asked the Minister for Health whether he is aware that arising out of his letters dated the 14th April, 1959, to the Cork County Manager, as published in the daily press on the 21st May, 1959, the Irish Medical Association requested its members to communicate with the Association before applying for posts in local authority hospitals; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Medical Posts in Local Authority Hospitals.
4.
I have seen in the press the announcement referred to.
As my statement in regard to this matter is necessarily rather a lengthy one and as the matter is one of considerable public interest, I would propose, a Cheann Comhairle, with your permission, to make it before the commencement of public business.
What does that mean? Does it mean that the statement which the Minister may then make can be questioned and queried in this House?
No.
In relation to the procedure, a question has been tabled, put down to the Minister by a Deputy to elicit information——
The question has been tabled—Question No. 4—to elicit information from the Minister in accordance with the procedure of this House. Surely the Minister must give the information subject to the right of Deputies to question the Minister on the statement he makes? I should object very much if the Minister made a statement which may not be questioned.
I thought the Minister asked the permission of the Ceann Comhairle.
Yes; it is with the permission of the House.
I was under the impression that it was the Ceann Comhairle who decided whether or not an answer——
The Ceann Comhairle is, I hope, not in the habit of outstepping his functions.
I think Deputy O'Higgins has unwittingly misled the House. I was asked if I was aware of certain newspaper reports and if I would make a statement on the matter. I said I would make a statement on the matter, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, at the commencement of Public Business.
On a point of order, is it not open and more natural for the Minister to make a statement now in regard to the question on the Order Paper? Is he not fully entitled to make this statement now?
May I indicate —I have seen this question and I have heard the Minister's reply—that the Minister can make the statement which he has indicated only with the permission of the House? I do not want to prevent the Minister making any statement he desires to make but I do suggest that I and other Deputies who may be interested in this matter, as I am sure the House will be, should be entitled to question the Minister on his statement in the same way as if he made the statement in reply to a question. In my short experience in this House, similar questions have been addressed to Ministers over a number of years. Ministers have always made a statement in reply to the question and their replies have been subjected to the rigour of supplementary questions and such questions as might arise properly on the reply. The Minister for Health should not seek to get preferential treatment in regard to a matter as important as this is.
I am not seeking preferential treatment. The permission I am seeking is often accorded to Ministers and Deputies. Deputies may wish to put questions and there are two ways of doing that. The matter may be raised on the Adjournment or Deputies may put down short notice questions to-morrow when they have fully considered the statement I am going to make.
This is a matter of importance. The Health Estimate has concluded in the last few days. The Minister could have made a statement to this effect on his Estimate when it could have been fully discussed. It is quite wrong that the Minister should now seek to run away from Question Time to make a statement after Question Time and to seek a privilege whereby he can avoid being subjected to Supplementary Questions. I do not think that is right.
Statements are made to the House with the permission of the House, and such statements are not subject to discussion by the House. That is the practice.
May I suggest a way out of this difficulty? If the Minister wishes to leave his answer to this question to the end of questions and then provide it as his answer to the last Question on the Order Paper, I think by that means he avoids inconveniencing anybody else and at the same time meets what appears to be a reasonable request that Deputies should be entitled to ask supplementary questions, particularly in view of the fact that on Question 3 we had Supplementary Questions withheld at the Minister's request because he said he thought his answer to Question 4 would meet the subject matter of the Supplementary Questions contemplated. Would that not solve the difficulty?
I did not say precisely what the Deputy has said in the concluding portion of his remarks; but the suggestion Deputy Dillon has made would be quite acceptable to me if the Chair will permit my deferring the answer to Question 4 until the end of Questions.
That means the statement will be a reply to question 4.
This is a most admirable deliberative assembly. We can settle anything.
If we had more Dillons in the House.