Is this the appropriate occasion upon which to refer to a motion standing in my name?
Order of Business.
As soon as the Order of Business has been settled, the Deputy can mention it.
It is proposed to take the business as on the Order Paper, in the following order: Items 1 and 2, 6, 7 and 8; item 5 will be taken in the appropriate place. If the Public Business as ordered should be completed, the remainder of the time will be devoted to Private Members' Business.
Is it proposed to sit to-morrow?
If the Public Business is finished, no.
I object to the House being adjourned to-night in view of the amount of Private Deputies' Business; there are 18 motions to be dealt with. Will the Government agree to sit to-morrow?
No.
At what time will the House be given an opportunity to decide this matter?
I would say about 10 o'clock.
Is there not a question on the adjournment to be taken at 10 o'clock?
That is so. Perhaps I could see Deputy Mulcahy at 9.30 p.m.
I sought permission to raise a question on the adjournment to-night. It was on yesterday's Order Paper and I wonder if the Chair will permit me to raise it.
Deputy Flanagan also asked permission to raise a question on the adjournment.
I am prepared to give way to Deputy Cafferky, provided the Chair will give me another opportunity of raising the matter I wish to raise.
The Chair cannot pledge any Deputy's rights; the Chair cannot interfere with any Deputy's rights.
I am prepared on this occasion to give way to Deputy Cafferky.
A more important question might arise on which the Chair would have to exercise judgment. I cannot promise the Deputy another day. Deputy Cafferky's question will be taken to-night at 10 o'clock.
It is a pity Deputy Flanagan's question is not being dealt with——
I will raise it on your Estimate.
——so that the Edenderry people might see some of his double dealing.
Edenderry? The Minister is very bad in his geography.
Now that the order of business has been settled, may I mention that I presented you, Sir, with a notice this morning? Before going into it, may I renew an inquiry to the Government as to the precise interpretation of the Taoiseach's announcement in regard to the Government's proposal to provide time for the discussion of a motion referring to the imprisonment of Monsignor Stepinac which stands on the Paper in my name?
Consideration will be given to the possibility of providing time for discussing that motion next week or the week after.
I understood the Taoiseach, in the absence of the Tánaiste, to say that time would be given next week.
Or the week after.
Does the Tánaiste reject or adopt the Taoiseach's recommendation. Will the Tánaiste tell us that?
I have stated that, assuming the business of the Dáil proceeds as anticipated, it will be possible to give time next week or the week after.
I take it that is beating a strategic retreat.
That is all the information the Deputy can get at the moment.
If the Taoiseach says time will be given, I have no desire to pursue further the proposal to ask your leave to raise the matter as one of urgent public importance. May I reasonably expect time will be given next week as the Taoiseach indicated?
Next week, or the week after, the Taoiseach indicated.
Are the Government in a position to say that it is likely this motion will be discussed next week?
The Government are not in a position to say that time will be given next week.
Then I ask leave, as a matter of urgent public importance, to raise the motion in my name, in these precise terms:—
That Dáil Éireann on behalf of the Irish people places upon public record their detestation of the travesty of judicial process which culminated in the imprisonment of Monsignor Stepinac, Archbishop of Zagreb and Primate of Yugo-Slavia; calls upon all Christian peoples and all those who do not actually hate Christendom to join in repudiating as fraudulent this pseudo-trial and in stigmatising it for what it is—a crude pantomime of justice, designed for the purpose of defaming Christianity in general and the Catholic Church in particular, so that the international Communist conspiracy against individual liberty everywhere may be relieved of its most formidable and uncompromising challenge, which must always come from Christianity; directs the Ceann Comhairle to communicate the terms of this resolution to the Presiding Officer of every sovereign Parliament sharing with us membership of the Inter-Parliamentary Union.
I submit that that motion might properly be described as a matter of urgent public importance, (1) on the ground that the imprisonment of Monsignor Stepinac continues and (2) that his imprisonment represents part of an international Communist conspiracy which is proceeding and the exposure of which, and the modest contribution towards the defeat of which this House can make, is a matter of urgency in that, with the passage of every day, the conspiracy grows further and its destruction becomes much more difficult.
I do not consider that the matter of which Deputy Dillon has given notice is one contemplated by Standing Order No. 29. One of the guiding principles, in determining the application of this Standing Order, is that the matter to be discussed must be within the executive responsibility of the Government or a Minister thereof. Monsignor Stepinac's trial and imprisonment by the Government of another State does not come into this category and I must, accordingly, refuse to the Deputy leave to make the motion.
I would like to make it clear that my ruling has reference only to the process under Standing Order No. 29 which the Deputy has invoked, and is without prejudice to his ordinary right to move the motion already standing in his name, when it is reached.
Your ruling is conclusive and I must now depend on the readiness of the Government to make time available.
Could not the House sit to-morrow to do this business?
The Government is entitled to an opportunity to consider business to come before the Dáil.
That motion has been in the possession of the Government for the past fortnight.