Wednesday, 11 April 1984
Seanad Eireann Debate
Mr. Ferris: It is proposed to take No. 2. I refer my colleagues in the House to the supplementary Order Paper which is being circulated and which contains Nos. 2a and 2b. It is also proposed to take Nos. 3, 5, 4, 1 and 6 in that order.
With reference to the supplementary Order Paper there is a further supplementary item which will be known as No. 2c, that is the Irish Shipping Ltd. Bill which it was intended in the other House to have completed. Because of the suspension of the sitting of the other House to allow Members to attend the inter-denominational service they were unable to conclude that part of the business of the House. We had expected to be able to introduce it in the supplementary Order Paper before Senators. I would like the House to give me permission to introduce it at a later stage in the day when it becomes available. I apologise for the fact that it is not on the Order Paper.
I also want to apologise to the House for not having the facility available to me within Standing Orders to suspend the sitting of this House to allow everybody to attend the inter-denominational service. As the House had adjourned until 2.30 today it would have had to meet to readjourn and, by the time we would had done so the service would have been over. I propose the Order of Business in that order and I trust the House will understand that it is my intention to get through as much business as possible. I also intend to adjourn for tea between 5.30 p.m. and 6.30 p.m. Immediately after that we will take the remaining 1½ hours on motion No. 5 and carry on with the rest of the business as it arises.
Mr. Lanigan: On the Order of Business, it is intended to take item No. 3. I presume we are just taking the Second Stage of item No. 3 today. What is the  situation regarding item No. 1? What is the intention of the Acting Leader of the House on item No. 1? Is the Shipping Bill a Money Bill? What is the intention in regard to No. 2c when it comes up? Do we intend to take Second Stage only? Is it the intention of the House to sit tomorrow?
Mr. Ferris: One question which Senator Lanigan raised was in connection with item No. 1. It is ordered but I cannot see us reaching it. It will probably be after the Easter Recess that we will reach it. It is a very important Bill. It is being initiated in this House. It is appropriate to order it with the intention of taking it as soon as possible.
No. 2c is the Bill in connection with Irish Shipping. It is not a Money Bill. I hope we will get through all Stages today as it is a matter of urgency. That is why I adopted this strategy, to try to accommodate the situation which has arisen. We have a statutory obligation to deal with Irish Shipping. I know I have the approval of the House. I discussed it with the Whips and they have agreed to facilitate the passage of that Bill.
Mr. Ferris: That is a matter for the House at the end of today's business. If the business is not completed it is our intention to sit tomorrow. It is my intention to try to get through as much business as possible today, to facilitate Members who expressed a wish about tomorrow. If the business is not completed I have an obligation to the Government and we will sit tomorrow. We will sit all day and late tonight.
Mr. Kiely: This seems to be in conflict with the Order of Business in the other House. We seem to be sitting until 12 o'clock or 1 a.m. which is very unfair to  Senators in a sense. Would it not be more appropriate to sit tomorrow?
|Last Updated: 14/09/2010 08:34:19||Page of 16|