Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 20 Feb 1929

Vol. 28 No. 1

In Committee on Finance. Financial Resolutions. - Treaty for the Renunciation of War.

Minister for External Affairs (Mr. McGilligan)

I beg to move:—

Go n-aontuíonn Dáil Eireann leis an gConnra chun Diúltú do Choga, a sighníodh i bPáris an 27adh lá de Lúnasa, 1928, agus 'nar leagadh cóip de ar Bhórd na Dála an 20adh lá so d'Fheabhra, 1929, agus go molann sí don Ard-Chomhairle gach ní is gá do dhanamh chun an Connra san do dhaingniú.

That Dáil Eireann approves of the Treaty for the Renunciation of War, signed at Paris on the 27th day of August, 1928, a copy of which was laid upon the Table of the Dáil on this 20th day of February, 1929, and recommends the Executive Council to take the necessary steps for its ratification.

As I said to-day in answer to a question, I do not intend to go into any details.

Mr. Lemass

Before the Minister proceeds I would like to suggest that it is unfair to the members of this House to take this motion to-day. The actual terms of the Treaty to which it relates have been laid on the Table of the House only to-day. The motion asking the Dáil to ratify it should not be taken for some time afterwards.

Mr. McGilligan

The Treaty has been effectively before the House since August, and even for months before that.

Mr. Lemass

It has only been officially before the House to-day. We cannot take newspaper reports in matters of this kind.

Mr. McGilligan

The publication which gave the draft of the Treaty was quoted in this House before the Recess. The draft of the Treaty has definitely, not officially, been laid before the members of the House, but it has been effectively before everybody in the House. If people discover flaws in what they saw before them in any form, or in what was officially before them, and if there is any material point in the matter, a complaint can be founded hereafter; but there has been no misrepresentation in the Press reports and there is no material difference. Deputies have had it definitely before them for many months—the full text of the Treaty. There is no modification.

Mr. Lemass

I think it would be establishing a precedent which would appear to be very undesirable. When a motion of this kind is brought before the House, an adequate interval should intervene between the presentation of the document and the motion of ratification.

Mr. O'Kelly

I think that there is a good deal in the point raised by Deputy Lemass. I cannot recall, though I accept what the Minister says, that there was a document circulated to members.

Mr. McGilligan

I did not say that.

Mr. O'Kelly

You did not say "circulated" but "before members of the House." If the document was not circulated it could not have been before members of the House, and it is not right to say that it was. The knowledge of the Pact only comes to the House when the document is laid on the Table. I think it is an unwise precedent, and it is rushing matters overmuch that on the day when the document is laid on the Table of the House a motion is made for its ratification. This precedent may be used afterwards with great disadvantage. I think that a document such as this, which is of considerable importance, ought to be laid for a reasonable time on the Table of the House, if not circulated to members, before its ratification should be asked for.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am not sure whether this matter is being put to the Chair as an actual point of order, but this particular motion in its present form was circulated some weeks ago and actually more than the necessary four days notice was given. As the Dáil was not sitting, this was the first opportunity that occurred to lay the document on the Table. From the point of view of order, I feel I would be unable to rule that the motion is not in order, seeing that such notice was given and that the House has not been meeting. For the purpose of laying on the Table, the ordinary procedure would be to lay the document on the Table and subsequently move a motion. Would the Minister state the urgency of taking this motion to-day?

Mr. McGilligan

There is this reason for urgency. The Pact only comes into operation when ratified by all the original signatories. The present American Administration goes out of office on the 4th March. It naturally expressed a desire that the Pact should be completed and in force before that date. That has led me to take this rather exceptional step, namely, to have a Ratification Order provisionally completed and sent to our Charge d'Affaires at Washington. It will then be presented in due form on the receipt of an intimation from my Department that both Houses of the Oireachtas have agreed to ratification. The ratification instrument has been despatched, but it cannot be released until intimation is sent that the Pact has been ratified here. There will be certain checks and certain things will have to be done in the meantime. While I do not say that it is absolutely necessary to pass this motion to-day, I got a motion that was put down in the Senate postponed on the ground that it was being taken here to-day. Its consideration was postponed in the Senate until to-morrow. If there were any fears that the document finally presented here was different from that which anybody who is interested in it could have seen for months past, and if such notification had been given, I could have arranged to take this motion in the Dáil to-morrow and in the Senate to-day. I do not press the matter, but, seeing that the actual draft of the Treaty was known to many members here, I think it is rather futile to hold the matter up.

Mr. O'Kelly

I do not want to be unreasonable, but we raised this matter in order to preserve the rights of the House as otherwise they might, I do not say they would, hereafter be filched from us. We want to preserve them. It is unfair. Granted for a moment that the terms of this Pact have been published in the Press, it is beside the question. We are dealing in an official way with a very official document, and we say that the rights of the House should be preserved. We think that some time—a day, or, perhaps, two days—should elapse so that Deputies may have an opportunity of seeing a document which they may not have seen before. It is not in order to act as obstructionists but to preserve the rights of members that we think that the motion for ratification ought not to be proceeded with on the same day that the document is presented to the House.

Mr. O'Connell

I think that there is a good deal in what Deputy O'Kelly says. I do not think that the House should be asked to discuss a document which has not been officially before us. The Minister has not stated why copies were not circulated even this morning. If they were, the same difficulties might not perhaps arise.

Mr. McGilligan

It is not going to be so circulated. It is in the Library.

Mr. O'Connell

I meant circulated to members. 150 Deputies cannot go to the Library together.

Mr. McGilligan

If people are going to go on with the farce that they do not know what they are signing I will, of course, have to give way.

Mr. O'Kelly

I do not say that.

Mr. McGilligan

Very well. I am willing to take it to-morrow, first business.

Debate accordingly postponed.