On that Vote, I want to ask the Minister a question.
Vote 67—External Affairs. - Supplementary Estimate.
Question proposed:—
Go ndeontar suim Bhreise ná raghaidh thar £5,086 chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1936, chun Tuarastail agus Costaisí Oifig an Aire Gnóthaí Coigríche agus Seirbhísí áirithe atá fé riaradh na hOifige sin (Uimh. 16 de 1924).
That a Supplementary sum not exceeding £5,086 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1936, for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for External Affairs and of certain services administered by that Office. (No. 16 of 1924).— (Minister for External Affairs.)
I understand, Sir, that these two Estimates were discussed together.
I remember that great capital was made——
May I again call your attention to the fact that the House has already ordered that Vote No. 67 for the Department of External Affairs, and the Supplementary Estimate, would be taken together. I suggest, therefore, that the Deputy is now out of order.
The decision as given by the Chair was that the two Estimates and the amendment would be discussed together. Deputy Dillon remembers that, I am sure.
I wanted to raise a trifling matter.
I object. It is out of order. The Deputy could have raised the matter on the main discussion.
If the Deputy just wants to ask a question I will not prevent him.
I cannot confine myself to a question. I want to raise a point on this Vote, but I see the Minister for Finance flying off. I do not blame him.
I do not propose to waste the time of the House.
If the Deputy wanted to make a statement he might have done so in the course of the general discussion.
Of course, it is for you to rule. The Minister for Finance has fled. If you rule that this cannot be discussed further. I am not prepared to question your ruling. I merely wanted to ask the Minister for Finance why it is that he deemed it right in the interests of this State five or six years ago, when similar Estimates were before the House, to say that it was a public scandal to provide money——
We will pass on to the next item.
Of course if you rule against me——
I understood the Deputy wanted to ask a question relevant to the matter before us, but apparently the Deputy wants to raise something that happened six years ago, so far as I can understand from his observations.
I want to ask the present Government a question. Before they came into office they stated it was a public scandal that the then Government should spend money from the public purse, dining and wining while the poor were in a condition of starvation.
That matter does not arise. The agreement was that a discussion should take place on the motion, and I cannot allow the Deputy to proceed along these lines.
I only wanted to ask the President why he is dining and wining now, if he considered it wrong to do so six years ago.
Were you not there yourself?
I always thought it was right and proper, and I never made any cheap notoriety or cheap scandal about it either, when Deputy Davin was there looking like a full moon.
Question declared carried.