I move:

"That, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Standing Order 85, the Report Stage of the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1931, be taken to-day."

This motion stood originally in the name of my friend Ald. Byrne, Lord Mayor of Dublin, who has resigned his membership of this House. I am taking his place for the moment and proposing the motion. I am not going to delve into this housing question. I consider it would be an insult to the intelligence of Senators to do so. Every member realises that housing is a pressing need, and that it is necessary to get on with the work. The purpose of the motion is to enable the Minister, in the words of a famous patriot, now dead, to get on with the work.

I second the motion.

I think it is presuming unduly on the docility of the Seanad to ask us to accept this motion. To hear Senator O'Neill speaking one would think that some vital issue hung on the question of time. I can imagine that for years this Bill has been incubating in Government offices, and now we are asked to say that the Bill cannot wait for a few days to enable Senators to consider whether, as a result of our discussions during the last two days, any amendments might usefully be framed for the Report Stage. Really, I think a motion of this kind is only making a travesty of legislation.

No serious plea of urgency has been made. Senator Johnson, only a few minutes ago, raised a matter which struck me as being one of importance, and one that certainly might be examined. Our experience has shown that in the case of all measures of importance it has been exceedingly useful to allow a reasonable period of time, following Committee Stage discussion, with a view to amendments being prepared for Report Stage. This Bill is one of great importance, and I protest very strongly against unseemly high haste of this kind.

In my opinion it would be very inadvisable for the House to pass this motion. The Bill before us is one of a very comprehensive nature. It raises very important issues relating to the whole question of housing. The Bill has been before the House for a good part of two days. During the Committee Stage a number of amendments were inserted, and surely Senators require a few days to look into the Bill again in its remodelled state? When Senators have an opportunity of doing that they may consider that further amendments on Report Stage are necessary, particularly in the interests of the body—the Dublin Corporation—that mainly will be concerned with the carrying out of the Bill when it becomes an Act. I think it would be a great mistake to rush the Bill through to-day without giving Senators a further opportunity to examine the alterations made during Committee Stage. Surely the Bill can afford to wait for a few days to enable Senators to do that? The Report Stage could be fixed for Wednesday, and, if necessary, the Final Stage could also be taken that day. In all the circumstances, I think it would be a great mistake to rush the Bill through to-day,' particularly in the interests of those who will have to administer it later on.

I am sorry that the last motion put on the Order Paper by the Lord Mayor of Dublin, who has ceased for the time being to be a member of this House, should be one tending to undermine the foundations of this Assembly. Senator Sir John Keane spoke very gently when he said that to introduce a motion of this character is presuming very much on the docility of this House. I would substitute for the word "docility" the word...

Servility.

The word "servility" has been suggested to me by Senator Dr. Gogarty, who has such a command of appropriate language. It is certainly a word that is appropriate to the present occasion. It is our duty to resist motions of this kind which are altogether too frequent, motions which propose to supersede the rules of this House and to show a certain contempt for this Assembly. Once or twice in a session a motion of this kind might be easily passed over, due to the necessities of legislation. Sometimes we do abrogate our rules for the convenience of Ministers. We are not unreasonable, and have never been unreasonable in this House.

The Minister does not say that this motion is brought forward on the present occasion to suit his convenience. I will say this for the Minister, that we can rely upon any statements he makes here as being correct. I will, however, say this also about the Minister, that he is the greatest offender in regard to his desire to abrogate the rules of this House in connection with various Bills from time to time. I oppose this motion simply to show that we do not lightly consent to any breach of procedure.

There is another reason. A very important amendment has been brought forward here just now. The Minister explained it fairly and frankly and, I believe, fully. Still I do not understand all its implications. It means money to some people. It means the loss of money to a man who started his house before 1st October and will not have it finished before 1st February. It may cause serious injustice to an individual. There are other features of the Bill which, as Senator Farren said, ought to be considered calmly between this and next meeting.

The Minister has not to go anywhere in particular. He could be here next Wednesday. Of course if he could not be here we might consider that as a reason, but so far as I know there is no reason why he cannot be here. There is an amendment to Section 53, a very important amendment. That could be moved next Wednesday. For all these reasons this proposal ought not to be pressed.

It is a new idea that a a Bill is passed here as a mark of favour to the Minister rather than in an attempt to relieve immediately the dreadful conditions that have existed in Dublin for so many years and that have been potential as a criticism of the Government because they have been allowed to exist. If there were any hope that a few days' delay would produce any improvement in the Bill there might be some idea in leaving it over. All that Senator Comyn has stated gives us to to understand that he desires to cogitate in a calm atmosphere upon a certain amendment until next Wednesday.

If there were any hope that a new orientation would come out of a few days' contemplation, I would be prepared to resist this measure being hurried. The suggestion we have listened to is not so much a presumption of the servility of the House as a criticism of the incapacity of the House to make up its mind immediately. There is only one point at issue and that is the difference between September and October. Surely a talk between the Minister and Senator Johnson would put that right? Surely one ought to be able to make up one's mind about a date in a few seconds?

The Senator might, but we are not all supermen.

I am not even a sub-man. Trying to turn the issue at stake into an insult on the House or endeavouring to take advantage of what Senator Comyn is so sensitive about, the presumed servility of the House, is not a fair way of dealing with this thing. There is only one point at issue, but in the meantime the people of Dublin are waiting. They have been waiting for years, and their patience is astonishing. Let us get some credit for doing a very necessary thing quickly and slickly. I suggest that the Report Stage should be taken immediately.

There is no desire to press the proposal if Senators do not wish it.

The Minister does not desire to go against the wishes of the House if Senators want this Stage postponed until next Wednesday.

I wanted to say that earlier. I am sure Senator O'Neill does not wish to press this proposal after hearing the opinions expressed. This proposal was submitted by the Lord Mayor of Dublin after seeing the amendments that were actually down to the Bill. There was an amendment introducing the question of grants for the improvement of rural housing submitted by Senator MacEllin and it did not appear from the amendments on the Committee Stage that that question was going to be further discussed. There did not appear to be anything radical in the original Committee Stage amendments that would necessitate waiting over until next week.

In view of the fact that I thoroughly discussed all the various points at issue with the Dublin Corporation, and that I thoroughly discussed everything likely to be contentious with the Irish Landowners' Association, including the point Senator Sir John Keane dealt with yesterday, I did not expect that any major point on that side was going to arise. I expected to be in the Dáil on Wednesday dealing with the Traffic Bill, and this motion was put down by Senator Byrne to convenience the work generally. If the Seanad would arrange for the taking of the Report Stage of this Bill first thing on Wednesday, it would be a considerable convenience to me. We can then get the amendments to the Dáil before the Dáil adjourns.

On the general question of this practice of putting down motions of this kind, I think it is quite excusable where there is a non-controversial Bill to which there were no amendments down for the Committee Stage. Let us take the Unemployment Relief Bill. That is a Certified Money Bill and it might well have been thought necessary to have it passed through all its stages yesterday. There were no amendments possible, yet there was no urgent motion put down to carry the remaining stages of the Bill so as to enable the money to be spent before Christmas. This motion was put down in face of the fact that there were ten or twelve amendments on the Paper. Most of them were Government amendments and were likely to be passed, but they were altering the face of the Bill. That the House should contemplate passing those amendments and taking the Report Stage without having an opportunity of finding out the effect of the amendments on the Bill would be an unwise procedure, and that ought not be a practice that we should allow to become generally operative. It is not by any means the truth, as Senator Gogarty suggested, that a delay of three of four days is going to affect by one second the carrying into effect of any housing scheme.

I am sorry that one of the last acts of the Lord Mayor in this Chamber should be designated by a member of the House as an attempt to turn the Seanad into a body of serfs. That was not his intention, I am sure. What prompted him to put down this motion was, I feel certain, his anxiety as Lord Mayor of Dublin to bring about an improvement at the earliest possible moment in the frightful condition of things that exists in the City. Those conditions have existed for upwards of a generation. Living amongst such conditions as he does, knowing that fully 20,000 families, some of them consisting of three, four, five or ten people, are compelled to live in one-room apartments, the Lord Mayor is keenly desirous of having an improvement brought about in the immediate future. He might, in his absence, have got some little credit, because I am sure that is exactly what was in his mind when he put down this motion. Owing to the kindly interest that the majority of the Senators seem to take in this Bill—

Not "seem." We always took an interest in it and did good work too.

Owing to the evident interest that the majority of the members of this Seanad take in this Bill— when we had a division on it to-day we had only twenty-six Senators present out of fifty-nine.

You desire to withdraw your motion, Senator?

Yes.

I do not think the Senator ought to be allowed to withdraw it without some comment. Seeing that one member of this House has almost made the supreme sacrifice and appealed to the House to pass the motion, we ought to consider that great, wonderful and heroic sacrifice made by this member and pass the motion as he suggested.

The Minister raised the point about my amendments in connection with the Report Stage. I would like to know definitely now if they are in order for the next day or not.

That was not the point. They were down for the Committee Stage.

There was a great deal of talk about the practice of the House. Senator Byrne was absolutely in order in putting down the motion and any criticism of his conduct is unjust.

In order, but very unwise.

He was absolutely in order.

We were in order in opposing it.

Certainly.

Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Report Stage ordered for next Wednesday.