Skip to main content
Normal View

Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 9 Apr 1930

Vol. 13 No. 17

Illegitimate Children (Affiliation Orders) Bill, 1929.—Report Stage.

Cathaoirleach

Before taking the business on the Order Paper, I desire to say that there are very strong reasons why the Report Stage of the Illegitimate Children (Affiliation Orders) Bill, 1929 (item 4 on the Order Paper) should not be considered to-day but should be postponed. Section 3 of the Bill (which deals with the crucial question of in camera) has been carefully examined from the legal point of view by the Minister, Senator Brown and others, and it is common ground that the legal position needs to be much more carefully explored and that, if the principle of holding the proceedings in camera is to be effective, a new section or sections will have to be drafted. The matter is still under consideration, and, as there is no particular hurry about the Bill, the best thing to do will be for the House to postpone the Report Stage until a later date—say the first meeting after the Easter Recess.

In support of what the Cathaoirleach has said, I desire to say that the position is this: when the Bill left the Dáil there was a provision in it that applications under it should be heard in camera, and giving power for limited publication. The latter provision was struck out in this House on the motion of Senator O'Farrell. As the Bill stands at present you simply have the declaration that these applications are to be heard in camera, but there is nothing in it to prevent publication. Publication of the proceedings in the District Court would, therefore, not be punishable as contempt of court. As the Bill stands there is no penalty clause in it. Personally I very much object to hearings in camera. At the same time, I am very anxious that no Bill should leave this House without being an effective Bill. If the Bill is to provide for hearings in camera, then I think we should take the necessary steps to see that it be effective.

I agree with the course outlined by the Cathaoirleach and Senator Brown. This is a question that bristles with difficulties. On the last occasion the Minister for Justice pointed out some of the difficulties. I agree that the matters involved should be carefully considered so that the House may produce an effective Bill.

I think that if the House were prepared to recommit the Bill it would be much more satisfactory. The Bill, I think, requires a good deal of discussion on small details. Such discussion is strictly not in order on Report. I think that substantial agreement could be reached, and what is mainly required achieved, if the Bill could be taken again in Committee.

I agree that it is better to postpone consideration of the Bill until an opportunity is afforded for considering all the points involved relating to in camera hearings. There is an amendment on the Order Paper which, if agreed to, would probably set the matter right.

Cathaoirleach

The acceptance of that amendment would not provide a penalty, and that is the great trouble.

In view of what has been stated, I agree that it is better to leave over consideration of the Bill until the House meets after the Easter Recess.

Question—"That the Report Stage of the Bill be adjourned"—put and agreed to.
Top
Share