Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 31 Oct 1956

Vol. 160 No. 4

Private Notice Question. - Greyhound Industry Bill, 1955—Committee Stage (Resumed)

Debate resumed on the following question: "That Section 50 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. MacEntee

On this section, I was directing attention to the fact that it is an exceedingly difficult section to understand because it refers back to a number of other sections, including Section 25 and Section 37. I was saying there seemed to be a rather complicated system of dual control to be operated, on the one side by the board and, on the other side, by the club. It will be scarcely appreciated what is at issue in this section unless Deputies turn back to Section 25. I am not debating Section 25; I am merely calling attention to its nature. Section 25 is rather confusing and peculiar. It says that the board may by regulations make provision for certain things, and in particular it goes on to state in paragraph (a) of sub-section (2):—

"... prohibiting persons from performing specified functions, or specified classes of functions, on greyhound racetracks save under and in accordance with permits granted by the board at its discretion."

Again, in paragraph (f) of that sub-section its says:—

"...prohibiting persons performing specified classes of functions on greyhound racetracks from having any beneficial interest in the income——"

and so on. That is not so important. The important paragraph is paragraph (a) of sub-section (2) because we turn over to sub-section (5) of this section where we see what the club is empowered to do. The club is empowered to make rules under the section and these are rules which require the provision of persons to perform specified functions on greyhound racetracks and prohibiting greyhound racing except when such persons and specified officers of the club are in attendance.

We have the rather extraordinary position that the board may prohibit persons from performing specified functions or specified classes of functions on greyhound racetracks save under and in accordance with permits granted by the board at its discretion. On the other hand, the club may require:—

"... the provision of persons to perform specified functions on greyhound racetracks and prohibiting greyhound races except when such persons and specified officers of the club are in attendance."

Most people thought, and I was under the impression, that the whole of this business was to be under the undivided control of the greyhound industry board and that in fact there would be a simple division of functions, that the club would be a subsidiary body of the greyhound industry board with subsidiary functions—the subsidiary function of regulating and controlling the sport of greyhound coursing. I now find that, in fact, the club has functions in relation to greyhound racing and this brings me back to Section 50. Let me state again, so far as I can clarify this highly confused situation, that the board would appear to have powers to prohibit certain persons from functioning and certain things from being done. On the other hand, the club would appear to have power to require certain things to be done and certain persons to be appointed. These persons are to be authorised officer. The definition "authorised officer" is not necessarily an officer of the club or an officer of the board. It is merely defined as:—

"A person appointed by the board or club, as may be appropriate, to be an authorised officer for the purposes of this Act."

One could see that in certain circumstances the club might appoint an authorised officer who could interfere with an authorised officer of the board in the performance of his functions. Bearing that in mind and appreciating —I do not want to detain the House unduly—that the same sort of diarchy is given effect to in Section 37 and I think also—I will have to refresh myself—in relation to Section 43, we then come to Section 50 where we find this:

"An offence under this Act, other than an offence specified in sub-section (2) of this section may be prosecuted by the board."

That would appear to rule out all offences under Section 25 and Section 27 which consist of a contravention of a rule under the section. It is very difficult for me to state the point I am trying to make but it does appear to me that, under certain circumstances and having regard to the overlapping powers conferred on the board and the club, respectively, the subsections (1) and (2) of this section might in fact operate to prevent the prosecution, particularly by the board, of certain offences.

It is almost incomprehensible how this thing will work. The one thing that would appear to emerge in the whole business is that we will have two sets of authorised officers doing almost identical things—one corps of officers appointed by the board, who will be charged to enforce prohibitions, and the other body of officers, appointed by the club, who will be empowered to see that specified requirements of the club are being carried out—and then, when these two sets of officers start to function in their respective spheres, there is a zone where their functions overlap and where, apparently, under Section 50, they will come into headlong collision with each other.

It has been necessary for me to enlarge in that way in order to show how really absurd the scheme of this Bill is in many particulars. It is only when one comes to Section 50 that the net point emerges, that the demarcation between the activities of the club and the powers of the club, on the one hand, and the functions and powers of the board, on the other hand, is so vague and indefinite that actually, while they have two separate corps of authorised officers, no one can say at the end who will be able to prosecute whom for an offence.

I think it might be relevant on this section, having elucidated that fact, to refer to an incident which happened some years ago and which is recorded in Volume 96, columns 1876 and 1877. If the House will bear with me, I will read it:

"With two friends, I went down to Connemara, to the Gaeltacht, a couple of days ago. We went to visit an old lady friend of ours whose house stood about 100 yards up from the road."

Mr. A. Barry

What is this about?

Mr. MacEntee

This is about the plethora of inspectors, of authorised officers, who are going to fight each other under Section 50. I continue the quotation:

"I went there with some people who were experts in the Irish language, to see how the language——"

Mr. Dillon

This has nothing to do with Section 50 of this Bill.

Mr. MacEntee

"——was getting on in what was the Fíor-Ghaeltacht, if there was any such thing in Ireland. We got out of the car on the road. There were 100 yards of road up to the woman's house. I could see her looking over the half-door when we got out of the car. When she saw us climbing the fence to go up the road she clapped out the door and ran in. My friend said to me: ‘Is dóigh lei gur cigirí sinn'—‘She thinks we are inspectors.' Up we went to the house."

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This has no relevance to Section 50, which deals with the prosecution of offences by the board.

Mr. MacEntee

Except to say this, that under this section we will have two corps of officers—one officer prosecuting a man, perhaps, because he is breaking a prohibition and another officer prosecuting a man, perhaps, because he is failing to fulfil a requirement. What I am pointing out is that here we are doing the very thing, under the Greyhound Industry Bill, which the Minister complained was happening under the Racing Board and Racecourses Bill, because, Sir, the person who did make that pleasant journey into Connemara, the person who did affright the poor old woman so that she slammed the door in his face, was the present Minister for Agriculture, then Deputy Dillon. But nothing in the Racing Board and Racecourses Bill equals the absurdity of the provisions of Section 50, which provides again for the two corps of prosecutors—the person who will prosecute under sub-section (1) of the section on behalf of the board and the person, or persons—let me put it in the plural because I am sure the number will be many—the persons who will prosecute under sub-section (2) on behalf of the club. It seems to me that this section is very bad indeed and that it would be far better to reserve to the board the right to prosecute in all cases and to reserve the right to prosecute for all offences, whether they are offences arising out of the contravention of a regulation or the contravention of a rule, to the board.

Mr. Dillon

If the Deputy had allowed me to interrupt him earlier on, I could have spared him the trouble of getting so cross about Section 50. I explained, when I was introducing this Bill, in Volume 153, No. 10, columns 1433-4, on December 14th:—

"Part III of the Bill provides for the licensing of greyhound racetracks by the board and for regulations by the board to cover all matters in relation to tracks and greyhound racing. Provision is also made for rules by the Irish Coursing Club in relation to the functioning of tracks and greyhound racing; here again the standing committee of the Irish Coursing Club appeared to make a reasonable case, subsequent to the Advisory Committee's report, for retaining purely disciplinary functions in regard to racing as well as breeding and coursing because of the close inter-connection of these in many respects, as well as the further important point made by the club that its racing rules apply to the Six Counties."

The problem was, as I tried to explain in the House at the time, that the Irish Coursing Club is recognised as the authority for the 32 Counties and Partition has never been allowed to enter into it.

That extremely happy state of affairs exists and I was particularly anxious to ensure that it should continue but if I, under this Bill, authorised the statutory body, the Greyhound Racing Board, to prosecute in respect of rules made by the club, which is recognised north and south of the Border, it was almost certain that by this Bill I would do the very thing I did not want to do—partition the greyhound racing industry of the country. I think the Deputy agrees with me that where, in sport, business or in any other way, we maintain unity with our people of the North, it is a good thing to do. If the Deputy would look calmly at Section 50 he would see that it provides that, in respect of the statutory conditions created by the greyhound industry in the Republic, the board is the prosecuting authority, but if he looks back at Section 25 (4) he will see:—

"The club may by rules make provision with respect to the use, management and control of greyhound racetracks and the conduct generally of greyhound races at such tracks."

For the violation of such a rule, the club is the prosecuting authority because the club is making rules and regulations for tracks and the conduct generally of greyhound races not only in the Republic but in the whole of Ireland. I wanted to leave that under this Act to be the authority for enforcing these rules so that there would be no disruption of the existing eminently desirable practice of the Irish Coursing Club being the recognised authority for the whole of Ireland.

Similarly, if the Deputy looks at Section 37 he will find that regulations may be made by the board but under sub-section (4) the club may make rules. Where there is a violation of rules, the club is the enforcing authority; where there is a violation of regulations which are applicable only to the Republic under this statute the board is the prosecuting authority. I suggest to the Deputy that in our special circumstances, where we are ardently anxious to ensure that nothing we did would disrupt the happy relationship that existed between coursing men and persons interested in greyhounds generally north and south of the Border, we were right to go to considerable lengths in order to avoid doing anything that would disrupt this happy relationship.

We could have one body to be the sole body authorised to prosecute. Why did the Deputy think we went to the trouble of making provision for the possibility of two such bodies functioning? Surely if he sat down for a moment and asked himself: "Why did they draft it so?" he would have said to himself: "They cannot have done it for fun", and it would have occurred to him there must be some good reason. Does the Deputy not think it is a good reason? The only method whereby I could achieve the simplicity, for which the Deputy appears to yearn, would be to disrupt the unity which at present exists, and it was to preserve that unity that I introduced the dual function set out.

Mr. MacEntee

I certainly would not like to say, no matter how strongly I might feel, that there was a certain degree of absurdity in these provisions, which would in any way further divide Irishmen in their common effort to improve an industry or sport. I would hate that anything put in this Bill would further consolidate Partition which the House and, I think, all sportsmen, deplore. However, I cannot see that the Minister has justified fully the duality which runs through this Bill by the statement which he has made.

I do not want to enlarge on this matter but if the Minister will turn back to sub-section (6) of Section 25 and the corresponding sub-section of Section 37 he will see that the rules take the force of law to the extent that, if they are broken in relation to greyhound racetracks, there is a contravention of the rule and the licensee under the greyhound racetrack licence relating to the track shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £50. I suggest there is not in that sub-section the clear-cut demarcation which he has described to the House. I will concede the Minister this. I appreciate the difficulty with which he was confronted and I will go a very long way with him to overcome that difficulty even if it did lead to certain inconsistencies and, to some extent, perhaps, absurdities in the drafting of the Bill but I do not think that the provisions of sub-section (6) are fully consistent with the arguments which the Minister has put to the House.

I cannot conceive that the Minister will say: "After all, our jurisdiction in relation to prosecutions for the infringement of our laws does not run outside the Twenty-Six Counties and therefore nobody is going to try to enforce these provisions upon greyhound racing tracks in the north or outside the Twenty-Six Counties." I presume that would apply also to the rules of the club in so far as they might cover local coursing. Trying to make the point I am making in relation to Section 50 might have repercussions elsewhere and on that account I do not want to prolong the discussion and I shall let the Minister have the section.

Question put and agreed to.

Section 51 agreed to.

SCHEDULE.

Mr. Dillon

I move amendment No. 32:—

In article 1, page 25, lines 54 and 55, to delete "duly recognised greyhound racetrack executives" and substitute "persons owning or exercising control over greyhound racetracks (in this constitution referred to as greyhound racetrack executives).

This is a drafting amendment. It has been introduced to meet a point raised by Deputy MacEntee in connection with the definition of a track executive. I hope it does.

Mr. MacEntee

I think it was Deputy Burke who raised that matter.

Mr. P.J. Burke

It was.

Mr. Dillon

This amendment has been introduced to meet the Deputy's point.

Amendment put and agreed to.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I move amendment No. 33:—

In article 3, page 27, before paragraph (ii), to insert a new paragraph as follows:—

"(ii) A representative member of the club appointed by a coursing club shall not be entitled to attend, act on or vote in the provincial committee unless such club has held a coursing meeting within two years of the date of such appointment."

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Amendments Nos. 33 and 35 can be discussed together and separate decisions taken, if necessary, on them.

Mr. P.J. Burke

The Minister could easily accept this amendment. Both amendment No. 33 and amendment No. 35 are quite reasonable.

Mr. Dillon

Perhaps I could help the Deputy. The position is that the Bill, as it stands, is a good deal more stringent than the Deputy's amendment would make it. The Deputy seeks to provide that "a representative member of the club appointed by a coursing club shall not be entitled to attend, act on or vote in the provincial committee unless such club has held a coursing meeting within two years of the date of such appointment." Article 2 (3) of the Schedule provides, in effect, that he cannot attend, act or vote, unless the club has had a meeting within 15 months.

Mr. MacEntee

We went through this Schedule carefully and that did not emerge.

Mr. Dillon

Perhaps the Deputy would look at article 2 (3) of the Schedule.

Mr. MacEntee

The Minister is quite right. I see it now.

Mr. Dillon

In effect, we are saying 15 months, which, I think, goes further than Deputy Burke's amendment and fully covers the point raised by him.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Briscoe

I move amendment No. 34:—

In article 4, page 28, paragraph (iv), line 26, before "The" to insert:—

", and from among the co-opted members of the club, provided always that the total number of co-opted members on the executive committee shall not at any time exceed, in the case of persons appointed:

(i) from the Province of Leinster ... three co-opted members,

(ii) from the Province of Munster ... two co-opted members,

(iii) from the Province of Connaught ... one co-opted member,

(iv) from the Province of Ulster ... one co-opted member."

Perhaps the Minister will accept this amendment, inasmuch as it provides for proportional representation. Perhaps the Minister would like to say whether he has considered the matter.

Mr. Dillon

I do not quite understand what Deputy Briscoe means by co-opted members because the whole theme of the Bill is to provide, over a term, that there will be no co-opted members on the executive and that the only person entitled to be on the executive will be a fully representative elected member.

Mr. Briscoe

No; that is not the way to interpret it. This amendment envisages the period after there have been co-opted members and it is for the purpose of restricting the number: "from among the co-opted members of the club, provided always that the total number of co-opted members on the executive committee shall not at any time exceed, in the case of persons appointed..." It is designed for the purpose of giving proportional representation from the four areas.

Mr. Dillon

This proposal envisages a choice of co-opted members, but there will be no co-opted members on the executive 18 months after the Bill passes. They have then to be elected members, fully representative of the clubs and tracks in their own provinces.

Mr. Briscoe

What about the existing ones?

Mr. Dillon

They are passing out.

Mr. MacEntee

I agree, but the late Deputy Tom Walsh——

Mr. McQuillan

On a point of order. With your permission, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I would like to raise the subject matter of Question No. 22 as well as Question No. 23 on the Adjournment.

Mr. Dillon

What is the purpose of this?

Mr. McQuillan

I just want to widen the scope of the discussion.

Mr. Dillon

This is scarcely the time to mention the matter. We are trying to iron out the Schedule to the Greyhound Bill.

Mr. McQuillan

I want permission from the Ceann Comhairle to raise this particular matter—Question No. 23.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I understand the Ceann Comhairle is considering this request.

Mr. Dillon

He is readily available in his room

Mr. MacEntee

I suppose the Deputy had not formally mentioned the matter in the House and took this opportunity to do so. I was saying that the late Deputy Tom Walsh and Deputy Briscoe were very keen on this for the reason that, while it is true that the co-opted members will in time disappear, in the transition period of the club, they should be allowed on the provincial committees and they should retain, during the transition period, their right to membership of the provincial committees. There are a number of well-known sporting figures who are co-opted members of coursing clubs and it was felt that, in recognition of their services to the sport, they might be allowed seats on the provincial committees and they might be allowed representation on these committees in accordance with the terms of this amendment. Perhaps the Minister might see his way to conceding something like that.

Mr. Dillon

I shall be very happy to consider it for the transition period— not that I think that it is of any importance. I have my difficulties: how am I to determine whether a co-opted member is or is not from the Province of Munster, for instance. Is it by residence?

Mr. Briscoe

Membership of the club in the area.

Mr. Dillon

It is not as easy as that. You may have a man who is prominently associated with Munster, but, if one comes to determine what club he belongs to, one will find he belongs to a club in North County Dublin. Yet, he is esteemed to be a Munster man. There is a difficulty as to how one would define such people. Remember, this is only for the interregnum. In the permanent arrangement, they will be elected proportionately according to the number of coursing clubs and tracks in their respective provinces, subject to certain limitations. I shall look into this, but I am bound to tell the Deputy that I see practical difficulties which, I think, would make the game scarcely worth the candle.

Mr. MacEntee

If the provincial clubs were permitted to keep their co-opted members, irrespective of where they resided, then in the case of an individual who belonged to a Dublin club but was esteemed to be a Munster sportsman, the Munster people might do him the honour of co-opting him to their provincial committee.

Mr. Dillon

This is for a very limited period.

Mr. P.J. Burke

Even for that limited period, I would like the Minister to concede this amendment because a number of men who have been in the sport for a long time will be very hard hit, except during this transition period. Would the Minister see his way to conceding this amendment tabled by Deputy Briscoe?

Mr. Briscoe

The Minister says he is prepared to consider this amendment between now and Report Stage. I am prepared to withdraw the amendment now, in view of that undertaking.

Mr. Dillon

I will, but I do not want to mislead the Deputy. I say I will consider the matter between now and Report Stage. At the moment I feel the difficulties are such that I may not be able to meet the Deputy.

Mr. Briscoe

I can withdraw the amendment now and reintroduce it on Report Stage.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I would urge the Minister to introduce a similar amendment. It would give the sponsors of the sport a sporting chance.

Mr. O'Malley

Before you leave amendment No. 34——

Mr. Dillon

The amendment has been withdrawn.

Mr. O'Malley

The Minister has said he would consider it.

Mr. Dillon

You may not debate it after it has been withdrawn.

Mr. Briscoe

Would the Minister not be a bit generous?

Mr. O'Malley

The only point I wanted to make was about the proportional representation given to the different provinces. Leinster is to have three co-opted members, Munster two, Connaught and Ulster one each. Munster at the present time has 88 affiliated coursing clubs and licensed tracks. It heads the entire country, because Leinster has only 49 or approximately half as many, Connaught has 17 and Ulster only ten. I would ask the Minister, since he knows very well that Munster is the headquarters of coursing——

Mr. Dillon

Would the Deputy explain to Deputy Briscoe the infinite and thorny difficulties that would arise in trying to implement the spirit of his suggestion?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I move amendment No. 35:—

In article 4, page 28, before paragraph (v), to insert a new paragraph as follows:—

"(v) A representative member of the club appointed by a coursing club shall not be entitled to attend, act on or vote in the executive committee unless such club has held a coursing meeting within two years of the date of such appointment."

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This amendment has been discussed with the previous one.

Mr. Dillon

I think my proposal goes even further than the Deputy's amendment.

Mr. P.J. Burke

I accept the Minister's statement and will withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Briscoe

I move amendment No. 36:—

In article 11, page 32, paragraph (ii), line 9, to delete "the secretary" and substitute "a committee consisting of the chairman, the secretary, and the honorary treasurer, provided always that all such appointments shall meet".

I think this is a vital amendment.

Mr. Dillon

I am very pleased to meet the Deputy here, though I do not believe it is vital. I have no hesitation in saying the appointment should be made by the secretary after consultation with the officers of the club. The appointment by the secretary is merely a formality.

Mr. Briscoe

Is the Minister accepting the amendment?

Mr. Dillon

No, but if the Deputy withdraws that amendment, I will put one down for Report Stage. My amendment can then be compared with this one. In the drafting of the Bill, I chose the secretary, my clear intention being that the secretary would make the appointments as the servant of the executive and not as the executive officer.

Mr. Briscoe

At the direction of the executive?

Mr. Dillon

Yes.

Mr. MacEntee

Wait a moment. I do not believe that is the real purport of paragraph 2 of the article in which it is set out that the staff of the club shall be appointed by the secretary with the approval of the executive committee. So it is not a mere formal appointment. It is not merely signing on the dotted line on the committee's behalf by the secretary. It would appear from the Schedule that the initiative would lie with the secretary and that all he has to do is to secure the approval of the committee.

Mr. Dillon

I shall bring in an amendment saying that the officials and servants of the club shall be appointed as the executive committee may determine.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Briscoe

I move amendment No. 37:—

In article 12, page 32, before paragraph (iii), to insert a new paragraph as follows:—

"(iii) The report submitted by the secretary shall contain a statement setting out the names, duties, total remuneration derived from the club and its subsidiary undertakings and conditions of employment of any member of the staff whose total remuneration as aforesaid exceeds £300 per annum."

Mr. Dillon

My only reservation about this amendment is that I think it is rather supererogation to put it in this form. The members can require the report to be submitted in any form they want it and can bespeak any information they may require.

Mr. Briscoe

The Minister has accepted in a sense the principle of the previous amendment and this obviously is consequential on it, from the point of view of operation. There will be certain appointees whose salaries will exceed £300 a year. There might be appointments at just under £300 a year which could be brought up to £600 a year after the appointment was made. I want the carrying out of the board to be a proper carrying out and I want to ensure that the secretary should have certain privileges and rights, but that they should be restricted. This is one of the points that I regard as being vital. My purpose is to ensure that all appointments will be made by the proper authority.

Mr. Dillon

That has nothing whatever to do with this amendment. The amendment states that the report by the secretary shall contain a statement setting out the names, duties, total remuneration derived from the club and its subsidiary undertakings and conditions of employment of any member of the staff whose total remuneration exceeds £300 per annum. I do not give a fiddle-de-dee, but we are all familiar with the pious sections put in Acts of Parliament which result in extensive documentation being compiled for years and years and years, long after people have ceased to remember why. It goes on and on, simply because somebody had a brainwave that this would be a good thing to do. I would put a statutory obligation in so that all information would be available at the annual general meeting. I would ask the Deputy to pause and consider. He must have a great deal of administrative work to do himself now and probably has experience in the Dublin Corporation of returns being made which nobody ever reads. Does he want to create an obligation of this kind?

Mr. Briscoe

I do not want to make a comparison between this organisation and a local authority. I do make a comparison between this organisation and similarly sized organisations. I do not believe any terrible amount of work should be put into the presentation of documents, but I think that a detailed document of expenses, included in which would be a list of officials and their wages, should be presented at the annual general meeting.

Mr. Dillon

I do not think it matters a hoot. My only objection to this is that I am reluctant to put on this body the obligation of unnecessary documentation. I do not rate the issue of such importance as the Deputy attaches to it, but if the Deputy feels it is necessary, he might put down an amendment for Report Stage and I will accept it.

Mr. MacEntee

That puts us in a rather unfortunate strategic position. If we withdraw the amendment, we forfeit our right to debate it as in Committee. On the Report Stage, we will be spancelled by the rules of the House.

Mr. Dillon

I am afraid I must resist the amendment.

Mr. MacEntee

I am very sorry the Minister has taken up this attitude. We regard this as being of importance. It is a simple amendment which does not impose any onerous duties upon the secretary. It merely provides that the report submitted by the secretary shall contain a statement of the names and duties of officers getting over £300 per annum. I will tell the Minister what really is the origin of this amendment.

If the Minister will read from page 35 to, I think, page 52, he will see there that the procedure, the tactics and the efforts of the Standing Committee of the Irish Coursing Club appear to be devoted to concealing from its members the real position of the club. The Minister has gone out to reform the club and the word "reform" carries with it the implication that there are abuses to be reformed. One would not reform an organisation which was working in a sound, satisfactory way. It is only an organisation which has been riddled with abuses that one strives to reform.

What we are really concerned about here is to ensure that one of the main conditions which allow these abuses to grow up and develop will be eliminated so far as the reformed club is concerned; that, in fact, a statutory obligation will be placed upon the secretary or responsible officer of the executive committee to keep the members of the club fully informed in regard to the matters set out in the amendment—that is to say, who and what are the officials employed, what are their duties, what is their total remuneration derived from the club, what is their total remuneration derived from certain subsidiary undertakings carried on by the club and referred to in the Advisory Committe's report, and their conditions of employment.

That does not involve any very elaborate documentation. It merely means that there will be one table in which the names of the officials, their duties and the remuneration derived directly from the employment they hold under the club and the additional remuneration which they may draw from subsidiaries will be set out, so that every member of the club will be fully aware of what is being done by the secretary and the executive committee. I cannot see that there is any disadvantage likely to attend the publication of this information for the benefit of the members of the club. The Minister is anxious that all this business should be cleared up and one way of ensuring that the old situation will not redevelop is by the publication of information which the club members are entitled to get but which, unfortunately, was denied to them in the past.

I am sure the Minister is not going to deny that, because here is the report of the committee which is very blunt and very informative. We are merely trying to ensure that the same sort of intrigue and the same sort of connivance and collusion to keep the members of the club ignorant of what was being done in their name and allegedly on their behalf will not occur again.

Mr. Briscoe

I cannot understand why the Minister does not accept this. I am a member of a number of small organisations but they are large enough to be compared with the organisation that has been conjured up in this present Bill. From the point of view of the amount of money that this particular organisation will require, as envisaged in all the talk that we have had, the total number of employees would be reasonably small and consequently the objection that the Minister has is not valid at all even if there is one-half——

Mr. Dillon

There is no use in the Deputy wasting his breath upon the desert air. I have told the Deputy already I think this is unnecessary; I think it is a waste of time but, if the Deputy feels strongly about it and put it down on the Report Stage, I will accept it. I hope there is no need for me to say that 45 times.

Mr. Briscoe

I am accepting what the Minister now says but some minutes ago the Minister said he would resist it.

Mr. Dillon

If—. I told you ten minutes ago that I thought it unimportant but if it is important to the Deputy——

Mr. Briscoe

It is.

Mr. Dillon

——and the Deputy puts it down on the Report Stage I will accept it. The Deputy was told that about a quarter of an hour ago.

Mr. Briscoe

But there were conditions.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. Briscoe

I move amendment No. 38:—

In article 12, page 32, paragraph (iii), line 34, before "A" to insert the following:—

", together with detailed accounts and balance sheets in respect of each undertaking carried on by the club or on its behalf."

This relates to article 12 of the Schedule, paragraph 3. I want that to read:—

"The secretary and honorary treasurer shall submit to every annual general meeting of the club a duly audited consolidated statement of revenue and expenditure and consolidated balance sheet of the club and its subsidiary interests for the year ended on the preceding 31st March, together with detailed accounts and balance sheets in respect of each undertaking carried on by the club or on its behalf."

I do not think the Minister will need much explanation as to why that is necessary. The Minister might say now if he will accept it and that will end the discussion but, if he is not prepared to indicate his views on it, I am prepared to argue my amendment and I hope my colleagues will further supplement my arguments so that if I leave out anything—as I probably shall —they will be able to bring it to his notice.

What does this mean? The supreme body will issue its accounts but there will be quite a few subsidiary undertakings acting as independent units and each of these as is usual in all undertakings commercial or otherwise should have their accounts submitted similarly in the same detail so that there would not be a bulk statement taken into the main balance sheet of the profits or losses of subsidiary organisations. This is what I call consequential. If the system of control by the members is to be accepted; if this is to be a democratic organisation, then every member should be entitled to this information.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.