I move that the Intoxicating Liquor (General) Bill, 1924, be now passed.
PRIVATE BUSINESS. - INTOXICATING LIQUOR (GENERAL) BILL, 1924—FIFTH STAGE.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
I should like to ask the Minister for a little more information on one point. I think he will agree with me, and the Dáil will agree with me, that this Bill, which we hope will produce beneficient results, is only the beginning in tackling a very great problem. The limitation of the hours during which drink is sold may be a benefit, but at the same time it may be a nuisance. Whether it may be a benefit or otherwise, you cannot really tackle the drink problem until you have tackled the excessive number of publichouses which exist in the country. In speaking to this Bill the Minister indicated that he was going to set up some form of inquiry into how that excessive number of publichouses could be dealt with in fairness to all the interests concerned, and he mentioned either a Departmental Committee or a Commission as the most suitable body. I want to urge upon him now, if possible, to abandon the idea of the Departmental Committee. In dealing with a problem of this size, a Departmental Committee is not the most convenient form of inquiry. I do not think it would carry sufficient public confidence. A Commission, in which all interests would be represented, would be more suitable.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
When I speak of a Departmental Committee I do not mean a committee of civil servants. I mean a selection of people who would inquire into the question of publichouses, and who would report to me.
That, I think, is not what is generally meant by a Departmental Committee. The Minister, I take it, means something like the Agricultural Commission which was set up by the Minister for Lands and Agriculture to inquire into the general aspects of the agricultural question.
Mr. O'HIGGINS
What I mean by a Departmental Committee is something very like the committee that inquired into the housing question, and presented a report which was the basis of the Increase of Rent and Mortgage Restriction Act.
What I had in mind was a committee which would take evidence in public, and which would educate the public mind. The Minister has in mind a committee which would sit privately, and very likely get through the business more expeditiously. I would prefer the type of committee I have in mind. The great evil — I will not say the great evil, but rather the great defect — in the Minister's scheme, has been that he was legislating somewhat in advance of public opinion, and because of that he has had to abandon what I personally regarded as one of the most valuable sections of the Intoxicating Liquor Bill — one that I had been in favour of for very many years. The public mind needs to be educated on those matters, and I do hope that the Minister will put aside the idea of a committee that will only sit in private, and that will present private conclusions to be cogitated over by the Minister, from whose head will suddenly spring ideas, just as Minerva sprang from the head of her father. A far more preferable type of inquiry would be one that would sit in public and take evidence and help people to understand what are the difficulties in arriving at a solution.
I entirely agree in some ways with Deputy Cooper. In connection with the Intoxicating Liquor Bill we were largely expressing our own opinions; yet it is a matter that ought to come from a public demand for reform. On the other hand, the setting up and the working of this commission or committee, or whatever it is going to be, will be much more tedious than if it was an expert committee. I am inclined to agree with Deputy Cooper that a public committee will serve the object of coming to a conclusion that will have a certain weight of public opinion behind it, and in that way it will be very valuable.
Will the Minister say if the committee will be representative of public interests and of total abstainers, or will the different associations get an opportunity of appointing their own representatives on this committee?
Mr. O'HIGGINS
I probably would be able to make a statement shortly here as to the constitution of the Committee. I will give consideration to what has been said with regard to the advisability of a public sitting. At the moment I cannot go into details about it.
Surely the Minister can, at least, give us some idea as to what his intention is in the matter, as to the manner in which this Committee will be constituted. Will it be possible that a total abstinence society will get an opportunity of sending representatives? Will the public get an opportunity of sending representatives? Will clubs be represented, or is the Committee to be appointed by the Minister, who will say to them: "You will sit, and as you act I will agree with your findings"? Is that the Minister's intention?
Mr. O'HIGGINS
It is hard to have an intention without having formed a decision, and I have explained that I have not formed a decision.
The explanation is not very satisfactory.
Question —"That the Bill do now pass"— put and agreed to.