It is proposed to take No. 16 and, subject to the appropriate order being made, the Unit Trusts Bill, 1990. It is also proposed, subject to the agreement of the House, that (1) business shall be interrupted at 11 p.m. tonight; (2) the order fixing the Committee Stage of the Unit Trusts Bill, 1990, for Thursday, 13 December, shall be discharged and the Committee and Remaining Stages shall be taken at 10 p.m. and, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 11 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 for Industry and Commerce and the order shall not resume. Private Members' Business shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. and shall be No. 28.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal for the late sitting tonight agreed? Agreed. Is the order for dealing with the Unit Trusts Bill satisfactory? Agreed. Is the proposal for concluding Second Stage of the Private Members' Business agreed? Agreed.
I wonder if it is possible for the Taoiseach, having read the papers this morning, to make up his mind and announce the appointment of a Minister for Defence?
What about the Deputy's Front Bench?
Has the Taoiseach reached the point where he could divest himself of responsibility for this Department and allow a full-time Minister for Defence to be appointed?
There is an element of repetition in this. That is a luxury we cannot afford on the Order of Business and I wish it were determined in another way.
My understanding is that we have a new system of dealing with the Order of Business which restricts matters which may be raised to a well defined list. Perhaps the Chair in his great wisdom and with his great parliamentary skill could persuade the new Leader of the Opposition that he does not really impress anyone by being grossly disorderly.
On a point of order, would the Chair not agree that the appointment of a Minister for Defence would require Dáil time because if the Taoiseach thinks that will be put through on the nod, he has another think coming. It is relevant to the ordering of Dáil business because this business must be taken if the Taoiseach intends to appoint a Minister for Defence. Having received no answer from the Taoiseach I will not pursue the matter in deference to the Chair.
There is a question appertaining to the matter in the name of the Deputy today.
Perhaps the Taoiseach might be able to make up his mind between now and Question Time. In respect of promised legislation, when is it proposed to introduce the Roads Authority Bill in view of the fact that we are spending £150 million on road building, a good portion of which is being wasted due to lack of proper co-ordination? This is money we will only get once from the EC.
The Deputy can ask a relevant question but there is no need for elaboration.
That legislation will not be taken this session. I am happy to see that the Leader of Fine Gael has acknowledged the fact that £150 million is now being spent on roads compared to the derisory £15 million which was spent while he was in Government.
The European Community is providing the money and the Government are wasting it.
The Government are trying to con the people.
On a previous occasion the Taoiseach indicated that he was willing to consider a debate on the Gulf and the implications for Ireland arising from the Security Council motion. Has he decided to allow a debate before the Dáil adjourns in view of the fact that a deadline has been incorporated into the motion and that this could mean the launch of hostilities against Iraq by the United States before the Dáil resumes?
I do not think this House has any control over the United States launching attacks on anyone. There is no time available. As the Deputy can see from the agreements the Whips made, we are sitting long hours in an endeavour to get through a necessary programme of legislation. There will not be time between now and Christmas for such a debate.
I suggest that as we are sitting on Tuesday and Wednesday next week it would not be a great inconvenience if we were to sit an extra day, on Thursday, to deal with this matter.
That is a matter for the Whips. We ought not to deliberate on it now.
I will try, on the Order of Business, to remain within the parameters set down by the Taoiseach. The Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 1990 which was agreed to be taken tomorrow has now been deferred. When will Committee Stage be taken or is it intended to abandon that and put a fresh Bill on the Order Paper? I ask so that those who are currently operating on the legislation that was enacted three years ago by this House will know how they stand.
Let me also, while I am on my feet, ask a question in relation to time. I agree there are a number of important issues, one of which is the GATT negotiations. Is it intended before the Dáil rises to afford the Minister for Industry and Commerce or the Minister for Agriculture and Food, or both, an opportunity next week to report to the Dáil on the progress to date on an issue which obviously has huge implications for Irish industry and Irish agriculture?
I do not want to reopen the wounds of yesterday but, as the Deputy knows, a rather unfortunate contretemps took place over the fisheries legislation. It was no fault of his. There was no fault here.
You are in better humour today.
The legislation, of course, will be continued with but, unfortunately, it cannot now be taken before the next session.
On the question of the GATT negotiations, I suggest to the Deputy that we have had a number of discussions about it and, as the Deputy knows, the whole process is now suspended until the New Year. I do not believe there is time for any further reports to the Dáil on it but perhaps we might be able to fit in something.
On the Order of Business, a Cheann Comhairle, I would like to ask the Taoiseach two things. First, I note from the schedule of the business for the week that the Exchange Control (Continuance) Bill, 1990 was due to be taken at 10 o'clock this evening. It does not appear on the Taoiseach's programme today. Would he kindly indicate when the Committee and remaining Stages of that Bill will be taken?
The second question I would like to ask the Taoiseach is, in view of the answer he gave to Deputy Howlin regarding the Fisheries (Amendment) Bill, 1990, would he indicate what, if anything, will be substituted for that Bill on Friday afternoon?
All stages of that Bill have been taken. The Exchange Control Bill finished last Friday.
On the Order Paper for some time there has been a second interim report of the Committee of Public Accounts on the Appropriation Accounts of 1987. Since we are moving towards 1991 I wonder would it be possible — I have raised it here a couple of times — to find even two hours to debate the matter before we go into the recess, even if it is done during a Wednesday sos? It has been on the Order Paper for some time and I have raised it here on a few occasions.
I doubt it but I will ask the Whips. We will keep it in mind.
In connection with the Environmental Protection Agency Bill which was circulated yesterday and which is being put before the Seanad initially, may I ask the Taoiseach and the Minister for the Environment if they anticipate that this Bill will be brought before this House in the next session and if they can indicate if there is some target date for the enactment of that legislation?
I would certainly hope it would be brought before this House next session. It is the intention to do that. The only target date I can suggest to the Deputy is that, subject to giving it the attention and discussion and detailed debate that it deserves, we would get it through as quickly as possible.
(Carlow-Kilkenny): The Taoiseach has said that this House has very little control over the United States. Would he have any plans to call in the Skibbereen Eagle once more to help us?
That is of no relevance.
Perhaps another poem from the Deputy might be in order on that matter.
I would like to ask the Taoiseach to think again about the possibility of discussing the Gulf crisis. It is very clear from the operation of the Order of Business this week and, one can anticipate, next week that some legislation may not take the time allocated. I very much agree with the suggestion which has been made that this House will not have resumed until after the crucial end date for the Iraq-United States talks, but also the deadline that has been set. I urge the Taoiseach to give serious consideration to allowing some time to discuss the present changes in the Gulf crisis.
That is a matter for the Whips.
Yes, but I think the Taoiseach's attitude to this would be important. The other point I wanted to raise was that in view of the widespread publicity and now the referral of conditions in our prisons, particularly Mountjoy, for consideration by Amnesty, I would like to ask the Taoiseach if the Minister for Justice is disposed towards allocating some period of time for discussing conditions in our prisons?
That matter is not relevant to the Order of Business, Deputy.
Apropos the points raised——
I was anticipating a reply to my first suggestion.
On the first matter raised by Deputy Higgins — perhaps the Taoiseach would reply to them both — would it be the case that the Taoiseach will be raising at the Rome Summit the deadline for the possible outbreak of hostilities in the Middle East and will there be an EC position over which he will, presumably, have some influence, if not over the US?
I was about to say in response to Deputy Higgins, even though he was totally out of order, the indications are that there will be a discussion on the Gulf crisis in Rome and if I am, as I hope, reporting to the House on the Rome Summit, perhaps it could arise in that connection.
I want your assistance on a certain matter. I had a question down to the Minister for Education yesterday which was only partially answered. I think it defeats the purpose of Question Time if the Minister can get away with that. I would like if you would study the question and the answer and take the matter up with the Minister.
I will ascertain if I have any function in the matter.
What do we do if a Minister is evading a question?
Deputy, you will have to find another way of dealing with that matter.
I would like to ask the Taoiseach and the Minister for Agriculture and Food if they have got any official confirmation from Brussels of the acceptance of Ireland's application for the extension of the disadvantaged areas; and when will the Minister set up a committee to deal with the thousands of disgruntled farmers throughout the country?
Deputy Sheehan, please desist.
Will you look for 100 per cent?
In regard to the Taoiseach's reference to the more restricted form of the Order of Business, would the Government Whip support the termination of the trial period of grievance time which has degenerated to farce, and a return to the orderly spontaneity that was the procedure previously?
These are matters that might be considered at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges.
My grievance is that Deputies on that side of the House are inclined to completely ignore the new arrangement we have made.
Because it is useless.
That is my particular grievance but I do not intend to raise it with you, a Cheann Comhairle.
Let me ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food when it is proposed to announce the new members of the Racing Board and if we will have legislation to amend the existing Act.
Apropos Item No. 8 on the Order Paper, that is the establishment of the Select Committee on Crime, in view of the fact that the Whips have collectively pursued this relentlessly week in and week out at Whips meetings, I would like to ask the Taoiseach if at this stage he will accede to our collective request that this committee be set up? When we had a previous committee there was agreement in relation to an Opposition chairman and there is agreement among all the parties that there would be an agreed Opposition chairman on this occasion.
The Deputy is misreading the situation. I am very anxious that that committee be set up. We had agreement which, unfortunately, broke down, but perhaps the Whips could get together again to discuss the matter.
I would like to make one point.
A brief point.
There is agreement among all Opposition parties that the Chair of this committee would go to the Labour Party, but we cannot get any agreement from the Government.
It is very simple to try to deprive the Government of their rights, but I want to assure the Deputy that with all the goodwill in the world we are not prepared to be deprived of our rights.
Dr. Woods was the chairman on the last occasion.
I am calling Deputy Mary Flaherty.
With the Child Care Bill finally passing through the House this week, have the Government made any progress on the preparation of a children's juvenile justice Bill which is also very necessary? Is it likely that we will see such a Bill in the House in the near future?
No particular promise was made in regard to that legislation.
Indications have been made in that regard.