It is proposed to take Business in the following order: Nos. 4 and 8, and, in No. 8, Votes 35 and 36.
Order of Business.
In the event of Votes Nos. 35 and 36 not being concluded today is it proposed to continue the debate on them tomorrow?
I understand it is the intention to take the Roinn na Gaeltachta Estimate tomorrow.
That is the point I wish to make. Would the Taoiseach not regard it as unsatisfactory that, in the absence of very good reasons, there should be a number of items, particularly different Estimates, going on at the same time in the House? This was characteristic of the last session when sometimes three or four Estimates, and perhaps, other items also, were being taken and adjourned. Would it not be more satisfactory to complete the business on hand?
Certainly, I shall consider what the Deputy has said but I do not think there is anything unusual in more than one item going through at the same time. It has been the practice often to take Estimates jointly. On occasions they are not taken consecutively so as to suit the convenience of both Ministers and Deputies. However, perhaps the Whips could have a word about it.
I accept that it is not unusual for a number of Estimates or other items to run together but having regard to the experience of the last session in particular, would the Taoiseach not agree that there seems to be unnecessary concurrent discussions of Estimates and legislation?
As happens not infrequently, the Leader of the Opposition is raising an issue while concealing what lies behind that issue, hoping that he will take listeners in. As Deputy Lynch knows, the reality so far as Estimates are concerned is that once they conclude a Standing Order provides that if they are not agreed a Vote must be taken at a particular time on that or the following day. One does not have to read too deeply between the lines to realise the imperative requirement that that places on a Government in ordering business on certain political occasions. Let us not play the baby about this.
I am not playing the baby but I am entitled to say that there seemed to be undue concurrent debates going on in this House during the last session. In so far as possible I wish to try to avoid such concurrences of discussion and I am asking the Taoiseach and the Parliamentary Secretary to so arrange.
I will consider carefully what the Leader of the Opposition has said.
Arising out of discussions which I am informed took place between the Government Chief Whip and the Whip of this party, can the Taoiseach say on what dates the House will sit during the week in which the by-election will be held?
The intention is to sit on the 14th and 15th of that week.
Would the Taoiseach not consider it undesirable that we should not sit on Wednesday of that week merely because a by-election is taking place? In anticipation of the Taoiseach saying that there is a precedent for this, I can say that it has happened before but that the by-election concerned was held on a Tuesday in which case we were able to have a reasonable week's sitting. On this occasion I suggest that it is not reasonable that the House should not sit on Wednesday, that it is unusual that it should not sit on that day.
There is no very settled practice on this except that on many occasions the House has not sat on the polling day of a by-election. The difficulty in this instance is that polling takes place on a Wednesday. I think the Deputy will appreciate that to sit on the Tuesday and not on the Wednesday but to resume on the Thursday would inconvenience most Deputies and that it would facilitate them better to sit on the Thursday and Friday.
May I point out that there was no Adjournment of the Dáil to suit the convenience of Deputies on the occasions of the three by-elections that took place while the last Government were in office?
That is flatly contradicted by what Deputy O'Malley said in referring to one of the by-elections to which Deputy Lynch has adverted. I quote from column 1143 of Volume 245 of the Official Report:
It appears that it would suit the convenience of the overwhelming majority of Members of the House that the Dáil should not sit on Tuesday.
If the Parliamentary Secretary will excuse me, I am dealing with the Taoiseach on the facts as I put them. Since the Parliamentary Secretary has had the propensity to quote records, might I point out that on 4th March, 1970, there was a by-election in Dublin South-West, that on 2nd December, 1970, a by-election was held in Dublin South-Central and that on the 8th December, 1970, there was a by-election in Donegal-Leitrim, and that the Dáil met on each of these occasions.
Without prolonging unduly this discussion, I would remind the House that on the last day on which the Dáil met before the by-elections in Longford-Westmeath and in Kildare, when Deputy O'Malley said truly that it would suit the convenience of Deputies if the Dáil did not meet on polling day, the then Taoiseach was questioned from the Opposition benches as to what precedent there was for this but Mr. Boland, that "rock of integrity" as he was described in, I think, that same month, by Deputy Lynch, said there were a lot of precedents for it.
There were two by-elections on the day to which the Parliamentary Secretary is referring.
That makes no difference. The question is that of the convenience of Members, whether they be north, south, east or west.
Or, perhaps the convenience of the Government Whip.
Because of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply to Questions Nos. 9 and 10 today I wish to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.