It is proposed to take Nos. 1 and 5 (Votes 34 and 25). It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) No. 1 shall be decided without debate; (2) The Questions necessary to bring the proceedings on Votes 34 and 25 to a conclusion shall be put not later than 1 p.m. and 5 p.m., respectively, and the following arrangements shall apply to the debate: (i) the speech of the Minister and of the main spokesperson for the Fine Gael and Labour Parties shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case and the speech of each other Member called on shall not exceed ten minutes; (ii) a Minister of State may be called on a second time to make a speech in reply; (iii) a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than ten minutes before the conclusion of the debate to make a speech in reply which shall not exceed ten minutes, and (iv) in the five minutes preceding such reply, Opposition spokespersons may request the Minister to clarify specific issues during the course of his reply. (3) The Dáil shall meet tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. and shall adjourn not later than 4 p.m. (4) In respect of Votes 19-24, inclusive, and 10, which shall be taken tomorrow: (i) Votes 19-24, inclusive, shall be moved and debated together and decided by one Question which shall be put not later than 1.30 p.m.; (ii) the Question necessary to bring the proceedings on Vote 10 to a conclusion shall be put not later than 4 p.m.; and (iii) the aforementioned arrangements for debate on Votes 34 and 25 shall also apply in respect of Estimates to be taken tomorrow. (5) If a Division is demanded on any Estimate today or tomorrow, such Division shall be deferred until Wednesday, 1 July 1992 and shall be decided by one Question which shall be put from the Chair at 6.45 p.m.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal that No. 1 shall be decided without debate, satisfactory? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with Votes 34 and 25 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for tomorrow's sitting agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing tomorrow with Votes 19 to 24, inclusive, and 10, satisfactory? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with postponed divisions satisfactory? Agreed.
I have no wish to press the matter I was raising but I would be interested to know if the Taoiseach has any response to the request I made.
I would like to inform the Deputy and the House that what they are reading is not in accordance with the facts.
Unfortunately, we are learning nothing other than what we read. It would be helpful if there was an opportunity to discuss this matter in the House. As you know, a Cheann Comhairle, I have submitted a Private Notice Question on this topic, but I would ask the Taoiseach if he would consider making time available today because this is an extremely urgent matter and there has been a succession of criticisms of the Government's position. The Opposition leaders in this House over a number of years have been particularly constructive in terms of the sensitivities of politics of Northern Ireland and we are entitled to some information, either confidentially or otherwise.
The Deputy and the House will appreciate that I have no intention of engaging in megaphone diplomacy in this very delicate matter.
The Taoiseach should talk to the party leaders on the matter.
I will brief the Leaders as to the position, in the good faith in which we have been and continue to be fully involved in these talks. We will not be found lacking in good faith in relation to any aspect of the matter.
On a different matter, it is clear from the briefing of the President of the European Commission in Brussels yesterday that he intends to abandon the so-called Delors II package in Lisbon this weekend. He is now talking about a seven year period rather than a five year period and about maintaining the ceiling on the budget——
I hesitate to interrupt the Deputy but the matter he is adverting to is not one for the Order of Business.
Does the Taoiseach propose to make a statement to the House today or tomorrow——
That is not in order now, Deputy.
The representatives of the Deputy's party should not have voted against it in the European Parliament.
Deputy De Rossa will have to find alternative ways of raising that matter. There are many avenues open to him for that purpose.
On Tuesday of this week I, together with three other Deputies, received a reply to a question put to the Minister for the Environment in relation to the disappearance — as it appears — of national lottery funds. I would like some assistance from you, Sir, as to how I can raise what amounts to deliberate, constructed and sustained evasion by the Minister for the Environment in regard to the allocation of lottery funds.
There is a longstanding practice in this House that if Members are dissatisfied with Ministers' replies they have a remedy. There are many ways of raising the matter.
All our questions were disallowed.
If the Deputies wish assistance from my office in pursuing the matter within the rules of this House my office will facilitate them.
Every question was disallowed.
Do I take it that if I wish to raise on the Adjournment the matter of the evasion if not the deceit of the Minister for the Environment in this matter you might give it sympathetic consideration? I have no other alternative but to raise it in that manner.
It is certainly a matter that may be raised on the Adjournment but since I have not seen the proposals for today's Adjournment debate I cannot give any assurance to the Deputy in the matter.
For old time's sake perhaps the Chair would agree to it.
It is one way of dealing with the matter.
Maybe he will get the Tánaiste to put his sweet lips a little closer to the phone.
May I ask the Taoiseach when he will provide an opportunity for the Minister for Agriculture and Food to introduce the promised legislation to increase the fines imposed on people who have been found guilty of using angel dust? This legislation was supposed to be introduced in the House by the former Minister for Agriculture and Food more than 12 months ago.
Is legislation promised in this area?
I presume the Deputy is referring to the Animal Remedies Bill and, if that is the case, the text is almost complete.
He has to get the animals out of the office first.
May I take it that fines imposed on people found guilty will be increased?
May I ask the Taoiseach if he will dissociate himself from comments made by one of his colleagues at a parliamentary party meeting to the effect that British soldiers who cross the Border should be shot on sight?
Please, Deputy Cotter, this is not in order.
What is the Taoiseach's view on the matter?
Arising from the point made by Deputy Sheehan, the Animal Remedies Bill is quite urgent in view of the importance of maintaining the image of our food produce overseas. Would the Taoiseach agree that it would be a good idea if this Bill was introduced here so that it could be processed through a special committee during the recess?
As I have already stated, the text of that Bill is almost complete. When it has been finalised we will decide how to deal with it.
May I ask the Taoiseach when the broadcasting sub-committee will be set up? The proceedings of the House have been broadcast for more than 12 months but the committee promised at that time have not yet been set up.
The Deputy should raise that matter in another way.