I have raised a number of times the Government's promise in the 1992 budget to introduce maternity leave for adoptive parents. It has not been introduced because the Department of Labour, now the Department of Equality of Law Reform, failed to produce the necessary legislation. When will legislation to implement a promise in the 1992 budget be brought before the House?
Order of Business (Resumed).
It is on the list for publication this session.
It has been on the list for quite a while. Could the Taoiseach use his prerogatives of office to promise specifically that it will be introduced within one month?
This session.
The Minister for Health announced yesterday outside this House an inquiry into the tragic Kilkenny case. Will the Taoiseach give time today or tomorrow for the Minister to make a statement to the House as to the terms of reference of the inquiry, whether the report of the inquiry will be published and the individuals who will be involved?
A speech on the matter is not in order now.
I am asking whether the Taoiseach will indicate on tomorrow's Order of Business that the Minister will be given time to inform the House what is intended. Does the Taoiseach not know of the inquiry? It is a very important matter which should not be treated with a degree of levity.
In view of the disturbing contents of the television programme last night on Beaumont Hospital, will the Minister for Health review the findings of the inquiry into events there?
The Deputy should proceed in the normal way to deal with that matter.
The Minister may wish to answer.
He may not answer now. It is out of order.
(Limerick East): Will the Taoiseach clarify the scheduling of the Finance Bill? The budget was very late this year. It is the intention of the Government to bring forward the Finance Bill, as in previous years, with a view to conclusion in the last week of May or will it run a month later? Does everything run from budget day in the schedule of dates? Will it be the end of June before the Finance Bill is passed?
The scheduling is under discussion. We appreciate Deputy Noonan's point. As soon as final conclusions have been reached we will communicate with the Deputy.
When will the Government implement the final parts of the Child Care Act, 1991 which, if in place, might well have been used in the Kilkenny case? These parts of the legislation will certainly be of use in future cases.
It is not legislation promised.
It is legislation. What else does the Taoiseach think it is?
It is a matter of regulations.
Would the Taoiseach not consider allowing the very reasonable request by Deputy Shatter for a short statement by the Minister for Health on the Kilkenny case?
I have ruled on that matter. I am anxious to facilitate Deputies but the raising of matters ruled out of order is not good enough.
It is a reasonable request. Yesterday you were sympathetic to the frustrations of this House in relation to this very important matter of public interest.
There are ways and means of proceeding to deal with that matter.
What are those ways and means? This is a reasonable request.
I accept that.
Why is this reasonable request not being facilitated? We are being thwarted.
There are ways and means of dealing with the matter.
On the matter raised by Deputy Owen, is it not the case that the regulations under the Child Care Act were supposed to have been brought before the House not later than 13 January? Why was it not done? In respect of promised legislation, can the Taoiseach say whether legislation to establish an agency to foster indigenous industry will be brought before the House this term? How can he reconcile the Government talk about commitment to indigenous industry with selling off the remaining shareholding in a major indigenous industry?
Deputy Rabbitte, this is not good enough.
It is a disgrace. It is not in accord with the commitment given to the House by the former Minister for Agriculture and Food and it runs contrary to stated industrial policy.
Since Members are not prepared to observe the rules governing the Order of Business, I am proceeding to deal with business as ordered.
On promised legislation, the Government has promised legislation to amend the Medical Practitioners Act, 1978. Will this legislation be accelerated in view of the concern felt by many people last night as to whether the tribunal established by the Minister drew conclusions that fitted the evidence in terms of the requirement of proof beyond reasonable doubt? Is there any plan to bring in legislation to regularise the procedures of such tribunals?
There is widespread consultation in relation to the Bill which Deputy Bruton mentioned.
Why was provision not made in the budget for the further implementation of the Child Care Act? This is particularly relevant in view of the serious issues which have emerged this week in the Kilkenny case.
Questions should be tabled on the subject.
We will have a budget debate in a few minutes time.
In view of the fact that the Government are allowing the Cablelink network to take in advertising, and the impact on public broadcasting policy, as well as the removal by the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht of the cap on advertising in RTE, will the Taoiseach accept the need for a public broadcasting policy? We cannot deal with it in an ad hoc way.
I thought the Deputy had something relevant to raise. This is not good enough.
This is a very serious issue. Public broadcasting is being dealt with in an ad hoc way by this Government. It cannot continue. Will the Taoiseach answer?
He may not answer a question which is out of order.
On the basis that the Taoiseach is most reluctant to answer any questions from the Opposition this morning, I have a question for the Chair. On today's Order Paper priority questions have been tabled to the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications. I wish to refer to a question in my name that you have ruled out of order. It does not appear on the Order Paper.
Deputy Flanagan is a very well versed Member and he should know it is wrong and out of order to challenge the Chair in this fashion. If the Deputy feels aggrieved concerning a ruling of mine he may consult my office in the matter, but he may not challenge my ruling in the House in this fashion. I must ask him to desist from any further reference.
The last occasion upon which questions were answered by the Minister responsible for transport was last October.
I have no control over how these questions are dealt with by the Government. The Deputy knows that.
Since then we have a crisis in Aer Lingus and we have had a general election and a change of Government and Minister.
I am not responsible for the transfer of questions. That is the prerogative of the Taoiseach and his Government. I am proceeding to item No. 3.
I refer to Standing Order 33.
I am on my feet. Deputy Flanagan will resume his seat forthwith.