I understand that Deputy Dowling is in possession.
Deputy Dowling rose.
Private Members' Business. - Old Age Pensions: Motion (Resumed).
Acting Chairman
On a point of order, Sir, it has long been recognised that the normal practice and procedure in the House has been that in Private Members' time, as at other times, the speakers from each Party would rotate. However, in this case this practice has been departed from and, naturally, we are concerned about this particularly in view of the request made to the Chair by the Minister for Local Government with regard to this matter some short time ago. With your permission, I shall quote the ruling made by the Ceann Comhairle at the time. I am quoting from volume 242 of the Official Report for the 26th November, 1969. At column 192 Deputy Boland is quoted as asking:
Is it not convention that there should be equal representation as far as parties are concerned? I suggest that this is overloading the case on behalf of the Opposition and that the Government are equally entitled to speak on this motion.
The report of the debate continues:
Mr. Ryan: Deputy Moore was the last speaker.
An Ceann Comhairle: The Minister asked about a convention. The practice has been the reverse on Private Members' motions for some years whereby a member from each party is called in turn.
The Ceann Comhairle continued:
If that is to be changed it is a matter I would like the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to discuss first.
I would respectfully suggest that in view of the ruling made by the Ceann Comhairle on the 26th November, it is now the turn of a member from the Labour benches to contribute to this debate.
Acting Chairman
I understand that that procedure was being followed by the Chairman of the time and when it was Labour's turn to speak there was no one available and that the Chair then called a Fine Gael member who was followed by a Fianna Fáil member.
Dr. Byrne rose.
With respect, I happened to be in the House at the time and Deputy Dr. O'Connell offered to speak and was not recognised by the Acting Chairman who was Deputy Carter.
Acting Chairman
Was this after the Fine Gael man had spoken?
Yes.
Acting Chairman
That is not in dispute. The position as I understand it is that speakers were being called in rotation but when Labour's turn came there was no one from that party in the House. The Acting Chairman then called a Fine Gael speaker who was followed by a Fianna Fáil speaker.
On the 26th November the Ceann Comhairle ruled that where a member of a party whose turn it is to speak offers, he would be recognised despite the request by the Minister for Local Government that the Chair should depart from that long established practice.
Acting Chairman
As far as I am aware it is beyond contradiction that when it was the turn of the Labour Party nobody offered.
Surely when a Fianna Fáil Member had spoken and a Fine Gael Member had spoken and when a Labour Deputy offered to speak he should have been recognised so that the long established practice might be continued and was it not entirely wrong that another Fianna Fáil man was called? I have no wish to delay the House or to cause any disruption but the Chair will appreciate that this is a matter of extreme importance to us as a party. We are quite prepared to allow Deputy Dowling continue provided it is clearly understood that this in no way establishes a precedent.
Acting Chairman
As far as I am concerned, there is no question of a precedent being established. I just wish to make it clear that the Chair on the occasion in question called a Labour speaker. He then called a Fine Gael speaker and next a Fianna Fáil speaker but he did not go back to Labour because he did not think it was their turn. As it is now, when Deputy Dowling finishes, the next call will be for a Labour speaker.
I accept the Chair's assurance that no precedent is being established. Thank you.
Before I was so rudely interrupted on the last occasion I was endeavouring——
What is the position about the Bill? Does the Bill not come first?
Acting Chairman
No, this is a resumed motion.
I just wanted to justify Deputy Dowling saying that he was interrupted.
In view of the fact that it was not proposed to allow the Minister concerned to indicate whether he is accepting this, I propose to leave.
The Minister for Local Government, Deputy Boland, withdrew from the Chamber.
(Interruptions.)
This is the second time that the Minister has run away from the motion.
In view of the fact that the Minister has left and that there is no one on the front bench, I suggest that the House be adjourned until the Taoiseach is informed of the position when, perhaps, he may be able to supply someone who can spare a few minutes to be here. There is no point in our continuing when there is no Minister or Parliamentary Secretary here.
Acting Chairman
I should like to point out that this is Private Members' time and Deputy Tully knows that I have no power to adjourn the House. Deputy Dowling is in possession.
Surely the Chair will not allow the Minister to treat Dáil Éireann with such contempt without taking serious action?
The Minister is doing no such thing.
He has walked out.
(Interruptions.)
Acting Chairman
Order. Deputy Dowling is in possession.
Does the Chair not consider it desirable to have the Taoiseach informed?
As far as I know, it is without precedent that a Minister should leave the House during Private Members' time. Why are we here at all if we cannot discuss the subject matter of this motion in the presence of Members of the Government so that it can be considered? Otherwise, it is utterly futile for us to be here and I do not see why we should continue.
The Minister is paid to be here to listen to the views of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour on this very important question.
Acting Chairman
The Chair has no power to insist that the Minister be here.
If the Minister will not be here, as far as we are concerned, we will not be here either.
This is an unparalleled affront to the House.
The Fine Gael and Labour Deputies withdrew from the Chamber.
It would appear that Fine Gael and Labour Members have no interest whatever in the motion put down in the names of Deputies Richie Ryan, Tom O'Donnell and Mrs. Hogan-O'Higgins. In relation to the motion I would say that some weeks previous to the acceptance of this particular motion, Fine Gael put down a similar motion in relation to social welfare problems and on that occasion the motion was moved by a front bench member of Fine Gael but he failed to find a seconder. This was an indication of the lack of concern on the part of that party for social welfare recipients.
I would say the dismal past of Fine Gael and the Labour Party when their contribution to the old age pensioners was tenpence a week on average over the period in which they were in office, is very much removed from the substantial increases the old age pensioners and other social welfare recipients have got during the past ten years or so. The increases were substantial; there is no need for me to mention them. The old age pensioners are as well aware of them as they are of the dismal failure of Fine Gael or Labour to make any substantial increase during their term and, as I said before, the very fact that the previous motion in the name of Fine Gael failed to find a seconder is absolute evidence of their inconsistency and their failure to recognise this particular section. It was purely a gimmick, as indeed is this motion, because we left it to the public to judge and they did judge in no uncertain terms last June and they will have an opportunity again in the coming week or so to make their judgment as to whether or not we have neglected the aged or the infirm in any way. The Minister for Health recently indicated the introduction of a home help service and indeed a meals service is provided by voluntary organisations in certain areas in Dublin city at the moment. I should like to pay a compliment to the voluntary organisations, supported by Dublin Health Authority, which provide meals for people who are unable to look after themselves. A very effective service is provided in this city and no words of mine, or no words expressed in this House, could do justice to the personnel who operate that meals on wheels service. As I said before, there is no need for me to explain further or to go into detail about the exact amounts allocated in the last Budget and in other Budgets to the old age pensioners. In so far as the resources allow, the Government have made contributions to them and will continue to make them in the future.
Acting Chairman
Is the motion opposed?
Yes, it is.
Question put and declared lost.