It is proposed to take business in the following order: Nos. 1, 33 and 2. Private Members' Business, No 53, motion No. 72, shall be taken between 7 p.m. and 8.30 p.m.
Order of Business.
We are not agreeing with the Order of Business. I do not propose to dwell on it at any length, but we were anxious that No. 33 should be taken first this morning, the Housing (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, 1985, Second Stage. That Bill has been before the Oireachtas since February. It deals with a very urgent social problem, namely, homeless persons. We do not award any particular priority to item No. 1, the Dublin Metropolitan Streets Commission (No. 2) Bill, 1986, because we feel that has been introduced for the purpose of gaining political kudos more than anything else. We are pressing the Government to take No. 33 first because there is a serious social problem, particularly in urban areas, in regard to homeless persons.
I have proposed business in this way, sharing the Opposition's concern to get rid of business as rapidly as possible. When we have dealt with No. 1 we should be able to get on with No. 33.
We cannot have a debate on this. I gather from what has been said that there have been discussions between the parties and that agreement on how the business should be taken has not been reached. In these circumstances the matter is governed by and I am bound by Standing Order No. 25 which reads:
Every sitting of the Dáil shall be governed by a printed Order Paper which shall be prepared under the direction of the Ceann Comhairle. The Taoiseach shall have the right to determine the order in which Government business shall appear on the Order Paper and, by announcement at the commencement of public business, the order in which it shall be taken each day.
The Deputy will see that the Chair is bound.
Our complaint is not with the Chair but with the Government. It is quite clear that if this Dublin Metropolitan Streets Commission piece of nonsense is taken first the Housing Bill will not be reached today. Am I right in thinking that the House has to agree to this Order of Business which is not in conformity with normal Standing Orders?
Standing Order No. 25 governs the matter. It is quite clear, but I will repeat the relevant portion of it:
The Taoiseach shall have the right to determine the order in which Government business shall appear on the Order Paper and, by announcement at the commencement of public business, the order in which it shall be taken each day.
So your ruling is that the matter is entirely one for the Government and that if the Government persist in this Order of Business that is the Order of Business. I would make one final point. I appeal to the Government, in the interest of homeless persons, to reverse the Order of Business and take No. 33 first. That is a suggestion to the Government and if they do not wish to take it that is not my fault.
I move:
That leave be granted to introduce a Bill entitled an Act to prohibit the entry into the State of vessels or aircraft carrying nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
Is the motion opposed?
(Interruptions.)
The motion is opposed and as it is——
I misheard you. We are not opposing the motion.
Deputy De Rossa's?
We are not opposing it.
The motion will go into Private Members' time for Second Reading. Is leave granted to introduce the Bill?
The Opposition have had no notice of this matter. Could you explain to the House what precisely will happen if this Bill is not opposed?
If leave to introduce the Bill is granted, the Bill will be printed and circulated and will go into Private Member's time for Second Stage.
Does that mean it will take a full two days of Private Members' time? How much of Private Members' time will it take?
When the Bill is taken it will be allowed six hours of Private Members' time.
If that is so, it will mean that two weeks of Private Members' time will be denied to the Opposition. Therefore, I have no option but to oppose the First Stage of this Bill.
It will be taken in Private Members' time.
This is an uniquely short term. The amount of time available for Private Members' time is——
As the Bill is now opposed, it will go into Private Members' time for First Stage.
I do not think you are correct. I understand it was the Government's position to oppose the Bill.
Any Member of this House can oppose it. Deputy De Rossa could oppose it if it was not his Bill.
Perhaps I could explain Standing Orders to Deputy Haughey. The allocation of time for Private Members' time is a matter for him and his party, not for me, or for you, or for the Taoiseach. Therefore, there is no reason for him to oppose the Bill unless he opposes its concept.
My position on the matter is quite simple. The amount of Private Members' time is strictly limited. It is the only opportunity the Opposition have to deal with urgent economic and social matters. I have no idea what is proposed in this Bill and I cannot at this Stage agree to six hours of Private Members' time in a very short session going to something I know nothing about.
It now goes into Private Members' time for First Stage.
I understand from previous replies in this House that it was proposed that Fridays would be set aside for Private Members' Bills. Could the Taoiseach indicate if that is to be the procedure during this session?
That matter is going to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
I did not hear that, a Cheann Comhairle.
That matter is going to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
I understand that it has already been before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and that there was a proposal before that committee——
We have dealt with this matter and the position is that the Bill will go into Private Members' time for First Reading.
Could I explain that the reason I did not oppose this Bill is that a practice has been established——
It cannot have been easy.
——of not opposing the First Reading of Bills. Whether they are taken in Private Members' time is a matter for the Opposition. Therefore, the procedure adopted by Deputy Haughey is superfluous to say the least.
The Bill will go into Private Members' time for First Reading.
Agreed and ordered accordingly.
It is most regrettable that the House does not have agreement on the Order of Business. It is most unusual and unfortunate. Could I ask the Taoiseach whether it is the Government's intention to conclude Item No. 53, Motion 72, at 8.30 p.m. this evening?
That is agreed.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment of the House the question of the provision of a new school at Drum, County Cavan.
I will communicate with Deputy Wilson.
I would like to refer to a report which appeared in the Sunday newspapers with regard to the reorganisation of Dáil committees. When these committees were first set up, they were set up by agreement following negotiations between the Opposition and the Government. Apparently, the Minister of State has had second thoughts about this procedure and in an interview with The Sunday Press he indicated that a document has been prepared for the Government which recommends abolishing all the existing House committees and reorganising the system in favour of three or four new committees. That is most unique.
The Deputy cannot deal with that matter in this way.
It is business of the House, a Cheann Comhairle. The committee structure——
It does not arise on the Order of Business.
It should arise now, a Cheann Comhairle, because the committee system has been put across as a very important part of Dáil reform. Now, the system is being abolished and we have not been consulted.
I am sorry Deputy; it does not arise.
If this legislation is passed, it can be raised here. Would this not be analogous to the promise of legislation to effect a major reform of Dáil procedure?
It would be a major extension of what can be raised on the Order of Business. It would obviously get out of hand if I allowed it.
As the Government propose to effect major reform in the committee structure of this House, in what way can we raise that with you?
The Deputy can put down a question in the ordinary way.
An ordinary question?
Yes.
I cannot raise it on the Order of Business. Therefore, the Minister of State can promise or threaten to abolish all the committees of this House and I am not in a position to ask the Taoiseach about the matter?
Not at this time, Deputy.
If I give you notice tomorrow morning, can I raise it on the Order of Business?
Not on the Order of Business. I have explained not once but on numerous occasions what may and may not be raised on the Order of Business. If everything that was sought to be raised on the Order of Business were allowed, the House would never get past the Order of Business.
I accept that, a Cheann Comhairle. You know we are always very attentive to your rulings on these matters but this is something slightly different. It does not come within the normal realm of our procedures. It is a purported proposal by the Government to abolish all committees of the House. Surely, there must be some way whereby I can ask the Government about the matter.
I would very much like to facilitate Deputy Haughey and I would like to facilitate the Opposition——
I know that.
——but I am certain as I can be about anything that, if I were to accede to this request, I would lose control of what may or may not be raised on the Order of Business and the House would not get past the Order of Business.
Let me make one final attempt to get this matter on deck. Through the Chair I should like to ask the Taoiseach if he will, now or tomorrow, make a statement about this very important matter of the procedures of the House.
I respectfully suggest that that be done through the Whips. That might lead to the Whips getting together again.
In view of the mood, the panic stricken mood the Government are in, and their bunker mentality, I suggest to the Chair that if he and I are not careful they may abolish the two of us.
There is the jolly old Constitution.
I wish to ask the Chair if I am in order in saying that in remaining silent in the face of unfounded accusations, as I am, I am obeying the Chair's ruling regarding being orderly.
I have ruled this out of order and I should like to ask everybody to co-operate with me.
Is it the intention of the Government to abolish the committees?
A Deputy
The Deputy will have to consult the colonel.
Are the Government having a little aberration?
We want to rename the People's Bureau.
That comment has come from Deputy Skelly's new friend.
I am very anxious to have the position in regard to the committee system clarified. Are we to take it that the committee system is totally irrelevant from today on?
I am not allowing any further discussion on this matter. I appeal to Deputy Brady to co-operate with me and I am sure that if the Whips get together they will solve the problem. They have solved bigger problems than this.
If they cannot agree on the Order of Business how can they agree on this?
I should like the permission of the Chair to raise on the Adjournment the continuing disputes in the postal services in Galway and Dundalk which are causing widespread disruption in the business life of those cities.
I will communicate with the Deputy.