asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will state the duration of the Employment Period Orders for the years 1955, 1956, 1957 and 1958.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Employment Period Orders.
As the reply is in the form of a tabular statement I propose, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, to have it circulated with the Official Report.
Following is the statement:
UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE (EMPLOYMENT PERIOD) ORDER
|
Year |
Duration |
|
1955 |
16th March to 25th October |
|
1956 |
14th March to 23rd October |
|
1957 |
13th March to 22nd October |
|
1958 |
12th March to 4th November |
UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE (SECOND EMPLOYMENT PERIOD) ORDER
|
Year |
Duration |
|
1955 |
15th June to 25th October |
|
1956 |
13th June to 23rd October |
|
1957 |
12th June to 22nd October |
|
1958 |
11th June to 4th November |
Could the Parliamentary Secretary say by what period in 1958 the Employment Period Order was extended beyond the concluding date in 1957?
I could not say without notice.
Surely we are not going to have this for an explanation? The Parliamentary Secretary undertakes to circulate what is before his eyes, and I am only asking him for a bit of the information before his eyes. He says he has not got the information and that he wants notice about it. That is a sorry yarn.
Why does the Deputy want it now? He will get it when he goes outside.
May I suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary, and to his mentor on the Front Bench, that the reason for extending the Employment Period Order to 1958 is to rig the unemployment register and to show——
Order!
——to show that the number of unemployed is not as big as last year when, in fact, it is more than last year?
Surely, Sir, your permission is required before the contents of a verbal reply to a parliamentary question are tendered in the form of a written statement? If the Deputy who asks the question demurs to the Parliamentary Secretary giving it in written form, is it not within your jurisdiction, and almost within your duty if the Deputy wants it verbally given, to ensure that is done?
It is not within my jurisdiction to suggest to a Minister the manner of his reply.
Surely the Parliamentary Secretary must say: "With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle"?
I have control of the Official Reports; therein my permission lies, not in the form in which the Minister gives the reply.
I remember omitting these words and you directed my attention to the fact that unless I had the Chair's permission I was obliged to read the reply; that is if a star was not put on the question.
On the understanding that the Minister is going to give a reply is it not within the competence of a Deputy to decide whether he wants that reply in a written or a verbal manner? I submit that that is a matter of grave importance to Deputies. Assuming that the material is to be given by the Minister, and that he proposes to give it, is it not within the compass of the Deputy to decide that he wants it in a verbal rather than in a written form?
Perhaps he cannot read.
May I have some kind of a reply on that, or am I to understand that, in refraining from giving a reply, the Chair does not want to create a precedent that might be a precedent founded upon a wrong decision?
There can be no wrong decisions from the Chair.
Just listen to helpful Henry. If the Minister for Health had told his Parliamentary Secretary to answer civilly, none of this would have arisen.
It is unfortunate that poor Deputy Norton has to depend upon Deputy Dillon to protect him.
Get somebody who can read.
I do not want to create an embarrassment or difficulty for the Chair and therefore, with your permission, I shall not press this question until everybody concerned can have an opportunity of consulting, in his or her own way, the Standing Orders and seeing that when the question is raised a decision is made that will be in accordance with the general understanding and the general will of the House.
May I intervene, as I am the Minister concerned? The form of the reply was not intended as a discourtesy to the House. It has been customary, where there are dates and figures, to allow the form of answer which has been given by the Parliamentary Secretary on my behalf, that is, "With your permission, the necessary particulars will be given in the Official Report." I am not contending that this is a firm precedent. I am only saying that it has been the custom of the House to accept this form of reply.
In relation to the remarks by the Minister for Health, I am not questioning the matter of courtesy. I am raising the question of rights and, because it is a question of rights, I do not want a hasty decision to be given on the matter. Therefore, I am not pressing my point at the moment.
May we take it that the Parliamentary Secretary will have your permission to circulate it?
The Chair has no power whatsoever to direct a Minister as to the form an answer must take.
No.
If a Deputy wishes his answer in a written form he may receive it in that form but if he does not wish it in that form he may receive it orally, unless the Chair considers that the answer is of a lengthy or statistical character in which case the answer is inserted in the Official Report.
Arising out of the Chair's comments on the situation, these questions which are answered by circulating the replies in the Official Report are preceded, at their introduction, somewhat as follows: "With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to circulate the reply in the Official Report." I take it that these words have some meaning besides mere verbiage? I take it that it is an accepted rule of the House that your permission, as Ceann Comhairle, is necessary before that procedure is adopted? Have these words any meaning besides mere verbiage?
I do not want to enter into a debate as to the meaning of the words. This is surely not the time to discuss that matter. If Deputy Norton wishes to raise the matter he surely has another way of doing so.
As the custodian of the rights of Deputies in this House, surely the words "With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle...." give to the Ceann Comhairle the right to say: "I give my permission to have the question answered in that way" or "I withhold my permission to have the question answered in that way"? The fact that these words are used while the Ceann Comhairle is in the Chair implies an acceptance of that responsibility.
No, no.
May I direct the attention of the Ceann Comhairle to Standing Order No. 35, paragraph (2), which reads as follows:—
"If in the opinion of the Ceann Comhairle any question put down for oral answer is of such a nature as to require a lengthy reply, the Ceann Comhairle may, at the request of the member of the Government to whom the question is addressed, direct that the answer be furnished in the Official Report of the Debates."
Does that not clearly indicate that the Ceann Comhairle will consider the reasonableness of a request by a member of the Government to be excused from reading an unduly long reply? If the Chair thinks the Minister's request is well-founded, in relation to the length of the reply, the Ceann Comhairle may grant the permission but, if he does not think the request is well-founded, he ought to refuse it. Is that not true? Furthermore, on the grounds that the answer is of such a nature as to require a lengthy reply——
I am satisfied that this reply is of such a nature as to justify my giving permission to have it circulated in the Official Report.
The Chair is satisfied that the reply is too long to have it read out here?
Question No. 23.
Is Deputy Dillon questioning the ruling of the Chair?
The hand is the hand of Esau but the voice is the voice of Jacob.
It is a mellifluous voice.
And a very uproarious Jacob we have.
Question No. 23.