Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 8 Dec 1925

Vol. 13 No. 15

DEPUTIES' PRIVILEGES.

Before the House proceeds to deal with the business on the Orders of the Day, I desire to raise a question affecting the privileges of Deputies. To-day, some Deputies have been unable to get one visitor into the gallery. I was endeavouring to bring two friends into the inner lobby a few minutes ago, one of whom was a former colleague of mine in Parliament. He is still a member of the Northern Parliament. I was refused permission to bring them into the inner lobby. There were at least 100 more people in the gallery yesterday than there is to-day, and I think that any Deputy who was unable to bring a visitor into the gallery to-day should receive some explanation as to why it is considered that the gallery is overcrowded to-day, when at least 100 people were allowed to stand in it yesterday. I merely wish to raise the question to see if some order cannot be made to safeguard the rights of private members, with a view to facilitating their constituents, especially on occasions like yesterday and to-day.

I am aware that at times certain seats can be reserved in the front row, even for people coming in late, while an ordinary member cannot get his friends in. When I was a member at Westminster, every member of the House was entitled to two tickets, and a member, no matter how humble he was, received the same courtesy as the biggest member in the House. They all had the same rights and privileges. I hope that on future important occasions, such as this, citizens will not be left outside the gates while there is still room in the gallery, or, at any rate, that you will insist that each member will receive a fair share of the tickets allowed.

I have the same complaint to make as Deputy Byrne. I have been refused two tickets for friends. I would like to know if there has been any discrimination, and whether certain Deputies have been allowed to bring in their friends while others have been debarred from doing so.

I also wish to support the argument of Deputy Byrne. I was refused a ticket for a second person to-day, while at the same time I saw a large bundle of tickets addressed to a gentleman who is not a member of the House—he is an official of the House.

I would like to know, sir, before you answer the point raised by Deputy Byrne, whether any member is entitled to more than two tickets?

Some members have not got one ticket, not to speak of two tickets.

Deputy Byrne has raised a number of points, but I am not clear as to what exactly his grievance is to-day. Was he refused one ticket to-day?

Mr. BYRNE

I was not, but I was stopped by another member who made a complaint to me. He understood that I was on the Standing Orders Committee. I am not on that Committee, but I was on the House Committee in the Second Dáil. I received a complaint from him, and said I would raise the matter for him. In the meantime I went outside to meet a member of the Northern Parliament, who had a ticket. I wished to bring this gentleman into the inner lobby for a few moments in order to send Deputy Redmond out to him. He had a ticket from Deputy Redmond, and I was refused permission at the door to bring this gentleman to the inner lobby. I have no complaint to make, personally, about getting my two tickets. I am always able to get my two tickets, because I apply for them in advance.

I was refused one ticket.

The most important point is this: Deputy Byrne got the two tickets to which he was entitled. Is that correct?

Mr. BYRNE

It is correct; but another member of the House complained to me, believing that I was a member of the Standing Orders Committee, and I said I would raise the matter for him.

That is a different point. Deputy Byrne got what he was entitled to as regards the tickets?

Mr. BYRNE

Yes, yesterday; but I applied for none to-day, and if I had I might be in the same position as the two members on the Farmers' benches.

I was refused one ticket to-day to bring a friend to the gallery.

Let us be clear on this. Was Deputy Conlan refused any ticket whatever to-day?

At about a quarter to three o'clock.

There are 127 seats in the gallery, and the gallery was overcrowded yesterday.

Mr. BYRNE

It caused no harm.

Deputy Byrne will have to allow me to make the statement which he has asked for. The gallery, as I have said, was overcrowded yesterday. In my judgment it was too overcrowded. I gave instructions to-day that only the number of people should be admitted for whom there were seats available. I gave instructions that every Deputy should get a ticket or if possible two tickets, and that if there were some Deputies who were not asking for any tickets that those requiring an extra ticket should get it. That was my judgment for to-day. I think that the gallery should not be overcrowded and that it should not contain 100 persons standing. That happened yesterday, but, in my opinion, it should not happen. I am sorry that Deputy Conlan and Deputy Doyle did not get the tickets to which they were entitled. If all the seats were filled perhaps that was the reason, but I think Deputies are clearly entitled to a ticket. There is no doubt about that. I have been trying for some time to get this question of tickets for special occasions looked into by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. There is no difficulty whatever about tickets on ordinary days. Some Deputies get six, ten, twelve, or even fourteen tickets for ordinary days, but on special occasions there is a difficulty and the difficulty arises because there only a certain number of seats and also a certain number of Deputies. Now on the question of Deputies' rights to tickets, a Deputy has a right to a ticket, but it may well be that if there is no seat in the gallery the Deputy's right cannot be exercised.

In view of the serious statement made by Deputy Doyle that he saw a bundle of tickets addressed to a certain quarter, can you say, sir, whether any quarter is entitled to more than two tickets?

No Deputy is entitled to more than two tickets. Deputy Doyle must be under a serious misapprehension.

I did not say a Deputy. I said it was to an official of the House that I saw the bundle of tickets addressed to.

It is quite possible that a large number of tickets might be addressed to a person in his official capacity.

They were tickets to bring in visitors.

I know nothing about that.

I do, because I saw it.

In view of your statement that you gave directions to-day that only a number of tickets corresponding to the number of seats in the gallery should be issued, are you aware that at the present time a considerable number of visitors are standing in the gallery?

I presume that the visitors in the gallery practically represent the two tickets to which each Deputy is entitled. I promised two people from my constituency yesterday that I would reserve my right, which I have never abused, for two tickets for them to-day. They are at the gate at present and have been there since twenty minutes to two o'clock and by your orders have not been allowed in.

I do not like to be brought so forcibly up against these two people from Deputy D'Alton's constituency. Did I understand the Deputy to say that they have been outside since twenty minutes to two o'clock?

I am sorry. What I meant to say was that they have been there since twenty minutes to three o'clock.

Perhaps, sir, you would give an answer to the previous question asked by Deputy Byrne, namely, that he asked to bring a member of the Northern Parliament into the inner lobby to-day, and that, as he states, he was stopped by an official of this House and prevented from bringing him in. Now, in view of the amity that is about to take place between the Northern Parliament and this Parliament, I ask is that proper procedure?

Will Deputy Byrne say what he means by the inner lobby?

Mr. BYRNE

The lobby downstairs where the post office is. There is a circular seat there near the foot of the stairs for the accommodation of visitors.

A member of the Northern Parliament, even unaccompanied by any Deputy, on producing proof of his identity would, in the ordinary course, under the instructions that I have already given, in every case get a ticket for my own gallery—what is called the Distinguished Strangers' Gallery. He would not need to be attended by any Deputy, and therefore I am at a loss to understand what happened in the case mentioned by Deputy Byrne. I am sure it would be quite explicable if all the circumstances were known. Members of the British Parliament, members of the Northern Parliament, American Congress men, and people of that kind, coming along and simply identifying themselves, have always been admitted, and I am at a loss to understand how the incident mentioned by Deputy Byrne occurred.

I desire to ask if all the seats in the gallery are not already occupied, will the tickets be issued to me to-day?

I move: "That the Dáil sit later than 8.30 p.m., and that the motion for the adjournment be taken not later than 10.30 p.m."

I have arranged with Deputy Lyons and Deputy Roddy that the earliest opportunity will be afforded them for the discussion of their respective motions on the Paper when the business on the Orders of the Day has been disposed of.

The Government were courteous enough to ask me not to raise any objection to allowing the business on the Order Paper to be taken before my motion which was put down for this day. The real danger is that if we do not deal with this question of unemployment to-day, we may not have a chance of discussing it before another election, and the people, on whose behalf I make this motion, might not be in a position to go to vote even for the Cumann na nGaedhael candidates. I thought, from the reply given to me by the Minister for External Affairs on Thursday, when I agreed to adjourn this motion, on the suggestion of the Minister, that it would be taken to-day, Tuesday. Now I do not wish to hold up the business of the House, but I do really think, if the President could, on the resumption after the interval for tea this afternoon, give an hour or an hour and a half for the consideration of this motion, he would do a great deal more good than by passing hasty legislation to confirm this Agreement, because a great deal more people are depending, coming on to the present Christmas, on something that might be given by the Government to provide themselves with something to eat.

I think the Government is not acting at all right towards Deputies when they give a promise that something will be taken to-morrow, and then when to-morrow arrives asking to have the question postponed again until the next day. I fully understand that there is no to-morrow, but I really think that members of this House are entitled, when they put a motion on the Paper, to have it discussed on the date that it is put down for. This motion was put down last Friday week and it is still on the Paper, and I believe it will remain on the Paper for a long time if the Government can find further opportunity for postponing it. I have lodged my protest. I know the Government may be in a position now to give the money owing to the fact that so many millions are to be remitted through the new Agreement which we are asked to confirm.

In persuading Deputy Lyons to let this motion stand over I said that the Executive Council had not fully exhausted its inquiries on this subject, and had not come to a decision. That was the main consideration I put forward to the Deputy. In other words, if the motion came on to-day, and was dealt with, the Deputy would be very dissatisfied, and I wish to afford him satisfaction by dealing with it in every possible way.

The President is very kind, and if he will be good enough now to give me a couple of minutes for the unemployed I would be very glad.

Ordered: "That the Dáil sit later than 8.30 p.m., and that the motion for the adjournment be taken not later than 10.30 p.m."

Barr
Roinn