Before the business of the day is entered upon, I and some other Deputies wish to make personal statements. I have before me a copy of yesterday's proceedings and I find that in those proceedings a statement was made by Deputy Davin to which I would now like to refer. I am sorry to have to make this statement in Deputy Davin's absence. Deputy Davin was asking a question and he said: "Will he also state whether subsequent to the decision of the Commissioners to acquire the land, and also subsequent to the announcement of the decision in this House by the Minister for Lands and Agriculture, a deputation was received, headed by a member from Trinity College with representatives of the landowner concerned? Will he further state if the final decision of the Commissioners was guided by the representations or misrepresentations of this deputation?" I wish to take advantage of this opportunity to make a personal statement. I, for one, know nothing of any such deputation and, in my opinion, the words "or misrepresentations" ought to be withdrawn and ought not to appear in the records of the House.
Deputies' Repudiations.
I wish to say most emphatically that I know nothing whatsoever about this deputation. I have taken no part in any deputation of such a nature.
I am equally ignorant and innocent.
Deputy Thrift has given his explanation in Deputy Davin's absence and, I presume, without first consulting Deputy Davin. I presume that time will be given at some later date in order to enable Deputy Davin to refute all this, and I think he is able to do so. Certain allegations and certain statements have been made in regard to the whole thing, and possibly a different view-point could be put forward to that which was put forward yesterday.
It is unfortunate that Deputy Davin is not present. The position is that the Deputy will not get any opportunity of refuting the statements made by Deputy Thrift and other Deputies. Deputy Davin mentioned that a member from Trinity College was one of the deputation. The Deputies from Trinity College say they were not on the deputation and that closes that part of the matter. My own intervention yesterday makes the position very clear. It is unfortunate that a Deputy, perhaps thoughtlessly, should by way of supplementary question make an accusation either against a particular or an indicated member or members of the House. I think Deputy Davin will probably realise that as well as anybody else, and we might now regard the question as closed. The only point I will now mention, in order to make Deputy Cassidy clear, is that when a Deputy rises and says "I was not on a particular deputation," that closes the matter.
Will Deputy Davin get an opportunity of making the position clear?
If Deputy Davin sees me it may be taken that I will be able to arrange what he desires.
I have taken the first opportunity of disclaiming any knowledge of the deputation.