Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 Feb 1974

Vol. 270 No. 7

Private Members' Business. - Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1973: Committee Stage (Resumed).

Question again proposed: "That section 2 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Molloy

We are dealing in this section with a proposal to increase the number of Deputies to be elected to this House from 144 to 148. I have already indicated that on this side of the House we do not in principle oppose increasing the number of Members by an additional four to 148 but that we object very seriously to the manner in which it is proposed to distribute these additional four seats among the various constituencies the Minister proposes in this Bill.

The Minister is aware that the Constitutional provisions allow for such an increase if he chooses to take the lower figures suggested in the Constitution of 20,000. This is what he has done. The House should be aware that the option open to the Minister ranges from 148 Deputies down to 99 Deputies if he chose the higher figure per Deputy of 30,000 mentioned in the Constitution. As it has been the practice over the years to decide on the number of Deputies by going to the lower limit mentioned in the Constitution, 20,000, one can in that way justify the creation of four new seats. We feel that the Minister is expecting a lot from us in seeking our ready agreement to this section in view of the manner in which those seats have been allocated.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy knows that the distribution or allocation is not in this section.

Mr. Molloy

This section is influenced by the use the Minister makes of the power he is seeking in this Bill which we claim is unjust and unfair. He is paying no heed to the practical situation which obtained in this country at the time he drew up the proposals which are contained in this Bill. One must consider that the population of the province of Munster in 1971 was 882,002 and that that, in fact, was an increase of 22,668 over the previous census figures published in 1966 but in this Bill the Minister does not propose increasing representation in any of the counties in the Munster region. Yet, when one looks at the census figures for Leinster and examines the increase in the population that has taken place in that province one sees that it has increased by 88,700.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair must draw the attention of the Deputy to the fact that if he proceeds to discuss any particular province every other Deputy might do the same and there would be duplication of debate. This section is only concerned with the number of Members. The distribution or the placing of them elsewhere will fall to be discussed on the Schedule.

Mr. Molloy

I submit that at no place in the Bill are the provinces mentioned.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy has been drawing attention to the numbers in the province. On that basis we would have duplication of debate.

Mr. Molloy

In deciding whether or not we support section 2 we must take into consideration the increase that has taken place in the population. One must take into consideration the fact that the Minister has an option of increasing the numbers but that it is not absolutely necessary that this section should be included in the Bill at all in so far as it relates to an increase of four seats. The whole basis on which this section stands is that there was an increase in population shown in the 1971 census. I submit that I am fully in order in examining the census figures.

Mr. Ahern

Nobody is interested. Deputy Molloy is making a speech and there is nobody except the Minister on the Government benches to hear him.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Molloy

The basis on which the Minister seeks to increase the number of Deputies is the fact that there has been an increase in population. It is only on that basis that he can argue in favour of increasing the number of Deputies by four.

Mr. Tully

Surely Deputy Ahern would not leave the House?

(Interruptions.)

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Molloy

We submit that the only valid argument that can be advanced by the Minister in favour of increasing the number of seats by four is that there has been an increase in the population since the last revision was carried out. I submit that it is in order for me to refer to this population increase on this section and that it would stifle debate on this subject if I were to be debarred from referring to the very basis on which this section stands, that is, population increases.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

This section deals with an increase in membership. The distribution of Members may be dealt with on the Schedule. It is not in order to deal with it at this stage.

Mr. Molloy

Whether or not the Fianna Fáil Party will support this section depends on whether the Government will give an indication to the House that they will allocate the extra four seats they are seeking in a fair and just manner. If I am not to be allowed to show that they are not allocating these seats in a fair and just manner——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The allocation of the seats is dealt with in the Schedule. We have not yet reached the allocation of seats.

Mr. Molloy

The Chair will appreciate that there is a vital principle involved here. The whole Bill stands or falls on section 2. If there are no additional seats to distribute, then the Schedule falls because the Schedule as drawn up is dependent on 148 seats being allocated. We are arguing the question of these additional seats. We feel we are fully entitled to go into this whole matter on this section in very great detail. If the Government are seeking the support of the Fianna Fáil Party for this Bill they must come clean and they must give us an indication as to whether they intend to make any amendments to the Schedule, whether they intend at any stage to consider the amendments proposed by this party or whether they are prepared to consider amendments on Report Stage which would effect a fairer distribution of the additional seats. Not alone is the Minister by this device in a position where he has the discretion to create four new seats but by the devious means employed by the Minister in this Bill he has taken unto himself the right to allocate six new seats by reducing that area of the country from Donegal to County Clare by two. The population, as given in the 1971 census, does, in fact, allow for the retention of 30 seats in that area, which is the existing number of Deputies elected from that area now and the Minister proposes to reduce that area by two. This means that, in dealing with the Schedule subsequently, the Minister has six seats to allocate; two which he stole from the west of Ireland and four which he is allowed to create under the Constitution if we accept this section.

What has happened? Five of those seats have been allocated to the Dublin area; one to the Minister's own constituency. Munster has received no increase and the west has been reduced by two.

We submit to the House that this is gross gerrymandering; that it is total dishonesty; that the Government should be completely ashamed even to come before the House with a measure such as this. If they sent in Deputy Tully to carry the brunt of this debate and bring this Bill through the Dáil; if they had said: "You do it, Jim; you stick it out there; you march it through; we will come in when you want us to vote"—that is a very poor way for the Government to treat this House. As is evident now, there are three Deputies sitting behind the Minister and they are there because we called for a quorum.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Molloy

The Minister was sitting here alone until the quorum was called. The Government have paid scant heed to the authority of this House in bringing this Bill forward.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should stay with the section.

Mr. Molloy

I am very much with the section because we are discussing whether or not there should be an increase in the number of Deputies.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Molloy is in possession.

Mr. Coughlan

What did you try to do in Dún Laoghaire/Rathdown? Do not talk to us.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Molloy is in possession.

Mr. Molloy

We have the interesting spectacle of not one Deputy from the Government benches behind the Minister making any contribution to this debate which has now gone on for three and a half to four hours.

Mr. Dunne

We have no objection to the Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Molloy is in possession. Deputy Molloy.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Molloy

As I have explained, the Constitutional position does permit these four extra seats being created. But we put it to the House and to the Minister that, in the allocation, it would have been more correct for him—in coming back to the House here seeking approval for his actions —to have used some arguments to support increasing the number of Deputies by four. No argument has been used other than that the Government have decided; the Government have the votes and will march it through. We are not satisfied that the Government have been fair and honest with the community in the manner in which they have distributed the additional seats that are to be created and the two seats that have been stolen from the west of Ireland.

The whole of the Munster region— increasing by 22,000 persons—was not granted any of these six seats which the Minister had to give away.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is again dealing with the distribution of seats.

Mr. Molloy

Yes—which we believe is a matter of fundamental importance if we are to be asked to agree to this section.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

What the Chair is trying to tell the Deputy is that the distribution of seats is part of the Schedule.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Molloy

Deputy Coughlan, I am sure, would have some valuable contribution to make to this Bill. It is a well-known fact that——

Mr. Coughlan

I do not do any crooked things like the Deputy. The Deputy cannot point the finger at Coughlan.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Molloy.

Mr. Molloy

There is the well-known fact that Deputy Coughlan was called into the office of the Taoiseach, Deputy Cosgrave, and pleaded with to agree to a three-seater in the Limerick East Constituency, and that Deputy Coughlan——

Mr. Coughlan

That is a confounded, damnable lie and the Deputy knows it.

Mr. Molloy

And Deputy Coughlan has repeated on numerous occasions, inside and outside this House, how he told Liam Cosgrave to go and get stuffed and that there would be four seats in East Limerick——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should not be making allegations.

Mr. Molloy

——and that Deputy Coughlan would maintain his rural base and would keep Mr. Lipper out of this House.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

People outside the House, who have no opportunity of defending themselves, should not be referred to.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Coughlan

The boy is lost for an answer so he is like a drowning man dragging at every old straw that passes his way. He should go back to Oranmore.

Mr. Molloy

I will not return again for quite a while to Mr. Lipper. But this interesting sidelight on the manner in which this Bill was drawn up is a reflection on the integrity of the Minister and of the Government who come before the House asking us to accept the Bill in all good faith, telling us, trying to convince the press so that they, in turn, would try to assure the people of this country that this was the only way this could have been done by the Minister; that this was the best way and that there was no other way out of it. I have seen, since this debate started—and in the speeches that were made here on Second Stage —Deputies from the west of Ireland totally indoctrinated by their leaders, coming in here—Deputies from Roscommon, from Sligo and from Leitrim —saying that the Minister has no choice, because of the population figures in the 1971 census, other than to reduce the number of seats in that western region by two.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Molloy

I have shown, in the amendment that I have put down, that that is not true. Yet those untrue statements have been made in this House.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Coughlan

Charlie headed the poll and not Brian Lenihan and the Deputy knows it.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Cunningham.

Mr. Cunningham

I live four miles from Derry city and all students of politics know that, in Derry city, we have the classic, international example of gerrymandering. I accuse the Minister for Local Government of bringing in here a gerrymandering proposal which is very little behind the Derry set-up.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will have to stay with section 2 which proposes to increase the number of seats by four.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister had a choice. According to the Constitution, he could have ranged from 148 Deputies down to the number mentioned by Deputy Molloy, which was 99. This is a fairly wide choice. We do not mind his making the choice he did; that is, 148. It does mean that he is creating a situation—by having 148 Deputies—where, in the views of all sides of this House, the people of this country will be better represented. In other words, we could have had a situation where the Minister could decide, under the Constitution, that he would take 25,000 persons per Deputy and, in so doing, would divide the population by 25, thus arriving at a number of Deputies which would be much fewer than 148.

Section 2 provides for that kind of activity by the Minister under the Constitution. Although he would be legally and constitutionally entitled to do it I think it would be wrong for the Minister to say that a Deputy will represent not fewer than 25,000 persons. I am glad he did not do it. As a matter of fact, the better representation any group of persons has in this House and the lesser number of persons which a Deputy represents, all the better. In other words, he can do it more efficiently, provided the area he has to cover is fairly small. Therefore, we do not object to 148 in itself.

We now have a situation where some men are more equal than others. The people in the Minister's constituency, where he added another seat, are more equal than the people in the western constituencies where, instead of a Deputy representing 19,000, he will have to represent 21,000.

Mr. Coughlan

The Deputy from Fianna Fáil forgets that the west of Ireland——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Cunningham

We on this side of the House are prepared to give the Minister section 2 of the Bill. We would not like to see him jackbooting it through the House.

Mr. Tully

The Deputies are reasonable men.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister said last night that this is what he would do. The Government had decided and they would not change their minds no matter what logic was used, no matter what part of the country was depopulated so far as Deputies were concerned. We do not mind so long as the people, through the voice of Fianna Fáil as an opposition, have it spelled out loud and clear——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Cunningham

——that they have been gerrymandered and that the Government and Minister will take away equal rights and the just society —and may call it the Justin Society if you like——

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

They are a Dublin Government, of course. Everything for Dublin.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Coughlan

At least we have got away from Cork.

Mr. Molloy

The Minister has a Munster Deputy behind him.

Mr. Cunningham

The population increased between the two censuses by 22,000 persons.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has already advised the Deputy that the distribution of seats is a matter for the Schedule. He will confine himself to the number of Deputies.

Mr. Cunningham

The distribution of Deputies is important. When the Minister was being chiselled by Deputy Coughlan——

Mr. Coughlan

Why not a carpenter? I cannot use a chisel. Any chiselling that was done was done by Deputy Molloy.

Mr. Molloy

I looked after the Deputy.

Mr. Cunningham

There is no truth whatsoever in the rumour that the Minister for Local Government had to lay a new piece of carpet at his door after the pilgrimage of Deputies from that side of the House.

Mr. Coughlan

Is that what Deputy Cunningham was doing?

Mr. Cunningham

I did not go near the Minister's office.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Section 2, please.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister must have had the distribution figures for the population of this country before him when he——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has already advised the Deputy that the distribution of seats is a matter for the Schedule.

Mr. Cunningham

I respect your ruling, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. Could I ask you to help me? I visualise a situation where the Minister sat down with the census figures in front of him and arrived at section 2 and 148 Deputies and the distribution of the population represented by those figures. Surely I can make a logical argument against what he has done. Am I allowed to refer to population distribution?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair is not interfering with the Deputy's right to argue. The Chair is pointing out that the section of this Bill enables us to have 148 Deputies. The distribution is dealt with in the Schedule and there will be an opportunity for Deputies to discuss it on the Schedule.

Mr. Callanan

On a point of order, may I respectfully suggest that some of the remarks by Deputy Cunningham are relevant. Suppose a manager came to his directors for £X,000 this year, the first thing he would be asked would be what did he want to do with it. We are not satisfied with what has been done and we want to find out exactly what the Minister proposes to do. Therefore, I hold that Deputy Cunningham's remarks on distribution are relevant.

Mr. Cunningham

The Chair has indicated that there will be an opportunity on another section of this Bill for me to discuss this subject. It could be that the Government might change their minds. A Deputy might vote according to his conscience and this section might be defeated. In that case I might never get a chance again to discuss it on another section. This is possible. The Government were defeated before.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will the Deputies accept from the Chair that what we are concerned with is the number of Deputies? The Chair is aware that even nine-tenths of the Deputies could discuss——

Mr. Molloy

Will the Leas-Cheann Comhairle repeat that please?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

When the Schedule comes before the House the distribution of seats will be debated.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

On a point of order, last night we had the distribution of population in Dublin and how the Dublin seats were arrived at, from the Minister. You were in the Chair, Sir. With respect, I asked him for the figures on Munster. I congratulated him for having the Dublin figures. If I were in his shoes coming in here and fighting for Dublin city I would have that ammunition with me. The fact is that he produced these figures and gave us not alone the population figures for the 1971 census but also the projected figures for the following two years. On that basis, if Deputy Cunningham is ruled out of order, the Minister should have been ruled out of order last night.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Cunningham

I have the figures which were given to us last night by the Minister in respect of the Dublin area. He also gave us the population of the Dublin area and the figures are, as the Official Report will show, 41, 42, 43 or 44. He had a choice.

Mr. Tully

Fianna Fáil should stop for a minute and look at themselves because they are being extremely childish. Nobody would believe that a group of grown men would come in here, argue in favour of 148 seats and then argue for hours and hours against it and in doing so make nonsensical arguments.

Mr. Cunningham

Every time the Minister rises he uses, in respect of the Deputies on this side, the words "stupid" and "ignorant", or says they do not know what they are talking about or that they have not a clue.

Mr. Tully

Can I be blamed if that is the way you behave on that side of the House?

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister must think himself the repository of all the wisdom, learning, understanding and other virtues of this House. He is not any such thing.

If the Minister took some time to discuss what he could have done arising out of the figures of the 1971 census in Dublin and the choices which he had available to him he might have had a different view. He has shown us clearly when talking on section 2 of this Bill that he had a choice in respect of Dublin. He explained to us that he was toying with the idea of giving Dublin 41 seats, 42 seats, 43 seats or 44 seats. As Deputy Molloy has pointed out, the Minister had six seats to play around with, four of which became available due to the increase in the population, the other two pilfered from the west of the country. Instead of any of the numbers that he mentioned the Minister decided on 43. In other words, the Minister went the whole hog but, of course, he kept one for County Meath, his own constituency.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

The eleventh commandment.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister went further. He went outside the population of the 1971 census and asked Dublin Corporation Planning Section to give him the up-to-date figures in relation to the city. What he wanted them for is hard to understand because they were not relevant to anything he was legally or constitutionally entitled to do with the Bill. However, he did so many things with this Bill that I suppose he had reached the stage where he thought he was all powerful and all mighty. He thought there was no harm in seeing what the situation in the future could be.

I should like to tell the Minister that the future for him, and his Bill, so far as the country is concerned looks bleak. The Minister will go down as the architect of this blatant piece of gerrymandering. The people up and down the country are not yet aware what is happening to them. That is because very little publicity has been given to this matter and little discussion has taken place. Some counties are now objecting to this. They are, of course, also objecting to the Minister's high-handed circular to the local authorities asking them if they have any suggestion to make but when they made suggestions down went the jack-boot.

Mr. Harte

We do not have jackboots.

Mr. Molloy

Hitler's boots.

Mr. Lawlor

The way the present Government is carrying on it will not be long before we are all in our bare feet.

Mr. Harte

We are not carrying tomahawks.

Mr. Cunningham

We are prepared to agree to this section but I should like to paint the picture of difference between the present Minister's proposals and those of his predecessor. Deputy Molloy would not have pinched seats from Ulster, from Connacht or from Munster. It used be "to hell or to Connacht", but nowadays it is "from Connacht to Dublin".

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is returning to the question of distribution.

Mr. Cunningham

I am trying to compare the attitudes on section 2.

Mr. Molloy

The Deputy is making an historical comparison between the Minister and Cromwell and there is very little difference between the two of them.

Mr. Tully

Hysterical, not historical.

Mr. Cunningham

I am showing the difference in outlook in respect of this section.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are dealing with the number of Deputies only.

Mr. Cunningham

The difference that exists between what is proposed now and what would have been introduced by Deputy Molloy if he was Minister for Local Government is vast. We have nothing against Dublin.

Mr. Molloy

Dublin does not want the unfair advantage being given it in this Bill by the Minister. It is being done for political reasons to suit the Minister's political philosophy.

Mr. Dunne

Deputy Molloy would not have done that; he is an honest man.

Mr. Molloy

At least we would have argued in favour of what we proposed doing but in this case we have nothing from the Minister to back up his proposals.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Molloy made a dog's breakfast of it when he was here and what is now proposed is entirely different.

Mr. Molloy

The Minister should defend his proposals.

Mr. Cunningham

We must get it across to the people of Ireland, to the people of Dublin who will be represented by some of the 148 and to the people of the west of Ireland that the principle of equal representation is gone. Worse than that, the principle has now been established that if there is a nice small compact highly populated area more Deputies will be given to it than to one which is scattered, far from this Parliament and handicapped in every way.

The Minister now adds another handicap to those which affect some of the constituencies of Munster. I notice that the Deputies from Munster on the Government side of the House are now as mute as mice.

Mr. Dunne

We are quite happy with it.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is anxious to ensure that every Deputy gets a good hearing. The Chair will tolerate no further interruptions and the Deputy will speak through the Chair.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister has only three Deputies behind him but they will not say anything on this section. It is logical that a Munster Deputy would give his opinion unless he is being muzzled. I am speaking as a Deputy from Ulster, whose province has been robbed of a seat——

Mr. Tully

The Deputy did not put down an amendment. He is quite satisfied. He knows he will get one out of the five anyway.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister took a seat from us. I want to tell the people of Ulster that he stole a seat; I will do it in this House and eventually the message will get across. The people of Munster are in the same boat but the Deputies from that province sit like dummies behind the Minister. When he looks crossly at them they freeze but on the appointed day they will troop in behind him and say they are happy with what the Minister did and that he is entitled to a seat in Meath which he has taken from Ulster. The same applies to Connacht. There is an Ulster Deputy sitting behind the Minister but he will walk into the lobby behind the Minister and say Ulster is prepared to be gerrymandered. We are not prepared and I want to state that loudly and clearly. The Minister can have 148 Deputies if he is prepared to give a fair deal. He should show by his actions that all people are equal.

Mr. Harte

I do not know if Deputy Cunningham is sincere in what he says or if he is playing to the gallery. He talked about going to hell or to Connacht. Does he realise that Fianna Fáil took part of Leitrim and put it into Donegal, that they brought part of Connacht into Ulster to keep six Deputies in Donegal, four of whom were Fianna Fáil? It amazes me that Deputy Cunningham and others seem to forget that prior to 1937 there were eight Deputies in Donegal and Fianna Fáil had four of these——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair hesitates to interrupt the Deputy but he must advise all Members that this section deals with the fixing of the total number of Members to be elected to this House. The debate should not attempt to cover distribution of the seats. Deputies should relate their remarks solely to whether the number should be 144 or 148 Members. That is the issue.

Mr. Harte

The section deals with an increase in the membership of the House. Last night Deputy Dowling entertained us in a pantomime effort on whether he should support the section and he ended up by telling us how he could oppose it. I do not know whether Deputy Cunningham supports or opposes the section. He seems to be objecting to the fact that out of 148 Deputies there would be one less Deputy in Donegal. It is on these lines I am making my case.

An Ceann Comhairle

We shall be dealing with Donegal, as well as other counties, on the appropriate Schedule and that will be the time for Deputies to raise arguments in respect of Donegal, Dublin and elsewhere It is not in order on section 2 of the Bill.

Mr. Callanan

I should like to raise a point of order. I put the matter to the Leas-Cheann Comhairle and I think he agreed with it. It is in reference to Deputy Harte's comments. If I were manager of a big business and wanted extra money this year, one of the first things a director would ask me would be what I wanted to do with the money. The Minister is asking for four more seats and, on a point of order, I claim it is relevant to ask him what he is going to do with them before we give them to him.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy's remarks are of interest to the Chair but they will not influence his decision on the matter. The Chair is quite satisfied that the distribution of seats must be left to the Schedule.

Mr. Callanan

It is important to section 2.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputies will be afforded every opportunity of expressing their views at that time. It is disorderly to raise the matter on section 2.

Mr. Harte

I submit to the ruling but if the Chair applied that rule as strictly——

An Ceann Comhairle

I sought to apply it last night and I shall apply it now.

Mr. Harte

I submit to the ruling of the Chair but I fail to understand how Deputy Cunningham could make the points he raised. I am at a grave disadvantage because I am not in a position to answer him as I should like to do. Deputy Cunningham forgets that in 1961 it was the then Minister for Local Government, Deputy Blaney, who kept the Deputy in this House, as happened in 1969 when Mr. Boland was Minister. What the present Minister for Local Government did should have been done in 1961 or in 1969. I do not know what thanks Deputy Cunningham will give the present Minister, but we all know the thanks he gave his former colleagues, Deputy Blaney, and Mr. Boland.

An Ceann Comhairle

This is not relevant to the section. It will be relevant on the Schedule only.

Mr. Harte

I submit it could be argued it is relevant——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair does not argue, nor will it be argued with.

Mr. Harte

I am not arguing but I am submitting to the Chair as a point of argument that Deputy Cunningham's submission has been——

Mr. J. Gibbons

That is a very subtle difference.

Mr. Harte

Deputy Cunningham's objection to the 148 seats is that one of his colleagues will be dismissed from this House. He should not have been here for the last 20 years.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is not relevant to the section.

Mr. Lalor

On section 2 it is difficult to discuss the question of agreeing that the new Dáil, following the dissolution of this Dáil, will consist of 148 members. We have had evidence from Deputy Harte of the difficulty there is for the House in discussing this on section 2.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy may not seek to circumvent the ruling of the Chair on this matter.

Mr. Lalor

I have no intention of doing that. Under the existing Act there are 144 Deputies in the House. The Minister proposes to raise that figure to 148 Deputies. I take it that is in order.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is in the section and nothing else.

Mr. Lalor

I agree. You have informed us that we cannot discuss individual cases and therein I have a problem.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

On a point of order, may I ask you a question, a Cheann Comhairle? I submit to you, as was submitted last night, that we are talking about 148 or 144 Deputies. The figure of 148 did not drop from out of the sky. It was added up by a number of constituencies grouped all over the country. I agree that we cannot talk about individual constituencies but, in a general way, surely how this figure of 148 is made up is relevant to section 2. With respect, Sir, I say this to you.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy's remarks are of interest to the Chair but do not change the Chair's ruling.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

Does the Chair not agree——

An Ceann Comhairle

Allow me, Deputy. The Chair is prepared to give reasonable latitude. I said last night that brief remarks on the constituencies or the variations would be allowed by the Chair, but Deputies are going into detail and we cannot have that.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

May I ask you a question? Is there another section on which we can talk about the groupings as distinct from the individual constituencies?

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes, indeed.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

Which section is that?

An Ceann Comhairle

We will come to that. Indeed, I will be recommending that we discuss this matter——

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

I was trying——

An Ceann Comhairle

I want to help the Deputy. I will be suggesting to the House that we engage in this grouping to which he refers. There will be ample opportunity to refer to constituencies on a regional basis.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

I accept that. I am not asking you to allow us to deal with the constituencies on this section but surely the groupings are relevant to the figure of 148.

An Ceann Comhairle

No. That will come under the appropriate Schedule.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

Surely it must be——

Mr. Tully

This is becoming a bad joke. The Deputy is arguing with the Chair while another Deputy from his own party is on his feet.

Mr. Cunningham

On a point of order, I appreciate what you have said, a Cheann Comhairle, but as a matter of guidance am I right in this? You could visualise a situation in which this section was defeated and there might not be an opportunity to deal with what you are suggesting could be dealt with.

An Ceann Comhairle

I can assure the Deputy that the Chair is quite conversant with the procedure in this instance.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

I am sorry——

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Fitzgerald, resume your seat please.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

All right.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Lalor is on his feet. The Deputy raised a point of order. I replied to him. He should allow Deputy Lalor to proceed.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

I asked a question which you did not answer. I fail to find a Schedule on which you can refer to the groupings.

An Ceann Comhairle

If the Deputy consults me on the matter I will help him.

Mr. Lalor

Like other Fianna Fáil speakers I share the view that it is advisable to have the maximum numbers of Deputies in Dáil Éireann arising from—and I take it this is relevant —the necessity to be represented in Europe and the possibility of a Council of Ireland. There are various reasons why we should have the maximum amount of representation especially in view of the proposed new regulations under which we will have more meetings in Committee. Deputy Molloy is also convinced that we should have the maximum number of Deputies. While we fully support that, we have reservations in view of the fact that we have no indication as yet from the Minister as to whether he is willing to accept amendments to the Schedule which have been submitted by Deputy Molloy.

Mr. Tully

Will it help Deputy Lalor if I answer that now?

Mr. Lalor

Possibly.

Mr. Tully

I do not propose to accept the amendments.

Mr. Lalor

Therefore my view on the figure of 148 Deputies is totally changed. In the 144 Deputies at present there are representatives from all over the country. There are 38 Deputies from the Dublin city and county area. In the 148 Deputies it is proposed to have 43 Deputies from the Dublin city and county area and 105 Deputies from the rest of the country, whereas at present there are 106 Deputies from the rest of the country. That acts as an incentive to us to oppose this section. While the Minister proposes that the people of the Republic be represented in Dáil Éireann by four extra Deputies he is also proposing that 25 counties should be represented by one less. This Electoral (Amendment) Bill sounds to me in a peculiar sort of way—if I am not ruled out of order—very much like the Sunningdale Agreement.

An Ceann Comhairle

That certainly would not be in order.

Mr. Lalor

There is a similarity between the Bill and that non-mentionable agreement.

Mr. Harte

What is the similarity?

Mr. Lalor

We are talking in this instance about section 2 and when we talk in another instance about section 5 we are told we have to buy the whole package. We cannot have details.

Mr. Harte

On a point of order, is the Deputy trying to tell us that the similarity between Sunningdale and the Bill before the House is that both are wrong because Fianna Fáil did not draw them up?

An Ceann Comhairle

That is hardly a point of order.

Dr. Loughane

It is sub judice.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Coughlan

It is a poor effort when you have to come back to try to justify your claims in this way.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Lalor

While I cannot make out what Deputy Coughlan is saying I am sure it is the most intelligent contribution from the Government side so far.

Mr. Coughlan

Look at the following we have.

Mr. Lalor

I suggest the Deputy should listen to me. We hear about this open Government but we do not seem to get any factual statements from them. I was pointing out that the 1971 census of population showed that there were roughly 94,000 extra people in the country as compared with the 1966 population. Arising from that, the Minister, following the pattern his predecessor would have adopted, proposes that the number of representatives to be elected to this House should be raised to 148. I was saying that I agreed with this proposal in section 2. That means an extra Deputy per 23,000 or 24,000 people and this is fully justified but the manner in which the Minister proposes to increase the representation in one area, the Dublin city and county area, by five Deputies and to reduce the other 25 counties by one Deputy has this side of the House worried. I think this view has been expressed by everybody speaking here. It is from this point of view that we are worried about sanctioning the increased number of Deputies.

We are justified in asking the Minister to give some indication that he is willing to review his decision to disenfranchise 25 counties which have earned increased representation in order to boost the representation in Dublin city and county by an extra five Deputies. I am talking not in terms of Ulster, Munster and Conacht but about Ulster, Munster, Connacht and the remainder of Leinster outside Dublin city and county. There has been an increase in population all over the country. The Munster area population increased considerably. So did the Leinster population. The population in the Connacht area dropped by little more than 10,000 people. From that point of view there seems to be every justification for querying the intention of the Minister and the Government as expressed in section 2 of the Bill.

There are two different matters involved: one, the Minister is seeking four extra seats in Leinster House with which we agree, and two, the manner in which he proposes to fill them, with which we positively disagree. I realise that we shall have an opportunity of discussing individual cases on the Schedule and later in the Bill but if the Minister is adamant on this we would be justified in opposing the increase in representation which will have an end result of reducing rural representation—by "rural" I mean outside Dublin city and county —from 106 to 105 Deputies. This is extremely important. At present, outside Dublin city and county 106 Deputies are returned to Dáil Éireann. As a result of this Bill, as it is apparently planned at present, we shall have four extra Deputies but on the other hand we shall end up with a situation in which there will be one fewer Deputy from the 25 counties outside Dublin city and county.

Mr. Harte

How it will affect Fianna Fáil—that is what is worrying the Deputy.

Mr. Lalor

I am not talking about parties.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please.

Mr. Molloy

The injustice of the distribution. The people of Dublin have an unfair advantage.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Lalor

I am extremely anxious to make a positive and concrete contribution on section 2 and I am sorry that the ringing of the quorum bell brings in what it does bring in.

Mr. Molloy

The cat was let out of the bag there.

Mr. Lalor

If reducing the representation of the 25 counties from 106 to 105 meant that Deputy Harte might be the 106th man, I should feel inclined to support the Bill and I have a funny notion that on that guarantee the Minister for Local Government would probably support me——

Mr. Harte

The Deputy has become very clever since he became chief whip of the Fianna Fáil Party.

Mr. Lalor

No, I was always clever.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Lalor without interruption, please.

Mr. Lalor

I was even reasonably clever in keeping down the cost of living, something the Deputy's Minister has not been able to do.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Harte

The Deputy loves himself.

Mr. Molloy

The county are paying dearly for your crowd. The cattle are starving——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is anxious to secure order and will insist on it.

Mr. Molloy

The people will be starving next.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputy Molloy please obey the Chair?

Mr. Molloy

It is true; there are cattle starving.

An Ceann Comhairle

What has that to do with section 2 of this Bill? It is utterly disorderly and the Deputy knows it.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Coughlan

I suggest if what Deputy Molloy says is true we will do what they did. We will give the people free beef.

Mr. Lalor

We have had an extremely decent offer.

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us not forget the dignity and decorum of this House.

Mr. Molloy

This is a warning to Deputy Coughlan.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is no help to the Chair with these interruptions.

Mr. Lalor

I am sorry that as a result of our asking for a quorum we get those interruptions. I am trying to get across the real reason why on this side of the House we are being so difficult about section 2. At present there are 106 Deputies in this House representing the territory of 25 counties.

An Ceann Comhairle

I seem to recollect having heard that before. Repetition is not in order.

Mr. Lalor

I have not expressed how worried the Government were.

Mr. Harte

On a point of order, is the Deputy making a speech?

Mr. Molloy

He has plenty of time to make it.

Mr. Lalor

On the one hand, you are telling me that I am repeating myself and on the other hand Deputy Harte, who has been here all the time and is a Pioneer, does not seem to have got the message.

Mr. Coughlan

Let the Deputy not resort to that tactic. If the Deputy does not want to put up his Pioneer pin in his coat and marshal before the people of Ireland——

Mr. Molloy

The Deputy should say that to the Minister. He is the one who does that more often than anybody else.

Mr. Tully

Is Deputy Molloy objecting to the fact that I wear a Pioneer pin?

Mr. Molloy

No, I am objecting to the objection which Deputy Coughlan has against the Minister.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Lalor on section 2.

Mr. Harte

On a point of order, Deputy Lalor is making his continued, rather boring argument on the fact that the territory of 25 counties is losing one seat.

Mr. Faulkner

That is not a point of order.

Mr. Harte

It is a point of order. The Deputy said that Dublin is being increased by five seats. On a point of order, does the Constitution not state that Deputies represent people and not geographical locations?

An Ceann Comhairle

This is not a point of order.

Mr. Molloy

The Constitution says that this House decides within constitutional limits. We do not agree with the way the Government are doing it. We do not think it is fair.

Mr. Lalor

I think I have endeavoured to make my point in this regard by indicating that we can have two different points of view. We are anxious to have the maximum number of Deputies but only provided they represent the proper distribution of people. I do not know if anybody has read section 2. It states:

Dáil Éireann shall, after the dissolution thereof which next occurs after the passing of this Act, consist of one hundred and forty-eight members.

The most extraordinary thing can happen here. It is quite possible by a great stretch of the imagination to visualise a situation whereby the National Coalition Government, of which the Minister for Local Government is a member, may continue in office for a period of five years. This would mean their term of office would last to March, 1978. A census is due in 1976 and if the Government survive till then it is likely they could mess about a lot with the count— they have done so already—and might deliberately hold back having the census. I wonder if it would be possible for the Minister to alter this section to read:

After the dissolution thereof which next occurs after the passing of this Act or after the next census, whichever comes first

because it is quite probable that the population may have exceeded the number which would justify having 149 or 150 Deputies. I know that constitutionally it has worked out that 148 is the absolute maximum number of Deputies we can have in the House arising from the 1971 census. It might be no harm if the Minister amended section 2 in some way to take into consideration the possibility of increasing the representation of the country arising out of the 1976 census. That is likely to take place before the present Dáil dissolves. Tolerances have been stretched to the limit in some constituencies and those could be out of order following the next census. If the Minister was not so anxious to get this Bill and to do the gerrymandering which is so blatant and if he waited until after the 1976 census he would be in a position to see to it that the people would be more adequately represented.

Mr. Harte

The Deputy has said that so often that he is beginning to believe it.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is entitled to a good hearing.

Mr. Lalor

I am endeavouring to make an argument against this section.

Mr. Harte

That is very difficult. The sad thing about the Deputy is that he has said that so often that he believes it.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputy Harte please cease interrupting and allow Deputy Lalor to continue?

Mr. Lalor

I believe anything I say in this House. I am not masquerading like Deputy Harte, keeping up a front. I stand over everything I say in this House. I have said that I am fully in agreement with and fully support a section of this Bill which says that we should have the maximum number of Deputies because I realise that the maximum number of Deputies are necessary. If the Minister intends to misuse the power to increase the number by four, as he appears to intend to misuse it, by taking away from the representation of the people in 25 counties in order to give increased representation to the other——

Mr. Harte

On a point of order, is it in order for the Deputy to refer to 25 counties when the Constitution states that it is 20,000 people we represent?

An Ceann Comhairle

That is not a point of order.

Mr. Molloy

The Bill relates to counties.

Mr. Lalor

I presume I am in order talking about 25 counties apart from Dublin. It makes sense to me.

Mr. Ahern

He wants to recognise the 26 counties.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Lalor has made a long speech. He has been substantially in order but I am concerned that he may feel inclined to dwell on the distribution of the seats and this is not in order on this section.

Mr. Lalor

I appreciate that.

Mr. Molloy

We want to know what he wants the four seats for.

Mr. Coughlan

Any old straw to a drowning man.

Mr. Molloy

We will not swallow gerrymanders. That is what this is.

Mr. Lalor

I do not want to talk about the matters covered in the Schedule.

Mr. Coughlan

If you had got your way proportional representation would have gone and gone forever.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Coughlan, please.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

You had to fight for your own corner.

Mr. Molloy

What did you tell Liam Cosgrave? You told him to go and "get stuffed" and fair play to you. Deputy Cosgrave went down on his knees and pleaded with Stevie Coughlan for three seats in East Limerick. "Get stuffed" said Steve.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Coughlan and Deputy Molloy will please cease interrupting.

Mr. Coughlan

With all due respect and obedience, but I hate hypocrisy from the Fianna Fáil benches. You are a sad sight over there.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Molloy

We will fight gerrymanders anyway.

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us have some order, please.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputies please desist from interrupting? I ask Deputy Coughlan to desist.

Mr. Molloy

Put him out.

An Ceann Comhairle

Interrupting is responsible for gross disorder in the House.

Mr. Ahern

I agree with the Ceann Comhairle. It should not be allowed.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputy Ahern please resume his seat? He is being disorderly.

Mr. Lalor

In this debate we are having a number of interjections. As I see it, an extremely useful interjection at this stage——

An Ceann Comhairle

Can we keep off personalities, Deputy, please, and get back to the Bill?

Mr. Lalor

It is not personal. I am seeking an interjection from the Minister for Local Government.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy ought not to invite interjections.

Mr. Lalor

He has already indicated that he has no intention of accepting Deputy Molloy's amendments.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Lalor is making a Second Reading speech and in the middle of it asks me to answer a question which he knows but I do not. This is asking a little too much. Second Reading speeches would not be in order here. I am amazed at what is happening over there.

Mr. Lalor

I am surprised that the Minister is amazed in view of the fact that he has said, and I presume he believes what he said, that we are all sorts of duffers over here, that all the genius is over there.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Lalor

We accept that we should have 148 Deputies in this House and more if the Constitution would allow it, more if we had an up-to-date census. I suggest that the Minister would do more justice to the voters of this country in its entirety if he would withdraw this Bill at this stage.

An Ceann Comhairle

That does not arise on this section.

Mr. Molloy

It arises on every section.

Mr. Lalor

It arises on the basis of 148 Members.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Bill as introduced passed its Second Stage and is now in Committee.

Mr. Lalor

The Minister should indicate now that he is willing to consider or introduce amendments. The Minister today on the Motorways Bill saw reason in a certain number of the amendments put forward by this party. While he resisted them originally he saw the justice of a number of them today and——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy appreciates that the amendments will come up on the Schedule.

Mr. Lalor

With all due respect, there would not be an amendment on the Schedule. The Minister should consider an amendment so that he could increase, if the Dáil has not dissolved before the next census which is due in 1976, the representation in this House. I think that is very much on the section and is something that probably the Minister himself would welcome the opportunity of doing, because it is very much accepted, in the House, that the House could well do with the maximum amount of representation. Despite the fact that we regularly read letters in the papers, referring to how adequate it would be to have 40, or 50, or 60 working Deputies to have a proper Parliament here, we—who are engaged in parliamentary work—are extremely conscious of the pressures on our time in order to give legitimate representation.

I object to the Minister describing this as a Second Reading speech because I have indicated on two or three occasions in the course of my contribution the fact that I would welcome an indication from the Minister of an intention to intervene in order to clarify any of the points. As a matter of fact, I know there is nothing to stop me sitting down, letting the Minister reply and speaking again on Committee Stage. I am all for 148 Deputies but I object——

Mr. Harte

Watch it!

Mr. Lalor

——to 25 counties of this Republic of ours being reduced by one Deputy and having the balance go to build up the representation from Dublin. I suggest the Minister seriously consider building into section 2 an amendment to provide that the numbers can be, or may be, increased following the dissolution of this Parliament, of this Dáil, if it exists beyond 1976 on the basis of the new census.

Mr. Dowling

In relation to section 2, I should like to say that representation is the keynote. It refers to the number of Members of Dáil Éireann and an increase of four Deputies. Again, this is related to the population of the country. If we take the 148 Members, we find that that is broken down into a number of constituencies and counties. Nowhere else in the Bill is there a reference to numbers except in section 2. Therefore, I take it I am in order in referring to the breakdown of the numbers of population in relation to the 148 seats that the Minister proposes in the Bill. We see that the Carlow/Kilkenny area, in the 1971 census, had a population of 100,001 persons.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair has said on a number of occasions that the Deputy may not discuss the distribution of seats at this juncture. The Carlow/Kilkenny constituency and all other constituencies can be discussed in detail, to the fullest extent, on the appropriate Schedule.

Mr. Dowling

I am not discussing seats. I am discussing population in relation to seats and that is what this section is all about because, nowhere else in the Bill, is there any indication of where the population can be discussed in relation to seats. In the Schedule, there is no reference whatever——

Mr. Davern

On a point of order, Sir, is there a quorum in the House?

Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,

Mr. Dowling

As I was saying, in relation to section 2, I was going to discuss this matter in relation to the 148 seats. I think this is in order. I am going to discuss the ratio of Members——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair will decide what is in order.

Mr. Dowling

Nevertheless, the ratio of population to the seats is very important. You cannot discuss this section without discussing the population on which these 148 seats will be based. It is fragmented into 42 different constituencies, this 148 Member Dáil which is proposed. This fragmentation is done in the following manner: in the Carlow/Kilkenny area—as indicated in the Bill—there are 100,001 persons. This is based on the census of population 1971. The second one is the Cavan/ Monaghan——

An Ceann Comhairle

The constituencies to which the Deputy refers are contained in the appropriate Schedule and can be, and will no doubt be, discussed in detail at that point. They may not, and shall not, be discussed at this juncture.

Mr. Dowling

I am not, a Cheann Comhairle, discussing——

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy must not seek to circumvent the ruling of the Chair. He will abide by my ruling in the matter. He must not discuss constituencies, on a constituency basis, at this time.

Mr. Dowling

The fragmentation of the 42——

An Ceann Comhairle

The distribution of the seats does not arise on section 2.

Mr. Dowling

I am not concerned with the distribution of seats; I merely wish to discuss the population in relation to——

Mr. Donnellan

On a point of order, I wonder would it be possible to reduce the number of the quorum to ten on this occasion?

An Ceann Comhairle

Now, Deputy, please. Deputy Dowling.

Mr. Dowling

I wish to discuss the breakdown of population on which the 148 Members is based.

An Ceann Comhairle

That would be more appropriate on another section, Deputy.

Mr. Dowling

There is no other section in the Bill where population is mentioned or where there is any reference to population——

An Ceann Comhairle

There is full and ample scope for that, Deputy.

Mr. Dowling

There is no other section, I submit, a Cheann Comhairle, on which one can discuss population in relation to the 148 Members. I wish to discuss the 148 Members in relation to the population. This is a reasonable approach. We were told earlier that this must be discussed in relation to population and it is on that basis that I wish to discuss it.

The population of the nation is fragmented into 42 different sections. The first section which is fragmented is in Carlow/Kilkenny where there are 100,001 people. The second area— and I am not referring to seats but to the breakdown in population in relation to the 148 Members which the Minister has indicated in the Bill——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy may not move to separate constituencies.

Mr. Dowling

I am at a loss to know how I can relate the population of the nation to the 148 Members proposed in the Bill without discussing the matter on that basis. I have no desire to move into the field of discussing the number of seats or, in a broad way, the constituencies.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Information was given in a statement regarding the total number of population and the number of seats.

Mr. Dowling

There is a table in the explanatory memorandum which breaks down the population of the nation into 42 different sectors. I submit that it is reasonable and in order to relate the 148 Members to the population. There is no other way in which this particular section can be discussed unless on a population basis.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That will be dealt with in the Schedule.

Mr. Dowling

In the Schedule there is no reference to population or numbers. The only place there can be reference is in section 2 which relates the number of Deputies to the population.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is trying to deal with individual places.

Mr. Dowling

It is impossible to discuss section 2 without relating to the 148 Members. This is referred to in the table in the explanatory memorandum. Surely it is reasonable that one may comment on the fragmentation of the population in relation to the numbers in the Bill.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

When the Deputy comes to the Schedule he can deal with fragmentation.

Mr. Dowling

There is no reference in the Schedule to population. There is a reference to the name of the constituency, to the area and the number of Members. I do not want to discuss in a general way the areas in the constituencies or the breakdown of Members in the constituencies. Nowhere else in this Bill can there be a comparison between the 148 Members and the population except in section 2.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

148 Deputies cover the country at large.

Mr. Dowling

I want to relate that to the breakdown given in the explanatory memorandum.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

In any explanatory memorandum the breakdown is given in the Schedule.

Mr. Dowling

There is reference to——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair is concerned with keeping order.

Mr. Dowling

I can find no other basis for discussing the population of the country as against the 148 Members. There is a breakdown one will agree. It is fragmented into 42 different areas.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy will appreciate that that is in the Schedule.

Mr. Dowling

There is no reference to population in the Schedule.

Mr. Cunningham

It is in the explanatory memorandum only.

Mr. Harte

On a point of order, Deputy Lalor had us bored stiff for 30 minutes——

Mr. Molloy

That is not a point of order. Are we going to hear a speech from the Government side at last? Is there any Deputy on the Government side who will argue in favour of this Bill?

Mr. Harte

Is it in order for Deputy Dowling to make an argument which is contrary to that of his Chief Whip?

Mr. Molloy

That is not a point of order.

(Interruptions.)

Deputy Dowling

I spoke last night for 45 minutes giving good reasons why we could accept this. If Deputy Harte was not here I can cover that ground again——

Mr. Harte

I was here. When I went back to my hotel I had a nightmare.

Mr. Dowling

I want to deal with this section in depth. There is no other section in the Bill where population can be related to Members. I submit, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, that I am in order in discussing the——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair will decide what is in order. I am telling the Deputy for the last time that he must keep within——

Mr. Dowling

Can the Leas-Cheann Comhairle tell me where there is a reference in this Bill to population or where population can be discussed on the broad basis of the breakdown into 42 different sectors. The total membership of the House relates to the population. Therefore, one must be able to discuss population in relation to Membership and the breakdown thereof.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy can deal with the breakdown of the constituencies later.

Mr. Harte

Maybe Deputy Dowling is beginning to break down.

Mr. Dowling

This is the section on which discussion must take place in regard to the 148 Members. Elsewhere we will see breakdowns in different ways in relation to seats, areas but not population. This is the basis on which this particular section of the Bill stands. It is related to the total number of population as in the 1971 census. The fragmentation of this 148 is broken into 42 different sectors.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has already given his ruling. The Deputy will have to accept it. Individual constituencies including their populations can be dealt with on the Schedule.

Mr. Dowling

When discussing this section I do not wish to deal with the number of Members because that is clearly defined in the Schedule as, indeed, are the areas. I submit that if the 148——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy is telling the Chair what order should be. Each time the Chair tries to advise the Deputy——

Mr. Dowling

Where else in the Bill is there reference to population or where population can be related to 148 Members?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There is no reference in section 2 to population.

Mr. Harte

Deputy Dowling is breaking down.

Mr. Callanan

On a point of order, surely when discussing 148 Deputies, one cannot divorce population from the number of Deputies?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

There is no divorcing in that sense.

Mr. Harte

Who is talking about divorce?

Mr. C. Murphy

Does the Deputy anticipate a Bill of that nature?

Mr. Harte

While Deputy Dowling is arguing about the number of Deputies that should be in this House one of his backbenchers is talking about divorce.

Mr. Dowling

In my view I am being deprived of certain rights in this House. For that reason I do not propose to participate further other than to say that this most blatant type of gerrymandering which I was not permitted to discuss in full is a disgrace. It is useless to proceed on this because the Minister has already indicated that he is going to jackboot this Bill through the House. It is possibly the worst type of gerrymandering that has occurred in this country north or south.

Mr. Molloy

In the five hours of debate which has taken place on sections 1 and 2 of this Bill there has been only one contribution from the Government side.

Mr. Tully

How could there have been any more with you fellows over there yapping all the time? No chance was given to Members on this side to speak.

Mr. Molloy

I drew attention on a number of occasions to this extraordinary silence on the part of Deputies on the Government side. We consider this Bill a most disgraceful measure. It brings disgrace on the Government, the members of which should hang their heads in shame for attempting to succeed with a gerrymander of this type. We are all political animals in this House and we realise——

Mr. Harte

Talk about yourself.

Mr. Molloy

——that within the law and the Constitution there are very few restrictions on a Minister in preparing a Bill dealing with the revision of electoral areas. The few restrictions that exist allow great discretion to a Minister who is charged with carrying out the revision.

The Minister, and the Government because there is collective responsibility involved in all measures brought before this House, the Fine Gael and Labour Parties must be tarred with the brush of shame arising out of the measure they have brought before Dáil Éireann in this instance.

Mr. Donnellan

The Deputy cannot talk about shame.

Mr. Molloy

I want to warn the Government, and the Deputies on that side of the House, that if they persist in bringing legislation similar to this before Dáil Éireann they have commenced on the slide down which will result in their being put out of Government. They are bringing great discredit on themselves from the community.

There will be reaction to this gerrymandering. At the outset, when the debate opened on section 2 of the Bill, we announced that we did not have any objection, in principle, to the proposal to increase the number of Deputies by four. Our objections and arguments up to now have been that the extra seats, which are at the discretion of the Minister, should have been allocated in a manner that could be seen to be fair and just to the whole community. This House should not be asked to pass legislation which is discriminatory in its very structure. This legislation discriminates against the rural areas.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Deputy should keep to the section which deals with the number of Deputies.

Mr. Molloy

We will have ample opportunity when dealing with the other sections, and in particular with the Schedule and the amendments we have tabled or others we may choose to bring forward on Report Stage, to register again our strongest protest against the deliberate gerrymandering and political manipulation being carried out by the Coalition Government.

Mr. Donnellan

The Deputy could cut a long playing record.

Question put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 69; Níl, 63.

Tá

• Barry, Peter.
• Barry, Richard.
• Begley, Michael.
• Belton, Luke.
• Belton, Paddy.
• Bermingham, Joseph.
• Bruton, John.
• Burke, Dick.
• Burke, Joan T.
• Burke, Liam.
• Byrne, Hugh.
• Cluskey, Frank.
• Collins, Edward.
• Conlan, John F.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Cooney, Patrick M.
• Corish, Brendan.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Costello, Declan.
• Coughlan, Stephen.
• Creed, Donal.
• Crotty, Kieran.
• Cruise-O'Brien, Conor.
• Desmond, Barry.
• Desmond, Eileen.
• Dockrell, Henry P.
• Dockrell, Maurice.
• O'Connell, John.
• O'Donnell, Tom.
• O'Leary, Michael.
• O'Sullivan, John L.
• Pattison, Seamus.
• Reynolds, Patrick J.
• Ryan, John J.
• Ryan, Richie.
• Donnellan, John.
• Dunne, Thomas.
• Enright, Thomas.
• Esmonde, John G.
• Finn, Martin.
• Fitzpatrick, Tom (Cavan).
• Flanagan, Oliver J.
• Gilhawley, Eugene.
• Governey, Desmond.
• Griffin, Brendan.
• Harte, Patrick D.
• Hegarty, Patrick.
• Hogan O'Higgins, Brigid.
• Jones, Denis F.
• Kavanagh, Liam.
• Keating, Justin.
• Kelly, John.
• Kenny, Henry.
• Kyne, Thomas A.
• L'Estrange, Gerald.
• Lynch, Gerard.
• McDonald, Charles B.
• McLaughlin, Joseph.
• McMahon, Larry.
• Malone, Patrick.
• Murphy, Michael P.
• O'Brien, Fergus.
• Spring, Dan.
• Staunton, Myles.
• Taylor, Frank.
• Timmins, Godfrey.
• Toal, Brendan.
• Tully, James.
• White, James.

Níl

• Ahern, Liam.
• Allen, Lorcan.
• Andrews, David.
• Barrett, Sylvester.
• Brennan, Joseph.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Ben.
• Browne, Seán.
• Brugha, Ruairí.
• Burke, Raphael P.
• Callanan, John.
• Calleary, Seán.
• Carter, Frank.
• Connolly, Gerard.
• Crinion, Brendan.
• Cronin, Jerry.
• Crowley, Flor.
• Cunningham, Liam.
• Daly, Brendan.
• Davern, Noel.
• de Valera, Vivion.
• Dowling, Joe.
• Fahey, Jackie.
• Farrell, Joseph.
• Faulkner, Pádraig.
• Fitzgerald, Gene.
• Fitzpatrick, Tom (Dublin Central).
• Flanagan, Seán.
• French, Seán.
• Gallagher, Denis.
• Geoghegan, John.
• Gibbons, Hugh.
• Gibbons, James.
• Gogan, Richard P.
• Haughey, Charles.
• Healy, Augustine A.
• Herbert, Michael.
• Hussey, Thomas.
• Kenneally, William.
• Kitt, Michael F.
• Lalor, Patrick J.
• Lemass, Noel T.
• Leonard, James.
• Loughnane, William.
• Lynch, Celia.
• Lynch, Jack.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• MacSharry, Ray.
• Molloy, Robert.
• Moore, Seán.
• Murphy, Ciarán.
• Noonan, Michael.
• O'Connor, Timothy.
• O'Kennedy, Michael.
• O'Leary, John.
• O'Malley, Desmond.
• Power, Patrick.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Timmons, Eugene.
• Tunney, Jim.
• Walsh, Seán.
• Wilson, John P.
• Wyse, Pearse.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Kelly and B. Desmond; Níl, Deputies Lalor and Browne.

Question declared carried.

An Ceann Comhairle

I understand we have agreement that sections 3, 4 and 5 be postponed.

Mr. Molloy

We are agreeable to that. When is it proposed to take sections 3, 4 and 5?

An Ceann Comhairle

Immediately after the Schedule is decided. Is that satisfactory?

SECTION 6.

Question proposed: "That section 6 stand part of the Bill."

Mr. Tully

This section is purely administrative. It is similar to the corresponding provision made in the 1969 and the earlier revisions of Constituencies Acts.

Under the revision some polling districts or parts of polling districts will be in a constituency different in area from the constituency in which they are situated at present. The names of electors in the register of electors are arranged under polling districts and the name of the constituency is shown in respect of each polling district. The register which will be in force following enactment of this Bill will have been prepared on the basis of the existing constituencies. It is essential that arrangements be made to have the name of the appropriate new constituency entered clearly for each such polling district or such part of a polling district affected in the register to be used at the general election first held following the enactment of the Bill.

It is not possible to specify at this stage which register will be affected or whether the direction will be given in respect of the draft or final register. This will depend on the date of dissolution of the Dáil following enactment of the Bill and the date of the subsequent general election. For this reason, subsection (1) proposes that the Minister may by direction provide for the entry of the name of the appropriate new constituency, in respect of each such polling district or part of a polling district, in every draft register, list of claimants, register of electors and list of corrections published before the dissolution of the Dáil following the passing of this Bill. It is intended that the Minister's direction would be issued on the dissolution of the Dáil and would specify precisely which draft or register et cetera should be amended.

Subsection (2) provides for the preparation of a new postal voters list or lists where a new constituency is not identical in area with the present constituency. Corresponding provision was made in the 1947, 1959, 1961 and 1969 Acts.

Mr. Molloy

Did the Minister say that this direction would be issued at the dissolution of the Dáil? One could foresee a situation in which the Dáil would be dissolved on 16th April and the register that is prepared would come into operation on 15th April. In such circumstances it would be necessary for the Minister to issue such an instruction on the day of dissolution. If by some mischance a general election did not take place until, we will say, next September, would it not be prudent for the registration authorities, without having to wait on a direction from the Minister, to have this tidying up job done before the dissolution of the Dáil? Why would it be necessary for them to wait for a dissolution and await a direction from the Minister?

Mr. Tully

In the normal way it would be done, but it can be done up to the dissolution of the Dáil. This is the very same provision as was made in all previous constituency changes. There is no alteration whatever in the arrangements.

Mr. Lalor

Having a section like this in the Bill and justifying it on the basis that it is a replica of similar sections in previous Bills does not appeal to me, quite frankly. Later on, on the Schedule we will be talking about the creation of new constituencies, of new locations. There is nothing in the Bill which provides that the Minister may by direction make an order to delineate the particular constituency. That is inbuilt in the Bill. Somewhere in the Schedule a line is drawn down through the middle of a street. Is that not a straightforward indication to the returning officer for the area that he is expected to make the proper arrangements for the publication of the draft register to suit that area without any direction from the Minister? I cannot see that there is any necessity for the Minister to make an order which is obviously directed at the returning officer or the registrar for the area telling him that he is to put the constituency of Kildare on a register already marked Kildare.

The Dublin constituencies have been so messed about that I can visualise many registers having to be prepared. The titles of all the Dublin constituencies will have to be changed. Does the passing of the Bill not automatically mean that the registrar has to prepare the registers for the new constituencies in each location?

Mr. Harte

On a point of order, I understand that it is the county secretary who prepares the registers, not the county registrars.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is a point of information, not a point of order.

Mr. Molloy

The registrar deals with claims. That comes under this section as well.

Mr. Lalor

The Deputy's intervention raises another interesting point. In section 6 I see no reference to whom the Minister is to give his direction. I thought it was the county registrar. Deputy Harte understands it is the county secretary. I wonder is it the returning officer in the Custom House a couple of corridors down the way.

Mr. Tully

This can become terribly complicated if we proceed on the wrong assumption. To clear up the point raised by Deputy Lalor it is the registration authority and that is the county council or the corporation as the case may be. The direction will be given to them. The reason the direction is given on the dissolution of the Dáil is that the existing registers must remain for by-elections. The work will be done on preparing the new registers immediately this Bill becomes an Act. Legally they cannot be changed until such time as the Dáil is dissolved. That is why it is stated in this way. It is quite a simple matter. I know it can appear to be confusing. No. 1, the reason it is not changed is that the old registers will be used for by-elections and No. 2, the new register can only be declared on the dissolution of the Dáil but the work will be started as soon as the Bill becomes law. Does that explain Deputy Lalor's question?

Mr. Lalor

I read here:

... the Minister may by direction provide for the entry of the name of that constituency in respect of the polling district or part of the polling district, in every draft register, list of claimants, register of electors and list of corrections prepared under Part II of the Electoral Act, 1963, and published by a registration authority before the dissolution of Dáil Éireann which next occurs after the passing of this Act.

Does this mean that, following the passing of this Bill, Dublin Corporation will have the responsibility continuously of having two sets of registers in preparation, one in the event of a by-election and the other in the event of the Dáil dissolving?

Mr. Tully

That has always been the case. It is the existing law.

Mr. Lalor

I have not had the experience. My constituency has never been changed. I have never heard any Deputy say that at the time of issuing an approved register he gets two copies, one covering, say, a section of Ballyfermot for a by-election and the other covering a section of Ballyfermot for a general election. Is the Minister saying there will be two registers issued?

Mr. Tully

There will be two names on the same page. It is not actually as Deputy Lalor suggests. The register of electors is drawn up and when this Bill becomes law it will be necessary for the registration authority, the local authority, to prepare the new arrangement. This preparation will be done by the local authority even before the direction is issued by the Minister but on the dissolution of the Dáil the Minister will issue the direction. Meantime, the local authority will prepare the register to cover both eventualities if the constituency is changed. This has been the position, I understand, since the passing of the 1947 Act.

Mr. Molloy

An interesting point arises from the comments of Deputy Lalor. For the sake of argument we must assume that by some mischance the present Government stays in office for longer than most people expect, say, for another two years. The registration authority is obliged to publish a final register on 15th April each year. It has been customary for each sitting Member of the House to be circulated with a copy of that register each year, the up-to-date register for the constituency he represents. If a general election did not take place for two years from 20th April this year we would have a situation where the registration authority would forward a copy of a completed register to a Deputy which in the case of a general election would be absolutely no use to him. I do not know if this point was ever raised before but, unfortunately, when the Electoral (Amendment) Bill was before the House in 1969 the then Opposition allowed all of the sections in that Bill to pass without comment. There were no queries on the Bill up to section 7, which we come to next.

We should like clarification on this point from the Minister. Does he foresee that following the passing of a Bill similar to this the registration authorities will be issuing registers to Deputies for areas they will not be able to represent in the succeeding general election, if they stand? That seems rather anomalous. Could the Minister say if it is intended to distribute these registers which must cost the State and local authority quite an amount of money to circulate?

Mr. Tully

Deputy Molloy has made a very good point. It is something on which I am not too clear. Deputy Molloy says there was no debate on the last occasion when this type of Bill was passed but in the Official Report we see that sections 1 and 2 were passed without discussion. Sections 3, 4 and 5 were postponed and there was a discussion from then onwards. I understand it was accepted that this was how it was done. Deputy Molloy said the Opposition did not make this point. While it is being made now by the Opposition, in a sense it was the Government's job if there was something wrong to see that it was dealt with. My information is that—and this has been the case since 1947—when a constituency is changed the local authorities draw up two registers and publish the register with two headings. This has not happened in my constituency because I got the County Meath end of it, even though portion of it was in County Monaghan and portion in County Cavan. I also got the Kildare end of it when portion of Meath was in Kildare. It never struck me that there was any particular significance in the fact that it was marked "Kildare". The reason was that if a by-election occurred the old register would operate. That is what has been done and that procedure will be adopted in this case.

I have been making some inquiries about how the mechanics of it work. I am as anxious as anybody to ensure there is no unnecessary duplication. I am assured it is necessary and that although inquiries were made earlier it was not found possible to find a simpler way of doing this. I intend to pursue this matter and see if there is some simpler way. All I can say is that I shall have further inquiries made and ensure that there is no avoidable duplication. I understand we are following exactly the procedure which was followed up to now. It appears the previous Government found it was all right and there must not have been much wrong with it or somebody would have noticed it.

Mr. Molloy

A general election took place very shortly after the passing of the previous Electoral Bill and this situation may not have arisen before. Perhaps a general election will come very soon after the passing of this Bill, if it is ever passed——

Mr. Tully

About four years.

Mr. Molloy

——and that would mean that the problem we are discussing would never arise.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Molloy

The Minister said that when this Bill was before the House previously section 6 which was dealing with a similar provision in the 1969 Electoral (Amendment) Bill was, in fact, discussed. I should like to read out what was stated at that time in connection with section 6. The question was proposed that section 6 stand part of the Bill. Deputy James Tully of the Labour Party asked if the Minister could do anything about this problem possibly in this Bill or if not in some future Bill, where there are polling districts crossing. "The result of these proposals before the House" he said "is that people living in certain areas could be voting several miles away in the heart of another constituency. This is a peculiar situation and has arisen because of the way in which the boundary map is drawn up. Could the Minister try to have constituencies or electoral areas straightened out in some way so that this will not keep on recurring." The Minister replied: "It is provided for in section 7."

In other words, the question put by Deputy Tully on section 6 should, in fact, have been asked on section 7 and really there was no question asked on section 6 when the Bill was before the House then. The Minister may have inadvertently misled the House on that matter. There never has been any proper discussion on section 6 and on what happens and on the matter of whether two registers will be published and circulated which could involve substantial waste of the taxpayers' money. I am satisfied that the Minister is not too clear on what the procedure is.

Mr. Tully

The very same situation has arisen now. Section 7 is the section on which we should be discussing this.

Mr. Molloy

Section 7 is the section where reference is made to polling booths. Section 6 deals with the register of electors. The Minister's question about areas crossing dealt with polling booths. So, they did not discuss the question of the register of electors and its publication and the position arising following the passing of such a Bill and also the position arising in the interim period between the passing of the Bill and the holding of the next general election and the obligation of the registering authority to forward copies of the completed register to each sitting Member in his constituency, to give him a register of the total number of persons entitled to vote in that constituency. It will, of course, be pointless because that constituency, in the case of quite a number as proposed by the Minister, and even as proposed by us in our amendments, would not exist after the passing of this Bill and the dissolution of the House. I am satisfied that the Minister is not clear how this will operate. He is not clear whether money will be wasted in distributing such registers to Deputies who will have no interest in them and he cannot clarify the point we raised. We could come back again on Report Stage and the Minister might at that stage be able to inform us exactly what the arrangements will be, how this problem will be dealt with and he may be able to give us an assurance that there will not be any undue wasting of the ratepayers' money.

Mr. Tully

The only mistake I seem to have made so far is that I have taken a section of the Bill out of a previous Act. I suppose I should have more sense and found out if what Fianna Fáil have been doing over the years was right or wrong. Deputy Molloy seems to be casting very grave doubts on what was done by the Fianna Fáil Government over the years and he has made me believe there must be something wrong with it, although I am not quite convinced.

He referred to sections 6 and 7. In fact, the former Deputy Boland, the then Minister for Local Government, referred to the fact that it was section 7 that dealt with it. We are not talking about the same thing. We are talking about a polling district split up and we are talking about the question of the register of electors. The whole point in talking about the register of electors is because the names of the people on that register of electors are in a split polling district. There is no point in talking about one unless we are prepared to relate it to the other. The former Deputy Boland whom many people considered to be an unreasonable man pointed out that it could be discussed under section 7 and I, being a reasonable man, agreed to that and we discussed it under section 7.

Apparently that does not hold any longer. As a matter of fact, one of the comments of the then Deputy Boland was that it was handed down over the years. I used almost the same expression earlier when I said that it was the way in which it was being done. He also said his carving was done to suit the Constitution. I quite agree with Deputy Molloy that, as it stands, it could appear that maybe there is too much printing being done and, perhaps, there is an easier way to do it. The best thing I can do is to have another look at this, see if it can be dealt with in another way and have an amendment on the Report Stage if this is necessary. It appeared down the years that it was not considered necessary but I am always open to suggestions if they are good ones.

Mr. Molloy

I am grateful to the Minister for agreeing to come back and give us a full explanation of the exact procedure to be followed when we come to Report Stage. However, I would like to take him up on one point where he stated that because a similar clause was contained in the 1969 Act it should be good enough for Fianna Fáil today. We do not accept that argument. If the Opposition at that time did not decide that it was necessary to query these things and to establish what the facts were, then on their heads be it but we are not satisfied in Opposition that just because some similar section appeared in some Bill while we were in office we will not query it, that we will not see if it can be improved.

We believe in progressive legislation, in improving the system in this country and in making a positive and worthwhile contribution to the debates here. If we find that some measure that we brought before this House in the past comes before us again by way of a section in a Bill we will not concede our right to see if that can be improved. It is a nebulous argument on the Minister's part. I draw attention to it because it is about the fifth time he has used it. He seems to be satisfied that if we accepted it four or five years ago in a previous Bill it must be all right. It is a great compliment to the Fianna Fáil Government at that time that the Minister should think in this way and should put that forward as his only argument in favour of retaining such a section.

I would like to make it quite clear to the Minister that as long as we are in Opposition we will examine every single line of every Bill that comes before this House. If we can find ways of improving them we will do so. We appreciate that the Minister has already recognised that we have been able to make a valuable contribution to Bills already. He has accepted some of our proposals and the Bills have been substantially improved because of that. We would like to see that continuing and we would like to give the assurance to the Minister that quoting that argument again will hold no water with us.

Mr. Tully

The only thing I would like to say about this particular Bill is that Deputy Molloy seems to consider that he, in Opposition, is entitled to query things—rightly so— which neither he nor any member of his Government were prepared to do when in office. It appears that this is the fifth or sixth time, or maybe more, in which Deputy Molloy particularly has been prepared to throw overboard everything that Fianna Fáil did. It explains to me a lot of things because, unfortunately, I was under the impression that a Government who were in office for a good while would at least know the whole position. However, it appears to me that they did not bother to query anything at all. As long as they were in office it was all right. Deputy Molloy is saying that while that might be all right while they were on this side of the House when they are in Opposition it is an entirely different matter and they are then able to look for the mistakes they made.

Mr. R.P. Burke

The Minister is in Government and not in Opposition.

Mr. Tully

I was pretty good at it over there. The man who was in my position at that time was not prepared to do what I am doing now.

Mr. R.P. Burke

At least he used to give an explanation.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister without interruption.

Mr. Tully

If the Deputy will look at the debates he will find that I did query this particular matter.

Mr. Molloy

Not about the publication of the register.

Mr. Tully

I queried whether or not the crossing of polling stations could be dealt with. The whole point in talking about the splitting of polling stations was that they would appear on different registers.

Mr. Molloy

That would be a very expensive way.

Mr. Tully

Of course, but apparently Fianna Fáil did not mind what expense there was as long as they were in power. No expense mattered as long as they were over here.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

The Minister should thank Deputy Molloy for bringing this to his notice.

Mr. Molloy

We will make sure the Minister does his job.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister without interruption.

Mr. Tully

Let me point out for about the sixth time to Deputy Molloy that not alone will I do my job but where he failed to do his job—I have a lot of things to do which he did not do—while he was over here I will do it. He would probably still be over here if he was a little more meticulous. He is pretty good in Opposition. It is rather a pity he was not as good when he was over here.

As far as this matter is concerned it appears that the proposal I am introducing, is a repetition of five different Fianna Fáil Bills which were passed in this House silently. If it is possible to improve it I will do so. Maybe Fianna Fáil are right and it is not possible to do so. Perhaps this is the best way it could be done. I will have a look at it.

Mr. Molloy

We will wait until Report Stage.

Mr. Tully

The difference between Deputy Molloy and me is that when I say I am going to look at something and do something I look at it and I do something. I do not come in afterwards and say that I did this or I did that when I have forgotten all about it.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Tully

I do not want to start talking about building societies. The Deputies will be talking about them in the morning.

Progress reported; Committee to sit again.