It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 2, 1, 8, 4, 9 (Resumed) and 10 (Resumed) and to take Private Members' Business from 7 p.m. to 8.30 p.m., No. 60 by agreement. With regard to No. 4 which is the motion on the Health (Hospital Bodies) Regulations, 1972 (Amendment) Regulations, 1978, this motion is incorrectly numbered on the Order Paper. In its correct sequence it should be No. 5.
Order of Business.
When is it proposed to deal with the question of the validity of adoption orders?
I understand that the Minister for Justice hopes to introduce very shortly a Bill in that connection.
Will the Tánaiste agree that the commitment given by the Government was that this matter would be through the Oireachtas before the Christmas Recess? The question is one that is the cause of considerable mental anguish to a large number of people. Therefore, can the Tánaiste be more explicit as to when the matter may be finalised by the Government?
I understand that the Deputy's version of the Government's commitment in this regard is not correct. However, the Deputy is aware that there are very complicated legal issues involved. These have been pretty well solved and the Minister will have the Bill before the House very shortly.
Before Christmas?
I should hope so.
Is it not anticipated by the Government that the matter will be resolved before Christmas?
The Deputy will appreciate that without anticipating the contents of the Bill, I cannot answer that question. I could say that when the Bill is introduced the Opposition Parties could, if they so wished, make arrangements to have it passed very speedily. I am sure the Minister would welcome that.
As the Tánaiste may be aware, we have not only tried to have the matter dealt with speedily, but we produced our own Bill, which the Minister rejected on the basis that the Government were dealing with the situation as a matter of urgency. That was a considerable time ago. Unfortunately, the Government do not appear to have the same sense of urgency in this regard as have many adoptive parents.
I am aware that the Labour Party introduced a Private Members' Bill in this connection, but unfortunately that Bill was defective in a number of respects. The Deputy will appreciate that there is involved here a very difficult constitutional issue and I think he will find that the Bill to be introduced by the Minister for Justice will be satisfactory in that regard.
It was pointed out clearly that the constitutional matter concerned would be dealt with by way of referendum, if necessary——
We cannot have a debate on it now.
——but, instead of saying that our Bill had some complications, the Tánaiste might have said that it was on all-embracing measure so far as the welfare of those children is concerned.
The word I used was .
Would the Tánaiste care to elaborate on the defects?
The Minister elaborated on them in the House.
Does the Tánaiste mean that it was defective in that one of its aims was to endeavour to be rid of the social stigma attaching to illegitimacy?
This has been dealt with already.
In relation to the actual No. 4 on the Order Paper, can the Tánaiste give any indication when the Government intend publishing the Bill?
Is the Deputy referring to a motion in the name of Deputy Browne?
Yes.
The answer is no.
The Tánaiste will be aware that there is a commitment from the Government to have this Bill published and circulated before Christmas, but there is only one sitting week remaining.
The Minister and the Deputy are referring to different items.
I am referring to the Government measure in relation to what is the actual No. 4 on the Order Paper.
I do not know whether Deputy Boland is confused or whether he is trying to confuse us, but the item to which I understand him to be referring is a Private Members' Bill and any undertaking from the Government does not relate to a Private Members' Bill.
Can the Tánaiste give an indication when the Government intend publishing their Bill in connection with the matter referred to in No. 4?
I have indicated to the House that it will be quite soon, but this does not relate to No. 4.
May we have an indication of when the Dáil is likely to adjourn for Christmas?
It may be subject to agreement.
Or to disagreement.
I was about to add that, but I could not give a date because I understand discussions are in progress in this connection between the Whips.
May we have any indication of when Budget Day will be?
Not at this stage.
Perhaps the Tánaiste will be able to give us the information next week.
In accordance with the normal procedure, we would hope to be able to let the House have the date before we adjourn for Christmas.
Is it a question of the Tánaiste's hoping to be able to give the information or promising to give it?
Hoping.
Is it that the Minister would hope or that he will?
I would hope.
As it is normal practice I presume he would abide by it on this occasion. There would be no hope that there would be an actuality.
We hope to abide by the normal procedure in this regard but the Deputy will appreciate that there may be some complicating issues.
Is he sitting next to the Minister?
Would the Deputy believe the EMS?
Mr. Barry
I would believe other things, possibly that there are internal complications.
I do not wish to commit myself completely because of this possibility, but I believe that we will be able to indicate the date of the budget before the Christmas Recess.