It is proposed to take the business as on the Order Paper, Nos. 9, 4, 5, 6, 10, 8 and 7 and in No. 7 Votes 58 and 59. It is proposed to interrupt business between 6 p.m. and 7.30 p.m. to take items Nos. 8 and 7 (Votes 58 and 59).

I understand that the Money Resolution in connection with the Health Bill has been ordered for discussion. I would like at this stage if we had from the Taoiseach or theMinister for Health some statement in connection with the rumours which are circulating in this city and throughout the country. It is generally rumoured that the Government have received a communication from the Hierarchy in connection with the Health Bill. I would like to know (1) if that is so, (2) whether we can be made aware of the document which the Hierarchy has issued in connection with the Bill and (3) whether we can be told what steps the Government propose to take in the matter. It is obviously unfair to the House that it should be asked to consider this Bill in a vacuum. The House ought to approach the consideration of the Money Resolution and the provisions of the Bill against a realistic background. Some statement should be made on the matter and the House should be afforded an opportunity of considering the statement.

We go ahead with the discussion.

That is what I am asking. I am asking the Taoiseach whether it is a fact, as is generally rumoured in this House amongst newspaper men and the general public, that the Government has received a letter from the Hierarchy which constitutes a protest against sections of the Bill? If it is a fact what does the Government propose to do about it? This House should not be left in doubt. I am merely asking for information so that we will not vote in the dark.

Is the Minister's attitude based on the attitude of Deputy Kennedy, who at the Westmeath County Council the other day said that "30 years ago they had shook the Bishops at the Republican Party and threatened them with excommunication but that cock would crow no more."

Some queer things happened 30 years ago.

I think that at least notice of a question of this sort should have been given to me. We are not responsible for rumours.

We all know it.

We are not responsible for rumours.

We all know it.

Any questions dealing with other persons who may be interested in this Bill are not questions for answer by me.

I want to know if the Taoiseach has caused to be delayed and attempted to have suppressed the document referred to?

The Taoiseach and the Government are conducting their business in the best public interest.

I asked a simple question.

You will not get the answer from me.

We know the answer.

You are the only people in Ireland who could make that reply.

The Opposition are clearly very anxious to make——

I am not giving way.

The Deputy is not entitled to an answer and he will not get it.

I am trying to ask my question.

The Deputy is not getting any answer.

Order, order!

Chair!

It should be understood that there is nothing before the House on which a discussion can take place.

The Order of Business is before the House.

Yes. But arguments such as are being deduced are not in order at the moment. I will allow Deputy McGilligan to ask the question.

On the matter of the Order of Business, I am anxious to know in regard to the document which was addressed not to the Government, unless they are included in the faithful, which may be doubted, whether the Taoiseach has caused it to be delayed in its publication and is endeavouring to suppress its publication? That was the public belief.

That suggestion is untrue, that I am endeavouring to suppress anything. What I as the head of the Government and what the Government is doing is our duty to conduct the public business in the best public interest.

Hear, Hear!

That apparently involves causing the delay in the publication of the document.

Are they permitted to be described as the faithful only those who celebrate a Church Holiday by committing four murders?

Is the Chair going to take action on that?

That is good enough for you anyway. You were fishing for it.

Speaking as the brother of a man murdered going to Mass——

That has nothing to do with it. What about Rory O'Connor and Liam Mellows?

Shut up.

We can all shout.

Only some people are skilled in murder.

I think the Minister for Finance should withdraw that statement.

If Deputy McGilligan withdraws his insulting references to me.

I think the Minister should withdraw the statement.

No, Sir. I put this to you. You have allowed Deputy McGilligan to suggest that I am not by birth and by conviction a loyal member of the Catholic Church. When you ask Deputy McGilligan to withdraw that, I will withdraw the statement I made about him.

Deputy McGilligan's statement is not at all on a par with the statement made by the Minister.

Perhaps not. It contains even a lower imputation, but I will withdraw in deference to you.

No. 9 on the Order Paper.

On the Order of Business, I want to make an appeal to this House as a democratic Parliament. Every Deputy in the House has read in the newspapers of the country that it is popularly believed that a document of substance addressed to the faithful was communicated to the Press——

Has not that been dealt with already?

He is young and brash, and will learn sense.

(Interruption.)

Is it not generally known that, at the instance of the Government, the publication of that document was postponed. Is it not known that the Government had expressed the desire to be afforded an opportunity——

Surely this is not on the Order of Business?

I was about to remind Deputy Dillon of that. The position is that the Government is entitled to order the business of the House and the Government has so indicated its intention. A particularOrder of Business is before the House and is not open for discussion. Questions may be asked, but there is no motion before the House. Therefore, the Order of Business is not open for discussion, and only questions may be asked. Deputy Dillon has been proceeding to adduce arguments which are not questions.

In this situation, where it is common knowledge that a matter of substance referring to the subject matter of the debate that is proceeding is not accessible to Deputies of this House, surely common sense would require, or suggest, a postponement of this discussion until such time as the document can be disposed of or rendered accessible to every Deputy in the House who desires to participate in the debate? When I say "disposed of" I mean presented to the faithful. (Interruptions.) You have stopped the document being published.

I have called Item No. 9 for discussion. The Deputy is not asking questions but adducing arguments.

Is it the intention of the Government to introduce some amendments to the Health Bill? If so, does the Government not consider that it would be wiser to postpone the discussion until the amendments have been introduced when we may discuss the whole thing?

The Government is in charge of the Order of Business. The Minister for Health is in charge of the Health Bill, and he will follow the usual procedure in introducing amendments when and where necessary.

No. 9.

On a point of order. In order to prevent any ambiguity later on, I take it that it is agreed now that we are in Committee on this motion, and that second speeches by Deputies, as well as by the Minister will be permitted?

Standing Orders provide that Deputies may make more than one speech in Committee.

It will take you a long time to get your money boys.