Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 17 Jun 1982

Vol. 336 No. 3

Fuels (Control of Supplies) Bill, 1982: Order for Second Stage.

Bill entitled an Act to amend the Fuels (Control of Supplies) Act, 1971.

I move: "That the Second Stage be ordered for Tuesday, 22 June 1982."

I know it is not conventional——

The sniper.

——to seek to make speeches on this Stage of a Bill, but technically there is a motion to fix the date for Second Reading. I consider that Tuesday next would be premature for the taking of the Second Stage since a cursory reading of the Bill does not suggest that it is apt to do what the accompanying explanatory memorandum indicates.

The Deputy may not discuss the Bill now. All he may do is to agree or disagree with the setting of the date for the Second Stage.

I simply wish to say that this very novel dimension of administration — referred to in the explanatory memorandum as "mandatory disposals", is polite language for forcing someone to buy something he does not want and that is what is purported to be enacted by means of this Bill. Therefore, the Government should look at the Bill again, and ask themselves whether it is legal to attempt such an operation, and whether the Bill as drafted will enable the proposed operation to be undertaken even if it is found to be legal.

Surely this is a matter for the Second Reading.

We know what are the political realities of the House. I am only trying to be helpful. If the Government go ahead with this Bill they may be making a serious mistake. They do not seem to have considered the enormity of what they are trying to do.

The Deputy can say all this on Second Stage.

As I understand the point being made by Deputy Kelly, it would be premature to take this Bill on Tuesday next and, consequently, it should be deferred. He is entitled to make that point.

He did not explain it that way.

That was how it came through to me.

But not to me.

Subject to agreement with the Whips, the Second Stage will be taken on Tuesday next, 22 June, 1982.

The Deputy could have said that he did not agree with the Bill.

There will not be the agreement to which the Minister refers.

Question put and agreed to.
Top
Share