I am proceeding with Amendment 40(b). Amendment 40 (a) was withdrawn in consonance with the acceptance of two earlier amendments. The amendment that remains should, I suggest, take its place, if adopted, after Article 43, amongst the other legislative provisions. It is strictly a legislative provision, whereas those I accepted yesterday more strictly came amongst the Articles dealt with under “Fundamental Rights.” My amendment reads: “To substitute after Article 43, and before Article 44, of the present draft the following:—`The utilisation of water-power and the production of electrical energy is placed under the control of the Parliament/Oireachtas, and Parliament/Oireachtas shall from time to time prescribe the manner in which this control shall be exercised, so as to safeguard the public interest and to ensure proper development and use.' ” It is not my intention at very great length to develop a case for the insertion of such an article as this, because it occurs to me that the case is more or less obvious and apparent. I would suggest to the Minister for Home Affairs that it would be germane to the consideration of such an Article as this to consider that a case has already been made out in the practice of other countries on this very matter. The case of Switzerland has been frequently referred to in this Chamber when dealing with different parts of the Constitution. There is an Article in the Swiss Constitution dealing with this exact matter. It is numbered 24 (a). and it deals with the utilisation of water-power under the supreme control of the Federation. The Article at some length, and with considerable detail, sets forth exactly the legislative restrictions upon the exercise of that water-power. What I wish to draw the Minister's attention to is that this Article in the Swiss Constitution is not an original Article. It is an amendment that was adopted by referendum in the year 1908. The Constitution was originally devised in 1848 and was revised in 1867, and this Article found its way by way of amendment in 1908, by a very huge vote—21½ cantons as against a half canton, or 304,000 votes as against 56,000 votes. I point to that for this reason, that this Article in the Swiss Constitution, dealing with the very matter intended to be covered by the amendment which I am now proposing, found its way there because of the teachings of necessity—that, unless some such provision were made as a constitutional provision, the country failed to protect itself in the development of its resources of power, and failed to ensure that development in the most economical way. The dangers experienced in Switzerland were twofold, and I just allude to them briefly in order to bring them before the attention of the Ministry and of the Dáil. The first was that until that Article was embodied in the Constitution it was found that foreign corporations were using Swiss water-power for foreign purposes, and it was also found that people—Swiss citizens—who held small water-powers in one place or another, were developing here at this particular point 50 h.p., where. apart from their obstruction, of larger development, it would have been possible to have developed in some other place on the same river a considerably higher water-power. The matter is very technical, and it has been examined in this country at very great length. I think it has been examined in this country recently by a body set up by an earlier Dáil, and called a Commission of Inquiry. It has been examined by that Commission at greater length and with greater detail than has ever been given to this matter in this country before, certainly far greater detail than one could expect to give it in debate in this House. It was to obviate such a debate that it was appointed. Here are the conclusions of this Commission—the technicians attached to which gave special attention to the matter:—“That all water resources and rights should be vested in the State. That the State should encourage sound water-power schemes by paying a bonus on every h.p. developed. That, as far as possible, the current generated in hydro-electric stations should be of a standard type, and also that the State should exercise sufficient control over the development of water powers to ensure (a) that all proposed schemes are economic; (b) where the development of a water-power interferes with existing rights and properties, that private compensations are equitable, that interests of greater value to the nation are not sacrificed for power development, and that the development of power is not prohibited by interests of less national importance; and (c) that all schemes within each catchment should tend to give the best total output for that catchment area.” After careful investigation this body came to the conclusion that those objects, which it considered to be vital and necessary for the development of water-power resources could only be attained efficiently and economically if the State undertook the supreme control by vestment of the entire water-power resources of this country, and I may say that this Article has been very carefully considered by electrical engineers and by certain competent authorities, and has been reduced down to as small and as compact a form as the importance of the subject warrants. And it is considered in this form to give just that degree of vestment that is adjudged to be necessary if this country is to get the best value out of its slender water-power resources, and if we are not to have those water-power resources raided by those in this country who are not primarily concerned with the development of this country for the advantage of the citizens in it, and it is in order to safeguard public interests as the amendment reads. It is to ensure that proper development and use that the intention of this amendment is that by an Article embodied in the Constitution, these rights should be ensured to the Free State, and for that object, and with that intention in view, I move that that amendment be accepted by this Dáil and embodied in the Constitution before the report be accepted.
CONSTITUTION OF SAORSTÁT EIREANN BILL—AMENDMENTS.
Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS
Mr. J. LYONS
I formally second the amendment.
MINISTER for HOME AFFAIRS (Mr. Kevin O'Higgins)
The case against the amendment is that it tends to redundancy in the Constitution, because the object of the proposed amendment is already secured in an amendment which was accepted yesterday, and which I moved. In order to place these two matters in direct juxtaposition in the minds of members it would be well, if I read out both. Deputy Figgis' amendment is:—"The utilisation of water power and the production of electrical energy is placed under the control of the Parliament/Oireachtas, and Parliament/ Oireachtas shall from time to time prescribe the manner in which this control shall be exercised, so as to safeguard the public interest, and to ensure proper development and use."
Now, turning to Amendment 20, which we passed yesterday, and following the very excellent lead which Deputy Figgis gave us, leaving out mere relative clauses and parentheses, we find:—"All the lands and waters, mines and minerals, within the territory of the Irish Free State, and also all the natural resources of the same territory (including the air and all forms of potential energy) belong to the Irish Free State, and shall be controlled and administered by the Parliament, in accordance with such regulations and provisions as shall be from time to time approved by legislation, but the same shall not be alienated," and so on.
Now, I submit that amendment accepted yesterday amply covers the object which Deputy Figgis aims at, and to accept his amendment now would merely be to leave ourselves open to the charge of having something superfluous and redundant in the Constitution. We, therefore, are not inclined to accept the amendment, and we ask the Dáil to take that view.
The amendment was put, and declared lost.