I wish to raise on the Adjournment the question of the closure of Kilrush Pottery which is dealt with on Question No. 452 on the Order Paper. There are two questions dealing with industries which were closed down in County Clare but the Order Paper distinguishes between the two industries and I wish to raise the question of the Kilrush plant the closure of which has had a devastating effect in that case.
Business of Dáil.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment this evening the position in relation to the unemployed people in Tallaght who had to queue at the Garda station yesterday until 7.30 p.m. to register for unemployment benefit. This is a very serious matter and I do not want these people to have to endure this further humilitation next week. I am disappointed that my Private Notice Question was disallowed.
The Deputy may make a minor speech but we do not have to enlarge on it. The Chair will communicate with Deputy Harney.
On a point of order, Deputy Seán Walsh and myself put down a question on the problem at Tallaght yesterday. Why was the question disallowed having regard to the urgency of the situation?
In accordance with normal practice the Private Notice Question was considered and ruled out because it did not meet the criteria set down for Private Notice Questions. My private secretary conveyed the reason to Deputy O'Hanlon.
I was told that it did not meet the criteria but I was not told what criteria it did not meet.
We cannot have a discussion on it now. If the Deputy wishes he could have an oral answer to that Question next Tuesday. The Deputy should consider an oral answer. I am now calling Item No. 7.
Before we resume the Finance Bill I would be grateful if the Chair would clear up the question of times. We are due to finish Part I of the Bill sometime this evening.
That must be a gentleman's agreement.
Is not the time 14½ hours?
An order of the House was made by agreement yesterday that the Committee Stage would conclude by 4 p.m. on Friday and that is the only arrangement of which the Chair knows.
The Chair has not then taken any notice of the time allocation for the different parts. Section 46 should be finished by——
By 11.30 p.m. tomorrow.
That would include amendment No. 54 which is the last amendment.
On sections 1 to 46 the question will be put at 11.30 p.m. tomorrow.
In other words, amendment No. 54 must be dealt with by 11.30 p.m. tomorrow. Reverting back to what I said this morning about the circulation of amendments, the Chair is aware that we had an additional amendment circulated this morning. That has now been withdrawn and a subsequent amendment has now been circulated. Dealing with this Finance Bill is like trying to build a house on shifting sand because the Government keep changing their position.
We will go on to section 7 of the Bill.
I must make the Chair aware that there is a new amendment No. 38 before the House, in case the Government did not tell him. The Government circulated an amendment No. 38a. This morning they have withdrawn that and have just now circulated a new version.
There is nothing the Chair can do about that.
Would the Chair consider reprimanding the Minister?
I would not reprimand the Deputy if he were in order.
It is unprecedented.
It is not unprecedented, it is a procedure that is not unknown in the consideration of Finance Bills.
One thing is clear and that is that the more we encroach on the time for debating the less time we will have to debate the Bill.
As far as I know this deals with stock relief and millions of pounds of taxation could be at stake. No later than this morning the Minister circulated amendment No. 38a purporting to deal with this question. This afternoon the Minister has withdrawn that amendment and brought in a new version. If the Government do not know their minds from morning to afternoon I suggest——
(Interruptions)
The Leader of the Opposition can leave to me to know whether I know my mind or not. The Leader of the Opposition made the point this morning that he would have wished to have more time to discuss amendments and sections in the Bill with people outside of the House. I presume he wished that so as to be better informed and if necessary put forward amendments. It is not at all unprecedented to do this.
I have only now heard from the leader of our party about this new amendment. Deputy Haughey has only just got notice of it while those of us involved in the debate, except the Minister, have no knowledge of what was proposed at lunchtime. Will the Minister suggest how people representing the Opposition can possibly know the current situation if while we are debating here new amendments are submitted?
If I can get section 7 under way——
On a point of order, does the Minister intend to introduce further amendments to this Bill before the end of the Committee Stage and if so how many?
I will not give any such undertaking. I appreciate that the Opposition have a difficult job and I will facilitate them to the greatest possible extent. I am following precedent—I am choosing my words carefully—in that I am doing nothing unprecedented in circulating further amendments while the debate is in progress.
Circulating further amendments is bad enough. Normally when a Committee Stage is in progress only technical amendments intended as drafting amendments are circulated, drafting amendments which are intended to clear up doubts. The Minister has already brought forward amendments of a substantial nature and with far-reaching implications.
If that was not bad enough, he sent around a new amendment this morning of very considerable import. He has now withdrawn that and substituted an amended amendment for it. That is going a bit far. Whatever about circulating additional amendments during the course of Committee Stage, he is now circulating an amendment and then withdrawing it and circulating another on the very same point. I do not think that is being very fair or helpful to the parliamentary procedure.
The Minister can be assured that there is no precedence for that.