It may be necessary to recommit the Bill in regard to one particular section and I should like to raise that point now. The position is that the Minister inadvertently failed to answer a question on section 29 of the Bill. It might be possible, if this were now drawn to his attention, for something to be done on this Stage without recommital.
Finance Bill, 1971 (Certified Money Bill): Report and Final Stages.
I do not understand the opposition of Senator Dooge.
Senator Dooge has moved that the Bill be recommitted in respect of section 29. It is a matter for the House to decide.
I object to any recommittal of the Bill in respect of section 29.
This has arisen because the House moved from section 29 to section 30 before the fact had been adverted to. It is a relatively simple question which had been asked of the Minister and has not been answered. It is a question which, surely, he is willing to answer. I think the most appropriate way in which to do this is to recommit section 29.
What is the question?
Unless the Bill is recommitted I am not in order in putting it.
I should like to ask the Chair if there is any statutory obligation on the Minister to answer a question put to him?
It is not a matter of statutory duty; it is a matter for the House to decide whether it is to be recommitted in respect of section 29. The House can decide to do so or not to do so. It is a matter entirely for the House.
I would have thought that Senator Dooge was quite adroit in this matter and that he could very easily in the course of his address at this Stage manage to convey to me the question which remains unanswered, and I would endeavour to answer it.
That is what I endeavoured to do, but I seemed to trouble the Chair by this attempt.
If the Minister was not doing his job and did not answer a question, the least the Leader of the House can do now is to facilitate the Senator.
This is not a matter for the Chair, but is a matter for the House. The Chair would suggest that it should be possible for Senator Dooge to put a question at this Stage.
Does Senator Dooge wish to ask the question now and get it over with?
In regard to the best procedure for handling this matter, might I say that the question is that if the Minister's reply were entirely satisfactory, when concluding on Fifth Stage, this might well be an appropriate way. If the Minister's reply were unsatisfactory Fifth Stage might not be a suitable vehicle.
The Chair can do nothing about that, because it is a matter entirely for the House to decide whether they wish to recommit. It has been proposed by Senator Dooge that the House recommit section 29. I am putting the matter now. Those who wish——
Throwing a little bit more light on this——
It means that in respect of section 29 we discuss it as on Committee Stage, that we return to Committee of the House in respect of section 29.
Agreed.
Bill recommitted in respect of section 29.
On section 29 Senator Boland asked the Minister the reason for the differential between the amounts which were allowed to be imported free of duty by persons travelling from the Continent of Europe and persons travelling from places other than the Continent of Europe. Further to that I should like to ask what constitutes the Continent of Europe? For example, what parts of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics would come under the classification of Continent of Europe?
Would the Senator mind repeating the last part of his question?
The last part of the question was in regard to the definition of the Continent of Europe in this regard. I cited as an example the Soviet Union. What parts of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics would be classed for these customs regulations as part of the Continent of Europe?
In regard to the first part of the Senator's question, the reason for the larger allowances for people coming from further away is possibly that they do not travel that far and come back that far as often as people would from the North and Britain. As regards the Continent of Europe, I think that it means the Continent of Europe as shown on the atlas we all are so familiar with.
It depends on which side produces the atlas.
The line is not drawn on what is commonly known as the Iron Curtain.
Is Yugoslavia, for instance, in the Continent of Europe?
Yes, and so are Hungary and Rumania.
But not the Republics of the Soviet Union which would be commonly counted as Asia, places such as Turkestan——
No, this side of the Urals.
Which side of the Caucasus?
Section 29 agreed to.
Section 29 reported and agreed to.
Bill reported without recommendation, received for Final Consideration and passed.
Ordered: That the Bill be returned to the Dáil.
The Seanad adjourned at 10.20 p.m. sine die.