It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 3, 4, 4a on the Supplementary Order Paper, 9 — all Stages, 1 — all Stages and 2 — all Stages. By agreement the proceedings on all Stages of No. 4a, if not previously concluded, will be brought to a conclusion at 6.30 p.m. by putting from the Chair one question which, in relation to amendments, will include only amendments set down by the Minister for Trade, Commerce and Tourism. Also, by agreement, there will be no Private Members' Business today.
Order of Business.
It is proposed to take Nos. 3, 4, 4a on the Supplementary Order Paper, 9 — all Stages, 1 — all Stages and 2 — all Stages. By agreement, the proceedings on all Stages of No. 4a, if not previously concluded, will be brought to a conclusion at 6.30 p.m. by putting from the Chair one question, which, in relation to amendments, will include only amendments set down by the Minister for Trade, Commerce and Tourism. By agreement, there will be no Private Members' Business today. Are the arrangements in regard to No. 4a on the Supplementary Order Paper, as outlined by the Taoiseach and as read out by me, agreed?
Is No. 4a the Insurance Bill?
Yes.
Our position on that Bill is that we have been asked by the Government as a matter of urgency and emergency, to facilitate its passage today. Naturally, we feel it is our responsibility to co-operate with the Government. Some Members of our party have expressed the wish that there would be more time devoted to Committee Stage of the legislation rather than a Second Stage type of debate. The situation is such that that arrangement would be more helpful to the House. Perhaps the Taoiseach or the Chief Whip would indicate that the House might give perhaps one hour to a Second Stage debate and perhaps two hours to Committee Stage?
Yes, whatever arrangement is the most acceptable to the Opposition. I should like to thank the Leader of the Opposition for the way he has acceded to our request with regard to the handling of this matter immediately and without hesitation when the issue arose. Obviously, we wish to facilitate the Opposition in any way possible within the limits of the time available.
, Dún Laoghaire): With regard to the question of time, from past experience we found that when we wrote something like that into the Order of Business it was too inflexible. While respecting the wishes of the Leader of the Opposition, I suggest we see how the debate goes and then, by agreement between the two Whips, we could reach a suitable compromise that would satisfy the Opposition.
Is the Minister for Trade, Commerce and Tourism agreeable?
I have no objection to the request. The only reservation I would have is that within the specified time it would be very desirable that I should at least be allowed some time to reply to the Second Stage debate.
First of all, it is agreed that all Stages be concluded by 6.30 p.m.?
We are giving three hours to it from 3.30 to 6.30. Perhaps it could be extended to 6.40 p.m.?
Is that agreed?
There is a problem. The other House has arranged to take the Bill at 7.30 p.m. This would rather foreshorten the interval.
If it goes through in the allotted time, so much the better.
All right.
I would prefer to have something hard and fast here.
Let us say 6.40 p.m. if necessary, but it may be concluded by 6.30 p.m. If it concludes a few minutes earlier that will be helpful.
It is also agreed that arrangements between the Whips will provide for a reasonable Committee Stage and, finally, it is agreed the Minister in charge will have 15 minutes to reply on the Second Stage. There is just one other thing. Are the arrangements with regard to Private Members' Time agreed?
Agreed.
On the Electoral Amendment Bill, we have agreed to all Stages. The first point I want to make is that I do not think we will be able to take all Stages today, but we, on reflection, would like to seek some time between the Second Stage and the Committee Stage. That can be discussed later.
I do not think the Order of Business provides that it will be concluded today.
, Dún Laoghaire): It is highly unlikely.
(Clare): I would like to ask the Taoiseach to clarify the position regarding the proposed official participation of our Defence Forces at Remembrance Day ceremonies in a few weeks' time as reported in The Irish Times of Saturday, 15 October.
I am sorry, Deputy, but that does not arise on the Order of Business.
(Clare): I am asking for clarification of something that should be regarded as of serious national importance. Surely I am entitled to clarification with regard to a newspaper report on this matter.
I appreciate the Deputy's object but, if that formula were to be accepted, it could subsequently be availed of to raise anything and everything on the Order of Business. I would like to facilitate the Deputy but I cannot do so. I am sorry.
(Clare): I can only assume the report is correct and senior officers and the Minister for Defence will be officially participating at this remembrance service, a remembrance service to do with two world wars, World War I and World War II.
The Deputy will have to find another way of raising the matter.
(Clare): We are a neutral nation and this is very serious.
(Interruptions.)
We have just arranged a very serious limited debate on a very important Bill.
This is serious too.
Yes, but it is not reasonable to intrude on the limited time in a disorderly manner. I do not use the word "disorderly" in an offensive way but to show that what the Deputy is doing now is not in accordance with Standing Orders or with precedence.
(Clare): I wish to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
That is all right.
I mentioned already — I do not think you heard me, a Cheann Comhairle — the question of the building of Navan General Hospital. I want to raise the matter on the Adjournment.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
In view of the growing unemployment and the state of crisis throughout the country, I have a motion on the Order Paper in my name relating to economic policy and the Government's failure to deal with the crisis. I just want to ask the Taoiseach if he will arrange for time to be made available for this discussion next week, if possible, because of its urgency.
That can be discussed between the Whips. There has been a request from the Opposition for a debate tomorrow on another matter in the names of Deputy Michael J. Noonan, Deputy Hugh Byrne and Deputy Michael D. Kitt and I think that also should be discussed between the Whips with a view to arranging for a debate. I mention it because it might be desirable that the debate would be on the negotiations generally because it is difficult to confine oneself to the one issue and the manner in which it should be discussed.
I can quite understand the Taoiseach and the Government would like to have time to prepare their position. In fact I would wish they would have time to formulate a clear and consistent policy. On that basis is the Taoiseach agreeable to having this debate next week in Government time?
We will certainly consider it and the Whips will discuss it. As you know, our policy is to try to facilitate the Opposition in matters of this kind.
When does the Tánaiste intend to introduce the building regulations?
I hope to have them before the House this session.
In view of the seriousness of the proposed closure of the Gaiety Theatre I would ask that the request from the manager for a subvention be given serious consideration and for the underwriting of a loan of £14,000 to keep the Gaiety open until after Christmas. The Gaiety is a historic building and its closure would be a tragedy.
We cannot discuss this on the Order of Business.
May I raise it on the Adjournment?
I will consider the matter.