Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 10 Jun 1993

Vol. 432 No. 2

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take Nos. 6 and 3. It is further proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) business shall be interrupted at 4.45 p.m. today. (2) The proceedings on the Committee and remaining Stages of No. 6, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 2.15 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 the Environment. (3) The proceedings on No. 3 if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 4.45 p.m. and the following arrangements shall apply to the debate: (i) the opening speech of the Minister and of the main spokesperson for the Fine Gael Party, the Progressive Democrats and the Technical Group shall not exceed ten minutes in each case; (ii) the speech of each other Member called on shall not exceed five minutes; and (iii) the Minister or Minister of State shall be called upon not later than 4.40 p.m. to make a speech in reply not exceeding five minutes.

May I now ask if the proposal in respect of No. 1 that business shall be interrupted at 4.45 p.m. today is satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 6 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 3 satisfactory and agreed? Agreed.

I am sure the House would wish to convey its congratulations to the Garda Síochána on the success they have had in detecting drug importation into this country. I am sure the House would also wish to ensure that the laws we pass here give them the full support they need. In that context would the Taoiseach agree to two measures in relation to money laundering which is helpful to the trade, because it enables drug barons to put their money to advantage. Firstly, I request the Taoiseach to enact promised legislation to outlaw money laundering and, secondly, to reconsider the proposed tax write-off in so far as it may help money laundering by drug barons?

Legislation regarding money laundering has been raised recently in the House.

We have not had legislation on the matter.

The query has been raised in regard to it.

The Confiscation of Criminal Proceeds Bill is well advanced.

Deputy Bruton, we should not pursue this matter now as it is not in order.

Money laundering is a separate issue. It is not a criminal offence in Ireland. We have not ratified the relevant international convention. Would the Taoiseach agree to accelerate the preparation of that legislation as part of our battle against the drugs menace here and in Europe?

The Deputy may be assured that the Government will take all possible action in relation to the matter.

In view of the Taoiseach's fondness for writs, would he indicate when he proposes to move the two writs for the by-elections, particularly in view of the fact that the Labour Party has now selected a candidate for the south central constituency and that this would give the people in that area an opportunity to declare their view on the tax amnesty?

This matter has been the subject of debate in this House and it can be dealt with again in the appropriate way. It does not arise now.

It does of course.

I wish to ask the Taoiseach the same question I asked him yesterday. How does he explain the necessity for legislation in regard to crimes relating to tax and exchange control but no necessity for legislation in regard to social welfare, where apparently the Minister may absolve crimes committed under those Acts?

Legislation in relation to social welfare is not required.

Is there no answer again today?

The Chair has no control over that matter.

If the Deputy wishes to put down a question he will receive an answer. The Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy Woods, has made it clear that no legislation is required in this regard.

Would the Taoiseach indicate if the Government has any plans to amend the National Lottery Act, 1986, in order to put a ceiling on the prize fund and enable funding to be made available to a number of——

I would prefer the Deputy to deal with that matter in the appropriate way.

I know the Taoiseach is willing to dispense with procedures in respect of good causes when necessary. Would the Taoiseach agree that it would be useful if he, myself and other party leaders were to have an opportunity to briefly congratulate Peter Sutherland on his appointment to the most senior position of any Irish person in recent memory? It would be useful if the House wished him well in the tremendous task he is undertaking. The Taoiseach can sometimes be quite generous and I ask him to agree to this proposal.

The Chair hesitates to rule this matter out of order but clearly it is not appropriate to the Order of Business. The Chair would prefer if it was dealt with in a more appropriate manner.

I know Deputy Bruton is very relieved at the new appointment. However, in view of that I am willing, if all parties agree, to allow half an hour this evening at the close of business, from 5 p.m. to 5.30 p.m. to discuss the appointment.

The Taoiseach should not be so catty.

Small minded.

The Taoiseach could not even do that right.

The Deputy should be glad.

There would be less "aggro" in the House if Ministers were more forthcoming with information. In that context, will the Minister for Social Welfare make a clear statement on the social welfare amnesty because as of yesterday——

We have had questions on the matter which will be coming before the House in due course. It does not arise now.

We are not sure of that because as of now there are no phone links about the amnesty, no guidelines and no personnel have been appointed to deal with inquiries.

Deputy Allen is completely out of order. He may not ignore the Chair and he should resume his seat.

I wish to ask a question also of the Minister for Social Welfare. I appeal to him to end this appalling student workfare scheme that is now in a shambles.

That is not in order now.

It may not be in order, but it would be in order for the House to do something for students who are deprived of an income.

The Minister should make a statement to this House as he has done to the media.

Are we concerned in this House about the students who are being driven into poverty as a result of this scheme?

I do not wish to repeat myself but the Deputy is out of order.

The Minister can make uncontested statements to the media.

I wish to give notice that at the meeting of the Committee on Procedure and Privileges I intend to seek a change in Standing Orders whereby if Ministers give a promise of legislation outside the House it should be appropriate for that matter to be raised on the Order of Business.

The position is ridiculous at the moment.

Will the Taoiseach indicate when the House will have an opportunity to debate the threat to approximately 1,000 jobs in Aer Lingus?

I am proceeding to the business as ordered.

Mrs. Owen rose.

This must be the final question.

I am concerned for the Taoiseach's reputation.

The Deputy should not worry.

Is the Taoiseach concerned that his name is included in a letter which is circulating in the EC Commission soliciting funds for Fianna Fáil and requesting those funds to be sent to the Fianna Fáil party leader, Albert Reynolds?

Top
Share