It is proposed to take items Nos. 1 to 8, inclusive, omitting Nos. 4 and 5, Public Business not to be interrupted at 9 o'clock for private Members' time.

Do I understand the Vice-President to say that there will be no Private Members' time to-night?

That is so.

I want to protest against this procedure. A fortnight ago I was promised by the Parliamentary Secretary to the President that time would be provided before the Easter Recess for the discussion of the first Private Member's motion on the Order Paper, and early this morning I was informed that time would be provided at 9 o'clock to-night. Later on, I was told by the Parliamentary Secretary that there had been a change of policy and that no Private Members' time would be provided. I had a very definite promise from the Parliamentary Secretary that time would be provided this week for discussion of this motion, and we now have a proposal not to provide time. Last week, when this matter was being discussed, I called the attention of the Parliamentary Secretary to the fact that this motion should have been discussed on the previous Thursday night when the House adjourned at 7.30, three hours of Parliamentary time being available for its discussion and I was then assured that time would be provided this week. Now we have a proposal to take Private Members' time to-night which means that the motion cannot be discussed until after the Easter Recess.

Might I suggest to Deputy Norton that he would probably get much more satisfaction in this and in other matters if the fortnightly conferences between the Labour Party and the Government were resumed?

I am challenging the taking of Private Members' time to-night in view of the very definite promise which was made on behalf of the Government.

Is there any reason why we should not sit on Friday, if necessary, in order to give Private Members' time?

It is quite possible that we will be able to give time at 9 o'clock to-morrow night, if the House agrees.

Does the Opposition agree to that, as they agreed to this?

Agree to what?

To taking Private Members' time to-morrow night.

This private quarrel can take place afterwards. Do I understand that time will be provided to-morrow?

I am not making any promise. I say that it is possible that we will be able to give time at 9 o'clock to-morrow, if the House agrees.

Can we test the feelings of the House on that matter?

If the Deputy likes. We will not stop him doing anything he wants to do.

I support Deputy Norton in his demand. After all, there was a time when the members of the Government Party were on these Benches, and when we had a proposal to adjourn for Christmas I remember that they objected and said that we were in receipt of allowances for doing the business of the people. They now adopt a different attitude and bring people from the country for two days and then adjourn. Why not sit on Friday and do the business you are sent here to do?

Do not worry. We will soon be sending you to the country again.

Ní thuigim tú, in aon chor.

Then the Minister will have to worry.

The Vice-President says it may be possible to provide time to-morrow night, if the House agrees. Might I suggest that he ought now to ask the House to agree, in view of the very definite promise made on behalf of the Government by the Parliamentary Secretary last week.

Let the Vice-President now say that we will have time for Private Members' business to-morrow night.

It is usual to settle the business when the House assembles at 3 o'clock.

If the Vice-President is prepared to say that the Government will provide time after 9 o'clock to discuss this motion to-morrow night, the matter can be satisfactorily disposed of.

We were anxious to give the time to-day if possible, but we did not like to restrict the discussion on the Central Fund Bill. If the discussion on that Bill is likely to conclude before 9 o'clock, we could give time to-day.

Would it not be much better if the Minister could forecast that, if the House was agreeable, the Government would give time to-morrow evening? So far as we are concerned, we shall be agreeable to give time to-morrow at 9 o'clock. The Government may not feel free to say that explicitly, but they might give a signal that that was their intention.

I have said that the Government hope to be able to give time to-morrow at 9 o'clock. If the Opposition, as Deputy Dillon says, are prepared to see that time will be available, we shall be quite happy to give it.

We may take it, therefore, that time will be available?