It is proposed to take No. 6.
Order of Business.
There is nothing to put to the House.
May I ask the Taoiseach in view of the High Court decision yesterday about the EC regulations which Ministers have implemented during the past number of years, particularly since 1988, what action the Government will take? Do they intend to appeal to the Supreme Court? What action is proposed in the interim to give the Garda power to continue to prosecute and arrest people who are using angel dust? If legislation is required has the Taoiseach put in place the necessary motions?
Strictly speaking, the matter does not arise now. Nevertheless, as an exceptional measure, I will allow a brief question on the Order of Business since the nature of the decision has obvious implications for future legislation.
A Deputy
That was a decision the Government did not expect.
The silence of the lambs.
The implications of the decision are being studied by the Attorney General. It is expected that there will be an appeal to the Supreme Court. The Government is already engaged in examining the implications of the decision and the Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry is examining its aspects of it. The Deputy can be assured that the Government will find its way to accelerate whatever action is necessary in this regard. The House should also consider the early introduction of the committee system to try to ensure that all those directives have the opportunity of being discussed fully in this House.
Does the Taoiseach realise that the difficulty which arose yesterday does not just apply to one agricultural Statutory Instrument, important as that may be, but it applies potentially to every Statutory Instrument made under the European Communities Act since 1973? There are hundreds of these and they form, or appear to form, an integral part of our law. It has the equivalent effect as if a whole range of Acts were declared unconstitutional.
We know that. That is nothing new.
A Cheann Comhairle——
I have allowed a question on the matter. Deputy O'Malley, please hear the Chair. This question may not give rise to debate. The Taoiseach has answered the question posed. I am calling Deputy De Rossa.
As a result of a High Court decision in regard to an aspect of the activities of the Office of Public Works legislation was introduced the following day, even though it was a very limited topic.
I cannot allow that matter to be debated now.
Here we have something that goes across a whole range of legislative activities for the past 25 years.
We cannot have a debate now on the subject. I am calling Deputy De Rossa.
Arising from what the Taoiseach has said, can he indicate whether he will make a statement to the House on Tuesday as to what he proposes to do regarding the situation in which we now find ourselves? With regard to the second part of the Taoiseach's reply, in which he said he hoped the committee system would be established to debate these directives, is he proposing, as virtually everybody on this side of the House wants, to establish a European Affairs Committee specifically to deal with these matters?
The question of the European Affairs Committee is one that has been decided by the House, has it not?
We expect the Foreign Affairs Committee to be established next Wednesday. A standing committee is what I referred to in relation to discussing legislation and regulations. It is not true to say that legislation was introduced on the day following the High Court decision on the Office of Public Works; it took a little more time than that. The House can be assured that the Government has this matter fully in control.
Let us come to the Order of Business proper.