This motion is to be taken without debate. Is that agreed?
Allocation of Time: Motion.
I have an amendment to the motion.
I have an amendment to the motion.
I move:
That, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders—
(1) the Dáil shall sit later than 9 p.m. on Tuesday, 25th October, and Wednesday, 26th October, and the hour at which business is to be interrupted on those days shall be 10.30 p.m.;
(2) in the case of the motion in the name of the Minister for Finance regarding the 1989 Estimates for the Public Services (Abridged Version) and the 1989 Summary Public Capital Programme, the following shall apply:—
(a) the speech of the main spokesperson for each of the groups (as defined in Standing Order 98 (1)) shall not exceed 40 minutes;
(b) the speech of each other member called on in the course of the debate shall not exceed 20 minutes;
(c) the Tánaiste shall be called on not later than 4.45 p.m. on Thursday next to conclude the debate; and
(d) the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 5 p.m. on Thursday next by putting from the Chair forthwith and successively the Question or Questions necessary to bring them to a conclusion."
I move amendment No. 1:
1. "(a) the speech of the Minister and of the main spokesperson for each party in Opposition shall not exceed 40 minutes;".
As the motion reads at present, it restricts the time available to The Workers' Party spokesperson to 20 minutes. As I have said many times previously, this is an unnecessary, a petty and a mean-minded approach to the allocation of time. I want to put it on record that every time such a motion is put on the agenda here in this way, this party will oppose it and will call votes on it, and the time lost in that way will more than exceed the extra 20 minutes which could have been given to us in the first place. I find it extraordinary that this arrangement to take this motion without debate, and the arrangement to restrict our speaking, was agreed by, apparently, all the Whips——
Deputy De Rossa—
I wish to make just one point.
(Interruptions.)
It must have been agreed by all of the party Whips, including the Labour Party Whip and that is quite extraordinary. I appeal to them in the interest of co-operation of the left——
Deputy De Rossa, resume your seat for a moment, please.
——to try to ensure that we get a fair hearing in this House.
Deputy De Rossa has a reputation here for proceeding in accordance with the rules and regulations—
Yes, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle but—
Deputy De Rossa, would you resume you seat, please?
I am tired of the attempts being made to gag me in this House.
I am not gagging you, but if you admit and advise the House that you were party to an arrangement whereby the motion would be taken without discussion, is it not rather remiss of you then, to proceed to discuss it?
That is the great mistake that is being made. This party do not participate in the meetings of the Whips because we are precluded from that. What I am saying is that all of the Whips of the other parties have agreed to this arrangement and that that is not a proper way to do the business of this House.
I am now putting the question: "That the paragraph proposed to be deleted stand."
Vótáil.
Will the Members who claim the division, please rise in their places?
Deputies De Rossa, Mac Giolla, McCartan and Sherlock rose.
As fewer than ten Deputies have risen, I declare the question carried.
Question declared carried.
The names of the Members dissenting will be recorded in the Journal of Proceedings of the Dáil.