Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 10 May 1977

Vol. 299 No. 4

Business of Dáil.

A Cheann Comhairle; I would like to draw your attention to the fact that I submitted this morning two drafts of Private Notice Questions which I sought to raise today and I received a message from your office subsequently that these were not in order. I am not challenging your ruling in any sense that it is not properly founded, but the questions dealt with an advertisement which appeared in last Sunday's and yesterday evening's newspapers on behalf of the Minister for Labour with the Minister's photograph and a facsimile of his signature in which he promised and I quote: "I will pay you £20 per week for every extra person you employ". I ask the Taoiseach if he authorised or approved the insertion of that advertisement. The advertisement purported to state that the Minister personally would pay a specific sum of money tax free to employers who would give work to unemployed persons and I asked if he would indicate the cost of this advertisement. I also intended to ask the Taoiseach whether it was now Government policy to insert in newspapers at public expense advertisements on behalf of Departments in the personalised form in which this advertisement appeared. You, Sir, ruled the matter out of order on the grounds, apparently that it was not of urgent public importance. I think it was of public importance in so far as these advertisements have to be paid for by public funds and urgent in so far as there is not only a danger, but, having regard to recent behaviour of members of the Government, an imminent danger that similar advertisements will appear tomorrow, on Thursday, Friday, Saturday and even next Sunday. That is why I raised it. It was an abuse of ministerial power, a gross misuse of Government funds and one that ought not to be permitted to continue.

Order of Business. An Taoiseach.

Has the Chair no comment to make on it?

No, except that my ruling stands. I have indicated to Deputy Lynch, the Leader of the Opposition, why his question was not deemed in order. Clearly the urgency requirement of the Standing Order was not met in this case.

Even if the questioner had not been given an assurance that no such advertisement will appear pending the taking of such a question in the ordinary way on the Order Paper?

(Interruptions.)

If this assurance has not been given, on what basis can the Chair say that this is not an urgent matter?

That is a matter for the Chair who decides these matters in accordance with long-standing precedent and practice in this House.

There is no precedent for this.

The precedent is a bad precedent. It ought not to be observed.

This question can go down for ordinary notice in the ordinary way.

In the meantime, we are going to have a plethora of Ministers' promises to pay money to buy votes.

(Interruptions.)
Top
Share