Before the Bill is reported with amendments, there are some readjustments of the lay-out which I have to suggest.

The contents of Part XI of the Bill —Miscellaneous—in the course of drafting and amendments have become rather too extensive, and I have in mind some rearrangements of sections before the Bill comes before the House on Report.

Sections 85, 86, 87 and 88 of the Bill, as introduced, are intended to provide the legislative basis for the proposed extended maternity and child welfare and school medical services. By official amendments Nos. 83, 84 and 101 (third group) the total number of sections dealing with this matter becomes six. Moreover, I intend to see if it would be possible by Report Stage to introduce amendments to repeal completely the Public Health (Medical Treatment of Children) (Ireland) Act, 1919, and re-enact those of its provisions which are still needed. This would obviate the system of legislation by reference which has been adopted.

In view of this, and as these provisions represent a very important aspect of the Bill, I think that they should be taken out of their present place and made into a separate part of the Bill, to be inserted before the present Part V, under the heading of "Mother and Child Service". This new part of the Bill would comprise a complete code of the law dealing with the mother and child health service. I also suggest that Sections 92 to 95— Disposal of Bodies—be transposed to be inserted immediately before the present Part X.

I propose therefore that the changes indicated be made in the lay-out of the Bill and be embodied in the next print of it.

I therefore move:—

That the following changes be made in the position of sections and the division of the Bill into Parts:—

(a) The group of sections (including new sections inserted in Committee) between Sections 84 and 89, but excluding those two sections, to be transposed to constitute a new Part before Part V, with the heading: Mother and Child Service;

(b) Sections 92 to 95, inclusive, to be transposed to constitute a new Part before Part X, with the heading: Disposal of Bodies.

This is merely a matter of reconstruction and lay-out. Nothing new is being introduced.

This is an unusual procedure which seems to involve a fairly far-reaching change in the general make-up of the Bill. I should like to ask whether, on the Report Stage, the House will be permitted to deal with matters more fully than is usual on Report Stage; in other words, will the Bill be re-committed?

Not at all. We have spent 15 days in Committee. The Bill will be recommitted in respect of certain sections which have already been mentioned. There is nothing in the proposal before the House now but the provision of a different lay-out. Nothing new is being introduced by this motion.

I am not inclined to accept that view completely. This is a very far-reaching change in the structure of the Bill and I think that the Bill ought to be recommitted in respect of the sections mentioned here as being transposed from one part of the Bill to another.

On what grounds? If we transpose certain sections from one part to another, sections which have been fully discussed by the House, on what grounds should a mere transposition of sections justify another Committee Stage?

Having sprung this matter suddenly on the House at the end of the Committee Stage, it is scarcely fair to ask on what grounds we advocate a recommittal.

Advocacy of a recommittal at this point is entirely out of order.

I am putting it forward as a ground for opposing the motion.

I do not think it is in order to oppose the motion, because I do not see on what grounds the Deputy can put forward opposition. The Minister simply wants to change the location of certain sections.

Surely, if there is a motion before the House, Deputies are in order in opposing or supporting it.

Very well; I will hear the Deputy.

The implications of the change being made require very careful examination, and, for that reason, the Parliamentary Secretary should agree to a recommittal, at least in so far as the particular sections involved are concerned. If he is not prepared to agree to that, I feel that I could not accept this motion, and I protest against its being introduced without notice. It is an unusual procedure, a procedure which has never been adopted with regard to any other piece of legislation.

The motion simply gives notice that this is intended to be done. It cannot take effect for two or three weeks.

At the same time, it must be passed.

It is a wise suggestion.

Does it make any change in the Bill?

No.