Paul Murphy challenges Chair's constitutional ruling
Paul Murphy challenged a ruling by the Chair, Count Corlea, that declared his private members' motion out of order, arguing the Chair had acted outside standing orders and improperly invoked the Constitution. He said the ruling was unconstitutional and pushed to refer the issue for legal advice and committee consideration.
Challenge to the ruling
Murphy argued the Chair gave a constitutional reason rather than a standing orders reason for ruling the motion out of order, and he accused Count Corlea of acting outside his powers by effectively determining constitutional questions.
Constitutional points raised
He repeatedly cited the Constitution and raised Article 1510 as recorded in the debate, insisting the House has the authority to make its own rules and standing orders and questioning how the Chair's ruling could be reconciled with that provision.
Rulings of the Chair contested
Murphy said the Chair was selectively quoting salient rulings that relate to legislation, not private members' motions, and asserted that rulings of the Chair should not be used to pre-empt the House's decision on a motion.
Procedural remedy sought
He proposed convening the Oil Reform Committee that afternoon to hear arguments and asked that legal advice be provided through the Clerk of the Dáil. He also challenged colleagues over the Order of Business and pressed for a vote if they wished to oppose the proposed approach.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Excuse me, for as long as the Constitution sets out, as it does in 17-2 and 28-4, we are constrained. Now what I'm saying to you, what I'm saying to you, you might wish we weren't, but we must deal with the reality. Our amendment brings standing orders into line with the Constitution. That's not the advice I have. But the point, Count Corlea, and a lot of the comments that are made here today are a bit external to the point. The point here is that you have not given a reason, based on standing orders, as to why you've ruled our motion out of order. You didn't do it in the letter, and you didn't do it in oral form today. Instead, you have referred to the Constitution. You've given a constitutional reason as to why our motion is out of order. Well, that is unconstitutional, Count Corlea. You do not have the right, it is not your role to determine the Constitution. You are acting outside of your powers. You are acting outside of the standing orders. It's very, very clear, and it's clear in terms of what's interpreted by the salient rulings of the Chair. You do not rule in the constitutionality of any measure coming before. And that's what you're doing. And what about... That is what you're doing, Count Corlea. Can you resume your seat? Can you resume your seat? Can you resume your seat? Can you resume your seat, please? Please. You're selectively quoting from the salient rulings of the Chair, which refer to matters relating to legislation, not to private members' motions. It is also the case, as the House is well aware, that rulings of the Chair, as from all of my predecessors, must be accepted and cannot be challenged or debated on the floor of the House. In fact, we've given over 20 minutes to a debate that I probably should not have allowed, but I am anxious for people to have their say. What about Article 1510 of the Constitution? What about Article 1510? We are going to proceed. Oh, Count Corlea. We're going to proceed. Count Corlea, can you please explain to me how your ruling is not conflicting with Article 1510 of the Constitution that says, I quote, each House shall make its own rules and standing orders. I'm not getting involved in a further debate. So you're saying we're not allowed to do that? That you can decide the House is not allowed to do what the Constitution says it is allowed to do? Please don't be obstructive. I'm not. I'm asking you to explain that. Please don't be obstructive. I'm not being obstructive. Please. Well, please don't. Resume your seat. Our motion is being obstructive. The Chair of the Court is going to be obstructive. Will you resume your seat? Can you explain that? Are the members willing to accept that we would convene this afternoon a meeting of the Oil Reform Committee to hear the arguments on this, which we will do? We will ask for the legal advice to be provided through the Clerk of the Dáil to that meeting. Will you accept that? We're not accepting the Order of Business for Wednesday. Well, vote against the Order of Business then for Wednesday, if that's what you want. It's not clear what we want, no doubt. We will be Pfle." No. Thank you. Please. We will be the Attorney General. We will the Attorney General. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We will see you. Thank you. We will be the Attorney General. Thatrás pod? I will. Thank you. Okay. See you, Tony? Thank you. I will be the Attorney General. I know you and I am the Chief of Business. I know you know you. I know you'reular.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
