I move:
That a sum not exceeding £675 be granted to make good an Excess on the Grant for President's Establishment for the year ended 31st March, 1965.
Excess Vote, 1964-65. - Vote 1—President's Establishment.
How does this excess arise?
It arises mainly because of the visit of the late President of the United States to this country.
Surely the Minister is mistaken? Is this not an excess to cover the visit of President de Valera to the US and Canada?
The Deputy is correct.
I must remonstrate. I urge on the Minister for Finance a little more circumspection. It is not enough casually to say that this Vote is due to the visit of the late President of the United States to Ireland when in fact the excess is due to a visit by the President of the Irish Republic to the US and Canada. This reduces the proceedings of the Dáil to a farce.
Do not make an international incident out of it.
I do not propose to do so but this House is entitled to a certain modicum of respect. One of the modica of respect which this House is entitled to seek is that the Minister for Finance will at least take the trouble that an ordinary backbencher, as I now am, has taken to read the paper circulated, which reads:
Vote 1—President's Establishment.
The excess is due to an official visit by the President to the United States of America and Canada, and, also, to increased telephone charges.
I do not think this is a matter of substance. The President's expenses have to be met and we accept the necessity for this Estimate, but it is a matter of substance, and I think it is well at the start of the Minister's career on the first occasion he has appeared in this House as Minister for Finance, that the Minister should not ramble in here without having read what his Excess Vote is for. If the Minister is prudent he will express his regret to the House and his resolve not to offer gross discourtesy to the House.
As you would say yourself, go and fish.
I will not go and fish. This business must stop: that is all. If the Minister wants prepare for troublesome, he must prepare for trouble. This is not the first time we have had this trouble with the Minister for Finance. The Minister began his career in this House as Minister for Justice. He inherited a good deal of legislation prepared by the previous administration to reform the law. He brought a lot of law reform Bills before the House.
I do not think this is relevant on this Excess Vote. Any alleged errors by the Minister for Finance should not be brought in on this occasion. We cannot discuss anything but what is before the House.
The Minister for Finance is getting tired of Deputy Dillon's personal abuse of him. He never fails to hurl personal abuse at him.
We ought not to introduce anything except what purely arises on this Estimate.
What arises is that we have been informed by the Minister that this Excess Vote relates to the visit of the late President of the United States to this country. It arises from the visit of the President of the Irish Republic to the United States and Canada. I want to say that I deplore the practice of the Minister for Finance approaching this House and dealing with such matters in such an irresponsible manner. I do not believe I trespass on the rules of order when I point out that this is not the first time this has happened.
The Deputy has done that.
I want to go on from there.
I do not think we should enlarge on anything it is alleged the Minister for Finance has done in the past. What purely arises is what the Minister said on this occasion. That is the only thing that arises on this occasion.
What I am saying is that anybody who comes before the House to recommend an Excess Vote, without any consideration at all for what the Excess Vote is for, causes trouble. This is what caused trouble before on the Succession Bill. This is what got the Minister into trouble when he took office as Minister for Agriculture and we ended up with the farmers sitting out in front of Government Buildings.
That does not arise. What arises is purely what the Minister said on this occasion, and that is all.
What did he say on this occasion?
That is not for me to say.
Perhaps it might help to expedite matters if I were to explain that in giving the answer I did, I was looking at a wrong figure.
I am not giving way.
Personal abuse is the Deputy's tradition.
I do not really know whether one can appropriately describe the remarks I am now making as personal abuse. I am reflecting on the Minister's competence.
The Minister's competence does not arise. What is open for discussion is the White Paper and the Estimate.
And the Minister's statement.
Purely the ipsissima verba.
The ipsissima verba of the Minister for Finance are that this Excess Vote arises from a visit of the late President of the United States to this country.
I have already explained that I was looking at the wrong figure when I gave that explanation.
I think the Minister's explanation should be accepted.
I am very much obliged to the Ceann Comhairle for his view on this matter. I do not for a single moment think that the Minister's explanation should be taken because I do not believe it.
The statement of any Deputy here is always taken to be the truth as he sees it.
I am not making any allegation but surely nobody can ask me to believe the ipsissima verba of every Deputy of the Fianna Fáil Party? If I believed that, I would be in Grangegorman long ago.
It is accepted practice.
I do not believe it, and the longer I am in this House, the less reason I have for believing it. On the contrary, all my experience teaches me to view the Gospel of St. John from the lips of these men with grave suspicion. I check every word and syllable if they recite it. I believe the Minister made a statement casually without having done his homework and in the belief that nobody would notice what he was saying. I do not believe that is the proper way to treat the House. It is a most unfortunate commencement to the Minister's career as Minister for Finance. He said to me once before, when I had reason to criticise his conduct, that I was trying to destroy him. I am not trying to destroy him; I am trying to reform him. I warn him now that in the responsible position he now occupies he cannot afford the luxury of not doing the homework which he should do before he comes to this House, before he goes to the Government, or before he makes a decision. Perhaps this incident will be of value to him. I cannot expect him to be grateful to me for the well-deserved rebuke he has received. We are not always grateful for benefits conferred but I have very little doubt that I am conferring a benefit upon him.
Vote put and agreed to.