I move for leave to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to effect certain amendments of the Constitution in relation to the executive authority and power and in relation to the performance of certain executive functions.
Constitution (Amendment No. 27) Bill, 1936—First Stage.
Before we give a First Reading to this Bill, Sir, I want to put a few questions to the President of the Executive Council. One: Is it the intention of the Executive Council, in these Bills, to sever the connection of this State with the Commonwealth of Nations? The second question is: Has consideration been given by the Government as to whether the Bill severs or jeopardises our membership of the Commonwealth? And, three, in connection with the second question, has there been consultation with all or any of the other States, members of the Commonwealth of Nations, as to the effect of the proposed legislation on our relations with them?
I do not know, Sir, whether we are to conduct this debate by a series of questions and answers right through, or whether any of the ordinary rules of debate are to apply.
One statement on each side is allowed.
Am I to take it that the questions asked by the leader of the Opposition are intended to be his statement?
Yes.
Very well. My reply to these questions, is, first, that there is not in this Bill any proposition to sever our connection with the States of the British Commonwealth. Article I of the Constitution remains untouched. The next is that what we propose to do in this is to bring the law and the Constitution into accord with the actual facts of the situation. The actual facts will be reflected in the Constitution as it will be when these amendments have been effected. Next: Have we consulted the other members of the Commonwealth on this particular matter? I say that this is a matter that affects ourselves alone. It is a purely internal matter and it has no connection whatever and no other State is interested in, or has a right to be interested in, what mechanism we have here for giving effect to the will of our own people and the will of our Parliament. I can say, in general, however, that as far as Great Britain is concerned, a considerable time ago I indicated quite clearly that the new Constitution would be one in which there would be no reference whatever to the King—the King would not appear in our new Constitution— and that any relations that would exist between our State and Great Britain, so long as the people willed to have that connection, would be maintained by the fact of co-operation, and would be regularised, so far as that was concerned, by law.
Now, that general indication that the King was to be removed from the Constitution was given a considerable time ago. Of course, it was only indicated informally, and as a matter of courtesy because, again, they have no right to interfere in any way with what we may do in this particular matter. However, as a matter of courtesy it was indicated, but there was no opportunity, in the present circumstances, to give any specific communication. With regard to these Bills, there was a general desire expressed by the States of the British Commonwealth that there should be concerted action as quickly as possible. Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa are arranging for simultaneous action by means of assent to British legislation. We, on our part, are not prepared to give any countenance to the idea that the British Parliament can in any way legislate for us. If this thing has to be done, it has to be done by our
Parliament and our Parliament alone. At the same time, so long as there is any association at all, so long as we continue in association at all, it is obvious that we ought to do our part to facilitate other countries in dealing with this situation. If not, clearly, the right thing for us to do is to go out; but so long as we do remain, it is clear that you would have either by goodwill to meet situations of this sort, or there would have to be some convention in advance with regard to the meeting of it. In fact, there has been already—not in our time, but in the time of our predecessors—a sort of general convention, not that they would take simultaneous action of that kind, but it was implied that the question of succession was a matter in which nothing definite should be done unless all the States who were associated would co-operate in the doing of it. That is why, in answer to the third question as to whether we have given any information of this, we have not had the opportunity of giving it formally, (and we would not do it informally) to the British—and we have not communicated the terms of this to any of the other States. Time did not permit. I say, however, that it is a matter concerning ourselves alone and therefore is a matter which is quite proper for us to determine here, and my reason for the summoning of the Dáil at this short notice was that this situation should be dealt with as quickly as possible.
May I ask the President, Sir, if the Dáil will get the correspondence to which reference has been made by the President in connection with the informal notification between all the members of the British Commonwealth?
I did not say that it was done informally.
Was it done by correspondence?
No. I do not think so.
The President does not know?
I do not know that it was done by correspondence. It was probably word of mouth; by the High Commissioner, possibly.
Was it done at all?
I think so.
Leave granted.