It is proposed to take Nos 2, 11, 12 and 13. By agreement, the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach shall be called on to conclude the debate on No. 2 not later than 6.45 p.m. and proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion not later than 7 p.m. by one question which shall be put by the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments include only those amendments in the name of the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach. Private Members' Business shall be No. 78.
Order of Business.
Are the arrangements for disposing of item No. 2 agreed?
No.
I am taking the motion as proposed by the Taoiseach and I am now calling on Deputy Mac Giolla to speak to it.
I am objecting to this procedure whereby the words, "by agreement are used at the outset of what is a guillotine procedure. The motion represents a major change in Standing Orders in relation to that most vital aspect of business, Question Time, which is the only time in the House, apart from budget day, when the Public Gallery is likely to be full.
This item proposes to alter Question Time fundamentally, to make a major change of a most undemocratic nature. The use of the guillotine is perhaps an appropriate undemocratic and jackboot method of pushing through this undemocratic change. On behalf of The Workers' Party I must object to this guillotining of an item to which we have tabled 29 amendments. We have not played any part in this motion being brought before the House. We were not advised of it at any stage. Even when the Committee on Procedure and Privileges reached their decision regarding this change, that decision was not conveyed to us. A week or so ago you advised me that the decision could not be communicated to anyone other than members of the committee but apparently news of the decision was available to members of the press and to practically everybody in the House but ourselves.
What is being proposed is an attempt to prevent us from moving the amendments we have tabled to the motion and from demonstrating the point that the change is a drastic and most undemocratic interference with the rights of Members of the House. If the House agrees that there shall be no amendments other than those set down by the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, who of course has no amendment to put down, we will be specifically pushing the motion through but not allowing any amendment to be voted on. Only a minority of Deputies make use of Question Time but I trust that those who are in that category would support us in the amendments we are attempting to have accepted. Specifically what I am objecting to now is the guillotine or the jackboot method of the Taoiseach, obviously with the agreement of the Leader of the Opposition, to have the motion accepted. Since we are told that there has been agreement on this matter, it is obvious that both Government and the main Opposition agree that the motion should be put through the House as rapidly as possible, with a minimum of fuss and without allowing opportunity for voting on amendments. The attitude is, "let us hope it will not be noticed. Then we will have total control again of the proceedings and will silence all opposition".
I am calling on the Minister of State to conclude and as no other Deputy is offering I will then put the question.
Dún Laoghaire): I reject the accusation that the proposal in regard to the motion is in any way undemocratic or designed to silence any Deputy. The whole purpose of the changes being proposed is to assist Deputies in putting questions to Ministers on a more regular basis. That could not be deemed in any way to be undemocratic. Anyone who reads the motion will find that there is no reduction in the amount of time being allocated to Question Time. On the contrary, the Government have decided to extend Question Time by 15 minutes.
I suggest that a three and a half hour debate on any item is generous. It is a matter for the Deputy concerned and for the Chair to decide on the way in which the amendments will be taken. The wording used in proposing a limited debate on this motion is the standard wording in these cases. We will be representing the motion to the House and hoping that any Deputy who wishes to contribute will do so. There is no question of trying to push the motion through the House. I reject totally the allegation that we are behaving in a totally undemocratic fashion. When we are speaking to the motion, I shall deal with the other aspects of Deputy Mac Giolla's remarks.
Can either the Chair or the Minister of State outline the order in which the amendments we are suggesting will be taken? I ask the question because it has a bearing on the motion before us.
I will clarify that matter for the Deputy when we are on the motion.
I am putting the question: "That the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach shall be called on to conclude the debate on Item No. 2 not later than 6.45 p.m. and the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion not later than 7 p.m. by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall in relation to amendments include only amendments set down by the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach."
Vótáil.
Will deputies supporting a division please rise in their places.
Deputies Blaney, Tomás Mac Giolla and Proinsias De Rossa rose.
As fewer than ten Deputies have risen, in accordance with Standing Orders I declare the motion carried. The names of those supporting a division will appear in the Journal of the proceedings of the Dáil.
I wish to raise the question of Anne Maguire on the Adjournment. The question number is 329 on the Order Paper.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Will the Minister for Finance consider making a statement elaborating on the statement reported to have been made in the Seanad in relation to the termination of limited partnerships?
That does not arise.
It does. It was in a debate which took place in the House. We spent three weeks on it.
If the Deputy thinks about it he will realise it does not arise on the Order of Business.
In deference to this House where the debate was conducted will the Minister——
The Deputy should get the Whip of his own party——
In view of the reaction and concern, particularly in the film industry, would the Minister feel disposed to make a clarifying statement here when he speaks about introducing legislation which will have a retrospective effect? The Minister owes it to the House and the people.
My Private Notice Question on the incident in Athlone this morning regarding the Asahi train has been disallowed on the grounds that it lacked urgency. I accept your decision although I disagree with it. I wish to raise this matter on the Adjournment as it was an extremely dangerous situation.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the question of the staff of The Irish Press who have not received payments from the employment exchange and who have not received anything from the Eastern Health Board.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Will the Minister for Communications say why he has refused permission to RTE to introduce a new transmitter in the Cork area which would improve stereo VHF reception and would allow Cork local radio to broadcast more satisfactorily? This decision is against the best interests of RTE——
The Deputy has obviously overlooked the Chair's ruling on several occasions.
I plead on behalf of the people of Cork for a debate on this matter because the Minister for Communications has discriminated against the people of Cork by preventing the use of stereo by a very efficient Cork local radio station. I demand that this matter should be debated.
The Deputy cannot demand——
I request that there should be a debate on this matter.
Your request is regretfully refused.
May I raise it on the Adjournment?
I will communicate with the Deputy.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the increased charges for the attendance of customs officers at land frontier posts outside normal working hours for the clearance of merchandise.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
Would the Taoiseach, or someone on his behalf, make a statement to the House on whether Members of the Government or Ministers of State have been nominated to fill vacancies in the forthcoming local elections and the propriety of such a procedure?
I cannot allow that on the Order of Business.
This matter raises a very urgent constitutional point in that Members of the Government——
The Deputy will have to resume his seat.
(Interruptions.)
I cannot hear Deputy Lenihan but he is being disorderly.
Perhaps the answer is that the Government do not expect to be in office for much longer. Could I raise on the Adjournment the question I referred to the Minister for Finance?
I will communicate with the Deputy.
May I raise on the Adjournment the question of the loss of jobs, part time working and the threat to further jobs in the textile industry as a result of imported yarn used to manufacture Garda uniform material and curtaining for Beaumont Hospital?
I will communicate with the Deputy.