It is proposed to take Nos. 6, 8 and 9. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders that: 1, No. 6 shall be decided without debate; 2, in the case of the resumed debate on No. 9, the speech of each Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes; 3, the Dáil shall sit tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. and adjourn not later than 4 p.m.; 4, statements shall be made tomorrow on the Report on Marital Breakdown and the following arrangements shall apply: (i) the statement of each Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes; and (ii) the Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than 3.40 p.m. to make a statement in reply not exceeding 20 minutes.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 6 satisfactory?
This motion provides for a very restrictive debate on the Social Welfare Bill which affects the livelihoods of one million citizens of this State. May I ask the Government to ensure that next year arrangements are made to provide adequate time, not just one day, for Committee Stage discussion of the Social Welfare Bill because of its importance and the contribution that many Members, if not all Members, wish to make?
That is a reasonable request. The standing committees will be in operation by then and adequate time will be provided for that matter.
Proinsias De Rossa rose.
I presume Deputy De Rossa wishes to refer to the same subject.
More or less. I may or may not be right in relation to this matter but I understand it is necessary for an order of the House to be made if the Social Welfare Bill is to conclude at 5 p.m. today. However, there is no provision in the orders you have read out for such a conclusion.
It is provided for in Item No. 6.
Thank you. This seems to be a new way of presenting the proposal.
That is what the Government meant by change.
Perhaps it is intended to succour people into making mistakes of this kind.
Open Government.
It is openness, yes. I would also make the point that although spokespersons on Social Welfare have agreed with the Minister on the scheduling of the debate — I presume an order will be made later this morning in relation to that matter — the time available is very short. There are 34 sections to be dealt with, relating to many major issues, and one day is not adequate for that debate.
May I take it that the proposal is agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 9 — the budget debate — satisfactory? Agreed. Is the proposal for tomorrow's sitting agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals relating to the statements on marital breakdown satisfactory? Agreed.
Do they include the Government? Does Deputy Kemmy wish to say something?
In view of the developments in regard to Greencore in the past 24 hours will the Taoiseach agree to allow the House have a further debate or statements on this subject in the near future before a final decision is taken? May I ask the Taoiseach — this question is not in order but I am going to ask it just the same — if he will consider asking the Minister for Foreign Affairs to make representations to the appropriate authorities in regard to Maggie O'Kane who is being detained and about whose welfare I am sure many Members in this House will be concerned?
It is a humanitarian cause which I could not disallow. I now call Deputy Des O'Malley.
Will the Chair permit the Taoiseach to answer?
This matter is out of order. Nevertheless on humanitarian grounds the Deputy can be assured that any assistance required by the journalist concerned, Maggie O'Kane, is being made available to her.
What about Greencore?
Deputy O'Malley.
There was an inquiry yesterday about the possibility of having a debate on Northern Ireland. Would the Taoiseach agree now that it might be discussed next week so that the House could be aware of the present position with regard to the talks that have now stalled and in view of the continuing violence — the latest instalment of which I understand is that there were two further murders in County Derry this morning — which is absolutely appalling. This will go on and on apparently daily on a tit-for-tat basis. This House should discuss the matter at an early stage.
I said yesterday morning that asking the Taoiseach or Ministers in this House to make statements is, strictly speaking, not appropriate on the Order of Business. Our Question Time invariably ends up by asking the appropriate Minister, the Taoiseach or the Tánaiste to make a statement. I would ask Deputies to bear that in mind. I would much prefer if these matters were discussed and deliberated upon in another way.
Yesterday I asked the Taoiseach if he might consider allowing a debate on Northern Ireland next week and I suggested Friday of next week. I understand that a debate on European affairs has been fixed for Friday of next week, but it seems that in the course of next week's business we have also scheduled a day to debate the Comptroller and Auditor General Bill which is not the most urgent legislation. If Wednesday or a large portion of Wednesday was set aside——
These were matters which I was seeking to dissuade Members from raising. When the Deputy raised this matter yesterday I indicated to him that I would prefer that it be discussed with the Whips.
I appreciate that. I would point out, with respect, that there is a considerable degree of anger and frustration outside of this House, among the population, at the continuing activities of the Provisional IRA——
I have to dissuade the Deputy from making a speech at this stage.
——and the loyalist gangs. I am making a point in response to what the Chair said.
No, Deputy. The Deputy must desist now.
I am not seeking to create a row about it, I am simply making the point that the House should be seen to be taking this matter on board. If this House was to set aside three or four hours next week to debate Northern Ireland——
The Order of Business is not the way with which to deal with the matter.
——it would indicate a great advance in that we would actually be debating issues relevant to the people outside this House.
I would welcome such a debate as this is probably the most important issue facing this nation at the moment. If there is to be a debate I would request the Taoiseach and the Government not to have a restricted debate of three or four hours and not to restrict Deputies with time limits. We should have a free discussion on what is happening in the northern part of this island.
There should not be any further reference to that matter.
On a point of order——
I am calling Deputy Currie.
Will the Chair agree that there are some things which are so important that they ought to take precedence over restrictions and precedents of this House? In this instance I strongly suggest to the Taoiseach that he accede to the demand for a debate and that he give serious consideration to the proposal first made by the Tánaiste and now supported by Deputy John Bruton that there should be a round table all-party discussion, because there are certain things we would like to say which with all responsibility we cannot really say in the publicity of this House.
To be helpful and in accordance with the Chair's wishes, I am prepared to let the Whips discuss this matter. As the House is aware, the Seanad is having a debate today on Northern Ireland. Certainly the increase in violence is a matter of serious concern not alone to everybody in this House but to the people of this country and elsewhere as well. I have no objection to allowing the Whips discuss what might be desirable in relation to a debate. With regard to what Deputy Currie said, the Tánaiste issued an individual invitation to each political leader to come and talk to him privately about this issue.
We hear that the Minister for Enterprise and Employment is telling his colleagues that the grass is greener over the next hill. When will we see the legislation to introduce the changes proposed by the Culliton group in relation to the industrial agencies? The reality is that progress on the Culliton report has come to a standstill.
Not so.
That is not so, as the Minister concerned has just said. He has a meeting every Thursday morning advancing the Culliton recommendations. The preparation of the legislation is well advanced and it will be brought to this House at the earliest possible opportunity.
I raised this matter of the promised legislation on the Culliton proposals on a number of occasions. In the light of the story in today's Irish Times about the squabble between the Minister for Enterprise and Employment and the Minister for Tourism and Trade——
This is not Question Time, Deputy Rabbitte.
It is relevant to the legislation.
You will have to pursue that in some more appropriate way.
Can the Taoiseach assure the House that the legislation promised will not be held up as a result of the squabble between these two Ministers, and that the assault on unemployment will not be delayed because of this dispute?
The Taoiseach, on promised legislation in this area.
I have already stated clearly that this legislation is not being held up for any of the reasons put forward by Deputy Rabbitte or by a well known Irish newspaper.
Who leaked the row to the newspaper?
(Limerick East): Has the Taoiseach any plan to keep the House informed of the progress of events at Aer Lingus? When does the Taoiseach expect his Minister to be in a position to inform the House as to what rescue or stabilisation plan has been put in place?
Clearly that should be dealt with in a more appropriate manner.
Some weeks ago a precedent was established whereby statements in relation to Greencore were made. In view of the fact that there is now an imminent Government decision on this and in view of the internal tensions in the Government on this issue, would it not be appropriate that there would be statements so that the public would be assured that this company will not fall into foreign ownership in the future?
The matter is not relevant now.
Will the Chair accept Private Notice Questions on the matter today?
I will consider them Deputy, but I can give no promises in that area.
The Chair will be aware that there is a controversy over the payment of television licences by primary schools——
I am indeed, and it is something that may not be raised now.
It is a very relevant question.
I understand it was the subject of a question here recently, perhaps by the Deputy himself.
It is a very relevant question, a Cheann Comhairle.
It is not relevant now Deputy.
(Interruptions.)
You have not heard the question yet.
The Deputy will proceed in the normal way about that matter.
You have not heard my question.
I understand you wish to raise that matter, Deputy. It is not in order now.
Can the Chair clarify if separate television licenses are paid by this House for each——
(Interruptions)
Deputy John Bruton. I am going on to the Order of Business proper.
I would not pursue that. We will end up paying them.
(Interruptions.)
When will promised legislation to deal with alleged miscarriages of justice be introduced in order that we in this jurisdiction may have a procedure for reopening cases where there has been an allegation that the original trial and conviction was unfair?
Work is proceeding on the preparation of that legislation. It is at an early stage now.
My understanding is that the recent dispute in this House is effectively resolved, but that no arrangement has been entered into in respect of clearing the backlog and that there is indeed a very substantial backlog to which we, as Opposition Members, need access. Can the Chair say whether any arrangements are being contemplated to enable this work to be cleared?
I can assure the Deputy that that matter is receiving most serious attention and I hope it will be resolved shortly.
With respect, Sir, while I know you are doing your best you gave me a similar answer three weeks ago.
It was a difficult issue to resolve, Deputy.
Are we to expect, therefore, that in three weeks time there will be a similar reply?
I am moving on to item No. 6.