It is proposed to adjourn for the Easter Recess until Wednesday, 2nd May. This recess is slightly longer than usual. Because the Government is new a great deal of business has to be prepared. As I mentioned earlier, printing and other difficulties have delayed the preparation of the Estimates and, as I told the Opposition today, the Budget will be taken as early as possible in May. It is not possible at this point of time to give any precise date for the budget.
Committee on Finance. - Business of Dáil.
The Government have already created a precedent today in the earlier contentious business before the House. This is another precedent; we are to have an adjournment now after the usual two weeks already between the coming together of the new Dáil and the commencement of public business. It is surprising, to say the least of it, that some business is not ready which could be taken in the two weeks before the Easter adjournment period. There were some Bills drafted and there were some Bills almost completed. I appreciate that the new Government could not be committed willy-nilly to Bills drafted by their predecessors, but the Bills could have been taken on Second Stage and any amendments desired could have been made on the Committee Stage. There was one Bill in particular, a Bill about which the Opposition at the time expressed some concern; I refer to the Ministers and Secretaries Bill providing for the setting up of a new Department of State following on the recommendation in the Devlin Report. While I appreciate that the Government could not be expected to accept these Bills as drafted by their predecessors, the next two weeks could have been availed of to debate some of the issues involved.
I suggested today that we might have a debate on the British Government's White Paper on Northern Ireland. I realise that it would be too early to have such a discussion either this week or next week because the White Paper was published only a little more than a week ago, but I should like to ask the Taoiseach if he would indicate how soon after the proposed re-assembly there will be a debate on the White Paper.
As I said at the outset, I am surprised that the Taoiseach should suggest an adjournment of more than a month.
As I said earlier, circumstances are somewhat unusual. Printing problems have delayed the preparation of the Estimates and that is the sole reason for the budget being put back until the approximate date I mentioned. So far as a debate on the White Paper is concerned, if the Opposition is agreeable I shall arrange to have the debate in the first week after the resumption.
I understand it is proposed that the House will adjourn for some period.
Has the Deputy a question?
Is the House adjourning and until what date?
Yes, until 2nd May.
May I ask the Taoiseach what is the purpose in having a debate on the White Paper next May? Surely a debate would be irrelevant at that point of time. Discussion on the White Paper should take place here and now. It is irresponsible to defer the debate. Obviously, we are running away from the matter. Everyone can discuss it, including the British Parliament, but we do not think it worth our while to have a debate. I appeal to the Taoiseach: there should not be any adjournment until the White Paper is discussed. The fact that such a lengthy adjournment is proposed is proof that the new Government is not overburdened with work. There is really no excuse. We are only running away from it. Worse still, we are seen to be running away from it.
The Deputy is making a statement, not asking a question.
It is a rather lengthy question. I am appealing to the Taoiseach not to adjourn without having a debate on the White Paper. Certainly, we should not adjourn until 2nd May. The debate could be taken next week. I know the Taoiseach has problems starting off in a new Government, but I do not consider those problems sufficient reason for not having a debate. I appeal to the Taoiseach not to relegate the White Paper to Limbo.
As I explained to the Leader of the Opposition, I do not think there is any need to rush the debate on the White Paper. Circumstances, as far as I can see, will not alter substantially between now and the resumption of the Dáil. There may, in fact, be an advantage in deferring the debate until then. As Deputy Lynch pointed out, the White Paper has only been published. Different views have been expressed and it may be to our advantage to avail of the time in between to assess the views expressed and the comments made and then have a debate here.
Could I put this further point to the Taoiseach? In view of the shortcomings of the White Paper, shortcomings which are legion, would he agree there is great need for a debate here so that some of the important omissions might be put to the British Government and others in the hope that even at this late stage the White Paper might be altered in its intent if not in its form. Waiting for comment from other quarters is not serving our purpose. If the document were one that could be regarded as, say, near perfect, I agree that there would be a usefulness in waiting for comment and then having a debate on what everybody else had said. It must be obvious that the White Paper is so short and requires so much radical change that for this Parliament to remain silent on the matter——
The Deputy has been given the opportunity of a second question but now he is going on to make a statement.
All I wish to do is to put it on record that this is a scandalous performance and one that has occurred for the second time in a matter of months in regard to the most important issue that has ever been before us. We are running away from it in this Government in the same way as the last Government ran away from it in the Green Paper.
I would like to ask the Taoiseach if he recalls that several members of the Labour Party, some of whom are now members of his Government, were on record recently in recommendations which they made to a committee of this House as suggesting that the House should sit on four or five days in each week, that the summer recess should be limited to a month or six weeks and that the recesses at Christmas and Easter should be limited to a week or two on each occasion? Does the Taoiseach reconcile the views of the Labour Party with the proposal of the Government of which they are now members? Does he realise also, that if the Dáil adjourns now, the House will have sat on two days between December and May? That is scarcely a satisfactory situation.
The Deputy will appreciate that we will need time to consider that report. It is one of the matters we have in mind but he will appreciate also that this Government came into office only a fortnight ago. Many of these matters are taking time to consider and allowing for the fact that we have had already to consider as a matter of urgency the White Paper and other matters and to give Ministers an opportunity to read even the current files in the Department, it is a reasonable proposal. At the most it is only about two weeks longer than the normal Easter recess and in the circumstances it is reasonable.
The Dáil adjourned at 7.55 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Wednesday, 2nd May, 1973.