I indicated on the Second Reading of this Bill, in connection with the Presidential election, that the date for taking the poll would probably be fixed for 15th June. The 15th June happens to be a Friday and it has been represented to me that that might be inconvenient, particularly in urban areas and, accordingly, if a poll has to be taken, I propose to fix the day for taking of the poll for Thursday, 14th June. That is more generally convenient, I am told.
Presidential and Local Elections Bill, 1945—Committee and Final Stages.
Sections 1 to 4, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 5.
Question proposed: "That Section 5 stand part of the Bill."
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 6.
Question proposed: "That Section 6 stand part of the Bill."
There is one point which I should like the Minister to clarify. Section 6 provides the machinery for the holding of the poll. The returning officer is to be the county registrar or——
The under-sheriff.
——the under-sheriff. Section 10 says that the local returning officer for a constituency shall, in relation to the taking of the poll in any local electoral area in the constituency for the purposes of a 1945 local election, be the returning officer. Hitherto, of course, as the Minister is aware, the returning officer for local elections was the secretary to the county council. Under this Bill, apparently, the secretary of the county council will not perform any functions, although it would appear from the wording of Section 10 as if it is the Minister's intention to bring back the secretary of the county council and to give him certain functions in relation to electoral areas as distinct from constituencies.
I will explain that.
There is, to my mind, a contradiction and I should like the Minister to explain what it does mean.
There is no contradiction. For the purpose of the Presidential election, under the Presidential Election Act, 1937, the poll has to be conducted according to the Dáil constituencies. In order that all the votes, say, for the county council and the votes for the Presidential election will be counted in the one place, and to avoid a great deal of confusion that might arise if ballot boxes had to be sent here and there, we are providing that in general the constituency for the purpose of the Presidential Elections Act this year will be the administrative county or county borough, as the case may be. That means that we have to define or prescribe who is going to be the local returning officer for the purpose of the general conduct of the Presidential election and that is prescribed here in Section 6. When we come, however, to consider the taking of the poll, we anticipate that we shall be in this position, that in some places we may have only one presiding officer presiding over both polls, and perhaps even in some cases the one set of ballot boxes, because of supply difficulties.
Mr. Corish
Does the Minister mean returning officer?
The one presiding officer. I am talking about polling places. Is that clear?
Do not get into a temper again this evening.
All Ministers are entitled to a hearing.
Mr. Corish
I only asked a question.
I was trying to deal with the point which has been raised by Deputy Roddy. I was pointing out the circumstances which we think may exist. We hope, if we can, to avoid them. If we can get an ample supply of boxes, if we can get an ample supply of polling compartments and arrange for separate polling booths for the taking of the poll for the Presidential election as distinct from the taking of the poll for the local elections, all this will be done, but there are places, we fear, where we may have to use the one polling booth, where we will have only the one set of polling compartments and the one set of ballot boxes and, therefore, the one presiding officer. In order that there may be no doubt as to whom the presiding officer will derive his authority from, and in order that there may be no doubt as to who is to be responsible for the conduct, particularly of the Presidential election, but also of the local elections, we are making, for the purpose of taking the poll only, the local returning officer for the purpose of the Presidential election, the returning officer for the purpose of taking the poll for the local elections, but for that limited purpose only.
Where does the secretary to the county council exercise any function at all?
He will, yes.
What function will he exercise?
All the preliminary preparations—preparation of the ballot boxes and——
Will the returning officer, who is really the county registrar, be also responsible for the actual counting of the votes, after the poll has taken place?
The officer who will be responsible for the counting of the votes in the local elections will be the officer who in the normal way would be the returning officer for the local authority.
That is the secretary.
Yes, or the town clerk, in the case of an urban district.
Mr. Corish
And he will be acting in his own area?
Yes, but the area, as far as the county council is concerned——
Mr. Corish
That is different. I am talking about urban authorities. There will be three elections in some cases.
We know that.
Is not that arrangement likely to give rise to a certain amount of confusion? As I understand the Minister, the county registrar—because the under—sheriff is only the deputy for the county registrar—will act as returning officer. His responsibility apparently will end when the poll finishes on the day of the election and then, from what the Minister has stated, seemingly the secretary of the county council takes over and he will be responsible subsequently for the counting of the votes and the actual returns of the election.
No. First of all, let me clear up a misapprehension. In most constituencies the county registrar is returning officer. In certain other areas, because the office of under-sheriff still survives, the undersheriff is returning officer. There is no question of one being deputy to the other. So far as the general conduct of the poll is concerned, as I have already indicated, the local returning officer under the Presidential Elections Act will be responsible for the taking of the poll everywhere.
That is for the Presidential election.
For the Presidential and local elections. When the ballot boxes are sealed up to be counted and sorted out, then the returning officer to the local authority will resume his duties as normally.
Mr. Corish
He takes on after the poll?
Yes.
Mr. Corish
If there is no Presidential election he will act as usual?
I made that quite clear on the Second Reading of the Bill. If it is not necessary to take a poll at the Presidential election, then the local elections will be conducted in the normal way. We are only providing here against the contingency that there may be a contested Presidential election. In that case we are making a special provision to enable the Presidential and the local elections to be held on the one day.
Section put and agreed to.
SECTION 7.
I move amendment No. 1:—
Before the word "Local" in line 57, page 4, to insert the words "Gárda Síochána or".
I see no reason for discriminating against the members of the Gárda in this matter. They are entitled to exercise the franchise at the local elections and they will be in the same position as members of the L.S.F. Some of them may find themselves at stations other than the stations where they would be entitled to vote and I think they should have the same facilities as the members of the L.S.F.
It was never the intention to deprive the Gárda of the right they have. There is some doubt as to whether they will be covered by this section and I am prepared to accept the amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 7, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 8 and 9 agreed to.
SECTION 10.
Question proposed: "That Section 10 stand part of the Bill."
I feel that I am still suffering from a certain amount of confusion in connection with the arrangements for the carrying out of the provisions of this Bill. According to the Minister's statements, the county registrar or the sub-sheriff will be the returning officer for the purposes of both the Presidential and the local elections and then, immediately the poll is over, it appears that another returning officer will take control and will be responsible for the actual counting of the votes and the making of the final returns to the Minister. Is not that arrangement likely to create a certain amount of confusion? Is it not likely to lead to a certain duplication of work? Is it not likely to cause unnecessary expenditure? The county registrar, I presume, or the sub-sheriff, as the case may be, will engage one staff for the purpose of carrying out the poll and the other returning officer, the secretary of the county council or the town clerk, as the case may be, will engage another staff for the purpose of counting the votes. It has been customary both at local elections and at Parliamentary elections for practically the same staff to perform both sets of duties. In this instance, apparently, these two responsible officers will be left free to engage separate staffs for the purpose of carrying out separate sets of duties. I think the whole thing is likely to lead to confusion and unnecessary expense. Would it not have been better for the Minister to have appointed the county registrar or the sub-sheriff, as the case may be, not only to take charge of the poll but to take charge of the counting of the votes as well? If he did that, does he not think that the work would proceed much more smoothly and efficiently than it will under this peculiar dual arrangement provided for in this Bill? Dual control in any circumstances does not give satisfaction. It is unlikely to give satisfaction in connection with this election. I think that the Minister was badly advised when he put a provision of this description in a Bill of this kind. I do not know who is responsible for advising him, but I think the advice was bad.
Mr. Corish
I do not agree with Deputy Roddy. I think the Minister is right to separate the counting of the votes for the Presidential and the Local Government elections, otherwise it would mean that the urban and town commissioners election votes would all be brought to one centre and the count would probably take a fortnight.
Will the Minister make it clear why it is necessary to duplicate the office of returning officer?
We are not duplicating the office of returning officer. We have envisaged a situation in which there may be a contest for the Presidential election and because we feel— and I think the House agreed with us —that if there is to be such a contest the country should not have the disturbance of two elections within three or four days of each other, but that they should be held on the one day, we have tried to make such departures from the existing arrangements as may be necessary, but only such departures as may be necessary, to enable that to be done. Now the existing law provides that the returning officer for the purpose of the local elections will be the secretary of the county council or, in the case of urban authorities, the town clerk. We do not want to interfere with that arrangement except to the very minimum extent that may be necessary. The Presidential Election Act provides, on the other hand, that the Presidential election is to be conducted by constituencies and the local returning officer will be the county registrar or the under-sheriff, whoever in the normal way would be the returning officer for that particular Dáil constituency. We are faced with this problem, that the elections are not only to be held on the one day but may be held in the one booth and that the ballot papers may be actually put into the one box. We must therefore make somebody responsible for that day for the conduct of both elections. Therefore, for the purpose of taking the poll we say that, since we must choose between one officer and another, the officer who is made responsible for conducting an election which is of national importance will be the officer who is to assume the whole responsibility for the taking of the poll in connection with both elections. Further, we must fix responsibility for conduct within the polling booth upon one person, for we could not have a conflict of authority within the polling booth. We could not have one presiding officer telling a voter that he could vote there but another presiding officer saying he was not entitled to vote there. We cannot have two separate returning officers; we must have one person responsible for the general management of affairs inside the polling booth.
That is all right, as far as it goes. It is clear enough in regard to the taking of the poll, but when the counting takes place, will the returning officer, the country registrar, count the votes for the Presidential election, and will the secretary of the county council count the votes for the local election? Will there be two different counts or will one person be responsible for the lot?
I think I have explained it and I must remind the Deputy that he knew very well what was going to happen. It is very simple. I have already said that we wish to be responsible for the minimum amount of interference with the existing arrangement. The Deputy is aware that the votes in the local elections are counted by the returning officers for their respective local authorities. Therefore all we are doing is to ensure that, where there will not be separate ballot boxes, the papers will go to the right local authority. Naturally there has to be a preliminary sorting and that sorting will be conducted under the control of the local returning officer for the purposes of the Presidential election. When the votes are sorted, they will be made into parcels and sent to the appropriate returning officer for the local authority. That is the position.
I hope it works out that way.
We hope it does, too. I have no difficulty in assuring the Deputy that, if I could possibly avoid it, I would not be responsible for this arrangement.
Two counts are going on simultaneously.
Mr. Corish
Three.
Not necessarily in the one room or the one place.
Will there be three distinct staffs?
We want to interfere as little as possible with the legal rights of persons under the existing law. We do not want to bring candidates from Enniscorthy to Wexford.
Surely it should have been possible for the Minister to find a more simple way out than that which is provided in this Bill?
I wish I could put that job on the Deputy.
Is the Minister correct when he says that the returning officer, when he counts the votes and parcels them for the Presidential election, sends them to the returning officer for the local authorities?
I did not say that.
That is exactly what the Minister did say.
I did say that he would make up parcels and send them to the appropriate returning officer.
For what?
For whomever it may be.
Well, the Minister said "for the local authority" and I think he made a mistake.
If for the Presidential election they go to the returning officer for the Presidential election; and if for the local authority they go to the returning officer for the local authority. If for elsewhere they go elsewhere.
Mr. Corish
As I understand the position, the Minister is dealing with a situation in which there may be two or three ballot boxes and in any one of them there might be votes for the Presidential election or for a corporation or county council election and this is to ensure that they are all sent to the appropriate returning officer.
I want the Minister to make this clear. I do not know whether the Minister is aware of the queer things which could happen in a polling booth, where there is considerable excitement. Supposing a bundle of Presidential votes gets mixed up with the local authorities votes, or, on the other hand, if a bundle of county council votes were mixed up with the others—I suppose there are to be different colours but I do not know—it will lead to confusion. I would like to see in practice how it would work out. I do not think it is as simple as the Minister thinks. I would suggest that the returning officer, the county registrar, when he is the returning officer for the Presidential election, should be responsible for the whole lot.
He cannot be in several places at once. If we were to give effect to what the Deputy proposes, all votes for all the local authorities would have to go to one centre and all the candidates would have to send their representatives to that one centre.
Mr. Corish
It would be very inconvenient.
I know that, but wait until we see the other proposal.
It is a plunge in the dark.
Let us hope it will not have to be operated.
I presume that, for the purpose of convenience, the count will be in an adjacent room, so far as the main count and that for a smaller authority in the same county are concerned—that the county council count and the Presidential count will be in the one building and in adjacent rooms.
They will be at least in the one town, so far as the county council votes and the Presidential votes are concerned; but if it happens that it is an election for a local authority in the far end of the county, those votes will have to be counted in the presence of the candidates.
Mr. Corish
That is the proper thing to do.
Question put and agreed to.
SECTION 11.
I move amendment No. 2:—
Before Section 11 to insert the following section:—
For the purposes of the qualification and nomination of a candidate at a 1945 local election, any person, who is registered in the register of local government electors for a particular registration area which came into force on the 1st day of June, 1944, but is not registered in the register of local government electors for that registration area which will come into force on the 1st day of June, 1945, shall be deemed to be registered in such last-mentioned register.
The purpose of this amendment seems to have been generally misunderstood in the Press. It has nothing whatever to do with the Dublin electoral areas— let me emphasise that—because there is no residential qualification in relation to candidature for the Dublin Corporation. The purpose of the amendment is to meet a contingency which might arise, but is not likely to arise. If we had fixed the polling day for the Presidential election for the 15th June or up to the 20th June, the polling day for the purposes of the local elections would also have been the 15th, 16th, 18th or 19th of June. It might have been any one of those days. That might lead to the situation, that you had some people in a county electoral area, perhaps a remote one, wanting to nominate a candidate for a local authority and because of the difficulties of transport nowadays they might have found some difficulty—I say they might, though I do not anticipate they would; however, we have to try to cover the contingency—in getting a copy of the register in advance, so as to enable them to satisfy themselves as to whether persons whom they wished to nominate them or whether a candidate whom they wished to nominate would be qualified under the Local Government Act, 1941, to be a candidate or to be a nominator for that particular county electoral area. The way we propose to get over that, if the situation should arise, is to say that any person who was qualified to act as a nominator or to be a candidate for that electoral area in the year 1944 will be qualified to act as a nominator or to be a candidate for that electoral area in 1945. In fact, we do not think that that position will arise, but, in any event, in order to be on the safe side, since the possibility has been adverted to, we feel that it is desirable to make the necessary provision in the Bill to cover it.
It had been my intention to put that query to the Minister, to ask him to define or explain the qualifications referred to in the amendment, as the 1898 Local Government Act, sub-section (5) of Section 2, does not apply to the Dublin Corporation elections. The section reads:—
"A person shall not be qualified to be elected or to be a council or for a county, unless he is a local government elector for such county."
The Minister now has made it clear that it does not apply to the Dublin Corporation elections.
It does not relate to them.
I do not know if there is any particular point which inspired him to put the amendment down.
Is it quite clear from what the Minister said that the acceptance of this amendment in no way supersedes the 1930 Dublin Act, the provisions of which make no call for a residential qualification? The general opinion amongst those of us who saw this was that it was quite simple and we could not understand the idea of the Minister in introducing it, so far as Dublin is concerned, as we have had no residential qualification since the elections in 1930.
Does it not simply mean that we are providing extra facilities for the elections? At the last elections we provided extra booths in the country and it meant that you took smaller areas, in dividing the electoral areas, and to cover these small areas you must put them in this county?
No. Under the law as it stands, a person going forward for a county council—we can leave Dublin completely out of it, as Dublin is not affected one way or another by this amendment—in order to be qualified as a candidate must be a local government elector for the county electoral area for which he is nominated. Now it may happen that people may have some difficulty in ascertaining whether a person fulfilled that qualification in the register for 1945 and all we are saying is that, to avoid confusion and inconvenience, we will accept it if the man's name was inscribed in the register for 1944 as an elector in that county electoral area. That will be accepted as a qualification.
This has nothing to do with Dublin. It is intended to deal with areas outside Dublin, with county councils, urban districts or town commissioners. In the case of the urban districts and the town commissioners, there is not likely to be the same difficulty in getting a copy of the register. I do not think there will be that difficulty, even in the most remote county electoral areas. But, in order that there will be no hardship or disqualification, we are making this provision.
Mr. Corish
If a person is on the register in any county, can he stand for membership of the county council in any area, or is he confined to the area in which he resides? Take County Wexford, for instance. You have there the areas of Wexford, Enniscorthy, New Ross and Gorey. Must the person stand for the particular area in which he is registered, or can he stand for any part of the county?
If he is seeking election as a county councillor, he must be a local government elector in the county electoral area for which he stands.
If a man was on the 1944 register and left the district, he can be nominated as a candidate for the 1945 election?
Perhaps I tried to over-simplify the matter in my reply to Deputy Corish. I do not want anybody to be under a misapprehension. A man may also be a candidate if he happens to be the owner of freehold or leasehold property.
Mr. Corish
I understand that.
Am I to understand that the real reason for the introduction of this provision is the close proximity of the election date to the date of issue of the new register of electors? The new register of electors will be issued on 1st June and the election will take place on 14th June.
I did not say that.
That is what I inferred from the Minister's remarks. I find it hard to understand this proposal.
The Deputy stated that the new register would be issued on the 1st June.
It comes into force then.
Yes. It comes into force then, but lest by any mischance the advance copies of the register might not be available before 1st June, we are taking this precaution.
That is really what I did say.
No, no.
That is what I meant.
The Deputy implied that I suggested that copies of the register would not be available.
I asked the Minister if that is what he meant. I was trying to help him.
Does not this mean that if a man was on the 1944 register and clears out of a district, he can be nominated for the coming election?
Can a man be a candidate in two electoral areas? If he is registered as an elector on the old register, the 1944 register, in a particular area, and if he is registered in a different area, within the same county council area, under the 1945 register, can he be a candidate in both electoral areas?
He can, under this provision.
I assume he could. He would be qualified in respect of the 1944 registration and also in respect of the 1945 registration.
Is the amendment accepted?
I do not know. I do not feel happy over this amendment. It seems to me it opens up a rather wide field. It is intended to admit people who, in the ordinary normal way, would not be eligible to come forward as local government candidates. In the interval between 1944 and 1945 a candidate may have left the country and it seems to me, according to the terms of this amendment, that man would still be eligible for nomination for the local elections. I am sure it is not the intention of the Minister to facilitate that type of person. Again, a candidate may have transferred from one part of the country to another, but because his name happens to be still on the register of the area which he had recently left, he would be eligible as a candidate for the local council, notwithstanding that he was not residing in the area and was not likely to go back to reside there. I think the terms of the amendment are too wide and it is likely to lead to abuses which, I am sure, the Minister is anxious to avoid. It is also likely to encourage the nomination of candidates who will probably never sit on local councils to which they are elected.
This is almost bewildering amendment.
Indeed it is.
Will the Minister say that the procedure which obtained in previous local elections will be the procedure in the coming local elections, with the exception of this peculiar contingency for which he is now providing? If he does so, we shall not mind.
Could the Minister give the House any idea what will be the last day for nomination and, from the time the register comes into force, for how many days will prospective candidates have the register in their hands? Apparently the point that is worrying the Minister is that in remote districts the register will not be available for individuals anxious to nominate a candidate. He need not worry about that, and I do not think the amendment is really necessary. If the register is in the hands of the people for about a week or so, I think there will be ample time.
Mr. Corish
Is the Minister definitely fixing the election for the 14th June?
The Presidential election, yes.
Mr. Corish
Is there any reason why it could not be on the 21st?
It could not be on the 21st. I have already explained that the Constitution provides that the incoming President will take up office immediately on the expiration of the term of office of his predecessor.
Mr. Corish
When is that to be?
It terminates at midnight on the 24th. There are certain arrangements to be made for the induction of the new President, and we must be certain that the count will be completed in time to enable these arrangements to be made. I have estimated that the very latest date on which we could have the poll would be on the 20th June, but there would be grave risk that we might not have the count completed and there would be very little time for the induction of the new President.
Mr. Corish
Why not select the 18th?
There are a dozen reasons why that date would not be suitable. These matters have all been considered carefully. It is generally to be found, and I am sure the Deputy knows it, that Monday is not a good day for a poll. Various arrangements have to be made, taking into consideration the convenience of candidates and Sunday would not be a good day on which to carry out arrangements for a poll on the succeeding day. Then, again, we are not living in normal times and we have to allow the returning officers a longer period than usual to make the necessary arrangements, particularly where they are dealing with remote districts. The whole question of the islands and the possibility of interruption of communication between the islands and the mainland have to be taken into consideration, and the net result of all our cogitations was that the 15th would be the date which would give us time to enable the necessary arrangements to be made, but it has been represented that the 14th would be generally much more acceptable to the urban populations and a number of others. Friday is pay-night and many housekeepers and others have domestic arrangements to make on that night. Therefore, in order to give everybody an opportunity to vote with the least possible inconvenience, I decided that, taking everything into consideration, the best date for fixing the poll for the Presidential election is 14th June.
Mr. Corish
If there is no Presidential election, will that still hold for the local election?
No. There will be a Presidential election, but if it is not necessary to take a poll in connection with it, Part II of the Bill does not come into operation, and the local elections will be held on some date between 23rd June and 1st July, which may be fixed by the appropriate authority.
Mr. Corish
Who accepts the nomination papers for urban authorities and county councils? Is it the old returning officer?
Yes.
Mr. Corish
That is, the town clerk and secretary of the county council?
Yes. Let me get back now to Deputy Hughes. He asked me to give him some idea of the date of the poll. At this stage, I am concerned only with the position which would be created by the need to take a poll in connection with the Presidential election. If that poll has to be taken, the date of the local elections will be 14th June, and if 14th June is the date for taking the poll in the local elections, the last day for receiving nominations for county councils will be 31st May, and the last day for receiving nominations for urban authorities will be 2nd June.
Would these local elections be held at all this year if you did not want a President?
That is quite a separate question.
In order to get the people to come out and vote.
The Deputy has some responsibility as a member of the House. He is also a member of a local authority and he ought to consult the law. The law provides that the local elections must be held this year. The Deputy professes to be a democrat, as I am. I believe in local representation and I believe in holding these elections on their due date. They were not held until 1942 and I took the decision, with the consent of the Government, to restore the principle of local elections and they were held in 1942. The fact that a Presidential election falls due this year has nothing whatever to do with the holding of the local elections and the Deputy, if he is a democrat, ought not to try to create the impression that local elections can be postponed at the whim of any Minister or anybody else. The law provides that they shall be held and so far as I am concerned they will be held.
Were they not postponed for years?
That question is quite irrelevant.
Is the purpose not to get the people to go out to vote for the President?
This amendment simply means that because of the awkward date on which the election is taking place we have to nominate from one register and vote from another?
We may. The Deputy again is jumping to conclusions which are unjustified by anything I have said. I said that if the polling date is 14th June, the last day for receiving nominations for urban authorities will be 2nd June. The register for 1945 will be available to every urban elector on 1st June, and, we believe, earlier. The 1945 register will also be available to those rural electors who wish to make the journey to the place where the register is available. It will also be available, we have every reason to believe, before 1st June, but we are inserting this amendment to provide for the contingency where it might not be convenient for a man to make the journey to the place where the register is available a day or two days before he had to make up his mind as to whom he is going to nominate as candidate. We are trying to meet the convenience of the candidates and the nominators.
Amendment agreed to.
Question proposed: "That Section 11 stand part of the Bill."
If a Presidential election takes place, will the returning officer in the case of the Dublin Corporation be the city manager or the registrar?
In the case of the local authority, it will be the city manager as at present provided.
But for the Presidential election?
The Dáil returning officer.
Question put and agreed to.
Section 12 agreed to.
Question proposed: "That Section 13 stand part of the Bill."
With regard to (a), might I ask if, in the event of there being no poll for the Presidential election, polling cards will be issued to local government electors?
No.
Notwithstanding the fact that the Minister has them prepared?
The Minister has no polling cards prepared. Polling cards will be issued only to those who are participating in the national election, the Presidential election.
Question put and agreed to.
Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendment.
Bill received for final consideration and passed.