Seanad Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 19 Mar 1975

Vol. 79 No. 10

Amendment of Standing Order: Motion.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

I move:

That Standing Order No. 45 of the Standing Orders relative to Public Business be amended by the deletion of `A Parliamentary Secretary who is not a member of the Seanad' and the substitution of `A Parliamentary Secretary or Attorney General who is a member of the Dáil'.

This is a proposed amendment of Standing Order No. 45 for the purpose of allowing audience here to the Attorney General. Standing Order No. 45 at the moment deals only with the position of Parliamentary Secretaries. It reads:

A Parliamentary Secretary who is not a member of the Seanad may attend and be heard during the different stages of any Bill or the debate on any other matter.

Members will be aware that we already had a Bill which was dealt with by the Attorney General in the Dáil when the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions was being established. Because there was no right of audience here it was necessary for the Minister for Lands to deal with it in this House. The Attorney General has dealt with the Law Reform Commission Bill in the Dáil and it was suggested that we might make provision so that he could deal with it here. The general thinking which was agreed on both sides was that, rather than make an ad hoc arrangement for the Attorney General to deal with a particular Bill at particular times, so long as the Attorney General is a Member of the other House we should amend the Standing Order to permit him the same right of audience as Parliamentary Secretaries. Ministers have a Constitutional right to be heard in either House. The proposal in this motion is designed for that purpose.

Mr. Lenihan

We have no real opposition to this. It is a sensible motion having regard to the Law Reform Commission Bill. I take it that it will be confined to measures of this kind relating strictly to the Attorney General's Office and that there is no question of the Attorney General coming in as an alternative Minister or anything of that kind.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

This is something that must develop from practice. What we are suggesting now is an amendment to the Standing Order which effectively would put the Attorney General on the same basis as a Parliamentary Secretary. The practice would be that the Attorney General would attend only in connection with legislation which he is dealing with in the Dáil, or in which he may have a special interest. I should not like to confine myself more than that. It will probably occur to Senator Lenihan that there are other matters to be considered. For example, if there was a motion here dealing with the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions—I am just drawing this example out of the air—it would seem to me that the proper person to attend would probably be the Attorney General.

Mr. Lenihan

This would enable this to be done. That is reasonable.

Mr. McGlinchey

Did I understand the Leader of the House to say that the Attorney General is classed the same as a Parliamentary Secretary?

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

He is being put on the same basis as far as audience in this House is concerned.

Mr. Yeats

The Leader of the House will appreciate that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges agreed to this suggestion on the basis that the Attorney General would appear where matters, legislative and otherwise, would arise concerning his own Department. That is really the point that I am making. We should like to make it clear that we are in agreement with this proposal on the basis of the Committee's views expressed that he should be allowed to attend and be heard in this House where questions concerning his own jurisdiction were involved.

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

That seems to be reasonable. Unfortunately, due to circumstances over which I had no control, I was unable to be present when this was being discussed by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. I was not aware of any condition attached to the agreement to the amendment, but we can ensure that that point of view is put to the Attorney General and I am sure it will be appreciated by him.

Mr. Yeats

I was unable to be present at the Committee also. I am only going on what we got in the post this morning. I should not like it to be understood from what I said that there was a condition. There was not. As I understand the decision transmitted to us this morning there was not any specific condition, but I got the impression that there was an understanding.

Question put and agreed to.