Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 2 Apr 1974

Vol. 271 No. 9

Electoral (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 1973: Committee Stage (Resumed).

Debate resumed on amendment No. 2:

In page 4 to delete the entry relating to the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan and substitute the following:

"

Name	Area	Number of Members
Cavan	The administrative county of Cavan, except the part thereof which is comprised in the constituency of Monaghan;	Three
	and in the administrative county of Meath the district electoral divisions of: Killeagh, Oldcastle, Moylagh, Stonefield, Knocklough, Crosskeys, Crossakeel, Killallon, Ballinlough, Boherboy, Kilskeer, Burry, Loughan, Castlekeeran, Trohanny, Moybolgue, Newcastle, Moynalty, Newtown, Girley, Grennanstown, Stahalmog.
Monaghan	The administrative county of Monaghan;	Three
	and in the administrative county of Cavan the district electoral divisions of: Shercock, Taghart, Lisagoan, Enniskeen, Kingscourt;
	and in the administrative county of Meath, the district electoral divisions of: Ardagh, Drumcondra, Killary, Grangegeeth, Posseckstown, Nobber, Carrickleck, Ki,mainham, Cruicetown, Castletown, Rathkenny, Donaghpatrick, Stackallan.

"

—(Deputy Molloy.)

Mr. Molloy

We were debating group 2 which includes amendments Nos. 2, 13 and 16 dealing with the proposed constituencies of Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Meath. We have already clearly established in our contributions to the debate that the way in which the Minister has allocated seats in this area is not the fairest or best way in which they could have been allocated. We have put forward as strongly as we can the argument that the counties of Cavan and Monaghan, being Border counties, should have been established as constituencies each in its own right; the Minister should have and could have established a constituency of Cavan electing three Deputies to this House. We have suggested in our amendments that the same could be done with County Monaghan; that county could have been established as a constituency in its own right by the inclusion of some transfers from adjoining areas thereby enabling that area to send three Deputies to this House.

We have argued in favour of that as against the Minister's proposal to establish one five-seat constituency covering the whole of Cavan and Monaghan. We believe the area is too vast; it will involve very, very long journeys because these counties sprawl right along more than two-thirds of the Border and there are very special problems. Because of the special problems of these two counties—we have argued fairly and our argument cannot be refuted— they should have been allowed to return the maximum number of Deputies here. The Minister and his Government have chosen to do otherwise and, doing otherwise, they have reduced the combined area of Cavan and Monaghan by one representative because only five seats have been allocated as against the present two three-seat constituencies. This is a retrograde step. No heed is paid to the special problems of the people residing in these areas. In these difficult times this is, indeed, a wrong decision. The Minister has decided on a five-seat constituency covering this vast area, an area which extends in a U along the Border and he has also decided the constituency of Meath shall be created returning four Deputies to this House. We do not agree that this should be done. The existing constituency returns three Deputies and we believe that situation should be maintained; Meath should return only three Deputies.

We agree with the proposal that a constituency of Louth should be created returning four Deputies, but we do not agree with the way in which this four-seat constituency is devised. If the Minister had accepted the principle put forward by us of establishing two three-seat constituencies, one in Cavan and one in Monaghan, then his proposals for the constituency of Louth would have to have been somewhat similar to our proposals. As the House knows, in making a five-seat constituency in Cavan-Monaghan, he conceded part of Monaghan to Louth. The argument has been put fairly adequately and I do not wish to detain the House, but the one thing which disappoints us is the fact that it can be shown that the Minister has given the greatest advantage from the point of view of ratio per population head in the number of Deputies to be elected to this particular area. We accept that the Minister may have had a personal or vested interest in the area and it is our obligation to highlight that fact here so that the House may know exactly what is going on. In the groupings the Minister has devised, with North Leinster including these counties in Ulster, the grouping of South Leinster and Munster, the grouping of the west, and the grouping of Dublin constituencies, the group which benefits most as a result of the Minister's interpretation and implementation of the Supreme Court decision from the point of view of tolerance range is the group in which the counties of Meath, Cavan, Monaghan and Louth appear. It will take less population per Deputy in these areas and that is discrimination against the other areas. It simply cannot be justified.

Very few arguments have been made during the course of the debate to justify these groupings. All we have had is confirmation of the Government's majority. That is apparently sufficient argument to justify what they are doing. It is the pattern they have chosen to follow. We will leave it to the judgment of the people as to whether they are acting in the best interests of the community in their allocation of seats. We deeply regret the manner in which seats are being distributed. We greatly regret that the counties of Cavan and Monaghan will no longer be separate constituencies. The Coalition Government have lumped them together and reduced their representation by one.

Minister for Local Government (Mr. Tully)

There is one thing that must be clarified. As far as Deputy Molloy is concerned, he has established just one thing; he has established the fact that he did not have any expert advice about the area he was dividing. The amendment the Deputy is putting in could not be operated even if it was passed by this House. The constituency he suggests would not work and, apart from any other argument which I may put up, it would be impossible to work.

It is only right that I should nail a couple of untruths mentioned here. As far as Cavan and Monaghan are concerned it would not have been possible to leave them on their own and Deputy Molloy knows that very well.

Mr. Molloy

I said with transfers.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Molloy's proposal would add a big slice of Meath on to Cavan to make a three-seater, it would add the areas around the Cavan border and it would move up by Kells almost to the town of Athboy which is almost in mid-Meath. I forgive him for making this sort of mistake because he does not know the area. However Deputy Molloy does worse; he goes across the other way through an area of County Meath and into Stahalmog and moves it, even though it has no connection with Cavan, into the Cavan constituency.

As far as Monaghan is concerned Deputy Molloy takes the towns of Kingscourt and Shercock, and two other areas, out of Cavan and puts them into Monaghan. This in no way keeps Cavan as one entity. The proposal of Deputy Molloy is to take a sizeable portion of Cavan, including two of its principal towns, and put them into Monaghan. In addition, he goes into County Meath, jumps certain areas, and finishes in Donaghpatrick, a few miles from Navan. The areas could not work and they are too ridiculous for words.

Louth, on its own, has almost enough to make it a four-seater. Less than 2,000 people are taken out of Monaghan to make Louth a four-seater. For this area Deputy Molloy's proposal was to put in the district electoral division of St. Mary's which is Laytown and Bettystown where I live. He may think that was a clever thing to do but, in my view, it was the petty action of a petty little man who knew he could not get away with it but still put it in.

Cavan and Monaghan have been put together because they are a natural unit. The population and everything else makes it possible for them to be joined together. Louth is also a natural for a four-seater and there is no trouble about that. Meath or Kildare had to have an additional seat and I gave the additional seat to Meath because over the years Meath was cut up. On the first occasion the southern portion of the county was cut up and when that was given back north Meath was cut up. It is time Meath got its fair share.

I should like to make it perfectly clear that I am not fire-proofing my own seat. I had just under 1,000 votes over the next Fianna Fáil man at the last general election and that is good enough to win a seat, as anybody with common sense knows. The proposals made by Deputy Molloy are only put in for the purpose of pretending that Fianna Fáil were doing something for these people which we were not doing. Last week we had an argument that we did not tell the people of Monaghan that we intended to join them with Cavan under this Bill. We did tell the people of that county of our intentions. We told them from every platform and they still voted for the National Coalition. That scotches that argument. There is no reason why the proposals I have made should not be passed by this House.

Minister for Lands (Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

, Cavan): I am aware this is a limited debate and I do not propose to take up the time of the House on this matter. I should like to say a few words in regard to the proposed constituency of Cavan-Monaghan. When the constituencies were revised on the last occasion I spoke against the proposal to create the constituencies of Cavan and Monaghan as then constituted and argued in favour of a five-seater. I did so because I disagree with the proposed constituency of Cavan as drawn up on that occasion. On that occasion, in order to create the constituency of Cavan, it was necessary to bring in portions of Meath which had nothing whatever in common with Cavan and were not even adjacent to each other.

The area around Oldcastle was brought in and the then Minister proceeded from the Oldcastle area to Moynalty, several miles away, and brought in another area there. In that way he created quite an unwieldy constituency of Cavan. The people of Oldcastle and the people of Moynalty, notwithstanding what Deputy Wilson says, have nothing in common with the people of Cavan. Apart from going to the county town for an occasional football game they never have any business going to Cavan. In order to create the constituency of Monaghan we had a repeat performance—it could be said to have been worse—because they had to bring in, not alone a portion of County Meath but a portion of County Louth as well. I disagreed with that.

As far as I am concerned I am prepared to represent either Cavan or Cavan-Monaghan. It does not matter to me. I will offer myself to either the constituency of Cavan or the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan. I would not have thought it would have been necessary to waste the time of the House in discussing this proposed constituency, particularly in regard to the Monaghan portion of it. This Bill was circulated, and the Second Stage discussed in this House, before the Monaghan by-election. Everybody in Monaghan knew that the proposal was to put Monaghan and Cavan together as a five-seater before they voted in the by-election on 27th November. I am satisfied that a considerable number of people were influenced in the decision they made by the fact that it was proposed to put Cavan and Monaghan together. On the basis of that the National Coalition candidate won by between 200 and 300 votes notwithstanding the fact that eight months earlier the second Fianna Fáil candidate won the seat by approximately 1,000 votes. That was a big shift from Fianna Fáil to the National Coalition.

If the people of Monaghan were dissatisfied with the proposal we have before us, as Deputy Leonard will have us believe, they would have registered that protest in the by-election. Deputy Wilson and Deputy Leonard are against the five-seater and Deputy Wilson has spoken about the importance, the wisdom and desirability of keeping the Kingdom of Breffni together. However, there is an amendment before the House in the name of Fianna Fáil Deputies to take the important towns of Kingscourt and Shercock, and the electoral division of Enniskeen, out of Cavan and put them into Monaghan. That does not make sense to me especially coming from a party who are arguing in favour of keeping County Cavan together.

It can be argued that Monaghan and Cavan have a lot in common. They are two Ulster counties and they have shared health services since local government was introduced. Seven or eight members of Cavan County Council and a similar number from Monaghan were members of the mental health board until it was abolished. They got on very well during those years. The people in these counties have a lot more in common than the people of Cavan and Meath or the people of Monaghan and Louth. Among other interests they have in common, they have me and that is a fair starting off ground.

Mr. Molloy

Is that the reason for the Minister's proposal?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): No. I am happy either to represent Cavan as I was elected to do in 1965, 1969 and 1973 or to represent Cavan-Monaghan. In fact, on the occasion of the debate on the last Electoral (Amendment) Bill I told the then Minister for Local Government that if there were a five-seater constituency of Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael would win three seats out of the five and that if we had two three-seaters, we would win four out of six. The then Minister asked me why, therefore, I was complaining. In the short term I was proved right because in the election which followed immediately afterwards we won four of the six seats. In the 1973 election the position was reversed when we won only two out of six but we are well back on the way towards reversing that balance.

Mr. Wilson

This is the imaginative bit.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): We started off on the road back by winning the Monaghan by-election. No doubt if the people of Cavan were given the same opportunity of making restitution they, too, would do so. It would be unfair of me to delay the House unduly and I shall conclude by saying that the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan is a much more compact unit and a much more manageable area to be represented by people from Monaghan and Cavan instead of representatives from Cavan trying to represent parts of Meath about which they know nothing and the people of Monaghan trying to represent parts of Meath and Louth about which they know nothing. If these two constituencies were to be left as they were drawn on the last occasion, the people of Meath who were in the Cavan constituency would never be represented by a resident of their area while the people of Louth and Meath who were in the Monaghan constituency would never be represented by a resident of either of those areas because no such person would have a reasonable opportunity of being elected. From the way in which the people of Monaghan have passed judgment on this, they seem to be perfectly satisfied.

Mr. Wilson

Only 50 per cent of them.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): There was a big swing to us.

Mr. Wilson

I do not wish to interrupt except to remind the Minister that we increased our vote there by 1,000.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Must I repeat that in February, 1973, Deputy Leonard got the last seat by approximately 1,000 votes more than the number polled by the late Senator Fox but that that was turned into a majority for Deputy Toal in the by-election?

Mr. Wilson

As an intelligent man, the Minister knows well that he is cooking figures. I can smell the cooking—it is pot pourri.

Mr. Molloy

Would the Minister not agree that Fianna Fáil got more first preferences than the Coalition candidate?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Deputy Toal won the seat by 300 votes.

Mr. Wilson

The figure was 289.

Mr. Molloy

Fianna Fáil got more first preferences than the Coalition candidate.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order, please.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): We won the seat notwithstanding the fact that Deputy Leonard had 1,000 votes to spare at the general election.

Mr. Calleary

He will have 1,000 more next time.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Regarding Deputy Wilson's suggestion that I am cooking the figures, I have given the matter more thought than Deputy Wilson did when he spoke here about preserving the ancient kingdom of Breffni but then proceeded to glut that ancient kingdom by taking out of it Doonaree, Shercock and the district electoral division of Enniskeen.

Mr. Wilson

Not guilty, m'Lud.

Mr. Tully

Did not Deputy Wilson support Deputy Molloy?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I am happy with Cavan as it is and with Cavan-Monaghan as it will be and the people of Monaghan are happy with the proposals. Therefore, they should be accepted.

Mr. Wilson

I wish to make a final appeal to the Minister for Local Government to maintain the Cavan constituency substantially as it has been because, as I explained last day, it is a community. However the community evolved or developed, it has done so so that we have a unified community. I mentioned last day also that the county town is in the centre of the area, that the GAA played a big part in welding this county into a single community. I mentioned also that the headquarters of the GAA are in the county town and that by a long parliamentary tradition, a tradition of which I would not expect the Minister for Lands to be aware since he is not a Cavanman, the county regards itself as a unit. I reminded the House that structures have developed as a result of the county being a unit, that ways of thinking have developed in that area, that we think of ourselves as a county with distinct characteristics and with a unified community spirit. It is on this basis mainly that I am appealing to the Minister to accept Deputy Molloy's amendment. I am grateful to Deputy Molloy for tabling this amendment.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): And for endeavouring to put Shercock and Kingscourt into Monaghan.

Mr. Wilson

In tabling the amendment, Deputy Molloy has recognised substantially the community that has developed down through the years. This party are grateful to him for that. The Deputy spoke of the amorphous new constituency that the Minister proposes. From my doorstep near Lake Sheelin to the custom's post at Aughnacloy is too big a constituency and indicates a way of thinking that disregards the problems of rural communities at present. No doubt both the Minister for Lands and the Minister for Local Government are aware of the problems of rural Ireland but I am afraid that they have allowed themselves to be dominated in this matter by this eastern, this city-thinking administration.

Admittedly, our amendment would involve a loss here and there but I appeal to the Minister to recognise the existence in Cavan of a substantial community. The amendment would involve a gain to some extent but I shall come to that in a moment. I refute the statement of the Minister for Lands that there is no connection between the part of Meath which is included in Deputy Molloy's amendment and the rest of the county. This allegation can come only from a man who does not know the traditions of the county, one who has not lived in it from childhood and who does not know what went on in that area in different social circumstances. For example, Oldcastle has a large cooperative society which has very close links with County Cavan. The Minister for Lands was made aware of that comparatively recently. This co-operative is not part of tradition. It is a modern development. Oldcastle, too, was a fairs and market centre for a whole area of County Cavan. Again, I would not expect the Minister for Lands to know that since such activity is not part of his way of life. The people in the area from which I come have always regarded Oldcastle as one of their own towns. It was there from time immemorial that they sold their cattle and made their purchases. Neither would the Minister know of the old connections between Moynalty and Cornafean or of the epic stories of the connection between these two areas.

Mr. Haughey

Are we to take it that the Cavan men went to Meath to sell their cattle?

Mr. Wilson

Of course they did and were very proud to be able to get better prices.

Mr. Tully

The Meath men did not go into Cavan to sell their cattle.

Mr. Wilson

They came in to marry with obvious good taste. My argument is based on the old community that has been established by a variety of factors which some people criticise. For example, criticism has been made of the GAA for giving too much attention to county boundaries and giving them an importance which they should never have got. I am not arguing that point. I am arguing that the county was developed and administered in a certain way and had long traditions of representation from a constituency point of view. The Minister is interfering with the county as it is today. I appeal to him, as a near neighbour, to look into this again. He knows what I am talking about.

I can assure the Minister for Local Government and the Minister for Lands that, generally speaking, the people would like to maintain a constituency of Cavan. They would still be proud, even with an addendum, to have a constituency of Cavan and not have a huge constituency covering a wide area of territory known as Cavan-Monaghan. The Minister for Lands is a Monaghan man. He said that one of the benefits of the Cavan-Monaghan constituency was that he was a Monaghan man and lived in Cavan.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I said they had a lot in common.

Mr. Wilson

I was trying to avoid the word "common". The Minister used this as an argument for having the Cavan-Monaghan constituency. I do not intend to make any cheap remarks. I am a Cavan man, born and bred. I am proud of our traditions. I am proud of the way the county has developed. Countless people all over the country are trying to preserve old communities, old structures; to refurbish them and organise them but preserve them in the way that has a meaning for people. Cavan as a constituency has a meaning for the people among whom I was born and reared. I appeal to the Minister to maintain that constituency in accordance with the amendment put down by Deputy Molloy.

Mr. Tully

I am sure Deputy Wilson will forgive me for making the comparison about the devil quoting scripture when it suited him. Deputy Wilson quoted the GAA and what they have done. I have a great respect for the GAA in Cavan down through the years. I have made almost as long, although not as memorable, a contribution to the GAA as Deputy Wilson. I have been associated with them for over 45 years. I know all about the GAA in Cornafean and Moynalty. That did not tie them into one. The fact that the games were so good, were fought so hard and attracted such attention was because it was Meath playing Cavan in another way. Anybody who tries to make out that a team from Meath playing a team from Cavan were all from the one area and everything was grand does not understand the matter. I am surprised at Deputy Wilson suggesting this was so. I am also amazed to hear him trying to make an argument that because a portion of Meath was attached to Cavan for the last few years it made Cavan people out of them.

Mr. Wilson

On a point of order, I never said that.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Wilson spoke about the close community and the Cavan constituency. Once you come to the border between Meath and Cavan you come to an area where people are entirely different and Deputy Wilson knows that better than I do.

Mr. Wilson

Nonsense. That is Paisley talking about Tyrone and Monaghan, orders by granny's grunt. There is no difference.

Mr. Tully

I do not know about the Deputy's "granny's grunt". I know that area better than Deputy Wilson or anybody else in this House. I know every stick and stone of it. I proved that the last day. If we had the time I would prove it again tonight.

Mr. Wilson

I was trying not to be ratty. The Minister is getting ratty.

An Ceann Comhairle

Will Deputy Wilson please allow the Minister to speak?

Mr. Tully

Deputy Wilson is inclined to get a little bit personal after saying he would not. He got personal with the Minister for Lands and he is now attempting to do it with me.

Mr. Wilson

On a point of order, I was not personal and I ask the Minister for Lands to say if I was.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Wilson, we can only have orderly debate if interruptions cease. Interruptions of the kind we have been having are provocative and ultimately lead to disorder. The Minister, without interruption.

Mr. Wilson

I am entitled to the protection of the Chair when I think what has been said is not true.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Wilson said he would not expect the Minister for Lands to know as much about Cavan because he did not spend as much time there as he did. As far as I know, the Minister for Lands probably spent a lot more of his time over the last ten years there than Deputy Wilson did.

Mr. Wilson

The Minister is selective.

An Ceann Comhairle

Let us get away from personalities and back to the amendment.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): If the Deputy wants to go back to the Cavan tradition perhaps my connection with Cavan is as long as Deputy Wilson's.

(Interruptions.)

An Ceann Comhairle

You are indulging in personalities now. Let us get back to the amendment.

Mr. Tully

Anybody who suggests that Cavan county should be a constituency on its own and then admits it is necessary to take in some of the areas fringing it into County Meath and then proceeds up beyond Kells to the town of Athboy to look for bits of it and expects it to be accepted——

Mr. Wilson

Grennanstown.

Mr. Tully

Grennanstown is beside Athboy.

Mr. Wilson

It is a lovely place.

Mr. Tully

It is lovely country. That is why I am so proud of it and so happy to keep it in the constituency of Meath.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): The Fianna Fáil amendment is not as foolish as it looks.

Mr. Tully

It is because of the fact that it brings a strife between Meath and Westmeath right up to the town of Athboy. Deputy Haughey knows that particular area very well. If I tell him that Grennanstown and Girley are included in the constituency of Cavan in the amendment it shows how ridiculous it is. You go back down again to Crossakeel, Ballinlough, Castlekeeran, Newcastle——

Mr. Molloy

Could we have a little bit of order?

An Ceann Comhairle

Is it a point of order?

Mr. Molloy

I should like to draw attention to the fact that the Minister is not in order in bringing us up and down these little boreens he travelled as a boy in short pants.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy, he is in the constituency and on the appropriate amendment.

Mr. Molloy

We were up and down these lanes last week.

An Ceann Comhairle

I have heard a fair amount of repetition on all sides.

Mr. Tully

I have tried to prove that Deputy Molloy did not know the first thing about what he was doing when he put down the amendment. He worked out how many people lived in one electoral division and then drew his pencil up the line until it finished at Athboy. Anybody who suggests that there is anything in common between Athboy and Bawnboy does not know what he is talking about. After Deputy Wilson said this he conceded to County Monaghan what every Cavan man would have his life for. I do not know how he will go back to Cavan, tell them that he was willingly handing over Shercock, Kingscourt, Enniskeen, Taghart and Lisagoan to Monaghan and say that they are Cavan men.

Mr. Power

Since when did Inniskeen go into Cavan?

Mr. Tully

This one does. It is spelt with an "E". I am talking about Enniskeen.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): From Deputy Wilson's point of view that is a very shrewd move.

Mr. Tully

I know. Being a shrewd move is one thing, but trying to sell it to the Cavan people that those who live in Shercock——

Mr. Wilson

I said "substantially".

Mr. Tully

——and the other three areas are not entitled to call themselves Cavanmen because Deputy Wilson feels that substantially he would rather have portion of County Meath in with Cavan, and they can go anywhere they like——

Mr. Wilson

They will not believe the Minister.

Mr. Tully

They may not believe me, but they will find it very difficult to accept this from Deputy Wilson, that he is really interested in representing Cavan.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Tully

I am talking about what will be the position at the next general election. As far as I am concerned, I said I would defend county boundaries and I have done that to the best of my ability. Here I have put Cavan and Monaghan together in a natural five-seat constituency without breaking the boundary except in one place. Deputy Molloy suggests that County Meath would be divided in four. It is little spiteful ideas like this that ruins any effort Deputy Molloy makes. I do not want to take up the time of the Fianna Fáil Party because they are making it short enough for themselves. I only want to point out how ridiculous it is to put in an amendment like Deputy Molloy put in, with the suggestion from Deputy Wilson—and he put in the Cavan GAA——

Mr. Wilson

I said "substantially".

Mr. Tully

The Deputy knows what the Meath border people would say if they were called Cavan people when a football match was being played between Meath and Cavan. In Oldcastle 103 people came to a clinic of mine and the only complaint they had was that they had not seen a Deputy since the last election. I understand that Deputy Wilson has been back there since and I hope he will look after them until I take them over in four years' time.

Mr. Wilson

There are a few of them from Cavan all right.

Mr. Haughey

Could we have an identikit Cavan man?

Mr. Tully

I do not think there is one. I am the nearest to it.

Mr. Leonard

Our complaint on other occasions during this debate was that the representation in the three Ulster counties was being reduced by two seats and that part of Monaghan was being transferred into Leinster, an area which has already received an extra allocation of seats. We also claimed that the constituency of Monaghan-Cavan was very unwieldy. We are told now today that from every platform in the last election the people of Monaghan were told about this five-seat constituency. That is not so, because if you examine any of the daily or weekly papers where those speeches were recorded, you will not find one Coalition speech indicating to the people of Monaghan that it was proposed to make Monaghan-Cavan a five-seat constituency. Both Ministers suggested that the election was won on that point.

Mr. Tully

We said we did not lose it because of that and Fianna Fáil said we should have.

Mr. Leonard

The Minister for Lands is basing his arguments on the results of the 1973 by-election. There are conflicting views as to whether the man who was successful in that by-election is Fine Gael, Labour or a mixture of both. I hope the Minister will clear up that point. One Minister refers to a general election——

An Ceann Comhairle

This is hardly relevant to the amendment.

Mr. Leonard

I think it is as relevant now as it was previously.

An Ceann Comhairle

There have been some passing references but the Deputy is going into it in depth.

Mr. Leonard

The Minister condemns Deputy Molloy's amendments. I think Deputy Molloy's amendments are very sensible and I cannot see how the Minister read the map when he says Deputy Molloy is going into the centre of Meath. I have examined this very carefully since last week, and I cannot see, unless we are looking at two different maps——

Mr. Tully

The Deputy does not know the area as well as I do.

Mr. Leonard

That is another point. However, the people of Meath must have felt they were fairly well represented by Fianna Fáil when the constituency was Monaghan-West Louth-Nobber. Anyone who looks at the tallyman's returns for the by-election——

Mr. Tully

Does the Deputy believe the tallyman's returns?

Mr. Leonard

——will accept that those people must have felt that they were better represented when that part of Meath was added to Monaghan than they were previously. Having regard to the Fianna Fáil vote over the entire portion of Meath in previous elections and to the small parcel of votes that went into Monaghan, it will be seen that if that majority was related to the whole Meath constituency, it would mean a landslide in favour of Fianna Fáil.

The Minister suggested that he tried to adhere as far as possible to county boundaries. He did not go by the county boundaries in Monaghan and Cavan and that is certainly one case in point. I admit that Monaghan and Cavan people have a lot in common but they have not that much in common that they would prefer to be bunched together and lose a seat. The Minister for Lands will have a lot of trouble convincing people at area meetings that it was a good day's work reducing the representation and I would say they will not take kindly to it. As I said previously, there is a loss of two seats in the three Ulster counties. No doubt they will show their disapproval of the Coalition anyway at the next election but doubly so if the Minister does not retract, as I think he will, and accept some of these amendments.

Mr. Tully

There is just one point I should like to make before we finish. The statement has been made more than once that we are taking a seat from the two Ulster counties. I want to emphasise again that what in effect we are doing is taking a seat with the people from Leinster who were attached to those two Ulster counties. Can the Deputies opposite not understand that?

Mr. Wilson

We do not want that.

Mr. Tully

They do not want to understand that.

Mr. Wilson

We do not want to benefit. We want to develop our own area.

Mr. Tully

You can have your own area. I am giving it to you. I cannot give two-and-a-half Deputies to each of the two counties. I am doing the best I can. I am making one five-seater. The Louth people and the Meath people who are being taken from Monaghan and Cavan, where they were tied on artificially, are being put back again into their old constituencies. They are the people who will be represented by the one Deputy we are taking from Cavan-Monaghan. There is no question whatever of the representation being any worse. I do not know what they are grumbling about. Deputies opposite understand the whole thing but they do not want to admit it and I cannot blame them for that. Deputy Leonard is perfectly happy with the constituency he is getting and I am sure that with time Deputy Wilson will become used to the idea.

Mr. Wilson

When the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education was in Oldcastle and when the Minister for Local Government said there was nobody there——

Mr. Tully

What I said is that I was there just before him and there had not been any visit earlier. I thought it was a shame in a way. The Parliamentary Secretary had quite a big crowd. Then I went down and there were a lot of Fianna Fáil people there. I looked after them and I told them they could go back to their own man if they ever saw him again.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I am very pleased to know that Deputy Leonard attributed the success of Deputy Toal in the by-election to the success of the National Coalition Government. I agree with him. He said it was not fair to compare Deputy Toal's vote as a National Coalition candidate with the late Senator Fox's vote as a Fine Gael candidate. I agree that when the by-election came along the people of Monaghan had the eight-month record of the National Coalition——

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

A dismal one it was.

Mr. Wilson

A margin of 289 votes out of 33,000.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): It was natural to expect that the record of the National Coalition would be reflected in Deputy Toal's vote. Monaghan and Cavan are two units. The entire county of Cavan is preserved and 99.9 per cent of Monaghan is preserved.

Mr. Wilson

Two units, not one.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): A little bit of Enniskeen which naturally runs to Dundalk is being put into Louth. The two county boundaries are intact.

Mr. Wilson

How are they intact?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Deputy Wilson makes an impassioned plea for the preservation of the county boundaries of Cavan and Monaghan.

Mr. Wilson

Substantially.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): And then he wants to take away——

Mr. Wilson

I said "substantially".

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Then he wants to take Shercock and Kingscourt from Cavan and put them into Monaghan. I note that Deputy Smith is not in the House to support that proposal.

Mr. Wilson

He has been 50 years in the House and he will be 55.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): If that amendment which Deputy Wilson supports were carried, the effect would be to pull the carpet from under Deputy Smith.

Mr. Wilson

That would be impossible. I should like to see the Minister for Lands pulling the carpet from under Deputy Smith.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I am not saying that is the purpose of the amendment, but the effect of it would be to take away from Deputy Smith his own area, Shercock, Kingscourt and the surrounding districts. I wonder did Deputy Wilson put down this amendment without consulting Deputy Smith.

Mr. Wilson

Does the Minister for Lands approve of the development of Leinster and the Pale at the expense of Ulster?

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I approve of keeping the two counties together.

Mr. Wilson

And losing a seat.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): We are not losing a seat.

Mr. Wilson

We have now six Deputies and we will have only five. There are six Deputies living in Monaghan and Cavan at the moment but there will be only five.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): Deputy Wilson does not usually lose his temper or behave in a disorderly fashion. If he continues in this fashion, I will be forced to believe that I have hit the nail on the head and that the purpose of the amendment was to push Deputy Smith anywhere you like——

Mr. Molloy

Do not be so ridiculous. The Minister is trying to stop discussion on the constituency.

Mr. G. Fitzgerald

He is delighted Cavan is losing a seat. God be with Cavan—the people there would love to hear him say it.

Mr. T.J. Fitzpatrick

(Cavan): I am satisfied beyond doubt that Cavan and Monaghan together form a far more natural unit than Cavan with two bits of Meath and Monaghan with a hunk of Meath and a hunk of Louth.

Mr. Conlan

As one of the Deputies affected by this amendment, I will vote for the Bill as it stands and I should like to give my reasons for doing so. I do not think it was fair during the debate to say that this Bill was designed to copper-fasten the Coalition Government. As the only Deputy for Monaghan supporting the Government, I was never consulted about this Bill when it was introduced. I first saw this Bill in draft the night before it was circulated. I confess that if I had seen the Bill sooner I probably would have put up a fight to have Enniskeen, Kiltybeg and Drumboory kept in Monaghan.

However, I realise that the underlying principle is to preserve county boundaries as far as possible. Realising that, I appreciate that the Minister had to get some extra population to make Louth a four-seater and we in Monaghan have to hand over the electoral divisions of Enniskeen, Kiltybeg and Drumboory. I cannot understand the argument put forward by the Opposition that Ulster are losing two seats because when 12 seats were being kept in Ulster we had to take in a big portion of Meath and of Louth and County Leitrim. Therefore, the representation for Ulster is not being reduced by this Bill.

As one with experience from 1961, at that time as secretary of a political party and later as a Member of the Seanad who had experience of working with a constituency like Monaghan and Louth, while I made many good friends in Louth over the years I always realised that the people of Louth were not happy in the constituency of Monaghan/Louth, or the constituency of Monaghan as it was and is at present. These people were always looking forward to the day when they would get back to their own county. Again, in 1969 when the Meath portion came into Monaghan the people in Meath worked with the people in Monaghan but were not happy there. Again, they were looking forward to getting back to their own county.

We in Monaghan and Cavan have more in common than Monaghan people have with Louth people or with the people of Meath. Deputy Wilson mentioned the GAA and I know that he had a long association with them and that he was a fair exponent of the game. I also had some association with it and I know that the people of Monaghan and Cavan while we may fight while we are in Ulster, when Cavan goes outside Ulster, Monaghan people are behind them, horse, foot and artillery. In fact, unlike some of the people of Meath, I seem to remember a Cavan bus being stoned going through Navan one evening after an All-Ireland final. The people of Monaghan and Cavan have more in common than they have with those in Meath and Louth.

The problems in Monaghan and Cavan are more similar than those of Louth and Meath people. As an instance, sometimes when one is representing the people of Louth and Monaghan problems come up. Some time ago a certain problem arose. People of Monaghan engaged in pig feeding while the people in Louth are grain growers and at times when one had to make a case for cheaper feed for the people of Monaghan one would be speaking against the Louth grain growers. The people of Monaghan and Cavan where the farmers are mainly small farmers have similar problems and it is, therefore, easier to represent Cavan-Monaghan than Cavan-Louth-Meath.

In the area I represent in the county council in Monaghan, half the people do their marketing in County Cavan, in Cootehill or Shercock. They have much in common which is another point in favour of the two counties being amalgamated in one constituency. I shall support the Bill because I think it is more rational than either of the amendments proposed. Last week I heard Deputy Wilson talking about the close-knit community in Cavan but I could not understand his logic in supporting an amendment to exclude Kingscourt and Shercock and adjoining areas from Cavan. If I were speaking from a selfish point of view, I could see merit in the amendment because that area is very close to me and I have many connections with it but I understand the aim of the Minister's Bill is to preserve county boundaries as far as possible and that mainly is what the Bill does. I support the Bill because I feel we have more in common in Monaghan and Cavan than we have in Monaghan-Louth and Meath.

Mr. Wilson

A boundary is something that defines a territory and the boundary that is at issue when one is talking about a constituency is the constituency boundary and how one preserves a constituency boundary when the constituency did not exist beforehand I do not know. In fact, it is the county boundaries that are supposed to be at issue and the county boundary between Cavan and Monaghan is being wiped out by the Bill. Apart from getting a kick in a humorous sense in thinking of anyone pulling the carpet from under the massive frame of Deputy Paddy Smith, I want to ask how can the Minister for Lands or the Minister for Local Government, looking at a list of Members of this House, state that Leonard of Smithsboro, Conlon of Ballybay, Toal of Smithsboro, Smith of Cootehill, Fitzpatrick of Cavan town and Wilson of Kilgolagh, all living in their respective county boundaries will not lose one position out of the six. The Minister for Lands said he was not voting for the loss of his seat. A seat is being lost by those two counties in a rural area which is crying out for more representation and a more favourable percentage than is desirable in built-up areas which are accessible and easy to organise. Representation in the area under the new scheme is being made more difficult. There is no doubt about that and I am sure the Minister himself will admit it. The amendment is trying to give more Members of the Oireachtas to represent an area and give better service to the constituents. I reiterate my appeal.

Mr. Molloy

Finally, on this side of the House, we would like to say that we have made the case as best we can for the creation of two separate three-seat constituencies, one in Cavan and one in Monaghan, covering both those areas with additions. We have fought on behalf of the people in those areas and we make a final appeal to the Minister to accept our amendment.

Mr. Tully

All I will say is that when Deputy Molloy was Minister for Local Government he definitely had a proposal, a copy of which I have, suggesting that he was going to make Cavan-Monaghan a five-seater. I wish to God he would stop playing.

Mr. Molloy

If you have, I shall have to hear it.

Mr. Enright

In regard to this particular constituency——

Mr. Molloy

Might I ask the Chair to put the question now? There seems to be a filibuster going on. I ask that the Ceann Comhairle be sent for and let the question be put.

Mr. Enright

I should briefly like to put the point that I am fully in support of the Minister in trying to maintain county boundaries as far as possible. As somebody who represents two counties, a constituency similar to this particular constituency, I believe it is an arrangement which can prove satisfactory. In the constituency of Laois-Offaly, which is similar to the Cavan-Monaghan constituency, this is desirable. I am certain that Deputy Lalor will agree that it is convenient for those wishing to attend meetings throughout the constituency. Where there are energetic and hardworking Deputies in a constituency such as that proposed by the Minister, it is administratively, geographically and in every other respect suitable. Therefore, I agree with the Minister.

Mr. Molloy

That suits the Minister politically.

Question put: "That the entry in relation to Cavan-Monaghan stand part of the Bill".

The Committee divided: Tá, 72; Níl, 64.

Tá

• Barry, Peter.
• Barry, Richard.
• Begley, Michael.
• Belton, Luke.
• Belton, Paddy.
• Bermingham, Joseph.
• Bruton, John.
• Burke, Dick.
• Burke, Joan T.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Coughlan, Stephen.
• Creed, Donal.
• Crotty, Kieran.
• Cruise-O'Brien, Conor.
• Desmond, Barry.
• Desmond, Eileen.
• Dockrell, Henry P.
• Dockrell, Maurice.
• Donegan, Patrick S.
• Donnellan, John.
• Dunne, Thomas.
• Enright, Thomas.
• Esmonde, John G.
• Finn, Martin.
• FitzGerald, Garret.
• Fitzpatick, 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.
• Burke, Liam.
• Byrne, Hugh.
• Clinton, Mark A.
• Cluskey, Frank.
• Collins, Edward.
• Conlan, John F.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Cooney, Patrick M.
• Corish, Brendan.
• 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.
• O'Connell, John.
• O'Donnell, Tom.
• O'Leary, Michael.
• O'Sullivan, John L.
• Pattison, Seamus.
• Reynolds, Patrick J.
• Ryan, John J.
• Ryan, Richie.
• Spring, Dan.
• Staunton, Myles.
• Taylor, Frank.
• Thornley, David.
• Timmins, Godfrey.
• Toal, Brendan.
• Tully, James.
• White, James.

Níl

• Ahern, Liam.
• Andrews, David.
• Barrett, Sylvester.
• Brennan, Joseph.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Ben.
• Browne, Seán.
• Brugha, Ruairí.
• Burke, Raphael P.
• Callanan, John.
• Calleary, Seán.
• Carter, Frank.
• Colley, George.
• Collins, Gerard.
• Connolly, Gerard.
• Crinion, Brendan.
• 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, 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.
• Meaney, Tom.
• Molloy, Robert.
• Moore, Seán.
• Murphy, Ciarán.
• Nolan, Thomas.
• 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 Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Amendment No. 3, in the name of Deputy Molloy, please. Group C—Constituencies of Clare, Clare-East, Galway, West Galway, East Mayo, West Mayo, Roscommon-Leitrim, and Sligo.

Mr. Molloy

I move amendment No. 3:

In page 4, in the second column of the entry relating to the constituency of Clare, to delete "West Galway" and substitute "Clare-South Galway".

Amendments Nos. 3, 4, 10, 11, 14, 15, 17 and 18 are in my name. I reserve the right to speak later on.

Mr. Callanan

I cannot be accused of wasting the time of the House. I have been waiting some time for a chance to speak. My complaint with the Government is that they should have given more notice of the motion today. The area under discussion is hard-hit by this Bill. The Minister stated that the 1969 Act put people out of this House. This Bill is attempting to put two seats out of the area around my district. I defy contradiction on that. The Bill is doing away with one constituency—the old constituency of Clare-South Galway. In this Bill the tolerance figures react against the west. There are pluses and minuses. Deputy Molloy has brought in an amendment to the Bill. The Bill will do away with one seat. In the new Clare constituency, according to Deputy Molloy, there is a minus of 951. The Minister mentioned a plus of 787. In the west Galway constituency Deputy Molloy proposes to retain the constituency with a plus of 51, but the Minister has a minus of 542. This is the urban constituency of the city of Galway and part of Clare.

In the Clare-South Galway constituency Deputy Molloy has a minus of 804 and the Minister's new constituency has a plus of 671. The big pluses in the Minister's Bill are in Leitrim and Roscommon. Under the Fianna Fáil proposal Leitrim-Roscommon has a plus of 373, and the Minister has a plus of 996 in that constituency. In Sligo-Leitrim there is a minus of 578 in Deputy Molloy's proposal and there is a plus of 882 in the Minister's Bill. That shows that the tolerance has gone against the west. With a tolerance of 1,000 each way, if the Minister and the Government wished to leave them the seats, they could have retained the three constituencies as they were.

I am a long time associated with politics. I was not always as active as I am now. For a long time in Galway we had six Fianna Fáil TDs and three Fine Gael TDs. Before the revision of the constituencies in 1969 there were three Fine Gael Deputies there and they were still there after that revision. Therefore, nothing that happened in 1969 took a seat from Fine Gael. There was no Labour seat in that portion of County Galway and Clare. In this revision one man who can speak for himself is totally blackguarded, that is, Deputy Loughnane. In this revision his vote is cut in three. Portion of it is in West Galway, portion of it remains in the new East Galway constituency, and portion of it is in Clare.

In the new East Galway constituency there are five sitting TDs who must fight for four seats. They are three Fianna Fáil and two Fine Gael seats. On the figures for the last election the seat is taken from us unless there is a landslide. The cultural relationship between Cavan and Monaghan was mentioned. That may be so. I will not argue about that, but I will argue that there is no cultural relationship between the people of Lisdoonvarna and Lahinch and the people of Galway city. In the old Clare-South Galway constituency the division line ran across the mountain. The people in Scarriff had a lot in common with the people of Gort and Woodford. If there was any cultural relationship it was between the people in the part of Galway which was in the Clare-South Galway constituency.

In the new set-up there is nothing whatsoever to link them culturally or otherwise. Headford is close to the Corrib and, if any place was to go in with West Galway, I suggest it should be Headford. Instead of that, Headford is left in the new East Galway constituency which goes up to Athenry and veers back near Loughrea to Craughwell village. Then the line veers west again and puts Gort into the new East Galway constituency and goes away up into Clare and takes in Ennistymon and Lisdoonvarna and those parts of Clare which have nothing in common with Galway.

I cannot speak for too long because our time is limited and there are a number of western Deputies who want to make contributions. I would ask the Minister to take a hard look at this amendment. As I said before, I do not blame the Minister. The Government are a Dublin-based Government, a Leinster Government, with the exception of one decent man from the west. A lot was said about the 1969 Act by the people who were then in Opposition. I was not here then. Maybe it was done party-wise. I read some of the remarks made by the then Opposition. I will not quote them because I have not got the time. We are having another "go" at 8.30 p.m. At that time they said there should be a commission. No matter what was done in 1969 nothing was done deliberately to take a seat from any political party in the west. This revision is definitely taking a seat from the west.

The population of Galway has increased and still we are losing a seat. The population of Clare has increased and still we are losing a seat. The irony of the whole thing is that, as was pointed out forcefully when we were discussing Dublin, it takes 500 more votes to elect somebody in Leitrim than it does in Dublin. That is not fair play to the people of the west. It is stated in the Boys of Wexford that when Ireland lay broken she called for revenge to the west. I do not believe in long speeches but I want to make this point. We consider that this is a gerrymander of the west and particularly the western seaboard. Normally the Minister is considered to be a fair-minded man but I do not know why he did not consult with somebody. Deputies opposite do not agree with this Bill. Nobody likes to see his area losing seats. This Bill definitely takes seats from the west. It is an urban-minded Bill.

Mr. Tully

I should like to refer briefly to what Deputy Callanan said because I believe he is normally a reasonable man. He is over-emphasising some of the things which he feels are likely to happen. I should like to correct him on one matter. The last time the constituencies were revised the west lost three seats and there was no moaning or ullagoning from Fianna Fáil although it was a Fianna Fáil Minister who did it, backed by the Fianna Fáil Party.

Mr. Callanan

Not in my area.

Mr. Tully

The west lost three seats and if they gave preference to one area over another I will leave it to other people to say why that was done.

Mr. Callanan

They had to do it on a population basis. There was no tolerance that would leave them the seats where they lost them.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Callanan talked about Deputy Loughnane's area being broken up into three seats.

Mr. Cunningham

Lost them to where?

Mr. Tully

To the east.

Mr. Cunningham

Give us one example.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Loughnane said to me one day—and I believe him of course—that he would win a seat in any of the three areas. In Deputy Molloy's proposal in the previous amendments he was dividing my constituency into four. He was splitting it up much smaller than Galway. This is something I should like to point out because it does not seem to have sunk home to those on the opposite side from the west who are prepared to support Deputy Molloy's proposal. Under Deputy Molloy's proposal the boundary of every county in the west, either by losing population or by having people from another county added to the constituency which that county forms is broken again and again. Four counties lose population to other counties and a total of 63,550 persons will find themselves in a constituency, the greater part of which consists of a county other than that in which they live.

Mr. Cunningham

But they would have an extra seat.

Mr. Tully

No, they would not have an extra seat.

Deputies

They would.

Mr. Tully

One extra over the whole lot. You cannot conjure up things like that. Those are the facts and Deputies cannot get away from them.

Mr. MacSharry

The Minister did agree there was one extra seat available in this area.

Mr. Tully

Under Deputy Molloy's amendments he would make transfers as follows: 17,491 persons from County Clare to Clare-South Galway; 9,509 persons from Roscommon to North-East Galway; 22,833 persons from County Leitrim to Leitrim-Roscommon constituency. He would transfer 2,835 persons from Donegal to Sligo-Leitrim and 5,527 persons from County Leitrim to Sligo-Leitrim. If that is not what I described earlier on as a dog's breakfast, I do not know what it is.

Mr. MacSharry

It must be a dog's supper at this stage.

Mr. Tully

He got so mixed up in what he was doing that anywhere the spirit moved him he took a number of people and moved them across into some other area asking "How can I remedy that?" He went somewhere else, proceeded to draw a line again and he started drawing them in from there back into where they had been.

Mr. MacSharry

The Minister has Sligo, Leitrim and Donegal in one constituency—three counties.

Mr. Tully

Deputy Molloy wanted to break up Leitrim into four. I have broken it into two.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister did exactly the same in his own constituency—Kildare, Louth and Monaghan.

Mr. Tully

One group of people who are very happy about all of this are the people from Donegal because they have got five seats. Deputy Cunningham is sure of his and that is why he is so quiet.

Mr. Cunningham

I am not quiet.

Mr. Tully

He is dead lucky. He has five there and no matter how strong they are against him he will get one seat out of it anyway.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Tully

No matter what way one looks at this Bill, it was drawn up fairly. Some people feel it is the job of this House to guarantee that they will be returned to Dáil Éireann and that, therefore, their own area——

Mr. Cunningham

Nobody said that.

Mr. Tully

——should be left with them so that they will be returned. It is no business of Dáil Éireann to bring in or pass a Bill which will guarantee anybody a seat.

Mr. Cunningham

Except to the Minister for Local Government.

Mr. Tully

Let me tell Deputy Cunningham and Deputy Gallagher that I had 1,000 votes over the Fianna Fáil man the last time and, when they reach that stage, they can afford to talk. Let that be the end of it.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister was the last to be elected.

Mr. MacSharry

The Minister needed every one of those 1,000 votes.

Mr. Cunningham

He was elected on the last count.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputies Cunningham and MacSharry should not interrupt the Minister. Interruptions are disorderly from any side of the House.

Mr. Tully

He was the hindtit man of Fianna Fáil in the area and he is hoping he will not be there the next time. Neil Blaney will not be there to drag him in so he will have to work under his own steam next time.

Mr. Cunningham

The Minister was the hindtit of Fine Gael and still is.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister to continue.

Mr. Tully

Until the last Fianna Fáil Minister for Local Government carved up constituencies here I headed the poll, over 1,000 over the quota so do not forget——

Mr. Cunningham

The last Minister for Local Government did not carve up constituencies.

Mr. Tully

He did, the last Minister carved up constituencies. The last Minister for Local Government before me did not because he had not the guts or you people would not allow him draw it up. God knows, he did enough doodling. I got four different proposals which he left behind him in the Customs House——

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Tully

And he could not make up his mind what he was going to do. I am talking about Deputy Molloy now. I have made a proposal to this House which I consider to be fair to everybody concerned.

There is one final thing I want to say because I do not believe it is fair to take up too much time on this. Deputy Callanan talked about 500 extra votes being needed. He was not quite correct. It is 500 extra people in the area and that includes the child in the cradle—a different thing between that and 500 votes.

Mr. MacSharry

If Fine Gael had their way there would not be too many of them either.

(Interruptions.)

Dr. Loughnane

I do not want to make a sermon or delay too long but I was reminded of a quotation from the Bible when I heard the Minister speak—Do unto others as you would have done unto you.

Mr. Tully

If I did that I would shoot you all!

Dr. Loughnane

I was very pleased to hear the Minister say, and I agree entirely, that people should not be transferred from one county to another. I know he has applied that in his own county, Meath. I wonder why he did not apply it in County Clare. Even at this late stage—since he is the only person who could introduce an amendment—perhaps he would ponder on an amendment to consider making County Clare, which had over 75,000 people in the last census, a four-seater. We hear a lot about the increase in population in Dublin but Counties Clare and Galway increased their populations between the last two censuses. In fact, in County Clare, the population has increased so much that, in the Ennis electoral area alone, the present voting list is greater than the number of people on the census for 1971. It is a pity the Minister has left the House now because recently when a deputation from County Clare came to see him regarding the proposed changes in electoral areas for local authority elections, he produced those figures. They show that the population of County Clare has increased much more than 75,000.

I was pleased to hear Deputy Callanan refer to me by name, and the Minister too. Deputy Callanan spoke about our constituency as it was between Clare and Galway and the culture we have there. I wonder is that the culture to which the present Minister for Posts and Telegraphs refers when he speaks of "bog oak culture". I know the present Government are geared to favouring the east as against the west. There is no doubt about that. The population of the west of Ireland, from Donegal to County Clare, is 578,039 people and the number of seats there were 30. If the seats were to be retained at 30, the average per Deputy would be 19,267 which the Minister will accept is above the constitutional minimum. In Dublin SouthEast constituency the population per Deputy will be 19,292, a mere 18 or 19 more than in the west of Ireland. In Meath, the Minister's own constituency, the population per Deputy will be 19,239 which is less than the figures for which he is dropping two seats in the west of Ireland. Now Clare, as a three-seat constituency, will mean that the population per TD will be almost 21,000. According to the 1971 census, the population of Clare was over 75,000 and the population of West Galway was 62,731, a difference of almost 13,000.

The Minister proposes a four-seat constituency for West Galway, by taking 13,000 North Clare people and adding them to West Galway—entirely contrary to his statement a while ago about retaining county boundaries. He is taking 13,000 Clare people to justify a four-seat constituency in West Galway. We know the reason for that. The Minister has his own ideas. Other people may not have the same ideas. He has stated frequently that it is his wish to retain county boundaries. Even last week he said he did not want to have any new boundaries established such as the Shannon. He thought we were speaking too much about the west of Ireland. It is obvious that there is complete partiality towards Dublin and the Pale.

Consider the proposed West Galway constituency. It is obvious that it is an unworkable constituency for any TD. It stretches from the Mayo border down across Galway, on to Lahinch and almost to the town of Ennis. In that constituency you have every possible problem. There are large mountain areas, the Gaeltacht, the islands. There is sea fishing and inland fishing, the large city of Galway with all the problems that arise in a city. There is Galway harbour and there is a university. There is the largest hospital in the country with the biggest number of beds. There is a large military barracks. There are the problems of housing, agriculture, forestry, land drainage, Land Commission work and tourism. These are common to other constituencies. When one compares that with some of the Dublin city constituencies and sees the amount of work they offer for a TD one will see the sense in reconsidering the suggestion.

I suggest that the Minister should put down an amendment to consider County Clare as a four-seat constituency or at least acknowledge the rights of 13,000 Clare people by putting them in with West Galway and calling the constituency Clare/West Galway.

Mr. Reynolds

In this debate particularly in relation to the western constituencies people are inclined to use figures to suit their own arguments. We are told by the Opposition that there is no reason why there should not be another seat or two in the west of Ireland. At the last revision three seats were taken by that party out of the west. I do not know whether they went to Leinster or to Munster but they certainly went out of the west.

Seats in this House are based on population in a particular part of the country. Let us look at the record of the Opposition with regard to the population of the west of Ireland. When that party came into power in 1932 the population of the province of Connacht was 552,970. At the last available census in 1971 the population of Connacht went down to 389,763, a drop of 163,144. There is the kernel of the trouble. In that period the Fianna Fáil party were in Government except for six years. If anybody is to blame for that situation surely the blame lies with them. There is no point in shedding tears tonight about the drop in population in the west and about the loss of seats. If they have been lost through the neglect of the last Government.

Dr. Loughnane

That is not true. There was an increase in Clare and in Galway between the last two censuses.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Reynolds.

Mr. Reynolds

The overall picture is as I have stated.

Dr. Loughnane

The figures for those two counties increased. Did the Deputy work out the figures for those two counties?

Mr. Reynolds

I did not work out the figures for Clare and Galway. You did. I do not blame you for working them out. I worked out the figure for the province of Connacht. The population of Galway at the moment is 148,220. In 1932 it was 169,366.

Dr. Loughnane

Between the last two censuses——

Mr. Reynolds

It is all right to take the figures that suit yourself.

Mr. Molloy

Go back to the Famine.

Mr. Reynolds

I know this annoys the people opposite but I am obliged to tell the facts.

Dr. Loughnane

You are one of the wise men.

Mr. Reynolds

There is nothing wise about me. I challenge anybody to prove that my figures are wrong. I took them from the census book.

Dr. Loughnane

Take the last two censuses.

Mr. Reynolds

In 1932 the population of Leitrim was 55,907. Today it is 28,313.

Mr. MacSharry

And you were a TD during all that period. What did you do about it?

Mr. Reynolds

The population of Mayo when Fianna Fáil came into office was 172,690. At the 1971 census it was 109,497.

Mr. Molloy

That is not a correct figure.

Mr. Reynolds

That is a correct figure.

Mr. Molloy

I have the census book in front of me.

Mr. Reynolds

Quote it.

Mr. Molloy

You are wrong.

Mr. Reynolds

I am not.

Mr. Molloy

I am just pointing out that the Deputy's figures are wrong.

(Interruptions.)

Dr. Loughnane

What was it in 1014?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Will Deputies allow the Deputy in possession to speak?

Mr. Molloy

It is a disgrace to see a western Deputy standing up here defending the loss of another two seats to the west. It is a nice spectacle.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputies should not interrupt the Deputy who is speaking.

Mr. Tunney

There is a difference between speaking and saying something.

Mr. Reynolds

The population of Sligo was 71,388. At the last available census it was 50,236.

Mr. Molloy

That is wrong.

Mr. Reynolds

It shows that there has been a drop in the Province of Connacht of 163,144.

Mr. Molloy

The Sligo figure is wrong. I want to put on the record that I am saying he is wrong.

Mr. Reynolds

I do not want to delay the House. I want to tell the House the reason why the seats are being dropped in the west of Ireland.

Mr. Calleary

Give us the reasons why they are being dropped.

Mr. Reynolds

Neglect by the Government that was in power since 1932 with the exception of six years—a complete neglect of the west.

Mr. Molloy

The Deputy is the worst thing they sent in here in a long time.

Mr. Reynolds

The result in the west was quite favourable to the Government party in the last general election. There was reference by some speakers to county boundaries. More has been done in this Bill to keep county boundaries than in the previous legislation.

Mr. Molloy

The Government are putting Connacht into Munster.

Mr. MacSharry

What about Leitrim?

Mr. Reynolds

The Deputy is annoyed about County Leitrim. The previous Government divided County Leitrim into three parts; part went to Sligo, part to Donegal and part to Roscommon. In this Bill it is divided into two parts; part to Roscommon and part to Leitrim. For Deputy MacSharry's information, you cannot travel by road from north Leitrim to south Leitrim without going through County Cavan or County Roscommon. That border was used. It was not made by the Minister for Local Government; it has been there since the county was created and the Minister cannot be blamed for that. Deputy Molloy had a proposal to divide the county into four parts——

Mr. Molloy

That is not true. The Deputy is speaking rubbish.

Mr. Harte

We saw the files.

Mr. Reynolds

Deputy Molloy proposed to divide it into four, giving part to Donegal, part to Sligo, part to Cavan and part to Roscommon. That is exactly what Deputy MacSharry's party proposed to do until they were stopped.

Mr. MacSharry

The Deputy said he would put it together in one constituency.

Mr. Reynolds

Where did I say that?

Mr. MacSharry

The Deputy has been saying it in the county.

Mr. Reynolds

I never opened my mouth about it. Let the Deputy quote me on it.

Mr. Molloy

Will the Deputy give way?

Mr. Reynolds

I shall finish my contribution. The Deputy may quote me on it when he speaks. The movement of people in the Roscommon-Leitrim constituency means that in Ballaghaderreen, where Deputy Seán Flanagan lives, he will be able to vote for himself and I can also cast a vote for myself. Fianna Fáil made me travel 18 miles to get my first vote. Deputy G. Fitzgerald said I was like a cork so far as this House was concerned, that I was in and out. Deputy Wilson spoke about Deputy Paddy Smith; he said he was in this House for 50 years and that nobody would be able to pull the carpet from him. I have not been here for that length of time but, taking into account the service of my father, my mother and myself in this House, my family have been here for more than that time.

Mr. MacSharry

In that period the population in the constituency dropped by 50,000.

Mr. Reynolds

That was because of Fianna Fáil.

Mr. MacSharry

It was scandalous representation.

Mr. Molloy

Now the Government want to bring in the pill.

(Interruptions.)

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

We are discussing the constituencies Bill and the amendments. Deputy Reynolds should be allowed to speak without interruption.

Mr. Reynolds

Deputy Molloy was anxious that I should give way to him. I will do so to allow him to quote any statement in which I made reference to County Leitrim being put together or separated. I never made such reference. I had a fight on my hands; at the previous general election I failed to be elected but at the last election I succeeded. I do not think that was a mortal sin. Perhaps I was lucky in defeating one of the Ministers in the last Government. I do not think that was a great achievement; I think the time had come for a change and the people knew I was a victim of a gerrymander.

Mr. Molloy

Deputy Reynolds has invited me to quote him. If I am allowed to speak between now and 10.30 p.m. I shall certainly do so. I want to put on the record of the House that what the Coalition are doing in this Bill, so far as it affects the area west of the Shannon plus Cavan and Clare, is an action of total discrimination against the community living in that area. With the increase in the population in the country the Government could allow four additional seats but they decided to reduce the representation in the western counties from 36 to 28. This dealt a severe blow to the spirit of the people in that area and it gave them a clear indication of the attitude of the Government towards them and their special problems.

Deputies from the west have always considered they had a special cause to plead, that they were pleading for a disadvantaged section of our country where life was not as cushy and easy as in other parts. Yet, we are faced with a reduction in the number of voices that can come to this Parliament and speak for this difficult area. The western part covers a very wide area. It is a well-known fact and it has been recorded in surveys, commissions, and in booklets that the population have depended largely on small agricultural holdings to eke out a living and that special efforts should be made by the State to encourage industries to this area.

During the years the efforts of Deputies from all sides have succeeded to a certain extent in ensuring that this area got special consideration and, by way of special arrangements in relation to grants and tax-free allowances to promote the west, some progress has been made. We are not satisfied that sufficient progress has been made and the task is still not completed. We need as many voices as we are entitled to under the Constitution to come here and to lobby for the people living in the western areas.

An extraordinary piece of gerrymandering has been carried out by the Coalition Government in deciding to operate the tolerance against the western areas and granting only the minimum number allowable under the Constitution. Following the last census, the maximum number of Deputies allowable under the Constitution in the western areas is 30, while the minimum allowable is 28. To our utter amazement, this Government decided the western area was to get only the minimum number of Deputies in the next election. This is a reduction of two seats. Government spokesmen have come here and claimed that the reduction of two seats in the west was due to the drop in the population.

I want categorically here and now to refute that false statement. There is no authority for it and there is no basis upon which it can be founded. There are no statistics to substantiate it. I have proved conclusively during the course of the debate that the population in the western area, in compliance with the constitutional figures, could have allowed for the retention of 30 Deputies. Rather than seek any special privilege or any special consideration we, in our amendment, have suggested that in fairness at least 29 Deputies should be elected to this area. We have not sought any special consideration or any special privilege. Had we done so we could have claimed the full 30 Deputies.

We are amazed that the Government should have the effrontery to come in here and expect the House to accept their miserable argument in support of what they have done. They have tried to create the myth that the population has dropped and so the Minister had no option other than to reduce the western areas by two. Like all myths, this myth is false. It is despicable that not on one single occasion has any speaker on that side of the House stood up and admitted that what we are saying here is true. It amazes me to see people like Deputy Coogan, Deputy Harte and the Deputy who has just run out, Deputy Reynolds, all representing the west, with obviously no influence of any kind with the Government parties or with the Cabinet; they have once again allowed the western areas to be sold down the river.

As I say, we are not pleading for any special consideration. We are merely suggesting a proper and correct thing to do—that would have been to allocate the 29 seats suggested in our amendment. To give some evidence of the way in which the Minister has approached this matter, I want to show——

Mr. Harte

On a point of order, is it in order for a Deputy to roar at the Chair when addressing the Chair?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Molloy.

Mr. Molloy

The tone of my voice indicates the feeling of this party and, if the Deputy is disturbed, he has his choice; he can leave. He knows he has turned his back on his constituents. He knows he has let down the area he represents by supporting this effort on the part of this Coalition Government.

I want to point out now that in the western counties the Minister has made provision for one Deputy per 20,509 electors and that allows for only 28 seats. The maximum tolerance range rises to 21,123. Yet the Minister did not avail of the opportunity offered to him but acted rather in a manner detrimental to the western areas because he could have gone for a much lower figure and, in doing so, balanced things out.

Why am I suggesting he should have gone for a lower figure? The figure for the west, 20,509, is the highest figure in the country taking the areas the Minister has set out in his explanatory memorandum. Even in the Munster area, the next highest, it is 20,174 per Deputy. In the Dublin area it requires only 20,142 per Deputy. In the South Leinster area it requires only 19,937 and in the North Leinster area, including Cavan and Monaghan, it requires only 19,596 per Deputy. The lowest possible number per Deputy was chosen by the Minister in that area in which he himself will stand. It includes the constituency the Minister is proposing for Meath. It is quite obvious what the trend is. There is positive political discrimination and manipulation being indulged in in a very blatant fashion by the Coalition Government and by the Minister, who has a capacity for this, and who has been told to come in here and have it passed with their vote and with their feet.

Mr. Tully

And the Deputy was not able to do it in all the time he was in office. He had not the guts to do it. He produced four different proposals.

Mr. Molloy

We have shown that by dividing the western area into the following constituencies and allocating 29 seats we could have had a situation with a Donegal constituency of five Deputies, a Sligo-Leitrim constituency with three Deputies, a Leitrim-Roscommon constituency with three Deputies, an East Mayo constituency with three Deputies, a West Mayo constituency with three Deputies, a North East Galway constituency with three Deputies, a West Galway constituency with three Deputies, a Clare-South Galway constituency with three Deputies and a Clare constituency with three Deputies, giving a total of 29 seats. The total population for all of that area is 574,294 persons according to the census of population in 1971. The average on that basis of allocation, of 29 seats to the west, per Deputy would have worked out at 19,801. That figure is still not as low as the figure to which the Minister went in the area in which he will stand himself. The area of North Leinster.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy was proposing to give 11 seats to Galway and, if that is what the Deputy is looking for, he is not getting it.

Mr. Molloy

My figure of 19,801 per Deputy is closer to what the Minister allocated to the South Leinster area including all the prosperous counties of Wexford, Carlow, Kilkenny, Laois-Offaly, and Wicklow and, in the Dublin area, the Minister's proposals are 20,142. We have discussed the Dublin area. The position is as I have outlined it; it is possible that what we suggest can be done and is practicable. I have shown how it can be done.

Mr. Harte

Then why did the Deputy not do it?

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Molloy

We have illustrated clearly by our amendments what the position should be. We have drawn maps to show the effect of these amendments. They can be studied. They are compact and reasonable and, above all, they maintain a reasonable balance as between each constituency and as between the different areas from the point of view of the averages and the ratios. To the west 29 seats should have been allocated without there being any question at all of giving the west any special consideration whatsoever. In allocating somewhat around the same average as the rest of the country 29 seats would have been a fair figure.

We have shown on previous occasions here that, in fact, even going to 30 one could have allocated that many to the west and still complied with the minimum requirement of 19,123 population per Deputy. But we accept that, in doing that, it would have been necessary to divide County Leitrim between a Donegal constituency, a Sligo constituency and a Roscommon constituency and we do not agree that that should be done again and it is because of that our amendments are designed to divide the county of Leitrim by restoring it as far as possible as a political entity.

Mr. Tully

The Deputy had Leitrim divided four ways.

An Ceann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Molloy

We have included every major town in the Leitrim-Roscommon constituency that we have shown here. As against that, the Minister has taken a large portion of County Leitrim and put it in with another county. We did not do that. We put the minimum amount necessary into County Donegal and left substantially the whole of the county of Leitrim with part of Roscommon to form a constituency on its own.

Mr. Harte

The Deputy let his own side down.

Mr. Molloy

We have shown Leitrim could have been restored as an entity. We did not favour the division of it into three parts and we do not agree with the Minister's division of it into two parts. We feel he has removed too much of one part of the county thereby reducing both the voice and the effectiveness of the county.

We have made our argument firmly and fairly. The facts are indisputable. There is nobody on that side of the House. The previous speaker quoted from the census of population and I regret to say his figures were not correct. I challenge any Deputy on that side of the House to state that the figures we have been working on are incorrect in any way. I challenge anybody to show that it would not be possible to do what we suggest in our amendment. I submit it is possible and that in fairness to that area, without giving it any special consideration, it would have been proper and correct to have allocated that number of seats to it.

The Coalition Parties who have done this bad deed, who have done this dirty work against the western areas, will live to regret the day. The community in the west will be fully aware of the attitude of the Coalition Government to them and especially in the work they have done since coming to power.

Mr. Tully

The people are aware of who drove them out of the west. It was Fianna Fáil who drove the people from the west.

An Ceann Comhairle

In accordance with the order of An Dáil I must put the questions necessary to bring the proceedings on Committee Stage to a conclusion.

Mr. Molloy

Am I not being allowed to put forward the arguments on behalf of the people of the west of Ireland? There are several Deputies on this side of the House who represent constituencies in the west anxious to speak on behalf of their people. Are they not being allowed to speak for the areas they represent? This is a disgrace and I wish to protest as loudly and strongly as possible. The parties forming the Government should resign over the manner in which they are letting down the west of Ireland. Deputy Gallagher from Mayo is anxious to speak and so are several other Deputies. They are anxious to highlight the discrimination against the people of the west. Deputy Calleary and others are also anxious to contribute.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am putting the question that the amendment be made.

Mr. Molloy

Ba mhaith liom a rá nach bhfuilimid sásta leis an gcaoi ina bhfuil obair an Tí á riaradh agat.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is merely conforming to an order of An Dáil which was passed today indicating that at 8.30 the questions necessary to bring the proceedings on Committee Stage to a conclusion would be put. I have put amendment No. 15 (a), that the amendment be made.

Mr. MacSharry

On a point of order——

An Ceann Comhairle

There can be no point of order when a matter is being put.

Amendment put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 72; Níl, 65.

Tá

• Barry, Peter.
• Barry, Richard.
• Begley, Michael.
• Belton, Luke.
• Belton, Paddy.
• Bermingham, Joseph.
• Bruton, John.
• Burke, Dick.
• Burke, Joan T.
• Burke, Liam.
• Byrne, Hugh.
• Clinton, Mark A.
• Cluskey, Frank.
• Collins, Edward.
• Conlan, John F.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Cooney, Patrick M.
• Corish, Brendan.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Coughlan, Stephen.
• Creed, Donal.
• Crotty, Kieran.
• Cruise-O'Brien, Conor.
• Desmond, Barry.
• Desmond, Eileen.
• Dockrell, Henry P.
• Dockrell, Maurice.
• Donegan, Patrick S.
• Donnellan, John.
• Dunne, Thomas.
• Enright, Thomas.
• Esmonde, John G.
• Finn, Martin.
• FitzGerald, Garret.
• 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.
• O'Connell, John.
• O'Donnell, Tom.
• O'Leary, Michael.
• O'Sullivan, John L.
• Pattison, Seamus.
• Reynolds, Patrick J.
• Ryan, John J.
• Ryan, Richie.
• Spring, Dan.
• Staunton, Myles.
• Taylor, Frank.
• Thornley, David.
• 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.
• Farrell, Joseph.
• Faulkner, Pádraig.
• Fitzgerald, Gene.
• Fitzpatrick, Tom (Dublin Central).
• Flanagan, Seán.
• French, Seán.
• Gallagher, Denis.
• Geoghegan, John.
• 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.
• Carter, Frank.
• Colley, George.
• Collins, Gerard.
• Connolly, Gerard.
• Crinion, Brendan.
• Crowley, Flor.
• Cunningham, Liam.
• Daly, Brendan.
• Davern, Noel.
• de Valera, Vivion.
• Dowling, Joe.
• Fahey, Jackie.
• Lynch, Jack.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• MacSharry, Ray.
• Meaney, Tom.
• Molloy, Robert.
• Moore, Seán.
• Murphy, Ciarán.
• Nolan, Thomas.
• 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.

Amendment declared carried.

Question proposed: "That sections 3, 4 and 5 stand part of the Bill and that the Schedule, as amended, and the Title be the Schedule and the Title to the Bill."

Mr. Molloy

May I inquire whether the procedure you are adopting, Sir, is in accordance with the terms of the motion as passed this evening? In other words, is it proper that these three sections, the Schedule and the Title should be put together?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is merely following the allocation of time motion passed here today. There is nothing more nor less than that involved.

Question put.

The Committee divided: Tá, 72; Níl, 65.

Tá

• Barry, Peter.
• Barry, Richard.
• Begley, Michael.
• Belton, Luke.
• Belton, Paddy.
• Bermingham, Joseph.
• Bruton, John.
• Burke, Dick.
• Burke, Joan T.
• Burke, Liam.
• Byrne, Hugh.
• Clinton, Mark A.
• Cluskey, Frank.
• Collins, Edward.
• Conlan, John F.
• Coogan, Fintan.
• Cooney, Patrick M.
• Corish, Brendan.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Coughlan, Stephen.
• Creed, Donal.
• Crotty, Kieran.
• Cruise-O'Brien, Conor.
• Desmond, Barry.
• Desmond, Eileen.
• Dockrell, Henry P.
• Dockrell, Maurice.
• O'Brien, Fergus.
• O'Connell, John.
• O'Donnell, Tom.
• O'Leary, Michael.
• O'Sullivan, John L.
• Pattison, Seamus.
• Reynolds, Patrick J.
• Ryan, John J.
• Ryan, Richie.
• Donegan, Patrick S.
• Donnellan, John.
• Dunne, Thomas.
• Enright, Thomas.
• Esmonde, John G.
• Finn, Martin.
• FitzGerald, Garret.
• 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, Henery.
• Kyne, Thomas A.
• L'Estrange, Gerald.
• Lynch, Gerard.
• McDonald, Charles B.
• McLaughlin, Joseph.
• McMahon, Larry.
• Malone, Patrick.
• Murphy, Michael P.
• Spring, Dan.
• Staunton, Myles.
• Taylor, Frank.
• Thornley, David.
• 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.
• Colley, George.
• Collins, Gerard.
• Connolly, Gerard.
• Crinion, Brendan.
• 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, 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.
• Moore, Seán.
• Meaney, Tom.
• Molloy, Robert.
• Murphy, Ciarán.
• Nolan, Thomas.
• 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.

Bill reported with amendment.