It is proposed to take Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 in that order.
Order of Business.
I wish to raise the matter of Motion No. 13 concerning Northern Ireland. I raised this same point on the Order of Business on the last two occasions the House met. I hope that the Leader of the House will arrange to take this motion in the near future and particularly now that the debate is taking place this afternoon in the other House. I feel, as I said on the previous two occasions, that we are failing in our duty if we fail to take this motion in the very near future and I should like the Leader of the House if he possibly can to give us a date on which this motion could definitely be taken.
Senator O'Higgins to conclude.
I am not in a position to give a date. I think I should say in all honesty that it seems to me that the fact that the debate is taking place in the other House today would militate against a debate here rather than enhance the prospects.
I must say I cannot see why, because the argument here was that the situation was too critical to have a debate.
I did not develop it but it does seem to me that the most generally held view would be that the popularly elected House is discussing it and that is the proper place to discuss questions of this sort. I feel myself that if the Dáil were not discussing the motion on Northern Ireland today there would be a better prospect of an early discussion here. I have no intimation from the Taoiseach or the Minister for Foreign Affairs that this would weigh against holding a debate here—I am merely expressing my own view on it.
Could I ask——
I must point out that Senator M.J. O'Higgins was concluding the discussion and while it is possible to put a short question to him it is not in order to continue this debate.
The question I wish to put is in relation to this absurd idea that because the Dáil is discussing this question the Seanad should not. This is presuming the idea is that there is no need for the Seanad. Virtually all legislation is discussed by the two Houses. This is a new principle which is being introduced: that because a subject of great importance is being discussed by one House it should not be discussed by the other House. There seems to me to be a case here for discussing it rather than not discussing it. It was discussed in Westminster, in the Assembly, in the Dáil. Why not discuss it here? For the Leader of the House to take this view is to accept a very considerable and inexplicable demotion of the responsibilities——
Perhaps I will be more careful in future about expressing my personal views. There is no new principle being established. I made it quite clear that I was expressing a personal view which, in deference to Senator Browne's own view, I think is a sensible view. I do not want to see this House merely becoming a debating society, and to argue that merely because a thing has been discussed elsewhere we are failing in our duty in not discussing it here seems to me to rank this House merely as a debating society. This House deals with legislation. It is entitled also to deal with motions. I do not accept for a moment the argument that because some topic is discussed here, there or anywhere else, it immediately imposes a duty on this House to jump in and discuss it in a kind of debating society atmosphere.
Could I put——
It is not possible. The position is that the Order of Business is debated by way of proposition and amendment with one speech by each Senator and a conclusion by the Leader of the House or a Senator acting for him. It is not possible to carry on any further debate after the concluding speech has been made and in particular after the question has been put.
I want to ask the Leader of the House if he could consider——
I cannot allow the Senator to ask——
——whether he would consider allowing Motion No. 14 on the Order Paper to be discussed with No. 3?
The Senator is out of order and I must ask him to resume his seat and allow the House to express its opinion on the question that has been put.
The Chair is now adopting the same role as his deputy adopted in another case in frustrating the right of this House to discuss its business as a responsible part of the——
The Chair is protecting this House under the Standing Orders and his ruling should be respected by all Senators.
I must point out to Senator Browne that he had ample opportunity to discuss the question of today's business. The question now before the House is the business to be discussed today. The Senator had an opportunity to discuss that and is not entitled to continue the debate after its conclusion in accordance with practice.
Senator West asked a question from the Leader of the House and was given the answer by the Leader of the House. I should like to ask the Leader of the House whether Motion No. 14 on the Order Paper concerning mines can be taken with No. 3, which is being introduced by the Minister for Finance. Can they be taken at the same time?
I am not making that proposition. I propose that Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4 be taken.
Can I take it that the Leader of the House is refusing to take what is a perfectly reasonable action—to take a closely related motion on mines with No. 3 on the Order Paper?
It would also have been reasonable to give some advance notice of the request. I have made my proposal to the House.
The Leader of the House is having it both ways. Senator West put forward the proposal that we should have a debate on the North on another occasion and it made no difference to the Leader of the House. Whether he gets notice or not he is doing exactly the same as the Cathaoirleach and the Leas-Chathaoirleach did on another occasion. They want to machine this House into talking about subjects on which the Government are not afraid to talk——
Before the Senator——
——but not to talk about mines or the Northern Ireland situation.
If the Senator wants a row he can have it, but not on this occasion.
I have repeatedly pointed out to Senator Browne that he was out of order in his discussion. He has now resumed his seat but I ask him to withdraw the charge made against the Chair that the Chair is dragooning something through this House.
No.
With respect. Sir, I say you are unfair to Senator West and to Senator Browne. I intend to question further, in support of Senator West, the motion on Northern Ireland. Senator West expected the Leader of the House to answer his question before he pursued it further. You encouraged the Leader of the House to make a closing speech on it. This deprived Senators West and Browne and other Senators, including myself, of the chance to debate the motion on Northern Ireland.
It is the duty of this House to uphold the authority of the Chair. It is regrettable that Senator Browne has adopted this attitude. The Chair waited, as I did, to see if there were any other Senators wishing to contribute to the discussion on the Order of Business before the Chair called on me to conclude. After pausing and giving every Senator an opportunity to contribute, the Chair called on me to conclude. I did so and the Chair was not only in order but obliged by the duties of his office to regard the debate as being concluded then. This is as simple as A, B and C. It is not correct for Senator Browne or any other Senator to make this sort of accusation against the Chair. It is to be regretted and I and most Senators would have greater respect for Senator Browne if he withdraws the charge he has made. If he does not——
I am not concerned for your respect.
I am concerned about the respect due to this House. If Senator Browne chooses to adopt that attitude it is a matter for himself.
You are turning the House into a debating society. You will not let us talk about any serious matters.
I should like to make one point. I do not agree with Senator Browne that you, Sir, were unfair in your attitude. According to procedure you acted correctly. The problem has not been caused by you but by the Leader of the House in his unsatisfactory reply to my reasonable request which I had made on two previous occasions. On one occasion, so far as I can remember, he stated that he was not opposed to holding a debate on the North but that the situation was too critical. The problem has been caused because the Leader of the House has dismissed what I felt was quite a reasonable request in such a way.
I must intervene again to indicate to Senator West that my position is that the debate has been concluded and the question should be determined.
I just wanted to bring the situation back into perspective.
I appreciate the remarks you made at the beginning of this contribution. I am now putting the question: "That the Order of Business be Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 4."
Question put.
Vótail.
Will the Senators seeking a division please rise?
Senators N. C. Browne, Martin, McGowan and West rose.
Since there are not five Senators requesting a Division their names will be recorded as dissenting.
Order of Business agreed to, Senators N.C. Browne, Martin, McGowan and West dissenting.