Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Tuesday, 11 Mar 1952

Vol. 129 No. 11

Committee on Finance. - Vote 70—Technical Assistance (Resumed).

Mr. Dillon

When I moved to report progress on the 5th March we had reached the astonishing stage of learning from the Minister for Finance that the projects which he had described in his opening remarks were the projects for which no provision was made under this Vote, and that, therefore, any further reference to them, according to the decision of the Chair, would be out of order. When I pressed to extend the ambit of his observations to cover matters for which it was intended to provide money under this Vote, he said he felt no obligation to me whatever to do so, and that he was only prepared to give examples of the type of work which it was intended to undertake. I must now draw the attention of the House to Volume 129, No. 9, of the Official Reports of the 5th March, 1952. At columns 1514 and 1515 the Minister says:—

"There is a considerable number still in progress and it is merely necessary to enable us to complete those which are still——

Mr. Dillon: Still what? Can you tell us what they are?

Mr. MacEntee: I can.

Mr. Dillon: It is not an unreasonable request.

Mr. MacEntee: Not unreasonable at all, but I think it would be better if the Deputy put down the question; then I could give him full information, because there are some projects here still to be dealt with.

Mr. MacBride: But the Minister is looking for money from the House?

Mr. Dillon: I think we ought to know what it is for.

Mr. MacEntee: I have said that this £2,500 is necessary to complete these projects in respect of which commitments have been entered into but not definite formal contracts. The projects which are in progress at present number over eight. There are other projects under consideration at the moment. Those which are in progress at the present moment are as follows:—"

The Minister then read out a considerable list at column 1515 and he went on to add to that list at column 1516 and added the following remarks:—

"There are a considerable number of projects which are temporarily suspended. We anticipate that the projects, amounting to 41, which will be financed will be of that particular nature."

Mr. MacBride intervened in the debate then and when I was proposing, at column 1517, to deal with certain aspects of the projects which the Minister had read out, he intervened, at column 1518, on a point of order:—

"I know that Deputy Dillon's ignorance of Standing Orders is abysmal, but the point of order I want to put is that this is a Supplementary Estimate, that the discussion must be confined within the narrow limits of the sub-heads and that we are not entitled to talk about anything that happened in regard to Deputy Dillon's administration of this Estimate. I know we could say quite a lot if we opened up that debate.

Mr. Dillon: That is a point of order!

Mr. MacEntee: I am merely pointing out that Deputy Dillon's references to his administration as Minister for Agriculture have nothing to do with it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: The Deputy will confine himself to technical assistance projects other than those with regard to E.C.A.

Mr. Dillon: The Minister gave us particulars——

Mr. MacEntee: I gave you examples of the type of work.

Mr. Dillon: The Minister gave the House some half-dozen of the 41 projects in progress or in suspension pending provision by Dáil Éireann of the money he now seeks. He said he was too tired to read out all the 41. Of the few he read out he spoke of some which were designed to send technical officers of the Department of Agriculture to the United States for courses of instruction varying from four to six months.

Mr. MacEntee: I did not say that it was proposed. I said that was the nature of the project. On the point of order I made, I pointed out that sub-head C, which is the only sub-head we are entitled to discuss, is for grants towards technical projects other than those sponsored by the E.C.A. I gather Deputy Dillon is now discussing projects which were approved by the E.C.A. and that that has got nothing to do with the Vote."

We exchanged compliments for some time at columns 1519 and 1520. I was still trying to find out what on earth the money was going to be spent on.

Then the Minister intervened again to clarify the issue:

"On a point of order, if Deputy MacEoin would forbear for a moment, I was asked to give some examples of the type of project and the best example I could give was those projects which are in course of progress. These are projects which unfortunately are being carried out, projects which have been approved by the United States European Economic Co-operation Administration. It is not in order to discuss these projects now because they do not come within the categories of projects for which the moneys asked for under sub-head (e) are provided. I merely mentioned them to quicken the recollection of Deputy Dillon as to what had been done in his own Department. Apparently, he is trying to take advantage of my effort to refresh his memory as to what his own Department was doing when he was Minister for Agriculture."

Deputy Dillon at this stage mildly interjected:

"Is this a point of order?

Mr. MacBride: Can we be told what this money is needed for?

Mr. MacEntee: As I have already said, to encourage our producers to seek expert assistance.

Mr. Dillon: Is this still a point of order?

Mr. MacEntee: In order to enable them to increase production.

Mr. MacBride: There must be some specific proposal.

Mr. MacEntee: I can give the nature of the proposal. We know we shall want some money to get things going this year. We want, in order that nothing will be left out, to enlarge the ambit of the Vote.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle: Since the Minister has pointed out that the seven projects are not covered by the Supplementary Estimate, there can be no discussion on them.

Mr. Dillon: Very well; I shall turn to the 34 he did not mention."

Then I went on to point out that it was very odd that the Minister could ask for a sum of money without telling anyone what that sum of money was for. Progress was then reported, after some gracious observations by the Minister, and we are now back where we were at the beginning. Now I want to know what this money is wanted for. I think it is time the Minister told us and it is unbecoming of the Minister to swagger into the House and ask the House to vote money, and on being asked, as he himself concedes, reasonably and civilly, the purposes for which the money is required, to say that he will not tell beyond giving an indication of the type of work it might be used for.

I think the time has come to ask the Minister for Finance, in the presence of the House, a question of some considerable gravity. As a result of the Marshall Plan operations in this country, there were created two counterpart funds. One was the Counterpart Loan Fund, and that was deposited in the Central Bank in the name of the Minister for Finance wherewith to pay off the instalments of the Marshall Plan Loan as they fell due. The second counterpart fund was the Counterpart Grant Fund. Now the Counterpart Grant Fund amounted to, I think, 18,000,000 dollars. The legislation of the Congress of the United States of America provided that where a Counterpart Grant Fund existed in a country like Ireland it was up to the Government of Ireland to propose a project to E.C.A. and if that project were approved by E.C.A. moneys would be released from the Counterpart Grant Fund as a free gift. I would ask the House to note that the legislation of the United States Congress provided in each case that the consent of E.C.A. was required. The United States Congress passed subsequent legislation which resulted in E.C.A., as such, ceasing to exist on 8th January of this year. Is it true that the Government of Ireland as a result of their own folly and incompetence have lost the 18,000,000 dollars of the Grant Counterpart Fund by failing to complete the necessary preliminaries before 8th January and that this Vote is only the first instalment of demands which are going to be made on the resources of the Irish taxpayer to replace the 18,000,000 dollars that the present Government through their incompetence failed to collect?

I am fortified in that suspicion by finding in the Book of Estimates under the Department of Agriculture a sub-head for £200,000 for the ground limestone subsidy for last year and a further projected Estimate of £300,000 for the same purpose in the coming financial year. Let the House note this. There was no provision in last year's Estimate for any ground limestone subsidy because the ground limestone subsidy was to be provided for out of the Marshall Aid Fund.

Mr. Allen

On a point of order, is it not Standing Orders in this House that only the particular matters covered in a Supplementary Estimate can be discussed on that Estimate?

An Ceann Comhairle

Only the particular matters covered in the White Paper issued.

Mr. Allen

Are the matters referred to by Deputy Dillon—the ground limestone subsidy, Marshall Aid, and so on —covered in this Estimate?

An Ceann Comhairle

The Estimate is for grants towards the cost of technical assistance projects other than those approved by the United States Economic Administration.

General Mulcahy

On a point of order, the Minister cannot come into this House to vote a certain amount of money and give absolutely no information in regard to what it is for.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair did not say anything of the kind. I simply pointed out to Deputy Allen what is in the White Paper.

General Mulcahy

I did not intend my remarks to reflect on the Chair. I am merely speaking to the Minister and Deputy Allen through you.

Mr. Dillon

Anyone who has any contact with this business knows that the whole concept of projects and all that word implies belong in the context of the procedure agreed between the Irish Government and the E.C.A. Administration in Dublin. That is the first place I ever heard the word "project". When I see the Irish taxpayers' money being appropriated for projects other than those approved by E.C.A. and when I see in the Book of Estimates a proposal to raise revenue from the Irish taxpayer to meet a charge which the Government of which I was a member was in the process of agreeing with E.C.A. to meet out of the Grant Counterpart Fund and when I ask the Minister for Finance on this Estimate to tell me what the Estimate is for and find that he will not, is it unreasonable for me to begin to wonder can it be that we have lost the Grant Counterpart Fund and that the provision of the money in this Supplementary Estimate is to keep the wheel turning from now until 31st March when further moneys will be made available through the Vote on Account to carry on from that time on? I think it is a great misfortune that the Minister for Finance should deliberately create a cloud of doubt and confusion in a matter of this kind but I would ask the House to bear in mind that 18,000,000 dollars is no small sum. It is more than £6,000,000. There could have been a lot of useful developmental work done with that, if we had it. For instance, if that sum were applied to nothing but the ground limestone subsidy, it would make provision for it for the next 25 years.

Mr. Davin

And the Works Act.

Mr. Dillon

The E.C.A. Administration, as far as I am aware, were prepared to approve of the use of a large part of that sum to establish an institute of higher studies in agriculture in this country. I want to know has that sum gone? Have we lost it and, if we have, why? The House is entitled to know that last March, I think, the Government approved the submission of a project for the ground limestone subsidy to E.C.A. A substantial time before the Government, of which I was a member, went out of office, the submission to E.C.A., which the legislation of the Congress of the United States requires, had been made by the Irish Government. It was what the technical jargon of E.C.A. called being processed by E.C.A. and awaited nothing but their consent.

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order, what are we discussing—something which has been approved and processed by E.C.A. or the assumptions of the Deputy?

An Ceann Comhairle

I was waiting to hear the Deputy's views on the matters referred to in the White Paper. I do not know what Deputy Dillon is referring to, but if this is one of the projects approved by the United States E.C.A., it does not fall for discussion on this Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Dillon

Clearly the matter to which I am referring has not been approved.

An Ceann Comhairle

It does not fall for discussion on this Supplementary Estimate, if it has been approved.

Mr. Dillon

The one I am referring to has not been approved.

Mr. MacEntee

Surely the onus of proof lies on the Deputy?

Mr. Dillon

Certainly, and I accept that onus most willingly. It will take three-quarters of an hour to discharge it but I shall gladly undertake it. Definitely, the proof is here.

Mr. Allen

Is that for next year or last year?

Mr. Dillon

Definitely it covers both years. I shall have to deal with it at some length. The Deputy will have enough of it before I have disposed of it. If the House will look at the Estimates for 1952-53, page 123, Vote 27, sub-head M. (10), Deputies will find that, set out beside the estimated expenditure for the coming financial year, is the alleged provision that was made for it in the past financial year. Now there was no provision made in the Estimates for 1951-52 for the ground limestone subsidy.

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order, are we entitled in a debate on a Supplementary Estimate to discuss the principal Estimate for the Department of Agriculture for the coming year?

That I submit is what Deputy Dillon is now endeavouring to do.

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Dillon told us that the project he wished to discuss was not included in the projects approved by E.C.A. I understood the Minister to ask him to prove that.

Mr. MacEntee

Oh, no.

Mr. Davin

Of course, you did.

Mr. Dillon

He said the onus of proof was on me and I am proving it.

Mr. MacEntee

I put it to the Chair that the Chair should not permit the debate to proceed on Deputy Dillon's assumption. I am submitting to you that since there is no proof that can be adduced in support of Deputy Dillon's assertion, he should not be permitted to discuss the ground limestone scheme. It is not within the ambit of this Vote. In so far as it will be before the House it will come before the House when the Vote on Account is taken to-morrow or when the debate on the principal Estimate is taken in due course during the next few months.

Mr. Cosgrave

What does the Supplementary Estimate relate to?

Mr. MacEntee

There is nothing in the sub-head about the ground limestone scheme.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister says that the ground limestone scheme does not fall for discussion on this Supplementary Estimate and the practice of the House has been to accept a statement by a Minister.

Mr. Dillon

But the Ceann Comhairle will hear a submission from me? I personally as Minister for Agriculture submitted to the E.C.A. Administration on behalf of the Irish Government the ground limestone scheme that is here set out in sub-head M (10).

Mr. Allen

That will come before the House on a later Supplementary Estimate.

Mr. Dillon

That project submitted by me, in my official capacity on the instructions of the Irish Government and by Government decision, was still in process of being examined by E.C.A. when I left office. No provision was made by the Government of which I was a member for this scheme in the Estimates because it was the Government's intention to meet the charge that would come in course of payment out of the Counterpart——

An Ceann Comhairle

There is a Supplementary Estimate for Vote 27.

Mr. Dillon

They now propose later on to make provision for it but the Minister says that this money is to deal with projects not approved by E.C.A. Is that not true?

An Ceann Comhairle

The practice of the House has been to accept the Minister's statement as to what an Estimate refers.

General Mulcahy

We have not got that yet.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister says that the ground limestone subsidy does not fall for discussion on this Estimate and I must accept his statement. It is provided for in Vote 27, Item M. 14.

Mr. Dillon

The Ceann Comhairle is referring to a Supplementary Estimate to be brought before the House?

An Ceann Comhairle

Yes.

Mr. Dillon

I am talking about E.C.A. projects and I am telling the House that I submitted on behalf of the Irish Government, and I challenge the Minister to deny it——

An Ceann Comhairle

I am not concerned with that. When the Minister informs the Chair that the ground limestone subsidy does not fall for discussion on this Vote, I must accept that. I am strengthened in that decision by the fact that there is a Supplementary Estimate being introduced later, to provide for the ground limestone project. I am following precedent long established in accepting the Minister's statement as to what the Estimate is for.

Mr. Dillon

We are now discussing projects, I understand, not approved by E.C.A. I want to ask the Minister for Finance a question across the floor of the House and I think I am entitled to an answer. As for myself, I have no special rights whatever but, as an ex-Minister of an Irish Government, I have some. As such, I asked the Minister for Finance in the Government which succeeded the Government to which I belonged, if a project was submitted on the authority of the Government to E.C.A. to subsidise limestone. Did the E.C.A. administrator, Mr. Millar, state in public at Killarney that if such a project were submitted to E.C.A. he would support it?

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the Deputy not discussing the matter which I have already ruled out of order?

Mr. Dillon

What I am asking is whether that E.C.A. project has not been approved as yet and, as such, is it not one of the projects not approved by E.C.A.? I am labouring under this disability. I have asked the Minister repeatedly to say in this House the projects not approved by E.C.A., and for which we are asking the Irish taxpayers' money, and the Minister says he will not tell. I am now trying to search round to find the fons et origo for the proposals before this House. No Deputy in this House knows why the money is sought. I know—and I know why the Minister will not tell the House—and I am going to shame the Minister into telling the House because the House is entitled to know. It is a shocking abuse of the procedure of any Parliament—never mind our own—that the Minister for Finance can come before us and ask us to vote public money and tell us why he refuses to say for what purpose that money is wanted. The House should not let that pass. If we should take it as a precedent of what Dáil Éireann would tolerate, we should become disreputable among Parliaments. Silly as is the Minister for Finance, I do not believe he would be guilty of that egregious folly if he were not trying to hide something. I think that what he is trying to hide is the contemptible incompetence which brought him clamouring to the threshold of the E.C.A. administrator on the 7th January begging to short-circuit the procedure requisite to release 18,000,000 dollars of the grant out of our fund, only to discover that, with the best of goodwill, it was not in the power of the E.C.A. administrator to do it—and they are now scrambling through the back alleys of Washington trying to retrieve for this country what their own incompetence threw away. It is a disgraceful thing that their own humiliation and their left-handed incompetence should be offered to this House as an excuse for the contemptible contents of the Official Report, which I have brought to the attention of the House, and which represents the contribution of the Minister for Finance to this discussion up to now. We expect nothing from him but futility and insolence, but we have a right to demand certain information. Deputies on every side of the House, no matter which Party they may belong to, should, in principle, sustain that demand, namely, that we will not vote money until we know what it is wanted for and that if any demand is made for money without explanation, it will be rejected automatically—but not until the full disclosure has been made will the House proceed to divide in the normal way on the merits of the proposal brought before it.

Secrecy and deception are not becoming instruments in the armoury of a Minister of the Irish Government, transacting business with Oireachtas Éireann. The Minister for Finance disgraces himself when he, above all other Ministers, stoops to such expediency. It is a humiliation to Deputies on every side of the House that he has to be dragged out of the bolt-hole of anonymity in which he has sought to take refuge as he shakes the much of that inglorious bolt-hole from his person. I hope he will make some effort to restore the dignity of this Oireachtas, even if he despairs of resurrecting his own.

General Mulcahy

The deception which the Minister is practising in connection with the presentation of this Supplementary Estimate is so great that I ask whether it would be in order to move the adjournment of the House so as to give the Minister an opportunity of making up his mind whether or not he is going to tell the House what this money is going to be spent on.

An Ceann Comhairle

I do not think there is any reason for moving the adjournment of the House.

General Mulcahy

I draw the attention of the House to the fact that the presentation of this Supplementary Estimate, No. 70—being presented under that number—would seem to be a deliberate attempt to deceive the House. The Supplementary Estimate is related to the Estimates for the year 1951/2. When Estimate No. 70, Technical Assistance, was presented last year it was headed: "Estimate of the amount required in the year ending 31st March, 1952, for Grants-in-Aid in connection with Technical Assistance afforded by the United States E.C.A." The description of the Supplementary Estimate before us now, Technical Assistance—retaining the No. 70—has been extended to: Supplementary Estimate of the amount required "for the year ending 31st March, 1952, for Grants-in-Aid in connection with Technical Assistance afforded by the United States E.C.A."—and, instead of a full stop, it continues—"and for other expenditure on Technical Assistance."

I submit that the Minister is attempting to deceive the House when he presents an Estimate for expenditure on Technical Assistance, under the heading No. 70, in respect of technical assistance that had nothing at all to do with the United States E.C.A., except, as definitely underlined by Deputy Dillon, it is no longer possible to go ahead with the projects initiated in the atmosphere of the United States E.C.A. with the assistance of the grants which were available from that administration by reason of the failure of the Government to do their part of whatever was required to see that these plans were properly arranged.

Deputy Dillon has appealed to the Minister, as one who bore a certain responsibility in connection with the working out of these projects, to tell him something about them. I want to appeal from a rather simpler but, nevertheless, I think, a more fundamental principle as a Deputy with the responsibility of a Deputy. I want to challenge the whole attitude of the Minister in coming in here and asking us to vote for what practically amounts to authorising an expenditure of £2,500 without giving us the slightest inkling as to what the items are and what the work is upon which it is intended to expend this money. I am going to resist in every way possible consenting to the voting of this money until we have from the Minister a statement as to what this money is to be used for. I think we are entitled to a statement from the Minister as to why he came into the House with this Estimate and insisted on treating the House in the way he has treated it, in spite of his attention being drawn to the various aspects of our complaints. I now ask the Minister if he will tell the House, from whom he is asking permission for the expenditure of this money, what are the projects upon which this money is intended to be expended.

An Ceann Comhairle rose.

General Mulcahy

I understood that you were preparing to put the Estimate.

An Ceann Comhairle

That is right.

Mr. Dillon

Surely the Minister is not going to ignore the House altogether.

General Mulcahy

Is the Minister going to tell the House what the money is required for?

Mr. MacEntee

If I am to conclude, I will be glad to do it.

General Mulcahy

I submit that we are in Committee discharging the responsible duty of considering the expenditure of money and considering the matters upon which that money is to be expended. I submit, through you, Sir, to the Minister that he has a duty, to this House to assist the House in the consideration of this matter.

An Ceann Comhairle

No Deputy offers himself to speak on the Estimate.

General Mulcahy

I again ask is there no other Deputy in this House besides myself and Deputy Dillon who wants to protest against the Minister's attitude in this matter?

Mr. MacEntee

I will be glad to conclude the debate and deal with the blundering, floundering, unscrupulous speech we have just listened to from Deputy Mulcahy.

General Mulcahy

On a point of order. I ask you to rule, Sir, that the Minister is not concluding the debate. I submit that we are in Committee.

An Ceann Comhairle

We are in Committee. I put it clearly to the House that if no Deputy offered himself I would put the motion to the House and no Deputy has offered himself.

Mr. Dunne

We are waiting to see what answer the Minister has to give.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Chair is always in the position that it assumes that the Minister is concluding, otherwise we would never have any finality. The Minister has moved the motion and he is entitled to conclude on that motion.

Mr. Dillon

In Committee on Finance?

An Ceann Comhairle

Surely even in Committee on Finance there must be finality as well as anywhere else. The Minister moves a motion and he is entitled to conclude on that, but that is not limiting any Deputy by any means. I said to the House when I rose to put the motion, when the Minister for Finance intervened, that I was going to put the motion. The Chair must have finality somewhere.

Mr. Dillon

Deputy Lemass, no later than last year, on a Supplementary Estimate for the Department of Agriculture claimed and secured from the Chair leave to continue the debate after the Minister had spoken on the ground that we were in Committee on Finance. The Chair said that if that claim were pressed by Deputy Lemass he was obliged to concede it and Deputy Lemass did, in fact, reopen the debate and continued for a protracted period. That was no later than last year.

General Mulcahy

On a point of order. I submit that what was happening just now was that the Minister for Finance was deciding that he was going to conclude. I submit to you, Sir, that in Committee on Finance the Minister can speak as often as he likes in order to help the business and his speaking now will not in any way prevent him having the right, which we would all give him, to conclude the discussion. But I suggest it is not proper for the Minister to decide that he is going to conclude the debate. If it is to be decided that the debate is to conclude, I submit that that is your prerogative.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Minister did not decide that he had the right to conclude. I told the House that if a Deputy did not intervene and offer himself to make a contribution to the debate, I would put the motion.

Mr. Dillon

Fair enough.

An Ceann Comhairle

Then the Minister intervened and I could only assume that the Minister was to conclude seeing that no other Deputy offered himself.

Mr. Dunne

On a point of order, will the Ceann Comhairle explain to me how any Deputy can make a contribution to this debate when he has not got the information as to what he is to talk about?

An Ceann Comhairle

That is an offer to the Chair to make a political speech which the Chair does not accept.

Mr. Davin

I was waiting to hear the answer——

An Ceann Comhairle

Is this a point of order or on the Estimate?

Mr. Davin

If you decide that the debate is concluded——

An Ceann Comhairle

I have not decided that the debate has concluded. I am ready to hear any Deputy who wishes to speak to the Estimate.

Mr. Davin

May I submit that there is no precedent for the attitude adopted by the Minister in this particular case, the contemptible attitude adopted by the Minister? The Minister gave as a reason on the last night, which was referred to by Deputy Dillon, that he was tired and he was sleepy. It is quite clear from his appearance now that he is neither asleep nor tired. He is silent and he is treating the House with silent contempt. Personally, I was waiting because I have not at my disposal the necessary information which Deputy Dillon and Deputy Mulcahy must have at their disposal as Ministers of a previous Government. Therefore, I was waiting to hear what the Minister had to say on this matter, on the understanding, also, that it is the right of a Deputy in Committee on Finance to speak at least on three occasions if he desires to do so.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy can speak as often as he likes, but let it be understood by Deputies that after the Minister has concluded someone may like to "have a go" at what the Minister stated, but the Chair must get finality somewhere. If I call on the Minister, I must call on him to conclude because others might be anxious to continue the debate.

Mr. Dillon

I respectfully ask where is the Standing Order to warrant that conclusion? If we are in Committee on Finance the Minister may intervene and, if the House wishes to comment on his intervention, they can do so, but he has always the guarantee that he will be allowed to speak again.

An Ceann Comhairle

It is the duty of the Chair on all occasions to secure finality in a debate.

Mr. Dillon

Provided there is no abuse or repetition. Do not the Standing Orders permit Deputies in Committee on Finance to continue the discussion?

Major de Valera

Is this not the position? This comes before the House as a motion. The motion is moved by the Minister for Finance and it is in Committee. The right of Deputies to speak on it a number of times is conceded, but it is, nevertheless, a motion in Committee. A motion comes normally to a conclusion by the proposer of it finally winding up on it.

Mr. Dillon

That is begging the question.

Major de Valera

Deputy Dillon is confusing the right of a Deputy to speak a number of times with the right of the proposer of a motion to conclude on it. If any Deputy wants to speak a number of times, he can do so, but as nobody has offered in this case, the Minister is entitled to conclude the debate on the motion.

General Mulcahy

I would be glad if Deputy de Valera would attempt further to help us in this matter. Deputy Allen appeared to be anxious to help us originally, but he probably found that too awkward and has gone. I would ask Deputy de Valera, if the Minister cannot help us, whether any of the money that is now sought for is for the purpose of paying those technicians from the United States who, as we read in the Press a day or two ago, have come to this country to examine our railway system. Normally, I would have thought that the technicians who were being brought from the United States to examine our railway services here would have been properly paid out of this grant. Do I understand now that some of this money is intended to pay those who have come here since 8th January last? Could Deputy de Valera not spare us a moment to help us to discuss this matter?

Mr. Dillon

Very prudently he is taking flight now.

Major de Valera

Unfortunately, I have to go to preside at the meeting of the Defence Committee at 4 o'clock. I am sure Deputies will be able to get plenty of advice on procedure. The precedents are there, that in Committee on Finance on an Estimate the Minister concludes, and on a motion the proposer of the motion.

Mr. Cosgrave

The precedent was there until Deputy Lemass broke it.

Major de Valera

That was on the right to speak a number of times. They are totally different things.

Mr. Cosgrave

Deputy Lemass broke the precedent.

General Mulcahy

What is the use in having a Committee on Defence if the House, which is the instrument for the exercise of all authority, is trampled on in the way in which it is being trampled on by the Minister for Finance? Surely, in that situation it would be worth the Deputy's while to postpone the meeting of the Committee on Defence for a quarter of an hour to help us solve the difficulty which is of importance not only to us but to every member who sits behind the Deputy. It is in the interests of every Deputy in this House that the actions which are taken in it, particularly in regard to the spending of money and its utilisation, would be a guarantee to themselves and to their people that they would be used effectively and efficiently to defend the country.

Major de Valera

The Committee on Defence was nominated by the Dáil.

An Ceann Comhairle

I must bring this discussion to a close and put the motion unless some Deputy offers himself to speak. If the Minister for Finance offers to speak I must allow him to conclude inasmuch as he is the mover of the motion. That is the only decision I can give, and I cannot allow any further discussion on the matter. I do not want to appear arbitrary to Deputies, but that is the position. I have explained it to Deputies, and I will put the motion.

General Mulcahy

I would like to emphasise, in respect of Deputies who do not wish to rise, that they are practically stopped from taking part in the debate by the persistent and continued refusal of the Minister to say what use the money is required for.

Mr. Hickey

There is one question that I want to ask. Is any of this money going to pay the technicians who are expected here to advise us about our transport? If I had an answer to that, then I would have something else to say.

Mr. McQuillan

In connection with the proposed visit to America of a number of agricultural instructors, I understand that some time ago a number of such persons were selected to go to America for a course under the E.C.A. Since then, I understand, the E.C.A. has been changed over to M.S.A. I should like to know if provision is being made under this motion to enable those agricultural officers to go to America. On the last day I did not hear the Minister make clear what the position was in connection with those people. I am very anxious to find out whether or not those responsible officers are going to have an opportunity of undergoing a very excellent course in America in the very near future. The Minister, of course, is aware that in the past, under the E.C.A., opportunities were given for the members of young farmers' clubs to undertake a course in connection with agricultural matters in the United States. I understand that the courses which the agricultural officers wish to undergo in America would be on somewhat similar lines to those undertaken by the members of young farmers' clubs.

Mr. Dillon

Now, Sir, I propose to resume the debate. I take it that Deputy McQuillan's observations come within the full ambit of order and relevance. We can now resume where we left off. I would refer the House to column 1498—no, that is where, when speaking, I described the Taoiseach as a disciple of Machiavelli. I would ask the House to look at column 1517 where, when speaking, I said:

"When these projects were largely financed out of the general affluence of the United States Treasury, I felt it was right and reasonable for the Irish Government to give very great weight to the views of some of the distinguished gentlemen who came here in the service of the E.C.A. and who are urged by the Irish Government to feel at home in this country. They were urged to speak out frankly in respect of any matter which would help to increase the productivity of the land and to be assured that, no matter what their animadversions would be, they would be interpreted as being inspired by friendly solicitude meant for the best interests of Ireland, whether we liked or whether we did not like such animadversions."

The Minister for Finance then intervened to make a helpful contribution. I now take up the theme where Deputy McQuillan has laid it down. Proposals were made to me of the kind referred to by Deputy McQuillan and, acting on the assumption that the greatest possible weight should be attached to any suggestion made by the representative of the E.C.A., I consented to the sending of a number of the officers of the Department of Agriculture to the United States. I think it is only right to say, with the same frankness and the same goodwill as I have no doubt inspired every officer of the E.C.A. in Ireland in everything they did, that I think we may be overdoing this business. We have particular scientific problems relating to agriculture in this country. I have travelled a good deal of the world. I have managed in my time to visit five continents, and I am not at all convinced that there are to be found, promiscuously scattered about the world, agricultural experts on the special conditions obtaining in this country qualified to teach the experienced officers of the Department of Agriculture and the technical officers of the Department of Agriculture or the experienced scientists who have been reared in the school of agricultural science as specifically applied to Irish conditions. One project that was proposed to me was that we should send a technical officer from Ireland to study the best methods of growing grass. I doubt if, in the whole of the United States of America, there is a single acre of grass equal to some of the best grass in this country.

With nothing, again, but the warmest admiration for the E.C.A. Administration and as an avowed admirer of the United States of America, I would suggest that a little traffic in the other direction might be of considerable value and if they would send us some of their technical experts we would be very happy to show them how to grow grass. I think they would benefit greatly from the instruction. The plain fact is that an imprudent zeal to promote projects of every sort, kind and description, while it may be actuated by nothing but kindliness and the desire to help, might very seriously jeopardise the success of a great deal of valuable work by injecting into the main body of the work undertaken a number of projects, so-called, which manifestly to all the parties concerned are ill-advised and really represent in the last analysis the bringing of "coals to Newcastle".

While a very special solicitude for the views expressed by the E.C.A. Administration might have justified collaboration in certain projects, the full wisdom of which we doubted on this side of the Atlantic, nevertheless, I want to urge on the House that the appropriation by Parliament of the taxpayers' money to finance the dispatch of technical officers of the Department of Agriculture to study such subjects as grass-growing in the United States of America cannot be justified and should not be undertaken. I think undoubtedly there may be a number of spheres in which technical advice might be of value to us in regard to certain industrial processes, but I think it necessary to remind the House that in quite a wide variety of matters, industrial and agricultural, our circumstances approximate much more closely to conditions obtaining in Europe than to those obtaining in the United States of America and the effort to identify our processes, or the methods appropriate to our circumstances, with those appropriate to the United States of America may in many cases lead to confusion and to ultimate failure.

If the Minister for Finance had behaved himself like a mature man instead of an hysterical schoolgirl last Thursday, what I wanted to say on this Supplementary Estimate would have been said in 20 minutes. That is all it would have taken me to say all that I wanted to say last Wednesday. If scandal has been given and the time of this House has been ill-spent, the blame is on this silly little man. But if the example that has been made of him serves as a warning to others the time of this House may not after all have been misspent. It is deplorable that a man with 40 years of the public life of this country behind him should require the treatment appropriate to an hysterical schoolgirl. It is time he grew up. Neither he nor I has much time left to us to carry out that very necessary operation. If it still remained for me to do, I would lose no time in getting about it. I offer similar advice to the Minister for Finance.

General Mulcahy

I asked last week if any of this money would be used in connection with the transport system. The principles that are involved here this afternoon are such that I am not satisfied to part from this discussion without seeing more members of the Minister's own Party in the House and I call the Chair's attention to the fact that there is not a House.

Notice taken that 20 Deputies were not present; House counted, and 20 Deputies being present,

General Mulcahy

In response to the bell we have been favoured with the presence of 11 of the Minister's Party and two of his Independent supporters.

Mr. Allen

And two of your Party.

General Mulcahy

I am quite satisfied that the members of the Fine Gael Party appreciate the issue involved here. The issue is that the Minister has asked the House to vote a sum of money for purposes which he declines to disclose.

I particularly asked whether any of the money that has been provided for in this Estimate is intended to cover the payments of those technicians who are being brought from the United States to advise on the transport system. It was the intention, when those technicians were being brought here, that they were to be paid out of the Counterpart Grant Fund. If the Minister will not tell us anything in reply to this question of mine, my challenge passes from him to all the members of his Party here present.

We have had occasion in the past to complain that the Fianna Fáil Party came in behind their Minister and with shut mouths they moved in whatever direction he told them to go in a division lobby after he had spoken. We now find ourselves on the threshold of a very important period of financial discussions. From the opening of the Vote on Account to-morrow until we finish with the Budget and financial business we will be dealing with an expenditure of £90,000,000 or, perhaps, £100,000,000 or even more. It is to me a rather sinister performance that, on the eve of such an important period in our Dáil life, we should now have a silent Minister demanding money and up to the present, at any rate, a silent Party prepared to walk dumbly into the Lobby and say that he must have it.

Deputy Dillon, before the Deputies came in, spoke of the concern that he had felt in relieving certain officers in the Department of Agriculture to go to the United States for certain examinations and inquiries there. He was fully appreciative of the help that technicians in the United States could give and fully appreciative of the lavish generosity of the United States Government in making funds available so that our technicians could go and see their technicians and their people on the job. I want to know whether any of this money covers the sending of vocational education officers and officers of the Department of Education for instruction or for courses in the United States because I, in an even more difficult way, found my judgment in the matter constrained.

I responded to the generous offer of the American Government to take some domestic economy instructors and some technical officers to the United States to see some of the work done there. I did so rather reluctantly when I considered the vital interests of the Department of Education, the work of that Department itself and the very small and limited staff that was available for that work. I think, just as Deputy Dillon thinks, that, perhaps, a different arrangement might be even more productive in such matters as the examination of grass growing. We could for example, get some assistance from the United States technicians if they came here. The same would apply to much of our rural instruction. I think, as a matter of fact, that it would be mutually beneficial if some of the American technicians came here and saw how our small rural community solved many of its organisational and educational problems. I believe that we have quite a lot to teach people from other countries. Those of us who have had any contacts abroad and who have seen conditions abroad will realise that we can teach other countries quite a lot in regard to certain work.

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order. I know Deputy Mulcahy is very interested in educational projects but there is nothing in this Estimate making any provision for foreigners to come here to be educated.

General Mulcahy

Will the Minister say if there is anything in this Estimate to pay for foreigners coming here to educate us?

Mr. MacEntee

That is a different matter. There is nothing in this Estimate about sending rockets to the moon, but would the Deputy like to discuss that?

General Mulcahy

I would certainly like to discuss any matter that would bring us some distance along the road to finding out what we are paying this money for.

Mr. MacEntee

Read the report of last week's debate. Deputy Dillon gave you full information on that point when he read from it.

General Mulcahy

I read the report of last week's debate.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy did not understand it.

General Mulcahy

It is reading the report of last week's debate that whets my appetite, excites my curiosity and suspicion and makes me press for some information here. The Minister has kindly intervened to put me right on some small matter—that there is nothing in this Estimate intended to bring non-Irish nationals here and educate them. Will the Minister say, firstly, whether there is anything in this Estimate to take Irish nationals and pay for their expenses or their travelling expenses abroad and, secondly, whether there is anything in the Estimate to pay for bringing here or for maintaining here non-Irish nationals who come here to examine our services or to give advice or instruction of any kind?

I should like the members of the Minister's Party to understand that that is all we are asking. We want some reasonable and simple explanation as to how this money will be spent. I should like to reiterate Deputy Dillon's statement that I feel the Minister could do that inside seven minutes. If he spent seven minutes honestly doing that and endeavouring to help this House, anything we would have to say on the matter would take even less than seven minutes.

Mr. Dillon

Hear, hear!

Mr. Cogan

For once I am happy to find myself in complete agreement with Deputy Dillon.

Mr. Dunne

Is the Deputy really serious?

Mr. Cogan

It is, I think completely wrong to waste the time of paid officials by sending them globe trotting round the world. It is time that we should check up on that operation, which, I think, was initiated during Deputy Dillon's régime, and see what value we are going to get out of it. Not only do I feel that we should not waste the time of officials by sending them round the world, but I also doubt if it is right to encourage young farmers to travel as far as the United States in order to find out what the farmers are doing there.

I have spoken to young farmers who have come back from the United States. The only thing they saw there was that the standard of living in agriculture was reasonably high but the hours of work would not be tolerated in this country. Young farmers would certainly find out how to get a higher standard of living without having to go as far as the United States.

The only sum required in this Estimate is a nominal sum of £10. I think that a good deal of our time has been unnecessarily wasted by Deputy Dillon. Deputy Davin spoke about the failure of the Minister to tell what the full purpose of this Estimate is and to accept the points that have been made but every time the Minister stood up to speak there were loud and vehement protests. It is an amusing thing to find Deputy Mulcahy, who, I think, claims to be the leader of the Opposition, following blindly behind the coat tails of Deputy Dillon.

Mr. Dillon

Deputy Dillon admires the senile delinquent.

Mr. Cogan

Deputy Dillon is talking about delinquency. I want to say that there are worse things in public life than mere delinquency. There is criminal conduct which should only be excused, perhaps, on the grounds of mental unbalance. Deputy Dillon mentioned last week that there was nothing in this Estimate to provide a druid's role for Deputy Little. I want to ask is there nothing in this Estimate to provide a clown's rôle for the abominable showman from Ballaghaderreen.

Mr. Sweetman

On a point of order, are the remarks made by Deputy Cogan in accordance with the order and decorum of the House as laid down by a committee of which Deputy Cogan was a member?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The remarks are unparliamentary but they arose out of unparliamentary interruptions by other Deputies.

Mr. Sweetman

If they are unparliamentary I would request you to ask the Deputy to withdraw them.

Mr. Killilea

Is this cross-examination?

Mr. Cogan

I spoke them in the heat of the moment having regard to an interruption by Deputy Dillon and if they are unparliamentary I withdraw them.

Mr. Dillon

Fair enough.

General Mulcahy

The Deputy, I think, was probably here when I based my real grievance in this matter on the grounds that as an ordinary Deputy of this House I considered that I should protest against the attitude of the Minister who came into this House demanding money and giving no scrap of information as to the projects for which he wanted that money. I would like to ask Deputy Cogan does he support the attitude that it is proper for a Minister to do that and do I understand that his intervention in this debate now is to criticise me for taking up that attitude here? If the Deputy has any information in his possession that would enlighten us as to why the money is required——

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order, I understand we are discussing a Supplementary Estimate to provide a sum of £10. May I submit to you that Deputy Mulcahy appears to be discussing Deputy Cogan, and that is hardly in order?

General Mulcahy

Is that a point of order?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair is awaiting Deputy Mulcahy to come back to the Estimate.

General Mulcahy

We are here in this House to discuss an Estimate and if the Minister declines to give us information as to what this money is for, I will take the information from any side of the House. When we have a Minister who is deliberately and insultingly dumb I am willing to pass over the Minister's indisposition, his lack of manners or his lack of responsibility as long as I know what I am doing in this House. I am prepared to do the work and I will take the information either from Deputy Killilea or Deputy Cogan or from anybody else. As for the Minister's intervention the Minister now says that this Estimate is one for £10. It is an Estimate to give the Minister authority to spend £2,500. Does the Minister deny that? We are charging the Minister with suppression of certain information up to the present. I add the Minister's intervention as another attempt to deceive the House and I again challenge Deputy Killilea or Deputy Burke, agus an Teachta ó oirthear Chontae na Gaillimhe, an bhfuil siad sin sásta fanúint ina suí taobh thiar den Aire atá ag iarraidh airgid a sholathár gan aon eolas a bheith acu cad chuige go dteastaíonn an t-airgead uaidh. I ask the Deputies in Irish or in English are they satisfied, as the elected representatives of the people who chose them to carry out certain public duties, with the treatment they are receiving from the Minister, who asks us on the eve of a three months' period of financial business to pass money without knowing what it is for and who says: "To the dickens with the Dáil," that he is going to get the money and give no account of it. Are these Deputies going to support the Minister and hold up his hands in taking up that attitude?

Mr. Dillon

May I direct the attention of the House to the sagacious intervention of Deputy Killilea? Deputy Killilea said some time ago that this was cross-examination and, by the tone of his voice, I thought he appeared to deprecate that. I want to submit to the House that that is what the Committee of Finance is specifically designed for. It is designed in order to provide every Deputy in the House, influential and insignificant, great and small, with equal right of pressing on the responsible Minister such inquiries as he thinks proper in order to get the information that the Deputy requires to make up his mind as to whether he should vote for or against the proposals made by the responsible Minister. I put it to Deputy Killilea that instead of feeling aggrieved that the proceedings of this House in Committee on Finance, in the presence of a reluctant Minister, assume the exterior appearance of cross-examination, it should be a matter of congratulation to Deputy Killilea that unlike many Parliaments, in Dáil Éireann any Deputy has the right to go on asking the responsible Minister for the information he wants and he has the right to go on doing so until the Minister gives it.

Mr. Killilea

That is very different from a cross-examination of Deputy Cogan on this Estimate.

Mr. Dillon

I misunderstood the Deputy. I thought his comment was in regard to the repetitive demands being made on the Minister for Finance.

Mr. Killilea

That is not so.

Mr. Dillon

I thought Deputy Killilea's intervention was more illuminating than it actually was.

Mr. Dunne

It has just occurred to me that it would be a very difficult situation in a commercial undertaking outside this House if the managing director or the secretary of such an undertaking came along to the constituents in the persons of the shareholders or what you will, of this company and said to them: "I am going to spend £2,500 of your money"; and, on being asked to explain what it was about, the best he could do was to refer vaguely to one or two heads and say that he was too bored to give the rest of the details. I wonder what the reaction of the members of such a commercial undertaking would be. What would be the feelings of the public in such circumstances and how long would such an official last? Here Dáil Éireann is being subjected to what is no more nor less than an insult by the Minister for Finance. Of course we all appreciate very well that the members of the Fianna Fáil Party sitting behind the Minister will support him, and must support him, because their political lives depend on it, regardless of what explanation he may or may not give.

Mr. Killilea

The same as you support Cumann na nGaedheal.

Mr. Dunne

The Independent Deputies are in a similar position.

Mr. Killilea

The same as you support Cumann na nGaedheal.

Mr. Dunne

I am not trying to come into this House tied on to the coat tails of any political Party.

Mr. Killilea

What about the people who dragged you in—your bosses?

Mr. Dunne

The exhibition we are witnessing on the part of the Minister is not alone disgraceful from the point of view of denying to the members of this House their right to information in regard to the expenditure of money, but it has led to the waste of the time of this House. There was nothing whatsoever to prevent the Minister from explaining an hour ago, or from explaining last week, what this money was required for unless something is being hidden from the House. It is in order to ensure that nothing shall be hidden that we intend to protest here to-day, for as long as it may be necessary, against what is being done by the Minister for Finance. As I have said, nobody expects those who sit on the Government Benches to find any degree of independence. They are afraid to hazard their political career, but, at least, ordinary parliamentary decency demands that they should join with those of us who are anxious to get this information. No matter what Minister may have control of finance in this House, it is his duty at all times to inform the House of the purposes for which the money is required. Here we are being treated with silent contempt. What is more, the Minister's attitude, in my view, in regard to this whole matter is contemptible and even less than contemptible. I want to associate myself with those who protested against what is being done. I feel that the fashion in which the House is being treated is disgraceful.

Mr. Sweetman

Deputy Dunne said a moment ago that he suspected that something was being hidden in regard to this Supplementary Estimate. It is not a question of suspecting but a question of knowing. The original Estimate, as introduced, made it quite clear that a sum of £50,000 was going to be spent on sub-head A, and that such £50,000 was going to be reimbursed by way of an extra receipt into the Exchequer by way of the Grant Counterpart Special Account Fund. This Estimate only asks for the sum of £10 because of the savings on sub-head A—£2,490. The reason for the silence of the Minister and the reason why this whole matter has not been explained is a simple one. Under the E.C.A. arrangements, we all know that, before the 31st December last, the Government of Ireland was to submit certain memoranda and make certain arrangements before the European Economic Co-operation Account closed. This Government failed to do that. This Government, now represented by the Minister for Finance, did not send in in time the proper returns to the American Government. It is because the Minister for Finance failed to do so that it is necessary to produce this as a Supplementary Estimate here in the Dáil with the equivalent of an additional supplementary in the Extra Receipts Note as there was in the original Estimate. No wonder the Minister is silent and hangs his head, more especially when he knows we will have another opportunity of discussing this matter on other Supplementary Estimates. The Minister for Finance and the present Fianna Fáil "Coalition" Government failed to complete their arrangements with E.C.A. before the 31st December and, in consequence, they lost for this country the handling of the unexpended portion of the Grant Counterpart Fund set out at 18,000,000 dollars. No wonder the Minister is silent and hangs his head.

Mr. MacEntee

He is bored at such tosh.

Mr. Sweetman

No wonder he does not want the House to know about his inefficiency and about the inefficiency of the Government of which he is a member. That is the real explanation of the Minister's attitude and of his delay in giving an explanation to this House.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister to conclude.

General Mulcahy

I am not going to allow this debate to conclude.

Mr. Sweetman

You cannot conclude in Committee.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

It is customary for the Minister to conclude, even in Committee.

General Mulcahy

On a point of order, Sir, it is quite unusual.

Mr. Davin

A Leas-Chinn Comhairle, would you ask the Minister to sit down while a point of order is being raised?

General Mulcahy

On a point of order, I have been taking part in this debate and I was about to rise after Deputy Sweetman had concluded. However, I was anxious to give an opportunity to any other Deputy in the House who wished to rise. I had felt quite a number of Deputies wished to rise and show that we were not being given a scrap of information. In the absence of anybody else rising to speak, I was going to ask if you would accept a motion that the Dáil should adjourn for the purpose of giving the Taoiseach an opportunity of attending the House, and an opportunity of realising that the Minister for Finance was trampling the House under foot, insulting it and ignoring it by asking that money should be voted without giving any information as to what the money was for. I beg to propose that the House should adjourn for a quarter of an hour in order that the Taoiseach may attend and give some information to the House in default of the Minister for Finance.

Mr. Dunne

If that motion needs seconding, I will second it.

Mr. Davin

There is no precedent in the history of this House for the silence of the Minister for Finance.

Dr. ffrench-O'Carroll

Has the Minister given any indication that he is not going to explain when concluding?

Mr. Morrissey

Is that the time for it?

General Mulcahy

If the form of my motion makes any difficulty for you I put it in that form in order to emphasise my point. I now move to report progress and my reason for doing so is that we may have an opportunity for the Taoiseach to attend and see what is happening here.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair has called on the Minister to conclude.

Mr. Morrissey

On a point of order. It is quite true that the Minister was called upon to conclude, but it has been the invariable practice since the establishment of this House that, even when the Minister is called upon to conclude, any other Deputy who offers to speak before the Minister starts his concluding speech is accepted by the Chair and by the Minister. I just want to put that on record so that we will not have any new precedent created by the Minister for Finance.

General Mulcahy

I find myself in a difficulty. Anybody in the House will understand that I hesitated for a moment after Deputy Sweetman had spoken to allow anybody else who might wish to speak to rise to his feet. I found myself in the position that I made a proposal to you and that you discussed the matter. You seemed to go back on your decision and you called on the Minister to conclude.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair is not going back on any decision. After Deputy Sweetman had concluded, no other Deputy having offered himself, the Chair called on the Minister to conclude. That is the established practice of the House.

General Mulcahy

I submit, Sir, that this is going to have very serious repercussions, when you come to deal with the Supplementary Estimate on Agriculture.

Mr. Morrissey

On a further point of order, can we have from the Chair, because we have not got it yet, a ruling for the records, whether the Chair is accepting or refusing to accept the motion proposed by Deputy Mulcahy?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair is refusing the motion.

Mr. Morrissey

I just wanted to have the ruling.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Because if any other Deputy had offered to speak, the Chair would have heard him.

Mr. MacEntee

It is extraordinary that Deputies purporting to represent the Irish people and who have been in public life for such a long time, as Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Dillon have been, should behave like children in a kindergarten. This storm was foreshadowed last week when Deputy Dillon, writhing and suffering sorely from the castigation which the Taoiseach had delivered to him for his unpardonable personal attack on Deputy Little——

Mr. Morrissey

On a point of order——

Mr. D.J. O'Sullivan

On a point of order, what has this to do with the Estimate?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Minister to resume.

General Mulcahy

On a point of order.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

How many points of order?

Mr. D.J. O'Sullivan

I ask on a point of order, what has Deputy Dillon's reference to Deputy Little last week got to do with the Minister's reply to the particular matter under discussion?

Mr. Morrissey

Because he is prepared to talk about anything except the Estimate.

General Mulcahy

On a point of order. The Minister is concluding this debate in rather peculiar circumstances, circumstances that I think should not have arisen. However, he is concluding a debate in which he has been asked for information. I submit that the first thing the House is entitled to know is whether it is going to get that information, because if the Minister is going to substitute abuse and further insolence for the information we should have got, he can only blame himself for anything that may happen in the course of his remarks.

Mr. MacEntee

May I be permitted to make my speech? After all, we are not living in a totalitarian State such as Deputy Mulcahy wished to establish.

General Mulcahy

Everyone behind you knows what that means.

Mr. MacEntee

The Deputy has been going on for a long time, turning over like a white mouse in a cage, and he should now see if he can listen to me. I was saying that this storm was foreshadowed last week when, after the circumstances which I have recalled to the mind of the House, Deputy Dillon rose to follow me after I had introduced this Estimate. This is an Estimate for a sum of £10. I do not know how other Deputies value their time or value the time of the Legislature. It costs quite a lot to send us here. There is very important work to be done here. Last week we spent an hour, and to-day we have spent almost two hours, discussing an Estimate to provide a sum of £10——

General Mulcahy

That is a complete misrepresentation.

Mr. MacEntee

It was introduced in order to widen the ambit of a Vote for which a sum, not of £10, but of £100,000 has already been granted by this House. In the course of my opening speech I referred to the fact that, by reason of the passing of the Military Security Act by the United States Congress——

Mr. Morrissey

The Mutual Security Act.

Mr. MacEntee

——it became necessary that certain decisions be taken since the Government had indicated——

General Mulcahy

On a point of order. Is the Minister going to be allowed further to mislead the House by talking of a Military Security Act when it is the Mutual Security Act he should refer to?

Mr. MacEntee

The Mutual Security Act.

Mr. Morrissey

That is more like it.

Mr. MacEntee

However it is quite clear that Deputies do not want to have the boomerang——

Mr. Sweetman

We just want to make sure that the Minister tells the truth. We are discussing a loss of £750,000 at the moment.

Mr. Killilea

It is long ago you should have raised that.

Mr. Dillon

Deputy Killilea is bringing up the reinforcements now.

Mr. MacEntee

I dealt with the position at length—at least sufficient length in my opinion. I am not a man of many words like Deputy Dillon. I am not a man of tiresome prolixity like Deputy Mulcahy. I am a practical person, charged with a practical task. I discharge it here in this House with the least possible loss of time and I gave to the House every information that was necessary to enable the House to come to a decision upon a very simple proposition. In the midst of the irrelevancy to which the House has been treated, the terms of that proposition have been lost sight of. Let me remind you of what we are asked to provide money for—for grants towards the cost of technical assistance projects other than those approved by the United States E.C.A.

I pointed out the reason why the House was being asked to provide this sum, in order that our producers might secure for themselves technical assistance to enable them to increase their production and to develop their exports, to enable us to face the very grave crisis in which we find ourselves. That is what the money is for. I know that Deputies in this House—I suppose there are no exceptions to what I am going to say—can read. I assume that even Deputy Dillon read the phrase "grants towards the cost of technical assistance projects other than those approved by the United States E.C.A.". But though Deputy Dillon may have been able to read, I am bound to say that, having listened to his speech at length the last day, and to his several speeches at great length to-day, I doubt if he understands what he has read.

Mr. Dillon

On a point of order. The Minister has purported to read from the motion before the House but he has completely misread what he purported to read. What he purported to read was the motion but he stopped by design at the essential words. The motion is:—

"That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1952, for Grants-in-Aid in connection with technical assistance afforded by the United States E.C.A."

The final words of the motion are: "and for other expenditure on technical assistance". These the Minister left out.

Mr. Davin

That is deliberate.

Mr. Dillon

Why did he leave out these words?

Mr. MacEntee

I am completely "flummoxed".

Mr. Dillon

Hear, hear!

Mr. MacEntee

I am completely "flummoxed" because I do not know how to deal with a person like Deputy Dillon. I am not a pedagogue, but I have seen children in class who are quite incapable of receiving instruction and I have seen children so puffed up with their own knowledge that they thought they could teach their teacher. I was not reading the resolution or the motion. I was reading sub-head G of the Supplementary Estimate—but though Deputy Dillon, apparently, may be able to read and talk he is not able to hear, or if my words are audible to him he is not able to grasp their meaning.

Mr. Dillon

Are we not discussing the motion?

Mr. MacEntee

I was saying that we are discussing the purpose for which the money is asked. It is quite clearly set out in sub-head C of the Supplementary Estimate. The details are given in that sub-head. We should look back and recall how it is that we have had this three hours' debate on this very simple motion. When I introduced the motion I fully explained the Supplementary Estimate to the House. Then Deputy Dillon asked me if I could tell him the sorts of projects on which this money might be spent— the sort of technical assistance project which might be held to come within the ambit of the motion. Being anxious to give the House, and even Deputy Dillon, all the information which might legitimately be required, I proceeded to set before him, by examples which were——

General Mulcahy

The Minister is deliberately misstating what happened. Deputy Dillon asked him what they were.

Mr. MacEntee

I must ask the Chair to protect me—and not only me but the dignity of the House. It is obvious that Deputy Mulcahy must be suffering to-day from some sort of nervous disorder. He is behaving like a parliamentary jack-in-the-box.

General Mulcahy

The Minister is deliberately misrepresenting Deputy Dillon's intervention. At column 1514 of the Official Report of the 5th March, 1952, Deputy Dillon asked: "Can you tell us what they are?"—and the Minister replied: "I can." He has not, however, told them to us yet.

Mr. MacEntee

I then proceeded, by way of example, to give the House, not in some detail because that would be quite impossible but in a very informative way, the full title of each of the projects. I think there were no less than eight projects and I mentioned that there were some others of a like nature.

General Mulcahy

And the Ceann Comhairle ruled that it would be out of order to discuss them.

Mr. MacEntee

Instead of the debate proceeding in an orderly manner, Deputy Dillon—still suffering from the castigation which he had received from the Taoiseach—made it quite clear that he was going to exploit the nuisance value of his enormous capacity to talk nonsense about anything at interminable length. It became quite clear that Deputy Dillon's purpose was not to have an orderly debate on this subject, was not to elicit information, but was merely to be obstructive—knowing, of course, that this is the most critical part of the financial year and that these Supplementary Estimates have to be disposed of in order that the Vote on Account and the Central Fund Bill may be taken. He continued, in his usual repetitive fashion, to go over and over and over again the same ground last week and then, when at last progress had to be reported, he hied himself off to Ballaghaderreen and prepared the elaborate oration to which we listened when the debate on this Supplementary Estimate opened this afternoon. That is why this House has been treated to the exhibition which we have had from Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Dillon and Deputy Dunne. Deputy Dunne was not in this House when the debate opened on the last occasion. I think he probably hied himself off to Kilsallaghan.

Mr. Dunne

Do you remember when you were a member of the land division council there? You should not talk about Kilsallaghan.

Mr. MacEntee

I have no recollection of any such membership. I am explaining why it was necessary for me to exercise a very great measure of forbearance while I was watching the performances of Deputy Mulcahy and Deputy Dillon and Deputy Dunne to-day.

I take occasion now to give to the House, in concluding the debate, the information which already appears at column 1515 of the Official Report of the 5th March, 1952—the statement that, first of all, in accordance with sub-head C of the Supplementary Estimate, these grants were being made towards the cost of technical assistance projects other than those approved by the United States E.C.A. The fact of the matter is that the original Estimate—which, of course, was prepared by the last Administration— was much too narrow. It confined the source from which this technical assistance might be secured.

Deputy Dillon has taken up quite a good deal of time in this House this afternoon detailing how little he thinks of the type of technical assistance which one can get from the United States. I do not wish to decry either the technical knowledge or the vast experience of the people of the United States. We are very glad and very thankful for any assistance they can give us. We are, however, as Deputy Dillon was not in the past when the E.C.A. were the whiteheaded boys of Deputy Dillon, quite prepared to assume that, after all, there may be other sources of wisdom in the world besides the United States. While we would be glad to have their assistance, we are not going to confine our industrialists, agriculturists and merchants in general to securing their technical assistance from that one source. For that reason—in order to throw the wide world open to our people—we have brought in this Supplementary Estimate.

General Mulcahy

For £10.

Mr. MacEntee

For £10, because it is a token Vote to widen the ambit of the original Estimate which you, in your narrow-mindedness and short-sightedness, drew too narrow. That is what all this hubbub has been about. Every word of what I say now was said on the last occasion, though not in precisely the same terms. The meaning was there and the only thing about it was that there was not enough comprehension and common sense on the other side to understand what I was talking about.

Mr. Dillon

On a point of order. The Minister now says that this Supplementary Estimate was moved for the purpose of throwing the whole world open to our industrialists, agriculturists and merchants in general. May I direct the attention of the Chair to the terms of the motion:—

"That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1952, for Grants-in-Aid in connection with technical assistance afforded by the United States E.C.A.——"

Mr. MacEntee

And what else?

Mr. Dillon

Read on.

Mr. MacEntee

"... and for other expenditure on technical assistance." And sub-head C makes it quite clear.

Mr. Dillon

The words "technical assistance" appear for the first time in this motion. Are we to understand that in the last sentence the words "technical assistance" have no relation to where they appear in the main sentence? Is the money to be applied to technical assistance other than the technical assistance mentioned in the body of the motion?

Mr. MacEntee

Sub-head C, which is the only sub-head, makes it quite clear. I hope Deputy Dillon will be able to hear this time. It reads:—

"Grants towards the cost of technical assistance projects other than those approved by the United States E.C.A."

General Mulcahy

Will the Minister say from what other countries technical assistance is being sought under this Supplementary Estimate?

Mr. MacEntee

Better ask some of your friends over there. They know a lot more about Russia than I do.

Mr. Dunne

The Minister for Justice would know a little about it also.

Mr. Davin

The Tánaiste would know something about it.

Mr. Sweetman

Do I understand the Minister to suggest that this Estimate is to enable technical assistance to be obtained in countries other than America?

Mr. MacEntee

I do not propose to add anything to what I have said already.

Mr. Sweetman

Because when the Minister spoke on the last occasion he mentioned 12 projects and in each case he mentioned the United States of America and the explanation that he has given now is untrue. He is trying to hide the fact that he failed in his job.

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order. The Deputy alleged that something I have stated is untrue. I made it quite clear that I mentioned these things as examples of the type of technical assistance project which could be financed out of this Vote. So far as the Deputy uses the word "untrue" I throw it back at him.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister stated that he told the House on the last night that this Supplementary Estimate was for the purpose of getting technical assistance from other countries. That is untrue. There was not one word uttered by the Minister about that. The Minister could quote the word if it was there. He knows it is untrue.

General Mulcahy

Does the Minister refuse to say from what other countries he is getting technical assistance under this Supplementary Estimate?

Mr. Morrissey

May I ask a question?

Mr. MacEntee

I do not propose to answer any more questions. I have concluded.

Mr. Sweetman

You did not answer that.

Mr. Morrissey

I submit to the Minister and to the Chair that it is customary, after a Minister has concluded, that questions are allowed to the Minister.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That is being allowed in this instance.

Mr. Morrissey

May I ask one question? Whether the Minister answers or not, I do not mind. I will put the question.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

The Chair will allow the Deputy to put the question.

Mr. Morrissey

Will the Minister state whether the sum of money he is looking for is for technical assistance from countries other than the United States of America? On the answer to that question will depend whether he should get the money at all. The Minister led the House to believe until now that the money was in connection with American technical assistance. We are now told that it is for a completely different purpose.

Mr. MacEntee

The money is to get technical assistance from wherever it can be best and more readily secured.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister will not answer any question.

Question put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 51; Níl, 30.

Tá

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Bartley, Gerald.
• Beegan, Patrick.
• Blaney, Neil T.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Brady, Philip A.
• Brady, Seán.
• Brennan, Joseph.
• Brennan, Thomas.
• Crowley, Honor Mary.
• Cunningham, Liam.
• Davern, Michael J.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• de Valera, Eamon.
• de Valera, Vivion.
• Duignan, Peadar.
• Flynn, John.
• Flynn, Stephen.
• Gallagher, Colm.
• Gilbride, Eugene.
• Harris, Thomas.
• Hillery, Patrick J.
• Hilliard, Michael.
• Humphreys, Francis.
• Kennedy, Michael J.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Buckley, Seán.
• Burke, Patrick.
• Butler, Bernard.
• Carter, Frank.
• Childers, Erskine.
• Cogan, Patrick.
• Colley, Harry.
• Cowan, Peadar.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Little, Patrick J.
• McCann, John.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• MacEntee, Seán.
• Maher, Peadar.
• Moylan, Seán.
• Ó Briain, Donnchadh.
• O'Reilly, Matthew.
• Ormonde, John.
• Ryan, James.
• Ryan, Mary B.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Traynor, Oscar.
• Walsh, Thomas.

Níl

• Beirne, John.
• Cosgrave, Liam.
• Costello, Declan.
• Costello, John A.
• Crowe, Patrick.
• Davin, William.
• Dillon, James M.
• Dockrell, Henry P.
• Dockrell, Maurice E.
• Donnellan, Michael.
• Doyle, Peadar S.
• Dunne, Seán.
• Esmonde, Anthony C.
• Everett, James.
• Giles, Patrick.
• Hickey, James.
• Leary, Johnny.
• McGilligan, Patrick.
• McMenamin, Daniel.
• McQuillan, John.
• Morrissey, Daniel.
• Mulcahy, Richard.
• Murphy, William.
• Norton, William.
• O'Hara, Thomas.
• O'Sullivan, Denis.
• Roddy, Joseph.
• Rooney, Eamon.
• Sheldon, William A. W.
• Sweetman, Gerard.

Tellers:—Tá: Deputies Ó Briain and Killilea; Níl: Deputies P.S. Doyle and Dunne.

Motion declared carried.