Before we enter upon the business upon the Order Paper, I would like to mention that the Minister for Industry and Commerce is here, and I understand that he would like, with the permission of the House, to make a statement dealing with the reports connected with the Shannon Electricity scheme. In as much as there is a motion standing on the Paper to be dealt with later, perhaps the House would now consult the convenience of the Minister and allow him to make the statement.
THE SHANNON SCHEME.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
Would it not be more suitable if the Minister made his statement in reply to the motion?
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
I think we had better hear it first, Senator, for this reason: I do not know what its character may be, but it may be of such a nature that it might dispense with the motion altogether.
I have not to urge any motion at this moment with regard to the proposals relating to the experts' report or to the scheme as presented by Messrs. Siemens-Schuckert for the development of the River Shannon. I simply wish to ask the Seanad to come to a decision on one very small point, a point really that is only one of time, not a decision on any essential portion of the scheme. In the absence of the Cathaoirleach last week, I indicated to the Vice-Chairman that I had the intention to bring before the Dáil a resolution, the terms of which you have, no doubt, seen in the Press, and I consulted with the Vice-Chairman as to what would be the attitude of the Seanad towards that — I mean their attitude, not on the merits of the question, but as to how it should be brought before the Seanad as well as before the Dáil. I made the suggestion that I should come here to-day and state that I had a resolution in certain terms before the Dáil, and take the opinion of the Seanad as to whether they wished that resolution to be brought before them to-day or on some other day, this week or next week, which they would appoint, or whether in the alternative the Seanad would prefer to leave over the discussion on the Siemens-Schuckert report and the experts' recommendations until such time as a Bill which will deal with the Shannon scheme had been brought in, and having passed the Dáil, shall come before the Seanad.
To a certain extent my plans changed when I saw the motion standing in the name of Senator Sir John Griffith, but I thought it advisable to ask the Cathaoirleach to-day to allow me to state simply what had been my intentions in the absence of any resolution by a Senator, and now to put it to the Seanad that in as much as that resolution had been put on the Paper they should decide to-day whether or not they will take the resolution standing in the name of Senator Sir John Griffith, or whether they will allow me to bring in my resolution on some day which they will appoint, say this day week, to which resolution Senator Sir John Griffith's motion could be moved as an amendment. If that motion is to be proceeded with to-day, I would ask, as a matter of convenience, and in as much as it cannot be proceeded with immediately, because the question of the Central Fund Bill is more urgent, that some definite hour should be fixed to-day at which the discussion of Senator Sir John Griffith's motion will be taken. That is the simple proposition I have to make, either that the Seanad decides here and now that it will postpone Senator Sir John Griffith's motion until some day next week, when either his motion would be brought in as a substantive resolution and mine as an amendment to it, or mine as the substantive resolution and Senator Sir John Griffith's as an amendment to it, or, if the Seanad proceed to take Senator Sir John Griffith's motion to-day, that they would appoint a specific hour at which it would be taken.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
I think a later hour would probably be more convenient. If that would suit the Minister we could fix Senator Sir John Griffith's motion to come on at 4.30.
That would, of course, suit my convenience, but in as much as the other resolution has been tabled, if Senator Sir John Griffith's motion is merely debated and a negative decision taken on it, there would be no decision as to what would happen to the motion I am bringing before the Dáil; there would be no indication as to whether or not the Seanad desires that that should be discussed. If the proposal I have outlined were accepted, that I should come here on, say, this day week with a substantive motion in the terms of that of which I have given notice to the Dáil, then Senator Sir John Griffith's motion could be taken as an amendment to it and would have precedence to it as an amendment. If it were defeated there would be a substantive motion on which the Seanad could pass its judgment.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
Could we not meet all parties in this way, that when Senator Sir John Griffith's motion comes on, the Seanad should determine whether they will go on with that motion or accept that of the Minister for Industry and Commerce? That could be determined at 4.30.
The difficulty would be this, that if the Seanad decide to reject Senator Sir John Griffith's motion, and to proceed with mine, the latter will involve discussion, and a discussion will involve a complete reading of the scheme and of the experts' report with reference to it. From the number of copies of the report which have been asked for by the Senators, I am not at all sure that the Seanad is in a position to proceed with that discussion to-day. That is the reason why I would like to have my motion considered after a week's notice, so that the report could be read in the meantime and a discussion, with a certain amount of information available, could take place this day week.
Would Friday of this week be possible? I think there is a feeling against next week.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
What is the objection to having this discussion after Easter?
A discussion after Easter might very easily take place. I have not made myself clear. There is a motion before the Seanad at the moment. I have an alternative to offer, and my alternative is in two parts, either that the Seanad will, this day week, adopt a resolution similar to that which I am bringing into the Dáil, or that the Seanad will say "We will take a resolution similar to what is this week being moved before the Dáil, somewhere in May, when the Bill dealing with the Shannon project comes before us." There are two alternatives, if Senator Sir John Griffith's motion is not proceeded with to-day.
I would like to ask is it necessary, for the execution of any preliminary work he may intend, to have this resolution which is being moved by the Minister for Industry and Commerce passed by the Seanad? Does it mean that the holding up of that resolution will also mean the holding up of certain developments?
I think not.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
Would there be any difficulty about letting this whole matter stand over until after Easter, and then letting Senator Sir John Griffith's motion be threshed out on the merits?
There is only one objection I have to that, and that is that if Senator Sir John Griffith's motion were likely to be accepted, that action upon it should be taken at once. It is, of course, obvious that action should proceed at once on a matter so important, and if it were decided by the Seanad to set up a Committee of the Seanad to report to them on the scheme, it would be necessary that that Committee should be set up as soon as possible.
This is a matter of very great public importance. I am speaking for myself, and I may be speaking for other Senators, too, and I do not know that we have studied the question very seriously one way or another. We know that there are various schemes before the public. We are naturally interested in the development of the country, and we would all like to see the best possible scheme adopted, but most of us, I imagine, have not made up our minds one way or another. We have not sufficiently studied the question. Senator Sir John Griffith has put down a resolution for to-day. He has given the ordinary notice in connection with the resolution. I do not think it is quite fair now to say to Senator Sir John Griffith that his motion should be put aside without notice to him, unless he is satisfied that his motion will not suffer through the postponement.
As far as the Government's proposals are concerned, we know nothing about them; that is to say as far as the proposals to which the Minister has just alluded are concerned, we know nothing about them. We know nothing about these conversations he has had with other members of the Seanad, but, speaking for myself, I would like to have all the discussion possible on this question. I do not see why we should not continue this afternoon to discuss Senator Sir John Griffith's proposal. It is quite open to us to adjourn that discussion, when we have heard what is to be said on behalf of Senator Sir John Griffith and his friends, until such time as another debate can be had, if necessary, upon the Minister's proposals. We can adjourn the debate until such time as the Minister tabulates his proposal, and then we will know more about it than we do at this moment, and we will be in a better position to give a decision. We must remember this, that, according to our Standing Orders, we cannot discuss a similar matter twice in the same session. By adjourning our debate it is quite possible to bring forward an amendment, if necessary, to Senator Sir John Griffith's motion and have a discussion on it at the adjourned session. I would be prepared, if Senator Sir John Griffith wishes to go on to-day, to support him, on the understanding that the matter should be adjourned until we have the Minister's proposals.
I am sorry that I cannot agree with Senator Sir Thomas Esmonde when he says that the Seanad knows nothing about this proposal. I have taken a great deal of pains and spent a great deal of time in reading up this matter, and I think, out of fairness to the Seanad and to Senator Sir John Griffith, this motion of his should be taken forthwith, with the implication that, whatever the issue is, we can have the other motion on Tuesday next. It is unfair to the Seanad to mix up the hours and to have a notice of motion and not go on with it merely because other people think the Seanad has not taken the trouble to acquaint themselves with the facts. It is unfair that we should postpone this with an indefiniteness which would perhaps only be equalled if the whole matter were put to the consideration of these indiscriminate bodies that Senator Sir John Griffith's motion suggests.
I rise to support Senator Sir Thomas Esmonde's suggestion that this motion should be taken, and if the Seanad sees fit, it can adjourn it later. I would suggest to the Seanad that the result of this debate on the motion will be far more valuable and instructive than any study of this Siemens-Schuckert report, and the experts' reports on it. An amount of this is highly technical and it cannot be understood at all by laymen but, as explained in lay language by persons of the eminence of Senator Sir John Griffith, it would be extremely instructive. I, therefore, support the suggestion of Senator Sir Thomas Esmonde.
The suggestion that has been made by the Minister is a fair one. The Minister suggests that the resolution down in the Order Paper in the name of Senator Sir John Griffith should be postponed for a week, and that the resolution which he is about to propose in the Dáil should be taken on next Wednesday, say, simultaneously with the notice of motion down in the name of Senator Sir John Griffith. This matter is one of the most important that the Seanad has discussed since its inception, and I think it is not unreasonable that the Seanad should accede to the request of the Minister. I think it is not unreasonable to ask the members of the Seanad to attend on next Wednesday in order to attend to this business, which is of the greatest importance. I think the Seanad ought to agree with the Minister's suggestion that the matter be postponed until Wednesday, and that simultaneously with the Minister's motion, or resolution, Senator Sir John Griffith's motion should be taken. In that way we could discuss the whole matter that day taking both proposals together.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
You cannot deprive Senator Sir John Griffith of his right to move his motion. He has given notice of it. Therefore, he is entitled to move it. When he has moved his motion it will be open to any Senator to move the adjournment of the consideration of the motion, but we cannot deprive the Senator of his right to move a motion which is in order and which has been duly placed on the Agenda.
Perhaps Senator Sir John Griffith and the Minister would agree to take the motion on Friday?
With regard to Friday, I am in the difficulty that I have given notice of my own motion in the Dáil for Thursday, and there is no expectation that we will get through with it on that day. The discussion will certainly go over to Friday. I do not think it would be fair for me to come to any agreement about taking anything here on Friday, when it is almost certain that I could not be here. It seems to me that Senator Sir John Griffith's motion raises a very simple and clear issue, and if the suggestion is accepted by the Seanad I would be pleased to take it this evening at 4.30.
AN CATHAOIRLEACH
May I take it, then, that Senator Sir John Griffith's motion will be taken for consideration at 4.30 this afternoon?
Agreed.