When is it proposed to take the discussion on the Supplementary Estimate?

I propose, Sir, that it be taken to-day in connection with the discussion on the main Estimate.

Does that mean there will not be a separate discussion on the main Estimate?

I assume so, in accordance with precedent.

I submit, Sir, that this is a Vote for an additional £280,000 which, as far as I can see, is for the wiping out of certain debts in connection with turf cutting, and I suggest that it is a matter for discussion in itself.

The object of this Estimate is to increase the amount.

I think that it is an extraordinary amount to provide at this time of the year for the purpose of wiping out an additional debt, and I submit that it is unreasonable to ask the House to discuss this Estimate now, seeing that it has only been introduced to-day.

Discussion is not limited on the main Estimate, nor on the items thereof.

Yes, Sir, but here we are presented with the first reading of an Estimate to-day for £280,000 for the purpose of wiping out debts in connection with turf cutting, as far as I can see. This is the first intimation we have got of it, and I think it would be unreasonable to ask the House to discuss such a matter at such short notice. It seems to me that there is sufficient matter to be discussed in connection with the Vote on Supplies without endeavouring to smother this item.

There is no question of attempting to smother anything. They can both be discussed together on the main Estimate.

That is the usual procedure.

If that motion is put before the House, I shall oppose it. Is the Minister persisting in that motion?

I am proposing that it be taken to-day.

The Minister cannot take it to-day.

The Minister cannot take the Supplementary Estimate to-day, if it is opposed.

Unless the House so ordered.

In effect, the proposal is that it be taken to-morrow. I assume that the discussion on the main Estimate will not conclude to-day.

That is what I want to avoid.

That is to be taken to-morrow?

I object to it being taken in such a way as to be included in the general discussion on the Supplies Estimate.

That is a most unreasonable objection. There is a sub-head for this particular service, and the supplementary Estimate is being submitted only for the purpose of increasing that sub-head.

As I understand the position, the House is being asked to vote £280,000 for the purpose of meeting certain debts incurred in turf-cutting.

For the purpose of subsidising the price of turf.

Is it not a case of subsidising turf in respect of the past year rather than in respect of the current year?

For precisely the same purpose as is covered by the sub-head in the main Estimate.

Is it not intended to cover the total loss involved in last year's turf cutting and not this year's, because the turf has not yet been cut? There is no loss if the turf has not been sold.

Is this money not required for development work in the future?

It is to provide the subsidy to which the Government is already committed.

It is to cover the paper losses in respect of last year.

Not paper losses— actual losses. It is in order to make turf cheaper for the people than it would otherwise be.

Is any of this money to be applied to future development work?

I propose that we take the Supplementary Estimate to-morrow.

I should like to know, if this is introduced to-day, whether it would be in order that the discussion on it be prevented from taking place until it is actually reached? I submit that there should be a separate discussion.

That can be decided to-morrow. It is customary to take the Supplementary Estimate with the main Vote in circumstances such as obtain in this instance.

Am I to understand that the Chair is prepared to take a motion that another Estimate be included when the discussion on the main Estimate is continued to-morrow?

That is not quite the position. This is a Supplementary Estimate related to a sub-head of the Vote sub-head G.

What will the position be if a Deputy wishes to move a reference back of the Supplementary Estimate? A Deputy might be inclined to oppose the Supplementary Estimate and yet be in favour of the main Vote.

That would be a very illogical attitude.

A Deputy could submit a motion to refer back the item in the main Vote which deals with such subsidies.

Supposing a Deputy takes the view that the reasons for the Supplementary Estimate are not precisely the same as for the sub-head in the main Estimate, surely a Deputy is entitled to submit a motion that the Supplementary Estimate be referred back? How can be do that if the Supplementary Estimate is taken to-day?

It is not being specifically taken to-day.

And clear of the main Estimate?

Am I to understand it can only be forced into the discussion on the main Estimate to-morrow after a motion so to do has been submitted?

No; it will come under discussion automatically unless that course be negatived.

Will the Chair indicate what is the position of Deputies who may speak on the main Estimate to-day? Will they be debarred from talking on the Supplementary Estimate?

The Supplementary Estimate will be taken with the main Estimate to-morrow. If the discussion on the main Estimate is finished to-day Deputies may speak on the Supplementary Estimate to-morrow, though that would involve a certain duplication of the debate.

I want to protest against the action of the Minister. It is just characteristic of the manner in which he treats the business here.

And I want to protest against the attitude of the Deputy as being stupid and illogical.