Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 17 Jun 1982

Vol. 336 No. 3

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 2 and 11 (resumed).

By agreement, the proceedings on the motion for the Second Reading of the Finance Bill, 1982, and on the amendment thereto, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 10 p.m.: and Members as follows shall be called by the Chair not later than the times specified: (i) 6.15 p.m. a Member nominated by the Workers' Party; (ii) 7 p.m. a Member nominated by the Labour Party; (iii) 8 p.m. a Member nominated by Fine Gael; (iv) 9 p.m. a Member nominated by the Government.

The Irish Times contained a report two days ago that there would be legislation soon on Whitegate oil. According to this report a Government source confirmed that legislation would, as the source put it, “be enacted”, — although that is not up to any “source” to predict — within two weeks, ordering all oil importers in the Republic to take 35 per cent of their total requirements from Whitegate Oil Refinery. Could I ask the Taoiseach whether it is intended to produce, before the summer recess, legislation to this effect? If the answer is yes will he assure the House that the passage of any such legislation will not be accompanied by consequential rises in the cost of oil products to consumers?

We will shortly be moving the order for the Second Stage for this legislation.

That is not a Bill to take over the Whitegate Oil Refinery. It is merely a Bill to control the distribution of oil products which is a different thing. Will legislation to control the Whitegate Oil Refinery be enacted before the summer recess?

This is the only legislation that will be enacted before the summer recess.

That is to control the distribution of products?

What about legislation to control the Whitegate Oil Refinery? The Government are not introducing legislation to take over the Whitegate Oil Refinery but only to affect oil coming out of Whitegate. It is not the Bill to take over the refinery.

This is the only legislation which will be enacted before the summer recess.

I am seeking to raise on the Adjournment Debate the proposed implementation of a three-day week at Irish Steel.

I will communicate with the Deputy.

When the Minister for Finance is concluding the Finance Bill tonight will he indicate to the House what agreement he has come to with The Workers' Party tail that is now shaking the Fianna Fáil dog and if he will let us know what changes will be introduced on Committee Stage of the Finance Bill?

The form of Deputy Barry's statements seems to have induced silence on the part of the Tánaiste. There is a serious intent behind the question, given that the Finance Bill departs so radically from the budget. If it is proposed to have further departures, it is important that the House be informed of this in the concluding speeches tonight. Would the Tánaise indicate if there is an intention to introduce further amendments?

The main thing about tonight is that the Fine Gael Party by their amendment propose to throw the finances of this country into chaos and to add £307 million to the public budget deficit.

Could I ask the Taoiseach if the Minister will indicate tonight if there are further changes proposed in the budget introduced last month?

I suggest the Deputy waits to hear what the Minister has to say. He will also deal with the irresponsible proposals of the Fine Gael Party to add £307 million to the budget deficit in an effort to secure——

(Interruptions.)

It is not in order to discuss that Bill now.

Could I ask the Taoiseach if the reason the Minister is not able to tell us about the changes is that negotiations with The Workers' Party have not concluded?

I want to suggest that this is an entirely new departure in parliamentary procedure——

It is indeed.

(Interruptions.)

Could we have a little order, please? The Deputies have all day to discuss that Bill.

You are clear that Fine Gael want to add £307 million to the budget deficit.

I know you will not be misled by that. The nature of our amendments speak for themselves and they do not do anything of the kind.

During the election campaign in February, the Taoiseach, through his representatives in the area, gave an undertaking that no jobs would be lost at the Clondalkin Paper Mills. Since his election as Taoiseach he has given a firm date on which the mill would reopen. That date has now passed. Could I ask the Taoiseach what the position is with regard to Clondalkin Paper Mills and when the necessary legislation of the Government's intention to take over the mill will come before the House? Will he or Deputy Reynolds make a statement to the House to clarify matters.?

That is more relevant to a Question on the Adjournment and there are other ways of raising it.

The question raised relates to intending legislation to take over the mill and it is entirely appropriate that it should be raised on the Order of Business. When are we to have this legislation?

Legislation is required to take over the mill at Clondalkin. Surely the Taoiseach has made some arrangements by now. Obviously the undertakings that were given to which I referred were given without any investigation whatsoever of the position of the Clondalkin Paper Mills. Surely the Minister has now discussed it with someone and there must be some plans to bring it before this House. Could we be told when it will be brought before the House or if a firm date has been arrived at for the mill to open.

I agree with my colleague, because a firm commitment was given that the Clondalkin Paper Mills would be open and in operation by 9 June and, if necessary, they would be nationalised. Clearly, nothing has happened. The mills were not opened in accordance with the Government's undertaking and the least we can expect is that a nationalisation Bill would be finalised. It is a matter for the Taoiseach or the Minister to indicate when that Bill will be published.

I have had no notice of any intention to raise this matter. I can only deplore this continual erosion of the standards——

Hear, hear.

(Interruptions.)

In my experience it has always been the procedure that if Deputies wished to raise a matter of this sort, notice should be given to the Ceann Comhairle and the Taoiseach. However, the position in regard to Clondalkin Paper Mills, as the Deputies who are asking these questions know, is that I have arranged to meet all Deputies of both constituencies at an early date as soon as the Minister for Industry and Energy returns from the US where he is on an IDA promotion tour to discuss the situation fully and indicate to them the Government's plans.

This is the first time I knew that I had to give notice to the Taoiseach but I already gave notice to the Tánaiste when I raised this matter on Friday last and he was not willing to answer. Surely he must have since reported to the Taoiseach or the Cabinet he was representing in this House. The Taoiseach's reply is most unsatisfactory. It is the first I have heard of any arrangement to meet the Deputies from either constituency. I thought the Taoiseach might have gone a little further today and give some indication as to when the mill might open. The workers in the area are now having meetings among themselves considering what further action they will take. The Taoiseach knows that he was responsible for the workers withholding a document which they indicated they would release prior to the by-election in west county Dublin and he personally arranged to meet them in the area on one of his visits ——

We cannot have a speech on the matter. I am trying to facilitate the Deputy but he cannot hold up the House unnecessarily.

Can the Taoiseach now give an indication as to when the mill will open or what new date is now being aimed at to have the mill reopened? Will he indicate how many jobs will be lost?

This is more pertinent to a Question on the Adjournment. The Deputy has been given an answer and we will have to leave it at that.

The Taoiseach seems to be evading this question by referring to discussions with Deputies in the constituencies. As a Deputy from a rural area I think this is a matter of national concern and as a Member of this House I am entitled to know what is happening in this area just the same as any other Member.

Could I ask the permission of the Chair to raise the matter on the Adjournment?

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

The question to the Taoiseach related to legislation because clearly nationalisation requires legislation and the Taoiseach is aware that there is no provision for such legislation in the programme submitted to us for the remainder of the session. Would the Taoiseach accept therefore that there is no intention of taking any action on this matter until next October and that the promises made are obviously not being taken any way seriously by the Government?

I do not accept the suggestion and I want to make it clear to the House that the Government undertakings in regard to Clondalkin Paper Mills will be honoured in full.

They have been dishonoured for ten days.

May I ask the Taoiseach seriously if he is not satisfied that the display in the past few months in relation to issues like Clondalkin Paper Mills and his comment just now that he proposes to honour in full the various commitments he has given to the workers in Clondalkin is an absolute disgrace? It is a disgrace that Irish industrial workers should be used in the manner of a pawn and in an outrageous way in which the future lives of these workers should be treated as a political game and statements made this morning by you that the commitments given in public will be honoured such as nationalisation and continued employment for 480 people, when you know perfectly well that there is no way in which you can deliver——

The Deputy must address the Chair.

It is outrageous that you should behave in this manner and you are continuing to do it.

That is a statement not a question.

I am sick and tired——

You probably are but the Deputy must restrain himself.

—— listening to this kind of thing.

The Deputy must restrain himself.

On a point of order, it is an outrage that parliamentary democracy in relation to industrial employment, in relation to redundancy

Where is the point of order?

—— should be abused in this manner.

Where is the point of order?

I think it is time that you either had a general election or resigned from the House.

Deputy Taylor has asked that the matter be raised on the Adjournment.

The key point of the issue was this. The Taoiseach has referred to meeting Deputies on some future occasion but here we are talking about the Order of Business and the key issue is not a matter of meeting Deputies but of asking the Taoiseach when he is publishing this nationalisation Bill because the date has already gone by. It is not a matter of the Taoiseach saying that he will comply with the commitments and promises given——

He has no intention of doing it. It is all bloody cod.

The point is that he has already failed to do that because 9 June was the key date and he knows that. We just want the answer to one question: When will the nationalisation Bill be published?

Never. They have no intention of doing it.

(Cavan-Monaghan): May I suggest to the Taoiseach that his election pigeons are coming home to roost in great numbers and the only way he would appear to be able to dispose of them would be to have another general election.

Deputies

Go now.

I do not see any smiles up there for that.

(Cavan-Monaghan): The only man in the Government lobby who seems to be enjoying himself is Deputy George Colley.

I think there are a few more.

I have a feeling that this feigned outrage and indigation by Deputies, particularly Deputy Desmond, arises from the fact that the Coalition Government failed to grapple with the problem of Clondalkin Paper Mills.

(Interruptions.)

It is absolute rubbish and cod.

Would Deputy Desmond please restrain himself?

On a point of order, will the Taoiseach not accept——

Is that a point of order?

On a point of order, I reject and I resent very much that the Taoiseach continues to play games——

That is not a point of order.

(Interruptions.)

I suggest that the only games being played in this House——

(Interruptions.)

Let us have a little order. The Taoiseach has offered to reply.

The only games being played in this House are being played by the Opposition parties with the jobs of these workers. They kept the workers and their representatives traipsing in and out of this House over a period of six months. We have given a firm commitment in regard to the opening and continued operation of Clondalkin Paper Mills——

From 9 June.

—— and that commitment will be honoured unlike the situation with our predecessors who did nothing about this problem. Out of my unfailing courtesy to Members of the House I offered to meet all the Deputies from both constituencies to discuss the situation fully with them and I propose to keep that promise.

Will the Taoiseach accept that the failure to put such a measure forward in the legislative programme for this session means that such a measure cannot now be enacted before November and that consequently there is no prospect of the factory being reopened as a nationalised factory before then and that the Taoiseach's promise that it would reopen by 9 June will be in default by at least six months even if he proceeds? Does he accept that that is factually the position?

I was responsible with Deputy O'Leary while he was Tánaiste for the Clondalkin negotiations. The Taoiseach has misled the House in what he has said concerning the negotiations that were being pursued by the last Government.

Mr. McMahon rose.

We cannot have a debate on this matter but I will allow Deputy McMahon to ask a final question.

For the past ten minutes I have been trying to ask a question and I was the one who raised the matter in the first place. May I suggest that not only is the Taoiseach misleading the House but that what he has said is untrue? He cannot honour the undertakings given to the workers in this case since one of those undertakings was that the mills would open on 9 June. We all know that has not happened. The workers, the public representatives and all the people in the area who are concerned about this matter are entitled to an explanation but there has not been any utterance either from the Taoiseach or from the Minister. Because of the unsatisfactory nature of what we might call the debate here this morning I wish with your permission to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

On a point of order, I have suggested to the House that the Taoiseach has mislead the House and Deputy McMahon has said that the Taoiseach has lied.

What was that comment?

Deputy McMahon did not say that.

The House is entitled to be told the truth at some point and I suggest that the Taoiseach put the record straight about the negotiations that were pursued not only by the last Government but by this Government.

That is not a point of order.

The Taoiseach has misled the House.

The Taoiseach has said that Deputies from the two constituencies have been invited to meet him but, like Deputy McMahon, this is the first I have heard of any such invitation. Therefore, to that extent the Taoiseach has misled the House.

I indicated to the representative of the workers, and I asked my office to communicate to the Deputies from both constituencies, that I would meet them at the earliest possible moment. I am sorry if Deputy Mitchell has not received notice of that yet. I took that action yesterday evening.

(Cavan-Monaghan): Is the Taoiseach blaming the civil servants again?

(Interruptions.)

I am calling Item No. 2. Fuels (Control of Supplies) Bill, 1982: Order for Second Stage.

I move: That the Second Stage be ordered for Tuesday next subject to agreement with the Whips.

Deputy Hussey rose.

I am sorry but we have gone on to the next item.

This is very annoying.

Deputy FitzGerald is annoyed with me because I have moved on to the next business but we cannot have a full debate on a matter on the Order of Business.

Deputy Hussey has been waiting to raise a matter on the Order of Business.

It is too late now.

I rose twice during the previous exchanges and having waited for that matter to conclude there is another matter that I wish to raise on the Order of Business.

I have moved on from the Order of Business.

That is because you did not listen to me.

I am trying to listen to everyone.

I am in a similar situation in that I have been trying since 10.40 to raise a matter on the Order of Business. I am referring to a matter that is on the Order of Business and which is of great importance. How can the Order of Business be concluded when this matter has not been dealt with?

Members took the opportunity of having a debate on the matter. That is an abuse of the Order of Business.

I am trying to raise a different matter. What are the Government's intentions in regard to fulfilling the undertaking given to the House last evening in Private Members' Time to develop and maintain the Ardmore film studios? In view of the fact that the original announcement of closure was when the Dáil was in recess but that on this occasion the Dáil is sitting, can the Taoiseach indicate to the House when the Government intend fulfilling the undertaking given last evening?

It is another can job.

It is not relevant to the Order of Business.

Deputy Desmond knows the answer to everything. One can only wonder why he bothers to ask any question.

What action is it proposed to take to fulfil the undertaking given last night? We are entitled to hear the Taoiseach's answer as to what action the Government intend taking in this matter in the next couple of weeks.

That is not on the Order of Business. There are means of asking that question.

I am asking on the Order of Business what action the Government propose to take by way of legislation or otherwise to implement the undertaking given last evening. That is a perfectly legitimate question.

It may be perfectly legitimate and it will be dealt with in due course but it is not appropriate to the Order of Business. I might remark that the Opposition are turning the Order of Business into a farce.

The Taoiseach is caught in a quagmire of his own false promises. He was the one who turned the country into a farce.

In view of the continuing dispute in the courts and since barring and protection orders are not available to the most vulnerable and weakest members of society, would either the Taoiseach or the Minister for Justice make a statement as to what steps they propose to take to bring about a situation in which the courts will function as they should be functioning?

Again, this is a matter that can be raised on the Adjournment or, if of sufficient urgency, can be raised by way of Private Notice Question.

I wish to give notice of my intention to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

In view of the continuing dispute between water bailiffs and the board of conservators and the Department of Fisheries and Forestry, I wish to give notice of my intention to raise this matter on the Adjournment.

The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.

On a point of order, last week I raised a very serious matter relating to a number of people in County Donegal who are not in a position to obtain council loans as a result of the Government not having made the money available to the local authority. There is £500,000 involved. Before the Minister concludes his speech this evening would be indicate whether this money will be made available to Donegal County Council?

That matter was raised on the adjournment the other evening. The Deputy may not pursue it again now. He got a reply.

I have not had a reply. There are at least 120 families in County Donegal who are affected by this lack of finance.

The matter can be raised on the Finance Bill.

I am asking that the Minister for Finance indicate, before concluding this evening, whether the necessary money will be made available.

The Deputy may make such a statement on the Finance Bill.

I am giving the Minister advance warning of my intention to raise the question.

Top
Share