Vol. 13 No. 11
The following message has been received from the Dáil:—
"Dáil Eireann has agreed to amendments Nos. 1 to 5 inclusive, and to amendment No. 7 made by Seanad Eireann to the Game Preservation Bill, 1929; it has agreed to amendment No. 6 as amended by the deletion of sub-section (5) of the proposed new section."
Before any motion is moved arising out of the amendment by the Dáil to amendment No. 6 made in this House, I think the Seanad would welcome your opinion, sir, upon the following point. Amendment No. 6 empowers the Minister to set up a consultative council for the purpose of advising him in connection with the provisions of the Act, and sub-section (5) provides for the payment of travelling expenses to the members of such council. The Dáil has accepted the amendment minus sub-section (5), and one might infer from the debate in the other House that the reason for the non-acceptance of sub-section (5) is that this is a money clause inserted by the Seanad in a non-Money Bill. I should like to know whether, in your opinion, it is within the competence of this House to insert such an amendment in the Bill.
No reason is given in the message received from the Dáil for the refusal of that House to agree to sub-section (5), but if the facts are as stated by Senator Miss Browne it is my opinion (in which I am fortified by that of my predecessor) that there is nothing in the Constitution or otherwise to prevent the Seanad inserting such an amendment.
What is the amendment?
It refers to the establishment of a Consultative Council and provision to meet the expenses of that Council.
Would it be possible to have the Minister present? He might tell us the reason why he did not recommend the Dáil to accept this portion of the amendment. Possibly there may be power to pay expenses without any such addition. That has been suggested to me. If such a reason were given I would be in favour of agreeing with the Dáil, but, on the other hand, if he gave as a reason that we had exceeded our powers, I would be strongly in favour of refusing to agree with that decision.
It would be more acceptable to have the Minister here. We will adjourn the matter for the present. It is still within the competence of the House to consider whether, on its merits, it should accept the amendment made by the Dáil or reject it. It would be well, possibly, to have the reason given for its rejection in the other House. With the permission of the House, we will let the matter stand over for the attendance of the Minister.
