May I ask, with regard to this rather elaborate programme put before us in the week before Christmas, how much of it is urgent and how much of it it is desired to pass before the dissolution? We have got no information on that question. There have been no consultations on it. Perhaps we might have that information in this House.
Business of the Seanad.
Mr. Hawkins
I understand that the Minister for Local Government is anxious to have the Seanad Electoral (Panel Members) Bill, the Local Elections Bill and all the other Bills in which he is concerned, passed before the recess. If there is a suggestion of a conference or a talk in the matter, I would suggest that we should adjourn any decision on it until later in the sitting.
What about the other Bills?
It would be a very great advantage if there could be a talk in regard to the matter, so that we could decide what Bills we should take before the recess. The time at our disposal could be better apportioned from that point of view. If the matter could be taken up later it might be possible to have a definite decision.
I have no desire to be told where I am, because I know where I am. I am utterly unaffected by any of these desires to pass certain measures speedily and to subject them only to a cursory examination. I am going to examine these measures and to give them the consideration they merit quite apart from any consideration as to the approach of Christmas or of an election. I think that is the responsibility of the House and we should not allow any question of urgency to influence us in rushing the proceedings.
I appreciate Senator Sir John Keane's stand as a new, all-sacrificing son of Cathleen Ní Houlihan, but there are certain factors which have to be considered. The approach of Christmas is one of these factors; the approach of a general election is another. The third fact is that the responsibility of a person here with some group behind him and some leadership is greater than Senator Sir John Keane's responsibility. I feel it is impossible, in the circumstances, before the recess—that is, before to-night—to give adequate consideration to the Bills here in the name of the Minister for Local Government. Everybody who knows what adequate consideration means knows that. There is no use in telling us, as we were told by Senator Hawkins, sitting in the seat of the leader, but not being leader, that he would sit through Christmas. We cannot all sit through Christmas.
And he does not want to sit through Christmas.
Mr. Hawkins
I never made any reference as to how long we should sit.
I thought the Senator said we should sit next week but I waive that. What we really want to get clear about is this: It clearly is not possible to give adequate consideration to all these Bills before the recess. That is not possible and, in the atmosphere of a general election, it is not possible to give them that consideration after the recess either. The Dáil passed these Bills rapidly, but I am against passing Bills rapidly. I do not think anybody in this House has done as much to keep Bills from being passed rapidly as I have. People find fault with me for that, but, in the present situation, I should like to face what are the real facts.
If we are to have a consultation, we will have to have it before the Minister for Local Government is let loose upon the House. If he is let loose upon the House he is the greatest obstructionist in the two Houses combined and the business could not possibly be concluded with the Minister performing publicly. Therefore, I suggest we will have to have some kind of scheme in regard to this. I am quite frank. I do not want to pretend that I am able to give adequate consideration to these Bills before the recess or, indeed, after the recess, when our minds will be on something else. There are some of the Bills which are completely new. The Garda Síochána (Acquisition of Sites and Retention of Premises) Bill has a completely new principle, a very vicious principle, against which I would like to make a protest.
As regards the proper consideration of these Bills in Committee, it is not possible and we may as well face that and see precisely what we will do about it. The suggestion for a meeting of the Seanad a week after Christmas is not feasible in the light of the printing and the staff. It cannot be done. Again, there is no use in meeting to-morrow if we cannot conclude the business. I do not want to make heroic offerings; I merely want to face facts.
Perhaps there could be a consultation during the tea interval?
In relation to these consultations, I suggest there are certain obligations on the House which obviously the House must discharge. There were a number of Bills passed in the Dáil and these Bills will become law automatically whether we like it or not. There is no use in Senator Hayes shaking his head—that is the fact. The Bills passed in the Dáil become law in a specified time and we cannot do anything about it. It all depends on the attitude of mind. If Senator Hayes or Senator Douglas want to prevent the House doing its business, that is one thing. I suggest the House cannot allow that type of mentality to prevail.
What does the Senator mean when he says that we want to prevent the House doing its business? That is a new rôle for Senator Hayes and Senator Douglas, surely.
When Senator Hayes has concluded, I might be permitted to continue.
And explain, if possible.
I am not called upon to explain to anybody; I am not called upon to make any explanation at all. I suggest that there is business to be done and it is the duty of the House to discharge this business. There must be a reasonable time allowed for the conduct of the business referred to the House. My view is that the business ordered for this week can be concluded by to-morrow. It is not suggested, I imagine, that the Committee Stage will be taken in the case of a Bill which will be read a Second Time to-day or tomorrow—it is not suggested that the Committee Stage should be taken without a reasonable interval. My suggestion is that the interval should be two or three weeks. That would take us over the Christmas holidays—let us say, 7th January. Is there any reason why we cannot come back on the 7th January and conclude the business by the 8th January? There is, of course, a mentality in the House that we cannot be permitted to insert amendments in Bills. If that mentality has any official backing in this House, we might as well close down.
Hear, hear! That is the point.
I am totally against that, but the remedy that Senator Hayes suggests is not the real remedy. The remedy is to come here and Senators should insist on saying in relation to a Bill what they think it necessary to say and submit such amendments as they think are called for in the circumstances. Let those who are of opinion that no amendment must be inserted if it means calling back the Dáil, take the responsibility for that action. I think the public will know how to deal with that state of mind that says because the Government are in a hurry with the election there can be no amendment of any Bill, good or bad. That is intolerable.
Mr. Hawkins
Where did Senator Duffy get that idea?
Time is passing. If this discussion were to take place during the tea interval perhaps some arrangement could be arrived at. I suggest it might be better to proceed with the Order Paper now.