It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 1, 17, 4, 5, 6 to 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22. Questions will be taken at 3 p.m.
Order of Business.
We have sought to make Parliament work. I will not be a party to any proposal to turn Parliament into the equivalent of a rubber stamp. The Government are proposing to attempt to deal with 15 Bills between now and the Adjournment, in addition to disposing of the Estimates which are on the Paper. We have sought to help in every way we can to expedite the discharge of public business but it is utterly wrong to propose that the House should expedite the discharge of public business to the point of not adequately considering it.
I do not believe that 15 Bills could be adequately considered in all their Stages between now and any practical date for the adjournment of the Dáil. I want to protest emphatically against the proposal to attempt to rush 15 Bills through the House in the time left available to the House. Some of the 15 Bills are of real substance, that is to say, they require careful consideration on Committee Stage of an elaborate character. I would suggest to the Leader of the House that some accommodation should be arranged to determine which of these Bills are urgently necessary so that we can facilitate their passage and leave any Bills that are not urgently necessary to be disposed of in the next session.
I have no desire to rush any Bill through this House. Heretofore, I have carefully avoided even suggesting a possible date for the Adjournment. Any arrangements the Whips consider necessary to ensure that there will be adequate time available for the business which the Government propose will be carefully considered by the Government. The only element of urgency is in relation to the financial business. As Deputies are aware, it is necessary to complete that financial business in time to enable the Appropriation Bill to go to the Seanad and receive the Presidential signature before the end of the month. If that were not done, the Government would be unable to make any payments after the end of the month.
I should hope that it might be possible to finish the debates on the Estimates today, on the assumption. which, I think, has been agreed to by the Whips in their discussions, that the debate on the Taoiseach's Estimate, which is, by tradition, the final business of this session, should be put over to the motion for the Adjournment and that the Estimate should pass today without debate. If we do not succeed in disposing of the other financial business, the remaining Estimates, the Appropriation Bill and the necessary Resolutions today, the Dáil would meet for that purpose tomorrow and for that purpose only. I would not propose to order any legislation tomorrow.
I do not think it is desirable that any of the legislation should be abandoned at this stage. The Government have, in fact, withheld from the Dáil certain legislative proposals which they would have wished to bring forward in other circumstances, merely to prevent the programme for the session becoming too heavy. That is a matter which we can discuss. I think it has to be approached on the basis that it is desirable that the business which has to be done should be done, rather than that we should provide for its postponement or abandonment.
I do not know what views the Deputies may have in regard to the hours for next week. As far as the Government are concerned, we would be agreeable to any hours which commend themselves to the Opposition Parties. Most Deputies would perhaps regard it as preferable to meet next week at the same hours as this week.
We are disposing of the financial business at this time of the year. For reasons best known to the Government, 15 Bills remain undisposed of in the last week of July. Theoretically, we can all sit here until next October, but legislation requires careful consideration and pretty heavy work from those engaged upon it. I do not believe that proper consideration can be given to 15 Bills at this stage of the parliamentary session. In theory, we can sit here forever, but the work is not being properly done.
I shall not be party to a procedure which aims to turn the House into a rubber stamp to pass legislation which has not got the proper consideration. It is perfectly reasonable to work, as we have been doing this week, 12 hours a day, and next week 12 hours a day in order to dispose of necessary and essential legislation, even though it is very unusual for a large volume of legislation to be before the House at this time of the year. But we are quite prepared for 12-hour days this week and next week to meet all reasonable requirements of urgent legislation.
We do not believe that 15 Bills are necessary to pass all Stages between now and the time of the adjournment. We do not believe that programme is consistent with the proper care that the legislation of this House ought to receive, and I emphatically protest against this programme at this time of the year.
I again disclaim any intention of trying to rush any legislation through the Dáil and preventing its proper consideration. When Deputy Dillon refers to 15 Bills, he will recognise he is including in that number Bills which have already been fully debated in the Dáil, both on Second Reading and in Committee, and which are only awaiting the concluding Stages before they can go to the Seanad.
Two out of the 15.
I have some knowledge of what discussions are likely to arise on these matters. Most of the other Bills are not of the kind that would lead to a long or certainly a contentious debate. In most cases, they are not likely to be challenged.
The Taoiseach must appreciate that, no matter what arrangement may be come to with regard to the number of hours or the number of days we sit next week or the week after, many of the Bills listed are Bills which, of necessity, must take three weeks, having regard to the fact that there must be a Second Stage and a Committee Stage and that there is a possibility of a Report Stage. It does not seem clear to me, even if we do sit for longer hours and for extra days next week and the week after, that we can dispose of some of these Bills within any reasonable time.
This is a matter of opinion. In my view, there would be ample time to dispose of these Bills with full discussions on them.
And full intervals between the Stages?
The Standing Orders provide for four days between Second Reading and Committee, and presumably those who drafted the Standing Orders thought that was an adequate time to give. I agree it is customary to give a longer period to long Bills, particularly those of a technical nature. I think it is quite reasonable to consider the possibility of completing that programme and adjourning on 4th or 5th of August.
That would hardly be possible in respect of the Holidays (Employees) Bill, which could be a fairly contentious Bill and to which amendments may be tabled. Surely it will take three weeks to deal with such Bills?
In my view—and I put it forward as a personal view—that is a Committee Stage Bill only. There would be no serious dispute about the Bill on Second Reading and it would be merely a matter of considering amendments on Committee Stage.
And Report Stage, if necessary.
And Report Stage.