It is proposed to take Nos. 6, 7 and 8. It is also proposed, subject to the agreement of No. 8, to take Vote 30. It is further proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) Nos. 6 and 7 shall be decided without debate; (2) leave be granted to introduce No. 8 and the Supplementary Estimate shall be decided forthwith without debate and any division demanded thereon shall be postponed until 6.45 p.m. on Wednesday, 14 October 1992; (3) statements on the economy shall be made after Vote 30 and the following arrangements shall apply: (i) the statements of the Taoiseach and of the main spokespersons nominated by Fine Gael and Labour shall not exceed 45 minutes in each case; (ii) the statement of each other Member called on shall not exceed 30 minutes; (iii) a Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than 4.30 p.m. to make a statement in reply not exceeding 30 minutes; (4) the Dáil shall meet tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. and shall adjourn not later than 4 p.m.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal that Nos. 6 and 7 be decided without debate satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. In respect of leave being granted to introduce No. 8, the Supplementary Estimate to be decided forthwith without debate and any division thereon postponed until 6.45 p.m. on Wednesday next, 14 October 1992 — is that satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with the debate on the economy satisfactory? Agreed. Is the proposal in respect of tomorrow's sitting to commence at 10.30 a.m. and conclude at 4 p.m. agreed? Agreed.
Would the Taoiseach agree that if a constructive, unambiguous and, above all, enduring consensus is to be sought on the substantive issues arising in the X case he should confirm publicly his view that a reasonable time should be made available to all parties for discussion and expert consultation? Will he confirm that he will promptly make available to all parties the supporting documentation he indicated he would be prepared to make available as quickly as possible?
In response to what Deputy John Bruton said, and the request from him and from Deputy Spring, I should say I indicated to them that I would examine the timetable and extend the period for consultation to the extreme limit, bearing in mind that we have deadlines to meet in relation to publication of Bills and dates to be fixed to allow the referenda to take place on 3 December next. I am having that done. It does appear that that will be some time next week; as of now it looks like Tuesday or Wednesday next. I will be in touch with the Leaders of the Opposition Parties during the day to confirm that we will be able to do so next week and adhere to that timetable. I will give them any help I can but it has to be accepted that Government documentation cannot be made available. I will answer any reasonable queries and make available any synopsis of views in relation to certain words that may concern Deputies. I will be as helpful as I can.
Whereas I welcome a reasonable extension of consultation time — I certainly felt the timetable was impossible — may I seek clarification from the Taoiseach? While I understand that actual Government documentation will not be available to the Opposition Parties, do I take it that that will mean that some back-up documentation by which the decisions were arrived at will be provided to allow us fully to understand how those decisions were reached?
The Deputy will appreciate that documents used by Government in arriving at decisions are constrained for release under the Supreme Court confidentiality rules——
Would the Taoiseach write me a letter?
That is the decision of the Supreme Court, not mine. I will be as helpful as I can within the parameters available to me.
I accept that.
Obviously I am pleased the Taoiseach has agreed to extend the time available for consultation. May I ask him to clarify precisely what is his interpretation of the Supreme Court decision in relation to confidentiality? What precisely is he able to give us in this respect? My understanding of the Supreme Court decision is that it does not relate only to documentation but also to any discussions that took place relating to Cabinet decisions which are also excluded. Is that right? Are we not hoist by our own petard in relation to this matter of confidentiality? Would the Taoiseach not seriously consider rectifying this anomalous position in which we find ourselves — that although the Government want to consult with the Opposition Parties they cannot provide us with documentation relating to decisions they have taken? Should they not proceed to remove this anomaly by referendum on 3 December next?
In my estimation the decision of the Supreme Court is very clear and unambiguous. It says quite clearly that decisions taken by Government can be announced by anybody delegated by the Taoiseach in the normal way, such as by the Government Information Services or Press Service but that the contents of discussions are clearly confidential. Discussions in relation to arriving at those decisions and consequently any documentation used in those discussions are confidential to the Government. That is it.
That does not follow.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that with the advance of modern technology it is possible to change the heading on a document from "memorandum to Government" to "background briefing" and that once the document is entitled "background briefing" it should be possible for the Government to provide the necessary information on a different basis?
It is called relabelling.
The Deputy's party did that lately.
I will not accept what Deputy Bruton says, that it is open to the Government to cut the heading or description from the top of a document and put a different heading on it. I am not in the business of trying to undermine Government business or finding ways around the Supreme Court decision.
The Taoiseach is hiding behind that decision and misinterpreting it.
I understand the Whips have indicated that the Government are agreeable in principle to the establishment of two committees, a Foreign Affairs Committee and the relaunched European Affairs Committee, with a shared secretariat. Will the Taoiseach confirm that this is the Government's decision and indicate when the necessary resolutions will be brought before the House?
It is still not finalised by the Whips. As soon as it is, we will deal with it.
Is it intended to introduce a Supplementary Estimate for overseas aid? If so, when will it be introduced and for what amount?
Is legislation promised in this area?
Yes, we had promises.
A Supplementary Estimate will be introduced at the appropriate time. I will contact the Deputy during the day with final details.
When will the Book of Estimates be published? Will it be this month?
I do not expect the Book of Estimates to be published this month. It will be published before the Christmas recess.
When will the Broadcasting (Amendment) Bill be published and will it be enacted this session, having regard to the financial implications of current legislation, particularly for RTE?
I expect the draft publication to be at some stage in this session.
Does the Taoiseach intend to allow time in the House to address the outrageous attacks on the welfare rights of PRSI contributors?
Your interjection on the Order of Business in respect of that matter is out of order.
The Minister is savagely cutting the welfare rights of PRSI contributors and it is time the Taoiseach allowed time to address what the Minister is doing.
The Deputy will please resume his seat. He will probably find an opportunity for dealing with that matter in the ensuing debate.
Is the Taoiseach aware that since the arrangements for today's debate on the economy were agreed, a statement was made by one of the leading bankers that the present rate of interest might continue for as long as six months? Will the Taoiseach arrange for the Minister for Finance to meet the relevant financial institutions so that the Minister can make an authoritative statement to allay the enormous fears of many mortgage holders on hearing that news?
I am aware of the statement made by one banker on this subject. I am also aware of a different statement made by a different banker. Any statement made by the Minister for Finance, who I have no doubt will be intervening in this debate, is authoritative. Other people outside the Department of Finance can speculate. His statements are always authoritative.
I would ask the Taoiseach if the Minister for Tourism, Transport and Communications will be making a statement which was promised as far back as Easter in relation to Shannon Airport? Will it be made in this session?
Or after she flys out?
I have no doubt it will come along in due course during this session.
Has she told the Taoiseach yet?
I want to ask why my Priority Question to the Minister for Labour on the employment situation was transferred.
I thought you had something relevant to raise.
It arises on the Order of Business. A Priority Question was submitted and was removed.
This is quite disorderly.
It is very relevant.
Are there any plans to introduce legislation this term, as indicated in the Programme for Government, to grant voting rights to emigrants?
Is legislation promised in this area?
No.
It is in the Programme for Government.
The Deputy should read the Programme for Government. No legislation is promised.
I refer to No. 15 on the list of legislation circulated, the Bills to be published this session. This refers to the setting up of the super agency for industrial development. Will the legislation be taken this term? Can the Taoiseach assure the House that the agency will remain under the aegis of the Department of Industry and Commerce and will not be arrogated to the Taoiseach's Department, as has happened in the case of various matters recently?
I do not understand the latter part of the question. The Bill will be brought before the House as soon as it is available and, if possible, it will be taken this session. It is in our interests to get it through the House as quickly as possible.
What contingency plans has the Minister for Health to deal with the ever-increasing likelihood of the withdrawal of GPs from the general medical service on 1 December?
That is not relevant now.
When will legislation be introduced to deal with the allocation of national lottery funds? I understood the Programme for Government included a new method of allocating funds.
Does the matter refer to legislation promised in this House?
No.