It is proposed to take Nos. 1 and 20; in No. 20 Votes 37 and 42; Nos. 15, 16 and 17. It is proposed to take No. 20, Votes 37 and 42 until 6 p.m. and to take Private Members' Business from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m.
Order of Business.
Could the Taoiseach say when it is proposed to resume the debate on membership of the Common Market?
Last week I suggested that we might resume on it next week. I take it that the Whips have been in touch in this regard.
Will the supplementary information be circulated before the debate is resumed?
I expect it will be circulated very soon, certainly before the debate—on the 10th March.
I wonder whether the Taoiseach is in a position to give us any information in regard to proposals that, I believe, are being considered by the Government, in relation to constitutional changes? For example, Article 44 of the Constitution and that Article which I think the Taoiseach agrees should be amended so as to give votes at 18. Perhaps it is the Taoiseach's intention to make these constitutional changes and put them before the people when the EEC negotiations, for good or evil, are negotiated. He should give consideration also to the introduction of an amendment to provide for votes at 18 before the local elections which are due to be held in 1972.
That would not require an amendment of the Constitution.
I think it would.
Not for local government elections.
In the event of the other proposals not being put to the people in the near future, would the Taoiseach give serious consideration to the introduction of legislation which would enable voting at 18 in the local elections?
My view now is that the giving of votes at 18 should be a matter for the people to decide at a referendum.
Is it anticipated by the Taoiseach that the proposed changes in the Constitution will be decided by the Government and that there will be a referendum within the next six to 12 months?
I do not think we will have a referendum within six or 12 months.
Is it the Taoiseach's intention to have all these proposed changes put before the people? I do not mean as one decision but in one referendum?
I indicated to the House some time ago that I would try to have as many of these constitutional changes as possible decided by the people at the one time, even though they will require separate pieces of legislation. I do not anticipate that the vote at 18 would precede some of the other changes that are in mind.
Legislation——
We cannot have a discussion on the matter. The Deputy is entitled to put a question but we cannot discuss the matter.
We were having a logical and sane conversation which the Chair wishes to break up. I would not mind if I were being unruly.
This is not in order at this stage.
Nothing seems to be in order. This is a very important matter. Did the Taoiseach not speak at the weekend about eliminating anything that might be offensive to the people in the North?
I did not say that. I did not go that far.
The matter does not arise. It is not in order.
I am entitled to ask the Taoiseach, on the Order of Business, about proposed legislation.
Hear, hear.
I am objecting to a debate at this particular time.
The Chair has spoiled a decent conversation between the Taoiseach and myself.
Due to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply to Question No. 30 of Wednesday, 17th February, I wish to raise the subject matter of that question on the Adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.