Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 13 May 1993

Vol. 430 No. 7

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 4.

It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders that: 1. business shall be interrupted at 4.45 p.m. today; 2. the proceedings on the Second Stage of No. 4, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 4.45 p.m., and the following arrangements shall apply in relation to the resumed debate;

(i) the speech of each Member called upon shall not exceed 20 minutes, and

(ii) the Minister for Finance shall be called upon not later than 4.15 p.m. to make a speech in reply not exceeding 30 minutes.

May I ask whether the proposal that business be interrupted at 4.45 p.m. today is satisfactory and agreed? Agreed.

Is the proposal for dealing with item No. 4 — that is the resumed debate on Second Stage of the Finance Bill, 1993— satisfactory and agreed? Agreed.

There are two questions I should like to ask. First, when will the Government provide time for a debate in the House on the new telephone charges?

My second question is on promised legislation. On Tuesday last the Minister for Justice promised legislation to deal with the sale by property companies over the heads of tenants of rented property to a circle of insiders but said that this legislation would not be retrospective. This creates an incentive to property companies to unload such properties to avoid the provisions of that legislation in the immediate future. Will the Minister agree to treat this as emergency legislation and introduce it next week so that it will not be possible for people to avoid its provisions by unloading property in the short term?

The reply to Deputy John Bruton's first question is that the Minister for Transport, Energy and Communications has already answered questions in the House regarding the revised telephone charges he announced earlier in the week.

The reply to Deputy Bruton's second question is that the Minister for Justice stated on Tuesday last, in reply to a Private Notice Question, that she would consider what amendments of the landlord and tenant legislation were required and she is doing so.

Please, Deputies, this must not give rise on the Order of Business to continuous questioning, tending towards debate. Questions have been asked, have been replied to and that should be the end of it. It must be raised at a more appropriate time.

I appreciate that, Sir. Would the Minister for Finance bear in mind the dangers of uncertainty in this area in that people may avail of that uncertainty to repeat what happened in the case of Mespil flats? Would he agree to discuss with the Minister for Justice the possibility of dealing with this on an emergency basis?

I can assure the House that the Minister for Justice is giving this matter urgent consideration and that we fully appreciate the need to take urgent decisions.

Will the Minister for Finance, or some member of the Government, make a statement on what has now happened in GPA, with particular reference to their associated companies in the Shannon region, one of which employs between 600 and 700 people and the other 250 people——

Such questions must pertain to promised legislation only.

——and whether the future of both companies can be guaranteed? In particular, will he say what action the Government proposes to take in respect of the £16 million which it was intended to invest through SFADCo?

The Deputy is embarking on a speech which is not in order. Statements are an integral part of Question Time in this House.

It is very unsatisfactory if the Government will not give some indication because what happened last night is of enormous importance to this country.

I am sorry, Deputy O'Malley, there are many other ways of dealing with that matter.

It is reaching the point at which it is becoming difficult to raise anything on the Order of Business.

I have gone to the trouble of telling Members what they can and cannot raise here at this time. If the Deputy wants to change the rules of the House, that is his prerogative.

Perhaps the Committee on Procedure and Privileges might address this issue, which is obviously one of constant concern to you, Sir. Deputies must be afforded freedom in this House to raise such matters and the only time of the day when we have the Government before us is at the Order of Business.

I merely administer the rules of this House, Deputy.

Surely we should have some right to raise current issues here and get some response from the Government? The issue I want to raise is that of the proposed hike in university and third level fees.

I am sorry, Deputy. The Deputy knows that is not in order now. Nobody should forget that there are very many ways of raising these matters under our Standing Orders. The Chair goes out of his way to facilitate Members.

There was an announcement in the papers printed overnight about this issue, which will affect all third level students.

The Deputy must now desist and resume his seat.

The Minister announced yesterday that he was cutting students off the dole. How will students survive and what will the Government do about these fees? On the one hand the Government is saying that they want access to third level education for everybody, yet under the provisions being made such access will be restricted.

A Cheann Comhairle, will you allow Private Notice Questions on this matter since the Government are committed to spending $20 million as part of their rescue package for GPA? It would seem quite inappropriate that the taxpayer should have to bail out General Electric.

I will consider any requests made to me in the proper fashion. It may not be raised now.

A few years ago this House enacted the University of Limerick Act, 1989, and the Dublin City University Act, 1989. Those universities are working very satisfactorily indeed and those Acts have a great deal of merit in them. It is mandatory under those Acts that every increase in university fees must come before the Minister for Education——

Is the Deputy asking a question?

I am asking a question about promised legislation.

The Deputy may not ask a question about legislation and then go on to raise other matters.

In view of the savage 8 per cent increase in university fees, is it proposed to fulfil the promise given in the Programme for a Partnership Government, and in this House, to introduce similar legislation to control all aspects of university funding, including fees? Will the Minister for Finance answer, yes or no?

No legislation was promised.

The Deputy is not merely asking about legislation, he is raising other matters about fees.

I am asking about legislation that has been promised.

The Minister cannot hide from that question.

There is no extension of the legislation promised.

So much for the promises in the Programme for a Partnership Government.

In the absence from the country of the President, the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste, are you, Sir, running the country?

Yes, together with the other members of the Presidential Commission.

The Deputy is jealous; he would love to run it himself.

There are some people we would like to put in gaol and most of them are on the other side of the House.

A short time ago our esteemed President on her State visit to Spain——

Order, Members should be slow to refer to the President, especially in any flippant manner. I would prefer if no mention be made to the Office of President.

As Mr. Sigismundo Crespo has disappeared from the office of the Commissioner for Social Affairs, apparently on the grounds of incompatibility of relationships, does the Government propose making representations to Mr. Delors to have an Irish programme manager appointed to this position?

Humour is not a bad thing.

Will the Minister for Finance be introducing legislation in the House to enable the investment of $20 million in GPA? Is that investment proceeding?

The Deputy must table a question.

My question is about legislation.

The Deputy referred to legislation and then went on to refer to a specific matter which is extraneous. It should be raised in the proper way.

Will legislation be introduced?

There is no legislation necessary.

Will the Minister indicate when the harbours Bill will be introduced? Will he assure us also that subsidiarity will prevail and that councillors will also be represented on the boards?

The intention is that the harbours Bill will be introduced this session.

As both the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste are out of the country, have their powers been devolved to respective Ministers?

The Deputy should table a question on that matter.

We have Government by remote control.

In view of the extraordinary opposition in RTE to a health promotion campaign by the Department of Health, when can we expect the promised legislation on the sale of condoms?

The legislation is due shortly.

What does "shortly" mean?

A matter of weeks.

Is the Minister aware that a report on BBC television purporting to be a preview of the Eurovision Song Contest depicted Ireland in the usual fashion of cattle lying in the street and rounded off the interview with the signature tune coming from a cowshed? That is appalling and is typical of the British media. It should be rejected by this House and by the Government.

The Deputy I am sure will find an opportunity of giving vent to his feelings on that matter. He may do so perhaps in the resumed debate on the Finance Bill.

We have very good cows in Cork.

At present the Government is privately making decisions about the expenditure of £8 billion from the European Community. The Government is committed to the establishment of regional authorities which are intended to have a say in the way this money is spent and under the Maastricht Treaty will represent Ireland on the European Committee of the Regions. However because of the delay in establishing them they are not able to have a say in the way money is spent and they are not in place to democratically elect our representatives on the European Committee of the Regions. When will this legislation, which has been lying around for a year or more, be introduced?

The legislation has been passed since 1991. I assure Deputy Bruton that the sub-regional groups have been involved fully in the preparation of the National Development Plan.

In response to Deputy Rabbitte the Minister for Finance said that it was not necessary to amend the SFADCo legislation. In view of the fact that the promised investment of 20 million dollars, is double its normal budget may we take it that it is not intended to proceed with that investment as legislation would be required if we were to do so?

As I said, legislation is not necessary. The Government's intentions have been made clear with regard to SFADCo assisting GPA.

Top
Share