The question is: "That the Emergency Powers Bill, 1939, be now read a Second Time."
Emergency Powers Bill, 1939—Second Stage.
Mr. Hayes
Before the Taoiseach speaks, Sir, I should like to point out that we have not yet got copies of the proposed amendments.
I understand that they are being typed at the moment.
Mr. Hayes
I am referring to the amendments inserted by the Dáil.
Yes, they are being typed and will be circulated.
I think members of the Seanad will understand that we are asking here for very exceptional powers—powers that no democratic Executive would think of asking for except in an emergency such as we contemplate at the moment. In the Dáil remarks were made somewhat to the effect that we were ending the Constitution, and so on, by what we were doing, and I tried to point out that, as a matter of fact, we were implementing the Constitution, except in one particular regard, which I mentioned here to-day, and that is by defining a time of war in, perhaps, a wider sense than some legal men might consider reasonable or correct. In the Constitution, provision is made for annulment of the protective powers for the individual and so on, in a time of emergency or the emergency of war; and although we ourselves are not dragged, or hope we will not be dragged, into this war, I think I mentioned, when Senator Baxter found fault with the phrase "if at all possible" that what I meant was that, in our own interests, we might have to defend ourselves and might have to abandon our neutrality in order to defend our own interests: that it was not a question of our own will in the matter, but that a situation might arise in which we would have to defend our own and national interests. That is one case in which we might have to pass from the position of neutrality, which we hope to maintain, into active belligerency, but even as a neutral State we shall still need these powers to protect the State.
In the Dáil there was a great deal of criticism as to whether the Executive needed these powers in the very wide form in which they are proposed to be given here. This measure is really proposed as a result of the deliberations of a committee that has been sitting for a considerable time. As you all know, the possibility of war and a situation such as now exists could have been envisaged by anybody, and naturally, of course, it was envisaged by us, for a considerable time past, as being possible. We set up a committee to examine the whole question and to inquire into the matter of what powers might be necessary to protect the interests of the State if this particular type of emergency arose, and the powers that were set down there in a general form were all felt to be necessary. They were not set down for political reasons by members of the Government, for example, regarding themselves as politicians or as members of a political Party. In the first instance, they were set down by officers of the State who have no political affiliations and who were only considering the possibilities as to the various questions that might arise in a time of war.
Undoubtedly, these powers are very wide, and there is not the slightest doubt that they could be abused by an unscrupulous Executive that tried to take advantage of the particular circumstances to put themselves in a position in which they would be able to ignore the ordinary methods of democratic control. I think it is not necessary to assure the Seanad that there is no such intention whatever on the part of the present Government. I think we have been sufficiently long in office, and I think our attitude towards democratic control is sufficiently known, to dispel any suspicions of that sort. If the Seanad were to approach this matter from the point of view of suspicion of the Government and try to limit the powers of the Government to do wrong, they might very well succeed in preventing the Government, not alone from doing wrong, but from doing right and from doing their duty towards the State.
I began to fear, at the end of the discussion in the Dáil, that, in giving way and making changes, in order to meet suspicions such as were evidenced by the remarks made from the Opposition Benches, we might very well reach a position in which the purposes for which this Bill was originally designed might not be met at all and that we might find ourselves, in a case of necessity, in such a position that we would not be able to do the work that a Government has to do in times like this—work that the Constitution itself recognised has to be done by a Government. Practically every democratic Constitution has a clause for its own abrogation in the case of an emergency of war or a warlike situation.
I ask the Seanad, then, to please remember these broader considerations. I think there is no way in which, by trying to impose all such limitations as were suggested in the Dáil, you could actually limit the power to do wrong, and the variety of circumstances that exist and might arise is such that you would have to have a very extensive code of regulations to specify all the things that you wanted not to be done and a lot of other things that you wanted to have done. However, I think that the Seanad would have the same misgivings as were expressed by members of the Dáil, and I think that the amendments we have accepted in the Dáil— which, I understand, you have not yet got, but which will be circulated to you —should relieve considerably any uneasiness with which members of the Seanad may face the giving of these very wide and extensive powers that are suggested should be given to the Executive in this Bill.
The Bill is really, in the main, a Committee Stage Bill, and in Committee you will have an opportunity of dealing with the various clauses, and I do not think it is necessary to go over them in detail in a Second Reading speech. You will notice that there are general powers given and that then, as it were, specific instances are set forth. As a matter of fact, these specific instances need not be given at all. The wide powers that are sought for will probably be sufficient to cover them all, but the fact that these instances were specified and mentioned gave rise to discussion in the Dáil. I think, however, that the general powers which are sought would cover them all and that they need not have been mentioned. We thought, however, that it might be necessary to indicate the type of circumstance that might arise or the type of procedure that might have to be adopted and we thought it was well to give these particular instances. Again, however, I say that they are only particular instances and that they are covered, in the main, by the more general clauses in the Bill. We could have taken these general clauses and not have given these particular instances at all, but we felt that the Bill would be a more educative Bill, so to speak, by having all these particular instances set forth.
I do not think I need say more except to recommend the Bill to the Seanad and to ask you, if possible, to pass it without amendment, because if there is any considerable amendment of it, or indeed any amendment of it, we shall have to go back to the Dáil with it. I do not say that if you think it should be amended in any important respect, you should simply, because of the question of time, refrain from putting forward such amendment, but I would ask the Seanad to bear in mind that if any amendments are passed here, their adoption will necessitate a further meeting of the Dáil and will prolong the sittings very much more.
Before I sit down there is a matter which I should like to communicate to the Seanad. It was my intention to mention it in the Dáil but, unfortunately, the Dáil ended rather suddenly and when I got there it had finished its sitting. On Thursday last the German Minister called on me to find out what was likely to be the attitude of the Government in the event of a European War. I referred him to a statement which I had made back in February indicating what the aim of Government policy was. The Minister said that the German attitude towards our country in case of war would be peaceful and that it would respect our neutrality. I replied that, as far as we were concerned, we wished to be at peace with Germany as well as with other States. An agreed communiqué was to be issued to the Press, and I think that communiqué has been issued to the Press now. I just want to explain that I intended to make the statement I have just made now in the Dáil and as it may appear in the announcement in the Press that I had made that statement in the Dáil, members of the Oireachtas might be puzzled. As I say I had intended to make it to the Dáil had the House not adjourned before the time I anticipated. I want to make it clear that the fault is mine and not the fault of the newspapers. It was agreed that this communiqué should be issued to the Press. I do not think there is anything further I have to say.
On a point of procedure, is it desired that there should be no comment here on the statement the Taoiseach has just made?
I should like that to be so. I felt it was only right when the House was sitting that I should make that communication to it. The communiqué will appear in the Press to-morrow morning and I thought it right that the members of the House should know its contents beforehand. I do ask that it should not be commented on at this stage.
The Taoiseach says there was an agreed statement and that it has been communicated to the Press. Does he mean that the Government here has communicated it to the Press, that it was not a bilateral communication?
As the Senator will understand, in cases like that, to prevent the possibility of conflicting statements being made on a matter of importance, it is arranged that there is to be an agreed statement to be made to the Press. That is the statement that has been published. I need not read it here to you now.
My point is that the Taoiseach used the passive voice—"It has been". I thought there was a possibility that the other party had communicated it.
We gave it, but the intention was that it was to be published in both places simultaneously. I asked if there was any statement to be made that it would be published simultaneously.
The Taoiseach's wishes in this matter will be respected by the Seanad.
I was quite clear that the Taoiseach was merely communicating the matter to the members of the Oireachtas simply because he desired that they would know of the matter before it appeared in the Press. It is quite clearly a matter that cannot be discussed now. With regard to the Bill itself, at this hour of the morning one can be brief. There can be no doubt as to the existence of an emergency and there can be no doubt as to the necessity of the Government here, like Governments in other places, getting special powers. The question is whether the powers should be oppressive to the ordinary citizen.
It is rather a question of how the powers are going to be administered rather than one of the precise provisions that are contained in the Bill. As the Taoiseach has said, the necessity has not been a sudden one. There has been a considerable amount of time to consider what should be put into the Bill but I think it is characteristic of the Civil Service that they want to provide for every possible emergency. It is interesting, for example, to note that the Bill, although published after the British Bill, did not contain certain safeguards for the ordinary citizen which were inserted in the British Act, such, for example, as the amendment which has now been accepted in the Dáil and which was suggested to the Taoiseach yesterday, making it clear that this Bill will not be used for the purpose of imposing either general military service or industrial conscription.
The Bill as we have it now, or rather as we hope to have it in a few minutes when we get the amendments from the Dáil, is a more acceptable measure than the Bill that was presented to the Dáil. I think the discussion in the Dáil, although it was a long one, in one sense was a much more desirable discussion and much more helpful to the Government, and to the people generally, than any discussion could have been under a time table or what is classed a guillotine motion. It is satisfactory, for example, that the Bill does now contain, as a result of the discussion in the Dáil, a proviso that it cannot be used to impose conscription or used for the abrogation of ordinary labour conditions or rights. Apart from the general difficulty that has been mentioned, it is quite clear, from all experience, that you might have regulation and perhaps very stringent regulation with regard to food supplies and hoarding. In time of war and stress, when there is a great deal of talk about sacrifice, I think it is the business of the Government, and that it is the unanimous desire of each House of the Oireachtas, that that sacrifice should be as evenly distributed as it can possibly be.
It is not, of course, possible to put a person with a small amount of money on the same footing as a person with a great deal more money but, at the same time, with regard to essential services and food, it is right to see that the burdens or the privations resulting from a war situation do not fall more harshly upon the poor and upon persons with lower incomes and lower wages, than upon more fortunately placed citizens. For that reason some parts of this measure, at any rate, are very necessary.
There are a good many points which can be raised in Committee, the question of censorship for example. It seems to me that very much will depend upon the type of person appointed to discharge that particular duty. In the administration of the Bill, and in the general conduct of its provisions, it appears to me that it would be easier to accomplish all that it is desired to accomplish, by a moderate exercise of the powers given under it rather than by taking extreme or panicky measures. It was agreed in the Dáil that the Bill would be administered so as to involve the smallest possible disturbance to the ordinary processes of trade. If that be done—and I am confident it will be done—the Bill is likely to get public acceptance and it is worth going a very considerable distance to get public acceptance of a measure like this. I know that no Ministers of any Government are enthusiastic about sittings of Parliament but I should like to suggest that, in the operation of this measure, while it might impose a little extra labour on Ministers who are already working hard, it would be of advantage to call the Dáil and Seanad together. That would impose a greater strain on Ministers, in one sense, but, on balance, that course would be of assistance to them and to the public. If the Dáil were called together before the date to which it now stands adjourned and if the business of discussing regulations made under this Bill, when it becomes an Act, could be discharged in the same temper and with the same reasonableness as was displayed in the Dáil and which, I am sure, would be displayed here, then very considerable good, publicly, would result. We can leave over other matters for consideration until we come to the Committee Stage. Meantime, the Bill on Second Stage should, certainly, be accepted.
I have not got the amendments made to the Bill in the Dáil. The Taoiseach stated that the first part of Section 2 gives wide. general powers and that the other part merely gave instances. Do the amendments affect part 1 of that section? If they do not, they cannot amount to anything because that part will be still operative and it provides that the Government may make such regulations as it thinks fit. That is surely the operative part of the Bill.
If you have certain things specified, you cannot do anything contrary to those.
I would have been just as pleased to give the Government part 1 because I believe that, when a Government has responsibility, it should be given the means of fulfilling it.
I have heard no reasons to justify the extreme haste with which this measure is being passed into law and I think that there is very considerable danger in that haste. When I saw the original proposal for a time-table, I was seriously disturbed as to the reactions it might have in the country. I think that the Government has been very wise in giving way on that point and allowing the free debate we are having here to-night. What I am concerned about is the virtual abrogation of Parliament once this measure is passed. There is very considerable danger in that. If I myself were a Minister, I should resent the necessity for having all these matters discussed, perhaps in an injudicious way, but I think we must admit that Parliament, in spite of its irrelevancy and waste of time, is of very great value in the reassuring of public opinion. I wish the Government had found it possible to be more deliberate in its procedure in respect of this measure. They could have introduced certain urgent sections straight away by means of legislation and very much reduced the volume of orders that will now be necessary. In fact, after this measure becomes law, there will be no legislation at all. It would have been possible to take powers in regard to urgent matters, like censorship and control of commodities, in a fairly extensive measure and limited the numbers of orders. These questions of arrest and detention—which I consider the most disturbing features of this measure—could have been taken separately in view of the fact that the Government have very considerable powers in the Offences Against the State Bill to deal with matters of that kind. At this stage, I suppose all we can do is ask the Government to summon the Dáil and Seanad to consider specific orders of a non-urgent character.
I have put down an amendment which I do not consider very suitable or scientific so far as the wording is concerned, but I feel that two courses are open. One course is to collect the non-urgent matters in which there might be considerable danger, such as currency and acquisition of securities There cannot be any great urgency about these matters and I know and the House knows the danger there might be if the public got alarmed or uneasy about them. It would be a great safeguard to the public if these matters were to be dealt with by direct and specific resolution only after debate and endorsement. Failing that, they should not come into force until the resolution is endorsed by the Oireachtas. Another matter which deserves serious consideration is the residual effect of these resolutions. The principle of these Orders will impregnate the whole life of the country. They may be made in a time of war but they will not cease immediately the war is over. I think that we should have an assurance from the Government that any resultant effect of these Orders will be subject to normal peace-time legislation when the occasion arises. Otherwise, I can see the danger of exceptional measures, which were only intended to apply to a war period, becoming part of our peace-time existence. Other matters I can raise on Committee Stage but I entreat the Government to set a due value on the power of Parliament and, although it may seem a waste of time, to do as the British have done and take Parliament into their confidence, however great a nuisance it may be to the administration.
Tá mé ag eirghe tuirseach o bheith ag éistéacht leis an Bhéarla ghalánta seo. Chuala mé níos mó Béarla san Dáil agus san Seanad indiu ná a chuala mé taobh amuigh le leath-bhliain. Sílim go mbeidh an Seanad sásta éisteacht anois le giota beag Gaedhilge. Bheinn sásta leis an chainnt a bhí againn dá mbeadh ciall ann. Tá blás an-ghalánta ar an Bhéarla a chluinmuid annseo ach, nuair a théidheann tú go dtí croidhe na cainnte, níl aon bhrígh leis. Tá dream annseo agus dearcadh acu nach dtaighnigheann le furmhór na ndaoine. Isiad na Seanadóirí seo atá i gcomhnuidhe ag cainnt. Labhrann siad níos mó ná dream ar bith eile annseo agus tá eagla orm go bhfuil polasai acu nach luadhann siad annseo. Ba mhaith leo dul isteach le Seán Buidhe da mbeadh cogadh ann, agus mar sin de. Sílim gur cuid den pholasai atá acu an moladh a thug siad dúinn anois—go mba cheart an Dáil agus an Seanad do thabhairt le chéile sul a gcuirfí an Bille seo i bhfeidhm. B'fhéidir go mbeadh práinnar an Riaghaltas leis an chomhacht seo. Goidé mar tá fhios againn an uair no an t-am a thiocfas baoghal don tír seo? Goidé mar tá fhios againn nach dtiocfaidh Hitler agus a chuid eitleán uair ar bith no Seán Buidhe agus a shluagh eitleán? Caithfimid a bheith réidh agus is ceart comhacht a bheith ag an Riaghaltas. B'fhéidir nach mbeadh am an Dáil agus an Seanad do thabhairt le chéile agus da mbeadh an méid cabarachta acu agus a bhí indiu b'fhéidir go mbeadh an tír scriosta sar a mbeadh siad réidh; ní bheadh aon am ionnsuidhe do dhéanamh. Tá daoine annseo dallruighthe le Mac Ui Hitler toisc go bhfuil sé i ndon a smaointe a chur i ngníomh. Táim fhein i bhfábhar an mhodh Riaghaltais atá againn—sluagh-riaghail—ach tá buaidh amháin ag Mac Ui Hitler nach bhfuil againn san tír seo: gur féidir leis no le triúr fear annsin a mbaramhla do chur i ngníomh. Táim sásta cuid den chomhact sin do thabhairt don Riaghaltas seo gidh gur sluagh-riaghail atá againn. Táim in aghaidh cuid de na molta a thug an dream beag thall dúinn. Níl ionnta ach dream beag, bídeach agus táim in aghaidh a molta. Molaim don tSeanad an chomhacht seo do thabhairt don Riaghaltas agus táim cinnte go mbeidh siad ciallmhar ina déanfaidh siad faoin chomhacht sin.
The Taoiseach will admit I think that as I have said, earlier to-day, he is asking for extraordinary powers. He can have no complaint about the attitude of either Chamber in their generosity and in their desire to be helpful in the situation which confronts the country. I would urge on the Taoiseach that there is very good reason for harkening to the suggestion of Senator M. Hayes that if the country is to be kept calm and solid under the conditions which a world war will create for all of us, the best way by which the Taoiseach will achieve that end will be by taking the people into his confidence occasionally through their elected representatives. All sorts of restrictions are to be imposed upon the decent, industrious, thrifty citizens of the State. It may be that it is true that it is to their own interest and with an eye to the future, but it is difficult to convince the hardworking, decent, thrifty and industrious citizens that that is so. It is easy enough to make people restless and distrustful. Whatever may be said against criticisms and opposition in a Parliament, these fulfil a very vital function in the life of the people. Because subconsciously or in some way they operate in the minds of the Government. I am convinced myself that the arguments of the Opposition carry weight with the Government and very often make them shape their policy in the direction suggested by these arguments rather than to the course which they would steer if these arguments were not advanced.
Government by decrees is a very simple thing in one way but it is much more difficult to carry the people along with you than it would be with the advantage of having the matter discussed here in Parliament. In this matter of government by decrees there is no consultation with anybody except with the staffs of the Minister's Department, perhaps only to a limited degree with their own supporters and perhaps not at all with the other representatives of the people. I do not think that would be satisfactory at all. As regards the powers which the Taoiseach is asking for here and which he is going to receive, the position may arise by which the operation of these powers is going to create difficulties of a far-reaching character. None of us know what sort of reaction there would be on the part of people to these things because we did not have experience of them hitherto. I think the Taoiseach ought to guard against any possible developments like that. The Taoiseach is convinced that the Oireachtas can be trusted and that they will be ready to help. If a spirit of co-operation is invited that will be forthcoming. The right way to get that co-operation is by asking for it from the members of the Oireachtas. If he is not prepared to do that, obviously there should be contact with the elected representatives of the people through whatever machinery may be devised to have those contacts made available. There are certain other things arising out of the consideration of these matters. It is possible that certain sections may not be made operative or that the necessity for that may not arise. But if the worst happens in Europe, this Bill as a whole will take the place of the ordinary law.
The Minister for Industry and Commerce recently indicated that we here may have experience of a rather disconcerting nature. We are going to have unemployment in certain industries and general dislocation of our economic life, a dislocation which at the moment it is not easy to realise. I believe that ordinarily if we had Parliament meeting and problems like that dealt with, we would have suggestions made as to how these problems could be met. Parliament will not be meeting but I would urge that in anticipation of a situation like that developing, the responsibility is on the Government to sit down and plan to meet such a position as inevitably will have to be faced by the country. All sorts of businesses will be disorganised and perhaps thousands of people will be put out of employment.
It will not be sufficient for the Government merely to govern by decree in a sort of negative way. There must be a definite, positive plan as to how the economic life of the country will not only be held intact but will be strengthened. The Government must have some sort of plan. It must be a sound plan and it must proceed on sane and normal lines. How exactly the Ministry is to have that advice and criticism without Parliament meeting is beyond me to suggest at the moment. But I am convinced that if we have not the people behind the operation of these laws there will possibly be much unrest. The Government must meet by anticipation and planning the new conditions which will arise. It will be found that a great many people will be leaving their employment. The Government must be able to turn the activities of these people into profitable directions wherein their labour can be employed. If we are giving these powers to the Ministry to operate them in the way they want to operate them it must be expected that the Government will be prepared to meet such a situation as that.
There are various questions which will arise on the sections to one or two at least of which I would like to refer. With regard to the position of neutrality, on which we are all united, I feel that even there again, if it be possible, the Government ought to take positive action, to get into communication with those other states in Europe whose policy in this international conflict, if it comes, is apparently to be the same as our own. If a great country like Italy is not to be in the world war, we should immediately make contact with her and with all the other neutral states on the Continent so that we could collectively galvanise into action all the forces in Europe and throughout the world that want peace rather than war. The leaders of the neutral states should, as far as possible, have a concrete policy, a thought-out plan, as to how war can be confined to the least number of states.
The Taoiseach, I think, on consideration, will realise that, in the interests of our own people here, it is essential that they be carried along with the Oireachtas in the operation of this measure. We are rather suspicious, doubtful even, when people who are politicians are attempting to legislate for people in this sort of way, that they are meaning to do the right thing. I think the people must be kept informed. There need not be much discussion of questions that might be dangerous to combatants outside but in connection with Orders which would be made and any references to our economic life, I think the more discussion there is and the more reasons which can be put before the public the more co-operation you will get from the public as a whole. I think the right way for the Taoiseach to secure that end is by getting Parliament to meet as frequently as it is possible for him to do so. I believe that if that were done much of the labour that would fall to Ministers could be lessened because you would get the co-operation, not only of the political parties, but of the people of the country as well. That is what the country will require most in the days ahead when calm and steadiness and resolution will be necessary and when it will be desirable that we should all pull together.
I would not rise at all this time in the morning if it were not that I have a somewhat different point of view from that which has been expressed. I think probably I am in a minority of one as far as this House is concerned. On the last Bill I expressed my approval because I believed that it was necessary to give extensive and wide powers to the Executive. I made it clear then that I was supporting that Bill. In spite of all that has been said, I am not convinced that the method adopted in the second Bill is the right one. I cannot agree with the Taoiseach that this is implementing the Constitution. It is quite true that the Constitution envisaged a possibility of abnormal powers. The Constitution did not say —or at any rate I cannot see it in it —that complete democratic totalitarian powers should be given to the Executive as soon as an emergency arose. In my opinion, certain powers are essential. I believe it is necessary to deal with people entering the country. I believe it is absolutely essential to deal with the distribution of food and raw materials and various other materials. I believe a good many of the powers which are mentioned in this Bill are necessary. I do not believe that it is necessary or wise to immediately give the complete and absolute powers that are provided in Section 2, sub-section (1).
I think that if those powers, which include, as far as I can see, every type of executive and legislative function, are to be given, they ought not be given under a Party system to a Party Government. They should only be given to a national Government. Even then, they should only be given when there is no other way out. I do not want to develop this at any length. I hold the view very strongly that in an emergency one ought not embarrass those responsible. I only give these views because they are my deliberate, considered and honest opinions. I am not going to press them further than that. I think some day we may be sorry they went so far.
Having expressed those views, I would like to say this: The powers given may be exercised on every occasion by the Executive. They should be exercised only when the normal method of parliamentary procedure is not suitable. I would like to suggest to the Executive, seriously suggest to them that, although they are getting these complete totalitarian powers, on every occasion when it is possible and wise they should not use them; they should use the ordinary machinery of legislation even though they could legislate in the same way by decree and, by that means, should maintain as far as is possible the parliamentary system and establish the totalitarian system as little as possible.
I believe, further, that in the control and distribution of commodities it is absolutely essential that existing trade, labour, employers' and industrial organisations should be taken fully into consultation. I would go further and say, subject to a policy specifically laid down by the Government, I think, as far as possible, the actual administration might be handed over to other bodies where that is feasible. I think in many cases existing trade organisations, with the additional powers that the Minister has, and with his guidance, could undertake a good deal of the work and in a case of an emergency, with their expert knowledge, do it better even than the best civil servants.
There is one other matter to which I would like to refer because I think it comes under the powers of this Bill. I would like to refer to the question of insurance. I think the Government, at a very early date, should give consideration to the question of insurance for war risks on property. To the best of my belief, it is impossible to obtain that, at any price as far as property is concerned and, as far as transit is concerned, only at a rate which is high and which may easily become abnormally high. I think if our industries, including agriculture, are to continue with confidence, some kind of insurance will have to be devised. We are not a large enough country to have mutual insurance, but we might combine the idea of mutual insurance with some kind of Government action. I am convinced, as the Taoiseach has made perfectly clear, that the Government will do their utmost to maintain neutrality, but we have to face the possibility that it may not be possible. There is uneasiness, and I think if some kind of insurance could be devised it would go a long way to creating confidence and preventing dislocation in certain industries. I am not speaking now on this matter for myself. I am speaking after consultation with other responsible people who, I know, are exceedingly uneasy. I wanted to register my own honest opinion that it was not necessary immediately, and possibly might never have been necessary, to take all the powers in this Bill. I am content with placing on record my own view. Once the Bill is passed and the powers are taken, I will take an attitude of complete loyalty to the Executive, in so far as I believe they are acting rightly, and I believe that every citizen should do the same.
What I am most concerned about is the manner in which the orders and regulations made under this Bill, particularly as regards the live-stock trade, will be carried out. My principal object in rising is to try and get an assurance from the Minister that before these orders will be put into force he will set up a consultative council to advise him on these matters. Some of us who were engaged in the export of live stock during the Great War and during the economic war know of the many injustices which were caused through not having a consultative council such as I suggest the Minister should set up. In the licensing period during the economic war we know how some people suffered from the regulations made by the Government at that time. During the Great War shipping was at a premium, and space in the boats during some of these years was worth as much as £3 a beast. All these things would not be known to anyone except people who have experience and practical knowledge of how the business is worked. For that reason I impress on the Minister that, before these orders and regulations with regard to the shipping, particularly, of live stock, are put into operation he would set up such a council to consult with the Minister as to the best means of carrying them out.
I do not think that there is anything that has arisen that requires any special remarks from me now. The Minister for Industry and Commerce will take charge of the Committee Stage and will probably meet the particular points of detail that may be raised. The question of urgency was raised in the Dáil—I mean the question of summoning the Dáil and Seanad by telegram and trying to get this put through in a single sitting. Some members blamed us for not having called the Dáil earlier, and others for calling the Dáil now and trying to put this through, saying that there was no need for any particular speed. We were naturally in touch with the international situation. As Minister for External Affairs it was my business to be in as close touch as it was possible for me with any information I was able to get and, as I said in the Dáil, until the guns began to speak in Poland I still had hopes, and I think there were others in responsible positions, and who were in touch with the situation, who had similar hopes, that war might at the end be averted.
If we had asked the Dáil to consider this before the emergency was upon us, I have no doubt that all sorts of questions would have been asked, such as, "Why do you want these powers now? Why not wait until the emergency occurs? We will not arm you with these powers in advance." Now, when we come to you within a short time of the possibility of the actual emergency that we are anticipating being in existence, we are told, "You can delay further." In summoning the Dáil and the Seanad at the time, I feared that before the Dáil and the Seanad had discussed this Bill we would actually find ourselves in a position in which, for the safety of the State, we should already have made certain orders under these Bills. A number of orders are, in fact, in draft. Once this Bill is passed they are ready for signature. For instance, if Great Britain was at war— because that is the sort of circumstance which will most affect us immediately anyhow—some of these powers which are provided for should be in the hands of the Executive. Consequently, we had to choose between summoning the Dáil, finding there was no necessity for taking the powers and being opposed in a more suspicious way than we have been by members of the Dáil, and waiting. We had to wait, and I think that we were justified in waiting until the last possible moment, because there is no doubt that a sitting like this does cause a certain amount of public excitement.
If the Government were to give advice to the public at the moment, it would be not to change their present mode of life until they are directed to do it by the Government, until the necessity for it has clearly arisen, because the less dislocation there is, the less attempt there is to anticipate the future, the better we will be able to pass into the new set of circumstances with the greatest safety to the community as a whole. Sittings like this do excite the public, and if there was no need, then there would be a great deal of public loss. Consequently we were anxious not to look for these powers if the actual emergency contemplated did not take place. On the other hand, having delayed to the last possible moment, when, so far as we could see, nothing but an absolute miracle could stop the war, we felt that we had to act at once. That is the explanation of the manner in which this is being introduced.
With regard to the way in which the powers will be exercised, I think I can assure the Seanad, as I assured the Dáil, that the considerations which have been very properly put forward by a number of the members of the Dáil will be the considerations which we will have in mind. Certain examples were brought up in the Dáil. We were asked for a decision in particular cases. Really, in regard to a particular instance, without consideration of the circumstances you cannot decide straight off what particular line you will take. I will give an example. I was asked in the Dáil whether the reports of the Dáil and Seanad would be censored. My first impression was, because it would be the foremost idea in mind: "No, we will not; the Dáil and the Seanad are privileged and it would be rather strange to be using these powers to censor the publication of expressions of opinion in the Dáil and Seanad." But one of my colleagues pointed out to me immediately —I think it was the Minister for Industry and Commerce—"What would happen if one of the members of the Dáil or Seanad gave information which was of a type that would damage the State." Supposing that information was that we had not supplies of essential materials, for instance, of a military character or something of that sort. Information of that sort might immediately endanger the State. Obviously, there should be some means by which that damage would not be done to the State—by which the State would be saved from the damage that would be done. That was a case, for instance, of an attitude of mind leading to a very hasty conclusion as to what would happen. The moment, of course, that the opposite consideration, which would occur to anybody dealing with that situation, was put forward, I would have to balance the two, and try to get the best possible means which would enable, in the first instance, the rightful expression of opinion to be published, and, on the other hand, see that any positive damage to the State would not be done. You may have to provide some special machinery to try to make a compromise between the two—to try to save, as far as possible, the freedom of expression of opinion in the Dáil and Seanad and at the same time save the State.
I think it would be the same about a number of other questions that may be raised here. If we were asked what is our intention, we could give in general terms what our general attitude of mind will be, but there may be some particular means of safeguarding the State which would operate, and which would make it necessary to set aside the general attitude from which those problems might be approached. Naturally, we do not want to interfere with private enterprise. Members of other Parties may not agree, but I think we have tried as far as possible not to interfere with private enterprise. We have tried to do our best, and we have only interfered where it became, in our opinion anyhow, necessary in the general interests of the community as a whole to interfere in that particular way.
Before I finish, I want to assure the Seanad that our attitude in approaching those matters would be very largely the attitude of members who have spoken here in regard to the circumstances that should be borne in mind in the operation of those powers, and, insofar as it is possible to summon the Dáil and Seanad to give them an opportunity of discussing those matters, that will be done. I have only, however, to plead here, as I did in the Dáil, for a recognition of this fact, that at the outset in an emergency such as we are contemplating there will be work of an Executive character that will engage the attention of Ministers practically day and night for a considerable period. So many problems will arise for solution, so much work will have to be done, that it would be almost impossible, humanly speaking, for the members of the Executive to be in attendance at the Dáil and do the Executive work at the same time However, it may not be as bad as I anticipate. If it is not, there is no doubt whatever that it would be helpful both to the Ministers and in regard to their work itself—because we get, very often, helpful and constructive criticism—and also in regard to keeping public opinion behind the Ministry in the measures which it has to take. Everybody recognises the importance of that. I, for one, believe there is no better way of keeping public confidence than for Ministers who are satisfied that what they are doing is in the public interest to get an opportunity in Parliament to meet criticism and to show why it is they are adopting such measures. That consideration will be clearly borne in mind.
I may not speak any more on this measure to-night, and I want to say that, as far as I am concerned, I have no reason to complain of the manner in which we have been met by Parliament in this matter. I should like to repeat here what I said in the other House, and that is that I am myself a firm believer—and I think every member of the Government is also a firm believer—in democratic institutions. I believe that, in the long run, they serve the interests of the community better than any other form. Other forms may give temporarily better results, but, taking it over a long period, the democratic form is more suitable, and is in the long run best for the community as a whole. I would certainly be the last person to do anything under powers of this sort ultimately to endanger democratic institutions. In fact the aim is to make sure that they are saved. I think everybody who has studied the history of democracies will recognise that they can be lost by not having them sufficiently elastic in a period of crisis to dispense with their own forms. I think that is true. I think even Senator Douglas would agree with me that history has shown that democracies have very often been lost because they have not been able to defend themselves on account of the forms which they have not been ready to abandon in the case of a crisis—a crisis in which those forms became really a burden and a menace to the community as a whole. I think I can finish by recommending the Seanad to give us this Bill, and with as few amendments as possible.
Question put and agreed to.