Tairgím:—
Go nglacfar le Tuarascáil an Choiste um Nós Imeachta agus Príbhléidí (T. 117).
That the Report of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges (T. 117) be adopted.
Committee on Procedure and Privileges—Additional Report re Wearing of Gowns.
What does this involve?
A gown for the Leas-Cheann Comhairle.
The Deputy has a printed copy of the report. The essence of it is that the Committee recommend a gown to be worn by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle when occupying the Chair.
And our adoption of this would constitute a confirmation of that decision?
Yes.
I suppose one might as well fight the last rearguard action in a matter of this kind. I cannot help feeling that most Deputies approach it rather in a spirit of levity, without any feeling that it is a matter of real significance. I think they make a great mistake in that. Deputy Breen and I, who do not see very many things from the same angle, found ourselves, I think, in substantial agreement at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges in taking the view that while a strong case could be made, and was, in fact, made, for reviving the practice in an Irish Parliament of having the presiding officer of the Parliament suitably attired in official garb, the whole significance of that step would be obscured and vitiated if a similar provision were made for any other functionary of Oireachtas Éireann. I have always emphasised— and I think rightly—that in a Parliament such as we have, which is a system of government extremely difficult to make work, the success or failure of the best intentioned men will depend very largely on the way in which the functions of the Ceann Comhairle are discharged and the attitude of Deputies on all sides of the House to the person who fills that position.
There is no use concealing, if you have some experience of the work of this Parliament, that cordial as may be the sentiments of all Deputies for the various occupants of the position of Leas-Cheann Comhairle, his position of prestige in this House bears no relation to that of the Ceann Comhairle. For instance, he never loses his Party character, he remains an active member of the Party for which he was elected by the electorate. It is true that, by convention, he is expected to be rather a shadowy figure, but that is purely by convention. There is nothing to prevent him from entering most vigorously into the proceedings of the House. It is quite otherwise with the Ceann Comhairle; he is required to withdraw entirely from his normal activities and there is a special provision that, in consideration of that withdrawal, he is always returned unopposed—not, as in Great Britain, by courtesy, but under the law—and is automatically declared elected for the constituency for which he was first nominated. No such provision attaches to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I do not think any Deputy will deny that it is common experience that, when the atmosphere of this deliberative Assembly becomes somewhat turbulent —as happily it infrequently does—a very material contribution to the restoration of calm and forbearance is made by the return of the Ceann Comhairle to the chair. That does not arise essentially from the personality of the present occupant, though doubtless it makes a substantial contribution, but is due to the fact that the Ceann Comhairle is recognised by Parties on all sides of the House to be not only the maintainer of order in the House but the defender of the rights and privileges of each individual Deputy, no matter where he sits.
All that sums up, in my mind, to a position which should be marked out as quite unique in our social fabric. Therefore, to prescribe robes for such a person seems appropriate and I could well envisage that we would provide that there should be a ceremonial robe, such as the chief justice may wear on the day of the opening of the courts, which would be placed on the Ceann Comhairle's shoulder on the day of his election to the position of Ceann Comhairle; and that he would have a work-a-day robe, such as judges usually wear in the ordinary day-to-day proceedings of the courts, which the Ceann Comhairle would ordinarily wear during the ordinary proceedings of the House. But the moment we proceed to confer a similar raiment on the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, we are not adorning the office of Ceann Comhairle: we are simply ensuring that, if the occupant of the Chair is wearing a dirty suit, we have provided him with something with which to cover it—and that is a very different thing. The question is whether we are trying to ensure that, if the occupant of the Chair is not properly dressed, we will cover him up with some kind of nightshirt that will make him look decent, or whether the provision of a robe or gown for the Ceann Comhairle is a mark by the Legislature, the supreme authority of this country, that its first officer and principal member is somebody who commands the respect and deference of every citizen in the State.
I remind you solemnly that the British House of Commons, who, in matters of this character, are no fools, when persuaded for reasons of expediency to allow someone other than the Speaker to preside over their deliberations, consented to that arrangement always providing that neither in his attire nor in his place would he usurp the position of the Speaker himself. We have provided in this House that there should be only one Chair from which the Ceann Comhairle or his deputy would preside. We have not here the same rite of traditional regalia and apparel which is available to an ancient ceremonial State such as Great Britain, but we have a good historical precedent for providing a suitable robe for the Ceann Comhairle. We might possibly carry over to the Parliament we have to-day the tradition of the independent Parliament which was destroyed by the Act of Union 150 years ago, by arranging that the ceremonial gown of the Ceann Comhairle would be identical with that of the last Speaker of the Irish House of Commons, John Foster.
I know that matters of this kind are important, but I also know with profound regret that few of my colleagues in this House appreciate that fact. We have got along very well without any robes for the Ceann Comhairle in the past. I would much sooner that we should continue in that way than that we should start distributing them broadcast. If we start putting robes on the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, we will be putting robes on every other official and dignitary of this Oireachtas before we have finished—and when we do, we have lost the opportunity to do something very valuable and, furthermore, we have instituted a system whereby, if we start distributing robes of that kind generally, we will bring nothing but ridicule on our institutions.
Therefore, I strongly recommend the House to reject the proposal put forward. The Committee envisages the possibility of rejection, as they had not made a categorical recommendation to the House. They have simply incorporated their views in a report and categorically stated that they wished the House to take the final responsibility in making the decision. I urge the House most strongly to reject the proposal to provide robes for any officer of this House except the Ceann Comhairle and I remind the House that, if they reject that advice, they will, in my judgment, seriously withdraw from the unique position which the Ceann Comhairle holds at present. Whether we like it or not, we are going to suggest to succeeding generations of the Members of this House that, in some measure in any case, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle shares the Ceann Comhairle's powers. That is an entirely false view. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle functions, and should only function, here as the deputy of the Ceann Comhairle.
Deputies will remember that in motions for the closure and, I think, in motions for the suspension of Deputies, the Ceann Comhairle must occupy the Chair. That proviso is clearly named to mark out the fact that in measures which strike at the fundamental rights of Deputies, the judgment of the Ceann Comhairle himself must be taken, as to the propriety of such a proposal being considered by the House, before it proceeds to come to a decision. These safeguards are of incalculable value. Without safeguards of that character Parliament cannot work. Unless there is accepted the duty of the Ceann Comhairle to protect and defend minorities against majorities, Parliament will break down. If you detract from the position of the Ceann Comhairle you are striking at the very foundation of Parliament. Whether you believe these things or not it is important that they should be put on the records. If you do not believe them then you do not understand them. If you understand and believe them you ought to be vigilant now in this matter, which, superficially, may appear to be trivial, but, in fact, is a precedent to diminish the position that a Ceann Comhairle could ever hold in this House, and will be marked as the first crack in what is in fact the citadel of our liberty, in the independence and safety of Parliament and every elected Deputy, no matter where he is. I strongly urge the House to reject the proposal contained in this tentative report.
As the representative of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, I should tell the House that when we deliberated on the question of providing a gown for the Ceann Comhairle, and also for the Leas-Cheann Comhairle, we had all the matters to which Deputy Dillon has referred present to our minds. I should say, first of all, that it is the duty of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to examine this question from every angle. The reason why such a Committee has been functioning in this House at all is because Deputies would not have the same time to devote to matters of this kind that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges have. As the House is aware, the matter has already been discussed in the Dáil. While there was a certain divergent viewpoint it seemed to me that the majority in the House, judging by those who spoke for their Parties, were in favour of providing the Leas-Cheann Comhairle with a gown, as well as providing the Ceann Comhairle with a gown. It was not our idea to detract in the least from the primacy of the Ceann Comhairle when we suggested that the Leas-Cheann Comhairle should be provided with a gown and, in proof of that, I direct Deputies' attention to paragraph 3 of the Report, which reads:
"The Committee decided that the gown to be worn by the Leas-Cheann Comhairle should be of a design distinguishable from that to be worn by the Ceann Comhairle, thereby marking the relative status of the two officers."
That proves that the Committee were well aware of the step they were taking. They were also well aware that in providing a gown for the Leas-Cheann Comhairle they were not detracting from the primal position of the Ceann Comhairle in this House. Therefore, I submit this report to the House, as the representative of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, and I strongly urge the House to accept it.
Do you?
Question put and declared carried.
I am not challenging a division, but I wish to be recorded as dissenting.
The Deputy will be so recorded.