It is proposed "That one item only, i.e. No. 2, be taken."
Order of Business.
Could the Leader of the House give any indication as to when it is intended to resume No. 1, the Army Pensions Bill? It seems to me far more important that the Seanad should continue and finish that business rather than discuss No. 2. I would propose as an amendment that No. 1 on the Order of Business be taken first.
I, too, would like to put down an amendment to the Order of Business. For the reasons given yesterday I do not think we should take No. 2. I propose that we take Nos. 1 and 11. The reason I suggest taking No. 11 is that the Taoiseach recently spoke on this point and it was the subject of an editorial in The Irish Times. The quicker we deal with it the better.
I should like to propose an amendment to the Order of Business. I think we should take No. 1 and No. 9. We were issued with a White Paper on the EEC this morning and I think we should discuss motion No. 9.
I should like to support the amendment proposed by Senator O'Higgins to take the order we were discussing yesterday and to continue the Second Stage of the Army Pensions Bill. It must be clear that pensions for widows must surely take precedence over repressive legislation should as the Forcible Entry Bill.
I should like to propose an amendment to the Order of Business: that we take No. 1 which the Minister for Defence assured the House yesterday was a matter of urgency, together with No. 16 in the event of our completing No. 1 early in the day. The Leader of the House will remember that we asked sometime ago when No. 16 might be taken and he gave us no clear indication at that time. Because of this, I think it would be better if, before the House goes into recess, the views of the Seanad on the White Paper were known. As an alternative to Nos. 1 and 16, perhaps, we could take Nos. 1 and 12. No. 12 is a motion which has been on the Order Paper for almost a year, calling on the Taoiseach to allow persons of 18 years and over the right to vote at referenda and Parliamentary and local elections.
(Interruptions.)
You go back to fixing the problem of the girls in the bikinis.
Does the Leader of the House wish to conclude the discussion?
Before he does so, I should like to ask him, through you, whether it is proposed that the remaining Stages of the Courts Bill will be taken before the House rises for the autumn?
For Christmas, you mean?
It is proposed to take the Forcible Entry Bill and the Army Pensions Bill in due course when the Forcible Entry Bill is finished. It is not proposed to do any other business. I have no comment to make on all the propositions.
Did you say that it is not proposed to do any business, or any other business?
Unless you give us the Forcible Entry Bill straight away, the others certainly will not betaken.
You are badly off for the Forcible Entry Bill.
A number of amendments to the Order of Business have been proposed. The question the Chair proposes to put is as follows. The motion moved by the Leader of the House was "That one item only, i.e., No. 2, be taken." The questions, therefore, are that the word "one" which is proposed to be deleted stand part of the question" and "That the figure ‘2' stand part of the question." Those in favour of this——
I do not understand. You are proposing the deletion of No. 2?
The motion moved by the Leader of the House was, "That one item only, i.e. item No. 2 be taken," and to deal with this matter the question to be put must be in this form—That the word "one" which is proposed to be deleted stand part of the question and, That the figure "2" which is proposed to be deleted stand part of the question.
Other amendments were proposed. Does this prevent decisions on them from being recorded?
In the event of these questions being decided in the affirmative, then the amendments fall and the Order of Business is accepted.
There are such a variety of Orders of Business which various Senators think ought to be the Order of Business for the day that one decision only might not at all clearly indicate the feelings of the House in this matter.
The Chair appreciates this point but the form of the motion which has been moved by the Leader of the House requires that this question be put in this form.
The House cannot then——
The Chair has no discretion in the matter.
Does this mean that No. 1 is substituted for No. 2? Is that the force of it?
No. The motion, again, is as follows: "That one item only, i.e., item No. 2, be taken" and the questions therefore, have to be put in this form: "That the word ‘one' which is proposed to be deleted stand part of the question" and "That the figure ‘2' which is proposed to be deleted stand part of the question."
Surely that does not bring before the House the fact that, for example, item No. 11 has been proposed and I have reminded the Chair that this item has been on the Order Paper for over a year now. The Leader of the House has made it clear to the House that he has no intention of allowing discussion on item No. 11 before the House rises for the summer recess.
The situation is that, in the event of the questions as I now propose to put them, being defeated, in due course it is open to the Senator to have a vote on his amendment. There are two separate questions. The first is: "That the word ‘one' which is proposed to be deleted stand part of the question."
Question put.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 30; Níl, 15.
Tá
- Brennan, John J.
- Brugha, Ruairí.
- Cranitch, Mícheál C.
- Crinion, Brendan.
- Doyle, John.
- Eachthéirn, Cáit Uí.
- Farrell, Joseph.
- Farrell, Peggy.
- Killilea, Mark.
- McElgunn, Farrell.
- McGlinchey, Bernard.
- McGowan, Patrick.
- Nash, John J.
- Norton, Patrick.
- O'Callaghan, Cornelius K.
- Fitzsimons, Patrick.
- Flanagan, Thomas P.
- Gallanagh, Michael.
- Garrett, Jack.
- Hanafin, Desmond.
- Honan, Dermot P.
- Keegan, Seán.
- Keery, Neville.
- Ó Maoláin, Tomás.
- O'Sullivan, Terry.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Ryan, Patrick W.
- Ryan, William.
- Sheldon, W.A.W.
- Walsh, Seán.
Níl
- Belton, Richard.
- Boland, John.
- Butler, Pierce.
- Fitzgerald, Jack.
- Kelly, John.
- Lyons, Michael D.
- McDonald, Charles B.
- O'Brien, Andy.
- O'Brien, William.
- O'Higgins, Michael J.
- Owens, Evelyn P.
- Quinlan, Patrick M.
- Reynolds, Patrick J.
- Robinson, Mary T.W.
- Russell, G.E.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Farrell and Brennan; Níl, Senators W. O'Brien and Reynolds.
Question declared carried.
As a result of this the word "one" stands part of the question.
The House has decided that only one item be taken today. Is that not so? I propose that item No. 1 be taken.
Yes. The question will be as follows: "That the figure ‘2' which is proposed to be deleted stand part of the question."
Question put.
On a point of order——
There can be no further points of order once the question has been put.
I am very disappointed with the attitude of the Chair. No proper explanation has been given to us.
There can be no points of order while a division is in progress. The question has been put in the only way in which it can be put in view of the wording of the motion.
The Seanad divided: Tá, 30; Níl, 16.
Tá
- Brennan, John J.
- Brugha, Ruairí.
- Cranitch, Mícheál C.
- Crinion, Brendan.
- Doyle, John.
- Eachthéirn, Cáit Uí.
- Farrell, Joseph.
- Farrell, Peggy.
- Fitzsimons, Patrick.
- Flanagan, Thomas P.
- Gallanagh, Michael.
- Garrett, Jack.
- Hanafin, Desmond.
- Honan, Dermot P.
- Keegan, Seán.
- Keery, Neville.
- Killilea, Mark.
- McElgunn, Farrell.
- McGlinchey, Bernard.
- McGowan, Patrick.
- Nash, John J.
- Norton, Patrick.
- O'Callaghan, Cornelius K.
- Ó Maoláin, Tomás.
- O'Sullivan, Terry.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Ryan, Patrick W.
- Ryan, William.
- Sheldon, W.A.W.
- Walsh, Seán.
Níl
- Belton, Richard.
- Boland, John.
- Butler, Pierce.
- Farrelly, Denis.
- Fitzgerald, Jack.
- O'Higgins, Michael J.
- Owens, Evelyn P.
- Quinlan, Patrick M.
- Kelly, John.
- Lyons, Michael D.
- McDonald, Charles B.
- O'Brien, Andy.
- O'Brien, William.
- Reynolds, Patrick J.
- Robinson, Mary T.W.
- Russell, G.E.
Tellers: Tá, Senators Brennan and J. Farrell; Níl, Senators W. O'Brien and Reynolds.
Question declared carried.
The figure proposed to be deleted, therefore, stands and the Order of Business is No. 2 only. Agreed?
It has been opposed.
It has been agreed. No. 2.
Could the Leader of the House give some indication of what the hours of sitting will be today?
Until 10.30 p.m.
I thought we would adjourn at 10 p.m.
It is a matter for the House.
We must fix the hours of sitting now. I propose we sit until 12 noon.
I would refer Senator O'Higgins to Standing Order No. 18 from which he will see that there is no specific time mentioned for concluding a sitting. Therefore, there is no need for the Seanad at this stage to decide when it will cease meeting.
The Chair will appreciate that Standing Order No. 18 provides that we meet at 3 p.m. today.
The Seanad decided last night to meet at 10.30 a.m. —therefore, no order is required.
Whether an order is required or not it is just as well that we clarify the position. A proposal has been made and we must take a decision on it.
I understand that the Chair is accepting a proposition from Senator O'Higgins to sit until 12 noon. Is that the position?
If the matter is opposed, I am accepting a proposition from the Leader of the House to sit until 10.30 p.m.
There has been an amendment proposed to that.
Then I shall put the question. The question is: "That in the motion, as moved by the Leader of the House, the figures 10.30 p.m. stand."
Question put and declared carried and main Question agreed to.
Who talked about Nero fiddling while Rome burned?
Item No. 2.