I wonder would the Minister and the Members from this side of the House agree to an adjournment of the proceedings of this Committee for, say, a week. My reasons are as follows. Some of us have been very much involved in the election campaign down in the west, and personally I am not as prepared for this committee meeting this afternoon as I should be. We have other amendments to put down and we feel that with the Order of Business of the week being what we now know it is, that is, the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Bill being taken on Thursday, it would help to keep things in order if the Minister would agree to a postponement.
Procedure
I should like to accommodate Deputy Collins. I would not like to see him taken short on an important Bill such as this, but it will be disappointing if we cannot get on with it. As Deputies are aware, there is considerable demand to have this Bill passed into legislation. I had hoped we would make a lot of progress today and that we would report before the end of the month and get the Bill into the other House before Christmas. Has the Deputy any idea how long we might be at this stage?
Certainly the Members of my party would like to see this Bill through as quickly as possible and we shall go as far as we can to enable the Minister to finish this Stage and get it to the Seanad. I was concerned perhaps more than I should be, as were the Members of the Minister's own party——
Not too much.
If the Minister could accommodate us by agreeing to a week's postponement, then we could make up for what might have been done today. This would be in the interest of giving the Bill the consideration it merits.
If the next meeting is to be this day week, we would want to fix, say, Friday as the latest day for receiving amendments.
I would go along with that.
In regard to amendments that may be considered by Members of your party, does he include the amendments to the first three sections?
I was going to say we could let the first three sections through today. They are purely technical sections.
If that suits all members.
If it does not interfere with the Minister, we will let the first three sections through today as they are purely technical and explanatory sections.
I know there probably will be criticism of the Committee holding up the matter for another week and that possibly the by-election should not intrude on Dáil business. As a matter of fact, on this occasion it did. Late this morning I received a number of suggested amendments from an extremely important body very much concerned with the Bill and its contents. In order to give proper consideration to the suggested amendments by that body I should like the Minister to accede to Deputy Collins' request.
I should be agreeable to that. I do not want to take Deputy Collins short in relation to this. All amendments put forward should be discussed.
Do I take it that we proceed with the first three sections now?
Yes.
A further matter which arises is the fixing of the date for the next sitting. We want to have some definite date for amendments in fairness to the Minister to give him an opportunity of meeting any of the amendments put in.
Supposing one said 4 o'clock on Friday for the amendments, that would mean that the amendments could be sent to the Department before 5 o'clock.
I was going to suggest lunchtime on Friday, if that is agreeable.
I would certainly go along with that so that the Minister's staff would have an opportunity of processing them.
Lunchtime on Friday for the amendments. What about the next day's sitting?
The 25th. At the same time might I suggest that we have a double session that day to make up for the time we are losing today?
We will say 4.15 p.m. on Tuesday, 25th of November. Is it the intention to sit the rest of the day?
What is the normal sitting time for a Committee such as this?
It is up to us. It is as well once we meet to get through as much business as possible.
We have a number of amendments in but I notice that one of them has been ruled out of order on the grounds that it involves a potential charge on the Revenue. Obviously it does not comply with Standing Orders. Can the Minister, as distinct from a Private Member, move an amendment which involves a potential charge on the Revenue?
Yes.
: It is important to know that. I wanted to have it on the record. It is my intention to urge on the Minister to take a certain course.
" To take a certain course " in the Deputy's language and mine are probably different things.
Section 1 agreed to.