It is proposed to take No. 9 (resumed). By agreement, there will be no interruption for Private Members' Business.
Order of Business.
I understand that there is no agreement about there being no interruption in the Order of Business for Private Members' time. We had put forward as the motion for debate in Private Members' time this week the motion on the cattle industry, that is, motion No. 26. However, it was indicated to us last Friday that because six months had not elapsed since a similar motion was discussed in the House, it would not be in order. On being told that, I asked Deputy Lalor, the Chief Whip, to indicate to the Government Chief Whip that we would then require to have the motion on the textile trade, that is, motion No. 31, taken. I understand there were some difficulties in communication last Friday, so I would ask the Taoiseach if he would reconsider the matter in this light.
Could I be allowed to explain the sequence of events as seen from my side? My recollection is that the order of events was the reverse of what Deputy Lynch has explained. First of all, the Opposition said they would want a motion on the textile industry, but they then indicated some time during Friday that, after all, it did not suit them and that they would look for some other motion, but up to the time when I left here I had not yet heard from him. My secretary then heard that they wanted the motion on the cattle industry but that was subsequently ruled out of order. In the last conversation I had with either of the Opposition whips the impression I got was that if they could not find a suitable motion it would lapse today and that the budget debate would not be interrupted. It was for that reason that I inserted in the Order of Business the phrase "by agreement". I am sorry if there is in fact no agreement, but that is the sequence of events last Friday as I recall it.
I do not intend having a wrangle about this, but the Parliamentary Secretary's recollection is not quite correct. Sometime on Friday I conveyed that it was the motion on cattle we were taking. I had a phone call back from the Parliamentary Secretary's private secretary telling me he understood from the Ceann Comhairle's office that it could not be taken because we had discussed it at the end of January, and I was to check and communicate with him again as to our alternative. I was engaged in the House speaking and could not check until after 5 o'clock. I rang the Parliamentary Secretary's office at 20 minutes past five in the House and could get no reply; I rang his office in Government Buildings at 25 past five, but again there was no answer from the Parliamentary Secretary's office either on the private extension or on the private line. I took no action yesterday but I was shocked that Private Members' time was announced as being given up by agreement. There was never any indication given by me that we would give it up by agreement.
I accept as a fact that there is no agreement on this matter, but I must point out that, although I appreciate the difficulties the Opposition may be in if their spokesman is not there to take the motion they want or whatever the reason may be, it is not time enough for a Minister and, above all, for the Department, to be told at 25 past five or thereabouts on a Friday evening that that motion will be required on Tuesday evening. While in the ordinary way we would try to accommodate the Opposition, and frequently have done so, I could not commit the Government to taking Private Members' Business with that kind of short notice when a Minister is told at roughly the time he is preparing to go home for the weekend that he will be needed in the Dáil at 6 o'clock on the following Tuesday.
May I help to resolve the question by suggesting that we take the last motion on the Order Paper in the name of Deputy Dowling, motion No. 33. If the Taoiseach and Parliamentary Secretary agree to that we could take it this evening.
As the Deputy knows, that motion was put in only last night and appears in print only this morning.
We put it in for a lot of reasons.
The Leader of the Opposition is well aware that there is a procedure under Standing Orders that a motion must have at least four days' notice.
I know that, but since the Taoiseach is not prepared to yield to that request, I would like to make formal application to you, Sir, to discuss this motion under Standing Order No. 30 between 9.30 and 10.30 tonight.
I am grateful for having had notice of this matter. It has been considered and I am to say that the matter has not the requisite degree of urgency to qualify under Standing Order No. 30, but the Deputy has other means of pursuing the matter.
May I address a few remarks to you on that decision? Standing Order No. 30 reads as follows——
I am bound to say that the Deputy may not argue with the Chair on this matter.
This motion has the ingredients of urgency and public interest required under Standing Order No. 30. I am surprised that the Ceann Comhairle has ruled against the application to have this matter discussed under that Standing Order.
It is on the front page of every newspaper. Surely we should be allowed to discuss it here.
I am surprised that you refused to accept the motion, but in that event may I ask the Taoiseach if he will provide Government time today to discuss this motion or will he do it tomorrow? Will the Taoiseach give a reason? We shall get it on the Order Paper, Sir.
No.