Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 24 Jan 1924

Vol. 6 No. 8

ACCOMMODATION FOR THE OIREACHTAS.

The following motion stood in the name of the President in the Orders of the Day:—

De bhri gur gá gan a thuille moille féachaint chun árus ceart do sholáthar don Oireachtas.

Agus de bhri go ndineann sé ceataí don phuiblíocht agus go gcuireann sé saothrú talamhaíochta agus saothrú eolaíochta chun deiridh áitreabh Chumann Ríoga Bhaile Atha Cliath agus an Mhúséum Náisiúnta do bheith ¾ sealbhú ag an Oireachtas agus cosc a bheith le cuairteoirí chun an Mhúséum Náisiúnta dá dheascaibh sin. Ar an abhar san beartuitear agus tathar a bheartu leis seo—

(1) Go ndéanfar gan a thuille moille féachaint chun foirgintí an Ospidéil Ríoga i gCill Mhaighneann do chur ar fáil mar árus sealadach don Oireachtas agus na foirgintí ina bhfuil an tOireachtas fé láthair do chur arís chun a n-úsáide bunaidh.

(2) Go gceapfar Coiste de bhaill den Oireachtas chun fiosrú dhéanamh agus tuairisc a thabhairt do dhá Thigh an Oireachtais ar ionaid oiriúnacha a bheadh le fáil i gcóir buanáruis don Oireachtas.

(3) Go vótálfar agus go vótáltar leis seo baochas Dháil Eireann do Chumann Ríoga Bhaile Atha Cliath i dtaobh na saoráidí a thug an Cumann don Oireachtas.

(4) Go gcuirfar teachtaireacht go dtí Seanad Eireann á iarraidh ortha an rún so do bhreithniú chó luath is bheidh san caothúil dóibh.

Whereas, it is necessary to take immediate steps for the provision of adequate accommodation for the Oireachtas.

And whereas, the occupation of the premises of the Royal Dublin Society and of the National Museum and the consequent restrictions on visitors to the latter institution is a cause of inconvenience to the public and of loss to agricultural and scientific development. Be it therefore and it is hereby resolved—

(1) That immediate steps be taken to have the buildings of the Royal Hospital, Kilmainham, made available for the temporary accommodation of the Oireachtas and the buildings at present occupied restored to their original purposes.

(2) That a Committee of members of the Oireachtas be appointed to enquire and report to both Houses of the Oireachtas as to suitable and available sites for the permanent housing of the Oireachtas.

(3) That the thanks of Dáil Eireann be and are hereby voted to the Royal Dublin Society for the facilities which have been placed at the disposal of the Oireachtas by the Society.

(4) That a message be sent to Seanad Eireann requesting that this resolution be considered by them at their earliest convenience.

The following amendment in the name ofMr. DARRELL FIGGIS was tabled:—

To omit all words after the first paragraph, and to substitute the following words:—

"Be it, therefore, and is hereby, resolved:

"(1) That a Committee consisting of ten Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, be appointed to enquire and report to both Houses of the Oireachtas as to (a) the temporary accommodation of the Oireachtas pending its permanent housing, and (b) the permanent housing of the Oireachtas.

"(2) That Seanad Eireann be requested to appoint an equal number of Members of the Seanad to serve on such Committee, and that a message be sent to Seanad Eireann accordingly."

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

In considering the amendment which has been circulated in the name of Deputy Darrell Figgis, and in amending the draft of that amendment, we discovered a flaw in paragraph (2) of the President's motion, and that paragraph, I think, would have to be framed to read, "That a Committee be appointed to inquire and report as to suitable and available sites for the permanent housing of the Oireachtas."

We are concerned here with the appointment of a Committee of Deputies, not a Committee of Members of both Houses. And I think it would be necessary to add at the end of paragraph (4) words to the effect "That a like Committee be appointed by the Seanad to join a Committee of the Dáil." That brings the motion and the amendment into conformity. I think the President agrees to that.

The PRESIDENT

Yes: In moving the Resolution in its amended form, I have to say that it may be an ease to Deputies' minds to know that we are putting it forward for the free vote of the House. As far as the Government is concerned, the Government Whips are withdrawn. In considering this question, we want the free and unfettered decision of the House, and as I notice Deputy Figgis wears an enigmatical smile, I may as well say it is not through pressure from the Party I have the honour to represent that this concession is made. It is in order that neither now nor at any other time can it be said that any influence, direct or indirect, has been brought to bear upon any member of the Dáil in deciding this matter. In putting forward this Resolution, I think it is right that I should state, at the very beginning, that we are here in occupation of premises which do not belong to us. We are here in the first place as guests, and in the second place very much like squatters, because, I suppose, as time goes on our claim to remain here gets a little stronger. We are very much indebted to the Royal Dublin Society for their generosity, for their courtesy, their great help, the great assistance that they have, at all times, given us in making our stay here as comfortable as possible, and for their readiness in meeting us on almost every occasion that we have had to make representations to them for still more hospitality. I should say that our occupation of these premises has to a very large extent, interfered with the work of the Society. It was, perhaps, some nine months after we came here first that we had representations from them to that effect, and I then gave an undertaking that I would bring the matter before the Oireachtas, and have it definitely settled as to whether we could not decide upon acquiring some other premises which would enable us to discharge the business of the State in a proper and workmanlike manner.

A Committee was appointed by the Dáil and the Seanad last July, and I think their report might be said to consist of two complaints—first, that they had not time in which to register their complaints sufficiently strongly, and the other, that the Committee was divided amongst itself upon the question of temporary and permanent accommodation, and upon the fact that they did not like to leave here and did not like to go to Kilmainham. And they were determined that they would not come to a definite conclusion upon the subject. I will admit that the time allotted to the consideration of the subject was very short, but these are days when quick decisions must be arrived at, and postponing the considerations of questions does not solve them, and very often does not lend much to their ultimate solution.

I do not think it is necessary for me to refer, at this stage, to the fact that we hear people now talking of sentiment who would perhaps scorn to be accused of such a thing as sentiment a short time ago. But any sentimental regard that there may be for fixing the housing of the Oireachtas in a particular place is not prejudiced by this motion. We have got to direct our minds to the fact that whether we decide upon ultimately taking over what is known as the old Irish Houses of Parliament or not, that our ultimate occupation or our entering into occupation of those premises must be set down—if we were to decide here and now that was going to be done—as not possible sooner than March, 1931, seven years hence. That is the information at my disposal and I believe that that information was at the disposal of the Committee considering this matter. What we are concerned with in this Resolution is: what is the best accommodation that can be provided for the Oireachtas between this and that period. I will concern myself with the time it would take to make the Royal Hospital fit for the occupation of Parliament, the cost of it and the accommodation that would be afforded. During the last week or so, Deputies may have read in the Press three advertisements giving notice of certain Bills that were to be introduced under the title of Private Bills. Now for that particular service we have got at the moment no accommodation whatever, and it will be necessary, if we are to consider Private Bill legislation, to allow a considerable amount of space to deal with it. We will require a much larger Committee Room and Examiner's Room and other apartments inseparable from and incidental to the consideration of such matters. The total available space in these premises represents something like 32,000 square feet, so it is limited. Even if we decided to remain here, a considerable amount of additional building would have to be done or provision of extra accommodation would be essential. We have examined the Royal Hospital from that aspect and after providing for the room in which the Dáil would meet and the room in which the Seanad would meet, there is available something like 48,000 sq. feet. In the case of the old Irish House of Commons, after accommodation had been provided for the Dáil and the Seanad, the accommodation available would be approximately 38,000 sq. feet, so that in this matter the Royal Hospital bears a rather favourable comparison either with what is hoped by a great many people shall be our ultimate home or what we have here, or any of the suggested alternative sites put before us.

The time that it would take to adapt the Royal Hospital to the needs of the Oireachtas would be twelve months from the date of the start. If it was decided to start in June, you would have the building ready by June 12 months. If we were ready to start now, it would be ready in 12 months. Apart from the Dáil and the Seanad Chambers, there would be 95 other rooms in the Royal Hospital with the every other accommodation that is required in an institution of that sort and there is also provision for a library within the quadrangle.

The total cost in the case of the Royal Hospital is estimated to be £45,000, so that if it were intended to remain there for a period of, say, ten years, the cost would run into approximately £4,500 a year. In the case of the Bank, or the old House of Parliament, it is estimated that the period, as I have already stated, would be seven years, and that the estimate would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of £1,000,000. I would like to say this. I have kept rather quiet on this subject, although there have been many rumours that I was personally interested, or that my friends were personally interested in the Royal Hospital. There is a tribe in this country known as speculators, and they have not been idle for the last couple of years. I do not know but that a good deal of the opposition to this particular Kilmainham site has been on the part of these speculators. I am certainly not keen upon putting money into these people's pockets. I have heard of one case where a premises was bought for £4,000, which brought in £3,000 in rent for a year. I suppose if we were to acquire that place as an annexe to the future House of Parliament the claim would be in the neighbourhood of £20,000. I am just as anxious to clip the wings of people who are absolutely indifferent to our economic necessities at the moment as I am to deal with those who are standing in the way of the provision of cheap housing accommodation for the people. That is a matter that cannot be left out of consideration in considering this particular problem. Recently the Medical Officer of Health for the City of Dublin gave an interview to the Press, and he placed beyond all doubt the fact that the housing accommodation of the working classes in this city is deplorable. We are faced within the next few years with the reconstruction of many destroyed business premises in the city and other premises in the country, owing to what has transpired during the last two or three years. That will require a considerable effort on the part of the building trades in this city, and I do not think it is an opportune time for large Government expenditure of money to provide suitable accommodation. I do think that if it be the intention ultimately to take the old House and the old site, we ought not to contemplate any large building schemes until after some inroad has been made upon the housing problem in the city. I think that those who have made a study of it will admit that even if it were possible to have a concentration of the building trades upon the housing problem in the city that they would not make an appreciable reduction in the number of houses required for the next five years, taking into consideration the fact that you cannot arrest the reconstruction of O'Connell Street and other places during the next few years. One must, as far as it is possible, from the Government angle, limit the amount that we would do in that respect. We have kept that in mind when considering the relative cost of the Royal Hospital with the other institution.

I was trying to find the report of an interview we had with the Royal Dublin Society, in which certain representations were put to us in regard to the work they were doing and to what extent their work was interfered with by our occupation of these premises. It was mentioned at that interview that the Royal Dublin Society was responsible for the initiation of quite a number of institutions in this country. They gave a list, I should say, of about twelve, and they dealt very strongly with the fact that that work was seriously interfered with.

I would like to say just one or two things in conclusion. The first is in connection with Private Bill legislation. We have got notice of three Bills, and in these cases there will be, I expect, junior and senior counsel on behalf of the promoters. Possibly there will be nine legal gentlemen engaged in the first case that will come before us. I expect that there will be a number of witnesses, technical experts and other people of that sort, and that, generally speaking, something in the nature of a miniature court will be required if the business is to be done properly and in a workmanlike manner. We have not got that accommodation at the present moment. The other thing is that our occupation of the premises here has, to a very large extent, interfered with the enjoyment by the public of popular institutions—the Museum, Art Gallery, and the Library. Dr. Joly stated:—

"Twelve institutions, now going concerns of the greatest value to the country, have originated under the Royal Dublin Society. They are: the Botanic Gardens, the National Library, the National Museum, the College of Science, the Radium Institute, the Geological Survey, the Ordnance Survey, the Veterinary College, the Metropolitan School of Art, the Agricultural Society at Ballsbridge, the Art and Industries Exhibition at Ballsbridge, and the Fishery Department of Ireland."

The principal case that was put by Dr. Joly was the Radium Institute, and I think we gave him some assurance on that point. The dual occupation of premises such as this does not lend itself to the proper treatment of a subject of that sort. In putting forward this proposal for the temporary accommodation of the Oireachtas, it is put forward in good faith, on the understanding that it is temporary accommodation, and that we are not now in a position to spend huge sums of money upon housing even the first institution of the country in surroundings that would be fit for such housing. We are calling upon the people of this country for perhaps the maximum amount of taxation that the people can bear. We are limiting Government expenditure in every possible way, and we are impressing upon everybody the necessity for economy. We believe that in this particular case provision can be made for suitable housing for the next ten years at a minimum cost, and that it does not prejudice and will not prejudice the ultimate decision as to where the eventual housing of the Oireachtas has got to be.

Mr. BLYTHE

I second the motion.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

In moving the Amendment to this motion, I would like to join with the President in stating from my own personal point of view what I am sure every Deputy will agree with entirely—that every member of each House of the Oireachtas is deeply indebted to the Royal Dublin Society for the courtesy with which they have placed these premises at our disposal—premises in which we have done work that, I believe, has been of certain importance, and where we have been eminently comfortable. One appreciates to the full the desire of the Royal Dublin Society that they should resume occupation of these premises, which they lent to us, not merely for their own purposes, but that they might be able to continue in these premises the good work they have done in the past, and which they wish to continue in the future. So far, we are in agreement. But my amendment is moved definitely so as to enable the Dáil not to go into many of the questions that the President dealt with in his original substantive motion. The rights and wrongs as to whether this House should remove even temporarily to Kilmainham, depends very largely on whether or not there is an effective alternative. I myself believe that there is not only one, but more than one effective alternative. I will not go into the alternatives at the moment. There may be others who will be speaking later to this Amendment who will deal with them more fully. I only wish the Dáil to recognise that Kilmainham is not the only alternative to our continuance here. But even if it were the only alternative, it is still worth considering whether we should or should not continue here, and whether the Royal Dublin Society could not be given provision other than would be given to it by our relinquishing these premises. That is to say, there is not only one question of alternative. It is not the only alternative this Dáil has to consider as to where it will be, but there is also the question of the alternative that might be suggested by the Royal Dublin Society, which is also worth consideration. I believe these matters would be better discussed—because they involve such close attention to detail—by a Committee appointed by this Dáil, rather than by the whole Dáil. I believe that if that Committee were to consider the matter, go into all these alternatives, investigate their possibilities, and report upon those possibilities to the Dáil, then the Dáil would be in a better position to examine the whole matter than it can be without having before it—as it is admitted the Dáil has not before it—the consideration of any other alternative than Kilmainham. The President, in his speech, with his usual acumen, has put before us only Leinster House or Kilmainham. The President has not dealt with the question of the permanent housing of the Oireachtas. He has stated that that should be considered by a Committee. If the permanent housing of the Oireachtas is a matter that should be investigated by a Committee because a Committee is more competent to handle a detailed question of that kind, then I suggest the detailed question of a similar kind —the interim housing of the Oireachtas —would also, for the very same reasons, be better investigated by a Committee than by the entire Dáil. Not that the matter will be taken out of the hands of the Dáil, but that the Committee, having given attention to all the details, will be able to report back to the Dáil and be able to put its investigations under more than one head, so that this Dáil will be able to judge with a fuller display of material before it than it has got at present.

There are one or two points in the President's motion that I would like to draw attention to. My amendment, as will be seen. rules some of them out. I particularly desire to rule out the second paragraph of the President's resolution:

"And whereas the occupation of the premises of the Royal Dublin Society and of the National Museum and the consequent restrictions on visitors to the latter institution is a cause of inconvenience to the public and of loss to agricultural and scientific development."

I would like to attend briefly to a sentence in that paragraph, and I will endeavour to do so with studious fairness. Take the sentence: "... the occupation of the premises of the Royal Dublin Society and of the National Museum...." Nothing is said there as to the occupation of the College of Science, which is also a matter of very considerable importance. Why do I refer to the College of Science? For this reason, that the premises adjacent to this building, including the College of Science, have been taken as Government buildings. The greater portion of the College of Science has been taken over as administrative offices for Government Executive work, and it will be admitted by everybody that it is desirable that the Parliament Houses of the country should be somewhere near the Executive and Administrative Offices that flow upon the legislative work done in Parliament.

There is another sentence of this paragraph I desire to call attention to. It says: "A consequent restriction on visitors to the latter institution"—the latter institution being the National Museum. I fail entirely to appreciate why our occupation of Leinster House —and I am not going outside the paragraph in my argument at the moment— should cause any restriction on visitors to another building that is adjacent, if it is desired that visitors should go there, and we should have the whole of Leinster House. In other words, we all come as far as the gates of Kildare Street. The public can come as far as the gates of Kildare Street. If, therefore, we were to consider the door of Leinster House as our entrance, the public, if it came to the door, would be in exactly the same position as the public is now, with no greater inconvenience to Deputies, if we were to take over the whole of Leinster House. My point is that the case is not proved. The President has referred to certain Private Bill legislation that will be coming before the Dáil. Those who are familiar with the procedure of Private Bill legislation know that before any Private Bill is allowed to be considered by the Oireachtas it will be necessary to prove its preamble, and I suggest, taking that merely as an illustration, that the preamble of this Resolution is not proved. In any case it does prejudge the question. The President knows that. He has admitted it, and his speech recommending his own Resolution was a very remarkable speech.

He was arguing in favour of the Oireachtas going for a period of time to Kilmainham, and I think Deputies will agree with me that I do not misconstrue that speech if I were to say that the tenour of it was: "The medicine is not very pleasing to you, but there is nothing else for you to do but to swallow it." He never pleaded in favour of Kilmainham; his argument was not that it was a desirable place for us to be in, but there was no other recommendation to be put before the Dáil. I suggest this is a matter that should be investigated by a Committee of the Dáil. I am not now going into the question whether the Oireachtas should or should not permanently be housed afterwards in the old Parliament House in College Green. The President states that that should be left to a Committee, and I agree that that should be so. I am merely saying that seeing a Committee is to be created for that purpose, that Committee is the best body to investigate the other question, which is cognate to it, and that is the housing of the Oireachtas until it takes its permanent quarters wherever they should be. This I do desire to say: There is a very strong sentimental feeling that we should go to the old House in College Green. That has to be recognised; but there is quite distinct and separate from that an equally strong personal and sentimental feeling that we should not go to Kilmainham, and I think that is sound. Deputy Wilson smiles. He remembers Kilmainham has in the past meant other things, some of them painful to the memories of individuals, but still, apart altogether from that, Kilmainham would be putting this Parliament, even for a very short period of time, outside of easy access from the centre of the city. I earnestly urge Deputies to consider that point. I think it is very desirable that the Parliament of the Free State should be somewhere right in the very centre of the capital of that State.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Is not the Deputy going into the merits of the main question?

Mr. O'CONNELL

He said he was not.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

I am.

Professor MAGENNIS

He is wandering around Kilmainham.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

Perhaps you will be sufficiently tolerant to let me wind that up? I have urged that we should not go to Kilmainham for the reason that it would take us from the centre of the city. Now I come to my amendment, and I say that in view of the fact that Kilmainham is so vexed a question, a Committee ought to be appointed to report whether there are or are not any effective alternatives to it. I am sorry the President should have referred to a question that, I am sure, in the feeling of every Deputy, he might have left without reference. That is that there were any motives in his mind other than the one motive which we attribute to him, to find the best place for this Oireachtas find the best place for this Oireachtas to go to. That motive is common to us all. There will be always speculators, and I hope there will be some contrivance by which their pitch will be queered. I am urging a committee should be appointed to go into this question and to go fully into the matter of alternatives, to examine costs and estimates in regard to those alternatives, and to put up framed conclusions and lay them before the Dáil. I am sure we will find much greater satisfaction will be achieved by that means. If as a result of the appointment of the committee, that committee should report that we go to Kilmainham, there would be greater satisfaction in proceeding in that manner than in proceeding in the manner now suggested to us in this Resolution, and that is that we should now decide this question out of hand; without respect to any particulars, without the provision of any formulated alternative, we are asked that we should now decide straight away upon Kilmainham; so let it be.

I urge that that is an undesirable course to adopt. I ask the Dáil to consider the matter carefully and to agree with me that the best course to adopt, and so avoid precipitating a conclusion now, is to let a Committee be appointed. I would prefer that as far as possible that would be the Committee that met last July. That Committee did go into this matter, and I think I am right in saying that whatever differences the Committee had, I believe the majority were of opinion that wherever the Oireachtas went or whatever it did or did not do, Kilmainham was not suitable.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

It sounds like the main question again, Deputy Figgis.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

No sir. I suggest——

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I rule that it is the main question.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

I suggest if a Committee came to that conclusion, that the right thing to do is——

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I was Chairman of this Committee, and Deputy Figgis is now telling us what the Committee decided. The Committee made no such decision, as a matter of fact. In any event, the question now is, whether instead of deciding the matter by motion, we should submit it to a Committee, and arguments should be directed towards proving that referring the matter to a Committee would be better than coming to a decision on the main motion now. If, on an amendment, we enter into the merits of it, such as would naturally arise when the main question is before us, it would surely be out of order.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

I bow to your ruling. The only point is that I think it is desirable that the Committee I am now urging should establish some kind of continuity with the work of the earlier Committee. There should be as many members of the new Committee as possible taken from the last Committee. I urge, therefore, that a Committee be appointed to investigate this matter and report to the Dáil. I am very glad the President has given the assurance that there will be a free vote of the Dáil. I remember the President, the Minister for Education, and the Minister for Home Affairs on several occasions told us that every vote in the Dáil was a free vote. I am sure they all are, but I would like to think that in this matter there will be a special kind of a free vote.

Mr. O'CONNELL

A freer vote.

Captain REDMOND

I beg to second the amendment. I take it that, with your leave, the only matter that we can discuss upon this amendment is whether a Committee is to be set up to consider the question of the temporary accommodation of the Oireachtas, and also its permanent accommodation. As regards the latter, of course, there is nothing to say, because the President himself, in his motion, has made a similar proposal; and as regards the former, I do desire to support Deputy Figgis in his contention that it would be more advisable for us to proceed to bring about even our temporary accommodation, after full consideration in Committee, than by means of a snatch vote taken in the Dáil. There are many alternatives to the one proposed by the President. I do not think that the President has made any case whatever on the question that it is either Leinster House or Kilmainham, and for that reason alone, I think it would be unwise on our part to take such an important decision as this is, even in regard to our temporary accommodation, involving, as it will, according to the President, an expenditure of some £45,000, on a temporary measure, without having the matter fully investigated and gone into by a small Committee of the Dáil, perhaps with the assistance of the Seanad. I cannot understand whether there is any particular reason why we should not continue where we are.

I presume that each Deputy, as he rises to his feet to-day—if any more are going to speak—will re-echo the words of the President and pass a most cordial vote of thanks to the Royal Dublin Society for the accommodation that they have given us here. The President has not informed us that very pressing measures or appeals have been made by that Society to him for us to take our exit from this place. There does not seem to me to be very much interference. There is certainly none with the Library, as far as the Dáil is concerned, and very little with any of the twelve matters which the President mentioned were within the purview of the Royal Dublin Society. I think that, as Deputy Figgis has said, the alternative accommodation of the Society itself might very well be a matter to be considered by this Committee. The Society has at its disposal the premises belonging to it at Ballsbridge. I do not know whether it would be possible for them to adapt those premises for their immediate and temporary purposes. Certainly, before we are to take a decision here to-day, I think we should be told whether it is proposed to remove the Government Offices from the College of Science, which they now occupy, up to Kilmainham, or not. If that was the intention of the Government, of course, it would put a different complexion on the matter. I think if we are interfering with anything by our presence here, we are interfering more with the College of Science than with anything else. If it would not be the President's proposal to remove the Government Offices out to Kilmainham then we would find ourselves out at Kilmainham, and no matter how many square feet we might be occupying, we would be a good many feet away from the principal Government Offices. That is, however, getting on to the main question as to the desirability of Kilmainham at all, which I, for one, having duly considered, absolutely reject. Therefore, I think that it is a most reasonable proposal that has been made here this afternoon by Deputy Figgis, and I hope that now the Government Party, having been unfettered and unchained, that they will record their votes individually, according as they themselves desire.

On the question of deciding now about going to Kilmainham, all I can say is this, that from my knowledge of the past, Kilmainham was a very easy place to get into, but a very difficult place to get out of. I also believe that in this particular sense, not in the sense in which that phrase might have been used in the days gone by, that if we went to Kilmainham even to occupy it as temporary premises and spent £45,000 there, and that is the estimate, mind you, of what we would have to spend, it would not be so easy in the future to remove from there to the place that we all hope, and that every Irishman throughout the world has hoped, we will one day occupy—our old Parliament in College Green.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The amendment is now before the Dáil.

Professor THRIFT

I do not want the members of the Dáil to be under any misapprehension whatever as to the serious effect on the work of the Royal Dublin Society that our occupation of these premises has. There is no doubt but it has seriously interfered with the work of the Royal Dublin Society in many of its branches. It interferes with the work they do in the matter of scientific lectures and their encouragement of music, and also in the accommodation that they give possibly for visitors in the Reading Room. It interferes and hampers their work more seriously. It interferes with their membership, and in that respect, does them serious harm. While I would be as emphatic as anyone in stressing that point, I would like to support this suggestion of threshing out thoroughly the question as to whether we are really faced or not with the occupation of these premises and the withdrawal to a place—the word for which was used in such an ambiguous sense by those who have spoken before me—Kilmainham. I am not going into that question at all, but I do think that we are to consider it our duty to set these premises free for the Royal Dublin Society in order that they may carry on their work unhampered. We all know that they could not carry it on if required to withdraw to Ballsbridge or some other place like that. While we ought to give them every opportunity of resuming their place here, after due notice, I think we should not come to the conclusion to depart to a place which will be unsuitable for the work of the Dáil. I refer to the suggestion of going to the hospital premises at Kilmainham.

I do not think we can really in this Dáil properly consider whether we are faced with this amendment as an alternative or not but it seems to me it is a quite reasonable course for us to ask for a Committee, qualified to go into this matter, to go into it thoroughly and with a reasonable time at their disposal for so doing so as to make a report to us upon the matter. It may be argued that we have already had a Committee to consider the question and we got no result from it. My recollection of the last Committee is that they were required to report within a very limited time and that they did not get any real or proper chance of making a proper report. I think it is a reasonable thing to ask for a Committee to go into this whole question in full detail, and for this reason I support the suggestion to set up the Committee.

Mr. WOLFE

I am one of those who hold very distinct views on this matter of the housing of the Oireachtas. I should have preferred to have spoken direct on the President's motion. I am rather ignorant of Parliamentary procedure, but it seems to me now that one must speak upon the amendment and accordingly I will try to deal with the amendment as it occurs to me. Of course we join forces with Deputy Figgis, naturally all of us, in thanking the Royal Dublin Society for the hospitality they have given to the Oireachtas during the time we have been here, and I am sure that they will, if necessary, continue that hospitality. One of the strongest points the President made for going to Kilmainham was the smallness of the cost compared with the taking over of the old House in College Green at once. Well, I think it is possible to be too economical. There are some things that it does not pay to be economical in, to that degree. If you are going against the sentiment of the Irish people throughout the world, I think it would be paying too much for economy. Now there is no doubt that the Irish throughout the whole world are looking to us to have our Parliament in College Green.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Deputy Wolfe is going into the main question now. The Deputy can discuss that on the main question if the main question comes up again. If this Amendment is carried, it sends the question of selecting both temporary and permanent accommodation to a Committee, and the amended Motion, therefore, would come before the Dáil as a substantive Motion, and would not include any question of whether we were going or staying. If, on the other hand, this Amendment is defeated, and if it is therefore resolved that there be no Committee, the question proposed by the President will again be before the Dáil, and then the question of Kilmainham or the alternatives can be discussed here, so that the Deputy would lose nothing by waiting.

Mr. JOHNSON

On a point of order and procedure and convenience, it occurs to me that the amendment should be taken as an alternative Resolution so as to allow the whole question pro and con to be discussed. Otherwise we will have to decide the question for or against. If we decide against referring the question to a Committee we shall then be discussing the motion, which includes the setting up of a Committee, and a decision if it was against the motion would not in any manner indicate the minds of some members of the Dáil, because the motion is in four paragraphs, some of which are agreed to, and there is only one paragraph that is not agreed. My suggestion is that it would be more convenient to consider the amendment as an alternative Resolution and that the whole question, including all alternatives, might be discussed in the one debate.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

If we proposed to set up, as this amendment does, a Commitee to go into the merits of certain proposals, it seems to me wrong that we should ourselves, before setting up this Committee, go into the merits of the proposals.

Mr. JOHNSON

My point is not that of going into the merits of other proposals but going into the demerits of one particular place—Kilmainham.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

If the Committee's proposal is adopted will we not have an opportunity of discussing this whole matter again when the Committee presents its report—if it ever does?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

That I take it is obvious. If a Committee is appointed it will have to take into consideration the whole question, and will have to report. When the Committee reports the whole question will be up again. I am afraid Deputy Johnson's suggestion of allowing people to go into the demerits of Kilmainham without allowing them to go into the merits of any other place is not practical. I think the real difference between the motion and the amendment is that the amendment proposes to set up a Committee to go into the whole question of both permanent and temporary accommodation, and the Deputy therefore, for example, would be quite in order in suggesting that there are a great many alternatives, and he would be in order in mentioning them. If there are 8 or 9 or 10 or 20 alternatives these would be the subject of discussion by that Committee; but it would not be in order to go into the merits of each of these proposals now or the demerits of the proposal about Kilmainham. Deputy Wolfe, I take it, is postponing his speech for the main question.

Mr. WOLFE

Yes.

Mr. SHAW

I do not know if I would be in order in suggesting that possibly the President might agree to the acceptance of the amendment, for the present, at all events, because there are a great many Deputies here, including myself, who have never seen these premises, and I feel that without seeing the premises I would not be in a position to vote.

MINISTER for FINANCE (Mr. Blythe)

I think it might be a good thing to adjourn the whole matter for, say, a week, in order that the people who have not seen the premises mentioned in the motion may have an opportunity of doing so. I think there would be no use really in appointing a Committee to go into the question of temporary accommodation, because I think it would be as hard to come to a decision on the question of temporary accommodation as on the question of permanent accommodation. I do not believe myself, and I was on the previous Committee, that the appointment of a Committee will carry us any further, or that we could get anything like an agreed or an unanimous report. It would simply become a matter again of the Dáil itself voting on the question, and there would really be nothing more to enable us to form a judgment than might be gained by simply looking at the premises. I think the speeches that have already been made in support of Deputy Figgis's amendment are quite sufficient to indicate that a Committee, or, in fact, any body on a Committee, is likely to go into this matter with an open mind, and I do not think that any Committee that is to deal with this question of temporary accommodation will carry us any further.

It was impossible to keep Deputies off the main question, and no Committee is going to discuss anything, I think, except the question of permanent accommodation, and I fear it will be unable to decide in regard to temporary accommodation until it has made up its mind in regard to permanent accommodation. You will find that people are always afraid that any decision in regard to temporary accommodation might prejudice the question of permanent accommodation. I think if we simply come to some sort of decision here on this question of Kilmainham, we will then put any Committee that may be appointed in a position to deal with its own proper work; but if we do not get this question of Kilmainham, which has been raised, out of the way before we appoint the Committee, I think we are simply letting ourselves in for a waste of time. I would suggest to the Dáil myself that, even although it might be desirable to postpone the matter for a week so that Deputies will be in a position to decide this question of Kilmainham, we should not appoint a Committee which perhaps would waste months, and then come back with two reports, and perhaps with a majority report and a couple of minority reports. If there are a number of Deputies who have not seen Kilmainham, and I think there are quite a number, I would suggest to them that they should see these premises. They at least know where the premises are.

Mr. A. BYRNE

Is the Minister in order in discussing the merits of Kilmainham now?

Mr. BLYTHE

I am not discussing the merits of Kilmainham.

Mr. BYRNE

I think you are.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Minister is not discussing the merits of Kilmainham.

Mr. BLYTHE

Perhaps I may be wrong in this, but I think the question of temporary accommodation is the real test in the matter. I believe it really will be found to resolve itself into a choice between Kilmainham and this building. There may be other places, but if Kilmainham were to be rejected, for instance, we could still consider the other places. If there is a disposition to accept Kilmainham, the people who think of other places can put them up here when the main question is being discussed, and there can then be a further adjournment on, say, any one of them. I do not believe, however, that any of the other places will be seriously put up. Deputies know this place, and they know Kilmainham, and I think if we were to adjourn this matter for a week Deputies, who have not seen Kilmainham, could go there and see it in the meantime, and they could then come here and vote on this motion. If they reject Kilmainham we can either remain here or look further around, and if they are inclined to accept Kilmainham, they can consider these other places. In any case whatever they do they would be able to appoint a Committee to consider the permanent housing of the Oireachtas, and they could then allow the Committee to go about its own business, and not be thinking all the time of, shall I say, manoeuvring for position.

I am now getting near the main question, but there are people who think that if we went to Kilmainham the accommodation would be so good there that we would never come out of it, and they are determined that we will not go there, even temporarily, because they are so much in favour of the College Green premises. There are all sorts of cross-currents, and I feel that any Committee dealing with the question of permanent accommodation will not be able to do its work until the question of temporary accommodation has been got out of the way.

Mr. O'CONNELL

The Minister for Finance has stated what is a fact, that it is hard to come to a decision on this matter. I find it extremely hard to come to a decision so far as I am concerned myself, as to how I should vote on this matter. I mean I find it hard to vote for the President's motion, impossible indeed, and for that reason I support the amendment, and I do not think I would be in anything of a better position to decide if I were to go and see Kilmainham. As a matter of fact I have never seen it, either the inside or outside of it. The Minister has suggested, in short, that we could see Kilmainham and then vote. A Committee was appointed on a previous occasion, but we got no facts from that Committee, and I think the reason was, as Deputy Thrift suggested, that there was no time for the Committee to consider the matter. It is not absolutely necessary, as the Minister would seem to imply, that we should get a unanimous report from the Committee, or in fact anything in the nature of a report or a recommendation, but what we do want are facts with regard to other possible places. I do not know whether or not there are other possible places. I never heard, as a matter of fact, of any places but three. There may be others, but the only information I had with regard to these three is the information which was briefly stated by the President here. Now, I suggest that Deputy Figgis' amendment will meet the position fully so far as a great many Deputies in the Dáil are concerned, who have an open mind on the matter. I have a perfectly open mind on this question. I am not opposed to Kilmainham or opposed to any place in particular, but I am prepared to vote for the place which is most suitable in all the circumstances. I do not want to vote in a hurry for any particular place, as I am asked to do, and therefore I strongly support Deputy Figgis' amendment. With all due respect to the Minister for Finance, I would say that his suggestion to have an adjournment for, say, a week, to enable some of us who have not seen Kilmainham, to go there, would not bring us any further. Some of us may not have the time or the opportunity to go and see Kilmainham, and without seeing it, I do not think we could have all the facts such as could be put before us by a Committee. I am not in favour of one place more than another, except such as might be based upon facts ascertained, and put before Deputies. Then the Dáil could freely and openly and fully come to a fair decision on the whole question.

Mr. HUGHES

I rise for the purpose of giving my support to what the Minister for Finance has proposed, because I believe that in doing so I would be giving an opportunity to every Deputy to see for himself the exact position with regard to Kilmainham as against this or any other place. I am not wedded at the moment to Kilmainham or to any other place. I have seen Kilmainham myself on a former occasion, and I think it would be well if other Deputies saw it, because then they would be in a position to form an opinion for themselves.

Mr. A. BYRNE

And other places as well.

Mr. HUGHES

There is one thing, at any rate, that some of us know; it is that we cannot carry on here indefinitely in the position in which we are. We know that the space is limited and that if this question is shelved by referring it to a Committee we will be stopping on here and not doing our business in a proper manner. If this question is adjourned for a week I am sure provision can be made by the Ministry for Deputies to go out on a particular day and see the site. If they then decide that the place is not suitable as a temporary home for the Parliament it will be very easy to find out whether we can have this place until we build a permanent home. I am against the shelving of the proposition by putting it on to a Committee for the reason I have stated—that we want the accommodation and we want it immediately. I ask the Dáil to agree to the proposition of the Minister for Finance and let us see for ourselves whether or not the place is suitable.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

I feel really that neither the mover of the amendment not the Minister for Finance has cleared up the difficulties. I can understand the objection of the Minister for Finance to the appointment of a Committee when no time is specified as to when the Committee will send in a report on this question. I am one of those who have not seen Kilmainham. I think an opportunity should be given to see it. There I am in agreement with the Minister, but I do not think that a mere external or internal walk around Kilmainham will be quite sufficient to clear our minds or to instruct us as to the accommodation that is wanted. I think that even if the Committee is appointed, the members ought to go. The members should be made to understand exactly the actual suitability of the premises and not the mere foot space. I do feel if the Committee is appointed that there is a danger of the whole question being shelved. If a Committee is appointed a definite limit should be fixed for their report. An intimation should come from the members that they will be ready to report within a fortnight or three weeks.

Mr. GOREY

With regard, to the suggestion of the Minister for Finance, that we should go and see Kilmainham on some day that he will probably arrange, and see nowhere else, I think it is absolutely unreasonable. We are not all Dublin people, and we do not know some of the sites that are suggested. I have seen Kilmainham once, and only once. Its surroundings and the approaches to it I have seen once or twice. I have a perfectly open mind on the question, even with the approaches to Kilmainham. If it is the best alternative outside this building, I am prepared to have it, but there are other alternative sites, and until the Dáil or the Committee have an opportunity of seeing, not alone Kilmainham, but the other alternative sites, I think it is not fair to ask the Dáil to come to a decision. The Minister for Finance said that if we got there we might get so fond of the place that we would never leave it. The only time I went there I did not fall in love with the air nor the atmosphere of the road I went, and I do not think there is any possibility of my getting so fond of it that I would not leave it.

Professor MAGENNIS

You are a teetotaller.

Mr. GOREY

I do not think it is fair for us to see Kilmainham alone. I will come to Deputy Magennis afterwards. We who come from the provinces do not know Dublin very well, and I do not think it is fair that we should be asked to come to a decision without having a report from a Committee or without visiting the alternative sites suggested. If we are to go to Kilmainham, let us have an appointed day. There is no use in Deputies going there in dribs and drabs. Let us have, as in the case of the Land Act, "an appointed day." What is the objection to a Committee being set up and giving a report here, whether it is a majority report or a minority report? Can there be any objection to a Committee investigating the alternative sites?

Mr. BLYTHE

Will you fix a time limit?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I may point out that if it were decided to appoint a Committee, the motion setting up the Committee would certainly have to fix a time in which the Committee would report to the Dáil. That is in the Standing Orders.

Mr. GOREY

Agreed. Reference has been made to a previous Committee in the previous Dáil that examined this site. One reason that that Committee did not make a report was that the time was too short. Another reason was that the members who were appointed on that Committee, or at least the majority representing the Dáil, did not attend the meetings, and they had to be adjourned because there was no quorum. Deputy Magennis, Deputy Johnson and myself were three members on that Committee representing the Dáil. I think we were in constant attendance. We found the other members of the Committee were not in constant attendance.

Mr. JOHNSON

I am sorry I was not in constant attendance.

Mr. GOREY

The discussion on this question in the last Dáil is on the records, and I say it frankly that the Committee had not an opportunity of coming to a decision. It did not get a chance of coming to a decision. I stated in the last Dáil, and I repeat the statement now, with as much confidence as I did then, that I do not think it was intended that we should come to a decision outside a certain site. The only full meeting we had really was the last meeting of the Committee. We had to report the day after. The attendance of the members then enabled us to come to the decision that we could do nothing.

With regard to speculators and vested interests there are rumours. Everybody living in Dublin, and people visiting Dublin, know that around College Green vested interests have grown up. There are also rumours that around Kilmainham they have grown up. I understand that speculators have also been busy there. I never attach much importance to these things until they are proved. But if you mention speculators and vested interests in one place there is no reason in shutting your eyes to the fact that there are rumours about other places also. The majority of Deputies, as I have said here, do not know Dublin, and do not know these alternative sites, and it is absolutely unfair to ask the Dáil to come to a decision without knowing something about Kilmainham and the alternative sites, and deciding on the merits of the case. I have an open mind, on this question, and I will certainly vote on what is to my mind the best site in the circumstances. I do not care where it is.

Deputy Figgis says the majority of the last Committee had decided against Kilmainham. The question was not put to the Committee to decide for or against. I know some members of the Committee who, it struck me, had biassed views with regard to Kilmainham. But the opinion of that Committee was never tested. What the view of that Committee would be neither Deputy Figgis nor anybody else could take upon himself to say. It is absolutely unfair to assert that they had come to a decision either for or against.

With regard to the occupation of these premises, I as well as every other member of the Dáil, and on behalf of the Party representing Agriculture, that I speak for here, agree that the thanks of the Dáil ought to be voted to the Royal Dublin Society for the kindness and courtesy with which they treated us. That, perhaps, comes fittingly from me, representing the same branch of Irish life—agriculture— with which the Society is connected. I do claim that the appointment of this Committee is the only fair and reasonable way to explore all the possibilities. There is no use in saying: "Go to Kilmainham and nowhere else and then vote." If we are going to Kilmainham, we ought to go to the other places also, and then make up our minds and vote. Let us do this thing fairly and squarely. We do not want to be led like a colt in winkers up to Kilmainham, and I think the people of the country do not want to be led like a puppy on a strap. There are other sites in Dublin. We have heard of those sites. There are more sites available to-day than there were twelve months ago, and I think the least we can do is to examine those sites. If the whole Dáil is too unwieldy to make examination of those sites, then the best thing to do is to delegate it to a committee. If you do not like a committee, let the whole Dáil have an examination of the sites.

Mr. GOOD

It appears to me we have lost sight, to some extent, of the proposals that are before the Dáil at the moment. There are two proposals embodied in the Amendment. One is that a Committee should be appointed for the purpose of expressing its views as to what is to be the future abode of this House. The other is the appointment of a Committee for the purpose of considering what is to be the abode of this House in the interregnum. Those are the two proposals embodied in the Amendment. That Amendment only differs from the original Resolution in one of the proposals. The original Resolution agrees that the question of permanent accommodation should be referred to a Committee, so that I think the question before us at the moment is as to whether the temporary housing should also be referred to a committee. The attitude taken up by the Minister for Finance, when he recommended the members to go to Kilmainham, was that there were only two propositions before the House—the question of Kilmainham or this building. On this point I beg to differ with the Minister for Finance.

We are not limited at all to two proposals in connection with the temporary accommodation of this House. Let me give you one possible alternative. We have a fine place here in front, known as Leinster Lawn. There would be no difficulty whatever in erecting temporary accommodation to house the Dáil and the Seanad there. That is only one proposition that occurs to me at the moment. I am sure when we get the Committee together there will be a number of other practical propositions to be put before them. I hold it is not fair to say that the alternative before the Dáil at the moment is between Kilmainham and the present accommodation. I agree with what has been said by previous speakers, that we have received every kindness and courtesy from the Royal Dublin Society, and it would be, I think, unfair that we should trespass unnecessarily on the kindness and courtesy which has been extended to us. It is quite possible, as one of the alternatives, to hand back these premises to the Royal Dublin Society and allow them to carry on that magnificent work that they have carried on in the city and country for a great number of years, and also for us to have premises to house the Dáil and Seanad in the vicinity of the Government offices.

Let me draw attention to a fact which has not had, I think, attention directed to it so far in the discussion— that is, that there is no proposal, as I understand it, to transfer the Government offices to Kilmainham. You will notice in the original proposition that there is no proposal to hand back the College of Science; therefore, I take it the offices at present occupied by the Government in the College of Science will be retained, and the officials will remain there. The proposal before us is, that while they remain there, the Dáil and Seanad should be transferred to Kilmainham. With all respect, I do not think it is a very practical proposition. It appears to me that no matter from what point of view you regard it, this is a question that should be carefully inquired into, and all the alternatives considered. When we have all the alternatives reported upon by this Committee, I take it that it will be the duty of every Deputy here to examine them and to come to a decision as to what is the best course for us to adopt in connection with the housing of the Dáil and Seanad in the interregnum. As a business man, it appears to me that this is a proposition that ought to be explored by a Committee, and that we should have their report before us and consider it very carefully before we come to any decision. Therefore, I will be most happy to support the amendment as proposed by Deputy Figgis.

Mr. O'DOHERTY

Might I offer a view differing both from the Resolution and the Amendment? It does not matter a fig to me whether the Oireachtas is accommodated here or out at Kilmainham. It matters a great deal to the country, which desires to see the Oireachtas at the old Parliament House in College Green. We have our Parliament restored. The Minister says that it would cost £1,200,000 to establish it there. I think that is the correct figure. But what is that to us? This is an ideal upon which the heart of the nation is set.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I think the general sense of the House has ruled the Deputy out of order without my intervention.

Mr. O'DOHERTY

May I not conclude my remarks?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The concluding remarks must be relevant to the amendment.

Mr. O'DOHERTY

I think I may be allowed to say that the proposal to remove our location to Kilmainham is absolutely stupid so far as the arrangements are concerned, and I want to oppose that. I will not occupy the time of the Dáil any further.

Mr. BLYTHE

Before the motion is put, I think perhaps that it would be well that something should be said about the date on which the Committee is expected to report, because if it is going to report moderately quickly, it simply means an adjournment of the question. If a time limit of one month were put on I for one would not be inclined to oppose it, but unless some limit is put on, that would ensure that we could deal with this important question in a reasonable time, it would not be satisfactory.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

So far as I am concerned I do not imagine that the Committee which would now be set up would be allowed to fix its own terms. I understand that the usual practice is to fix a term when the Committee should have to report. I do not think there could be anyone better fitted to judge the time at which the Committee would report than yourself.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I am afraid that I am particularly prejudiced in this matter of fixing the time when the Committee should report. There was some mention about attendances at the last Committee meeting. I was present at every meeting of the first Committee appointed——

Mr. GOREY

Question.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Perhaps I am wrong, but I think I was present at every meeting of the Committee.

Professor MAGENNIS

Except two.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I think at any rate I must refuse to state when this Committee should report. It is quite clear, if the procedure set out in the Amendment is followed, that the Committee of Selection would make a report to us. We would fix the date at which the Committee would have to report to the Dáil. The point of issue is how long the Committee should have to deliberate. I could not undertake to decide the date.

Captain REDMOND

I presume, in regard to the second portion of Paragraph 1, namely, the question of the permanent housing of the Oireachtas, it is not suggested that there should be a time limit for that?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

No.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

In regard to the first (a) the decision in respect of the temporary accommodation of the Oireachtas, there should be a limit of time, but that limit of time should be conditioned by the number of alternatives that might be put before the Committee. I have three in my mind that I would like to submit to the Committee, and, therefore, we ought not to fix too short a time. I would suggest that the Committee of Selection might consider the matter. I would myself be of opinion that six weeks would be a fully adequate time.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

Nothing less than six weeks would be of any use.

Mr. BEAMISH

I fully agree with Deputy Good. I think the mistake that had been previously made was due to the fact that the Committee was unwieldy. The smaller the Committee the quicker and the more rapidly the work is carried out. If you take a greater care in the choice of a reasonably sensible Committee, representing every section in the Dáil, not numerically as strong as on the previous occasion, you would come to a far quicker and wiser decision. If we could manage to do that, I quite agree with Deputy Good the right way to discuss this question altogether is not to adopt one plan or another plan, and it would come rather quicker to the Dáil if we appoint a Committee of practical men carefully chosen, and a Committee as few in number as possible, so that it would not lose so much time. The Dáil would far prefer this to rushing it too quickly and coming to an unwise decision.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The number in the Amendment is 10. Deputy Beamish appears to be inclined to exclude the Ceann Comhairle, all the Ministers, and all the leaders of parties. Then we might have a sensible committee. Does Deputy Figgis stand for the number 10?

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

I put down 10 because that was the number of the earlier Committee, but I think five would be adequate. Say five from the Dáil and five from the Seanad.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Amendment is altered by leave, and the Committee is now to consist of five members of the Dáil. As Deputy Good very properly suggested, the real matter under discussion was whether we would appoint a Committee to go into the question of temporary accommodation for the Oireachtas or not. The Amendment of Deputy Figgis proposes to appoint a Committee to go into both temporary and permanent accommodation. It strikes me that it might be possible to get the decision as to temporary accommodation more rapidly from a Committee appointed for that purpose than from the Committee appointed for both purposes.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

Therefore, I would suggest the deletion of paragraph A.

Mr. GOREY

I suggest that the Committee be composed of five members from An Dáil and five from An Seanad, with the Ceann Comhairle as Chairman.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

I think that will do. The question of the Chairmanship of the Joint Committee is a difficult one. This is the amendment now:—

"To omit all words after the first paragraph, and to substitute the following words: `Be it therefore, and it is hereby resolved that a Committee consisting of five members, to be nominated by the Committee of Selection be appointed to inquire into and report as to the temporary accommodation of the Oireachtas pending its permanent housing; that the Seanad be requested to appoint an equal number of members of the Seanad to serve on such Committee, and that a message be sent to the Seanad accordingly; that the Committee report to the Dáil not later than six weeks from the date of its first meeting."

This will give you a Joint Committee of ten in all. The permanent housing of the Oireachtas is excluded from the terms of reference.

Mr. GOREY

Is the question of the quorum a matter for the Committee itself or is it for the Dáil to fix the quorum? I do not want to have the matter as it was the last time when the quorum was fixed too high and we were unable to get a quorum.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The Committee itself will decide that.

Professor O'SULLIVAN

Will it be still possible to arrange for all the members of the Dáil to go up to Kilmainham and see the place, because, after all, the decision will rest with the Dáil?

Amendment put and agreed to.

Motion, as amended, read as a substantive motion.

Mr. JOHNSON

I ask leave to propose a further amendment to this substantive motion, and I do it because I want to ask the Dáil to express its mind on the matter with a little more clarity and perhaps with a little more speed than would arise from the reference to this Committee. The proposal is to omit all after the first word, to embody the thanks of the Dáil to the Royal Dublin Society, to indicate the necessity for taking steps to provide adequate accommodation for the Oireachtas, and to resolve "that the Executive be requested to open negotiations with the Royal Dublin Society for the leasing or purchase of Leinster House for housing the Oireachtas, and to provide alternative accommodation for the Royal Dublin Society."

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

This is an amendment to the motion as it now stands, which suggests the appointment of a Committee to consider the question of temporary accommodation. Is not this further amendment a proposal for temporary accommodation?

Mr. JOHNSON

It is a proposal for accommodation, and the question of temporary or permanent accommodation will arise when the Dáil proceeds with its experience.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

There is a certain difficulty in this. Unless I am convinced to the contrary it seems to me that the proposal already carried is to submit the question of temporary accommodation to a Committee, whereas this amendment which is now sought to be proposed is to decide a question which has been referred to a Committee. Unless Deputy Johnson can solve that problem for me, I am afraid that amendment is out of order.

Mr. GOREY

On a point of order, as the possibility that Deputy Johnson has suggested was in my mind when supporting the proposal for a Committee, I wish to say that the whole matter would be explored by the Committee.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

That was the view I was taking myself.

Mr. JOHNSON

I quite understand. My desire was to let the Committee at least have the mind of the Dáil expressed in speeches if not by a vote. As we have not had the opportunity in the course of the discussion so far to express our minds because of the ruling you gave on Deputy Figgis' amendment, it seemed to me to be necessary that the Dáil should express itself as to the desirability of retaining those premises for quite a prolonged period. If you rule that that is out of order, now that I have expressed my own mind, I do not mind.

Mr. DARRELL FIGGIS

You did it very well.

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

The amendment is out of order.

Mr. WILSON

Before you put the motion, the amendment states that this Committee is to report back to the Dáil. What will happen if it is reported to the Seanad and they do not agree?

AN CEANN COMHAIRLE

It would not be for me to give an opinion on that.

Motion—"Whereas it is necessary to take immediate steps for the provision of adequate accommodation for the Oireachtas, be it therefore and it is hereby resolved—that a Committee consisting of five members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection be appointed to enquire and report as to the temporary accommodation of the Oireachtas pending its permanent housing; that the Seanad be requested to appoint an equal number of members of the Seanad to serve on such Committee, and that a message be sent to the Seanad accordingly; that the Committee report to the Dáil not later than six weeks from the date of its first meeting"—put and agreed to.