It is proposed to take Nos. 9, 10 and 15. Subject to the agreement of the House, it is proposed that: (1) Nos. 9 and 10 shall be decided without debate; (2) The order of the Dáil of 26 February 1992 fixing the Committee Stage of the Control of Dogs Bill, 1991, for tomorrow be discharged and that the Committee Stage be taken after No. 9; (3) the proceedings on the Committee Stage of the Control of Dogs Bill, 1991, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 7 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 the Environment. Private Members' Business shall be No. 25.
Order of Business.
I have to ask if the proposal that Nos. 9 and 10 be decided without debate is satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal that the order of the Dáil of 26 February in respect to the fixing of the Committee Stage of the Control of Dogs Bill, 1991, for tomorrow be discharged and that the Committee Stage be taken after No. 10 today satisfactory? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with the Committee Stage of the Control of Dogs Bill, 1991, agreed?
In relation to that matter, I wish to oppose the guillotining of this debate on Committee Stage. There are 51 amendments to this Bill and I do not believe it would be possible to deal adequately with them in the time being allocated. Therefore, I oppose the guillotining of this debate. I also wish to indicate to the Government that the proposal being mooted around the place that the Criminal Evidence Bill will be guillotined tomorrow will also be opposed by us.
That is another matter. The question is: "That the proceedings on the Committee Stage on the Control of Dogs Bill, 1991, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. by one question which shall be put by the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only amendments set down by the Minister for the Environment". I think the question is carried.
Votáil.
Will the Members who claim a division please rise?
Deputies De Rossa, Rabbitte, Sherlock, Gilmore, Byrne, McCartan and Garland rose.
As fewer than ten Members have risen, I declare the question carried. In accordance with Standing Order 59 the names of the Deputies dissenting will be recorded in the Journal of the Proceedings of the Dáil.
Question declared carried.
Would it be possible for the Taoiseach to agree to an early debate on the two recent reports on Greencore in view of the fact that there are issues of ministerial accountability that need to be resolved, in view of the cost of the investigations, the conflicts between their conclusions, and the fact that suggestions were made last night that a Minister in the present Government interfered with the court appointed inspectors in their work? Would the Taoiseach be prepared to have a debate to clarify all these matters?
We have had this matter by way of considerable questioning yesterday. The House cannot expect a rehash of yesterday's discussion on the matter.
With the utmost respect, I am asking not for a debate now but simply that the Taoiseach would agree to set aside time for a debate on these matters at a later stage. I am sure the Taoiseach wishes to respond.
In relation to the ordering of time, I concur with the request made by Deputy Bruton. While we may be able to wait for a number of days for the debate, the Taoiseach should take the earliest opportunity to respond to the allegation made last night about interference by a Minister in the work of the inspectors. If the Taoiseach has had discussions with his Ministers and is in a position to deny that most serious allegation, he should take the first opportunity to do so.
This matter is clearly not in order now.
The Taoiseach is anxious to respond.
Yesterday on the Order of Business asked the Taoiseach if he would allow time for a debate on the report arising from the Greencore affair. It is now more important than ever that we have that debate in view of the allegations made last night and in relation to which there appears to be documentary evidence. We do not know yet what that evidence is, but I understand the person who made the allegation claims he has submitted papers in that regard. Would the Taoiseach make a statement in the House and say what involvement, if any, a Minister in his Government had in the matter?
I have to dissuade Members from calling on the Government or anyone else to make statements in the House at this juncture. There are many other ways of raising the matter.
This is a matter of concern not just to the Government but to this House. In the last few weeks this House confirmed in office as a Minister of this Government somebody who interfered — if we are to believe the allegations made last night — with inspectors appointed by the courts. This should be of concern to you, Sir, and to all Members of this House.
Doubtless this House will find a way of deliberating on that matter.
I do not think it is sufficient for the Taoiseach to remain silent and for you not to demand him to clarify this matter as quickly as possible.
The Taoiseach has received five or six reasonable requests on the Order of Business whether the Government intend to make time available to debate this matter, and I think that is in order. The Taoiseach's silence, if it is maintained, will be judged for what it is — fear.
I call No. 9.
Where is the open Government?
The shutters are down this morning.
Time should be made available.
Having regard to the length and the cost of the investigation, can the Taoiseach indicate the nature and purpose of the Minister's intervention in this matter?
Surely that could be pursued in another way, perhaps by question.
Does the Taoiseach intend to make a statement to the House or direct another member of the Government to do so on the Government's attitude to the McSharry reform proposals on the Common Agricultural Policy? I see the Taoiseach is smiling but this is not a funny matter. In today's Cork Examiner the Minister for Agriculture and Food is quoted as saying he has no difficulty——
Deputy Deasy knows full well that the matter to which he is adverting is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
——with the principle of the MacSharry reform proposals. This is a matter of great concern to the whole country.
Deputy Deasy will find a way of raising that matter at the appropriate time.
I am asking the Taoiseach if he will let us know what is the Government's policy regarding the Common Agricultural Policy reform proposals.
That should be dealt with in the ordinary way, by way of question, motion or Adjournment debate.
I should like to ask the Taoiseach, and the Minister for Labour, when it is intended to publish the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill and whether that Bill is likely to be taken this session.
That is a legitimate question.
(Interruptions.)
The legislation is at an advanced stage of preparation.
Is it likely to be taken in the present session?
Hopefully.
I seek your guidance, a Cheann Comhairle. What is the status of an inquiry that is requested by the House and agreed to by the Government? Would it not be fair to assume that when such an inquiry is completed the report of the inquiry should be referred back to the House for debate and discussion? Would that not be a reasonable request to make to the Government? I am mindful that this House instited on an inquiry into the Greencore affair.
I am sure that regard will be had to the Deputy's observation. I call on Deputy Fennell.
I am sorry, Sir. You are the guardian of Members of this House and I am asking you whether it is not fair to say that——
The matters appertaining to the orders of this House are primarily the function of the Taoiseach of the day.
But I regard you as the guardian of the rights of the Members of this House.
I shall continue in my role as guardian and the Deputy should not worry about that.
I regard you as the guardian of the rights of Members of this House.
As the details of the Supreme Court judgment are being made known today, will the Taoiseach indicate when the House will have the debate promised in the Dáil?
Again, such question on the Order of Business should be dealt with in another way.
I am sorry, a Cheann Comhairle. I am sure the Taoiseach wants to give an indication, given that we had agreement for a debate.
(Interruptions.)
We cannot hear the Deputy, he is too far back.
If the Minister was not lucky he might have been much further back. What about Saturday afternoon?
Is the Deputy satisfied with his leader?
The Order of Business is becoming quite disorderly and if it persists for a moment longer I will proceed to the business as ordered. I shall tolerate no more of this.
(Interruptions.)
A somersault.
Proinsias de Rossa
Will the Taoiseach explain the position in regard to the Health Family Planning (Amendment) Bill, which was published some time ago. Three different Minister for Health have expressed their personal views with regard to that legislation outside the House. Will the Taoiseach say precisely what is happening to that legislation? When can we expect to have the Bill debated and in what form will it be when it finally comes before the House?
That is a legitimate question.
I have answered that question on several occasions. The Health Family Planning (Amendment) Bill, to which the Deputy refers, will be brought forward to the Government in due course by the Minister for Health.
In the light of the Taoiseach's extraordinary silence in so far as the Greencore debate is concerned, will the Taoiseach tell the House when it is intended that the budget debate will be resumed in order that matters referred to in the report may be adverted to?
That is a matter for agreement between the Whips.
Will the Taoiseach indicate his agreement, having regard to the fact that what is agreed between the Whips obviously carries the imprimatur of the Taoiseach?
(Limerick East): May I ask the Taoiseach whether the Government have yet fixed a date for the publication of the Finance Bill?
Not yet.
I seek clarification of a matter having regard to what the Taoiseach said in regard to the Health (Family Planning) Bill. Is it intended to withdraw the Bill that was been published and circulated by the Government? Secondly, in relation to the proposal contained in the Programme for Government to deal on an interim basis with the updating of the extradition laws — not the major proposal about which the former Taoiseach told the House there was trouble with our neighbour — when will that legislation be circulated?
It is in the course of preparation.
What about the Health (Family Planning) Bill?
I have answered that question.
Several Deputies are offering and, consequently, Members should be brief when raising questions.
With your permission, A Cheann Comhairle, I seek to clarify the matter. There is a Government Bill in circulation and as a Deputy I wish to know if for the debate on this issue that will be scheduled I should address myself to the provisions of the Bill as circulated or whether the Government intend to withdraw it and circulate a new Bill. That is the least that should be made known to Members in relation to Government legislation.
I call Deputy McGinley.
So much for the Taoiseach's commitment to open Government; he is sitting there with a big smile on his face.
If it is in order, it is in order and if it is not in order, it is not in order.
(Interruptions.)
A Taoiseach would never be told to sit in his place.
Now that it is State policy to assist emigrants leaving this country, I ask the Taoiseach what progress has been made on the Government's undertaking to extend voting rights to emigrants who have left here?
That issue does not arise now.
There is legislation on this.
I should like to facilitate the Deputy and if he consults my office in respect of such matters I could do so. I cannot help him now.
What is the present position in relation to the publication of the family home Bill, as promised?
That is still under consideration.
Under the heading of promised legislation it is suggested that the Bill will be published. Is it proposed to publish the Bill this session, in view of the uncertainty created for spouses?
It is expected this session.
When is it intended to publish the Social Welfare Bill, 1992?
It is in the final stages of preparation.
Is the Taoiseach seriously suggesting by his silence that the House will not have a debate on the Greencore report? Surely the Taoiseach should answer this important question. Are we or are we not going to have a debate on the Greencore report? Please do not hide behind the Chair, Taoiseach; please answer that simple direct question.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
The Taoiseach orders the business of the House, not the Chair.
Whether the matter is in order is a matter for the Ceann Comhairle, not for me.
The Taoiseach's predecessor would have answered a question if he wanted to. The Taoiseach is obviously in fear.
I certainly do not fear the Deputy.
I believe this matter could be resolved by consultation with the Whips, as is the usual procedure.
Given the expressed interest of welfare groups that want to make submissions and briefings on the Social Welfare Bill, will the Taoiseach say when that Bill will be published? Will he guarantee sufficient time between the publication date and the Second Stage debate to allow for submissions and briefings?
I have indicated that the Bill is in the final stages of preparation.
In view of the fact that the Sugar Bill passed through the Houses of the Oireachtas and that at least one Government Minister knew about the irregular activities——
We have had all of this before, Deputy Hogan. I thought the Deputy had something relevant to raise.
——the Government were negligent in this matter.
Has the Taoiseach managed to clarify a matter I raised with him in the House last week, the Government's intention to dismantle the ESB, as indicated by the Minister for Energy in a major speech?
Deputy Flaherty, I should like to assist you.
That would require legislation. I presume he has clarified it with the Minister.
Is there legislation promised in this area?
That is what I am asking.
(Interruptions.)
It is a sad day when you have to answer questions for the Taoiseach.
Do not draw the Chair into this argument.
The Taoiseach does not order the Business — you do.
Give us an opportunity to talk about it in this House. The Taoiseach should not hide behind the Ceann Comhairle.
It is your responsibility, not his.
On a different matter, let me ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food when headage payments will be paid to farmers who have been waiting for three months?
That is not a matter for the Order of Business.
Every single one of you are getting the works at your clinics. Why are the payments not made? Does the Minister understand the hardship? Can he tell us when the payments will be made?
(Limerick East): Will the Taoiseach arrange to have copies of the Greencore report supplied to Members of the House?
I will discuss the matter with the Minister afterwards to see if there are sufficient copies today. It will certainly be put in the Library.
Last night a member of the Cabinet was mentioned in a television debate, casting reflections on the Cabinet. In deference to the members in the Cabinet who are not involved, will the Taoiseach not avail of the earliest possible opportunity to clarify the position?
Deputy Harte is raising a matter that we have deliberated on for some time here this morning.
We have not deliberated on it. This concerns certain individuals in the Cabinet. Why can the Taoiseach not clear their names? Who is the guilty one?