It is proposed to take Nos. 3, 4 and 11.
Order of Business.
I wish to tell you, Sir, that my party has formally requested the Government for Government time for a debate on the implications of the "Today Tonight" programme of last night on the adequacy of banking supervision arrangements in Ireland and the adequacy of the resources available to the fraud squad for the speedy conclusion of investigations. I wish to ask the Taoiseach if he is yet in a position to indicate when or whether such time will be made available.
The matter to which the Deputy has referred has no relevance to the Order of Business today and I cannot and will not allow any discussion on the matter.
I am merely asking, Sir.
That may be so, but there are procedures for asking questions in this House.
It may be that the Taoiseach is in a position to give an answer to this serious request. Perhaps he could give an indication.
A Cheann Comhairle, the dogs in the street are discussing the issues, but we in the Dáil are muzzled.
Deputy O'Keeffe, I have ruled on the matter.
I rise in support of the request made by Deputy Bruton. I believe the Taoiseach should make a statement and say if time is going to be made available. Very serious allegations were made last night on the "Today Tonight" programme. I believe this House should deal with them as a matter of urgency. I would ask the Taoiseach to state that time will be available today if possible.
I rise also to show that there is unanimity of voice and concern that there appears to be scope within investigative journalism to establish facts that cannot be acted upon within the House.
Deputy McCartan also knows full well that there are procedures in this House for dealing with such matters. It is not in order.
I said that a formal request had been made by my party.
That may be so. Can we proceed to the Order of Business proper?
The Taoiseach may want to answer.
That is not likely.
I would like to raise on the Adjournment the crisis for applicants for local authority housing in Dublin City where last year only six houses were built by Dublin Corporation.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
(Limerick-East): On a matter of legislation, a Bill abolishing Fóir Teoranta was circulated last week without an explanatory memorandum. Is this to be a precedent and a departure from the usual practice of circulating Finance Bills with explanatory memoranda?
I got the Bill myself in the post but I did not pay particular attention to the fact that there was no explanatory memorandum. Explanatory memoranda are not always circulated with Bills but I will look into the matter.
Prior to the dissolution of the last Dáil, the Second Stage of the Shannon Estuarial Authority Bill had been taken. Will that Bill be reintroduced?
What is the Deputy asking?
I would like to know if the Taoiseach and Deputy O'Malley have sorted out their problems in regard to it and if it will be reintroduced.
There are no problems.
Deputy O'Malley voted against it last May.
I wish to raise on the Adjournment the question of the summary deportation of a doctor from Galway in the last two weeks and the urgent need to address his return to this country.
I will communicate with the Deputy.
On the Order of Business, will the Taoiseach arrange not to take the Bill abolishing Fóir Teoranta here in the House until such time as the Special Committee on the Companies Bill has had an opportunity of considering the proposed alternative arrangements for company rescue which have not yet been discussed in any form before that committee.
No.
Would the Taoiseach agree that it would be foolish to proceed with the Fóir Teoranta abolition until an opportunity has arisen to demonstrate what I believe will be the case, that the company rescue provisions of the Companies Bill are totally unworkable?
The Deputy will have an opportunity to say that on the Bill.
Is it not the case that the Bill, being a short Bill, could go through this House and become law before the Companies Bill becomes law?
This should not give rise to argument or debate now. Deputy Ivan Yates has been offering.
(Interruptions.)
I would like to ask the Taoiseach about the serious situation in relation to when amending legislation will be taken to the Clinical Trials Act, 1985. Is he aware that a consultant treating AIDS patients has said that they cannot administer the latest drugs because of the present Act and that these patients have to go to England to get this new drug, DDI? Will the Taoiseach bring this legislation into the Dáil in this session?
Is this legislation promised?
It is promised.
The Chair is glad to hear an affirmative note on that one.
It will be taken very shortly. I thank Deputy Yates for reminding me about it.
I seek to raise on the Adjournment the subject matter of remarks attributed to the managing director of the IDA about the priority listing for industry in Tuam and whether the Taoiseach is aware that it would appear Ballina got greater priority than the town of Tuam——
The Deputy need not elaborate now. I will communicate with him.
Will the Taoiseach or his acting Minister for Agriculture and Food make a statement to reassure the staff working in Teagasc that the demoralisation——
That matter does not arise now, Deputy Ferris. You will have to pursue it through the normal channels in this House.
Perhaps the Taoiseach will reply to reassure the staff.
I seek to raise on the Adjournment the need for a site and a new school for Fingal community college.
(Interruptions.)
I will communicate with the Deputy. Hope springs eternal.
They will be past school going age by the time he gets it.
May I ask the Taoiseach or the Minister for Health if it is intended to bring in amending legislation to give effect to the decision taken with one stroke of a pen to abolish health advisory committees which were set up under the 1970 Health Act and adopted——
I am afraid it does not arise now.
I would like to raise on the Adjournment the proposed go slow in Ennis General Hospital which is to commence next Monday.
I will be in touch with the Deputy concerning that matter.