It is proposed to take to-day items No. 1 and No. 2 on the Order Paper, provided the Minister for Finance is able to begin on the Central Fund Bill not later than 4 o'clock. I think that will be feasible. I understand that it is expected that the Supplies and Services Bill will be finished in the Dáil to-day. The business for to-morrow, therefore, will be the Road Transport Bill, and the Supplies and Services Bill. Items Nos. 4 to 11, which concern the Department of Industry and Commerce, are being postponed, with the agreement of the Tánaiste, until after Easter. On the Adjournment, it is proposed to adjourn until 18th April.
Order of Business.
On the question of the ordering of the business to-day, I should like to formulate something in the nature of a protest, arising out of the fact that sometimes some of us in the back benches here in the Seanad are not quite clear as to what precisely has been decided, or what precisely is proposed, or for what particular reason. I should like to mention two illustrations of that. On 7th March, we were assured by the Leader of the House, in his own words, column 1215:—
"Motion No. 14 will be taken, if we come to it, either to-day or to-morrow."
I stress the word "to-morrow" because it was the general opinion of the House that we would meet on that Thursday, 8th March, but, in actual fact, there seemed to be a sudden decision that we would not, after all, meet on that Thursday, and that we should leave several items on the agenda untouched. I felt on that occasion that the House had been insufficiently taken into the confidence of the front benches. I felt that the consultation had not been wide enough. I am not suggesting at all that there was any conscious intention to do that, and I am not criticising the ordering of the business from the Chair; but a similar kind of thing happened on the last night of meeting. I said at the beginning of the meeting on 15th March at column 1433, that "we will be dealing largely with the Central Fund Bill and the Supplies and Services Bill next week, and I should like to know whether it is hoped that we may get through this agenda to-day, and, if not, whether it is the intention to use our right to meet to-morrow morning."
I was assured by Senator Hayes, in his own words:—
"It is our intention to endeavour to get through the business to-day, but it is not the intention to meet to-morrow."
I am quite sure that that reply covered the facts, but there seems to have been a sudden decision later on not to "endeavour to finish" the agenda; and I felt myself I was not quite clear how that decision had been reached, or for what reason, or indeed exactly what had been agreed. If I might refer the Seanad to column 1490 of the same debate, it becomes apparent, I think, that it was not even clear perhaps to all in the House just what had been agreed because you, Sir, state at column 1490:—
"It is agreed that the House will continue on this stage."
Later on, it seemed to be understood that we had agreed simply to finish the Superannuation Bill and then to adjourn altogether, whereas some of us were under the impression that we would finish that stage of the Superannuation Bill and then continue with the rest of the agenda. Quite clearly, some members understood one thing and some understood another. I myself am interested in the motion on corporal punishment which I handed in before Christmas, and I should not like to see it inadvertently postponed until after another school year is over.
Again, I have no intention of criticising the Chair, nor indeed of criticising the front benches, save in so far as they sometimes assume that the back benches know all about what has been decided and subsequently fail to explain sufficiently or to consult sufficiently the back benches when suggesting decisions in relation to the order of business or the changing of an earlier decision.
All I can say is that we do our best. It is not easy to order business here sometimes. When the Dáil is meeting, Ministers are not always available here. There is always a difficulty in arranging the business with a view to having the appropriate Minister present. But I am at one with Senator Sheehy Skeffington about the proceedings last Thursday evening. I was absent for a short time and I am not clear what happened, and I am not clear either why it happened. All I can say is that we shall do our best to make the position clear.
It is not usual for the House to meet merely for the discussion of a motion on the Order Paper. The House generally meets only for the transaction of Government business and then transacts other business afterwards. Neither is it always possible to consult what the Senator calls backbenchers. I do not think that would be a proper description of himself. It is difficult to consult them and nearly impossible to consult the lone-benchers. All that I can say is that we will do our best to see whether we can get any better scheme.
An Leas-Chathaoirleach
That disposes of the matter.