Deputies will remember that on the Second Reading of the Land Bill suggestions were made by various parties dealing with matters that were not included by me in the Bill which I brought before the Dáil. In my reply I indicated that possibly these points could be dealt with in Committee. That decision should, of course, have been as obvious to deputies as to myself. I said on Second Reading that the various points mentioned, notably those by Deputy Gorey and some deputies on the Labour Benches, could be dealt with in Committee. I did not realise at the time that in dealing with some of these points amendments would have to be introduced which, in effect, would not be in order. The points raised were mainly in connection with fee farm grants, residential holdings, building grounds, fisheries, and other matters which I need not mention at the moment. I thought that we might be able to deal with some of these by way of introducing amendments to the Bill, that is to say, that deputies who are interested in getting a decision on these points could introduce amendments and have them discussed. I indicated at the time that I would oppose them, but I stated that they could be discussed in Committee. Now I find that a number of them cannot be discussed, as they would be out of order. Not that that would make any difference as, with great respect, I think I would have got Second Reading, and I do not think that my statement made any difference to getting Second Reading at the time. I only made the statement very casually. I do not say that my statement in introducing the Bill was very casual, and I do not say that it had any profound-effect on deputies, or that they did not realise that it was a very important Bill. I only mentioned casually, as I say, that certain points in which certain deputies were interested could be brought forward by way of amendment, but now I find that they are out of order.
In view of the fact that I indicated that these amendments could be brought forward, I suggest, with the leave of the House, that the Bill be referred to a Special Committee. If the Money Resolution is passed it obviously will rule out some of these points, such as that in regard to fee farm grants, as it makes it impossible to increase the cost of service outside what is contemplated in the resolution. I suggest to adjourn the Money Resolution—at least, not to take it to-day— and I suggest also that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee of nine members, to be appointed by the body constituted for the purpose of appointing Select Committees. We could deal then with these points that have been raised. I think that there should be some sort of agreement that in Committee we will not roam too far afield and, generally speaking, deal only with the points raised on Second Reading, and which now would be out of order. In addition to the amendments that would be in order, these should only be dealt with by the Committee. Land law is a very wide and extensive subject, and a great many people have different views on almost every problem that arises, so that it could easily happen that a large number of amendments of all kinds could bo introduced in Committee. I think there should be some sort of general understanding that only amendments indicated by deputies on Second Reading should be introduced, as well as whatever amendments I may find it necessary to introduce myself.
