Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Apr 1945

Vol. 96 No. 17

Public Business. - Presidential and Local Elections Bill, 1945—Second Stage.

Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. MacEntee)

I move that the Bill be now read a Second Time. The reason for this Bill is to be found in the fact that a Presidential election is due to take place this year, and this election should be completed not later than June 24th next. The Constitution provides that the process of electing a new President shall not be initiated before the 60th day prior to the date upon which the current Presidential term expires. The Constitution also provides that the election of the President shall be regulated by law and the statute by which this is done is the Presidential Elections Act, 1937.

Under Section 6 of that Act the Minister for Local Government is bound to make an Order appointing, among other things, the last day for receiving nominations, the last day upon which a candidate who has been nominated may withdraw his candidature, and the day upon which a poll, should such be necessary, must be taken.

Should it be necessary to have a poll in order to elect the successor to our present President, then, for reasons to which I shall refer later, we must, I think, as a matter of prudence, fix the day for taking it not later than June 20th.

Now, it happens that in accordance with the existing law the elections for the local authorities must take place this year, and under Sections 5 and 6 of the Local Elections Act, 1927, it is provided that these elections shall take place not earlier than the 23rd June and not later than the 1st day of July.

This, accordingly, is the position. The poll for the Presidential election must take place over the whole country on a day not later than June 20th. On the other hand, except in one or two districts where special circumstances may obtain, the local elections are due to take place throughout the country in the period between the 22nd June and the 2nd July, that is, within a very few days of the date upon which the Presidential poll may have to be taken.

Everyone knows that elections in general do occasion some dislocation of the ordinary life of the community. It may be that sort of dislocation which by reason of the excitement and public interest which elections engender is not unwelcome, and is certainly not unhealthy. But most people would say that elections, whether welcome or not, because of this dislocation, should be avoided and should not be permitted to recur at too frequent intervals. Accordingly, when we have the Presidential election and the local elections falling within such a short interval of time as, perhaps, three to ten days, most people would say that the reasonable and sensible thing to do would be to arrange that these elections would take place on the same day. It is to meet that point of view, a point of view which I am sure will be that of the ordinary, practical businessman and citizen, that this Bill is introduced.

It may not, of course, be necessary to avail of the powers which the Bill proposes to confer. That will depend on whether or not more than one candidate having been nominated more than one still remains in nomination when the time fixed for withdrawals has expired. Should only one candidate remain nominated, it will not be necessary to invoke the powers which the Bill provides for, Part II of the Act will not come into operation, and the local elections will be held, in the normal way, on such dates between the 22nd June and July 2nd, as may be fixed by the appropriate local authorities under Sections 5 and 6 of the Local Elections Act, 1927. On the other hand should more than one candidate remain in nomination when the time for withdrawals has elapsed, then it will become necessary to take a poll for the election to the Presidency under Sections 12 and 20 of the Presidential Elections Act, 1937. In that case Part II of the measure will come into operation and under Section 5 thereof the polling at the local elections will take place on the same day as the poll for the Presidential election. It will be seen, therefore, that in these circumstances the date of the local elections will be determined by the date fixed for the Presidential poll.

We, accordingly, come to examine what considerations must be taken into account in fixing the day for the Presidential poll. The primary conditions governing an election to the office of President are laid down in the Constitution.

Under sub-section 3º of Section 3 of Article 12 it is prescribed that an election to the office of President shall not be held earlier than the 60th day before the expiration of the term of office of the President. As our present President's term of office will not in the normal course expire until midnight on June 24th of this year, an election for the Presidential office cannot be held on a date earlier than the 25th April.

The process of electing a President begins when the days for fulfilling the various essential steps in the procedure are appointed. These days are the days for receiving nominations for the office, for withdrawing such nominations, and for taking a poll, should such be necessary. Such days are appointed by the Minister for Local Government and Public Health by an Order made under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the Presidential Elections Act, 1937.

In conformity with this provision of the Constitution, sub-section (3) of the same section of the Act of 1937 provides that the Order in question "shall be made on or as soon as conveniently may be after the 60th day before the expiration of the term of office of the outgoing President", that is, in the present instance, on or as soon as may be after the 26th April, 1945.

Before that date the Minister can do nothing, whether under the Constitution or under the Presidential Elections Act, to set the process of election in motion.

The next provision of the Constitution which must be adverted to by the Minister when appointing the specified days is Section 7 of Article 12. This section prescribes that the new "President shall enter upon his office on the day following the expiration of the term of office of his predecessor or as soon as may be thereafter". It is obvious from this that, in appointing the day for the taking of a poll, should such be necessary, at a Presidential election, the Minister must endeavour to ensure, while taking all relevant circumstances into consideration, that the counting of the votes will be completed, and the result of the Presidential election announced, in due time to allow the new President to comply with the spirit of the Constitution, by entering upon his office on the day following the expiration of the term of office of the outgoing President.

With this consideration in mind my opinion is that in the event of a simple election, that is one in which there would not be more than two candidates, June 20th is the latest date that in prudence might be fixed for the taking of a poll.

On the other hand, if there are likely to be more than two candidates, then, so as to be on the safe side, it would be wise to advance the date of the poll by some days to June 15th. These dates, June 20th and June 15th, represent the very latest dates which, in the circumstances I have mentioned, could, with advertence to the requirements of the Constitution, be fixed for polling.

There is, however, another consideration which would suggest that the date should be as late in June as may be. We all wish the elections, whether Presidential or local, to be held on the new register which will come into force on the 1st June. It is desirable that those who may be engaged in the elections, or concerned with the conduct of them, should have as long a period as may be after that date to take whatever action may be required of them, or whatever steps they may think necessary or desirable to advance the particular interests which they have in view.

Therefore the day of the poll should be fixed as soon as possible to the limiting dates I have given. I have every reason to believe that the new register will be available to all concerned at the usual time in every area. In Dublin, indeed, I have caused inquiries to be made which indicates that the work of preparing it is well in advance of schedule.

Accordingly, while admittedly the last possible day should be appointed for the elections, I have no reason to believe that any interest will suffer if the date of the local elections is advanced from within the last week to within the last fortnight or so, in June. Therefore, I cannot see that the public interest or public convenience is going to suffer if, instead of holding local elections as they might be held, on June 23rd, we arrange to have them held on June 20th or June 15th.

When we have decided what day is to be appointed for taking the Presidential poll, should such be necessary, the appointment of the other days is a comparatively simple matter.

For reasons which I think I need not state, because I am sure they will occur to everybody, it is desirable to allow more time between the final settlement of the nominations for the Presidential election and the taking of the poll therefor, than is customary in the case of a Parliamentary or local election.

It is likewise desirable to allow a longer period to a person who has been nominated as a candidate for Presidency to consider whether he will persevere in his candidature or not. And it is finally desirable to give as ample notice as possible of the appointed days.

Accordingly I think I should say now that the necessary. Order appointing these days is likely to be made on the 26th of this month; that the last day for receiving nominations will be one of the days from 12th to 15th May inclusive: that the last day for withdrawals will be from the 17th to 20th May inclusive; and that polling, if necessary, will be fixed for either June 15th or June 20th, probably the former, unless I have very strong reasons to believe that there will not be more than two candidates.

To come now to the several provisions in the Bill. Sections 1 and 2 require no comment. Section 3 I have already referred to. It specifies the circumstances under which Part II, which embodies the remaining ten sections of the Bill, comes into operation. Section 4 declares that the Act will apply only to the elections in 1945. In the normal course the Presidential and local elections will not come to be held within the same month in any year until 21 years hence. Furthermore, we have no reason to believe that certain difficulties such, for instance, as paragraph (f) of Section 13 is intended to provide against, would arise at a future date and necessitate some of the provisions which are embodied in this Bill. Therefore, I do not think it advisable to make this Bill a permanent measure to apply to any other elections, except those held this year. Twenty years from now the circumstances may be quite different. The method of electing local authorities and of electing the President may be then quite different, so that I do not think it is necessary for us to pretend to such foresight as would cover whatever circumstances might exist at that date. Section 5 modifies the Local Elections Act, 1927, by fixing the poll at a local election to be the day for the poll at the Presidential election instead of the day appointed by the county council, between the 23rd June and the 1st July. Section 6 adapts Section 20 of the Presidential Elections Act, 1937, by making the administrative county or county borough, instead of the Dáil constituency, for the purpose of the Presidential election. As the House is aware the Presidential Election Act provides that the poll for the election of the President shall be taken by constituencies. This Bill proposes to make the whole administrative area of a county council or county borough the constituency for the purpose of conducting the Presidential poll.

Under Section 5 also the county registrar or under-sheriff, as the case may be, is appointed the local returning officer for the purposes of the Presidential election. The House no doubt is aware that, under the Act of 1937, the returning officer for the purpose of the Presidential election is appointed under the Act, but that all the county registrars and those functionaries who act as returning officers in the case of Parliamentary elections would act as local returning officers responsible to the returning officer for the proper conduct of the Presidential election in their constituencies. Under this section it is proposed to make those who would normally be the returning officers in the case of the Presidential election returning officers, not only for the purpose of the Presidential election, but also returning officers for the purpose of conducting the poll in the case of the local authority elections. Now the reason for this is that it is essential that the constituency be the same for each election in order to avoid confusion in the arrangements for the poll and in the collection of the ballot boxes and the counting of the votes. This adaptation also involves the preparation of a postal voters' list, arranged according to each local electoral area, and the necessary provisions to that end will be found in sub-section (2) of Section 6.

Section 7 authorises the issue to a member of the L.S.F. of a certificate enabling him to vote at a different place in the county electoral area from that at which he would otherwise vote if he were not engaged on duties connected with the election. The House is aware of the provision under which persons who are engaged in the conduct of elections, like presiding officers, poll clerks and so on, may vote in the place in which they are officiating. It was found at the Elections of 1943 and 1944 that members of the L.S.F. were on duty in places other than those in which they would normally vote and thus did not have an opportunity to vote at all. This section is intended to give them an opportunity of voting at this election.

Section 8 extends the obligation to preserve the secrecy of the voting to all agents present at the polling or counting, whether on behalf of the Presidential or the local election candidates. It is assumed that it may be necessary in certain areas to conduct the poll for the Presidential and the local elections within the one booth and therefore every person present inside that booth must be bound to secrecy, whether he is there on behalf of a candidate for the Presidency or there on behalf of a candidate for the local authority.

Section 9 provides that if separate ballot boxes are provided a ballot paper will not be invalidated by being placed in the wrong ballot box. It is the intention, if possible, to provide separate ballot boxes, but owing to stringency in the supply of materials, materials which may be required for another purpose, it may not be possible to provide seperate boxes in every area. Therefore, it may be necessary to allow all the papers to be inserted in the one box. On the other hand, if separate ballot boxes are provided within the same booth for the purpose of conducting the Presidential and the local election, then this section provides that, if by any mischance a ballot paper finds its way into the wrong box, the vote will not be invalid because of that fact.

Section 10 places the polls for both the Presidential election and the local elections under the sole jurisdiction of the local Presidential returning officer. The duties of a returning officer in relation to the poll are such that a division of authority between two or three officers would be impracticable, but at the same time it may be assumed that there will be a complete co-operation between the returning officers concerned.

Section 11 authorises the expenses incurred in taking the joint poll to be charged and paid as part of the expenses incurred in the conduct of the Presidential election. In so far, however, as these charges include expenses which would otherwise be paid by the local authority, the charges will be apportioned. A similar provision I may say was made in former days where county and rural district councillors were elected on the same day.

Section 12 is consequential on Section 11. The scale to be prescribed under this section for the local government elections will not include the expense of taking the poll since that expense will be paid and recovered under the provisions of Section 11.

Section 13 confers on the Minister for Local Government and Public Health power to make such regulations as may be necessary to give effect to the Act, including the issue of a polling card in respect of the Presidential election to each Dáil elector, and the other matters mentioned in the succeeding paragraphs.

That is the purport and these are the general provisions of the measure now before the House. The issue which is really involved in this is whether, should a poll fall to be taken in relation to the election for the Presidency, bearing in mind that that poll must be taken within a very few days of the period prescribed by the statute within which the local elections must be held, we shall make such provision as will enable these elections to take place on the one day and whether that would be to the general convenience of the public and whether it would be in the public interest. I submit that it would be to the general convenience of the public and that there is nothing contrary to the public interest in holding these elections on the one day. I submit, therefore, that it is only a rational and reasonable thing to make provision and to ask for the powers that are contemplated in this Bill.

General Mulcahy

In the normal way we would not see anything incongruous in having the election for the local bodies and the election for the Uachtarán on the same day. The election for the local authorities would normally mean the election of local citizens, undertaken in the democratic spirit on which our Constitution is founded, to act as representatives for the people, to look after their local problems, and to devote their energies, intelligence and co-operation with one another to dealing with these matters. The office of Uachtarán, as we understand it, though very little was said about it when the Constitution was being put through and the office being created, suggests as it were a noble spire to the general edifice of citizenship in this country. In normal circumstances, therefore, I would see nothing incongruous in the elections taking place on the same day. Furthermore, in the emergency period, when there is a shortage of material, there would be nothing incongruous in putting the voting papers into the same box.

However, there is an aspect of these elections that requires further and wider comment. We happen to be holding an election for the Presidency and an election for local authorities at a time when, if we read the events in Europe and in the world generally, the cloud of war is likely soon to be passing away from us. During the emergency period, there was a danger to our food supply on the one hand and to our security on the other hand. Our people, one and all, were appealed to by all Parties to do their best to secure the necessary supplies of food in the country; every man and every woman in a position to do so was asked to step in and do the best possible to provide food. From every party, every class, and every creed, the young men and young women were brought together, by a joint appeal from all Parties in this House in 1940, to provide the necessary defence forces and rescue services, to enable us either to ward off any military danger that might threaten us or to deal with any casualties that might arise as a result of the was reaching us here.

In the spirit of our Constitution and in the natural state of things, this sovereign and independent State had to have its work done by the ordinary men and the ordinary women. Those who came together to do that work, by providing those services, had an opportunity to see how necessary it was to have a fine spirit of citizenship. In creating a machinery to defend their sovereign and independent country, they developed that spirit of citizenship. They were looking forward to the day when the war clouds would pass and when the work of standing together in military defence and of doing military training for that defence would be over so that they might then devote themselves, in the spirit of new-found citizenship, to the carrying on of the ordinary work of the country.

It is at that particular moment that, in circumstances that normally might be happy ones, our country is facing this election, and we have to look after our local election on the one hand and, on the other hand, to elect to the position of Uachtarán a person who will represent citizenship here. But our great national mistake-makers could not let another opportunity pass of making a great national mistake. They are following the tradition which we might have hoped would have been broken and dropped, as a result of their experiences here and particularly seeing what can happen in other countries when the purely Party spirit is allowed to aggrandise itself into calling itself the nation. Not learning from that, it has now been declared that the Government Party intends to use all the power and force it has, to see that nothing shall be recognised as national in offering itself to do a citizen's duty, unless it bears the Fianna Fáil label.

Mr. MacEntee

Is this in order, Sir?

General Mulcahy

It is perfectly in order and there is no doubt at all——

Mr. MacEntee

It has nothing to do with the provisions of the Bill.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Order.

General Mulcahy

Deputies of the Government Party can assist in flying the broad swastika of Fianna Fáil over the President's building in the Park and can do the same over every local authority in the country. We will have an attempt to put a Fianna Fáil swastika over the Chair here in this House, but that time has not come yet.

Mr. MacEntee

Is the Deputy forgetting the time when he was running around with the Blueshirts, in order to be in line with the brownshirts and the blackshirts?

General Mulcahy

I am addressing myself to the circumstances of this hour and to the future, in respect of matters that are important and pressing. It is at such a moment that the whole national atmosphere here is being made muddy and obscure by a decision on the part of the Government to claim that the national interests demand that Fianna Fáil control the local bodies and that Fianna Fáil erect its flag over out President's establishment.

An Ceann Comhairle

A Deputy or Minister in raising a point of order should stand up. However, the Deputy has gone far outside this Bill. The conduct of elections for local councils has nothing to do with the Presidential election.

General Mulcahy

I leave it to you-Sir, to stop me at any point at which I am going outside the ordinary rules of order.

An Ceann Comhairle

I consider that the Deputy has gone outside the rules of order.

General Mulcahy

You can tell me to sit down when I show that, by following the only line of thought I can follow at the present moment, I am following a line of thought that is inconsistent with your duty here. I have no desire to injure this House, in the manner of doing its business, in any way. I do consider, however, that when we are asked to pass legislation here by which the votes for the Presidential office and the votes for the local authorities shall go into the one box, we should draw attention here to the Government policy that surrounds that proposal and discuss that policy. I suggest it is an attempt to bring narrow Party politics and sinister Party politics into the carrying out of this election.

An Ceann Comhairle

The main question here is to fix the Presidential election and local elections for the same date.

General Mulcahy

And the local elections.

An Ceann Comhairle

To bring forward the date for the local elections.

Mr. Corish

There are some changes.

An Ceann Comhairle

The main question is the Presidential election, but that does not warrant a discussion of the policy or policies on which the local elections are being held.

Mr. D. Morrissey

On a point of order, may I ask whether you are now ruling that on the Second Reading we can discuss only what is being done in this Bill?

An Ceann Comhairle

A discussion as to the alleged Fianna Fáil policy in connection with local elections does not arise on a Bill the primary purpose of which is to fix dates.

Mr. MacEntee

May I put a point of order? I should like to point out that the members of the Government, as a Government, have got nothing to do with the decisions of a political organisation as to what line it may take in relation to any election in this country. It would appear to be the view of certain Opposition Parties in this House that because people happen to belong to one political organisation they are to be debarred from the exercise of Constitutional rights in regard to elections.

Mr. D. Morrissey

That is a lovely point of order.

Mr. MacEntee

The Government, as a Government, has not indicated any policy in regard to the Presidential election.

Mr. Norton

Or in regard to anything else.

Mr. Donnellan

How does the Minister agree that with the statement by the Minister for Justice down in Roscommon that preparations were to be made for the elections?

Mr. D. Morrissey

It is a repudiation of the Irish Press.

General Mulcahy

I intend to keep to the things which it is appropriate to discuss on this measure. I feel in rather a difficulty when you, Sir, say that we may not discuss Government policy in regard to local elections. However, I shall leave the question of the local elections for the moment, and turn to the Presidential election. The Minister has indicated that part of his trouble in telling the House certain things in regard to specific dates for the Presidential election is that he does not know whether there are going to be two, three or more candidates— that he does not know what will be the number of candidates. Well, now, the Government's line, apparently, is to endeavour to exclude anybody except a Fianna Fáil Party nominee being nominated for the Presidential election.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy has 26 Deputies behind him, and it only requires 20 Deputies to nominate a candidate.

General Mulcahy

Is the Minister finished?

Mr. MacEntee

I am suggesting that the Deputy, if he wishes, can nominate a candidate, since he has 20 Deputies behind him.

General Mulcahy

Is the Minister finished? Is the Minister going to continue interrupting?

Mr. D. Morrissey

The Minister was finished years ago, but he could not stop.

General Mulcahy

I suggest to the Minister that whether this kind of thing is due to his insolence or his incompetence, he ought to allow this House to do its business without imposing one or the other upon it. We are dealing with serious matters here. We are dealing with matters that may very easily effect the whole trend of our people's fortunes in this country. We are dealing with a deliberate attempt to establish a one-Party State here and to make use of the coming Presidential election and the local elections in order to endeavour to secure that. We have a Government here that has a very strong Party majority in the House. There is no legislation which the Government may wish to pass here that it has not the power to pass or that it will not have power to pass next year or the year after. It can extend the parliamentary life of this House up to, I think, the year 1951. It has the Emergency Powers Act, which it can probably hold in being, through its Party majority in this House, until the end of the life of the present Parliament. Under these powers it can stifle the expression of opinion in the country; it can suppress statements of fact in the Press; it can suppress statements of opinion.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy has gone wide of this measure.

General Mulcahy

I am discussing, Sir, Government policy as intended by this measure.

An Ceann Comhairle

Would the Deputy state, for the guidance of the Chair, to what provision in this measure he could relate his argument?

Mr. D. Morrissey

On a point of order, Sir, I respectfully submit that when a Deputy is speaking on the Second Reading of a Bill he is entitled to give his reasons why the Bill should not be given a Second Reading and why, in his opinion, the Bill, if passed, would be injurious to the State.

An Ceann Comhairle

Quite right, but, surely to goodness, these reasons should bear some relation to the Bill.

General Mulcahy

I submit, Sir, that this is an attempt to confuse the people by running the local elections and the Presidential election on the same date and, by doing so, to infuse into the whole atmosphere of these elections a narrow, Party, pseudonationalistic spirit, in order to prevent the mind of the people working in a proper way and giving us the type of councils which this country wants. I want to expose the attitude of the Government in connection with that. I want to see that this House is given an opportunity of expressing its mind on that, and that if it cannot satisfy itself that the Government are not chargeable with what I suggest they are chargeable with, they will at any rate divide the Presidential election from the local elections. Our local authorities have very important work to do at the present moment. Their constructive work is six years behind-hand. Such works as drainage, sanitation, housing, and many other types of work, which our local authorities have to undertake, are six years behind-hand as a result of the outbreak of this war. Even before the war, they were under serious difficulties enough owing to the expenditure forced upon them as a result of the Government's policy since 1932. Their expenditure rose, year after year, from 1932, until it was a couple of million pounds higher at the outbreak of the war than it was in 1932. Accordingly, the difficulties under which they were labouring in 1939 were bad enough without having put down on top of them the arrears of work which have piled up on them during the six years of war, not to speak of the increased cost which has fallen on them during those six years.

We want the best, the keenest, and the most public-spirited brains in the country in our local authorities at the present time, and the intention of the Government, apart altogether from their expressed intentions from platforms throughout the country, in associating the Presidential election with these local elections is, as I say, to introduce a narrow, bitter, pseudonationalistic spirit, labelled Fianna Fáil, in the hope that they may be able to blind the people and influence them to put the wrong type of people into local bodies simply because the edict goes forward that nobody can be national unless he bears the Fianna Fáil label. We stand, absolutely and strongly, against the introduction of purely Party politics into local administration. Unless the ordinary spirit of citizenship in this country is given an opportunity to grow and to thrive—and it can only grow and thrive by being allowed to work without getting fussed or without being faced with a nihil obstat from the Fianna Fáil headquarters or a Fianna Fáil Minister or a Fianna Fáil organisation, and without having to hang a label round its neck—unless we can get a free spirit of citizenship in this country, our country will inevitably be destroyed as definitely and as brutally as if we were being invaded by an invading army. We want to appeal, over the threats and misrepresentations of the Government, to every Party in this House and to every section of the people outside the House—both the older people who have given good service in our local administration and the young people in whom the spirit of citizenship has been newly awakened—to come into the arena of public administration and public work, to go up for the local elections and to take their place in carrying on local administration.

An Ceann Comhairle

This Bill does not provide for the holding of local elections. The elections would be held in any event. It merely provides for the holding of the Presidential election and the local elections on the same day.

General Mulcahy

And it proposes to do that in order to drag the local elections into the purely political atmosphere which the Government are weaving around the Presidential election. The theory is being propounded that, unless the Government's nominee gets into Arus an Uachtarain, our prestige in the eyes of the world will be lowered and our economic and political interest, from the international point of view, will be jeopardised. This Bill proposed to place the local elections in a wholly political atmosphere, with an international spirit moving around in a peculiar kind of way. We ask both old workers on local bodies and young people to go forward for election, irrespective of the particular kind of recipe the Government may have for either nationalism or citizenship. I ask those people not to be frightened off by anything that will be said from the Government platforms, or anything that will be implied as to what the Government may do by the exercise of its power. I ask them to stand up courageously against that, and, in cooperation with their neighbours, of whatever Party, creed or class, to come forward to do constructive work for the country. If such work were not there to be done, they would not have been asked to come into the Defence Forces in the past. We stand against the introduction of Party politics into local administration. We will support the type of person who has shown in the past that he can give faithful and public-spirited service to local bodies. It is our intention to support the people of any Party or of any class in the coming elections who show that that is the spirit in which they approach the matter. The Government has very considerable power, and the very fact that they have that power, and that they parade it in the way in which they do, is being used to depress the spirit of citizenship and prevent people from coming forward to give public service who, in the ordinary way, would be prepared to come forward. They run the risk either of being abused or being prejudiced by Government power from doing their duty as citizens. I do not know whether or not there is any use in appealing to the Government to change their whole attitude in regard to this matter. But I do appeal to them in this way: they feel that they have got a mandate from the people; they are in a position in which they can give their decisions effect. I suggest that they have a majority in this House which makes them perfectly secure, and that they can keep this Parliament in being and under their control up to 1951. They can keep the Emergency Act in operation and retain the powers they have, which enable them to control so many things—the Press, public opinion, licences, and the direction of business. They have full power to do anything they might reasonably want to do, without stretching out and attempting in an insidious way to annul the efforts of our people in connection with local administration. Without those efforts this country cannot prosper, cannot be free, and cannot develop its spirit of citizenship.

As regards the Presidential election, the President occupies an office which was established a few short years ago. Our experience up to the present has not made clear what exactly that office can do but the people have ideas about it.

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order, do the functions of the President enter into the consideration of this Bill?

An Ceann Comhairle

They do not arise on this Bill. Presidential candidates are neither being nominated nor selected now.

General Mulcahy

I should like to discuss the point raised by the Minister as to whether it is likely that there will be one, two or three candidates for the Presidency. The Minister suggested that that might have some effect on the dates on which certain things would take place. In connection with that, I wish to mention that the President has important functions in relation to the constitutional rights of our people. He can refuse to sign certain Bills. He can send certain Bills to the Supreme Court for decision as to whether they are constitutional or not.

An Ceann Comhairle

The question of Presidential functions does not arise on this Bill.

General Mulcahy

If we are allowed to discuss whether it is likely that there will be two, three or four candidates for the Presidency, then I suggest that the question as to whether the President has powers or functions is likely to have some effect on the number of persons who will go forward. If the occupant of the office had no powers or functions, we should probably have no candidate. I am merely mentioning in the simplest way that he has functions and that they are important functions. That will have an effect in deciding whether there will be three, four or five candidates. If the Government says that they are going to put a Party man into Arus an Uachtarain, then there should, at least, be two candidates.

Mr. MacEntee

The Government has made no announcement in relation to the matter and it has no function in relation to the nomination of President.

General Mulcahy

Seeing that there is such a fog at the present time and in view of the tendency of fogs to exaggerate and magnify things that are dark, I should like to take advantage of this opportunity to ask the Government what their intention in the matter is, because they have created a complete conviction in the country that they propose to put a nominee and, as it were, an active, working member of their Party into the Presidential office for their own Party purposes.

An Ceann Comhairle

That question is not relevant. Candidates will be nominated in due course. This is a machinery Bill pure and simple.

General Mulcahy

It is a machinery Bill. The position in which we find ourselves here is that a Bill is introduced to deal with the dates of the Presidential election and that the President is supposed——

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order, this Bill does not affect the date of the Presidential election.

General Mulcahy

You can write a letter to the papers about that.

Mr. MacEntee

It does not affect the date of the Presidential election. It affects the date of the local elections.

General Mulcahy

At any rate it deals with the implementation of arrangements for the Presidential election. I submit that when we consider what the holding of the Presidential election means to the country, and particularly what it means to the country to have the election held in such manner and in such a spirit that there will be some chance that the office will be what it was intended to be—an office of dignity, an office of honour, representing the unified feeling of citizenship in the country and the dignity of love of country—when we are discussing a Bill that provides for such an election we should have an opportunity of clearing away the misconceptions, if the Minister likes, but from my point of view the positive fears, that have been created in the people's minds, that instead of this election being carried out in such a way as to win for the office the respect of all Parties and of every class in the country, the Government are preparing to make it a purely Party office. Surely in this Parliament of the people, where the people's rights and interests have to be safeguarded, so far as we can, we can spare a few moments to clear away, if possible, such doubts and fears.

An Ceann Comhairle

Such a discussion is not in order. I am sure the Deputy understands that.

General Mulcahy

The Labour Party have issued a statement this morning, or a statement has been issued on their behalf, which would suggest that they, as a Party forming part of this Oireachtas, are going to take no official part in the election of the President. Is this an occasion upon which I can discuss the necessity that exists for every citizen of the country to take an interest in the election of the person who is, or whom the Constitution intends to be, the ornamental head of the State?

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy has told the House already that the President has very important functions. Now he says he is a mere ornament.

General Mulcahy

If I were allowed to say the few simple things that I have got to say, the Minister would understand that the President has powers and functions, that he fills an office of dignity, and that he is an ornament in the State.

Mr. MacEntee

The Minister understands that well.

General Mulcahy

If so, the Minister ought to endeavour to be a little more helpful when in rather trying, difficult and, thanks to the Government, obscure circumstances, we are trying to discuss something about the Presidential election with a view, if possible, to securing that the election will be carried out in a spirit in keeping with the dignity that the office should be allowed to have and with results that would be beneficial to that office as an office that should be held in affection in the hearts and minds of the people, on the one hand, and that should be an institution of use to the State on the other. I think that it would be a disastrous thing at the present time from the point of view of the spirit of pure citizenship in the country, if a purely Party person were elected to the position of President in this election. Secondly, I think it would be a disastrous thing if the Fianna Fáil Party could go any further distance along the road either of persuading the people into believing, or of cowing the people into accepting, that we can have a one-Party State set up in this country. I called the Government great national mistake makers and they are now preparing to see that they will not avoid making another great mistake. At a time when the Party spirit which identifies itself with the nation is going down in the world in the ruin of its own mistakes we do not want to have it tried in this country.

I do appeal to the members of the Labour Party, the members of the Farmers' Party, and every section of the people that if a Government Party man is being nominated for the office of President, in the joint discharge of our duties to the people, we should endeavour to find some worthy person to be nominated with our support, and I suggest that we should oppose, in a spirit of pure, unadulterated citizenship, the attempt behind such an act on the part of the Government to propagate the idea of the one-Party State or Government in this country. I can appreciate the difficulties men have in circumstances when the public mind is so confused, so tired out, so frightened, when it finds in circumstances such as the present that the State becomes more important and more influential in the lives of the people, and after we have had a Party, such as we have here, tasting the totalitarian powers given them by the Emergency Powers Acts, and Emergency Orders.

They have tasted the kind of power over people's lives that they always dreamed of. I could understand people being cowed if they may have to spend five or six years more under a Government such as that, years of great difficulty for the ordinary trader, manufacturer and worker, but it is surely up to people who have accepted the duties of being public representatives to shake the people out of their carelessness and out of their lack of courage, and to join together to find some worthy person who could be supported by the votes of the people as a whole and put in there just to show that this country did not get through centuries of struggle in a democratic spirit in order to lie down under an idea that has raised its head and spent itself and destroyed itself and destroyed a lot of others with it throughout the world. I know there are difficulties in the matter. There is the difficulty of appearing to subordinate yourself to some one Party or another. There may be a difficulty of finance. There may be all kinds of difficulties. But we would not be here to-day and we would not have written in our Constitution that Ireland is a sovereign independent democratic State if our people in the past did not stand up against difficulties. We read here in the Constitution that all powers of government, legislative, executive and judicial, derive under God from the people, whose right it is to designate the rulers of the State. Do we believe in that? Someone has said: "Who would do aught for the glory of God must not be over wise nor act only after the measure of his means."

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy certainly acts in the spirit of that injunction.

General Mulcahy

We would not be here to-day if our people in the past were overwise with regard to their personal interests or with regard to their lives, or if they had acted only after the measure of their own means. We would not be here to-day if the people had not joined together from various parties and given their lives, knowing that the democratic spirit which maintained our people in the past would live after them. If ever a faith was justified it was that faith of the people who, in our own days, joined together from various parties and gave their lives so that this country might make itself secure and independent. We have our difficulties here, but look at the difficulties facing other countries. We may have had losses here, and losses by our own mistakes, but look at the losses other countries have had through their own mistakes I want to appeal to every Party in this House, and I want to declare that we are prepared to go any distance——

Mr. MacEntee

To oppose the Government.

General Mulcahy

——in the discharge of our duty to our people; to see that a people who would not allow their country to be kept in enslavement by outsiders will not allow it to be kept in enslavement by any proud, incompetent, heartless Party rising up in their own country. It is very distasteful at this hour of the day to be driven to discussing public matters in this spirit. I had no intention of doing it. I got up here to make a simple statement. I got up here to estimate the Government's attitude, and to say simply and plainly what it appeared to me to be, that is, that they wanted to get a complete totalitarian grip over every bit of public amenity and over every bit of public power in the country.

Mr. MacEntee

So the Deputy's reference to the Swastika was deliberate.

General Mulcahy

Absolutely.

Mr. MacEntee

I thought so.

General Mulcahy

I could not think of any other word.

Mr. Hilliard

And this Government was not elected by the people?

General Mulcahy

I am trying not to go into anything that happened before this Government got its last mandate. That is why I was discussing the Government's strength and how adequate that strength is to do what the Government is required to do.

Mr. MacEntee

Or the delegations of the totalitarian States.

General Mulcahy

But no Government, however great, can carry on without the initiative and the energy and the ordinary work of the ordinary man and woman of the country. You are strong enough for anything you may want to do. For goodness' sake, have sense. Do not make any more mistakes. We had to depend on the ordinary man and woman of the country to provide us with food. The Ministers could not do it, and this House could not do it. We had to depend on the ordinary man and woman to rally into the serried ranks of the Defence Forces. You could not defend yourselves, and we cannot do our work to-morrow except a spirit of citizenship is fostered in the ordinary man and woman of the country——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Is not the Deputy going outside the terms of this Bill?

General MacEoin

The Minister has interjected two speeches already.

General Mulcahy

I will not try either your patience or the Minister's any longer except to say this: We were simply playing as children in building up the Defence Forces since 1940 if we do not face the doing of our work properly to-morrow, and we were simply doing something that was outrageous if we asked the young men and women to risk their lives in defence work during the last four years if it was not to secure for them in the days that are to come the capacity and the sense to feel that they are free citizens of this country, that they have work to do, that they will have a place to do that work, and will be helped by Government action to join together effectively and fully, ignoring party and creed and class, in doing that work for the country as they were doing it in the Defence Forces. We are threatened by the Government's action with the breaking down of citizenship in this country. We are threatened with the complete domination of our people by that kind of cowardice which the Fianna Fáil Party knows so well how to engender in people, and if we allow it, we will drift into a position in which we will have repeated in this country all the disappointments, social, economic and spiritual, that have come to some of the countries in Europe. It is the responsibility of anybody who knows anything of how our people in the past brought themselves to the position of being sovereign and independent and safe to-day to leave nothing undone to challenge that spirit in the country. Therefore, I ask that we, the other Parties in this House, with the assistance of anybody else outside, will come together and will see if there is any worthy person who will stand in the gap to-day and with our assistance be a non-Party opponent of the purely Government Party candidate for Arus an Uachtaráin, so that in the difficult days that lie ahead of us we will have as the internal head of our State a person who is a citizen, a citizen pure and simple. Let us resurrect there a sign of courage, a sign of hope to our people that we can in this country rule our citizens in a spirit of citizenship and for the good of the citizens as a whole. I ask that in connection with the Presidential election. I ask that the same spirit dominate our work in approaching the election of persons who will rule our councils. There, again, in the new days dawning on the world, we might have expected to learn something from the horrible lessons we have had before us. We might have expected to look forward to a time when, with a pure spirit of citizenship, we might fill our councils with men and women who would devote all their life work to local problems. It is the doing of the local work and the solving of the local problems that will tend to strengthen the efficiency of this country.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

In connection with this Bill, I should like to point out that the matter to be discussed is very simple and very circumscribed. The whole question is that the poll for the President and the poll for local authorities be taken on the same day. There is nothing else in the Bill.

Mr. Norton

I take it that every other Deputy will have the same liberty as Deputy Mulcahy——

General Mulcahy

I hope so.

Mr. Norton

——or is that announcement being made, after his speech, for the guidance of other Deputies and you are excepting him?

Mr. Dillon

Surely it will be equally appropriate to define this Bill as a Bill to facilitate two steps towards a dictatorship on the same day, and discuss it on that basis?

Mr. MacEntee

Well, well, Deputy Dillon!

Mr. Dillon

Is not that perfectly relevant?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The House can deal only with the matter before it.

Mr. Dillon

The Government are proposing to establish a dictatorship.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy must have great powers of facial control if he can make that statement without smiling.

Mr. Dillon

I hope the Minister will have powers of facial control when we are finished with him.

Mr. Donnellan

The Minister seems to be very troubled about what the Constitution provides. Apparently, it is on account of certain things that the Constitution provides that this Bill has been introduced. First and foremost, as regards local elections, we are shortening the term of office. If I do not make a mistake, they are not three years in power, and I should like to make a comparison with the election that took place in 1934. In 1937 the period of office was extended, and local elections did not take place until 1942. It is our view that in 1934 you fought the elections on a political issue. In 1942 you pretended you did not, but really you did. All the same, you did not get good results out of it. Of course, you will do it now.

In our opinion the reason why you want both elections to be held on the one day is in order to save the political machine the trouble of doing its work on two separate days. We hear a lot about what the Constitution provides, but the Constitution also provides that the salary and the upkeep of the establishment shall amount to over £22,000—at least, if it is not the Constitution that provides that amount, our legislation provides it. I assure you that, as far as we are concerned, that is our main consideration. I think, as regards the Presidential election, that is the thing that is troubling the people of this country most at the present time.

On a few occasions I asked the Government to allow time for the consideration of a certain motion on the Order Paper, but that has been refused. I was told that the motion must wait its turn. Until such time as that motion comes before the House and is decided on—that is, the motion for the reduction of the President's salary and the upkeep of his establishment—our Party will not have anything to do or say as regards who will be the incoming President. If the Government will allow that motion to come before the House, we will take our part with the Fianna Fáil Party, the Labour Party and the Fine Gael Party in standing together for the selection of a man who is not a Party man. Until such time as you allow that motion to come before the House, we will not have hand, act or part in this matter.

As regards the number of candidates, the Minister seems to be very troubled. There may be two, three, or four. It is my opinion that the number of candidates will depend on the salary. Deputy Mulcahy spoke about the great responsibility on the man in the Park, the President. He talked of the great functions of the office and the great work he had to perform. I may give it as my opinion—and I believe it is the opinion of the vast majority of the people of this country—that he is only a rubber stamp and the coming man will be more than ever that if he is to be branded with the Party brush.

I will not keep the House any longer. Perhaps I have gone outside the terms of the Bill, but the Deputy who spoke before me was allowed to go outside its provisions also. I suggest that our motion should be allowed to come before the House. I appeal to other Parties, the Government Party included, to make some attempt to save the people from the expense of a Presidential election. I believe the various Parties should come together to select a man who will be above Party, who will accept a reasonable salary and whose establishment will involve only a reasonable expenditure. You will then be doing something that the people of the country will consider satisfactory—something better than could be provided by a Bill of this type.

Mr. Norton

I am afraid I do not see in this Bill the profound issues Deputy Mulcahy has been able to discover in it. I do not mind saying that off-hand I could name a hundred different and more vital issues affecting the people which could more usefully form the subject of legislation than the subject-matter of this Bill.

This country has many economic and social difficulties confronting it. These economic and social issues are the vital concern of our people, and it is the solution of these issues and not machinery Bills of this character that interests our people. We have a situation to-day in which tens of thousands of our people, because they cannot get employment here, are being driven elsewhere to earn a livelihood. We have another problem which takes the form of hundreds of thousands of our people having to live below the bare subsistence level because of our high cost of living. We have a Governmental wage policy which takes the form of grinding down the level of remuneration of the vast masses of our workers whilst at the same time permitting the prices of commodities to rise, apparently without challenge. It is to these issues the House ought to be directing its attention and not to the type of pettifogging issues which are raised in a Bill of this character.

I agree it is a most undesirable situation to have a Presidential and a local election held on the same day. If there is all the majesty that is alleged to be associated with the Presidential office in this country, then I think a Presidential election ought to be endowed with the honour of a separate poll. The people ought to go to the polls only to elect their President, if they are interested in electing a President, and local elections ought not to be directly associated with, or held on the same day as, a Presidential election.

The Government might very well have foreseen such a position and have arranged that, in a year in which the Presidential election and local elections were due to be held, the elections would be held on separate days, or that, in respect of the particular year, the period of office of the local authorities would be a statutory four years instead of the present statutory three years. Now we have a situation in which one has to go into a polling booth and elect a town commissioner and on the same day elect the President of the country. One can only hope that some person standing for election as a town commissioner will not discover, when the votes are counted, that he has been elected President in the mêlée which apparently is going to take place in the polling booths.

It is a very undesirable situation to have a ballot-box in a polling booth into which people have to put their votes for three entirely different sets of candidates. We may have a person voting for the Presidential candidates, a person voting for members of a corporation, urban council or town commissioners and a person voting for county councillors. Let us say that an elector sets out one morning in County Kildare or County Wexford, knowing that on that day he has to vote for a President, for certain members of a corporation or urban council and for county councillors. He has to keep the names in his head of the particular folk he wishes to vote for, and if there are separate ballot-boxes he must be sure to put the appropriate ballot paper into the appropriate box. If the Minister wants to mess up things completely, he is going a pretty good way about it by having the election held in such circumstances and I think it is rather a burlesque of the Presidential office, if I may say so, to have people voting for President and for town commissioners on the same day.

The Government might easily have avoided such an occurrence, but the fact that they did not take steps to prevent such a situation developing brings us up against very practical difficulties. There is the difficulty of whether the local elections are to be postponed to some other day and so give the Presidential election a fair field. That, of course, involves carrying the local elections over to a later period of the year and creates the undesirable practice of having two elections in one year—a situation which, I think, might easily have been avoided by a little forethought on the part of the Government and the Department of Local Government.

I notice from the papers during the past few days that the Minister, or rather his private secretary, is apparently engaged in a fracas with the editor of the Independent, and I was interested to read the views of the Minister and likewise the views of the Editor of the Irish Independent.

General Mulcahy

Or apparently the views of the private secretary.

Mr. Norton

We will come to that in a moment. The editor of the Independent says that the Minister's game and the Fianna Fáil game is to rally all the boys who go out to vote in the local elections to vote for Mr. Seán T.O Ceallaigh for the Presidency. I think the editor of the Independent is wrong and that the reverse is the game, that is, to get Mr. Seán T.O Ceallaigh, the Government candidate for the Presidency, to work up all the popular enthusiasm he can for the Government Party.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Would it not be better for Deputies to avoid the names of possible candidates?

Mr. Norton

We must know the names, because you could not put up people who would not do that. I want to show that this is a special selection off the shelf.

Mr. MacEntee

I thought the Labour Party had decided not to take any part in the Presidential election. I think the Deputy is sailing very close to the wind in this matter.

Mr. Norton

I suggest that the real purpose is not what the editor of the Independent says, that is, to rally the boys who vote in the local elections to vote for Mr. Seán T. O Ceallaigh as a candidate for the Presidency, but the opposite, that is, to get the boys who vote for Mr. Seán T. O Ceallaigh as a Fianna Fáil President to vote for the Fianna Fáil candidates at the local elections, so that the situation, so much desired by the Minister for Supplies, will be created whereby the local authorities will be packed full of Fianna Fáil nominees, of folk who will do whatever the Government in Dublin tells them to do, who will not question what is done by the Department of Local Government and who will pass any resolutions sent down to them by Fianna Fáil headquarters.

Mr. MacEntee

He is going to be a powerful candidate.

Mr. Norton

The Minister may laugh if he likes, but he is the Minister's candidate. That is the real strategy behind the Government's proposal— to try to get people out to vote for the President, and when they are out to say to them: "Look, lads, before you go home, you might also vote for candidates for the local authorities and vote in the Fianna Fáil nominees. Having voted for our candidate for the Presidency, you ought to complete a good day's work by voting for the Fianna Fáil candidates in the local elections, and, having packed the local authorities sufficiently with Fianna Fáil nominees, we will be able to get them to accept unquestioningly any instructions we send down, whether from Fianna Fáil headquarters or the Local Government Department, controlled by a Fianna Fáil Minister". As I said, while the viewpoint which the Editor of the Independent has expressed is one which in ordinary circumstances would secure general approval, namely, that it is desirable to separate the election of the President from the election of members of local authorities, I think that on this occasion he has really gone wide of the mark.

On the question of the viewpoint of the Editor of the Independent vis-a-vis the viewpoint of the Minister for Local Government, I think the Minister, when he does get into a row with the editor of a newspaper, ought to sign the letters himself.

Mr. MacEntee

Does this arise?

Mr. Norton

It is most unbecoming that a Minister should dictate a letter to the editor of a newspaper and then get a civil servant to sign it.

Mr. MacEntee

There is nothing about the Minister writing letters which arises here.

Mr. Cafferky

Has the Minister got the jitters?

Mr. Norton

The Minister ought to get an injection of bromide from somebody. When the Minister gets into a row——

Mr. MacEntee

There is nothing in this Bill about letter-writing.

General Mulcahy

There is this about it, that it is part of the general scheme of building up the totalitarian power to make the civil servants the mouthpieces and the servants of Ministers, and to make them talk as ignorantly and as impudently as Ministers.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Can the Deputy relate these matters to the matters under discussion?

Mr. Norton

Easily, if the Minister can be brought back to sanity. The Minister is alleged to hold certain views which he expressed in a newspaper the other day.

Mr. MacEntee

What has this to do with the Bill?

Mr. Norton

All these views relate to the Presidential election and the election of local authorities. I want to find out if these are really the Minister's views or the views of the Minister's secretary, and in order that there shall be no doubt about that in future, I think the Minister ought to sign his own letters to the Press, so that there will be no possible doubt that these are his views and not those of a secretary who may be thrown a leading article and told to reply to it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The only question the House is asked to decide is whether the polls will be taken on the same day.

Mr. Norton

I want to get at the Minister's strategy on the whole matter. I know the Minister can write nasty letters when writing to high ecclesiastical authorities, but he would not annoy the editor of the Independent by writing that type of letter to him. But this poor unfortunate secretary is told: “You go into action for me, and say what you like!” He has to write the letter setting out these views for an irresponsible Minister, which he probably does not share in the slightest, because very few people share the Minister's views, either in his own Department or elsewhere. I want to refer to the Minister's general policy not merely in respect of the date of the local elections but in respect of elections to local authorities in particular.

Mr. MacEntee

That does not arise.

Mr. Norton

I suggest, Sir, that you invite the Minister to take the Chair.

Mr. MacEntee

I think I am entitled to put, as a point of order, that any reference to the Minister's policy in relation to local authorities is not in order on this Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think that the election of local authorities and "other matters relating to the matters aforesaid" come in.

Mr. MacEntee

If that is your ruling, I think it is an outrage. I do not think the Minister's policy in relation to local authorities arises. It properly arises on the Estimate.

Mr. D. Morrissey

Is the Minister now challenging the ruling of the Chair?

Mr. MacEntee

I am saying what I have said. The Deputy has been allowed to discuss the manner in which I order my private office. He has been allowed to refer on this Bill to a difference of opinion which may exist between myself and some others. He is now proceeding to discuss, I understand, the general policy of the Minister in relation to local authorities. I am putting it to you that that matter is not in order.

Mr. D. Morrissey

On a point of order, I submit——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I do not think the Deputy is quite entitled to discuss the administration of the Minister in relation to general matters, but if he can relate the specific things which he first raised, certain specific letters, to the present election, I think he is in order.

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I am on my feet. In relation to Deputy Norton, the Chair has ruled that he was entitled to take a certain line. The Minister is now challenging your ruling. I submit that he has no right or authority to do that. Am I to take it that, as a result of the Minister's challenge, the previous ruling is now being changed?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I have not changed the ruling. What the Minister may think of my ruling is of no importance to me.

Mr. MacEntee

The only principle in this Bill is whether the election of the local authorities should be held on the same date as the Presidential election. I submit that my general attitude to policy, whatever it may be, in relation to local authorities cannot be raised on this Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I have ruled that the Minister's administration of general matters cannot be raised.

General Mulcahy

I submit that it raises the question of the reasons why the Minister makes changes in this Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Norton is in order in referring to certain specific letters which, he has said, had reference to the present election. I would ask him to confine himself to these.

Mr. Norton

Deputy Mulcahy was permitted by the Chair to discuss the general question of citizenship in relation to the election of local authorities, the interest of the citizen in local administration, and the desirability of encouraging the citizen to manifest the maximum possible interest in local administration. I think it is in the machinery of local government, and not in the cloisters in the Park, that real democracy can manifest itself. I think it is much more important to have democracy on the local authorities than to worry about some rubber stamp activities of the President whom people do not see and who rarely touches the lives of the ordinary people. It is because I believe that real democracy in local government is much more important than the other issues which I regretted to see Deputy Mulcahy raise on this Bill, that I think it is desirable that a stand should be made, and that every opportunity should be availed of to insist on local authorities being given the maximum amount of power to govern in the sphere of local administration.

Deputy Mulcahy said that he did not agree with politics being introduced into the local elections. I can see nothing wrong in politics being introduced into the local elections. I think that every good citizen is interested in politics, whether these politics be national politics or local politics. I think that good citizens ought to have a municipal policy just as they ought to have a national policy, the policy being one of endeavouring to convert the people to the acceptance of whatever appears to the people to be the most progressive municipal policy. I hope I did not misunderstand Deputy Mulcahy when he said that the Fine Gael Party had not contested the local elections on a political basis. I went through one very stormy local election which the Fine Gael did, in fact, contest on a political basis. That was in 1934. It was not just a nice drawing-room party.

General Mulcahy

Read some of the history of the year 1934.

Mr. Norton

I know all about it. We have had more pleasant local elections since then.

General Mulcahy

And before.

Mr. Norton

I think that a clean local government election is a healthy national aim, and that it helps to quicken the interest of the citizens in public affairs. That, surely, is a desirable thing in a democracy which is not the most brilliant in the world from the point of view of its knowledge of political, social, and economic questions. It seems to me, therefore, that any consideration of the holding of local elections, the fixation of the date for local elections, or the arrangements for the conduct of local elections ought to take cognizance of this fact— that the main purpose of local elections ought to be to induce the citizens to take the maximum possible interest in these elections. You can do that best if the citizens who stand for election, and those who vote for them can be induced to realise that the local authority has wide powers of implementing a municipal policy which is calculated to appeal to those who are municipal electors. But, of course, thanks to the passing of the County Management Act, which, unfortunately, was supported both by the Fine Gael Party and the Fianna Fáil Party, we now have the situation in which it is difficult to induce people to stand for election to local authorities. I think it will be still more difficult to induce people to vote at local elections because of the widespread and growing belief that the local authorities have no very effective powers, and that, consequently, there is no justification for the former interest that was taken in the local elections.

We have the situation now in which there is a county manager functioning in each area. He functions not as the manager for a county council, but as the manager of the county council. It has been shown in many places, in this city and elsewhere, that these county managers have arbitrary powers, and that they can set at defiance any attempt by the members of the local authorities to secure the adoption of a particular line of policy, if that line of policy is not personally approved of by the county or city manager. I suggest to the Government, therefore, that what they ought to do in connection with this Bill is to assure the House that what is meant is to introduce complementary legislation, part of which ought to be to give back to the local authorities some of the powers which they previously had, and to make the county manager not the manager of the council, but the manager for the council, and to leave to the representatives of the local electors the main responsibility of shaping local policy.

If we are to maintain democracy here and preserve our conceptions of democracy we can best do that by giving the widest possible powers to the local authorities. It will not be done by holding local elections in an atmosphere in which local interest has been largely chloroformed by denying to local authorities the democratic rights which formerly they wielded and, generally speaking, wielded well and wisely, and with considerable local approval.

Mr. D. Morrissey

There is one aspect of the results which will flow from this Bill which will not be for the public convenience but which will lead to a good deal of confusion. If the Bill becomes law, in certain areas, for intance, in urban areas, there will be no less than three separate ballot papers presented to the electorate. Those of us who have experience of local elections where there were only two separate ballot papers have some idea of the confusion that arose and the number of ballot papers that were spoiled. If we are going to have three separate ballot papers to be marked by each voter I doubt very much that it will be possible to have the poll completed within the normal hours. There may be in an urban district a number of illiterate voters. We know the extent to which an illiterate voter can delay the poll, even when there is only one ballot paper, but if the presiding officer has to read and explain to the voter three different papers, we can imagine the confusion of the voter and we can imagine the delay that will take place. The same will apply in the case of the ordinary old man or woman who goes to the poll and who is perhaps barely able to read and barely able to mark the paper. That poor old person will be presented with three ballot papers containing different names or perhaps the same names. That aspect of the Bill apparently has not occurred to the Government.

The Minister, of course, both in the Dáil and in his controversy with the newspaper to which Deputy Norton has referred, has tried to create the impression that this rush is unavoidable, that no provision could possibly have been made before the present moment. That is all nonsense, of course. If I may say so, I was rather disappointed with the direction the debate took after the opening given by Deputy Mulcahy. If we had any doubts as to the mentality of the people who sit opposite and who are the Government of this country, we saw it again displayed by the Minister for Local Government. The Minister shows himself as a dictator. He has refused consistently in this House to accept the decision of the Chair. He has on innumerable occasions attempted to intimidate the Chair by challenging every point in every ruling. That is not surprising to those of us who have been watching him for a number of years, both inside and outside this House. Recently, we saw, in relation to a distinguished churchman, the same insolence displayed as is displayed here. Deputy Mulcahy set out his objections to this Bill because, as he said, it was going to put the coping stone on what is sought to be erected here by the Fianna Fáil Government, that is, the totalitarian State. The Government are in an all-powerful position to-day. They can put what they like through this House. The Seanad has very little, if any, powers but in so far as it has powers they are controlled by the Government there. There is a censorship, the abuse of which can control the expressions of opinion of people either inside or outside this House, can either suppress them or distort them. We are now going to have a Fianna Fáil President in the Park and, finally, this attempt to choke the last place in which criticism might be offered to what is being done, namely, the local authorities.

The Minister said, by way of interjection, that the Government had not expressed any opinion about local authorities. Apparently he does not read his colleague, Deputy Lemass.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister for Industry and Commerce.

Mr. D. Morrissey

In this case, he was speaking as Mr. Lemass. He was speaking to a Fianna Fáil meeting in an hotel in Dublin.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think the Deputy must refer to him as Minister here.

Mr. D. Morrissey

I have not the slightest objection. I always do refer to the Minister as the Minister for Industry and Commerce, or the Minister for Supplies, as the case may be. On this occasion, when he was speaking to a Fianna Fáil club, I assume he was speaking not as Minister but as Mr. Lemass—a member of the Fianna Fáil Party. However, that is a small point, and if you like I will refer to him as the Minister for Industry and Commerce. In any case, he has sent forth a challenge that every effort is to be made, and every link is to be strained by Fianna Fáil to capture a complete and absolute majority upon every local authority in this country. Then we have the Dáil, the Seanad, the Park, the censorship and the local authority. When Deputy Mulcahy spoke about the one-Party State, he was not exaggerating in the slightest. The analogy between what is happening here and what it is being sought to bring about here, and what has happened in certain countries on the continent, with the results to which Deputy Mulcahy referred, is very close, even to the dictators. The idea of the Minister being shocked that a prominent churchman should dare to have an opinion other than the opinion shared by the Minister makes the analogy much closer.

I do not know whether or not Deputies see the matter as clearly as some of us think we see it. The fact is that, no matter how closely the cloak of democracy may have been wrapped around them, we have had a dictatorship of a sort in this country for a number of years. We now have the position when that dictatorship is going to stand forth naked unless the people of this country come to their senses before it is too late.

Mr. Corish

I should like to add to what Deputy Morrissey has said about the confusion that is going to prevail if the Presidential election and the local elections are held on the same day. On the last occasion, three years ago, when the Postponement of Elections Bill was being discussed, I referred the Minister to the confusion that is always created in urban areas. I am very familiar with the position in the town of Wexford. At the last election the number of members to be elected to the corporation was 12; there were 36 candidates. Wexford County Council area elected six; there were 21 candidates. There were 37 people before the electorate. Now we are going to have a Presidential election in addition to that. This Bill should be called the Confusion of Electors Bill, because that is the state of affairs it will bring about.

Of course, the Ministers at the present moment are not a bit concerned about local electors. They are not a bit concerned about local authorities. Local authorities have so little power now that it is hardly worth while holding elections at all. It would appear from the Bill as at present before the House that the Minister recognises that. Deputy Donnellan has pointed out that the local authorities will not be three years in office until August next. If the Presidential position is as important as the Minister would have us believe, surely there should be a separate day set aside for the Presidential election. The Minister has gone so far as to say that there may not be sufficient ballot-boxes to carry out three elections at one time, and the ballot papers are going to be thrown everywhere, in any box that is available. If the position of President is the dignified office that the Minister would have us believe, that is not the way in which to carry out an election.

I agree with Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Morrissey when they say that this Government is heading direct for a dictatorship. We have had dictatorship through the medium of Emergency Powers Orders during the period of the war and, now, as Deputy Morrissey stated, it has come out into the open, and unless the people assert themselves we are going to have established here a system which brought ruin and degradation in its wake in other parts of the world. I suggest to the Minister that the Presidential election is of sufficient importance to warrant being held on a separate day, as it is absolutely impossible to carry out elections properly if there are to be three elections held on the same day. As Deputy Morrissey pointed out, a considerable amount of time is taken up with illiterate voters. On the occasion of the last election I know that some people in Wexford lost votes because there was a rush at the end of the day, and some illiterate voters occupied so much time in the booths that other electors were prevented from registering their votes. If that happened on the last occasion, I suggest that the position is going to be infinitely worse this time. If an illiterate person is handed three ballot papers, one containing from 30 to 40 names, another containing from 20 to 30 names, and then a Presidential ballot-paper, and if some of the names on these papers are similar, that will create confusion.

Apparently the Government are not concerned about that. They are not concerned, I submit, about getting through the ballot boxes a true reflection as far as local elections are concerned of what is the people's mind. It is hard to know whether they are more concerned about the Presidential election or the local elections, but, in consequence of the fact that they are bent on putting one of their own Front Bench members in as President, they have apparently no respect whatever for the dignity of the position. I am not referring to the personality of any candidate, but he has to be a politician, and I say that that is no place for a politician. On the occasion of the previous election of a President there was agreement. Probably there is a chance of agreement now on some other prominent Irishman. I am not suggesting that that is the wisest policy, but it would be a better policy than having a political President, who will do everything he is asked to do by the Fianna Fáil Government and who will be as has been suggested by many people, merely a rubber stamp. A rubber stamp that costs £20,000 a year is a very dear commodity.

Mr. Costello

Whether this is a Bill to provide that there shall be local elections on the same day as the election for President, or whether it is one to provide that the elections shall be on the same day for the President and for local authorities, does not seem to matter a whole lot. From some of the remarks made by the Minister it would seem that there is a distinction to be made. What does matter is confined to the purpose behind this measure. It was stated in the debate, and we all know that there have been utterances by prominent members of the Government, that the Presidential election must be fought on a political basis; that there must be a nominee of a political Party put forward. We have also had utterances from members of the Government to the effect that it is desirable and essential that local elections should be fought on political issues. Of course we know that it has been the policy of the Fianna Fáil Party for many years to fight local elections on political issues.

When we find these statements made from authoritative sources, and know that the Presidential election is going to be fought on a political issue; when we know that there is going to be a political nominee for the office; and when we find that there is going to be a contest on political lines in local elections, and have a Bill providing that both elections shall be held on the same day, then we wonder if we cannot draw the obvious inference, that Fianna Fáil wants the President to be a nominee of theirs and that they also want a majority of the local authorities to be their nominees. Is that a principle that commends itself to the House? That appears to me to be the principle behind this Bill. This Bill is not designed to save the taxpayers' money by having two elections on the same day, and it is not designed, having regard to the matters I referred to, to save the electors trouble. The Bill is not designed to minimise the number of elections that are being inflicted on the country by the Fianna Fáil Government and Party, but is designed for the sole purpose of carrying out the policy of this Government, which is that every piece of State machinery shall be directed and maintained for the purpose of further advancing, if possible, the aims of the Fianna Fáil Party.

The leader of the Opposition and Deputy Morrissey pointed out that the whole aim is to get control of all the activities of the public and municipal life of this country in the interests of a Party. The aim of this Administration has been to control quasi-Government bodies and companies so that the whole structure and administration of this State is directed in the interests of a political Party. As Deputy Morrissey stated, this country is being governed in the interests of a political Party, tending towards the creation of a one-Party dictatorship. That is the principle behind this Bill; that is what we object to. The more innocuous a measure of this kind appears to be the more carefully have we to examine it. On its face this would be a Bill to save the electorate trouble and to save the taxpayers expense, but, having regard to the facts which cannot be controverted, the only aim of this measure is to create a one-Party dictatorship.

I was interested to hear the views expressed by Deputy Norton on the proper attitude of political Parties towards municipal and local elections. In this Party we always had the view that as a Party we should take our proper place in municipal and local affairs. That is entirely different from saying that we should fight local elections on a purely political basis or on political issues. We have announced, as we always did, our intention to take part in local elections in collaboration with other Parties who come forward with proper municipal policies, and to do the best that we can, and to give the greatest possible beneficial contribution that we can as a Party, with our nominees in the local bodies, towards local purposes and municipal objects. We want to keep that so far as is possible from national issues and Party issues.

The Government policy of fighting local elections on a political basis is not in order that Fianna Fáil should have a municipal policy on the question at all, but that those people who are on the local bodies will work in close co-operation and collaboration with the Party cumainn and the bosses and the Party in this House, so that they shall have a unified effort behind the Government in keeping the present Party in power and in furthering the political objects of that Party. That is what we object to, and that is what we mean when we say that we do not want to have the local elections conducted on a Party basis. We are prepared to work in municipal and local affairs with other Parties for the advancement and for the benefit of local communities. We will fight these elections in places which we think fit on a proper municipal policy. This Bill, innocuous as it appears on its face to be, is in fact a sinister measure, as sinister as many of the measures and many of the administrative policies and actions of the present Government have been in recent years. We accordingly intend to vote against the Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Parliamentary Secretary to conclude.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Local Government and Public Health (Mr. Childers)

I should say at the outset that this debate has developed on lines which, to me at any rate, are totally unexpected. I do not know whether to laugh or to cry at the observations of the Fine Gael Party in regard to this Bill. I might laugh, because I cannot help feeling that this accusation, that the Government, supported by the Fianna Fáil Party, are tending towards totalitarianism, is ludicrous beyond belief I feel almost like weeping because the observations of the Opposition would prevent for another period the development of what is always useful to a Government—a live, vigorous, and respected Opposition.

A great part of Deputy Mulcahy's speech was nothing more than unmitigated abuse of the Irish people. It was the Irish people that put the Fianna Fáil Party into office and thus enabled the present Administration to continue. It was the Irish people who, in their wisdom, decided that the Fianna Fáil Party should be in a majority in the State and the suggestion that our majority might in some way be extended as a result of this Bill so as to lead to dictatorship is merely an accusation that the Irish people themselves are capable of losing their own powers of self-government through some ill-advised and unwise attitude either in the local government or the Presidential election. I cannot help feeling that these observations are nothing but the last pitiful excuse of a defeated Party. Because Fianna Fáil has been successful, because a Fianna Fáil Administration has again taken office, automatically it must be considered totalitarian. Because there may or may not be candidates with some political flavour attached to them in either of these elections, we are therefore pursuing a policy destined to remove from the Irish people all the powers they have secured for themselves by their struggle in the last 20 years. Because we have a majority we believe in depriving the people of the power through which we secured office. I cannot help feeling that when tomorrow morning's papers are read the vast majority of the people will laugh at the statements made in the House to-night.

Through reading a good many periodicals which emanate from the United States of America I recall the comments made about the Presidential election in that country. There they have a very rigid Party system which goes much further than it does in this country under which many offices, election to which in this country is on an impartial basis and without regard to politics, are the reward of Party politicians. It was a very fierce election. It was an election in which nothing was spared in the way even of personal abuse of the two principal candidates. But, whatever abuse there was, I did not find that in the United States the Opposition Party thought fit to castigate the Party in office on the ground that, because they held a majority and intended to obtain a majority again, they were proposing to throw aside ordinary democratic government. In that country, where the election was fought on a basis of greater political abuse than here, at least that observation was not made, evidently because in that country the Opposition Party could hardly imagine that such an accusation would be taken seriously.

The very use of the word "totalitarian" in connection with the whole issue of this Bill is ludicrous. A totalitarian regime implies the complete suppression of all speeches of a hostile character made in connection with the prevailing Government. It implies secret expenditure of Government funds for the sake of securing and maintaining a majority. It implies, at least more often than not, the maintenance of a semi-private army. It implies that the Party desiring to maintain power makes use of the weapon of insinuating the idea that in some way democracy is associated with corruption in public life. So far as that is concerned, if I remember rightly, the last election was fought principally on the basis that at least certain members of the Government had lent themselves to corruption. To that extent it was the Opposition which was lending flavour to the idea of dictatorship.

The present Government, as the House knows, believe in a broad national policy of reconstruction. We neither claim to be conservative nor laissez faire on the one hand, or to have any extreme views with regard to the influence of the State on the life of the community on the other. I would welcome a more vigorous opposition in this country. I think that, in the long run, it might be better for the country if for the next five years we had to fight every step of the way. But, as I said, at the moment we have an overwhelming majority in this Dáil and we will continue our broad national policy of development. I cannot see that our determination to do that, and the success we have achieved in the last six months have any relation to the possibility, now or in the future, of a totalitarian regime in this country. I could continue in this vein for a very long time. I could give the House the history of the totalitarian Governments in Europe and show how completely they differ in every respect from the philosophy and opinions of members of the Government and the Fianna Fáil Party. I should say that there is a very large number of members of this Party who, if they are prepared to lay down their lives in defence of the country, aside from external invasion, it would be for the preservation of democracy above all else, and above all other considerations, and I say that with absolute sincerity.

I think there is no need even at this juncture to labour too much this absurd accusation that we are trying to institute a dictatorship. We are discussing a Bill dealing with machinery to bring about the Presidential and local elections on the same day. It is quite obvious to anyone that arguments could be evinced for holding the elections separately. In asking the people to exercise the franchise and carry out their duties as citizens, we must not ask too much of them in relation to the issues at stake. If we can secure orderly thought, a reasonable viewpoint, reasonable consideration of the issues, both in the Presidential election and the local government election, by having the polling days coincidental, and if the advantages of doing that are as obvious as are the disadvantages of holding separate elections, with the possible lack of interest being shown in the second of the elections, then there is justification for this Bill passing through the House. The Government believe that, taking it large and wide, it is better on the present occasion to have the elections on the same day.

We have considered most carefully all the matters which have been raised, all the difficulties mentioned by Deputy Norton, Deputy Morrissey and Deputy Corish, in regard to the confusion that might arise. We will take every step to secure that, in connection with the polling arrangements, the electors will not be confused. As far as possible, there will be separate polling compartments, separate places, even if in the same building, for voting in the different elections. We are taking every step to ensure that there will be no confusion in regard to the appearance of the different forms of ballot paper. Deputy Morrissey suggested that, on the occasion of a former local government election, there were many spoiled papers in places where there were only two elections—for, say, an urban authority and a county council. On investigation, I find that the spoiled papers in local government elections have been definitely less than I per cent.

The main confusion that could arise or would be likely to arise seems to be between the elections in respect of the two local authorities. In other words, possibly part of that percentage of spoilt papers may have been due to lack of understanding on the part of a certain type of elector, when presented with two papers, one for an urban council and one for a local authority.

If the elector can overcome any difficulty he may face in separating in his mind these two elections, the simple act of recording his preference in respect of one, two or even three Presidential candidates will not be a difficult or complicated matter. In other words, the addition of a third election, in which the issue is very simple, the candidates very few in number, the paper of a different description, is not likely to add materially to the number of spoilt votes. Therefore, we can say that no abuse is likely to arise as a result of there being three elections occurring in certain areas.

As I have said, we will take every step to avoid confusion and make sure that the elections will take place on an orderly basis. Looking back at the past, since 1932, in the administration of both local government and Dáil Éireann elections, I think I can say without exaggeration that the administration has been excellent. In fact, there have been amazingly few complaints. We have introduced a number of novelties, such as the taking of the plebiscite for the Constitution, and on every occasion the officers concerned, both in the Department of Local Government and Public Health and under the local authorities, advised and directed by the Minister, the duties have been performed efficiently and well. I do not believe that difficulties are likely to arise on the present occasion and I think I speak for the Government in saying that we hope the electors will exercise the franchise wisely and well.

I would like to make one more comment in connection with some of the remarks of the Opposition. There seems to be almost petty contempt in the idea that a person who has taken part in the political life of this country is necessarily unsuited to be President. I would like members of the House to think over this statement. Regardless of what the Government do, regardless of our decision, regardless of the type of person nominated to be President, the implication behind the statement of the Opposition is quite clearly that a person who has taken part in political life becomes almost automatically excluded from the Presidency. It is stated that a person who has taken part in political life, no matter what his character or attainments may be, cannot when he becomes President, be capable of that impartial attitude and wide exercise of his powers which would be expected of him. I think that statement is ludicrous.

People rise to prominence in various ways—some through their political activities, some through their commercial success, some through the exercise of some cultural power; but one of the most notable ways in which people come to prominence in this country is through taking an interest in public life. If they take a large interest in public life, if they become known to the vast majority of the people, if they enter into such a position in the life of this country that their candidature becomes of interest to the ordinary citizen in exercising the franchise for the first time in regard to the Presidency, it is more than likely that they will have, in fact, expressed their views on political matters. It is not only insulting to this House but insulting to the members of the Government and even insulting to the members of the Opposition Front Bench, of which Deputy Mulcahy is a member, who might be described as the shadow bench of Ministers, to suggest that it is impossible for a person to be either on this Bench or on that Bench to become President and then not be able to remove himself from the Party sphere of things and exercise his powers wisely and well. The idea is an absurd one. I can think of a number of persons sitting in this House and in different Parties who would be quite capable of exercising the powers of the President well and of acting as the person we would like to have in office here as a symbol of good citizenship. We would be creating a very serious precedent if we were to admit that, in future, no matter how the President may be elected, whether we continue the present procedure under the Constitution or change it, in some way we must debar persons who have taken part in public and political life.

There are very many issues on which the President can take a lead, in making speeches and in presiding on occasions of importance, where what he has to say can have no relation to Party politics. They are issues in which we ask for a greater sense of citizenship throughout the country, regardless of political views held by the persons concerned. There are issues where we ask for loyalty in regard to economic measures which would have the support of every Party in the House. There are issues in regard to the defence of the country, to the economic efficiency of the country, to the cultural advancement of the country, in which there need be no question of narrow Party politics.

I trust that the country will not follow the lead given to them by the Opposition here to-day. It may be many years before we have advanced sufficiently in self-government to be able to find a person who had been so prominent in the life of the community that he was, naturally, a good candidate for the Presidency and yet who, perhaps for very good reasons, had divorced himself so entirely from politics that no one could attach a political label to him. There is hardly a person in the professional life of this country, no matter if he never spoke on any political platform, who could not be labelled with a Party label of one kind or another. I challenge members of the professions in this House, whether members of the Bar or of any other profession, to name any person with sufficient prominence to warrant his being nominated for the Presidency and who, even if he never spoke on political matters, could not be labelled as belonging to or believing in one political Party or another, and I suggest that it is very unlikely that we could conduct either local government elections or a Presidential election in which the political issue might not arise.

I think, Sir, that I have said sufficient on the Second Stage of this Bill to convince the House that this is nothing but a machinery measure and that we are not engaged in a subtle plot to overthrow democracy: that we are not proposing, when the President is elected or when the local government elections have been held, to suppress the newspapers, to suppress freedom of speech, to start a private army, to suppress the trades unions, or to do any of the things that are usually ascribed to totalitarian governments, and I trust that in future discussions on this Bill it will not be necessary to refer again to the farcical views put forward by the Opposition to-day. I trust that on the Committee Stage we can get down to studying the technical aspects of the Bill, and I am sure that any suggestions on the technical aspects of the Bill that are put forward by members of the Opposition will be very carefully examined by the Minister.

Question put and declared carried.

Committee Stage ordered for Wednesday, 18th April.