Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 10 Apr 1929

Vol. 12 No. 1

Public Business. - Constitution (Amendment No. 14) Bill, 1928—Second Stage.

Question proposed: "That the Bill be read a second time."

I think it might be as well if we had somebody to tell us what the Bill means and to justify it. We have hardly had time to read it. I think at this stage it would be appropriate for me to raise a matter. This is the Constitution (Amendment No. 14) Bill. I am curious to know what will be the position of some historian in the future when he sees Amendment No. 14 Bill to the Free State Constitution immediately following No. 11 Bill and, nearly twelve months after, Amendment No. 13 Bill. The sequence of these Bills is rather puzzling. Amendment No. 10 Bill was passed before Amendment No. 6, and immediately following Amendment No. 6 was Amendment No. 13. Following No. 13 was No. 8, following No. 8 was No. 9, and following No. 9 was No. 7. Then we had No. 11, which has had, I believe, a Second Reading, and now we are asked to deal with No. 14. I hope, for the sense of order in this House, that we shall be able to put these various Bills in some sort of sequence so that the future student of the legislation of this House will have some reason to respect it.

I think that the effect of this amendment is to delete from the Constitution a sentence which has been a source of considerable irritation and difficulty in the interpretation of its exact meaning. It was intended to mean that if a Bill was introduced in this House and was rejected by the Dáil, this House could not, in the same session of the Dáil, reintroduce it. When that was drafted some of us who were to some extent responsible were innocent enough to believe that a session would be a year. Nobody has ever discovered what is the end of a session, and a session certainly is much longer than a year. Consequently nobody knows whether that meant that this House could ever reintroduce a Bill which the Dáil had rejected. Therefore, when the matter came up at the last Joint Committee it became perfectly clear that the sentence served no purpose whatever except as a source of irritation, with a possible limitation on this House, and I am quite certain that the House will have no objection to its deletion.

Question put and agreed to.

Cathaoirleach

On what day will we take the Committee Stage?

This day fortnight.

On this question of later stages, surely that will depend, to a very great extent, on the progress of business in the next two days. We have several Bills which may all pass within the next two days, and then the business for next week will be in the air. I think we ought not to postpone too many of these Bills for a fortnight.

Cathaoirleach

Senators like to have time between the different stages of a Bill.

They do, and it is very desirable, but this is a one-clause Bill about which there is general agreement. I am only warning the House that it is not wise to follow the course that seems to have been indicated, on the suggestion of the Senator from the Curragh, that everything should be postponed for a fortnight.

I think that Senator Johnson is quite right. We have been in the habit of fixing Committee Stages for the next week, which I think is a great mistake. For really important Bills I think it should be a fortnight, but minor Bills could be taken the following week.

Cathaoirleach

That is my view. If a Bill is contentious, I think Senators should get time to consider it.

I made the suggestion because I thought we might not meet next week, although I am in favour of meeting next week. Otherwise I would certainly have suggested this day week.

I am sure Senator Johnson would not be very happy if he heard I was waylaid when going home because I allowed the Seanad to meet on the second day of Punchestown.

Committee Stage of the Bill ordered for Wednesday, 24th April.

Top
Share