Our Party Whip has reported to me that the House will sit at normal time tomorrow or is there another proposition from the Government?
Business of Dáil.
It is intended to sit at the normal time tomorrow but to conclude at 10.30 p.m. and to sit on Friday from 10.30 a.m. to 5 p.m. As the Leader of the Opposition is aware, the business ordered for yesterday took longer than anticipated and the programme for the rest of the week will, I think, require longer sittings to conclude it.
While we on this side of the House are anxious to facilitate the Government in completing the business of the House in due time and are willing for that reason to sit longer and later, would the Taoiseach agree that this is an unprecedented procedure, that on the morning of the second day sitting in a week the Government decide to sit longer? Will he agree with me that on previous occasions, when it was desired to sit longer, the agreement of the Opposition was sought, and usually given, to take effect the following week? Will he agree with me that if it is decided to proceed with the longer hours of sitting tomorrow and to sit on Friday it will have taken many Deputies by surprise, Deputies who for one reason or another and for the good reason that they did not anticipate a long sitting tomorrow and a sitting on Friday, will have made other arrangements?
As the Deputy is aware, the business ordered yesterday, which was regarded by both sides as non-contentious, has been rather protracted. If it is possible to conclude the business that is ordered for the rest of the week by 5 p.m. tomorrow well and good. If not, perhaps we could have a discussion among the Whips and see what alternative arrangements can be made.
I would like the Taoiseach to consider this position seriously. First of all, while the business was non-contentious yesterday, it concerned the increase of capital to be borrowed by the ESB by some £350 million. Because the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach thought that this ought to have been finished within a certain time I suggest that, in a fit of pique, he suggested to the Taoiseach: "We will teach those fellows on the other side a lesson and sit longer and later". There is a certain cut and thrust about politics but there is a certain degree of accommodation between the Government and Opposition. If that kind of accommodation and consultation are not proceeded with then the Opposition, I would remind the Taoiseach, can have the last say in the end as to how long we may take on any particular piece of legislation.
(Interruptions.)
Order, please.
I want the Deputy to understand that there is no attempt by the Government to order business in a way that in any way discommodes the Opposition but, as I understand it, yesterday, by agreement, because so many Deputies on both sides of the House were at county council meetings, it was decided to put in this business which was regarded as non-contentious. I think the Deputy will appreciate that 14 speakers from the Opposition on a measure of this sort was a considerable number.
On an increase of £350 million?
If the Deputy believes that further time is required there is no reason why we cannot afford it.
We will sit long and late. I am talking about the unprecedented action of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Taoiseach suggesting to the Taoiseach that in order to teach the Opposition a lesson "we sit long hours tomorrow and again on Friday" without any notice whatever to the Opposition. I want to say again we are quite prepared to sit long and late to accommodate the Government. I put stress on the word "accommodate" because it can apply both ways. I just want to make that point.
May I say a few words on this matter? In two respects this week—and I claim no particular credit for it—the Opposition have been accommodated and willingly accommodated by the Government. The first respect was in the switching of the votes on the two Estimates which concluded last week from last night until tonight, at their request. The second respect was that the Agriculture Bill, which we would have ordered yesterday and might have hoped to reach yesterday, was not ordered yesterday in order to facilitate the Opposition spokesman.
That is common practice.
Of course it is, but I am sorry that the Leader of the Opposition would create the impression that there was suddenly an end to accommodation. In the discussions which I had with the Opposition Whip last week in regard to the business yesterday, while the Opposition Whip, in fairness to him, said he did not think the ESB Bill would go through quite on the nod, the impression I was left with from our conversation was that he would get two if not three of the Bills ordered yesterday. In the end what happened was that from this side of the House the Minister spoke and also a single other Deputy who had a particular interest in the ESB because he works in it, and from the other side 14 speakers spoke on the trot, and it is not finished yet.
Deputies
Why not?
While it is perfectly clear that the amount of money involved is large, the principle of extending the borrowing power is a simple one. The Opposition spokesman made an adequate speech and to prolong the debate for six and a half hours was out of all measure. It leaves the Government, pushing up towards the end of July with a Finance Bill to be dealt with, with no alternative but to look for extra time. It is true that no notice was given last week of these proposed late sittings, but then we did not realise last week that we would have spent the whole of Tuesday not even completing the Second Stage of what was supposed to be a non-controversial Bill.
May we pass on to the next business? Prosecution of Offences Bill, 1974.
And this is a measure of our accommodation. This has been agreed at the request of the Government.