Borough Constituency of Cork: Issue of Writ—Motion.

Mr. Casey

I move:—

That the Ceann Comhairle direct the Clerk of the Dáil to issue his Writ for the election of a member to fill the vacancy which has occurred in the membership of the present Dáil consequent on the death of Deputy John Galvin, a member for the Borough Constituency of Cork.

In doing so, I am exercising my right as a Deputy and, although it may not be in accordance with tradition or precedent, I do it for these reasons. It has been suggested in various quarters that it may not be convenient for one reason or another, either convenient for the Government or the other Parties contesting the election, that the election should be held at this particular time before Christmas. However, we cannot be too worried about our own convenience. What really matters is the convenience of the electorate and if I am interpreting the wishes of the people in my constituency properly, they are clamouring for an opportunity of expressing their opinions at the poll immediately and do not want to wait until after Christmas to do it.

It is significant that on his return from America the first public statement made by the Taoiseach was one which expressed views which coincide exactly with the sentiments I am now endeavouring to express here. In the Cork Examiner he was reported as saying when interviewed at Dublin Airport —and this has not been contradicted:—

A defeat for the Government in the forthcoming Cork by-election——

He had good sense enough to be able to anticipate that anyway.

——would not necessarily mean that there would be a general election. Stating that the Cork by-election would probably be held before Christmas Mr. Lemass said: "Surely the fate of the Government does not depend on one by-election."

He thought the most important consideration regarding the moving of the writ was the convenience of the electorate in the area but it was good democratic practice that the vacancy should be filled without undue delay.

He said that he saw definitely the possibility of a by-election in Cork before Christmas. Therefore, it is my duty as a Deputy for that constituency to draw your attention Sir, to the fact that this vacancy does exist in the present Dáil and I am quite sure that my colleagues representing Cork city and the adjoining constituency, the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the Lord Mayor, Deputy MacCarthy, will be able to convey to the Taoiseach that what I say is correct.

Mr. MacCarthy

Not as far as I am concerned.

Mr. Dillon

A Daniel come to judgment.

Mr. Casey

The people of Cork city want an election now. They want an opportunity now of giving their verdict on the turnover tax and the other various activities of the Government. I do not think it is any sharp practice on our part. The Minister for Industry and Commerce and Deputy MacCarthy may disagree with me but I am prepared to put it to the test. I do not think it should be dependent on a debate across the House between the Minister for Industry and Commerce and myself or the Lord Mayor of Cork and myself. I am prepared to put it to the test of the people of Cork and with the democratic set-up which fortunately we have in this country, nobody can resist that.

An Ceann Comhairle

Is the motion seconded?

Mr. Dillon

I second the motion.

Mr. Sherwin

The conspiracy thickens.

Mr. Corish

On a point of order, I seconded the motion.

The Taoiseach

There are some established decencies in our public life which I suggest should not be put aside and there are also certain traditional procedures of this Dáil which should not be lightly disregarded. These considerations have involved the acceptance heretofore by all political Parties in this House of the practice that a motion to fill a vacancy in the Dáil caused by the death of one of our colleagues should be moved only by a member of the Party to which the deceased Deputy belonged and when that Party so decided. There has been no exception heretofore in the whole history of the Dáil——

Mr. McQuillan

That is wrong. Go back to 1958.

The Taoiseach

There has been no exception heretofore to this practice in the whole history of the Dáil.

Mr. McQuillan

If you go back to 1958, you will find Deputy Ó Briain tried to move a motion after the resignation of a Deputy.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Casey may not be able to understand that Fianna Fáil Deputies have at least as much respect for the memory of our dead colleague, Deputy John Galvin, as the Fine Gael Deputies had for the late Deputy Belton. In the case of Deputy Belton, a period of about ten weeks passed between the creation of the vacancy and the submission by a Fine Gael Deputy to the Dáil of a motion for the issue of a writ for the by-election. We might have considered it to be to the advantage of our Party to have that election held earlier but the Fine Gael Party, however, decided that they wanted to have the election in May and they had a right to take that decision. Because of the considerations of decency and the traditions to which I have referred, it did not enter our minds to move the motion for the issue of the writ ourselves although we could possibly have carried such a motion against the opposition of the Fine Gael Party. The submission of this motion by a Deputy of the Labour Party in the case of the vacancy caused by the death of one of our members, Deputy John Galvin, has introduced a new and, I think, deplorable element in the procedure of the Dáil which we can only regret. This cannot be undone now but I think many Deputies will wish to dissociate themselves from it.

Whatever our views as to the date on which the Cork by-election should be held or as to any Party advantage thought to be involved, I would ask all members of the Dáil, outside the members of the Labour Party, who wish to have our traditional procedure and the decencies of public life maintained to reject Deputy Casey's motion.

Mr. Dillon

This sanctimonious declaration on the part of the Taoiseach is not becoming and does not serve the purpose of maintaining the respect for our parliamentary institutions which should be the concern of all of us. This House operates under its Standing Orders which it is your function, Sir, to enforce but also it functions under certain conventions which in our wish for the preservation of parliamentary institutions, we have, in common, accepted. That fact means the agreement of all of us to accept the rough with the smooth. If we dissent from a ruling made by you, Sir, under Standing Orders we must accept that ruling, unless we propose by the appropriate censure of your conduct to do otherwise.

Similarly, there is a convention in this House since I have been a member of it. That convention is that if one of our colleagues should die, there should be a suitable period of respectful mourning, which I always understood to be measured as one month, and thereafter it is open to the Party to which that member belonged to move the writ with all the respect due to a deceased colleague and to his family. Circumstances such as holiday periods and other considerations have forced us from time to time to postpone the moving of a writ but it is surely manifest that where issues of a critical character are joined between the Government of the day and the Parties in Opposition, after the suitable period has passed, the Government should move the writ for the by-election at the earliest possible occasion.

Note the danger of departing from that observance. If we are to vary our conventions to the point of saying that no delay on the part of the Party whose member has died will ever justify the moving of the writ by anyone else, it comes within the power of the Government of the day never to move a writ. Surely no one will say that is a situation that anything could justify? If the writ had been moved within the time of mourning, I would have demurred.

The Taoiseach

Deputy Casey did not wait for the month.

Mr. Casey

That is a lie. You will not get away with that.

Mr. Dillon

This is a matter for calm consideration without acrimony. I do not think it can be contested that the customary period has elapsed as of the 10th or 11th of this month. I want to submit to the House that in the situation now obtaining where the issue of the turnover tax is being hotly contested——

The Taoiseach

What you mean is that decency does not matter but that your Party advantage does.

Mr. Dillon

The Taoiseach will not irritate me into participating in any unseemly behaviour. The appropriate period having elapsed, and I believe it has elapsed, the Government were faced with notice that a Labour member of the city of Cork had decided to have the matter put to the test of a popular vote of the people of the city of Cork. Had the writ been moved before the customary period had elapsed, I would have demurred and I am quite convinced that Deputy Casey and no other Deputy would have sought to move it within that period.

Mr. Lenihan

Why did you not move it?

Mr. Dillon

I did not move it because up to yesterday it would not have been seemly to move it and I had the right to expect that a member of the Government Party would have moved it. I am well aware that anyone who tries to maintain the standard of decent relationship that should exist between the Opposition and the Government is likely to be faced with nothing but scurrilous abuse and insolence by the present Government. If we are to preserve parliament in this country as an effective system of Government there must be some amongst us who are prepared to make sacrifices to ensure that.

I, therefore, put it to the House that when the Government did not move the writ in the special circumstances which obtain and when they gave no indication of their intention of moving it in the early future, it is required, bearing in mind the acute issue joined in the country at the present time as to whether it is just to raise the revenue of this State from a tax on the essential food, fuel and clothing of the people, that an early opportunity should be taken to submit that question to the electors of Cork as it has already been submitted to the electors of Dublin who have given a clear and vigorous verdict. I believe that it is the failure of the Government readily to face that issue with the people that has made the course adopted by Deputy Casey justifiable today. I said myself in Cork that the Government had a duty to come out and face the people. They have that duty. They should have discharged it themselves, and if they are not prepared to come willingly to the people, we will do all in our power to drag them there.

Mr. Norton

I intervene in this debate only because of the act which the Taoiseach has thought fit to put on here this time.

The Taoiseach

A speaker on this side of the House has also offered, and I imagine that the Chair should rule that the speakers should come alternately from each side.

Mr. O'Sullivan

Let the Chair decide. You are not going to decide for the Chair and everything else.

An Ceann Comhairle

I will call the Minister after Deputy Norton.

Mr. J. Lynch

It was. Deputy Casey's Party have put up a candidate and they know well that they have not the slightest hope of winning the seat on behalf of the Party. Therefore to that extent again I accuse Deputy Casey and his Party of being the catspaw in this motion as well, for Fine Gael. The normal time that it would take to have an election, assuming the writ is moved today, would be not less than 21 days. Therefore, the by-election would inevitably be held within two weeks of Christmas. Cork city is a busy city. There is a tremendous degree of business activity in the city. I have canvassed the opinion of business people and of ordinary citizens and I assure this House that the people in Cork in so far as I can ascertain their wishes do not want the inconvenience of a by-election within a fortnight of Christmas.

The last precedent we have is the one the Taoiseach quoted when the Fine Gael Party delayed some three months. The nearest precedent we have to this occasion was the death of the late Deputy Dr. Tom O'Higgins who died at the end of October, 1953. It was within the power of this Party to move the writ at that time, if we were to adopt this precedent here to-day, but the writ was not moved until the next succeeding session of the House in the spring. The election took place towards the end of February. At that time there was no concern about leaving Cork without a Deputy.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

But there was no turnover tax at that time.

Mr. Corry

We shall turn you over.

An Ceann Comhairle

Surely Deputies can restrain themselves for at least a quarter of an hour and allow the Minister to speak.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

The death was 1st November, 1953.

Mr. J. Lynch

And the by-election took place about 18th February, 1954.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

There was no Dáil in session.

Mr. J. Lynch

It would have been possible to move the writ within a couple of weeks of that.

Mr. Donegan

What is the position? Are we all children, or is it just that this rot of humbugging has penetrated so deeply into the membership of this House that nobody can distinguish the truth from the fraud in this matter? What does the electoral law say? It should determine when we hold by-elections. The electoral law says that you may have a by-election in 15 days, excluding Sundays. That is the law on how early by-elections can be held. Yet this motion is moved almost five weeks after the Deputy's death so that we have complied almost to the extent of twice as much as the electoral law on the subject requires. In this case the Deputy has been dead four weeks last Friday so that as far as hurting his memory by dates is concerned, that charge carries no weight and has no foundation whatever.

Does everybody not know that the question of a by-election is always a matter of political tactics for whatever Party is vitally concerned? Does everybody not know that holding a by-election is always a question of buying time? It is purely a political stratagem. It is a question of whether the memory of the late Deputy is so good that you should catch it quickly and get more votes——

Mr. Lenihan

Disgraceful.

Mr. Kitt

You were planning this over his grave.

Mr. Norton

Or is it a question of waiting until something else arises, something that might arrive on the political scene in order to tempt the electorate to vote in a particular way for a particular Party? If the Government have something they are going to produce, to delay the election is better for them. If the Opposition see that the Government are going to run into a jam or are in difficulty at the moment, an early election is good for the Opposition. Or do the Government set themselves up as holy men——

Mr. P.J. Burke

You will get nowhere unless you are prudent. I notice the bookmakers' prices have not been chalked up here tonight as to what the odds are in Cork.

Notwithstanding the protestations by the Taoiseach and the Minister for Industry and Commerce and the applause from the wings, the plain fact is that there is no question of insulting the memory of the late Deputy Galvin or no question of breaking any previous practice in this House. We are more than complying with the law which was passed on the initiative of Fianna Fáil. The simple issue is: is it better to have the election now or is it better to wait until after Christmas? The Taoiseach says it is better to have it now and that we should have it by Christmas. In the first blush of his return from America he gave that advice to the people. We say with him "You are right. We ought to have it now." The people ought to have a chance of pronouncing on the turnover tax. They were not told about it in the last election. It was not in operation when the by-election was fought. It is now in operation and the people of Cork city should be given an opportunity of interpreting the feelings of the people of the country on the question of the turnover tax. That is why we want the by-election, so that the people can, in fact, express their views on the turnover tax.

The Taoiseach said there were certain things he wanted to preserve in Irish life. One of these things he said —with a gulp in his speech—was the kind of decency we had known and practised here without interruption for nearly 40 years. The Taoiseach ought to remember that decency in Irish public life was very seriously injured in the vote which took place in this House a fortnight ago, and the Taoiseach played a prominent and unworthy part in that odd transaction.

Order. Deputies might allow the Minister to speak without interruption.

Mr. Sweetman

Deputy Norton was not afforded that courtesy.

Mr. Aiken

When the Taoiseach decides to have an election, we will have it, and I can tell you, you will be very sorry for it on that side of the House.

Deputies

Oh!

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The Minister has the wind up.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Aiken

The very people who would be shivering in their boots if there were an election would be the Labour Party because they would be shown up——

Mr. Casey

Try it out.

Mr. Aiken

—for what they are, collectors merely of second preferences. That has been their tradition.

Order.

Mr. Aiken

Will it be raised in the way in which it was raised in 1956 when the level of unemployment rose to 100,000 people? That is what the people want to know.

Order.

Mr. Aiken

If the Deputies opposite think they can shout me down, I want to warn them they will not succeed.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister is helping us all the time.

Mr. N. Egan

That is not the way it was 40 years ago.

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

Forty years ago, you were Fine Gael.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order.

Everyone knows that the convention of this Dáil in relation to by-elections has been——

Deputy Casey must cease these interruptions.

Mr. Norton

What the Minister is saying is not correct and you, too, know that.

Mr. Aiken

It is correct. It has always been a member of the Party to whom a deceased Deputy belonged who moved the writ for the by-election.

Mr. Kyne

Why is the Chair accepting the motion?

Mr. O.J. Flanagan

The Chair will not accept the motion because Deputy Dan Breen is not here yet.

Mr. Aiken

I said that the convention has been up to now that it is a member of the Party to whom a deceased Deputy belonged who has the right to move for the writ.

Mr. Norton

Anybody can move it.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Order.

Mr. Aiken

Neither the Labour Party nor the Fine Gael Party have the right to deny Fianna Fáil that right and even if they attempt to deny it, we shall do our utmost to oppose it.

Mr. Barrett

I had no intention of intervening in the debate until the Minister for Industry and Commerce had the temerity to rise and announce on behalf of the electorate of Cork that they, the electorate, did not wish to have a by-election as soon as possible. I know that in his inner self the Minister is as convinced as Deputy Casey of the fact that the electorate of Cork are most anxious for an election. I rise mainly to corroborate Deputy Casey's statement that the electorate of Cork are most anxious to get at the throats of the Government, and I know the Taoiseach knows in his heart that is so.

The Taoiseach has spoken in this House on many occasions and also from public platforms on our economic policy and has underlined that we must be prepared to take risks. I wonder why this sudden access of prudence on this occasion, because this appears to be the one risk the Taoiseach is not prepared to take. I should like to know why. If the Taoiseach is as convinced as the Minister for Industry and Commerce professes himself to be that the electorate do not want the election, why did he speak in the way he has done today?

There is one other matter arising out of the performance of the Minister for Industry and Commerce when he took on the garment of order and spoke of ordinary decencies, suggesting that the Parties on this side were outraging these decencies. As Deputy Casey and Deputy Norton have pointed out, the first person to moot the by-election before Christmas is the person who does not now want it. The Taoiseach said that there would most likely be a by-election before Christmas. Unless he wants to have my constituents voting on Christmas Eve, he should be ready to move the writ now being moved by Deputy Casey. Since the Taoiseach has already spoken, perhaps some member of his Party will tell us why there has been this change of mind? Further arising out of this question of the ordinary decencies, I should like to recall that when the late Deputy Frank Fahy died, on 12th July, 1953, the writ was moved on 31st July.

The Taoiseach

Moved by the Fianna Fáil Party.

Mr. T. Lynch

Nineteen days.

Mr. Barrett

Where were the ordinary decencies then?

They would conspire and they have conspired. The evidence is that the people have not complained about the 2½ per cent in the past two weeks. They accepted a tax of only 6d. in the pound. They accepted that they were getting certain reliefs. Their complaint and the complaint of the ladies who will march around tomorrow is not the 2½ per cent but the profiteering which has been alleged here today.

It was stated by one Deputy on the Opposition Benches that there was profiteering of up to 16 per cent. All people who did not constitute the backbone of the Opposition in north-east Dublin or who were not the pals of the Opposition would be against profiteering to that extent which is purely to inflame the people and to influence the way they vote. We want the election when the people know what they are doing, when they can vote in accordance with the truth and not in accordance with lies and artificially inflated prices encouraged by the Opposition.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

Deputy Sherwin is entitled to be heard, just as any other Deputy and Deputies should not combine to shout down another. It is most disorderly.

Mr. Sherwin

Mr. M.J. O'Higgins

I think there is something nauseating in the spectacle of a largely unwanted Government clinging to office and proposing to vote deliberately for the purpose of preventing portion of the electorate, namely the people of Cork, from passing judgment on their policies.

When I hear the Taoiseach and other members of his Party lecturing here about decency and dignity, I remember that there are Deputies on these benches whose close relatives laid down their lives in helping the establishment of parliamentary democracy in this country.

It is, I think, true to say that for us democracy is now a right, but in present circumstances it is not going to be a fact until we drag the Fianna Fáil Party before the electorate.

I found it very difficult to suppress my indignation when I heard the Taoiseach in his first few sentences replying to the speech made by Deputy Casey. I believe that the allegations and insinuations of the Taoiseach were not alone scandalous but fraudulent, but it seems to me that no matter when the Cork by-election is fought, the main plank in the political platform of the Fianna Fáil Party will be the allegation that disrespect has been shown to the late Deputy Galvin. The Taoiseach has talked about precedent and convention. I want to assure him and the House that in making their decision to move for the issue of the writ, the Labour Party and particularly Deputy Casey were conscious all the time of the respect due to Deputy Galvin and to any Deputy who died. The Labour Party were very careful to observe all the conventions as far as respect to a late Deputy was concerned.

We handed in notice of motion in relation to the issue of this writ on last Saturday morning. Deliberately, we did not do it for Wednesday morning, Thursday morning or Friday morning because we wanted to observe the usual conventions. We realised that to have it moved here on Wednesday, it would have to be in by Saturday. Now the month has passed during which it is usual to pay respect to a Deputy who has died.

I want to say frankly that we decided to break with precedent. The Minister for External Affairs in a speech in which he had a lot of gesticulations talked about the right of the Taoiseach as Leader of the Fianna Fáil Party to move for the issue of the writ in respect of a vacancy caused by the death of a member of his Party. Despite what the Taoiseach said at the Airport about having the election before Christmas, we knew that the Taoiseach and the Fianna Fáil Party had no intention in the wide earthly world of having this election before Christmas. It was precisely for that reason that we decided to break with precedent and, if we could by putting this motion to the House and having it accepted by the House, force the Government and every other Party in the House to face the Cork electors.

It has been mentioned by some Deputy, and I think it is the perfect answer to the Taoiseach, that we are becoming a bit fed up with the fraudulent attitude of the Taoiseach when he talks about the decorum of the House and about precedent and convention. But does he remember so well to examine his conscience now in relation to the attitude of the Fianna Fáil Party when, 19 days after his death, they decided to move the writ to fill the vacancy created by the death of one who had been Ceann Comhairle, the late Deputy Frank Fahy? Therefore on that score there is no question of precedent. On the contrary, if precedent was broken, it was broken by the Fianna Fáil Party of which the Taoiseach is a member, when he or they moved to have the vacancy filled 19 days after the death of Deputy Fahy.

The Taoiseach

It is a question of who moved the writ.

Mr. Corish

There are two allegations made by the Taoiseach. One, that we have been disrespectful to the memory of the late Deputy Galvin. If he compares our attitude in moving for this writ with the attitude of the Fianna Fáil Party in moving the writ to fill the vacancy created by the death of the late Deputy Frank Fahy, he must agree that we certainly showed respect to the memory of the late Deputy Galvin. He ought to examine his own conscience about the respect shown by the Fianna Fáil Party to the late Deputy Frank Fahy. We moved this deliberately because, frankly, we want to put the issue of the turnover tax to the people.

Minister for Social Welfare (Mr. Boland)

The most significant thing about this attempt to break the precedents of the House is that the motion to move the writ——

——to move the writ. That was the gravamen of the Taoiseach's worry. Can we get over that and restore peace and happiness in the House by allowing the Taoiseach to take over our motion and we will all gladly accept that solution and have the election without any further differences?

Mr. Dolan

Like Pontius Pilate, he rises to wash his hands.

Mr. Norton

Then there will be no tears to dry.

Mr. S. Flanagan

Has the Chair ruled as to whether this debate takes precedence over Private Members' Business?

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I understand this question has never arisen before. It could, if desired, supersede all other business and continue.

Mr. Boland

Mr. Boland

The alternative is a return to the Fine Gael-Labour Coalition that brought disaster to this country on two previous occasions. We would like to give the people time to realise that the only alternative method of taxation to what we propose is the same type of taxation as created 100,000 unemployed and an annual emigration of 60,000, as happened under the previous Coalition.

The Deputy is still using the wrong personal pronoun, even though I admonished him several times.

Mr. Mullen

Deputy Sherwin accused the Opposition of enticing people to profiteer. I notice he accused only the Opposition and I regard that as an admission that he is no longer in the Opposition or independent, that he is now officially Fianna Fáil. If there has been profiteering, surely it is the fault of Deputy Sherwin and his Minister for Industry and Commerce. Repeatedly, the Labour Party have advocated price control but what did we get by way of reply? All we got was sidestepping, and Fianna Fáil promises that in all probability cannot be fulfilled. Certainly these promises will be useless to the people if they have to wait and see.

I have had to refer to all Deputies during the afternoon. I am concerned about the dignity of the House and every Deputy elected to this House should remember that. I am asking them to remember it. The conduct here this afternoon has not added much to the dignity of the House.

Mr. Mullen

I think the Fianna Fáil Party will be as quick as anybody to agree that there is a strong objection among the people to the turnover tax. Fianna Fáil should bear that in mind. They did not ask the people about it beforehand; they had no mandate for it. They have now been given the opportunity to ascertain whether the people agree or not. Prior to its introduction, the people in Dublin North-East had an opportunity of saying how they felt about its proposed introduction and we know what happened. It is only democratic now to afford the people of Cork an opportunity of saying how exactly they feel about the tax. Promises, letters to employers and trade unions do not answer this. The people should be consulted. It was they who sent Deputies to this Chamber and it is most unfair for the Taoiseach and his Party to disfranchise the people of Cork as they are now doing.

Mr. Carroll

I had no intention of contributing to this debate one way or the other. However, one has to examine one's conscience on occasions of this sort. Two weeks ago, I voted in this House on a vote of confidence in relation to the manner in which the Taoiseach was conducting the affairs of this country. With the exception of the 2½ per cent turnover tax, I said I was satisfied and that I felt the people were satisfied. However, may I say that looking into the matter and resorting to every bit of moral courage I had, I subsequently voted with the Government?I had voted against the Government in the space of two or three months.

Various references have been made this afternoon which do not affect me very much because I am not quite so over-sensitive, and when one Deputy refers, as Deputy Collins does, to the four feathers of the Government, as long as he does not suggest one of them is white, I do not mind. I have listened very carefully and, after the Taoiseach's statement, lest he or anyone else should infer that I am afraid of a general election, I have decided to support the motion in the name of Deputy Casey. I am supporting the motion because I cannot conceive why the Taoiseach has any hesitation in going to Cork. If the seat is to be lost, there will be another day.

However, I do think that your remarks, Sir, a few moments ago were true and that the conduct of the majority of the House this afternoon was reprehensible. I do claim that in the past, whether as chairman of a football team meeting or anything else, I demanded respect from those who were at the meeting and if I did not get it, I adjourned the meeting. It is deplorable when Deputies who ordinarily carry themselves with dignity can so lose their sense of dignity, because they have the privilege of this House, as to speak in relation to other Deputies about cheque books and the like. Is there any Deputy who could honestly imply that a cheque book would make any difference to me? It did not 40 years ago and it will not now.

It was said in the debate a few weeks ago that I was supposed to be Fianna Fáil in disguise. It was never suggested that I was inclined towards Fine Gael. I did come in here under the caption of Independent, honestly Independent, and if it is to be suggested that my vote with the Government two weeks ago lessened my independence, perhaps tonight's vote will offset that. I am not motivated by that but I cannot see why the Taoiseach will not say: "Yes; we will have the by-election in Cork before Christmas." It is not too much to ask. He knows when he is going to have it. I am satisfied he does not want to put it off. Personally, I would not like to be contesting an election in December or January. It is not the ideal time. I am not a member of a Party and no Party in this House can insinuate that I am partisan.

I am on the official records as stating two weeks ago in regard to the turnover tax that I was influenced by the assurance of the Taoiseach that any privation caused to the people would be remedied. I am disappointed that there are not sufficient inspectors going around the shops in Dublin trying to prevent what is gross racketeering.We had Dublin Opinion and other such magazines depicting Government inspectors looking over hedges checking on the farmers. They are not checking on the shopkeepers who are not adhering to the 2½ per cent. I have stated that I believe that a purchase tax of some sort is a very good thing, if it is not imposed on food. Why cannot we decide on units of 5/-, 10/-, or 20/- and thus facilitate putting a tax on each item?

I reiterate my confidence in the Taoiseach in his general approach but certainly not in the manner of his approach to the House this evening. I believe—and I am on the official record as having said this—it was not the Opposition who won North-East Dublin, that it was the 2½ per cent tax that won it. If the same thing happens in Cork, the Government will then realise it was a mistake to tax food.

I hope Deputies will not continue to approach this matter in the unfair manner which they have adopted so far. I had great respect for the late Deputy Galvin. He was a very good friend of mine. I did think—I have somewhat changed in my opinion now —that there was a type of indecent haste, a rush to capitalise on the death of a person, but today we have evidence that it is not indecent. I trust that before we adjourn tonight, the Taoiseach will accede to the appeal I made to him to set a date for the by-election, to go out and win.

Mr. P.J. Burke

There is only one simple issue at stake here now. Are we to turn our backs completely on tradition? The Taoiseach has opposed Deputy Casey's motion on the ground that since this Dáil was founded, it was always the Party to which the late Deputy belonged who moved the motion. The question before the House is not the turnover tax but whether we are to throw this tradition to the wind. That is the sole issue we are concerned with.

When the by-election is held—this week, next week or the week after— does not matter all that much to people who have been in public life for a long time. We are here to-day and may not be back again. After every election, about 25 per cent of Deputies do not come back.

I hold that our traditional procedure should be observed. It is a dangerous precedent that is being established here tonight. While I may be guilty of some heat in the interruptions, I have never been guilty of personal abuse of any of my opponents but I would like to say that while it may be the Labour Party's turn tonight to introduce this motion, it may be our turn in less than two years' time. You are establishing a precedent now that may be used against any other Party here. I am a great believer in tradition and in the procedures that have grown up in this Assembly since it was established by the will of the Irish people and, while it may be good political practice for the Labour Party to get Deputy Casey to introduce this motion now, it might be equally good tactics for Fianna Fáil to do the same to the Labour Party in a year's time.

When Deputy Casey had moved the motion, he sat down and the Ceann Comhairle asked who was seconding the motion and the Leader of the Opposition did so.

Mr. Tully

That is not correct. The seconder of the motion was Deputy Corish.

Mr. Lenihan

It does not really matter.

Mr. Tully

Let us be correct.

Mr. P.J. Burke

It was the Leader of the Opposition who seconded it. Deputy Dillon got up and said he seconded the motion. Whether it had been seconded before that, I did not hear. What Deputy Dillon has done here tonight is to establish another dangerous precedent. What he has done here tonight may be used as a precedent by some other political Party to take political advantage of him. In political life, the wind blows very frequently from one way to the other but it frequently blows to the advantage of the Opposition. I hope we will never come to the condition in which we would do what has been done here tonight and I am sorry that we are breaking a tradition in that respect.

It is a matter for my Party to say whether the election will be held now or at some future date, but I want to reply to some of the statements that have been made here. We have had a lot of talk about going to the country and having a decision from the people on the turnover tax, but let anyone in Ireland with any political savvy ask himself why Fianna Fáil introduced that turnover tax. I am a politician, as is the Taoiseach and all the other members of this Party. We are alert enough to know that when we increase taxation on the people, we are going to lose favour. Do you think we are doing this out of spite? That is the way in which it has been misrepresented to the people.

I admit that temporarily our political stock may have suffered as a result of this but we are a national Party and as a Party concerned with the well-being of our people, we are putting the national interest before our own interests. Every one of us is a politician and it would be easy for us to go before the people and say that everything in the garden is lovely. Every member of the Opposition knows that it is not in our interest politically to increase taxation, but what are we to do? We are putting the national interests before our own interests.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

The last speaker expressed his concern with precedent and his concern for tradition.This House has been functioning here for over 40 years. The Party of which Deputy Burke is a member stayed outside the House for a number of years and did their utmost to be-little it in the minds of the public. They came in eventually in 1927 and when, in 1927, there was a vacancy in the House because of the death of a Deputy, they moved a motion of No Confidence in the then Government. They did not wait for the filling of that vacancy because they knew that when it was filled, there would be a vote against their motion. That motion was defeated by the casting vote of the Chair and the then President of the Executive Council held a by-election and won it. He then dissolved the Dáil and went to the country and got a majority from the people.

That was the time when Ministers and leaders of Government were concerned with the views of the people and were never willing to shelter behind any kind of a majority in this House in order to avoid consulting the people. They talk about precedent. Forty years of Parliamentary history have passed inside this chamber. By-elections have occurred from time to time and once a vacancy has occurred, the motion to move the writ has been tabled. This is the first time a motion to move a writ has been opposed. Here tonight a precedent of many years' standing is being broken by the Fianna Fáil Party. They have decided to oppose a motion for the issue of a writ for the holding of a by-election. I do not suppose that anywhere where there is constitutional parliamentary government, such an example as this exists, that a Government Party or indeed any Party should suggest that a vacancy in the Dáil should not be filled. To me, it is incomprehensible. Never before have we witnessed a Party inside this House endeavouring to use a majority to prevent a vacancy being filled. That is a most dangerous precedent. Why is it being done? All pretence is swept away now. The Taoiseach started off by saying that he was concerned with decency and respect for the dead. Still as the debate went on, it began to emerge that the real reason Fianna Fáil are opposing this motion is that it is politically inopportune for them to have an election. In other words, they would lose it. If that is carried to a logical conclusion, no writs for by-elections might be moved ever in the life of a particular Dáil. If a Party with a majority feel that the political winds are blowing against them, they can prevent the safety valve of public opinion being used.

By-elections are important. If we are to ensure that the Irish people continue to respect our institutions, we must avail of the constitutional means which are there, that is, that from time to time if a vacancy occurs, the people are consulted and allowed to express their opinion. If we are to have what clearly Fianna Fáil would desire to have, a situation in which, because they have a majority, they may follow any policy they decide should be followed and at the same time prevent the people being consulted when a by-election is possible, then the danger may be that a move will take place outside and against this House itself. The House was strong enough 35 years ago to resist such a move when a concerted effort was made at one time to tear it down. It is important that those who may have at that time been party to that move and are now inside the House should not, by blundering and indeed by cowardice, create a similar situation.

It is wrong that a motion for the issue of a by-election writ should be opposed, and the people who oppose it are certainly not serving proper democratic and parliamentary government.

May I refer to one other thing? It is part of the Fianna Fáil technique. I know it well myself, and from bitter experience. They are inclined to say something whether it is true or false and by dint of repeating it, get people to accept what is said. The Minister for Social Welfare in the course of this debate stated that the Opposition —and I think he said both the Labour Party and the Fine Gael Party—had induced or been party to profiteering by traders and shopkeepers. The Labour Party have spoken for themselves.I want to say on behalf of the Fine Gael Party that there is not one word of truth in that charge. On the contrary, here in this House when the Budget Statement was read by the Minister for Finance last April, the Leader of the Fine Gael Party——

Mr. Haughey

The current leader.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

—the current leader of Fine Gael and the next leader of this country. In the course of the Budget discussion, the Leader of the Fine Gael Party foretold that one effect of the turnover tax would be to induce an upward spiral of prices. He was faced by the statement made on behalf of the Government by the Taoiseach and subsequently by the Minister for Finance that competition would keep prices down and in fact the turnover tax would be absorbed by shopkeepers and traders themselves. We know that not to be so and we foretold that what has happened would happen. If ever anyone or any political Party had warning of the errors they were committing, this Government and this Party had warning of those errors.

Deputy Burke says that the Taoiseach and the rest of the Fianna Fáil Party are all politicians. Of course they are. It does not take any oratory from Deputy Burke to convince us that Fianna Fáil did not bring in the turnover tax for the sake of making themselves popular. Of course they did not. It was a mistake, a cardinal error, made by them. They did not think it out clearly. It appealed to them as being a cute political move at the time and they did not see its ramifications. Now Pandora's box has been opened. The Taoiseach has given the green light for everything. We are to have an upward spiral of prices and all the rest of it, just because of the error made in the last Budget.

In any event, here we have tonight the regrettable spectacle of a Government Party breaking all precedent in the parliamentary life of this House and opposing a writ for a by-election. That is unheard of. It never happened before. I remember well some years after I came into this House when the late Deputy Mongan died. He had been for many years a revered and respected member of this House. I do not deny in the slightest that the particular by-election that was caused by his death could not have been won at that time by the Fine Gael Party and it was not convenient for us to move the writ to have the vacancy filled. Indeed, we would have liked, if we could, to have avoided the necessity, but the Fianna Fáil Party were out for the seat and declared when a month had scarcely passed that if we did not table that writ, they were going to do it and of course we moved the writ. The by-election was held and a new Fianna Fáil Deputy came into this House.

Political expediency served their book at that time. There was no tut-tutting from the Taoiseach about convention and respectability and regard for the dead Deputy. There was no talk about important parliamentary precedents or anything of that kind. As long as it suited Fianna Fáil, that writ was going to be moved either by us or, if we did not, by them. Now here is a queer kettle of fish. The Taoiseach who loves elections, the man who learned rough stuff in America, has come back here full of fight and will not fight. The Government Party are going to win every election. They always win according to Deputy Burke. They are bored winning. But they will not have an election.

For the first time, the writ in this democratic Parliament is opposed by a Government who feel they have a majority. I do not know what the people will think. I know it would be wise to use the safety valve there at the moment and allow the people to give an expression of their opinion in Cork. If the Government succeed in doing the undemocratic thing they are trying to do by preventing this writ being moved, it will serve them no good. I prophesy it will cause more annoyance in Cork and elsewhere.They will not stave off an election. Inevitably, this Dáil is becoming unrepresentative, and once that happens, it is time for a general election.

Mr. McQuillan

I should like to support this motion. It is significant that the Taoiseach interrupted one Deputy to point out that, if this motion were carried, it would mean a general election. That was meant as a threat to the Independent Deputies who, in their wisdom or otherwise, are keeping the Government in office. It was a deliberate attempt at political blackmail in order to hold on to office. The unfortunate Independents who are keeping the Government in office should realise that the Taoiseach's sole ambition at this stage is to hang on as long as possible in the hope that the fortunes of Fianna Fáil will improve sufficiently to allow him have an election next May or June and to jettison the Independents on whom he depends for his political life at present.

Politically speaking, the Taoiseach's arguments here this evening can only be described as a bag of eels. He sought to extract the last ounce of sympathy from the public because of the death of a Deputy in Cork and to say it was a desecration to suggest the by-election should be held so soon. That was his opening gambit. But when it was brought home to him that in 1953, when a member of his own Party died, the by-election was held within 19 days, he changed his course and said he did not mean that at all. His argument now was that only the Party to which the deceased Deputy belonged could move the writ. On that basis, the question of time no longer arises. The by-election writ would be moved within 24 hours if the deceased Deputy belonged to Fianna Fáil and it suited them to move it.

I am not interested in this raiméis and humbug about the so-called traditions of this House. If that is the type of tradition to be held up to the public in the future, it is time an end was put to it. It is sheer hypocrisy to suggest there is a tradition that only the Party to which the deceased Deputy belonged is entitled to move the writ. There is nothing in the Constitution about it or about Party politics. If an Independent Deputy dies, who is to move the writ? He is here with as much right and prestige as the member of any of the major Parties. It is the right of any Deputy after a certain period to move the writ. That is envisaged in the Constitution, which was quoted by the Minister for External Affairs. If he goes up to the Park, he will get six slaps for his lack of knowledge at present.

Mention was made of profiteering. Interestingly enough, it came mainly from the Fianna Fáil benches. They admit now that a spate of profiteering is rife in the country. They suggest it is going on because of inspiration from the Opposition Parties. Did anybody ever hear a more ridiculous proposition?Who are the people profiteering, according to Fianna Fáil? I have here a list of the biggest companies in this city—insurance companies, industrial companies and big firms—all of whom subscribed to a petition to the public for funds for Fianna Fáil.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

Is the Equitable there?

Mr. McQuillan

I will not mention the names of the firms. I have them all there on a list issued by the Fianna Fáil General Election Finance Committee.Is it not true that the majority of the industrialists in this country, with the protection and featherbedding given to them by Fianna Fáil over the years, have been in the Taoiseach's pocket since these industries were started? Is it not true to say that they have now stabbed their protector in the back by overcharging and profiteering?Have they not kept Fianna Fáil in office by their big subscriptions over the years? Now they have betrayed the man who protected them. It is sad for the Taoiseach to find that the very people to whom he gave an opportunity to batten on the Irish public, who have overcharged over the years without even waiting for a turnover tax, are the very people who have let him down.

I know for a fact that Fianna Fáil are as sore as can be with their business friends who have let them down. The argument put to these people by Fianna Fáil over the past two months has been: "Why did you not wait until the turnover tax was in operation a while before putting up your prices in order to have your own crack out of it? Why did you do it at present?" That is the line of approach Fianna Fáil have made to their business associates in this city and throughout the country: "You let us down; you should have waited until the coast was clear before profiteering." These people give no thanks. There is no mercy in politics. They were protected by Fianna Fáil in the past, but they have now decided they have got the most they can and that they will overcharge while they have the opportunity before Nemesis overtakes them.

As Deputy O'Higgins pointed out, the Taoiseach has sworn confidence in competition as the best means of keeping down prices. I do not know how many times he has told Deputy Dr. Browne and myself, when we suggested price control machinery, that we were wild men trying to do something wrong, trying to bring in dangerous practices that were in operation behind the Iron Curtain. His answer always was that the only way to prevent profiteering was healthy competition. Now he has found there is no competition. He is on record as saying that price control machinery will not work. Therefore, all avenues of escape are closed to him.

One of the reasons why I want to see the people getting an opportunity of passing judgment on this Government is to prevent the idea circulating that the Minister for Industry and Commerce is serious in setting up price control machinery. The Government have said they do not believe in the efficacy of price control machinery. Therefore, when the Minister says he will set up such machinery, we know it is only for the purpose of gulling the public. You must believe in something in order to operate it efficiently. The public should be made aware of that and given an opportunity of expressing their decision on it without delay.

When the Taoiseach arrived back at Shannon, with his chest out and full of American corn, he said he would possibly have the by-election before Christmas. Now it is a crime for anybody else to suggest it should be held before Christmas. He has decided he does not want to face the public on this issue. To my mind, it is not a question of being fair to the public; it is a question of deceiving the public. This Government are a minority Government.They are not there with the good wishes of the majority of the people. Tonight we have seen the Taoiseach show the iron fist when he said: "If this motion is carried, there will be a general election." He sought to put a shiver of fear down the backs of every Independent in the House. I should like to congratulate Deputy Carroll on his honesty in saying that he was not going to be intimidated by the Taoiseach's blackmailing tactics. Deputy Carroll said he would vote for this motion tonight. It is a terrible comment on public life when the only way a Government can stay in office is by political blackmail. The Taoiseach would be doing a service to the community — perhaps not to Fianna Fáil—by going to the country tonight rather than having a by-election. If he does that, he would give the general public the most welcome Christmas box I can think of.

Mr. Tully

My remarks on the motion will be brief. I rise mainly to contradict one or two statements made by Government speakers earlier. The Taoiseach himself opened his attack on the motion, moving from one foot to the other. He said first that it was not right that a motion should be moved in so short a space of time after a Deputy's death. When it was subsequently pointed out that the Fianna Fáil Party had, in fact, moved the motion on the death of the late Deputy Frank Fahy inside 19 days, he changed his tactics and said it was the prerogative of the Party to which the deceased Deputy belonged to move the writ.

The Taoiseach

There was no question of time at all. There was one moved before the Deputy was buried. The Fine Gael Party moved it in the case of the late Deputy Paddy Hogan. It was their own decision and nobody questioned it.

Mr. Casey

You mentioned the Month's Mind.

Our bush telegraph is fairly effective and we are told that Fianna Fáil have no intention of moving the writ as long as they can get away with it. The jibe was also hurled by the Taoiseach that we were trying to present the late Deputy's shoes to the Fine Gael Party. Let me remind the Taoiseach—he will not forget this in a hurry—that in the 1957 general election, Fianna Fáil got 15,000 first preference votes in County Meath and in 1959 when they fought a by-election, they scraped home only by the skin of their teeth, and not over Fine Gael but over a Labour candidate.I should like to tell the Taoiseach that if he watches what is going to happen in Cork, he will probably see a repetition of that there, except that it will be a question of Labour scraping home over Fianna Fáil.

The question of the turnover tax has been mentioned and we had the man in shining armour riding out in front of the Taoiseach prepared to slay all his enemies, the Independent Deputy from Dublin city. He made a statement that is so ridiculous that it hardly merits an answer at all, that the people in the Labour Party—he particularly mentioned the Labour Party—tried to incite shopkeepers to raise prices. Obviously, he does not read the papers because even the Irish Press has given credit to Labour speakers again and again in this House and all over the country in condemning any attempt by anybody wrongly to raise prices. If that is supposed to be encouragement to raise prices, I do not know where Deputy Sherwin gets his idea. He obviously wanted to say something which would tie him up with the Party and I suppose that was the best line he could take. Let me make clear that we in the Labour Party are determined to oppose, on any occasion, every attempt to extort money from the public, whether that is done by the Government or by the shopkeepers at the behest of the Government.

I am not a great believer in tradition because there are a great many traditions here and in many other countries that are not what they are supposed to be. If everybody adhered to them, we would still be walking and would have no roads and no means of transport. We would probably be cooking our food at a turf fire or a wood fire. There is such a thing as evolution and as the years go by, changes have been made, changes for the better. After tonight's debate, the Taoiseach will probably be very much wiser and will probably realise that this business of trying to maintain that there is only one way to do anything, that is, as it has always been done, is all cod. In fact, no harm can be done at all in having a change. I am prepared on behalf of the Labour Party, if the Taoiseach is so concerned about this division, and if it hurts him so much to feel that someone, other than Fianna Fáil, should propose to move the writ, to withdraw the motion for the issue of the writ if the Fianna Fáil Party will move it in this House tonight.

Acting Chairman (Mr. P. O'Donnell)

Do I take it the Deputy was concluding?

Mr. Casey

No, Sir. I think none of us can be very pleased with the manner in which my motion has been debated here this evening. The Taoiseach set the climate, and a very bad climate it was, as the first speaker on behalf of the Government in reply to my motion. Apparently he was not prepared to discuss the motion, or to invite the House to consider the motion, on its merits alone. Rather did he see fit to indulge in a personal attack on me; he pretended, indeed, that he was in a position to lecture me on the decencies of public life.

None of us here is, I think, over-sensitive, but anybody in public life is sensitive to the extent that, if he feels there is a genuine criticism of and an allegation against his conduct, privately and publicly, he gets a bit worried about it. I can tell the Taoiseach that the value I place on his criticism is to disregard it entirely. I have been in this House for the past ten years. I have been in public life in Cork for the past 13 or 14 years. I should be worried what the people of Cork thought of me and about my conduct, publicly and privately, and I am prepared to put it to the test in Cork, but I am not particularly worried about the opinion expressed by the Taoiseach, with his tongue in his cheek, shedding crocodile tears for the late Deputy Galvin.

The late Deputy was a personal friend of mine and I am prepared to put that to the test. I would be worried about what the relatives, family and personal friends of the late Deputy would think of me if I were, as alleged, guilty of any misdemeanour in moving this motion here. I am satisfied in my own mind that that is not so and the Taoiseach then cannot assume the role of the person who should attack me and say I have ulterior motives in doing this.

My motion tabled here today was simply a reiteration of the point of view expressed by the Taoiseach on his return from America. None of us knew until we read in the paper what point of view he might have regarding the Cork by-election. When he was interviewed at Dublin Airport, on his return, he said that he felt that the ordinary democratic process should take its course, that he was not a bit worried whether he won or lost the seat in Cork. He expressed the view actually that he would lose it, and rightly so; but, irrespective of that, he thought the election should be held, and there would not be a general election. Subsequently, of course, he was pulled by the coat and his colleague, the Minister for External Affairs, who dreads a by-election in Cork, and his colleague, the Tánaiste, must have said to him: "You must be daft to make a statement like that at Dublin Airport". It was then the Taoiseach proceeded to mend his hand.

I well appreciate the difficulties of the Taoiseach in this matter. First of all, he does not want an election anywhere at the moment, particularly not in Cork. He does not want a by-election in Cork and there is a political advantage for him in postponing it. Over and above that consideration, all of us are aware of the difficulty he has in selecting the candidate to carry the banner of Fianna Fáil for the constituency.I shall not delve into that. Indeed I would not attempt to increase the worries of the Taoiseach in that respect but, quite obviously, there is no first-class candidate willing to put his head on the old chopping block to get it knocked off in a by-election in Cork before Christmas. We know the jockeying that is going on at the moment. We know the intrigues within the Party regarding who should be the candidate, or the fall guy. Indeed the Taoiseach has worries in that regard.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce made an unworthy contribution here, unworthy of Deputy Jack Lynch, and unworthy of the office he holds at the moment. He also has his worries. All we are saying here is that we believe there should be a by-election in Cork. The people demand it. The Minister for Industry and Commerce challenged my authority to say that on behalf of the people of Cork and reminded me that I was a Deputy with 6,000 votes. Deputy Barrett and Deputy Anthony Barry also represent Cork. Surely the three of us represent some major section of the electorate of Cork and all of us say that the people of Cork demand that there should be a by-election.

I challenged the Lord Mayor of Cork, Deputy MacCarthy, to get up here and say the people do not want it. Did we hear from him? I was here most of the evening and he certainly did not say anything while I was here. Of course, he is too clever. He knows well the view expressed by Deputy Barrett, Deputy Barry and myself is the correct view: the people want an election; they want an opportunity of expressing their opinion on the turnover tax and on the activities of the Government generally. They want that and they should have it. It is no answer to that public demand for the Taoiseach to endeavour to engage in the niceties of the situation, to exercise himself with some old outworn precedent and tradition to be debated across the floor of the House because somebody did such a thing on such a date and someone else did something else on another date.

The fact of the matter is that the people of Gurranebraher and Spangle Hill are not interested in traditions and precedents in this House. What they are interested in is the fact that they are paying more for their bread, for their butter, for their tea, for their sugar, for their boots, for their shoes, for their clothing. That is what they are interested in and, if the law of this country and the Standing Orders of this House permit me, as a Deputy representing the city of Cork, to move the writ and to express the view of the people of Cork that there should be an election, then I should be failing in my duty if I failed to do so.

Our Party Whip has made an offer: we will certainly not force a vote if the Taoiseach accepts the offer. If he is so concerned about the niceties of the situation, with which, frankly, we are not concerned, and if it will salve his conscience, we will withdraw our motion, on condition that he forthwith tonight tables a motion moving the writ for the by-election in Cork before Christmas so that the people in the city of Cork will have an opportunity of expressing their views.

I do not think anybody has been led astray by the arguments put forward by spokesmen on the Government benches. We all know that at the moment, up and down the country, in every constituency, the matter of the turnover tax is the issue to which people are addressing their minds and on which they are expressing their opinions. It so happens that, through the unfortunate and deeply lamented death of Deputy Galvin, it falls to the people of the city of Cork to exercise their vote in that regard, and I think the Taoiseach, if he believes in what he says, and the Minister for Industry and Commerce who is a Deputy for Cork city, should decide to hold the election immediately and send down clients like our friend, the Minister for Transport and Power, to make in Patrick Street some of the statements and the claptrap we have been hearing at meetings of chambers of commerce and elsewhere where they cannot be challenged.

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

That does not arise on the motion.

Mr. M.P. Murphy

Having heard all the irrelevancies here this evening, I am surprised that you, Sir, are not allowing Deputy Casey——

An Leas-Cheann Comhairle

I am not allowing him to speak on something that does not arise.

Mr. Casey

I am simply suggesting that the members of this Government, the spokesmen for this Government, who take such great pains to avail of every opportunity to put their policy before the people, might reasonably be expected to go before the people in Cork now instead of endeavouring to convince certain Independent members of this House. They might instead go through the whole democratic process of putting the issue before the people who are, after all, responsible for sending us here. I invite them to come to Cork to hold this election now and I think I can guarantee them if they do that they will get a Christmas box in Cork they will not forget for a while.

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht - Wednesday, 13 Nov 1963

Deputies

Deputies

Deputies

Deputies

Deputies

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 13 Nov 1963