Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 7 Feb 1946

Vol. 99 No. 5

Censorship of Publications Bill, 1945—From the Seanad.

The Dáil went into Committee to consider amendments from the Seanad.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Boland)

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 1 :—

In sub-section (1), line 34, the word "three" deleted and the word "five" inserted instead.

This deals with the appeal board. When the Bill was introduced, and as it left the Dáil, it was provided that there would be three members on the appeal board. I was persuaded in the Seanad to extend that to five. I thought myself that three would be better, for more than one reason, the principal reason being the difficulty of getting ten people for both boards. I was persuaded that that could be done, and that it would be better and more acceptable to have five.

Mr. Dillon

What does the Minister mean by ten people?

Mr. Boland

Five for the Censorship Board and five for the appeal board.

Mr. Dillon

Then the procedure will be that the publication will first go to a board of five, and, in the event of an appeal, to another board of five?

Mr. Boland

Yes.

Mr. Dillon

Is there a provision that no person can be a member of both boards?

Mr. Boland

Well, I do not think there is any provision, but that certainly will be the position.

Mr. Dillon

That is the intention?

Mr. Boland

Certainly, yes.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 2:—

In sub-section (1) (a), line 36, before the word "barrister" the word "practising" inserted and before the word "solicitor" the word "practising" inserted.

Sub-section (1) (a) of Section 3 provides that the chairman must be either a barrister or a solicitor of seven years' standing. I am putting in the word "practising" there before the word "barrister", as it was thought that the person concerned ought to be practising for not less than seven years. That is, in case Deputy Dillon or someone like that might——

Mr. Dillon

Might apply?

Mr. Boland

Well, something like that.

Mr. Dillon

And, of course, the Minister, being impartial, he would have to comply.

Mr. Boland

I suppose so.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 3:—

In sub-section (1) (a), line 37, before the word "seven" the words "not less than" inserted.

This is only a drafting amendment. I do not think it makes much difference, but I suppose it improved this thing a bit.

Mr. Dillon

Is not ten years the usual period for the promotion of a legal person?

Mr. Boland

No, the period varies. I think it is ten years for a Circuit Court, judge but it is much less than that for a justice of the District Court.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 4:—

In sub-section (1), line 38, the word "two" deleted and the word "four" inserted instead.

This is consequential on No. 1, which increased the membership of the appeal board from three to five.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 5:—

In sub-section (2), lines 40-41, the words "a person to be" deleted.

This is purely a drafting amendment. The sub-section says that the Minister shall appoint a person to be the chairman, but it was thought that that was not necessary, and so I am deleting these words.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 6:—

Sub-section (7) deleted.

This provides for the deletion of sub-section (7) of Section 3. Sub-section (7) authorised the Minister, in case a member of the appeal board was unable to act as such member, to appoint a person to take his place. That was necessary when there were only three members of the appeal board, and all the members had to be present. Now, however, there will be five members, and accordingly it would not be necessary for the Minister to have that power. The amendment is really consequential on the first amendment.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 7:—

In page 4, at the end of Section 3, a new sub-section inserted as follows:—

( ) The appeal board may act for all purposes notwithstanding the existence of one vacancy in their membership.

This enables the appeal board to act for all purposes notwithstanding the existence of one vacancy in their membership. Formerly, they could not do that because there were only three members on the board and it was not thought desirable that two people only could act. Now we are providing that the others may act if one person is absent.

Mr. Dillon

In short, the quorum is four?

Mr. Boland

Yes.

Mr. Dillon

But there must be at least four?

Mr. Boland

Yes.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 8:—

In page 4, at the end of Section 5, the following new sub-sections inserted:—

(3) An officer of customs and excise shall not detain under this section a book, not being merchandise, which is carried by or forms part of the personal luggage of an incoming traveller.

(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed as affecting the operation of the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876, as amended or adapted by or under any subsequent enactment.

This concerns a matter about which we had a lot of discussion here in this House, and that is the right of a customs officer to seize books. We had the discussion again in the Seanad, and so I am providing that an officer of customs and excise shall not detain a book, not being merchandise, which is carried by or forms part of the personal luggage of an incoming traveller. Sub-section (4) of the amendment has to do with the case of obscene literature, and I think it meets the point that was made here.

Mr. Dillon

The Minister would not do that for me, but he did it for the Seanad.

Mr. Boland

Oh, well, I think that what the Deputy said may have influenced me to some extent.

Mr. Dillon

But you still do not believe in my reverend mother?

Mr. Boland

No, I am afraid I do not.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 9:—

In paragraph (a), line 13, the words "in its general tendency" deleted.

It was pointed out that a book could contain a number of short stories, all of which, except one, might be entirely unobjectionable, and the question arose as to whether such a book could be regarded as being indecent or obscene in its general tendency. For that reason, we have knocked out the words "in its general tendency".

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 10:—

In sub-section (1), after the word "author" in line 21, the words "the editor" inserted.

That is that where an editor edited a book, or perhaps put together a number of short stories, he would have the right to appeal as well as the author or publisher.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 11:—

In page 5, sub-section (1), in line 23 the words "at any time" deleted and at the end of the sub-section the words "at any time within 12 months after the operative date or 12 months after the date on which the prohibition order takes effect (whichever is the later)" inserted.

This is providing for an appeal from the present Censorship Board in respect of any book at present banned. In the form in which the Bill was passed in this House, an appeal could be made at any time, and this is limiting the period to 12 months. The appeal can be made within 12 months in respect of any book already banned under the Act.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 12:—

In sub-section (4), after the word "author" in line 33, the words "the editor", inserted.

This is consequential on amendment No. 10.

Mr. Dillon

With regard to amendment No. 11, Sir, may I put a question to the Minister? I found it rather difficult to follow him. I understood him to say that the new provision is that an appeal in respect of a book at present banned may only be brought within 12 months from the date of this coming into operation, but the Minister cannot appoint his appeal board until the Act comes into operation. Are we to understand that the appeal may be made within 12 months after the operative date, or that in case the appeal board was not set up in time it would be reduced to 11 months?

Mr. Boland

Once the Bill becomes law there is nothing to prevent an appeal being made.

Mr. Dillon

Even though the board is not constituted?

Mr. Boland

Even if there were a question of a delay in the appointment of the board, I do not think that that would arise.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 13:—

In page 5, Section 9, after sub-section (1) a new sub-section inserted as follows:—

(2) The word "advocated" in paragraph (b) of sub-section (1) of this section shall be construed as including the publication (whether by advertisement or otherwise) of any matter advocating, or any advertisement or notice of any publication which advocates anything referred to in the said paragraph.

The amendment proposes that the word "advocated" should be defined so as to make it clear that advertisements in connection with such things as birth control would be regarded as advocating. That was not clear before.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 14:—

In page 6, Section 12, paragraph (d) deleted and after paragraph (a) two new paragraphs inserted as follows:—

( ) four members shall constitute a quorum at any such meeting, ( ) a prohibition Order shall not be revoked or varied unless at such meeting three at least of the members vote in favour of such revocation or variation;.

This is consequent on the increase of membership of the appeal board from three to five.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 15:—

In Section 18, at the end of sub-section (2), the words: "or that it was not a prohibited book or prohibited periodical publication at the time he ordered it" added.

This means that if a person were bringing in a prohibited book and would be liable to prosecution for doing so, it would be a good defence for him if he were able to show that the book had not been prohibited at the time he brought it in. That might have happened in the meantime.

Question put and agreed to.

Mr. Boland

I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 16:—

In page 9, Section 20, after sub-section (1), a new sub-section inserted as follows:—

(2) The Minister shall, before making regulations under this section affecting the Censorship Board or the appeal board, consult with the board concerned.

This provides that before making any regulations the Minister shall consult any board concerned, either the appeal board or the Censorship Board.

Question put and agreed to.

Reported that the Committee had agreed with the Seanad amendments.

Report of Committee agreed to.

The Seanad to be notified accordingly.