Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 27 Jun 1928

Vol. 10 No. 19

PUBLIC BUSINESS. - DENTISTS BILL, 1927—REPORT STAGE.

CATHAOIRLEACH

The House will recollect this matter stood over to deal with one question. That was as to whether the House should delete the Third Schedule and accept the suggestion made by Senator Hooper that was embodied in his amendment, by which it would be open to unqualified persons at present to qualify under the provisions of the amendment, provided they satisfied the requirements of a certain examination. There was some question as to the nature of the examination and the body that would undertake it, and it was understood that the Minister and the Senator would confer together. I think the Minister's regrettable illness prevented that, and the position of affairs is that Senator Bigger has one proposal to make and the Government has another.

There are three proposals.

I have only seen the new clause, and, as I have not had time to examine it in all its bearings, I suggest that this matter should be postponed.

CATHAOIRLEACH

You mean the Government's new clause?

Yes. We only received it this morning, and I had not time to examine it.

The only point I make is that the point in the amendment standing in my name was spoken to a fortnight ago. There is no new point in the amendment. Every point in it was before the Seanad on the last day it was under discussion.

It does not go far enough. That does not mean that we would not have something to say to-day. It is not quite fair to the House that we should receive a new clause on the morning of the day we are to consider it.

CATHAOIRLEACH

It is not really a new clause. Remember what happened. The Minister fully explained the objections he had to Senator Hooper's amendment, and gave his reasons very fully, and there was nothing left by way of difference between the House and the Minister except this, as far as I understood the discussion, that the question stood over to see the exact nature of the examination and the body to carry it out as the Minister suggested.

there was a much more serious one, the age of the candidates and the length of service they should give before a certain date.

CATHAOIRLEACH

If these were all discussed why not settle them now?

We had no opportunity of discussing them.

If the Minister could see his way to leave consideration of the amendment over, I think it would be much better. There are other people to be considered, I presume. I am sure the profession at large would like to see the proposals in the amendment, and as it is not a matter of urgency, I think it might perhaps be more satisfactory to everyone if the Minister would agree to postpone it.

CATHAOIRLEACH

I think the Minister's purpose would be met if he gets his Bill through before the adjournment.

I believe the Dáil will adjourn about the second week in July, and this Bill will be amended. Consequently there will be further delay in the Dáil in the event of a dispute between the two Houses. If there were serious differences the Houses would need to be in session together in order to get the matter settled. A fortnight ago we were given an amendment by Senator Hooper. It was a new amendment. We had passed from the clause to which it was relevant, but the Senator got leave to go back on it. The House granted him that indulgence and we discussed every single point that is now in my amendment. If the Senator was prepared to move his amendment a fortnight ago, and was prepared to argue on it, it is very easy to get the points of difference between my amendment and his, and very easy for the House to make up its mind now.

I should have no grievance at all if the matter was discussed now. As the Minister stated, I raised all the points I had on the last day, and he also discussed them. But if it is not a matter of serious inconvenience, I think it would be more satisfactory to postpone it. It is no inconvenience to me personally, but if there is time to postpone it, it would be more satisfactory.

Might I suggest to the Seanad that we should go so far as to find what are the points of difference between my amendment and the amendments that are down?

Here is a page of printed matter which was sent to Senators this morning, dealing with a matter of vital importance to men now earning their living in a certain practice. If this matter is to be discussed now, I would want to move at least four amendments to separate sections, and I think, even then, I would not have exhausted the points to which I take objection.

CATHAOIRLEACH

This is a matter entirely for the House to decide. Personally I always like to convenience Senators, but at the same time it is my duty to try to convenience the Minister. Between the two, I should think that possibly we might have at least a discussion on this matter to-day, but if a discussion is not going to lead to any solution to-day, I think we had better leave it over until the next day.

I am offering no objection to completing this stage of the Bill if it is discussed this day week.

We are on the Report Stage already.

Is there any business for to-morrow?

CATHAOIRLEACH

I do not see any. I thought we would have the Afforestation Bill, but it is not ready. I think the Minister, with his usual courtesy, would probably consent, for the convenience of Senators, to let this stand over until Wednesday, as it would help him to shorten discussion on that day. It would be no harm if Senator Dowdall produced his thunderbolt now and let the Minister see it between this and next Wednesday.

I will give the Minister the points in writing this evening.

Report Stage deferred.

Top
Share