Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 14 Nov 1951

Vol. 127 No. 4

Report of Dáil Proceedings.

I have received notification from General Mulcahy that he will raise a matter in respect of the report of the Dáil proceedings on Wednesday last, 7th November, 1951.

I ask permission to raise a matter in relation to the reporting of the Dáil proceedings on the 7th November, 1951. During the course of the debate on the Supplies and Services (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1946 (Continuance) Bill, 1951, the Minister for Industry and Commerce used the words "—you cannot develop the resources of this country by credit. You must do it by cash!" That remark was made at 5.50 p.m. I noted the time at which it was made for ease of reference subsequently. I find, however, that the words, as spoken, are not reported. Towards the end of column 320 I do find the words "—you cannot develop the resources of a country without cash." In view of the importance of the matter under discussion, I would like to know what are the circumstances under which the words, as reported, are not in the debate?

In accordance with the usual practice, I was permitted to see the typescript of my speech for the purpose of correcting any reporting errors——

——and making the report conform with what I said——

Or what you meant to say.

——or think I said. Any corrections I made were accepted by the editor of the official debates.

What daddy does on Monday, the son does on Tuesday.

There is not a full moon to-night.

I raised the point in an orderly way to find out what the circumstances are in which things are not reported as spoken.

They are reported as spoken.

I assure the Minister that I took down his phrase in shorthand as he spoke it and it was because of the significance of the phrase that I noted the time at which it was spoken. We will reach a point, apparently, in the debate at which we will have to discuss whether, the Minister having spoken these words——

The question is whether my recollection is better than the Deputy's shorthand.

——is now withdrawing them from the debate, he repudiates the idea involved in the statement. I want to assure the House, however, that these words were spoken by the Minister, were taken down in shorthand by me and noted at the time, 5.50 p.m. Thank you, Sir.

The report made to me is that the alteration was made by the Minister and accepted by the editor.

As the report now stands, it confirms with my recollection of what I said or intended to say.

Intended to say.

I am not as lucid as Deputy Mulcahy.

What the Minister intended to say.

It is obvious we cannot have a discussion on the matter now.

The Minister will perhaps agree that, as the debate is in progress, the principle that appears to be involved in the words I understand the Minister to have used and the taking out of the phrase by the Minister will get adequate and full discussion.

He forgot column 312. He did not catch that one.

It is very difficult to talk against the barrage of interruptions.

Top
Share