Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 16 Feb 1956

Vol. 154 No. 4

Committee on Finance. - Greyhound Industry Bill, 1955—Committee Stage (Resumed).

Mr. Walsh

We have been discussing this amendment for over two hours now and I think most of the things that have to be said have been said. There are only one or two points I should like to make to the Minister before I conclude. I want to try to point out the importance of this board and of the work it is to carry out, and also the importance of the powers that are being given to it. Once this board is appointed, it will be responsible for the control of greyhound racing and coursing. I should like the Minister and the House, if only for a moment, to consider the important work and the important functions for which these people will be responsible in the future. They will have the appointment of all the officers and there is also the question of the remuneration of the officers.

If we appoint, as the Minister suggests, four representatives from the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club, it means that that body has complete control, with four out of seven members. It follows that the Irish Coursing Club members will have control of the appointment of officers. There is nothing to prevent them from appointing the people they wish to appoint themselves; these can be friends of their own, or people who have been identified with the Irish Coursing Club for a number of years; as a matter of fact, these could be other members of the standing committee. They fix the remuneration they are going to get themselves and there is nothing the Minister can do about that. They can purchase land or properties; they can sell these lands or properties after purchase. In other words, they can use the finances that are placed at their disposal because they have the right to borrow up to £25,000 without any permission from the Minister; it is only when they exceed £25,000 that they must go to the Minister for approval.

The board can delegate its powers to a sub-committee. That sub-committee may have the most important functions of all in connection with the industry. For instance, the control of racetracks may be handed over to it and the issue of permits may be given to this sub-committee, so that it could possibly happen that, instead of a board of seven deciding where a greyhound racetrack might be, or who was to have that racetrack, it might be the four members of the standing committee who would decide it.

We must remember two things when we talk of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club: One is that 16 of them are not elected representatives of the coursing clubs. These 16 members represent what are known as—in my opinion, the best word for them is — co-opted members; in other words, people who have not been selected or elected by the coursing clubs. It has been demonstrated here tonight, I think, by a number of speakers that, of the 21 people who are on the standing committee, 13 of them are already either directors or in some way connected with racetracks. I know that many of the names I have read out as being members of the standing committee are interested, in one way or another, in greyhound racing tracks in the country. If the powers are to be delegated to a sub-committee of four people and if two or three of these are directors of tracks, there is nothing to prevent them from refusing permission to some group to start a track. We have had that in the past when the Irish Coursing Club standing committee refused such permits. Waterford was one of the places and we know the reason why Waterford was refused. You had Waterford, Kilkenny and Clonmel together. Clonmel and Kilkenny were controlled from Clonmel and, because Waterford was going to do damage to Clonmel, it was thought better not to give a licence to Waterford.

We also had the case of Enniscorthy. There was an application from another place in the area and, because of its proximity to within a 30-miles radius of Enniscorthy, it was refused. These are part of the functions of the new board, no matter how you may look at it, and, leaving corruption and all the rest of it out, we must remember that these people have been members of the standing committee and had supreme control in the past.

The Minister now proposes to give it to them again. It has been admitted by Deputy Barry and, indeed, also by the Minister that these people have failed in their duty in the past. We all know that and the report of the investigation committee indicates that. That report has been accepted by the Minister. If that report is true, and I have no reason to doubt that it is true, I believe that we are doing a very bad thing for the industry generally if we put these people again in control.

The suggestion has been made here to-night regarding the personnel of the new board that in addition to the four members of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club the bookmakers would get a representative. That would be five. Another suggestion has been made that the breeders get representation. Deputy Sean Collins asked the Minister to give that representation and I think the Minister was agreeable to do so. It was very easy for the Minister to agree to give representation in a case like that. There is nothing to prevent him from taking two members of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club and saying that they represent the breeders of the greyhounds. Two others could be said to represent the tracks and others could be taken and said to represent any section of the industry.

Every member of the standing committee, as far as I know, is also a breeder. The Minister could not go wrong in picking out one or two of them to represent the breeders. These are not the people we want to represent the people. There was an organisation some years ago called the Greyhound Breeders' Association which represented greyhound breeders. These people had a quarrel with the standing committee of that time. They did not see eye to eye with the standing committee. If the breeders are to get representation, I believe that these are the people who should be chosen as their representatives.

The bookmakers are also entitled to representation, but in view of the Minister's assurance in the case of the bookmakers, I am prepared to withdraw our amendment in favour of Mrs. O'Carroll's amendment if she gives a guarantee that she and her Party are going to press that amendment and vote on it. If we do not get that assurance, then we shall press our own amendment. The amendment put for ward by the Labour Party is more explicit than ours and it is for that reason that I would support it. It may have been laxity on our part that we were not as explicit as the Labour people were, but our amendment covers our intentions.

We want to give representation to every interest in the greyhound industry. We are prepared to give two to the standing committee; one to the racetrack owners; two to the breeders and one to the bookmakers. The question of the racetrack owners is a simple one from the Minister's point of view. It would be very difficult for the Minister to avoid appointing a racetrack owner in his four, or even in three, of his four nominees from the standing committee due to the fact that the directors of the racetracks represent more than 50 per cent. of the present standing committee. It is only natural to expect, in view of that, that some of the racetrack owners will have their nomination submitted to the Minister for selection.

If I got the assurance that I have mentioned from Mrs. O'Carroll that she and her Party would press their amendment and vote on it, I would support that amendment.

Mr. Dillon

I welcome the somewhat more temperate tone of our discussion. I thought I made it clear, and if I did not I want to make it clear now, that the ultimate responsibility in choosing this board devolves on the Minister for Agriculture. I do not suppose that any Minister for Agriculture welcomes that responsibility but, in all the circumstances and the history behind this business, I think the Minister has to take that responsibility. It all depends on whether people believe that the Minister is going to do his job honestly or not. All I can say is that my purpose is to provide a board which will honestly and efficiently rehabilitate this industry. To that end I aim primarily to get an independent chairman.

I think I have already said this, but if I have not I want to say it now, that in choosing those six honest, upright men I conceived it to be my duty to see that among them there was fair representation for breeders, track proprietors and coursing clubs as representative of owners, and I think there ought to be a representative of the public, since they are interested. I think that I made that as clear as crystal. If I did not, the fault is perhaps mine. I want to make it clear now. Some people may regard my undertaking as regards that as insufficient.

Mr. Walsh

Will the Minister give this guarantee, that his nominees representing the greyhound owners and breeders will not be selected from the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club?

Mr. Dillon

I mean the Deputy no discourtesy when I ask him to exonerate me from the obligation to give him any such guarantee. I have stated my firm intention and I venture to depend on my colleagues to accept that. If they do not accept it, I am clearly not fit for the job I hold, but I venture to think that they will accept it. Surely we can get such a board established with the proviso that, in so far as that personnel is drawn from the executive of the Irish Coursing Club, it must submit itself not only to the test prescribed by me but to the test of election under the revised constitution by the coursing clubs and the tracks in each province. I lay no soothing unction to my soul that what I am now saying is calculated to conciliate the Opposition. I do not think they want to be conciliated, but I am anxious that the House should know what my intention is. On that, let there be no doubt or equivocation; my purpose is to secure fair and adequate representation for breeders, track proprietors, coursing clubs and bookmakers on the board which it will be my duty to set up if this Bill is passed.

Mrs. O'Carroll

While I am perfectly willing to accept the Minister's assurance on the point he has just mentioned, is it not possible for the Minister to make this much more explicit? I have no doubt in the world that the Minister intends to act fairly and squarely by everyone, but I have only been in this House a very short time and there are a number of State and semi-State bodies set up by this Government and previous Governments over which this House has absolutely no control. We cannot even ask a question about them. It is because of that that I am anxious that the body set up to control the greyhound industry will be constituted in such a way that, in so far as I am responsible, each section shall be represented on its own merits and not as the nominees of some other body. I am sure that the Minister will agree with me that I am not being unreasonable in pressing my point rather severely, but I am doing it only in the light of experience. with other public bodies for which we can vote money, over the expenditure of which money we have no control, and which have not always acted, in my opinion, in the best interests of the public, whom we are here to represent.

The Minister has met us to a certain extent. If he would even give us, as Deputy Collins said, the reason why it was so essential that the Irish Coursing Club standing committee should control the new body I would willingly accept that reason, but the only reason he has advanced so far was based on matters of precedent, that what was done in setting up the Racing Board has to be done here. Would the Minister not agree with me that when this Bill is starting off and Deputies on his own side of the House have no confidence in the type of board he is setting up, he would or should reconsider that and try to get the unanimous blessing of the House? I do not think I am asking him to strain himself too far. He has given me or the House no reason as to why the Irish Coursing Club standing committee should have not less than four members. It is not "more than four", but "not less than four".

If Deputy Dillon is spared to us for a long time as Minister for Agriculture, we might all take it as a certainty that the four selected would be four good men and true, but we have no guarantee. He cannot give us that guarantee that the board will always be under his control. If he could, I could readily accept the assurance on the lines I have indicated. I would ask the Minister once again to reconsider the matter and give me an assurance in a more explicit manner and confirm that the board will be composed on the lines suggested in our amendment — two from the Irish Coursing Club standing committee, two wellknown prominent breeders or owners or both — and, as I said this evening, although the Greyhound Owners' Association as such may no longer exist, I am quite certain the Minister would find no difficulty in contacting those people and getting from their ranks desirable people — one "bookie", and one track representative.

Deputy MacEntee mentioned this evening that of the 21 members of the standing committee there were 13 track directors, and for that reason it would be almost impossible to avoid putting on a track representative as such. I know one provincial track that has no director on the standing committee, the track mentioned by Deputy Walsh—Enniscorthy. I do not think it could follow that the Minister could not avoid a track representative. I do not know whether they have an association as such, but the Minister, to make this a good Bill and to start it off with a vote of confidence from this House, should get the track representatives together to select somebody they would appoint as the track directors' representative. I do think it is obvious that there should not be more than two greyhound owners' representatives, prominent breeders and trainers and a bookmaker.

With regard to Deputy Walsh's suggestion that I should give him necessary guarantees, and that I might have consulted his Party before tabling this amendment, in which case I might feel obliged to give them, I do not think it is quite fair and decent of Deputy Walsh to put it on that basis. Our amendment is a bit more explicit than his own, and I could not possibly guarantee that, if he withdrew his in favour of mine, the Party would necessarily follow the Fianna Fáil Party into the Lobby on the lines indicated by them.

Mr. Walsh

On your amendment.

Mrs. O'Carroll

I know. But you are making it contingent on my giving you a guarantee. I could not possibly do that.

Mr. Briscoe

We would support your Party.

Mrs. O'Carroll

I appreciate that, but how can I give guarantees if I cannot get them myself? If the Minister could give the assurance I am asking for, I think I could. He has read out 21 names of the standing committee this evening, but he should let us know the particular qualifications of each member of that body to be on the standing committee, whether as a director of a track, a greyhound owner, a member of a coursing club or a trainer. The House is entitled, I think, to know from what type of men these four are going to be drawn. If the Minister could show us that they are people on that standing committee who are there because they are breeders and trainers, and he will pick two from that body, I will accept his assurance.

Mr. Dillon

I give the Deputy an assurance that adequate representation will be given on the board to breeders, track proprietors, coursing clubs and bookmakers.

Mrs. O'Carroll

That covers my amendment.

Mr. O'Malley

The Irish Coursing Club will control the board.

Mr. MacEntee

I do not want to prolong this debate and I am sure that Deputies would like to dispose of amendments Nos. 3 and 4. We have not heard from the Minister why he considers it necessary to incorporate in sub-section (1) of Section 9, in lines nine and ten, the words "not less than four shall be members of the standing committee of the club." The Minister has asked us to accept his assurances on certain things. I think he would be in a much freer position to give effect to his assurance in a way that would be welcomed by the House if the words in the brackets in lines nine and ten were deleted.

I suggest that the Minister should consider deleting those words, because that would be one way in which the views expressed on both sides of the House could be met. Why should the Minister tie himself hand and foot, as he is doing in the present sub-section, to the present standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club? It would seem to me that the Minister quite forgets— whether some people are glad of the fact or very few regret the fact — that he is not going to be Minister for Agriculture in perpetuity. His tenure of office may be almost as brief as formerly. He has told us about the terrible things before the country, if by any chance a Fianna Fáil Minister were to succeed him. I suggest that, in order to ensure that a Fianna Fáil Minister is bound to give effect to the assurances which he has given the House, he should accept the amendment put down by Deputy Mrs. O'Carroll.

I think that is a perfectly reasonable way to approach it. The Minister should look ahead. He will not sit there until Tibb's eve; he will not be sitting there until doomsday. In the normal course of events, he will probably vacate that chair in another 18 months at most.

Mr. Kyne

Three years.

Mr. MacEntee

Three years, if you like. Some people have to work their passage, as he did previously. We know that in 1948-51 the three years had not very long elapsed before we had the general election.

Mr. Kyne

The period of the Dáil is five years.

Mr. MacEntee

We know that Deputy Kyne has been squared, promised.

Mr. Kyne

I do not mind that at all.

Mr. MacEntee

Neither do we. We think you are just as well qualified to occupy the Minister's job as the Minister himself. Having paid that tribute to Deputy Kyne and the Minister, I want to get back to the point I have been making, that the Minister should not tie his hands in this way or the hands of his successors. The best way to deal with the situation, having listened to the debate, would be to delete the words which stand between brackets: "of whom not less than four shall be members of the standing committee of the club". Then he can appoint the members of the standing committee of the club whom he wishes. He can appoint four members, if he wishes. He can appoint only two members of the standing committee of the club; two members of the Greyhound Breeders' Association; one person to represent the track directors and another person for the bookmakers. He would be perfectly free to do that.

The only thing I am wondering is why the Minister, who always talks in this House about freedom of action and enterprise, should feel it necessary to hamstring himself in this way. Let him take the shackles off. Let him not always be the serf of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club, but a free man for once, and in this case let his successors be free also. I suggest that is the best way to deal with the situation. Since the Minister cannot bring in an amendment at this stage, I urge him to bring in an amendment on the Report Stage. If not, it would be necessary for the House to have an opportunity of hearing from the Minister why it is that he feels it necessary to tie himself up in this way. Houdini himself could not get out of it.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the House asking for two divisions?

Mr. MacEntee

No. I understand that amendment No. 4 is before the House and cannot be withdrawn.

An Ceann Comhairle

I take it that amendment No. 3 is withdrawn.

Amendment No. 3, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment No. 4 proposed:—

In sub-section (1), lines 9 and 10 to delete "not less than four shall be members of the standing committee of the club" and substitute "not more than two shall be members of the standing committee of the club and the remaining four shall consist of two prominent breeders, one bookmaker and one greyhound track representative."

Question —"That the words proposed to be deleted stand"— put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 54; Níl, 40.

Tá.

• Beirne, John.
• Blowick, Joseph.
• Burke, James J.
• Byrne, Alfred.
• Byrne, Thomas.
• Carew, John.
• Coburn, George.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Corish, Brendan.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Costello, Declan.
• Costello, John A.
• Crotty, Patrick J.
• Crowe, Patrick.
• Deering, Mark.
• Desmond, Daniel.
• Dillon, James M.
• Dockrell, Henry P.
• Donnellan, Michael.
• Dunne, Seán.
• Everett, James.
• Fagan, Charles.
• Finlay, Thomas A.
• Flanagan, Oliver J.
• Giles, Patrick.
• Glynn, Brendan M.
• Hughes, Joseph.
• Kenny, Henry.
• Kyne, Thomas A.
• Lindsay, Patrick J.
• McAuliffe, Patrick.
• MacBride, Seán.
• MacEoin, Seán.
• McMenamin, Daniel.
• Morrissey, Dan.
• Murphy, Michael P.
• Murphy, William.
• Norton, William.
• O'Carroll, Maureen.
• O'Donnell, Patrick.
• O'Donovan, John.
• O'Hara, Thomas.
• O'Higgins, Michael J.
• O'Higgins, Thomas F.
• O'Reilly, Patrick.
• O'Sullivan, Denis J.
• Palmer, Patrick W.
• Pattison, James P.
• Reynolds, Mary.
• Roddy, Joseph.
• Rooney, Eamonn.
• Spring, Dan.
• Sweetman, Gerard.
• Tully, James.

Níl.

• Aiken, Frank.
• Bartley, Gerald.
• Beegan, Patrick.
• Blaney, Neil T.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Brady, Seán.
• Brennan, Joseph.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Burke, Patrick J.
• Carter, Frank.
• Childers, Erskine H.
• Colbert, Michael.
• Colley, Harry.
• Cunningham, Liam.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• de Valera, Eamon.
• Egan, Nicholas.
• Fanning, John.
• Flanagan, Seán.
• Geoghegan, John.
• Gogan, Richard.
• Harris, Thomas.
• Hilliard, Michael.
• Kelly, Edward.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Lahiffe, Robert.
• Lemass, Seán.
• Lynch, Celia.
• Lynch, Jack.
• MacCarthy, Seán.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Maher, Peadar.
• Mooney, Patrick.
• Moran, Michael.
• O'Malley, Donough.
• Ryan, James.
• Sheridan, Michael.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Walsh, Thomas.

Tellers:— Tá: Deputies O'Sullivan and James Tully; Níl: Deputies Hilliard and Briscoe.

Question declared carried.

Mr. Killilea

The Labour Party have become as meek as mice.

Mr. Sweetman

Now we have a great example from the back benches of the Fianna Fáil Party.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order!

Question proposed: "That Section 9 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. MacEntee

Speaking on amendment No. 4, which has just been defeated, I asked the Minister to tell the House why he considered it necessary to bind himself by the inclusion in sub-section (1) of Section 9 of the words in brackets —"(of whom not less than four shall be members of the standing committee of the club)". I think that, on reconsideration, the Minister will see that that is not only unnecessary, but unwise. If the Minister were to delete those words he would have absolute freedom of choice and could exercise his discretion according to his best judgment and in accordance with the undertakings he has given to Deputy Mrs. O'Carroll, Deputy Seán Collins and others, who have pressed him to do so.

The assumption underlying the requests, which were made to the Minister to give these assurances, was that the majority of the persons whom he would appoint to the greyhound industry board would not be members of the standing committee of the club. Now he cannot fulfil his undertaking, at least in the spirit, I think, in which it was accepted, if the words to which I am referring remain in the section; and, therefore, I would ask the Minister whether he is prepared on the Report Stage to bring in an amendment to delete those words, so that, as I have said, he will be able to fulfil the undertaking which he has given and which has been accepted by Deputy Mrs. O'Carroll and Deputy Seán Collins in the spirit in which, I think, they thought the undertaking was given.

Mr. Dillon

We have discussed the substance of this now for approximately five hours and I do not think it is up to me further to detain the House by reiterating what I have already said. As I have said, and now repeat, it is my intention to give fair and adequate representation on this board to the four categories of persons whom I name. I do not expect Deputy MacEntee or his colleagues to accept that. I am satisfied that my colleagues accept my undertaking and are prepared to stake their reputation on the belief that it will be honourably fulfilled.

Mr. MacEntee

That is not fair. There is no use asking people to buy a pig in a poke. There is no use trading on the assumption that this Dáil is composed of credulous persons who will be taken in by a mere confidence trick. What the Minister is really telling the people whom he induced not to vote for their own amendment is: "I have given you assurances, which I intend to fulfil, consistent with the pledges which I have given to the executive committee of the Irish Coursing Club." That is what the Minister is saying. If the Minister really wanted to fulfil his undertakings in the spirit in which, I think, they were interpreted by those who accepted them, he would agree on the Report Stage to bring in an amendment to delete the words to which I have referred so often: "of whom not less than four shall be members of the standing committee of the club." We are not just as guileless as the Minister would wish us to believe and we would like some guarantee that the House will not be deceived and that, in fact, the Minister will undertake to put himself in the position in which he can fulfil the assurances he has given. That is the next point. Of course, if we cannot get those assurances, we shall have to divide on the section, and we shall have to try on the Report Stage to rectify the situation which will exist, if the section is carried in its present form. We would like to free the Minister from these foolish pledges which he has given to the Irish Coursing Club. We would like not merely to free him, but to see, at the same time, the greyhound industry having a chance to make a new start.

Question put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 53; Níl, 34.

Tá.

• Beirne, John.
• Blowick, Joseph.
• Burke, James J.
• Byrne, Alfred.
• Byrne, Thomas.
• Carew, John.
• Crotty, Patrick J.
• Crowe, Patrick.
• Deering, Mark.
• Desmond, Daniel.
• Dillon, James M.
• Dockrell, Henry P.
• Donnellan, Michael.
• Dunne, Seán.
• Everett, James.
• Fagan, Charles.
• Finlay, Thomas A.
• Flanagan, Oliver J.
• Giles, Patrick.
• Glynn, Brendan M.
• Hughes, Joseph.
• Kenny, Henry.
• Kyne, Thomas A.
• Lindsay, Patrick J.
• McAuliffe, Patrick.
• MacBride, Seán.
• MacEoin, Seán.
• Coburn, George.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Corish, Brendan.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Costello, Declan.
• Costello, John A.
• McMenamin, Daniel.
• Morrissey, Dan.
• Murphy, Michael P.
• Murphy, William.
• Norton, William.
• O'Carroll, Maureen.
• O'Donnell, Patrick.
• O'Donovan, John.
• O'Hara, Thomas.
• O'Higgins, Michael J.
• O'Higgins, Thomas F.
• O'Reilly, Patrick.
• O'Sullivan, Denis J.
• Palmer, Patrick W.
• Pattison, James P.
• Reynolds, Mary.
• Roddy, Joseph.
• Spring, Dan.
• Sweetman, Gerard.
• Tully, James.

Níl.

• Aiken, Frank.
• Beegan, Patrick.
• Blaney, Neil T.
• Brady, Seán.
• Brennan, Joseph.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Burke, Patrick J.
• Colbert, Michael.
• Colley, Harry.
• Cunningham, Liam.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• de Valera, Eamon.
• Egan, Nicholas.
• Fanning, John.
• Geoghegan, John.
• Gogan, Richard.
• Harris, Thomas.
• Hilliard, Michael.
• Kelly, Edward.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Lahiffe, Robert.
• Lemass, Seán.
• Lynch, Celia.
• Lynch, Jack.
• MacCarthy, Seán.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Maher, Peadar.
• Mooney, Patrick.
• Moran, Michael.
• Ryan, James.
• Sheridan, Michael.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Walsh, Thomas.

Tellers — Tá: Deputies O'Sullivan and James Tully; Níl: Deputies Hilliard and Briscoe.

Question declared carried.

SECTION 10.

Mr. Briscoe

I move amendment No. 5:—

In sub-section (2), line 13, to add at the end of the sub-section:—

of whom, for the purposes of a quorum, not more than two shall be members of the executive committee of the club.

If the Minister had accepted one of the two suggestions in the last two amendments, it would not have been necessary to move this amendment, but until he sees otherwise it is quite obvious that the board will consist of seven members, four of whom will be nominees or will be selected from the executive of the Irish Coursing Club. This amendment is designed to bring about some limited control on the activities of these people. We suggest this addition at the end of the sub-section: "of whom, for the purposes of a quorum, not more than two shall be members of the executive committee of the club." I do not know whether the Minister will strenuously oppose this, but it is regarded as a limited safeguard. If the board consists of seven obviously the quorum will be less than seven. The quorum laid down in the Bill is four. There is nothing to stop the four members of the Irish Coursing Club deciding to have a meeting at a time to suit themselves, constituting themselves a quorum and carrying out any business they like in the absence of the other members. The chairman would be included in the quorum and there would need to be only three of them present. I would suggest that, whatever the quorum is, only two shall be members of the Irish Coursing Club so that, if the chairman is included in the quorum, at least one representative of other interests must be present.

I do not know whether the Minister would regard this amendment as unreasonable or not, but if the Bill goes through in its present form it is quite obvious that, not only will the members selected from the 21 members of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club have a majority on the board but they will be able to monopolise some of the meetings. I am giving a clear and explicit explanation that the amendment is designed to safeguard the activities of the board from what might be termed the unreasonable influence of one of the four bodies to whom this Bill seeks to give representation and in whose interests the board will work. I do not know what the Minister will say. I cannot anticipate strenuous opposition by him to this amendment. In view of what he has already said and to show that what he said has meaning, I think he will be inclined to accept the amendment.

Mr. Dillon

I can assure the Deputy that I have not the slightest intention of accepting the amendment. The House has by a substantial majority accepted my assurance that I shall choose six honest persons with an honest chairman to carry on the work of this board and I have not the slightest intention of suggesting, by implication or otherwise, that any individual whom I should consider it my duty to appoint to this board is not a trustworthy person. If any person is appointed to this board who in his person is unsuitable to constitute a valid part of the quorum, then the blame is entirely mine, but I give the House the undertaking that the six persons I appoint and the chairman will all be persons of honour and integrity, eminently qualified to constitute the quorum of any meeting of this board in the discharge of any business that falls to the duty of this board to transact.

Mr. Walsh

I would appeal to the Minister to accept the amendment. The Minister is taking full responsibility for appointing the board. He also took full responsibility for the appointment of the investigation commission but he has ignored their report. He thought he could not find people in the country better than the persons he appointed to that commission. Why did he not accept their report on the condition of the greyhound industry? He is now trying to put it across that when he takes responsibility for appointing all these honest men to this board that they, too, will be above reproach.

I have no doubt about what will happen if four of these gentlemen get together. I am not afraid to state it. The same thing happens in every organisation or where any group is concerned. The same thing would apply even if the Minister were in it. When you are dealing with human beings human nature asserts itself. If two or three of them are members of the standing committee, if it is a question of doing something that will aid the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club or themselves, they will do it. The Minister should not think they will do anything else. It would be foolish to try to make the House believe that anything else would happen.

I have not that exalted opinion that the Minister has of many of the people who are engaged in any of these businesses. I have as wide experience as the Minister, possibly wider, regarding them. If the Minister is taking necessary precautions to see that the industry is properly run, he must take cognisance of these facts. The only way in which he can make assurance doubly sure that the affairs of the greyhound industry will be properly run is to ensure that no interest, whatever it may be, will have a monopoly on the board.

In relation to Section 9, I mentioned that they have the right to buy property, to expend money up to £25.000, without the approval of the Minister. There is nothing to prevent these four gentlemen, whoever they may be, buying that property and spending that money. There is nothing to prevent them disposing of the property. When there is a body representing a certain interest there is the temptation to help that interest. Application may be made for a racing track or some such concession that will be within the power of the board to grant. It may not be given because it might interefere with the interests of some of the gentlemen on the board. Deputy Briscoe has pointed out that if you have a representative of another interest, he is going to ensure these things will not happen. I can see no reason why the Minister should not accept the amendment. There is nothing revolutionary in it; it is only plain common sense to take these precautions, and I respectfully ask the Minister to accept the amendment.

Mr. MacEntee

I wonder whose is the hidden hand that seems to be holding the Minister back, because the Minister is a person who, as a rule, likes to have the greatest freedom of exercise, the greatest room for manoeuvre. Here, however, he appears to have spancelled himself by some sort of undertaking given to the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club. It is all very well to come in here in the role of a Simon Pure, but we have had some experience in regard to these matters and would prefer to see the Minister binding himself by law to ensure that it would not be possible for a clique to be organised outside the board to secure control and, when suitable opportunity arose, to serve its own interests rather than the interests of the board.

The Minister comes in here, I will not say, blandly — I do not think his conduct in this debate could be characterised as bland; on the contrary, he seems to be very annoyed — and looks as if he felt he had put himself in an impossible position. I doubt if he studied this Bill before bringing it into the House; he does not seem to have grasped the implications of some of the proposals. It is too late now to do anything to undo mischiefs which the acceptance of Section 9 would impose, but we have in Section 10 the opportunity of trying to ensure that, even if the Minister has bound himself to appointing not less than four members of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club, at least he will ensure that, when business is being transacted, half of those who are present at the meeting will not be members of the Coursing Club — will be independent, in fact, of the club.

I think that is very desirable from the point of view of the public interest. The Minister does not make any attempt to justify the provisions of this Bill. He is asking the House to accept it, because of his own personality. Now the Minister has shown himself to be very gullible on occasions. I have heard the Minister in this House making statements from which, when he had to repeat them on oath, he had to run away. He was led into this impossible position by giving ear to things which were said, slanders which were spread by some of those people undoubtedly associated with the coursing club. After the Minister has done the damage, is the Dáil to be faced with the prospect of some other Minister coming in here and trying to undo the harm which the provisions contained in Sections 9 and 10 of the Bill undoubtedly will result in?

I want to hear some sort of an assurance and a warning on these points. When contributing to the debate on amendment No. 2, the Minister said that nothing is irrevocable. I hope that will impress itself upon those who are, in fact, controlling the Minister in this matter. The Minister, we know, appears to be a marionette, a cat's-paw for some outside influences. After all, the Minister will not always occupy that seat, and let everybody realise this: if there should be any abuse of their position by those who are now the pets of the Minister, there will be an opportunity later to revoke certain provisions of this Bill, and that revocation will not carry any compensation. We are not going to be treated in this House with the contempt the Minister hag manifested all through these proceedings.

When discussing the amendment to Section 6 of the Bill, the Minister was unable to give a solid argument in support of his desire to bring the board into existence before the Irish Coursing Club had been reorganised, and the only reason why he was unable to do that was that he is the mere puppet, the instrument of interests outside this House. He introduced this Bill in terms of undisguised contempt for everybody associated with the sport of coursing and greyhound racing and in any way involved in the greyhound industry. Let any person who doubts that read the Minister's speeches introducing and winding up the Second Reading of the Bill and the debates which took place on amendments Nos. 3 and 4 and on amendment No. 2, in which the Minister used arguments which might have some relevance, if they had been addressed to the House on amendments Nos. 3 and 4. In the debate on this amendment, the Minister has not even attempted to justify his rejection of it. He has simply said by implication: "I am tied to the Clonmel interests; I am tied to the owners of the greyhound tracks, and I am not going to do anything which will loosen their grip on the greyhound interests."

In fact, the Minister's attitude here has shown that he is barren of argument, but not empty of words. We know that the Minister has a reservoir of words which flow, without meaning, like water from a cistern, but in this matter we will not be treated with the outrageous contempt which the Minister has manifested, and before the debate ends, there are some other documents that can be adduced, and the Minister will have an opportunity of considering them and they will be on the records of the House to condemn the Minister when at a later stage we bring in a Bill to rectify the mistakes of this one.

Mr. Briscoe

I introduced this amendment and approached it from a very simple point of view, hoping that the Minister might take a reasonable view of it. Would the members of the House look at Section 10? In sub-section (3) (a) of that section provision is made that "the chairman of the board shall, if present, be chairman of the meeting".

He need not be present, but the quorum of four nominees of the Irish Coursing Club can hold their meeting. Sub-section (b) says:—

"If and so long as the chairman of the board is not present or if the office of chairman is vacant, the members of the board who are present shall choose one of their number to be chairman of the meeting."

If the Minister had in this section provided that no meeting would be held until there is a chairman, one might say there would be no need for all this suspicion, but what guarantee have we got that this board will not meet without its chairman at the very first meeting, and proceed to do all these things contained in sub-section (6) of Section 10? They will frame their standing orders and the proecdure of business of the board, and when the poor chairman comes along, this will all have been decided, and no matter how he might want to alter it, he is only one of the minority side.

Does the Minister think that with that kind of a section in the Bill, subsequent to the other sections which have been debated at such length— particularly Section 9 — that the amendment is outrageous? I cannot understand what his attitude is. I subscribe entirely to what has been said by Deputies Walsh and MacEntee. It seems to me as if this Bill has been deliberately designed, first of all, to give control to one of the four interests and then throughout the Bill, in case there would be any chance of any of the other interests defending themselves and doing something for themselves, they will be precluded from so doing by these very peculiar sections, all the way designed, at every step of the ladder they have to go up and down in their activities, so that something can be done only by one section of these four interests.

I agree with Deputy MacEntee, but I express the hope that it will not be long before a change will come, so that no harm will be done, and that a subsequent Minister for Agriculture will be able to remedy what I regard as the very sincere grievances arising from this particular Bill. The Minister, as I said, does not seem to appreciate that, even according to this section, if there was no chairman — due to his not having been appointed after the establishment date, or due to absence of the chairman appointed— the four gentlemen from the Irish Coursing Club could, in fact, control entirely and absolutely every activity and operation and make every decision, even against the interests of the other sections.

As I said when I was introducing the amendment, they could call a meeting at a time inconvenient, say, for the representative of the bookmakers, and could decide at that particular meeting matters of the most vital interest to the bookmakers, while their representative was not present, because it was not convenient, although it was convenient for the other gentlemen who formed the quorum. There has been, from all sides of the House, criticism of the giving of so many seats on this board to one body that is represented there. There have been efforts made and amendments discussed at great length to try to change that situation, and now we come to the quorum itself of the board, and we find it may no longer be a majority of the board representing the Irish Coursing Club which will conduct its business, but that a quorum of the board, consisting entirely of these gentlemen, can still conduct all the business of the board. That is why I think the Minister should take another "think", if he wants to pacify some of the people or interests who feel they will be grievously affected ultimately by the decisions of this body, if the board is set up as envisaged in the Bill and continues to act in accordance with its different sections.

I am glad that Deputy MacEntee and Deputy Walsh, I think, have the same view, that the sooner a time comes when there is a change and when there is another Minister for Agriculture, the better, so that the objectionable provisions in this Bill can be amended.

Mr. Burke

We have had a good deal of discussion dealing with various points raised here to-night and on this amendment I should like to refer to the one request that has been made to the Minister since the House began to discuss the Bill, that is, that it should cater for all interests. Every speaker, no matter on which side of the House, asked the Minister to give an opportunity of having a reasonable or fair representation on this new board. The Minister has promised to do that, but the Minister's promise is not legislation. In know, with the best will in the world, the Minister will see as long as he is there that everything will go on all right; at least, he has given the House that assurance. Nevertheless, in my experience of this House, legislation by promise is no legislation at all.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

How does this arise on this particular amendment?

Mr. Burke

I am dealing with Section 10 and the Minister did reply on this section. The only thing I wish to say to the Minister is this: I am one of the interested parties in the Irish Coursing Club and I have been associated with coursing since 1924, and I do want to say that I am very concerned that all interests should be fairly met. We are here to do our job impartially, justly and above board. I cannot speak too highly of the people I have been associated with in the Irish Coursing Club. I have met them and they have been all right with me, but nevertheless——

Mr. Dillon

May I ask what leg you are standing on now?

Mr. Burke

——we in this House must do our job and I ask the Minister to look again at the various points that have been made to him by Deputy MacEntee.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr. Donnellan)

The Deputy is really honest and sincere.

Mr. Burke

The amendment seeks to add at the end of the sub-section; "of whom for the purposes of a quorum not more than two shall be members of the executive committee of the club". The Minister has to deal with a feeling that has been created in the country outside this House, but that suspicion is in the House also, and surely the Minister should consider this point again and say to himself: "I am setting up a new board to deal fairly with this industry and I am going to try to meet the wishes of the Dáil as far as possible." In meeting the wishes of the Dáil, he will meet the wishes of the people of the country, and I do not think that will involve any injustice, even to the people with whom I am associated. I cannot see that there is any injustice at all in it, particularly if there is a fair and equitable discussion and impartial people are dealing with the matter and various interests are represented. Surely in that case you are bound to get justice and fair play; one would be afraid to do anything wrong in case it would come back on oneself.

I want to see how far one could go to be just and honourable in the Bill. If the Minister could think of some way of meeting the point raised in the amendment and going further than he is going at present, I would be very glad. A promise is very little use unless you accept the amendment and put it into the Bill. I feel we have a duty here to do our best to see that all interests are catered for.

Mr. Walsh

The Minister has apparently become adamant in his refusal to accept this amendment. The only reason I can see for that is that as a result of succeeding in having Section 9 accepted by the House, he is now suffering from an arrogant self satisfaction and is going to stand on this Bill line by line.

Mr. Dillon

I am more than anxious to meet other amendments on the paper.

Mr. Walsh

We have not come to them yet.

Mr. Dillon

Then let us come to them.

Mr. Walsh

We have not seen any sign of that. We have put forward reasonable amendments on this section and I do not know if the Minister has really seen the implications of Section 10 at all yet. There is a number of other sections in this Bill that will be governed by the actions of this committee. The fact of having four people responsible for all the activities of that board makes it incumbent on us to see that we are not going to give a majority to one particular interest in the industry.

Let me take one instance. Suppose these four men constitute a committee and that they are dealing with the sale of greyhounds. If they have an interest in any particular individual, there is no reason why that individual would not be given a complete monopoly of the sale of greyhounds in this country and there is no one to say yea or nay to that decision.

Why does the Minister place himself in that position? He is flying in the face of God's goodness when he tempts a group of people to that extent. One of these people may be a person who is interested in an auctioneering firm, in greyhounds or in a particular track and the board could decide that greyhounds could not be sold at any other track in this country but that one. The Minister is now legislating for a situation such as that. He is asking this House to make it possible to have that done. Does the Minister think that he is working in the interests of the public generally or the industry generally or in his own interests by having such a provision in the Bill?

The Minister may say that that could not happen but it could. There is nothing to prevent its happening. The same thing applies regarding permits for tracks and with regard to bookmakers. That committee could decide on what records are to be presented. That committee could appoint inspectors to visit the bookmakers' premises and not merely inspect the records dealing with greyhounds but possibly the records dealing with every bet that was made.

These are the responsibilities that are now being entrusted to the board and the board can delegate all these responsibilities to a sub-committee. That sub-committee could be composed of people who have an interest, a very genuine interest possibly, in one particular phase of the industry. I think the Minister should think carefully over this. I do not know if he has given it all the consideration it requires but this section and Section 9 are the two sections that govern this Bill. All the other sections are incidental to Sections 9 and 10, which deal with the formation of the board, the sub-committees of the board and the functions that will be carried out by that board and these sub-committees.

The sections of this Bill that are affected by our amendments to Sections 9 and 10 are Sections 12, 13, 16, 17, 21, 22, 33 and 39. There is a clause in every one of these sections that is affected by Section 10. We are trying to amend Section 10 so as to make it impossible for any particular section or interest to decide the future of the industry. I cannot understand why the Minister objects to this. What is the reason for not accepting this reasonable amendment? It is a safeguard. It is not brought in in any spirit of bitterness to the Irish Coursing Club and it is not proposed in any spirit of making the Bill unworkable. It is not proposed in any spirit of dissatisfaction with the people who might comprise the board but simply for the reason that I believe it will make the Bill a better Bill than it is now, that it will make it more workable and to ensure more integrity and honesty in the people who will have the task of conducting the affairs of the board. For that reason I would ask the Minister to consider this amendment and to see all the implications that are involved. I think that if he gave it the consideration it deserves he would not have any hesitation in accepting the amendment as put forward by us.

Mr. Briscoe

Are we not going to get any help from the Minister?

Mr. Dillon

I mean no discourtesy. I told the Deputies the reasons why I could not accept the amendment. I do not want for a moment to suggest that they should be limited in their observations, but I do not want to weary the House by repeating the carefully considered answer I have given.

Mr. Briscoe

First of all, let me say this to the Minister, that whenever he speaks no matter what he says he certainly never wearies the House. He may on occasion amuse and interest the House. The Minister must not forget that every section of this Bill is bound up with the authority which the board will ultimately have. The board will, of course, have control in its present form over who auctions dogs for export. It will probably license such persons as auctioneers and all the rest of it. I am amazed that the Minister has not taken the opportunity even at this stage to point out to us that the report from his advisory body shows that the number and value of dogs fell, from 1946 to 1950, from £1,000,000 to £422,000.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not seem relevant to the amendment.

Mr. Briscoe

It is relevant. The quorum of this board can consist of the four members of the Irish Coursing Club. There are other interests to be represented, and they may not be there at this meeting, and at that meeting, as I said before, matters concerning——

Mr. Dillon

On a point of order, Deputy Briscoe very frankly is interlarding his observations with the aside "as I said before". Surely even on the Committee Stage there is a limit to the number of times that you are entitled to say the same thing.

Mr. Briscoe

I am coming to other points. I did say that it could arise that four of those members could decide matters concerning bookmakers' interests, the bookmakers' representatives not being present. I am now going to say something I did not say, that the Bill gives this board authority to select auctioneers. There are interests of the greyhound breeders and greyhound owners who may consider that their representatives should have a voice in that particular decision. It may be made over their heads. The board decides about the licensing of tracks, the granting or refusal of licences, or the stopping of existing ones. Those decisions could be made without the representative the Minister has promised to try to get in of the track owners. The purpose of the amendment is to try to show that if there is going to be the slightest semblance of democratic control at least that safeguard is necessary.

I was going to say, by way of an aside, that the Minister has told us many things which were so irrelevant on the previous discussions of the previous sections that I wondered why he did not blame the Irish Press for the fall in the export of dogs both in number and value.

Mr. Dillon

Is this relevant?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise.

Mr. Briscoe

I know it is not relevant. I am saying it as an aside.

Mr. Walsh

It was not relevant to mention the other suggestion.

Mr. Dillon

To mention what?

Mr. Walsh

That the Irish Press was responsible for the drop in the price of cattle.

Mr. Briscoe

I suppose they are responsible for the fall in the price of cattle in England as well.

Mr. Dillon

How does this arise on this amendment?

Mr. Briscoe

I say that if the Minister is not prepared to accept this amendment, which is designed to bring about a safeguarding of all interests in view of the whole set up, which is so exceptional in comparison with any other such board, would he be prepared to increase the number of the quorum to be the full membership of the board, or to limit the type of decision that should be taken when the full membership of the board is not there, or to say that there shall be a rule that only matters concerning the interests of those who are there shall be discussed when such a meeting takes place with a quorum at which only one interest is represented?

Does the Minister not agree that this amendment has some merit when related to that situation? The Bill is going to hand over interests not at the moment under the control of the Irish Coursing Club. There were certain interests which they did manage to effect control over, and this Bill now is bringing in new operations not previously attended to by them. Therefore it is reasonable to suggest that because of that there should be some safeguard, some reduced number of those who represent any particular interest, rather than to have the full quorum to be in effect, as I say, the four from the Irish Coursing Club. I am not attacking the individual members. I do not know who they will be. I do not know who will be the successors of the present ones. But I do say that the Minister should not just take the line now of sitting down, having for the moment anyway achieved victory over the previous amendments which were so vigorously discussed, and now, in a matter of this kind, on this particular amendment which is subsequent and required subsequent to sections being passed as they were designed and prepared, he should just say: "I have nothing more to say. I am not going to accept it." I want to assure him that we did not hurriedly design this amendment. We considered the Bill in its entirety. We considered it from every aspect possible, and we are trying to make it what the Minister says he wants — a Bill that will work with satisfaction and will secure and continue to have the full confidence of all sections of our community that are interested in any particular aspect pertaining to the greyhound industry.

Mr. MacEntee

I do not know whether the Minister still remains mute of malice, because I had unfortunately to leave the House to do a little research, research which has, I think, solved for me at any rate the mystery of the Minister's silence. The Minister has been asked in the course of the debates on previous amendments to say why it was that he was tying himself hand and foot to the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club. The Minister, who is on most occasions voluble and expansive, bares his bosom and his inmost thoughts about this, that and everything, has during the course of this debate being woefully restrained. I have been wondering why. I think I have solved the mystery, and found a solution of the problem as to why it is that the Minister has thrown over the recommendations of his own advisory committee in relation to this Bill to establish the Irish Coursing Club in control of the Irish greyhound industry. That is what will happen if this greyhound industry board is set up, without the safeguards which we have endeavoured to have incorporated in the Bill.

This Bill is a very far reaching one, as Deputy Walsh pointed out in the discussion on amendment No. 4. It not merely gives the board control of greyhound racing and totalisators but also controls to a large extent greyhound sales and the export of greyhounds. It is in a position to confer benefits upon certain individuals. I am sure that those of us who listened to the Minister in this House, when he was in opposition denouncing the Government and all its works and pomps, will wonder why it is that the Minister has been at pains to introduce in this House legislation to establish firmly in control the vested interests in the Irish Coursing Club.

I have, I think, found the solution, and if any Deputy is curious about the point, he can turn to Volume 132 of the Official Report. In column 862, he will read some very curious correspondence. There was an exchange of documents. When high contracting parties enter into a treaty, it is generally done by an exchange of documents and there was on this occasion an exchange of documents. "My dear Seán"— it was not I, I may say, but a somewhat ambitious statesman anxious to establish himself as a world figure, who was breaking into Irish public life at that time and had an organisation behind him known as Clann na Poblachta. This idea of "My dear Seán" grew into "My dear Pat". In the course of his letter, he gave "My dear Pat" an undertaking that, if he was returned to power and was sufficiently influential, licences to establish totalisators would be granted to the proprietors of the greyhound racing tracks. Now, mark the year 1948! Who shall say that the Coalition does not fulfil its bargains? Who shall say after this that the Coalition has not a long memory?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

How does this matter arise on the amendment? We are dealing with the composition of the board.

Mr. MacEntee

Yes, we are dealing with the composition of the board, but, if you refer to Section 9, it will be seen that the board is to be appointed by the Minister and is to consist of six persons, of whom not less than four shall be members of the standing committee of the club. I am addressing myself to the fact that this board is merely going to represent the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club as at present constituted.

How is the Irish Coursing Club constituted at the moment? It has 21 members and it is admitted now that, of the 21, 13 are directors of greyhound racing tracks and it is to these 13 directors of the greyhound racing tracks that the greyhound industry board will be handed over. That is why the Minister tied himself, as a result of a bargain, to appoint not less than four members of the standing committee of the club to the board. That is why the Minister is refusing to accept this amendment which we are putting in as a safeguard. If he were to accept this amendment, then he could not fulfil the undertaking to permit the owners of greyhound racing tracks to establish totalisators.

Of course, he has not the audacity to come here and do it barefacedly and openly. Oh, no; not at all! The Minister adopts a subterfuge. He acts behind a camouflage and the camouflage is the greyhound industry board which the Minister is setting up under this Bill — a greyhound industry board which will be controlled by "my dear Paddy" and his good friends.

Let us carry this a little bit further. It has been the custom on occasions to read letters about subscriptions in this House. Let us hear how "my dear Paddy" responded when "my dear Seánin" gave this undertaking to his "dear Pat". I am quoting from the Official Report, column 865:—

"I am enclosing a statement of policy as affecting the greyhound industry, which I have obtained from Mr. Seán MacBride, Clann na Poblachta leader, in reply to a questionnaire addressed to him which is a very logical exposition of the position as affecting the two industries. In addition to obtaining funds, I consider it the duty of every greyhound owner — and a good investment — to — support this man's policy by sending me a subscription, which will be duly acknowledged by my headquarters."

There is the exchange of documents. There is the explanation of Sections 9 and 10 of the Bill. There is the promise given on the one hand by the man who claims he brought the Coalition into existence in 1948; there is "my dear Paddy" appealing on behalf of "my dear Seánin"; and here is the Bill which implements the contract. We have heard a great deal about dance hall proprietors.

Mr. Dillon

Hear, hear!

Mr. MacEntee

But here is the Minister handing over to this board the control of an industry which may well represent many millions to the Irish farmer. The people who are going to control these totalisators are not men of straw, but one way or another they are the gentlemen who entered into that contract.

That is why the Minister has not been prepared to discuss the provisions of this Bill in a rational way. He has tied himself hand and foot. He is mute of malice — mute because he has not the audacity to try to find arguments to support the provisions which he has incorporated in the Bill. And the only argument he can use in support of this Bill is the fact that his then friend and colleague, Deputy MacBride, gave an undertaking to "My dear Paddy", as a result of which "My dear Paddy" appealed for funds, funds which helped to put the first Coalition into power and everybody was told, in fact, that this was not a political contribution, that it would be a good investment which would yield dividends. And the dividends we are going to see manifested, when we come to consider the extent of them, will be the property of the Irish Coursing Club which is going to be vested in the hands that will now control it.

I warned the Minister about the way he was treating the Opposition in its attempt to make this Bill a workable Bill and to ensure that the greyhound industry would be cleaned up and an end be put to those most serious abuses which have been practised with impunity in greyhound racing and that the unsavoury atmosphere which has come to be associated with the greyhound industry as a whole would be cleared away. We have told the Minister that we are anxious to co-operate with him in this Bill. We accepted the principle of the Bill that there should be a greyhound industry board; we accepted the fact that, in view of the public demand for it, totalisators would have to be established; there were some objections to that; we accepted that, in general, there should be a certain control of the export of greyhounds in order to ensure that only genuine dogs would be exported.

This Bill, which seeks to establish a monopoly, is entirely unacceptable to the Opposition in its present form. We cannot understand why it is that the Minister is not prepared to accept helpful suggestions from this side of the House. I wonder if the Minister would be prepared to nominate the Earl of Sefton and the Earl of Enniskillen who, according to the document circulated, were part of the personnel of the Irish Coursing Club from 1916 to the present day? He has just as much right to nominate them as, perhaps, members of the Racing Board but, in view of the statements he made last night, I assume the Minister has in mind to select his nominees from the 13 of the 21 members of the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club who control greyhound racing tracks in this country and the 13 members who were party to that bargain between Deputy MacBride, as he was then, Deputy MacBride as he has come again to be to-day, and his good friend "Paddy".

We did not want to bring these things out and we should not have brought them out and we would not have brought them out: let us be quite clear about that. We did not wish to expose these things but, since the Minister — and he was warned — is not prepared to discuss this Bill as a free agent, we shall disclose the facts to the public. Quite obviously, the Minister is not prepared to discuss this Bill as a free agent because he is not free to discuss it. There is some bargain behind all this — some bargain which has compelled the Minister to tie his hands by binding himself to select not less than four members of the standing committee of the club. Because he is not a free agent, we are going to disclose to the public why he is not a free agent — and that is only the first of the documents that will emerge in due course.

Before this debate goes any further, I would suggest that, between now and when the Dáil reassembles next week, the Minister should re-examine his position and see whether he is going to be prepared to maintain it throughout the course of this debate because, I am telling you, it will not reflect credit upon the Minister or those who are associated with him in this matter.

Mr. Dillon

I just want to say this. I was taught, when I was very young, that when you are confronted with a cheap little blackmailer, the right thing to do is to take him out, expose him to the light of day, kick his backside and tell him to go to hell.

Mr. MacEntee

When is the Minister going to do that? He will have to grow up first, you know.

Mr. Briscoe

The Minister circulated what purports to be an explanatory document of this Bill. I have referred to it before. I did not go very far into it because I was hoping that some understanding might be reached. On page 3, the Minister says:—

"The provision in Section 9 that four of the seven members of the board should be appointed by the Minister from among the members of the standing executive committee of the club was not recommended by the advisory committee..."

One would imagine from that, that his advisory committee had, in fact, recommended possibly a lesser number. The amendment to Section 10 becomes more vital and more important because what did the advisory committee recommend? They recommended that the Irish Coursing Club should have no representation whatever on this board. Does the Minister deny that?

This is a document which one usually reads in good faith and assumes that, behind it, the Minister is trying to explain to the Dáil possibly what the Bill means and where he is advised on slight disagreement. But the advisory committee — and I want to emphasise that — and perhaps Deputy Mrs. O'Carroll may not have read this, recommended that the Irish Coursing Club membership should not be on it at all — not one. Why? On page 57 of the report of the advisory committee on the greyhound industry, we read:—

"After careful consideration, we are in agreement with the general demand for a control board and hereby recommend that such body be established by an Act of the Oireachtas. Every witness who advocated a control board was requested to give his view as to how the board should be constituted and what interests—if any—should have direct representation on it. It is perhaps only natural that certain interests, e.g., racing track managements, course bookmakers, bookmakers' assistants and the Irish Coursing Club itself, etc."

——mind you, put last——

would each feel entitled to representation. The bulk of opinion as revealed both in memoranda and during oral evidence was, however, opposed——"

Mr. Dillon

What has this to do with the amendment?

Mr. Briscoe

The answer is simple. Section 10 gives this control board set up by this Bill power to have a quorum. That quorum has full authority and, under this Bill, the quorum would constitute possibly on very many occasions absolute operation of its activities by the members or the representatives of the Irish Coursing Club. I am pointing out that there must be a safeguard, at this late hour, against their getting absolute monopolistic control when, in fact, the advisory committee to the Minister did not want these to have any representation whatever on this board.

The Minister is talking about blackmailers. There are other forms of sinners in this world besides blackmailers. What can one think of a Minister who circulates this document as an explanatory memorandum to members of good faith in this House who would assume from it that the only difference between him and his advisory committee is the exact number of representatives that should be put on this board, when, in fact, he has palmed off this document in spite of the recommendation of his advisory committee not to have one of them on the board? Does the Minister deny that? No wonder he is silent. That is why this amendment is of vital importance and that is why what I am saying and what we are all saying here is quite in order and relevant. Let me continue the quotation now:—

"...the bulk of opinion as revealed both in memoranda and during oral evidence was, however, opposed to sectional representation."

Mr. Dillon

How is this relevant?

Mr. Briscoe

I was pointing out— and I accept the ruling of the Chair in regard to it — that Section 10 lays down the quorum for operation of the committee of management set up under Section 9. Section 9 points out that not less than four of this governing body shall be representatives of this Irish Coursing Club; and Section 10 lays down the quorum for the meetings of this body and it lays down that four shall be the quorum. I say that it is dangerous to have as a quorum the four to whom we have been objecting as having a majority on the full board and we want some safeguard that this quorum shall not consist of more than two of the Irish Coursing Club representatives, and then the other two representatives of other interests. We assume the chairman will not be an Irish Coursing Club representative.

"It was, on the other hand, simply in favour of direct appointment by the appropriate Minister of the requisite number of persons — from five to ten — to constitute the board and would give the Minister entire discretion in the matter. As to whether an intimate knowledge——"

Mr. Dillon

What relevancy has this to the present Bill?

Mr. Briscoe

"Some witnesses would be satisfied with men of ‘integrity and character', ‘imbued with a determination to root out wrong-doing'——"

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not seem to have any relevancy to the amendment.

Mr. Briscoe

Subject to your ruling, I want to make this submission. The Minister, notwithstanding the advice he got from his advisory committee, which examined this matter, notwithstanding that advice and in spite of it, decided to put in charge of this body a majority of representatives of the Irish Coursing Club. The advisory committee said: "Put none on, you cannot trust one of them." Now the Minister has designed Section 9 which gives these people a majority. He has designed Section 10 which, again, makes that majority an absolutely controlling majority because of the fact that the four he wants on the board can constitute the quorum of actual management. I, therefore, feel that it is quite relevant to read the recommendations contained in this report from the Minister's own advisory committee as to why that should not be done. I hope the House will bear with us this time and at this late hour and, remembering the position we have reached in relation to the Bill, try to put a brake — even a brake — on the activities of these people. I am, subject, of course, to your ruling as to whether or not I am in order in making that point.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I think the Deputy has made that point three times.

Mr. Briscoe

The question has been raised as to whether I am relevant and I was not quite sure whether I had been ruled in or out of order.

Mr. Donnellan

The Deputy is not keeping on the rails.

Mr. Briscoe

I am keeping on the rails. I think it is the Minister who is off the rails. Paragraph (6) of Section 138 of this report says:—

"We are not in favour of direct representation of any particular interest. We do not consider sectional representation necessary and, in any event, it would be impracticable to provide representation for all of the interests which would demand it. To do so might result in setting up a large and cumbersome body——"

Mr. Dillon

Surely this a scandalous abuse of procedure.

Mr. Briscoe

If this document is not relevant, then what are we to call relevant? Here is a document produced by people who sat patiently for a considerable period of time examining into every aspect of this industry, heard witnesses from every branch interested in the industry, weighed the pros and cons of every quarrel and wrong-doing; and the Minister has tried to foist on this House this Bill. I do not know how many people in this House knew that the recommendation of this advisory body was against any representation of the Irish Coursing Club and other sectional interests. Yet, here we are handing over lock, stock and barrel absolute control, with no safeguard whatsoever. The more one examines into it and the more one reads the relevant documents the more one regrets that the amendments we designed were not even more violent in their opposition to the Irish Coursing Club since it has now emerged in this House that this Bill stands or falls on the acceptance by this House of majority control by the Irish Coursing Club.

I venture to say that had the amendment to Section 9 been passed the Minister would have said here what he said outside: "If certain sections are not carried as they are in the Bill I will withdraw it." Let me tell the Minister now — I am sure other Deputies know this — that all the other interests concerned would rather see this Bill dropped than see it made an Act of Parliament because their positions — all of them, individually and collectively—will be worsened as time goes on, if this Bill is passed in its present form. Therefore, I am not surprised really at the silence of the Minister. If the Minister had even a semblance of a case to put up against our argument we would have heard him rising to the highest pitch of histrionics, which only he is capable of reaching. But he is like the bold boy to-night — he has no argument.

Mr. MacEntee

And he is using rude language.

Mr. Briscoe

Boy's language, if you like. I say the Minister will have to indicate now whether he will accept this amendment, or, if not this amendment, then some other form of safeguard. As Deputy MacEntee has pointed out, we will have to go over all this again on the Report Stage. We are going to design an amendment to Section 9 and we will also design, if this is not passed, a further amendment to remedy the situation because this matter is of absolute and vital importance.

Mr. Donnellan

Deputy Briscoe wound up on a nice note. He said that probably the Minister did not understand what the members in the Fianna Fáil benches were saying. That is the only true thing he said in his speech. Several Fianna Fáil Deputies have condemned the Irish Coursing Club. Others, such as Deputy Burke, praised that organisation. We cannot, therefore, blame the Minister if he does not understand; it is very hard to know what the Fianna Fáil Party want. Deputy Briscoe reminded me of the electric hare because he seemed to be so electrified about it all. Of course, he wanted to keep on the racket, so to speak, that Deputy MacEntee tried to organise here and found what I can only describe as a mare's nest. He came in here quoting a certain volume. It would remind one of the days when the dance tax was remitted and the price of bread increased for a certain political purpose. The Minister was supposed to have quoted something that Deputy MacBride said to some other body or some other body said to Deputy MacBride. There is an old saying: "A guilty conscience haunts the guilty mind." That is the position with Deputy MacEntee.

Mr. Walsh

What about the people with no conscience?

Mr. Donnellan

I suppose the Deputy is one of those, is he? He would be non-conscious. He thinks, of course, that everybody acts like he did in his time and that the Minister has some ulterior motive in bringing in this Bill. Such is not the case.

Mr. MacEntee

Tell that to the Marines.

Mr. Donnellan

If any of the members of the Fianna Fáil Party can add anything or take away anything which will help us in any way, that will be accepted by the Minister, as the Minister himself has said. For heaven's sake, let us finish with the electric currents generated by Deputy Briscoe in trying to make a case and the mare's nest discovered by Deputy MacEntee. The Minister has brought this Bill before the House, saying to the Opposition: "If you have any suggestion that will help, and we think it will help, it will be accepted; or, if you have any suggestion to take from, which we think will help, that will be accepted also." Of course, there has been no suggestion of any improvement. The only suggestion has been to do all the damage they can on that side of the House.

Mr. P.J. Burke

That is wrong.

Mr. Donnellan

That is what the Deputy said himself.

Mr. P.J. Burke

What I said was entirely different. I said I wanted to see all sections catered for properly.

Mr. MacCarthy

I submit that if the views of the House, as expressed on both sides, are to be implemented, then this is a vital amendment. I think I can convince the Minister of that in this way: when the Minister did not accept either of the amendments tabled to Section 9, he is now in the position that he may appoint all six who are members of the Irish Coursing Club. For example, a man may be a breeder or an owner of greyhounds and may be put on a list submitted to the Minister but at the same time he may be a member of the Irish Coursing Club. There is nothing to prevent a bookmaker being a breeder or a large shareholder in a track — I do not know whether he could be a director of a track — and if a person's name is submitted to the Minister, regardless of whether that person is a bookmaker, a farmer, a labourer or a carpenter, he may still be a member of the Irish Coursing Club. If the Minister wants to avoid the difficulty, he must say: "He is a member of the Irish Coursing Club and even though he is put up by the interests concerned I cannot select him." If this amendment is passed he cannot have all the board as members of the Irish Coursing Club. Therefore, when the breeders are asked to put up a list to the Minister, he must be satisfied that that list does not include members of the Irish Coursing Club. Then he will at least have two on his board who will not be members of the Irish Coursing Club and out of a quorum of four, which is the essential minimum, he will have two outside the Irish Coursing Club.

There is a fundamental question involved here and I am sorry that the Minister let this come, as a natural growth from the past, that the people concerned, knowing their responsibilities and their rights under the Constitution——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not seem to arise on the amendment.

Mr. MacCarthy

I know it does not but, as I say, I am sorry the Minister has now allowed two and a half years for this thing to build up with all the background influences, giving them plenty of time to operate, instead of building up this organisation within a year at the very outside.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is still not relevant. We are dealing with amendment No. 5 which concerns the composition of the quorum.

Mr. MacCarthy

I am submitting to the Minister that this is a vital amendment if other interests are to be represented by people who are not bound up already as members of the Irish Coursing Club. Names will be sent to the Minister and even though they are put up as representatives of their branches of the organisation they will have to be ruled out autocratically by the Minister by reason of the fact that they are already in the Irish Coursing Club; otherwise the whole board will consist of Irish Coursing Club members. Even though I have nothing to say about the members — I am not a bit interested in racetracks because I do not know sufficient about them — I am interested in the greyhound industry, in open coursing and in park coursing and that is why I am so anxious to have the breeders and the owners represented.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy seems still to be getting away from the amendment.

Mr. MacCarthy

I think every Deputy has been getting away from it and the further away we get towards amending this Bill the better the Bill we will have.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I thought Deputy Donnellan was going to make some constructive contribution to this debate.

Mr. Donnellan

You will.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I shall try. As I have often said before, we must try in this House to separate ourselves from our affiliations outside and do justice while we are here. In doing that, I am respectfully asking the Minister to look upon this amendment to Section 10 in a fair and impartial way and to say: "Here is an amendment which has only one intention, to see that justice and fair play will be administered at all times." The fact that I have certain affiliations does not prevent me from doing in this House what I believe justice demands I should do.

If the Minister accepts this amendment no one can say but that he has contributed something worth while to the industry. If in the light of experience things go wrong and some undesirable people come along and injure the industry, the Minister has the matter in his own hands provided he is Minister during the transition period when this Bill is coming into operation. All we are asking is what everyone would like to see in any walk of life, a fair balance of power between each section. If you have that balance of power nobody can say to the Minister that he gave an unfair advantage to one section or another. I want to see the greyhound industry going ahead. I want to see every section associated with it catered for impartially. There are a number of sections who are dissatisfied and I would like to see the matter remedied.

As regards the committee which the Minister set up to bring in a report on the industry, the only comment I would like to make on that is that the inquiry should have been in public but, of course, that is not relevant to the amendment under discussion. Again I would say to the Minister that, in accepting this amendment he has an opportunity of demonstrating to the people generally that he is completely impartial, and of setting up a board that will represent all the interests involved. If he adopts the suggestion in regard to the quorum he will be ensuring that there will be a balance of power which will enable the affairs of the industry to be fairly administered.

Mr. Walsh

From experience of the past hour or two it would seem that the Minister has no intention of giving way on this Bill. He has stuck his heels in the ground. No matter how constructive the arguments may be for amendments, he has decided to stick by the Bill. Therefore, there is no purpose in pursuing this line any further. We will take an opportunity, I hope, of putting in an amendment on Report Stage. By permission of the House, we propose to withdraw this amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed: "That Section 10 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. MacEntee

I do not think we can go so fast as that.

An Ceann Comhairle

I put to the House the question that Section 10 stand part of the Bill. That is the question before the House.

Mr. MacEntee

I am sorry, Sir.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am not making any decision for the House nor am I seeking to ask the House to give any decision. I am merely putting to the House the question that Section 10 stand part of the Bill.

Mr. MacEntee

I am going to put it to the House that it should not stand part of the Bill. It should not stand part of the Bill because, if this board will be constituted as the Minister proposes to constitute it, it is quite clear from the report of his own committee that the procedure of the board at its meetings is not likely to be very regular or very edifying. I have put on the records of the House an account of a meeting of the Irish Coursing Club. The manner in which this club conducted its proceedings is here also in an official document issued by the Minister's own Department.

There is a number of matters which arise on this section. Sub-section (3) says that the chairman of the board shall, if present, be chairman of the meeting. It would seem to me, in view of the manner in which the board is to be constituted — the board as Deputy MacCarthy has pointed out may be composed wholly of members of the Irish Coursing Club to the detriment of the other interests concerned in this sport and in the industry — that there should at least be a proviso that no meeting of the board shall be held unless the independent chairman is present, that is, assuming that the Minister will appoint a person as chairman who will not be a member of the Irish Coursing Club.

I do not know that there is anything in the Bill which would prohibit him from appointing a member but I do suggest, in view of the composition of the board, that the chairman should be independent and should be neither a member nor an ex-member. Having regard to the circumstances in which this Bill has been conceived, and the long gestation period between 1948 and 1956 — eight years — before it saw the light of day, I do think that it should not be possible to hold a meeting of the board unless the chairman is present or a person nominated by the Minister to act as chairman in his absence. That would be a reasonable thing to do. It might give some greater degree of confidence in the procedure and operations of this board than the majority of the members of this House actually feel.

There is no use in referring me to division figures because we did hear a member of the Minister's own Party, Deputy Sean Collins and a member of the Labour Party, Deputy Mrs. O'Carroll, very ably presenting the case against the Minister's proposals in the Bill. I understand that Deputy Mrs. O'Carroll must have spoken for at least one other member of the Labour Party. She must have spoken for Deputy James Larkin because his name was associated with hers in amendment No. 4 and I am sure they were not the only two — I was going to say "swallows" but I suppose I had better say "birds of paradise"— in the Labour Party.

It is very difficult to know at any time what side Deputy Sean MacBride is on. Deputy Sean MacBride did certainly put some questions to the Minister which seemed to suggest to those who heard him that he himself, notwithstanding his affection for "dear Paddy", was a bit doubtful as to how business would be conducted with a board composed as the Minister has indicated he proposes to compose it.

So, I do suggest to the Minister that, however they may have voted in the Division Lobby — to what degree they may have swallowed their words, does not matter — it does appear clear that they themselves were convinced that the Minister's proposals for the future control of the greyhound industry were not wise and that there should be some attempt to ensure that the board would be an independent board. It can only be an independent board if it can act only in the presence of an independent chairman. That is why I have suggested that the chairman should be independent and that, if he is not present, there should be no meeting of the board, except a person duly appointed, under a provision which I hope the Minister might put in the Bill, to act as a deputy chairman is present.

It is very regrettable that we are compelled to challenge almost every section and every sub-section of this Bill. That is not our fault. We did not desire to debate this Bill in the manner in which this debate is being conducted. We wished to be helpful; we wished to be co-operative and we did hope that our advice and knowledge — which is not small, despite what the Minister may say — would be at least considered.

The Minister has seen fit to affront this House in the debate on the last amendment. He used words which, if he had used them when he was a boy, would have brought down upon him by those responsible for his discipline hands of corporal chastisement. We are not going to have to resort to that now; in any event, I do not think we would be able. Personally, I would physically be unable to do it. However, the language he used ill befits the Minister for Agriculture who has always posed as a person of good manners and decorum.

Mr. Briscoe

And has all the appearances of a gentleman.

An Ceann Comhairle

Might I suggest we discuss the section?

Mr. MacEntee

I am sorry; the admonition of the Chair was timely and well merited, and I accept it with all humility. We have reached only Section 10 of the Bill so far, and if the Minister would indicate that he is disposed to accept our objections, as implying that we are anxious to see the industry reorganised in a way that will make it both profitable to the community and a source of relaxation and sport to those who have the leisure to be interested in it, we could approach the Bill in a different manner. If the Minister would only approach the Bill with a fresh mind next week, we will not press a division on this section. We will not, however, be treated with contumely by the Minister. We had hoped the Minister would take our advice in the spirit in which it is given.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 11 and 12 agreed to.

SECTION 13.

Mr. Walsh

I move amendment No. 6:—

In sub-section (3), line 16, to add at the end of the sub-section:—

"provided always that the number of persons on any such committee who are members of the club shall not be such as to constitute a majority of the committee or of the quorum".

In view of the Minister's attitude on Section 10, I see no benefit in going ahead with amendment No. 6. We do, however, reserve the right to put in an amendment to Section 13 on Report Stage.

Mr. MacEntee

That is, if the Minister does not himself introduce an amendment to the section.

Mr. Dillon

I think there must have been a slip in the printing of this amendment which says: "provided always that the number of persons on any such committee who are members of the club..."

Mr. Walsh

The members of the Irish Coursing Club.

Mr. Dillon

I think it was meant to say "members of the executive of the Irish Coursing Club". That amendment could be redrafted and submitted on the Report Stage.

Mr. MacEntee

Perhaps the Minister might bring in an amendment along its lines to obviate the need for our bringing one in.

Mr. Dillon

I do not think I would accept fully the principle of the amendment. As the amendment stands, it is manifestly not going to execute the Deputies' intentions. The best thing would be to have it withdrawn and have a new one drafted and submitted.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed: "That Section 13 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Briscoe

I should like to say that as it stands, Section 13 gives rise again to the self-same objections as were raised on Sections 9 and 10. The section says:—

"(1) The board may from time to time appoint such and so many committees as it thinks proper.

(2) The board may delegate to a committee of the board any of its functions which, in its opinion, can be better or more conveniently performed by a committee, and may regulate the procedure of any such committee.

(3) A committee of the board shall consist of such number of members as the board thinks proper and may, at the discretion of the board, consist exclusively of persons who are members of the board or partly of persons who are members of the board and partly of persons who are officers of the board."

Obviously, the Minister will agree it is not right the board should have the power to delegate all its authority to a committee.

Mr. Dillon

Would the Deputy look at sub-section (4)?

Mr. Briscoe

Yes. It reads:—

"The acts of a committee of the board shall be subject to confirmation by the board save where the board dispenses with the necessity for such confirmation."

Mr. Dillon

If you feel that all acts of the committee should be subject to confirmation——

Mr. Briscoe

That is one point.

Mr. Dillon

I should be quite prepared to consider an amendment, if you want every decision of the committee subject to confirmation.

Mr. Briscoe

That is what we have in mind.

Mr. Dillon

Yes, but you have no amendment to that effect.

Mr. Briscoe

We had, but it was withdrawn. Now, however, the Minister has made one step forward towards meeting us. He says there is something in what we say here. That attitude may obviate the need for amendment to this section. If that attitude were taken in the beginning, we would have regarded it, as we now do, as a gesture which we appreciate. It was in the hope of attracting that attitude that I rose to speak on the section.

Mr. Dillon

I should be glad if the Deputy would put down an amendment. I shall, of course, consider the point made on the section, but, as I say, I should be glad if the Deputy put down an amendment.

Mr. Briscoe

Very well.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 14 and 15 agreed to.

SECTION 16.

Mr. Walsh

I move amendment No. 7:—

In sub-section (1), before paragraph (c), to insert the following new paragraph:—

"(c) the grant of such sums to greyhound racetrack executives as may be required to cover the difference between the track charges to bookmakers under Section 48 and the track charges in force prior to the appointed day for this Act."

Mr. Dillon

Before the Deputy speaks to the amendment, may I put to him the difficulty I am in? I think the Deputy will agree that, if the amendment were accepted, it would be open to every racetrack, who were already charging the bookmakers five times the normal spectator's charge, to "jack" up that charge to 30 times the present one.

Mr. Walsh

Surely the Minister could make provisions to see that this would not happen?

Mr. Dillon

And surely the Deputy will see the difficulty about making such a provision—that, in no case, will more than five times the admission charge be charged to the bookmakers?

Mr. Walsh

Down the country in tracks where the admission charge was about 2/6 a head, the bookmaker is in many cases now paying 17/6.

Mr. Briscoe

And I believe £2 in Limerick.

Mr. Walsh

It is now proposed to limit the tracks' charge to five times the 2/6 admission fee. That means that numerous tracks would lose considerably on this new provision. Would the Minister give his sanction to that?

Mr. Dillon

Except in exceptional cases——

Mr. Walsh

These are not exceptional cases; they are general to many of the smaller tracks throughout the country, and many of these tracks will be unable to make up losses suffered in this way.

Mr. Dillon

In certain cases of that kind, the board could permit the charging of a higher figure, and I would sanction a charge of more than five times.

Mr. Walsh

I am afraid this will have to be discussed in much more detail because this applies generally to small tracks outside Limerick, Cork and Dublin.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.

The Dáil adjourned at 10.30 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 22nd February, 1956.