on learning the position. I have been told to-day by the Parliamentary Secretary that we will not get this until the Trade Union Bill has been cleared out of the way. I could give no guarantee as to what time that would happen and he could give no guarantee as to an extension of the 21 days provided by parliamentary practice. I think the question is whether or not we ought to get time this evening to enable us to get the minimum of four hours for this discussion.

Will the Minister for industry and Commerce deny what has now been stated by Deputy Keyes? If so, we can produce witnesses.

There is one thing which cannot be denied, and it is that when time was first allotted for the discussion of this motion the first request for postponement came from the members of the Labour Party.

The second came from you.

I believe that what Deputy Norton asserted is that we are burking discussion. Yet we are giving time.

I did not say that at all.

That is finished with, I hope. I am quite prepared, if it would suit the House — and particularly the Labour Party, who are specially interested in this matter-that the motion be taken to-night between 7 and 10 o'clock.

We were promised four hours.

There are special circumstances.

Would the Tánaiste say between 7 and 10.30?

Yes. I suppose there would be no difficulty in getting the Local Government Bill through?

It is suggested, I understand, at 7 o'clock to switch to items 7 and 1 — 1 meaning Vote 41. Would the Minister agree to switch that to 6 o'clock — that is, to take items 7 and 1 at 6 o'clock and then let us resume at 7 o'clock on Emergency Powers Order No. 83? So far as 7 and 1 are concerned, we will facilitate their passage.

It is agreed, then, that Nos. 7 and 1 be taken at 6 o'clock. I take it that those two items are to be concluded before No. 2.

I am prepared to agree that items 7 and 1 be concluded between C and 7 o'clock.

It is agreed that the Government will get before 7 o'clock the two items put in at 6 o'clock, and if the discussion has finished we may go straight on to the discussion on Emergency Powers Order No. 831

Will we finish at 10.30?

Is there any stipulation about time for whoever is to wind up the debate? Will the Minister or Deputy Norton wind up?

Some member of the Party will wind up.

Does Deputy Norton intend to ask the Government to give any specific time?

There will be no difficulty about that.

A quarter of an hour?

Then, somebody from the Labour Party will rise to conclude at 10.15?

Is it intended to sit to-morrow after 2 o'clock?

On that point I have no information.

I would like to get the Fifth Stage of the Finance Bill to-morrow.

And only that?

That is all.

If we agree to give it to the Minister by 2 o'clock that is in order?

Wait now——

The Whips might arrange that within the next few hours.

I would like to know if we are resuming discussion on the Trade Union Bill to-morrow?

That will suit me all right, if it suits the Minister.

Top
Share