I oppose that. I do not think that the mere hope expressed by Senator Milroy is any reason why the Bill should pass through all its stages to-day. There is no necessity for it administratively. The Bill may be the subject of discussion between now and the 10th April. If it is passed on the 10th April it will be just as effective as if passed to-day. The charges that are being made in the Bill, and the powers that are given under it are at present effective. The fact is, if it is passed it makes no alteration except it takes out of the hands of the Seanad the power the Seanad ought to have, to retain it until it is finally satisfied that it should be passed without any recommendation being sent. I think it is a bad habit to follow, and a particularly bad habit for Senator Milroy to suggest—that a Bill dealing with such a matter, and in one clause of which the Seanad is particularly interested, should be rushed through the four stages in one day. The Seanad has a definite duty to consider this Bill, particularly as it is a Bill which while nominally a Money Bill, and rightly certified as a Money Bill, has very important economic and social results. I think on all those grounds the Seanad should not carry the Bill through in one sitting, especially under the circumstances under which we meet, and having regard to the sparse attendance at this meeting. I would be willing to meet the Minister by having the remaining stages taken when we meet after the adjournment, but I think opportunity should be provided for recommendations being sent forward if such are necessary.
