Business of the Seanad.

Cathaoirleach

I think it is the duty of the Chair to inform the House of the very difficult situation in which it is placed regarding the Control of Manufactures Bill. This Bill received a Second Reading in this House on Friday last, and to the Committee Stage, which is down for to-day, no less than 73 amendments have been offered. If we do not intend to pass the Bill through all its stages before we adjourn for the summer, then there seems to me to be no point whatever in taking the Committee Stage until the autumn. There is no suggestion in any quarter that the Seanad is obstructing the Government in regard to the Bill. The fact is that the Bill is of such importance that it ought to have been received here much earlier if it was seriously intended that we should pass it before the recess. If we decide to pass it through all its stages before we adjourn, the situation created will be unprecedented. We can hardly finish the Committee Stage before to-morrow or Saturday, and it would, in my opinion, be an abuse of procedure to take the Report Stage without a reasonable interval, so that the position may be further examined in the light of the amendments that will have been inserted in Committee.

The earliest suitable date for the Report Stage would be next Wednesday, August 3rd, which is the Wednesday in Horse Show Week, and if we passed the Fifth Stage also on that day, the necessary certificate would be ready for transmission to the Dáil on the following day. The Dáil would be summoned specially to consider our amendments on, say, Tuesday, August 9th, and it is almost certain that they would not agree to all of them. It would, accordingly, be necessary for me to summon the Seanad, for, say, Wednesday, August 17th, to consider the position further on the Dáil Message. If there were no agreement, the result would be a deadlock; but if a joint conference were called for, it would be necessary for the Seanad to meet again to agree to such conference and they would also have to meet subsequently, say, on August 24th, to ratify any agreement arrived at.

It may be that these dates may be altered so as to shorten the various periods, but I do not think very much can be done in that way. Obviously, very grave inconvenience will result, not only to ourselves, but to the Dáil. And I would like to refer particularly to the ordinary staff of the Oireachtas (I do not, of course, mean our own Clerk and Assistant-Clerk) who have been working very long hours for many weeks and who cannot begin their holidays until both Houses rise for the recess. The views of the Government in this matter are known, and I would now like to hear the views of representatives of other groups in the light of what I have said. The Chair is always strictly impartial in these matters, but I feel it to be my duty to make the position clear.

Mr. Douglas

I did not know that this statement was going to be made, and I cannot speak for anybody but myself. I have been interested a good deal in this Bill and my own view is that it is the kind of Bill which requires careful consideration by this House. I believe that the Committee Stage will disclose a great many points requiring further consideration by the Minister and his Department. But for the fact that the Government expressed the view that there might be prevention of a certain amount of industry if the Bill were postponed, I would be in favour of postponing the consideration of it. My own view is that the House, having got so far, should take up the Committee Stage. If, on the Committee Stage, there is found to be no likelihood of any kind of agreement on what we might regard as the essential portions of the Bill, I can see no object in keeping the staff and carrying on. After that, it would seem to be largely a matter for the Government.

Minister for Posts and Telegraphs (Mr. Connolly)

I fully appreciate the difficulty of this Bill. I should like to make clear, however, that the Bill could not have come to this House earlier. The general principles of the Bill were under consideration almost from the earliest stages of the activities of the Executive Council. It was a very difficult Bill and all aspects of it had to be considered at great length. Various drafts of the Bill came before us in the Executive Council and almost every clause of it was examined in detail and referred back. All sorts of view-points were put forward and we tried, so far as was humanly possible, to make the Bill conform to our ideas as regards industrial development in the country.

I explained that here last week, when a motion that this Bill should be deferred until the Autumn Session was voted on. The proposal for a postponement of the Bill was then defeated. It may be argued that there was a comparatively small House present, but it was a House in session in continuity, and the Bill then before the House was on the Order Paper from the previous Wednesday. Since last Monday various amendments came in. Acting in perfect good faith, and assuming that the Bill was going to be completed before this Session was over, I kept my staffs in considering the amendments that were put up. As I explained yesterday those that arrived late for the Committee Stage might obviously be considered with Report Stage amendments.

The main issue is, what effect is postponement going to have on the provision of employment, the development of industry and the establishment of manufactures in the country in the meantime? There is no doubt about it, that manufacturers, both at home and on the other side, are waiting to see exactly the terms in which this Bill will emerge from the Oireachtas. Many manufacturers on this side, who are in negotiation with manufacturers on the other side, say that joint operations may be adjusted to meet the terms of this Bill. We have before us at present quite a number of big projects which will be entirely held up if the Bill is postponed until the autumn. Naturally no firm is going to undertake the establishment of anything on an industrial basis until it knows where it is on such a measure as this. We will also be held up in the Department, because our hands will be tied by not knowing exactly in what condition this Bill will emerge from the Oireachtas. Generally speaking it may be taken, if this Bill is adjourned for the ten weeks during which the Oireachtas is not sitting, that there will be a considerable hold-up in potential employment and in potential industrial development. That is all I have to say on the matter. I have stressed the necessity and the urgency of having the Bill passed, even if amended. The amendments have been considered carefully. We are desirous, if possible, of meeting the views expressed in the amendments. Where it is thought they will improve the Bill they have been considered sympathetically and, in some cases, accepted. In other cases they have been accepted conditional on the amendments being put into proper form. As to other amendments which we were not prepared to accept the refusal is based on our idea that they cut across the principles and the policy embodied in the Bill itself. I feel that the Government is at the mercy of this House, being in the paradoxical position of being a minority Party in it. I submit that this Bill is one the House ought to put through if it is humanly possible.

Mr. Counihan

In view of your statement, Sir, and what the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs has said, could not a compromise be arrived at by which the House could take the Committee Stage of the Bill to-day and adjourn further consideration of it for a month or five weeks? Would that suggestion meet with the Minister's approval?

Cathaoirleach

That will arise on the Committee Stage. I have tried to get the feeling of the House. Senator Douglas, speaking individually, has not stated how far taking the Committee Stage now would ease the position. Apparently he has in mind a certain course of action which he would like to pursue.

Mr. Douglas

What was in my mind was that if we knew what the Bill would be like at the end of the Committee Stage, we would know whether it was possible to go on with it or not.

Cathaoirleach

That is the trouble.

Mr. Jameson

I think the Seanad should consider the concluding words of the Minister. He stated that the Government were in a minority in this House and therefore were in a difficult position in regard to the Bill. Speaking on my own behalf, as well as on behalf of the Seanad, I can assure the Minister that as regards this Bill it is not a question of a majority or a minority. All of us are doing our level best to see what is the wisest course with regard to the Bill, honestly believing that we are doing what is right if we can meet the Government. Undoubtedly the Minister puts the case further, that the Bill was given to us at a very bad time and that it is an extremely difficult one to deal with. The Minister admitted that it was a difficult Bill, and pointed out how long the Government took to consider it and to get it into its present shape. I can assure him that some of us who sat down after the last meeting of the Seanad spent hours trying to prepare amendments to modify the Bill in such a way that it could be worked. I think the Minister will admit that our amendments have a definite policy behind them, and that they are not drafted for the purpose of upsetting the Bill. Some Senators have not seen the amendments yet and others probably only got them this morning. I believe we would be doing what is wrong if we hurried this Bill. That is my considered opinion.

The only other thing that has been mentioned by the Minister was that there were proposals about business, and that if negotiations were got through between now and October some employment would be provided in the Free State. No one in the House except the Minister is able to give any reason against giving further time to this Bill. The Minister alone can say whether a good deal of employment is awaiting a decision on the Bill and what is the right thing to do. That makes it very difficult for the Seanad to decide because we may take it for granted that his knowledge is such that he could not communicate it to the House. I do not see what the House can do now except let the Bill go to the Committee Stage and then remembering what you, Sir, have told us, we can consider the question again. I do not see that the Seanad can do anything else at present.

Mr. Staines

My objection to the Bill is that it places enormous power in the hands of a Minister. I want it to be distinctly understood that my objection is not to the present Minister or to the present Ministry. The objection holds to any Minister or to any Ministry. It leaves the Government of the day open to the charge of favouritism and it leaves it open to a thing that I detest, political pressure. Once people get that idea into their minds public confidence is lost. No matter what Government is in power they must have public confidence. I strongly object to any interference with the ordinary flow of trade and commerce. It is a bad thing for any Government to interfere with either unnecessarily. The Minister stated that unemployment would be created if this Bill was not passed. My answer to that is this, if a licence is wanted by a particular firm at present, the Government can inform them that when the Bill is passed a licence will be granted. On the other hand, if the Bill is not passed there is no harm done because things remain as they are.

Cathaoirleach

It seems to me that the best course is to await developments until we come to the Committee Stage.

Mr. Guinness

I merely wish to say one thing, and that is that if there is fear of a breakdown on this Bill it seems to me that there is much greater danger of breakdown if we rush the Bill now than if we postpone consideration. I admit that I voted with the Government the other day, that is to say, I was against postponing it to the Autumn, but after hearing what the Cathaoirleach has told us it seems to me that there is an undoubted possibility of a breakdown. I think that in the interests of employment which the Minister and everybody is so anxious to bring about, it would be more likely that we would have a full consideration of all the points at issue—and there are 73 amendments—and that the matter would be dealt with more adequately if the Committee Stage were postponed.

Mr. Connolly

I should like before we finally leave the issue to point out that in my few years' experience here we have often, in fact invariably, got Bills for the Committee Stage on the Wednesday succeeding the week of Second Reading. There were many amendments to these Bills and they were taken in the normal course of events on the Wednesday or Thursday of the week following the Second Stage. I personally have a great deal of experience of sitting up at night to try to understand and digest amendments that were to come up for the Seanad on the Wednesday following the Second Stage. I think it is at least establishing a new precedent if the ordinary Committee Stage is not to go through on the week following the Second Stage. As regards what Senator Staines has mentioned about political pressure and public confidence, I dealt with that last week. There are some things which are left to the discretion of the Minister. We feel that a Minister responsible to the Executive, which is in turn responsible to the Oireachtas, is likely to be more clear of political pressure or nepotism than a Commission of three of four.

Cathaoirleach

We will take the question of proceeding with the Committee Stage when it is reached on the Order Paper.

Mr. O'Hanlon

I wonder would you leave it to the House to decide now, Sir, whether we are to proceed with the Committee Stage of the Bill or not?

Cathaoirleach

When the Committee Stage arises the Senator can speak on that matter, but not now.

Seanad Éireann debate - Thursday, 28 Jul 1932