Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Offences Against the State Act.
There will be no victimisation.
Housing Bill, 1965: Committee Stage (Resumed).
There may be a misunderstanding. I arrived here only a few minutes after these two amendments came up and I was under the impression that they had been discussed with other amendments. I gather from ...
May I say that, when Deputy Cluskey sought to move the amendments, the Leas-Cheann Comhairle said to him: “The Deputy may discuss this amendment on the section.” Those were, I think, his exact words.
He said 58 and 62, as far as I remember.
That is not right. Deputy Cluskey rose.
If Deputy Clinton were here, he could corroborate what we are saying.
That is wrong. It can be checked. It is not so far back.
Deputy Clinton is present now.
We are only appealing to reasonableness. May I, through the Chair, ask Deputy Clinton whether Deputy Cluskey was advised he could not move No. 64 but could take it up on the section?
And he did not say: “I withdraw it.”
Why not allow the amendment to be moved now?
We are officially present.
Deputy Cluskey stood up——
As soon as the Leas-Cheann Comhairle said “No. 64”, he immediately said “withdrawn”, and at that stage Deputy Cluskey rose to speak on amendment No. 64 and the Leas-Cheann Comhairle intervened to say:...
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle said “withdrawn”.
The Minister would reinstate him.