It is proposed to take business as on the Order Paper as far as item No. 12—Fisheries (Consolidation) Bill, 1952—which is not being taken to-day.
Order of Business.
Would it be possible to indicate when my motion, dealing with health services, is likely to be taken and whether it will be taken in priority to the other motions already on the paper which have been there for a long time and have not been moved?
I suggest that the Senator should meet the Leader of the House and representatives of groups in the House and see if some arrangement can be come to.
The Senator approached me just before the House sat, and, so far as I can see, there is no objection. The other motions have been on the Order Paper for a considerable time and have not been moved, and it would be a good thing if they could be disposed of one way or the other.
I do not want to object to any motion being taken, provided the other business is dealt with, but I might suggest that the Committee on Procedure and Privileges, apart altogether from what may be arranged with regard to this motion, might be asked to consider the position of motions, the question of priority and possible delay, and whether they should be dependent on the attendance of a Minister or not. It is rather a farce to have these motions standing on the Order Paper for a long time, and, if the question were considered amicably, as it would be, by the committee, some understanding would probably be reached. Some types of motions should not be taken without the attendance of a Minister under any circumstances, but there are others which could be taken, and possibly some understanding could be reached and the question of priority would not then arise in relation to these motions.
Is it not a matter for the people who have motions on the Order Paper already and who have a right of precedence? Should they not yield their precedence before this motion is taken?
That is why I suggested it would be well if the Senator would see the Leader of the House and representatives of the various groups with a view to ascertaining if an arrangement could be come to.
I agree entirely with the suggestion put forward by the Cathaoirleach. Senator Douglas has raised a point with which I also agree, that the position in connection with motions which have been on the Order Paper for a long time and which have not been dealt with is a matter which should be considered by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
Would it not be possible to get the views of such of these people as are here as to whether they have any objection to this motion being taken? I do not think there is any objection. I have met only one of the people who have these motions on the paper and he was agreeable.
I feel that some protest should be made against the treatment being meted out to these motions. Senator Tunney and I have a motion on the paper which was tabled when loan charges were increased. At the time, it was a matter of importance but since then the matter has been discussed in every boardroom in the country. It seems to me that Ministers treat these motions with contempt and that no effort is made to bring them before the House. If Senator Tunney were here to-day I would advise him to get the permission of the House to withdraw that motion because they are being treated as jokes not alone in present circumstances, but even under the previous Government when I have known motions to have been on the Order Paper for 15 and 18 months. I think that is very unfair. The motion to which I refer was a very important motion when it was tabled and was a matter of considerable discussion but to-day it does not make very much difference.
The position with regard to item No. 14 is that, if it is not taken soon, all the people who will benefit under it will be dead.
I do not think it is quite fair to say that motions were treated with contempt. There was never any pressure from the people who put down the motions, so far as I am aware, that they should be dealt with whenever it came to deal with the motions. There never was to my knowledge any pressure to have the motions taken.
On the other hand, there was never any effort made to bring them before the House. We would be told the number of items that were to be discussed and the matter ended there.
In connection with item No. 14, on three occasions efforts were made to have the motion raised and for various reasons it was impossible for the Minister to come to the House. It would be untrue to say that efforts—and strong efforts—were not made to bring before the House item No. 14 on the Order Paper. Those efforts were made.
Would Senator Hartnett be agreeable to consult the Leader of the House with the other Senators concerned in connection with this motion? It cannot come on this evening, I am afraid, on account of the pressure of other business.
Mairdir le tairiscint a 18, tar éis dom téarmaí na tairiscinte do scrúdú, táim tar éis a rialú go bhfuil sé as ordú. Chuir mé sin in iúl don tSeanadóir, An Seabhach, roimh lón.
Having considered the terms of item No. 18 on the Order Paper, I have ruled it out of order. I have already communicated this decision to Seanadóir An Seabhach.
Maidhir leis an rún tá brón orm gur measadh go raibh sé as ordú ach glacaim le rialú an Chathaoirligh go fonnmhar. Ba mhaith liom a fháil amach an mbeidh cead agam tairiscint a thairiscint ar Chéim an Choiste.
Ní féidir an cheist sin do phlé anois.
Conas a bheidh fhios agam?
Tá chaoi ann lena dhéanamh.
Might I be allowed to say that this motion appeared to be out of order and I advised that a similar motion should be put down for Committee Stage. I am glad to see that my advice is being accepted, although it has not been acknowledged.