Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 4 Nov 1964

Vol. 212 No. 2

Private Business. - Pawnbrokers Bill, 1963: Resolution Deeming Bill to have been passed by both Houses.

Minister for Justice (Mr. Lenihan)

I move:

That whereas the Pawnbrokers Bill, 1963, was, on the 23rd day of June, 1964, passed by Dáil Éireann and was, on the 25th day of June, 1964, sent to Seanad Éireann, and was, on the 1st day of July, 1964, rejected by Seanad Éireann,

Now therefore Dáil Éireann, pursuant to section 1 of Article 23 of the Constitution, hereby resolves that the Pawnbrokers Bill, 1963, as passed by Dáil Éireann, be deemed to have been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas.

The Pawnbrokers Bill, 1963, was passed by Dáil Éireann on 23rd June, 1964, and was sent to Seanad Éireann on 25th June. The Seanad voted against giving the Bill a Second Reading and sent a message to this House stating that the Bill had been rejected.

In such circumstances, under Article 23 of the Constitution, the Bill shall be deemed to have been passed by both Houses of the Oireachtas, if Dáil Éireann so resolves within a period of 180 days, which runs in this instance from 23rd September, 1964. Because of the importance of the provisions of this Bill I am seeking the adoption of this course and I believe it is proper that such a Resolution should be passed. I am anxious that the provisions of the Bill be brought into operation as early as possible.

Mr. Sweetman

I am sorry that the Minister for Justice should, as his first official act as such, take the action which he has indicated in this motion. It is a little too ingenuous just to reel off the dates as he has done. Anybody who takes the trouble to read the Report of the Seanad Debates of the 1st July, 1964 will see exactly what happened there on the Second Reading. The then Minister for Justice introduced the Bill with a speech of ordinary length during the course of which he was not once interrupted. A Senator from the Opposition rose to speak on the Bill, following the Minister, but that Senator was interrupted no fewer than four times by the then Minister for Justice.

Mr. MacEntee

On a point of order, as I understand it, the Deputy is proceeding to discuss what took place in the Seanad. Yesterday, if you remember, a Cheann Comhairle, the same Deputy raised, on a point of order, a similar matter and you quite properly indicated to him that the proceedings in the other House could not be discussed here.

An Ceann Comhairle

The Deputy is discussing the only matter open to him to discuss on this motion so far as I can see.

Mr. Sweetman

And, in addition, I am discussing it in appropriate language, unlike a colleague of the Tánaiste on the other occasion. Be that as it may, after that type of interjection, which we always know comes from the Tánaiste, when he wants to put somebody off his stride and for no other reason, the Bill was then subsequently spoken to by Senator Murphy from the Labour Party. In the course of proceedings in the Seanad, it was indicated by the then Minister for Justice that he wanted to get all Stages of the Bill that night. It was indicated by the Opposition——

Mr. Haughey

I had been promised all Stages.

Mr. Sweetman

I do not accept the Minister's word that it was promised and it is here on record that it was not promised.

Mr. Haughey

Arrangements were made outside the House.

Mr. Sweetman

Arrangements were made that it would be given that week. Arrangements were made by the Opposition to sit on the following day.

Mr. Haughey

They behaved like a pack of schoolchildren, and well the Deputy knows it.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister for Agriculture should learn how to behave himself.

Mr. Haughey

I shall learn nothing from the Deputy about how to behave.

Mr. Sweetman

The Minister for Agriculture does not know how to behave himself.

Mr. MacEntee

Surely a Deputy is not entitled to discuss the behaviour of Ministers in the Seanad. It was indicated yesterday that it would be a reflection on the conduct of the Cathaoirleach in controlling the debate to do so.

An Ceann Comhairle

As I understand it, the Deputy is discussing not what members of the Seanad did but what the Minister did, which is the subject under discussion.

Mr. Haughey

Am I on trial here? If I am to be put on trial, let us bring Senator Hayes here and put him on trial, too.

An Ceann Comhairle

I am not responsible for making Standing Orders. I am giving Deputy Sweetman the only liberty I think he is entitled to under Standing Orders.

Mr. Blaney

The Deputy is slagging everybody.

(Interruptions.)

Mr. Sweetman

Before the present Minister for Agriculture loses his tem-temper again, he would be wiser to read what he said in the Seanad on that occasion. At column 1405 he said:

Is it possible that we could sit tomorrow and take the remaining stages of the Pawnbrokers Bill?

Senator Hayes said:

We have no objection.

Mr. Haughey

The Deputy should go on.

Mr. Sweetman

"We have no objection." We in Fine Gael made it quite clear we had no objection but the Minister for Agriculture, in his then capacity as Minister for Justice, decided he was going to be just the steamroller and said: "It will pass, just the same." I am sorry, as I said initially, that the new Minister for Justice should have lent himself in this motion to that attitude. This could have been dealt with in the proper way by the Bill being sent back again to the Seanad and considered after the present Minister for Justice had dealt with it in the normal, courteous and polite way. Instead of that, the motion is brought here for the deliberate purpose of ensuring that there can be no discussion on it in the other House. That, in my view, is discourtesy to the other House, which has arisen solely because of the bad temper of the present Minister for Agriculture, who was Minister for Justice at that time.

Mr. Haughey

There are some people in the Seanad who try to make a hare of Ministers and they will not get away with it.

Mr. T.F. O'Higgins

It is another example of the bad temper which the Minister obviously displayed in the Seanad. May I draw attention to the fact that the interruptions which are coming from the Minister are most disorderly.

(Interruptions).

Question put and agreed to.