It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 4, 13, 14 and 3. It is proposed that, in relation to the proposed Joint Committee on Building Land, business will be interrupted at an appropriate stage today to deal with the relevant message from the Seanad and to dispose of any consequent order which may arise. By agreement, the speech of every Member contributing to the Adjournment Debate should not exceed 30 minutes, except for the concluding speakers from each of the parties who shall be called on tomorrow as follows: The Workers' Party at 1 p.m., the Labour Party at 1.45 p.m., the Fine Gael Party at 2.30 p.m. and the Government speaker at 3.15 p.m.
Order of Business.
I would like to raise on the Adjournment the question of Deputy Mitchell's interference with the Garda. I want to know if this was the only time this has happened and also what the attitude of the Leader of the Opposition was to Deputy Mitchell when this disclosure was made?
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
I would also like to ask if the Leader of the Opposition stands over the expression used by Deputy Gay Mitchell that the Galway people were gombeen men?
This is not a matter for the Order of Business.
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Gay Mitchell accused the people of Galway of being gombeen men and the Leader of the Opposition apparently stands over this statement.
(Dún Laoghaire): I would like to put the Taoiseach and the Government on notice that, in view of the importance of the Social Welfare Bill, we will be seeking extra time as was agreed last Tuesday week, particularly as the Government want to take all Stages. Some of the time that is put aside for the Adjournment Debate will be used for the Social Welfare Bill as was agreed.
I have no objection in principle to that but the Whips can discuss the matter.
As there will be a lot of amendments on Committee Stage and as the Bill is an important one, it will require more time than two hours to debate it.
We have no objection in principle to taking time from the Adjournment Debate for the Social Welfare Bill.
Could the Chair and the House be notified?
You will be the first to know.
There is no set time for the Adjournment Debate, so the Order of Business can stand.
It is extremely unusual for an Opposition to allow time for an Adjournment Debate to be shortened in order to permit Government business to be done.
Will the Taoiseach arrange, before the Dáil rises tomorrow, for a statement to be made to this House by the Minister for Health on the sacking of Sister Stanislaus by the Minister from the South Eastern Health Board?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
Is it in order to ask for a statement?
And her replacement by a political appointee.
There are other means of raising this matter.
Would you suggest a Private Notice Question?
I would not suggest anything, but I will consider a Private Notice Question.
A serious situation has arisen with regard to CIE workers with long years of service who, after being on sick leave for six months, are forced to retire on reduced pension. This is happening very frequently and I want to know if it is the Government's intention to bring in a proper pension scheme and to rectify this situation where workers with 35 and 40 years' service are being forced to retire?
This does not arise on the Order of Business. Do you wish to raise the matter on the Adjournment?
I do.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
I gave the Taoiseach notice of my intention to raise this matter. When, if ever, are we going to take item No. 16 on today's Order Paper? It concerns motions by the Minister for Finance?
I do not know if it is a matter of any great significance or of parliamentary importance, but if it would make the Deputy feel better we could lump it in with the Adjournment Debate.
I think that would be the proper procedure.
I apologise for the inelegant phrase "lump it in" but the Deputy knows what I mean.
(Donegal South-East): I wish to raise on the Adjournment the question of Deputy Gay Mitchell calling someone in Galway a gombeen man which, in effect, is calling all the people of Galway and the west gombeen men?
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
Will it be possible for Deputies who do not want written replies and would like their questions left over until October — presuming that we still have the same Dáil in October——
I intended mentioning this at Question Time today.
Do you mind if I ask if Deputies who, as in my own case, wish their questions to be left over until October for oral reply will be accommodated?
Yes, this can be done. If any Deputy wishes to have his questions left on the Order Paper he must notify the General Office by 5 o'clock today.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the closure of Gerritsen Copper and Brass company factory in Carndonagh. I accept your ruling disallowing my Private Notice Question but in this instance the workers involved have been at a financial loss due to their cheques not being honoured in the banks and there is urgency in this matter. It is an unprecedented and unannounced factory closure.
The Chair will communicate with the Deputy.
(Dún Laoghaire): This is more sensible stuff than the gombeen men at the back.
(Interruptions.)
(Cavan-Monaghan): You are hoping it will take the Minister for Agriculture and let him drown himself over there.
(Interruptions.)
I wish, Sir, with your permission and the indulgence of the House, to raise on the Adjournment the matter I raised yesterday, namely, the reply by the Minister of State to the question I had about the application of the one in three rule in regard to the number filling the vacancies in the industrial section of the OPW.
Could the Taoiseach indicate whether it is his intention that the Minister for Agriculture will be present to answer questions?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
Questions are ordered from 2.30 p.m. to 3.30 p.m. and the first set of questions are to the Minister for Agriculture. Could the Taoiseach indicate whether the Minister for Agriculture intends being present to answer questions here today, in view of the fact that this is the last day questions will be answered in this session?
(Cavan-Monaghan): He has gone on holidays.
On a point of order, on the last two days, and on one occasion last week questions down to the Minister for Finance were answered by the Minister of State at the Department of Finance. At exactly the same time as questions were being taken here at 2.30 p.m. I was standing on my feet in the Seanad speaking on the Finance Bill going through that House on both those occasions. This week my absence was raised here by Deputies opposite, knowing well that I was present in the Seanad.
(Cavan-Monaghan): Surely this is not a point of order.
We have had a number of questions on it and we would like to have the matter clarified.
(Cavan-Monaghan): It may be a personal explanation——
For the legal mind of Deputy Fitzpatrick I will make it a point of order. I am sorry if it offends the Deputy. The point of order I raise is this. Does this House recognise that Ministers have responsibilities and duties to perform in the other House?
Is that where the Minister was when he should have been in Brussels?
When they are doing so are they not relieved from duties in this House and do not Ministers of State take their places? Has not this practice continued down the years in this House? I do not mind personally, but it is most unfair of Opposition Deputies to raise such a question when they know that at the very same time the Minister concerned was standing on his feet speaking in the Seanad.
I gave way to the Minister for Finance on what I understood was to be a point of order in relation to the answering of questions addressed to the Minister for Finance. I asked yesterday if it came to the turn of the Minister for Agriculture to answer questions if he would be present at any time during the remainder of Question Time. I asked whether he would be present for Question Time today and his Minister of State indicated that it was quite possible that he would be present today. In that event I asked that just one question would be postponed from yesterday for answer today to enable the Minister himself to answer it. I am merely asking if the Minister for Agriculture will be present today. If the Minister for Agriculture has a commitment in the Seanad, in view of my time there I would appreciate that entirely. If the Taoiseach indicates that the Minister for Agriculture will be engaged in the Seanad from 2.30 p.m. to 3.30 p.m. I will accept that entirely.
The manner in which the Government arrange replies to questions is entirely a matter for the Government. Deputies can be assured that questions will be fully and adequately answered.
Can the Taoiseach say that the Minister for Agriculture will be able to be present?
Perhaps Deputy Boland's memory is short, but I happened to be in this House in the period of the Coalition Government when Ministers of State answered questions for their Ministers without any objections from our side of the House.
I did not notice any objections. I merely asked——
(Interruptions.)
Order, please. Deputy Boland is asking a question.
I asked whether the Minister for Agriculture would be present in order to answer Question No. 1 on today's Order Paper. If he is not present then presumably it is because the Taoiseach has arranged for him to be away on more important duties than answering questions in the House and we can draw our own conclusions from that.
Have any arrangements been made regarding the Adjournment Debate in the order in which speakers will be called by the Chair? Some arrangement was enforced regarding the times at which speakers would be called to make closing speeches on behalf of their parties tomorrow afternoon but there are no arrangements in relation to the order in which speakers would be called from the various groupings in the House. In a recent debate here Deputies representing a group three in number were afforded virtually the same amount of speaking time as Deputies of this party who were in Opposition and represent 63. This is not acceptable from our point of view and the Chair will agree that it is not in the best interests of representation that a minority group would be afforded the same amount of speaking time as the main Opposition party.
The Chair tries to ensure a fair share of representation. I recall the incident. I thought they just offered and there was no one else at that time. I will endeavour to ensure proper representation and proper balance.
In proportion to the numbers in the House.
As a general principle the number of speakers in a debate of that kind should be broadly proportionate to the membership of the three main parties, but we would be happy to join with the other parties in ceding some of that time to ensure that Members get an opportunity to speak; otherwise they might be squeezed out altogether. We are happy with the practice of allowing Independents to follow on our party and we will be looking for three out of every eight speakers speaking to the House.
There was no Fine Gael Deputy in the House to speak on that occasion. That should be put on the record.
(Interruptions.)
On that matter I must also say that this mistake was my fault.
(Dún Laoghaire): You should ask Deputy Sherlock to withdraw that remark.
We must move on now to other matters.
(Dún Laoghaire): There were two Fine Gael speakers sitting in the House who did not take their turn as a result of an agreement entered into with the Ceann Comhairle at 6.08. I would ask that the Minister for the Environment refrain in future from abusing me in my absence regarding the carrying out of my duties.
Surely these are matters to be dealt with by the Whips and not ones that should be taking up public time in this way.
It is good that we have heard the argument so that we may be able to do something about it.
It may not suit the Government.
Last evening there were Deputies who sat here for the duration of the debate on the Local Government (Planning and Development) Bill but who were not called while at the same time other Deputies who did not have the courtesy to remain in the House during the debate came in towards the end and sought to be allowed to speak. That is a gross injustice to those who are prepared to sit here during a debate. Some of those Deputies who arrived late suggested that some of us curtail our contributions. Anybody who is sufficiently interested in a debate should be in the House to hear it.
Thank you, Deputy. I am calling the next item.
That is what happens when a Government rush through legislation.
(Interruptions.)