That decision complicates to some extent the estimate of time which we had formed in regard to the business of the Dáil. We have now two courses open. The first course would be to sit, as proposed, until 10.30 p.m., with this proviso, that the debate in regard to the Land Bill report would conclude at 9 o'clock, and then, on the Motion for the Adjournment, there would be a discussion on the Imperial Conference Report. The other course would be to sit until 8.30 this evening and meet to-morrow at 2 o'clock, when the Imperial Conference Report could again be raised. I am willing to leave the decision to the House.

We entered into an arrangement that there would be no curtailment of the discussion regarding the Land Bill, but I do not see how we can carry on much further than 8.30 o'clock. A good deal will depend on the methods and tactics of the Minister for Agriculture. I will be no party to the curtailment of our rights. Time has been set aside for us, and I insist on having it.

How much time was set aside?

From 7 p.m. onward.

The arrangement was from 7 o'clock, and that the Motion for the Adjournment would take place not later than 10.30 p.m. I did not promise anything further.

It was for the purpose of disposing of the report on the Land Bill that the hour of 10.30 was mentioned. Now you want to cut right into it. I do not anticipate that we will take all that time.

There must be a bargain.

The bargain was made earlier in the day and not now.

We cannot begin the discussion on the report of the Land Bill until 7 o'clock. In the interval are we going to take up the debate on the Imperial Conference? If we are, we could stop at 7 o'clock, and, if it is not concluded, when will we resume it? I am not concerned with the solution. I am merely stating the problem.

I am not concerned with any time except the time allotted to us. I claim that the report on the Land Bill should be taken at 7 o'clock. That has been arranged already and cannot be departed from.

I do not say that it can be departed from.

All I can say is that I have bound myself to allow a discussion on the Imperial Conference and I do not intend to give to-morrow to finish it.

I will insist that very few speeches will be made from these benches except what will explain our view point. We do not intend to carry the discussion very long or to waste the time of the House.

Supposing we suspend the sitting now until 7 o'clock. When we resume at 7 o'clock we can take the consideration of the report of the Select Committee on the Land Bill, and if that concludes at 8.30 or 9 o'clock we can take the Imperial Conference question and decide then before 10 o'clock what we are going to do about to-morrow.

The MINISTER for POSTS and TELEGRAPHS rose.

The Minister for Posts and Telegraphs, I am sure, is concerned with the fact that in the Seanad certain amendments were made to the Wireless Telegraphy Bill. There are four amendments; in fact there is only one, but the one amendment needs to be made in four places. The Minister, I take it, desires to know when the Dáil will take it?

That is correct.

I would suggest that we take it immediately after the resumption.

Can we have some information about what this amendment is? This Bill was passed in the Dáil and sent to the Seanad. It comes back to us amended and we are asked to deal with the amendments without knowing what they are.

The Minister can explain what they are. I think we can take them up at 7 o'clock for a few moments before considering the report of the Land Bill.

I would like to put this point. The Dáil is to sit until half-past ten to permit of a full discussion of the Land Bill. How then can it be possible to fit into that arrangement the further discussion of this very important question, the Imperial Conference arrangement? Supposing that by any chance the debate on the Agricultural Committee's report does conclude, say, at half-past nine or ten o'clock, are we to understand then that half-an-hour only is to be permitted for the rest of the discussion of the Imperial Conference? I do not like to suggest that it seems dictated by the desire to curtail the discussion of the Imperial Conference—in fact, to burk it—but I do suggest that the public will get that impression, rightly or wrongly.

My suggestion was agreed upon on the understanding that the discussion of the Select Committee's report on the Land Bill will not take very long. Deputy Gorey suggested that those for whom he speaks will not take very long, and that the debate would be concluded before half-past eight or, at least, nine o'clock. If it is concluded later than that the problem will then present itself as to when the Imperial Conference debate will be resumed. It is possible that no difficulty will arise. If the President would make the hour for the adjournment 11 o'clock instead of 10.30 it might meet the situation.

Would it not be possible to have the Imperial Conference debate taken on to-morrow?

That would be possible, but would not that point arise better at 8.30 or 9 o'clock?

With all respect, I submit that it seems proper to raise it now when arrangements for the programme are being entered into.

I have no objection to its being raised now.

Can it not be raised at half-past eight and settled then?

The point is that we do not know that the Land Bill debate will conclude at eight or nine o'clock.

May I suggest that the hour for the adjournment be 11 o'clock, so as to allow a little elasticity?

I have no objection.