On the Fifth Stage, I want to resume where Senator L'Estrange left off, I hope, within the bounds of order.
Pigs and Bacon (Amendment) Bill, 1961: Fifth Stage (Resumed).
Question again proposed: "That the Bill do now pass."
I hope so.
It seems to be extremely difficult to keep within the bounds of order, particularly late at night, on final Stages of Bills——
Extremely difficult for the Senator.
——or in replying to things which may not suit the members opposite. Senator L'Estrange was saying that there were a number of amendments put down to this Bill, none of which was accepted by the Minister for Agriculture. The Minister recalled this evening the fine speech he had made in the Dáil justifying the failure to give proper and adequate representation to the producers. He will also have a fine recollection of the number of amendments put down to the Bill which established An Bord Bainne. Out of 60 amendments, if my recollection is correct, there was not one to command the sympathetic consideration of the Minister. The Minister, on an inconsequential Bill relating to dogs, accepted amendments. He always holds himself forth as a reasonable man that on that particular Bill he accepted an amendment.
The Senator is now getting away from the Pigs and Bacon (Amendment) Bill.
I merely want to delineate the atmosphere in which we have found ourselves in debating this Bill.
The Senator must confine himself to what is in the Bill.
Yes, a Chathaoirligh, and I propose to do so. What I am saying is that in this Bill we have, first of all, a body which is supposed to enter into the export market. This Bill, the Minister has told us on one of the recent sections, is concerned exclusively with exports of bacon to Britain and the Minister's antediluvian conception of how to increase exports of bacon to Britain is by having these conducted by a commission. I do not think there could be anything more laughable than the idea of a commission engaging in commercial activities.
The next thing we found was that the Minister remained resolute in his opposition to any change in the constitution of the Board and even in the one thing which is absolutely essential for the working of any body such as this. One of the essential parts of the machinery for the export of bacon and pigs from this country in future is that there should be a staff which are relatively contented and well provided for. The Minister has taken particularly strong action, even against incorporating in the Bill a permissive power to provide pensions, payable by the staff themselves and by the Commission out of the funds at their disposal, for widows and orphans of the staff.
On Section 28, I think, we were referred by the Minister to the generously worded sections in which the Board were being vested with all classes of powers which they need not use. That was the argument which we addressed to the Minister on Section 22, that it was a permissive power to be incorporated in the Bill, a power which the Commission might not be able to use, which the staff might not want the Commission to use but which, none the less, should be put into the Bill.
The Minister can reflect now with satisfaction on and regale his companions at a later stage, with not alone the fine speech he made justifying the inadequacy of the representation of the producers, but also the fact that, granite-like and solid, he stood against all classes of amendments and that when he had said: "This is my Bill: this is the way I want it", of course he had it. Of course, he did have it with his machined majority and the Senators opposite docilely walked into the lobby and did not even dare to express, upon a matter such as widows' and orphans' pensions, a contrary opinion. The only opinion we got was from Senator Carter at a late hour of the evening but it was not on the matter on which he might have been expected to speak as a person elected to this House on the Labour Panel.
We are making progressive legislation.
Question put and agreed to.