It is proposed to take Nos. 1 and 2 and to take No. 2 at 12.30 and, if necessary, interrupt discussion on No. 1 if it has not concluded and, at the conclusion of No. 2, to revert to No. 1 if it is still continuing. As regards No. 3, I am in some difficulty. I understand that the Minister for Finance is moving a similar motion in the Dáil and he would wish to move it in the Dáil first. I would ask in these circumstances, as we cannot be quite certain whether he will be able to move it here or not before we conclude, that we might order No. 3 provisionally.
Order of Business.
It is proposed to take No. 1 and to take No. 2 at 12.30 and to take No. 3 if it has been passed by the Dáil before the conclusion of Business. Is that agreed?
On the Order of Business, since it does appear we may not have a full day's work before us, might I suggest that we add to the Order of Business Items No. 6 on which I feel I am becoming now monotonous —the Illegitimate Children (Maintenance and Succession) Bill, 1974. I do not want to be in the position of dividing the House or, worse still, failing to divide the House each time we meet by trying to add this item. If the Leader of the House would give me an assurance that he will try to have this taken perhaps, next week, and that it would be given a Second Reading then I shall not divide the House on it but I think I will have to ask for some undertaking in relation to this item.
I explained to the Senator yesterday that I am not in the position to give an undertaking. The fact that her request for an undertaking has been repeated does not alter my position. I am not in a position to give an undertaking.
I find it very difficult to understand the attitude of the Leader of the House in relation to this Bill. It had been on the Order Paper for a long number of weeks and as I said, we have already debated and are taking the Report Stage of the Adoption Bill, a subject matter very closely linked with this Bill and I find that for some curious reason the Leader of the House is less willing to take any steps to have time given to this Bill than he has been in relation to motions and other items. I suggest that this is an important social matter; it is a problem to which this House ought to give time and I find his attitude very disappointing.
I would ask the Leader of the House to facilitate Senator Robinson in this regard. I can appreciate that it is not "on" to have this matter discussed today but surely some assurance could be given as to when it can be taken. It is an important social matter and I feel that the rights of Independent Senators in this House should be respected and appreciated. We have two weeks of sittings—next week and the following week—surely this Bill can be accommodated in either of those two weeks in some measure or some indication can be given by the Leader of the House that this item can be taken.
Before the Leader of the House concludes the discussion, does any other Senator wish to contribute?
All I can do is express my view on this. I pointed out more than once that it is a matter for this House to fix the Order of Business. It is not fixed by the Government; it is not fixed by me. It is a matter for the House to fix it. When Senator Lenihan refers to finding time to accommodate discussion on this Bill it is not for me to find time. The House is entirely free to come to its own decision with regard to it. It is open to Senator Lenihan, as it is open to Senator Mary Robinson, to propose an amendment to the Order of Business at any time and let the House take a decision on it. From the Government's point of view, this is the third or fourth occasion on which the matter has been raised. On the first occasion, I made it clear to Senator Robinson that it was unlikely that it would be proposed—if the proposal is being left to me as Leader of the House—for inclusion in the Order of Business this side of the summer recess. That still remains to be the position. Possibly I should have said earlier to Senator Robinson that I understand the Government have in preparation legislation dealing with this subject. It seems proper that whatever legislation is introduced should be introduced after the Governmental scrutiny and preparation that the topic warrants. The Government, I understand, will be introducing legislation. I am not in a position to indicate when that legislation will be ready. In those circumstances there are reasonable grounds for arguing against taking it now. If Senator Robinson or Senator Lenihan want to obtain the views of the House and the decision of the House on it, there is procedure for doing that. It does not rest with me.
I am afraid the Leader of the House has given me no option but to move the amendment to include Item No. 6.
It is your right. It is not an option I am presenting to you. It is your right to do it if you want.
Might I suggest that although I welcome the hint or indication by the Leader of the House that the Government are considering this matter and may be bringing in legislation this, to me, is all the more reason to have a Second Reading debate on this Bill so the Minister can give us an indication of Government thinking on it. I fail to see why he cannot give the time to a discussion on this very important subject especially if the Government have a policy on it.
I have concluded the discussion on the Order of Business.
The Chair is capable of controlling the proceedings. The Senator is not entitled at this stage to move an amendment but I am prepared to say that an amendment was implicit on her original contribution. Accordingly, I am prepared to accept an amendment that item No. 6 be added to the Order of Business provided it is seconded.
I would like to make a remark on this. We are doing this on the Order of Business regularly here in the Seanad. It is not doing anybody any good. It is all very well for the Leader of the House to say: "Right, we will have a vote" and a vote takes place and time is wasted. Let us be mature about this. This is a very important matter. Surely it can be included in two weeks sitting time which we have next week and the following week. Surely there should be some "give", as it were, in a matter of this kind which has been raised on numerous occasions by Senator Robinson, rather than adopt the crude device of voting in this manner on the Order of Business. I sincerely think it is bringing the whole proceedings here into disrepute to have repetitive votes on the Order of Business. I just want to make that last appeal.
I would suggest to the Senator that perhaps these views could be expressed more effectively outside the House and that consultation might take place. The Question is: "That Item No. 6 be added to the Order of Business."
Amendment put and declared lost.
The original question is that the Order of Business consists of Items Nos. 1, 2 and 3. Is that agreed?
Order of Business agreed.