Who is going to determine what is a valid reason ? It is easy to say that a valid reason for exclusion would be that a man has served a term of imprisonment, or that he is not a resident of Saorstát Eireann, but to define other valid reasons would be a very difficult thing Even if he has a valid reason a member should not stay on the Board longer than three months if he is ill and unable to attend.

How often do you contemplate meeting ?

Fortnightly probably in the beginning and monthly perhaps after some time.

It should be left to the discretion of the Minister to say what is a valid reason for absence.

I am prepared to put it in now. " For any valid reason in the Minister's opinion."

I think no reason should be regarded as valid after the time has expired.

A man should not be excluded for just staying away for three months. For example, Mr. O'Mara was recently sent by the Executive Council to discharge certain important functions abroad on behalf of the Government and should he be regarded as invalid just because he was away for three months and could not attend. Suppose he had been a member of the Pigs Marketing Board, and that notwithstanding that the Government determined it was necessary to send him abroad, is it to be argued that because the Executive Council thinks he can discharge valuable State functions that he automatically ceases to be a member of the Board ? That is clearly not the intention of the Bill.

That is the sort of case in which I am afraid we would have to say to Mr. O'Mara that he would have to get off the Board and let somebody else come on. Possibly the person who would come on to take Mr. O'Mara's place would, in the case put by Deputy Dillon, resign on Mr. O'Mara's return, and allow Mr. O'Mara to resume his place on the Board. Of course, the man put on as a substitute need not do that.

Suppose you had a very useful man on the Board who for some reason, such as illness, was not able to attend you would have to put him off and could not bring him on again.

If a man had a long illness that, of course, would be a valid reason. Still, if he could not attend, I think he should go off and let some active member take his place.

I think that this section should be qualified in some way on the lines in amendment No. 60. If needs be, name State business, sickness or one or two heads of that kind. In the event of the Minister being prepared to meet me in that regard, I am prepared to withdraw my amendment and to leave it to him to set out the circumstances under which he would be prepared to exonerate a member who was absent for three months.

I think it would be very hard to visualise in advance all the circumstances that might arise—the whole set of circumstances calling for the sort of treatment that the Deputy would like to see meted out to a member of the Board in the event of his being called away on some other business. It seems to me that you have either got to agree to the three months or increase the period to four or five months. The Deputy has given an indication of what a valid reason should be. At this stage it would be very difficult for the Minister to say how, in the light of subsequent events, he would interpret that.

There is one class of case for which I think special provision should be made. For instance, the Board may decide that it is necessary to send a member abroad to make investigations of a special character in connection with the business of the Board. They might decide that it was necessary for him to go to Denmark or America. During the period he was away he was engaged on the business of the Board. Would his absence bring him under the disqualification set out here ?

I think that what Deputy Smith has said strengthens the case that Deputy Dillon has made, that the Minister ought to be left with some discretion.

I am afraid that it would be found very difficult to interpret the phrase " valid reason."

I think the only point that needs to be considered is the one that has been raised by Deputy Keyes.

There is no penalty, so far as I can see, for habitual bad attendance.

I will not press the amendment, but I think that between this and the Report Stage the Minister ought to consider setting out certain stated reasons which would excuse absence or, alternatively, insert the words " what appears to the Minister to be a valid reason."

We can consider that as well as the point raised by Deputy Keyes.