I propose Deputy Esmonde as Chairman.
Election of Chairman
ELECTION OF CHAIRMAN.
Mr. Kenny
I second that proposal.
Question: " That Deputy Esmonde be the Chairman of the Committee" put and agreed to.
DEPUTY ESMONDE TOOK THE CHAIR ACCORDINGLY.
My first function is to mention one matter. On a large Bill of this sort the question of amendments is bound to arise. The Minister has furnished a fair number of amendments. I do not think any body else has put in any amendments so far. I do not want to be too technical on the question of the time for putting in amendments. The Ministers have been in since about 12th April. I would suggest to those who have thought about it and want to put in amendments that we should have them by Friday of this week. I am principally concerned that if somebody has amendments which are worth while I want the Minister and his Department to have time to consider the amendments so that they can be properly dealt with. Would the Committee bear that in mind?
Speaking for our side we could not get in the amendments by next Friday. There would be a major problem so far as we are concerned. Our Whip tells us he has been discussing with the Parliamentary Secretary, Deputy Kelly, the unsuitability of two committees meeting simultaneously. I understood the Special Committee on the Misuse of Drugs Bill was terminating its meetings.
The difficulty is that Deputies are not free to attend meetings. It was only on the eve of the recess that we got word of this committee and we have not had an opportunity to speak to each other about it since. It is all right to say the Minister has his amendments in. That is a relatively easy matter for the Minister but it presents difficulties to us. There is no question of our having amendments in by Friday.
I can appreciate that. I chaired two other committees. The committee dealing with the Corporation Tax Bill was somewhat rushed because the Bill had to be through by a certain date. I understand the Minister is anxious to get this Bill off the ground because a considerable interest is taken in it. This is the right time of year to be discussing something like this in which there is a general public interest. Possibly from point of view of amendments we could look at the first ten sections of the Bill. They are mainly definition sections. Perhaps we could approach it on that basis. If members of the committee have amendments to the first ten sections they might try to have them in by Friday. Once a section is dealt with it is dealt with.
What I am more concerned about is this: I want the various members of this committee to get the fullest possible back-up service from the Minister's Department to ensure that sections are properly dealt with. I want all members of the committee to have a fair reading of the Bill and not be over-rushing any sections of it. It is a very important Bill and one in which there is considerable public interest. It has been awaited for a long time. There have been numerous submissions and a lot of investigations in this field. It is virtually a new Bill in our legislation.
Can we agree that we deal with, say, the first ten sections and let us have amendments on them but, perhaps members would bear in mind to get on with any amendments they may have on the other sections. I think that is the practical way to deal with it.
Cavan): This Bill was introduced in the Seanad and we got all Stages there before the Christmas recess. I cannot be very accurate about the date of the Second Reading in the Dáil; I think it was shortly after its resumption early in February.
I do not want to appear to be unreasonable about this but I will be asking to have the Bill dealt with by this committee reasonably expeditiously. The fact that there is another committee sitting on another Bill, with different personnel, could not in any way hamper this Bill. I have not the slightest hesitation in allowing a reasonable time for submission of amendments but I would suggest that, once we commence, we do not do it piecemeal, that we keep going on with it. I do not want to appear to be patronising. Deputies are entitled to a reasonable length of time in which to couch their amendments. But that having been said and done, we should get on with the Bill.
Would the committee agree to the suggestion that all amendments be in by Thursday evening of next week, say, by 5 p.m.?
I was hopeful that we would have a sitting next week. I know from previous experience of Bills that definitions usually take some time. Unfortunately the present method of drafting Bills is to put definitions at the beginning; I would much prefer to see them at the end. However that is how it is done, but it has often led to lots of delays. Therefore if possible I should like us to get started on the definitions section. That is why I suggested a deadline of Friday for any amendments on the early part of the Bill. I think it should be possible to do that.
I am quite prepared to agree to Deputy O'Leary's suggestion. I would suggest that all amendments be in by Thursday, 6th May and that we arrange a meeting early in the following week—say, Tuesday, 11th May.
Would the Minister's Department be able to deal with amendments if they received them by the 6th May, and possibly sit on the following Tuesday?
Yes, we would be able to deal with them.
Is that agreeable to all members? That is giving us a fair length of time.
It is not entirely correct of the Minister to say they are two separate committees. For instance, Deputy Haughey is a member of this committee and chairman of another, and I think Deputy Hogan O'Higgins is a member also of the Misuse of Drugs Committee. Therefore there is that problem to be considered. There is also the other matter which I understand has not been fully clarified, that is, an objection which our Whip made some time ago—I think the matter was raised in the House—of having two committees sitting simultaneously. I am merely expressing that concern because it has been expressed elsewhere. I express it so that it will not be taken that I agree absolutely.
I understand what Deputy Tunney is speaking about because that situation arose when there were in fact three committees sitting simultaneously. It was a really impossible position because the Corporation Profits Tax Bill Committee was sitting for long periods and it was very tough on all the members of all of the committees. I think the situation will not arise to the same extent in this regard. I experienced that difficulty myself because I was on the three committees—the EEC Legislation Committee, the Misuse of Drugs Committee and the Corporation Profits Tax Bill Committee, when there was a fair load of work for the EEC Committee at the same time. I think it has been worked out now that there will not be an overburden on the various members of the various committees. For instance, the position in relation to the Misuse of Drugs Bill is that that committee are now on section 22 and have made considerable headway.
The point has been made that this Bill was introduced in the Seanad and it is some time since it was dealt with in the Dáil. That is all the more reason—having waited so long, I must say I sympathise with ministerial anxiety and appreciate the need for expedition—that our real concern must be that, whatever we do, we do well. It would be a pity for the sake of a week that we might not do as effectively the work we all hope to do. I take it that Deputy O'Leary's suggestion was in relation to Part I, sections 1 to 10?
With the greatest respect, I am against tackling this Bill piecemeal. For instance, if we tackle the first sections and say we will have amendments in by a certain date, I fear nothing would be done about the other amendments after that. Then we would have a lengthy adjournment in preparation for the next part of the Bill. I realise that the Opposition may have Deputy Haughey on another committee, but as we all know the bulk of the work on a Bill of this nature is done by the Opposition spokesman, who is Deputy Tunney. I think Deputy O'Leary's suggestion was, if I understood him correctly, that all the amendments would be submitted by Thursday of next week. I would suggest that we agree with that and we would be ready then to sit on the following Tuesday.
Yes, that would not clash with the Misuse of Drugs Committee which is scheduled for the Wednesday afternoon. Tuesday would be available for this committee. Therefore I would suggest that we would commence our first meeting at, say, 4 o'clock on Tuesday, 11th May. I take it the members are agreeable to that and that amendments will be in by Thursday, 6th May?
I want to say that there are a lot of people who are interested in this Bill and who would like to see this committee functioning. They will be very welcome here. There is seating accommodation at the end of the room and anybody interested in the subject—I think there is a great deal of general interest in it—is welcome to come and hear our proceedings.
The Committee adjourned at 7.20 p.m. until Tuesday 11th May, 1976 at 4 p.m.