It is proposed to take Nos. 5, 8 and 11. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders that: 1. the motion for leave to introduce No. 5 shall be decided without debate; 2. the proceedings on the Second and Remaining Stages of No. 8, 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 those set down or accepted by the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications and the following arrangements shall apply to the resumed Second Stage debate: (i) the speech of each Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case and (ii) the Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than 6.45 p.m. to make a speech in reply not exceeding 15 minutes; 3 in the case of the resumed debate on No. 11 the speech of each Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes. Private Members' Business shall be No. 16/ Motion 5.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal that No. 5 be decided without debate satisfactory? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 8 agreed? Agreed. Are the time limits provided for in dealing with No. 11, the resumed debate on the budget, satisfactory? Agreed.
In view of the fact that a major newspaper last Sunday named four key IRA personnel, including the person allegedly directing their bombing campaign in England, as living openly in this State, will the Taoiseach state when exactly the promised extradition legislation will be introduced? Will he tell the House if the Minister for Justice will, in her speech in the Northern Ireland debate on Thursday, deal specifically with the very grave allegations made in the Sunday newspaper report?
The Deputy should be well aware that I am not in the business of commenting on newspaper reports. I said here last week that the matter raised by the Deputy is being dealt with by the Minister for Justice. I also said the Minister would be participating in the debate on Thursday on Northern Ireland policy and that she would deal with that matter then.
Would the Taoiseach not agree that reports that members of the IRA are openly living in this State undermine the very genuine expression of public revulsion at the activities of the IRA and sympathy with victims of the IRA? Would he agree that clear political action is required from the Government to deal with this matter and that his response just now is completely inadequate to the needs of the times?
I am amazed the Deputy would even attempt to give the impression that the Garda are not active in combating terrorism.
I did not say that.
There are loopholes in the legislation.
The Taoiseach, without interruption, please.
The security forces are quite capable of and have had immense success in recent times in dealing with these matters. It is unbecoming of any Deputy to try to cast innuendo——
The Deputy did not say that.
I did not imply that.
Of course the Deputy, by saying these people are living here, is implying that the security forces are doing nothing about the matter.
There is a loophole in the extradition laws.
The Taoiseach is doing nothing about the matter.
I reject out of hand innuendo in relation to the security forces and the manner in which they deal with this matter. I would remind Deputies that this is not Question Time.
This is promised legislation.
This is not a matter for the Order of Business. It can be debated, as we all know, on Thursday next. I am calling Deputy Des O'Malley.
Mr. Byrne
The Deputy has scored an own goal.
On a point of order, I ask the Taoiseach to withdraw the suggestion that I cast an aspersion on the security forces. I cast an aspersion on the Taoiseach and his Government for failing to introduce promised extradition legislation.
In view of the promise made in the Programme for Government to introduce this legislation, may I ask the Taoiseach when it will be introduced? There is evidently urgent necessity for such legislation in present circumstances, particularly as the details of that legislation have been known for some time and the drafting of it is certainly not a matter of difficulty. For all I know, it may have been completed some time ago.
I am not sure if this is promised legislation.
The drafting of the Bill, as I have said on a number of occasions, is continuing. There will not be any avoidable delay in relation to it. We are aware of the urgency in this matter and any implications to the contrary are totally without foundation.
It will not be three years.
You can bring in legislation at the drop of a hat.
With regard to the proposed debate on Northern Ireland on Thursday and in view of the importance of that debate to this House and to the people, would the Taoiseach agree to have a motion tabled to have that debate broadcast live by RTE? It is the first debate on Northern Ireland, of an extended kind, for some years. The public in general would like to watch this debate.
Deputy Jim O'Keeffe.
Perhaps the Taoiseach might indicate——
It is not in order, as the Deputy well knows.
Will the Taoiseach give an explanation, with regard to the promised extradition legislation, as to why it has not been produced so far, in the light of the fact that there is a Bill which was drafted by me and circulated in June 1990, almost three years ago, to close the loopholes in that legislation? Why has nothing been done since the Taoiseach came to office? Will the Taoiseach clarify for this House on this issue whether he has the same attitude of ambivalence to it which he has to Articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution? Is that the cause of the problem and the delay in introducing necessary legislation?
That is an outrageous suggestion by Deputy O'Keeffe, in common with the sort of suggestions he has been making in this House for quite some time.
Answer the question.
The Minister for Justice was here all day on Question Time and we heard nothing from Deputy O'Keeffe on that specific matter. So much for his concern.
Three years.
I have already stated quite clearly that the Minister for Justice will be participating in the debate and will bring the House up to date on it. There will not be any avoidable delay. This attempt to try to turn——
Does that mean legislation? Why can the Taoiseach not tell us?
——the Order of Business into Question Time is to be discouraged.
Have the Government any response arising from the Supreme Court decision today with regard to section 31, the effect of which will be that members of Sinn Féin can now be interviewed legitimately in regard to noncontroversial matters, which will belie to a great extent their deeper, more malicious political motives?
It is not a matter for the Order of Business, Deputy.
Could the Taoiseach explain his reference to three years? Is the Taoiseach talking about the three years since the issue became apparent and nothing has been done about it, or the three years left in the lifetime of this Government? Under his breath, the Taoiseach mentioned a period of three years when he was being asked about his intentions on extradition. I want to know whether he is referring to the three-year period which has gone or the three-year period during which he intends to get around to it when it suits him.
That is not a matter that can be debated now, Deputy.
I did not say it under my breath. I said loud and clear that it will not be three years before it will be introduced.
When will it be introduced?
You had three years. We have been waiting three years.
The Deputy as a member of a party which was in Government very recently should have been well aware of the position in relation to it.
Is the Taoiseach aware——
Deputy Proinsias De Rossa.
——that in May 1990 the Progressive Democrats presented him and his colleagues with a paper showing that there was a need to amend the legislation and that he rejected that at the time and did nothing about it for three years?
You were not there at the time.
I asked a reasonable question in a reasonable manner with regard to a live broadcast of the Northern Ireland debate in this House on Thursday. Will the Taoiseach indicate if he is interested in making such an arrangement?
Deputy Liz O'Donnell.
Yes, or no? No answer.
On separate promised legislation, may I ask the Taoiseach——
Can I continue, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle?
Deputy Liz O'Donnell, please.
On separate promised legislation, will the Government allow the determination of our public policy in relation to freedom of access to abortion information to be determined by the Supreme Court rather than by this House, which was overwhelmingly mandated to legislate on this issue last November? This legislation is being long-fingered. How soon will it be brought before this House? If legislation is not brought forward the Supreme Court will be left to deal with it.
I can assure the Deputy that the Government will do its duty and will not leave it to the Supreme Court.
When?
The legislation is in course of preparation and will be brought forward at an early date.
Has the Taoiseach any plans to reconstitute the broadcasting control committee which was responsible for the broadcasting of the House? In the absence of that committee, will the Taoiseach give Deputy De Rossa a reply to his question and also inform the House as to who now has responsibility for controlling the broadcasting of matters in the House, since there is no broadcasting control committee, and the Taoiseach apparently will not answer questions on it?
The Deputy will have to raise that in another way.
In view of the fact that we do not have a lot of good news these days——
Falling interest rates.
——will the Taoiseach transmit congratulations from all parts of this House to Neil Jordan on his great achievement, and will he ensure that the disgraceful treatment this film-maker had to put up with, when he could not get any Irish money, public or private, to fund "The Crying Game", a film that went on to be the most profitable small budget film ever, will not recur? Will the Taoiseach set up a national film board which will enable us in future to stand over our record as film makers——
Is this Wicklow co-operation?
It hardly arises now.
——and enjoy the benefits of the tremendous talent we have in this country, in which we should take pride?
My question relates to requested legislation. In the interests of honesty, integrity and all that is good and proper in this country will the Taoiseach introduce legislation to deal with the situation of the person who was compromised, victimised and threatened by his former employer in the Department of Agriculture who has been campaigning outside the gates of this House every sitting day for the last ten years? He is an honest, decent man named Mr. Goodman. I have made every effort to get that message across in the House on numerous occasions. I have now delivered it and I expect an answer.
I am sure Deputy Boylan will raise this in another way at some other time.
I have raised it.
In view of recent developments in Northern Ireland, I welcome the decision of the Taoiseach to allow a debate on Thursday. I was present at the Rathkeale St. Patrick's Day parade. Will the Taoiseach allow his colleague who was there also to make in the House the same utterances he made in Rathkeale? Not alone did his colleague say what he wanted to say in regard to Articles 2 and 3, but he wanted the troops out as quickly as possible. Will the Taoiseach give him a chance to display his flowery rhetoric in the Dáil next Thursday?
It does not arise now. I am moving on to the Order of Business proper.