It is proposed to take Nos. 7, 20 and 21. It is also proposed, subject to the agreement of the House, that, (1) No. 7 shall be taken without debate; (2) the proceedings on the Second Stage of No. 20 shall be brought to a conclusion if not previously concluded at 12 noon today and the Minister for the Environment shall be called on to conclude the debate not later than 11.45 a.m.; (3) the proceedings on Committee and Remaining Stages of No. 20, and the Report and Final Stages of No. 21, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 1 p.m. and 3.45 p.m. respectively, by one question in each case which shall be put from the Chair, and which shall in relation to amendments, include only amendments set down by the member of the Government in charge of the Bill in each case and (4) at the conclusion of business today the Dáil shall adjourn until 10.30 a.m. on Tuesday, 18 December 1990.
Order of Business.
On item No. 4, in relation to next Tuesday's business——
I want to dispose of items Nos. 1, 2 and 3 and then I shall call the Deputy. In respect of No. 7 to be taken without debate, is that agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with Nos. 20 and 21 agreed? Agreed. On No. 4, Deputy Spring.
In relation to the proposal that the Dáil resume at 10.30 a.m. on Tuesday next and sit until 9.30 p.m. on that day, I suggest that because of the very dangerous road conditions around the country that are expected to persist for a number of days, it would be more sensible if the Dáil was to resume at 12 noon on Tuesday and sit until 11 p.m. that night. We would have the same amount of time and we could get our business done without having people on the roads very late on Monday night or early on Tuesday morning.
I appreciate what the Deputy has said but nobody could argue that 10.30 a.m. is too early. If we get sunshine as we did this morning all the ice and snow will have melted.
The Tánaiste is not taking this matter seriously. If we are to start at 10.30 a.m. many Members who have a four hours drive would have to be on the road at 5 a.m. or 6 a.m., and in these conditions that would be very stupid.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
Deputies lost their lives in car accidents.
I do not accept that we are treating this matter lightly. I am simply stating that there is a lot of business to be dealt with and the decision has been taken to start work at 10.30 a.m. on Tuesday. There is no lack of sensitivity to the difficulties of Deputies who have to travel long journeys.
There was in the Minister's first response.
Possibly, it would be better to travel the day before.
I am afraid there is no agreement on this matter.
I would be glad if the Tánaiste would reflect a moment on this matter. It is not a problem that particularly concerns me but I appreciate the concerns of other Deputies. On the basis of what has been proposed, no time would be lost to the House in terms of its business. If we were to start at midday and finish at 11 p.m., which has not been an unusual hour for us to sit in recent times, I do not think that would cause difficulty.
The Government have organised the business on the basis of what I have read to the House.
I am afraid we are not going to have agreement and I shall have to put the question.
I realise the Tánaiste might be reluctant to concede a point as far as organising the business of the House is concerned, but quite frankly there will be no time lost. There will be no difficulty in rescheduling the business. The only difficulty would be to move Private Members' time to a later slot. We are all going to be here anyway, and it is silly to put lives at risk by asking Deputies to take to the roads at 5 a.m. or 5.30 a.m. The Tánaiste should agree to have the matter reconsidered by the Whips during the day.
The Government are being perfectly reasonable in the proposal before us. It would be rather foolish for Deputies who have to travel a long distance to leave the trip to Dublin until Tuesday morning. In those circumstances it would be wise to make the trip the day before.
This is a matter, given that it involves practical considerations, that ought to have been raised at the Whips' meeting.
It was.
Given that there is clearly manifest disagreement on the matter it might be appropriate if the Tánaiste would agree that the Whips meet again to discuss this precise issue and see if agreement can be reached. If a new order has to be made as to the precise time we sit on Tuesday, it can be made during the day.
The Deputy's suggestion would be a perfectly reasonable one if the matter had not been already discussed and agreed by the Whips. I understand it was discussed by the Whips and agreed by them.
It would not be good for the House to divide on a matter of this kind. It would be better if the Tánaiste could agree to a further discussion between the Whips without prejudice to whether it had been discussed. I was not present so I cannot make any claims in that regard and we certainly should not have a dispute about a matter of that kind. I suggest that the Tánaiste should agree to a Whips' meeting without prejudice to the existing order so that a new order can be made if agreement can be reached on different times.
I repeat the request which I made for genuine reasons. I am not aware of any reason for the House rising at 9.30 p.m. on Tuesday. The Whips should discuss the matter further——
A Deputy
What about going home late at night?
I suggest that the order be made and that the Whips may have a discussion on it later.
That was a real test of the Tánaiste's leadership skills.
I live in a rural constituency and it is a problem travelling home at 11 p.m. on frosty roads. It is no joke to be driving home at that hour. I sympathise with the point but there have been a number of late nights recently. Late nights are not suitable for Deputies who have to travel home late on frosty nights.
I want to dispose of this matter.
If it is agreed that the Whips will meet to discuss this issue will the House agree that divisions not take place until after 1 p.m. on Tuesday? If the roads are bad on Tuesday evening I advise Deputy Wallace to stay in Dublin.
Is the proposal in relation to No. 4 agreed, subject to a meeting of the Whips later in the day?
I want to put it as it is to the House, the Whips can discuss it later and it is not subject to the Whips meeting.
Is the proposal in relation to No. 4 agreed? Agreed.
Yesterday the Taoiseach promised legislation to deal with the position of Romanian adoptions. The Minister for Health, in column 673 of the Official Report of 29 November, a few days previously, indicated that he had said nothing which would amount to promised legislation in this area. What happened between 29 November and yesterday in regard to this legislation? How has it advanced? Have the Cabinet considered the matter?
Has legislation been promised in this area?
Yes, it was promised yesterday although the Minister for Health stated on 29 November that he was not promising legislation.
I understand that the legislation is in course of preparation.
I am sure the Tánaiste's attention has been drawn to the incident early this morning where a fishing vessel from County Down could have been involved in a tragic accident with a submarine. What steps has the Tánaiste taken to ensure that Donegal fishermen — indeed all Irish fishermen — are not subjected to——
I am sorry, the Deputy must raise the matter at a more appropriate time.
It is a matter of extreme urgency.
I am satisfied about that but it is not in order to raise it now. There are procedures in the House for dealing with such matters.
I fully agree with the procedures but life is more important. What steps is the Tánaiste taking?
The Deputy must find a more appropriate time to raise this matter.
The promised patents Bill is one of the items on the list of legislation which it was indicated may have been circulated to the House this session. There appears to be difficulties with the Bill in the context of our Constitution. Will the Tánaiste provide me with information, when available, in regard to when the patents Bill will be circulated or whether there are problems which would make it impossible to do so without a constitutional amendment?
I understand that the Attorney General is, on a priority basis, studying the Bill.
(Limerick East): Are the Government aware of the concern in the stock market that yesterday's inflation figures were leaked around midday when the official release was at 5 o'clock? The earlier leaking was to the advantage of some investment managers but strongly to the disadvantage of others. Will the Tánaiste say whether the Government intend to have an investigation to establish from where the leak came. Was it from the Central Statistics Office——
This matter does not apply to the Order of Business.
(Limerick East): It is a most serious matter and it is the only opportunity I will have to raise it before the House goes into recess.
It is not in order now.
Did the Deputy not like the figures?
I am sure the Deputy will find a way of raising that matter before the House adjourns for the Christmas recess and the Chair will facilitate him in that regard.
(Limerick East): This is the ultimate in insider dealing, partial leaks to some investors and none to others. We will be a disgrace in the eyes of——
Please, Deputy Noonan, desist.
(Limerick East): My question should be answered.
Please desist. It is not in order to raise the matter now. I have given the Deputy quite some latitude in raising extraneous matter.
(Limerick East): Do the Government intend amending the companies Bill or the Official Secrets Act? Why is there silence?
The Chair has been as patient as he can. Deputy Noonan will now resume his seat or leave the House.
I should like to ask the Tánaiste, or the Minister for Communications, whether they agree we should record the Government's contribution to culture and the arts by inviting the RTE Chamber Choir to perform a farewell concert in memory of Minister Burke's Broadcasting Act.
I thought the Deputy wanted to raise something relevant.
With regard to promised legislation, I would ask the Tánaiste to clarify a promise he gave to Deputy Bruton a few moments ago. Yesterday the Taoiseach indicated to the House that the Government would bring forward legislation in relation to the recognition of foreign adoptions, but when Deputy Bruton asked the Tánaiste this morning what the position was he replied that legislation is in the course of preparation. By accident, matters have not been clear in relation to this. I do not see this as being deliberate. Can the Tánaiste confirm that in fact the Government are not currently preparing legislation and that what has happened is that the law reform Commission report has been sent——
The Deputy is embarking on a speech. This is not good enough.
——to the Government for their observations? Is that not the position?
The Deputy must put a pertinent question relating to legislation promised. The Deputy may not make a speech now, and he knows that.
I am entitled to make a point.
No, Deputy you are not entitled to make a speech.
I am entitled to the information.
You will resume your seat now.
I have finished. Let the Tánaiste reply.
I will not be treated with disdain or disrespect by you or any other Member of this House.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
You will not speak from a seated position, Deputy.
A Deputy
Arrogance.
Deputy Shatter, resume your seat or leave the House.
On a point of order——
I will not hear any point of order, Deputy, when I am dealing with gross disorder from you.
The Deputy should leave the House.
On a point of order——
I will not hear a point of order, Deputy. I am dealing with disorder in respect of your performance here this morning.
Are you suggesting that you will discriminate against a single Member of this House?
I am asking you to resume your seat, Deputy.
You said that if I have a point of order I should stand up. I am now standing trying to make the point of order.
For the third time, I tell you, I will hear no point of order when I am dealing with disorder from you.
Sir, I am entitled to raise a point of order
Resume your seat or leave the House, Deputy Shatter.
The Deputy resumed his seat.
Sir, can I now make a point of order?
No, Deputy. I have been treated with the utmost disorder from you this morning. I will not hear any point of order.
I would like the Tánaiste to confirm that there is not any such legislation currently being prepared, because all the Attorney General's office is doing is examining a report of the Law Reform Commission. There are not even the heads of a Bill prepared on that issue.
(Limerick East): The Tánaiste is misleading the House.
Let us come to deal with——
I would ask the Tánaiste in his capacity as Minister for the Marine if he is aware of the danger signals emanating from Brussels for the last few days regarding drastic reductions in fish quotas for next year and what plans he has to counteract that?
It does not arise now, Deputy McGinley. Deputy Paddy Sheehan. I trust the Deputy will be in order. We have suffered enough disorder here this morning.
In view of the unsatisfactory information emanating from Brussels this morning——
Item No. 7.