It is proposed to take Nos. 1, 4 and 6 (resumed).
Order of Business.
A Cheann Comhairle, through you could I ask the Taoiseach if, having had an opportunity to consider the matter further, he will follow the precedent set by the Minister for Home Affairs in relation to the postal dispute in 1922 by supporting the suspension of Standing Orders to allow a debate on a matter of urgent necessity, namely, the telecommunications dispute, or give Government time for this purpose?
I have considered the suggestion made by the Deputy yesterday. As the House is aware, when he raised the matter I indicated that it was my belief that a debate on the delicate issues involved in this strike would not be conducive to a settlement. I still sincerely believe that a debate now would not be helpful. It is not my intention to accede to the Deputy's request. Of course, that does not the Deputy from repeating it next week if he wishes.
Would the Taoiseach not accept the fact that this dispute is not one external to the Government and it is not one in which any movement towards a solution is occurring—the two circumstances in which his argument that discussion in the House might be unhelpful could have some validity. But, as it does not fall into either of these categories, his argument against discussion of it when there is ministerial responsibility directly involved does not really hold or stand up.
I can appreciate that point, but I still think, as I have indicated, that a debate now would be unhelpful.
May I ask the Taoiseach if he appreciates that, under the previous Government, there was a long-standing precedent that, on matters of urgent public importance, the Minister responsible would make a statement to the House, and the responsible spokesman would be given a reasonable opportunity of responding and there would be no further debate? Does he not think that at 5 o'clock this evening it would be appropriate, in view of the growing critical situation in the postal and engineering dispute, that the Minister should make a statement and allow the responsible spokesman for Fine Gael to reply and the spokesman for the Labour Party to add his contribution? I do not think we would in any way exacerbate the situation. At least as a minimum courtesy, the Taoiseach will appreciate that the House is entitled to know what is happening.
I do not want to exacerbate the situation any more than the Deputy does, and I would not like to say anything which would in any way adversely affect the situation, bad as it is. I should like to point out to the Deputy that his party had an opportunity of raising the matter— indeed I invited him to raise it under the priority rule for Private Members' Business—but he put down a motion on a different matter altogether. I am not suggesting the situation is exactly the same now as it was then, but I still repeat my sincere belief that any action in the House now would not be helpful, and I should like to leave it at that.
I am sure the Taoiseach——
We cannot have a debate on the matter. I allowed a question.
I am sure the Taoiseach appreciates that Private Members' Business is the least satisfactory way of resolving an industrial dispute.
We have had a speaker from all the parties and we will now move on.
I propose, with your permission, to raise on the adjournment of the House the situation created by the instructions of the Minister for Education to the authorities of the Dublin teacher training colleges to increase fees to students.
I will communicate with the Deputy during the day.
I propose, with your permission, to raise on the adjournment of the Dáil the subject matter of Question No. 238 on yesterday's Order Paper.
I will communicate with the Deputy also.