It is proposed to take Nos. 4, 5 and 6. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: 1. Business shall be interrupted at 12 midnight; 2. the sitting shall be suspended at 8.30 p.m. for 15 minutes; 3. the proceedings on the Second Stage of No. 4 if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 6.45 p.m.; 4. the Second Stage of No. 5 shall be taken today and the proceedings thereon if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 12 midnight. Private Members' Business shall be No. 17.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal that business be interrupted at 12 midnight satisfactory?
On the question of concluding at 12 tonight, the general point raised yesterday related to the fact that every Stage of every Bill we are dealing with this week is being guillotined, and a particularly serious guillotine is being applied to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill to be taken tomorrow, for which only 55 minutes is being allowed on Committee Stage. Will the Taoiseach indicate that he is prepared to extend the time available to that Stage of the Bill in view of the serious implications in certain sections of it in relation to new offences and penalties? I would like the Taoiseach to give such an indication before we proceed to agree the order of guillotines for today's business.
The matter to which the Deputy refers is for tomorrow's business.
I appreciate that, but I am sure you will agree, Sir, that the last thing you want is a row tomorrow on the question of 55 minutes being allowed for this Bill. I am simply asking the Taoiseach to indicate at this stage that he is prepared to be reasonable with regard to dealing with the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill.
That is a matter for the Whips to consider.
The Taoiseach is ignoring me.
We are talking now about the interruption of business tonight.
I am asking a reasonable question and all the Taoiseach is prepared to do is keep his head down.
The Deputy's question appertains to tomorrow's business and will be more appropriate at this time tomorrow.
I am asking the Taoiseach to respond.
Is it agreed that business be interrupted at 12 midnight?
Question put: "That business shall be interrupted at 12 midnight."
The Dáil divided: Tá, 80; Níl, 14.
Tá
- Ahern, Dermot.
- Ahern, Michael.
- Ahern, Noel.
- Aylward, Liam.
- Bell, Michael.
- Bhamjee, Moosajee.
- Bhreathnach, Niamh.
- Brennan, Matt.
- Briscoe, Ben.
- Broughan, Tommy.
- Browne, John (Wexford).
- Burton, Joan.
- Byrne, Hugh.
- Callely, Ivor.
- Collins, Gerard.
- Connolly, Ger.
- Costello, Joe.
- Coughlan, Mary.
- Cowen, Brian.
- Dempsey, Noel.
- de Valera, Síle.
- Doherty, Seán.
- Ellis, John.
- Ferris, Michael.
- Fitzgerald, Brian.
- Fitzgerald, Eithne.
- Fitzgerald, Liam.
- Flood, Chris.
- Foley, Denis.
- Gallagher, Pat.
- Haughey, Seán.
- Higgins, Michael D.
- Howlin, Brendan.
- Hughes, Séamus.
- Hyland, Liam.
- Jacob, Joe.
- Kavanagh, Liam.
- Kemmy, Jim.
- Wallace, Dan.
- Walsh, Eamon.
- Kenneally, Brendan.
- Kenny, Seán.
- Killeen, Tony.
- Kirk, Séamus.
- Kitt, Tom.
- Lenihan, Brian.
- Leonard, Jimmy.
- McCreevy, Charlie.
- McDaid, James.
- McDowell, Derek.
- Moffatt, Tom.
- Morley, P.J.
- Moynihan, Donal.
- Mulvihill, John.
- Nolan, M.J.
- Ó Cuív, Éamon.
- O'Dea, Willie.
- O'Donoghue, John.
- O'Keeffe, Batt.
- O'Leary, John.
- O'Rourke, Mary.
- O'Shea, Brian.
- O'Sullivan, Gerry.
- O'Sullivan, Toddy.
- Penrose, William.
- Power, Seán.
- Quinn, Ruairí.
- Reynolds, Albert.
- Ryan, Eoin.
- Ryan, John.
- Ryan, Seán.
- Smith, Brendan.
- Smith, Michael.
- Spring, Dick.
- Stagg, Emmet.
- Taylor, Mervyn.
- Treacy, Noel.
- Upton, Pat.
- Walsh, Joe.
- Woods, Michael.
Níl
- Clohessy, Peadar.
- De Rossa, Proinsias.
- Foxe, Tom.
- Gilmore, Eamon.
- Gregory, Tony.
- Harney, Mary.
- Keogh, Helen.
- McDowell, Michael.
- McManus, Liz.
- Molloy, Robert.
- O'Donnell, Liz.
- O'Malley, Desmond J.
- Quill, Máirín.
- Rabbitte, Pat.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Dempsey and Ferris; Níl, Deputies Rabbitte and Keogh.
Question declared carried.
Is the proposal that the sitting be suspended at 8.30 p.m. for 15 minutes satisfactory?
May I again ask the Taoiseach, now that he has finished reading his A4 sheet, whether he can tell the House if he is prepared to consider extending the Committee Stage debate on the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993 tomorrow? It is a simple question and the Taoiseach should afford the House the courtesy of answering it.
The Deputy should not indulge in repetition either.
Why not, if I do not get a reply to my question?
Please, Deputy, I have said it is more appropriate to the Order of Business tomorrow when the matter comes before the House formally.
I am putting the Taoiseach on notice that I shall be challenging it again.
Is the proposal that the sitting be suspended at 8.30 p.m. for 15 minutes agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with item No. 4, Industrial Development Bill, 1993 agreed?
A total of five and a quarter hours is being allowed for Second Stage of this Bill today; in fact its duration will probably be somewhat less now because of the vote on the Order of Business and so on. The Bill is of major significance. Its preparation continued for more than two years, with the establishment of the Culliton committee and the report of that committee. The Bill does not in any way reflect the recommendations of that committee which is a cause of concern to many people. It is of huge importance to the future industrial development of this country. The fact that it is being guillotined in this manner is totally unsatisfactory. I understand it is proposed to take Committee Stage first tomorrow morning, with almost no interval between the very short Second Stage and an even shorter Committee Stage. I protest at the manner in which the Government is ordering business this week and guillotining this Bill through.
This is the only Bill the Government has put forward since assuming office that has any relationship to the jobs crisis. To suggest that Members of the Opposition be asked to have their amendments ready tomorrow morning, after a brief Second Stage debate today, is not to take the jobs crisis seriously. In my view the Government is wrong in attempting to deal with a matter of this potential significance in such a cavalier manner.
The question is: "That the proposals for dealing with item No. 4 be agreed".
Question put and declared carried.
Are the proposals for dealing with item No. 5, Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993 satisfactory?
I do not think there should be any limit on the Committee Stage of this Bill. We are willing to accept a limit on Second Stage, which is what is being decided today, but we do not believe there should be any limit on Committee Stage. On Committee Stage Members are afforded an opportunity to examine the precise meaning of sections, to propose alternative wording and so on. To suggest that all of that should be taken within 45 minutes tomorrow is not to take the House seriously.
Again, we are anticipating tomorrow's business.
There are three and a quarter hours allocated to Second Stage of this Bill this evening. The Bill is of considerable importance in that it proposes to make major changes in the law. The changes do not relate simply to changing the law relating to homosexuality; they extend far beyond that. Indeed, it is many of the other areas of change that give rise to particular concern. It is impossible, given the diverse views that undoubtedly are held by Members, for that concern to be expressed on Second Stage within three and a quarter hours. I wish to protest vigorously against that. My party shall not be voting against the Bill on Second Stage, but we have a number of amendments tabled for Committee Stage, for which 45 minutes will be devoted tomorrow. It is quite a long Bill and effectively no amendments can be discussed within that time. It is totally unsatisfactory.
If we did not have these long speeches, indeed if the Members opposite were as conscientious about their work as they are endeavouring to pretend here — I might add——
That is disgraceful.
Yes, it is disgraceful.
——there was briefing offered to the Progressive Democrats on the Industrial Development Bill, 1993 which was not accepted. However, in deference to what Deputy John Bruton said, in regard to Committee Stage of this Bill, the Whips are meeting today and, if they can rearrange business to allow more time tomorrow, I will not have any problems with that.
I take it that the proposals in respect of item No. 5 are agreed?
As the Taoiseach, at long last, has responded to something I put it to him that, instead of having Committee Stage of three quarters of an hour tomorrow, the House might agree, as I suggested, that Committee Stage of this Bill be sent to the relevant Select Committee on Legislation and Security.
Sorry, Deputy O'Malley, I understand the matter is now the subject of consideration by the Whips. It should be left with them.
Would the Taoiseach agree that Committee Stage of this Bill should go to the relevant select committee since these committees were established to deal with matters of this kind? The House cannot deal with it in 45 minutes.
Please, Deputy O'Malley, we cannot debate the matter now. I have allowed the Deputy some latitude this morning. He must now desist.
I wish to pursue this issue with the Taoiseach. On the Order of Business last month he said the Tánaiste was correct in saying there would be no disposal of State assets and I understand yesterday the Government told the unions that there had to be disposal of State assets. What is the Government's policy on this matter? Does it have a policy and who speaks for it?
That matter does not arise now, Deputy; there are ample ways and means of pursuing it but not on the Order of Business.
Except in the Dáil.
On the Order of Business, I am sure it must be in order to ask if the Government will report back to the House on management's proposals for Aer Lingus——
It is not, Deputy.
——and the outcome of its meeting yesterday with the unions. This House has a serious interest in that matter.
Maybe but there are procedures governing the Order of Business and Deputy De Rossa is well aware of them. The matter he raises can be adverted to in many other ways but not now.
Can we at least be told, after yesterday's meeting with the unions——
I am sorry, Deputy but I have ruled against you in the matter.
——if the Government is still seeking payroll cuts of £50 million in Aer Lingus?
The Deputy must now desist.
Does the Government still intend, before the summer recess, to introduce the legislation to provide for the write-off of tax for tax cheats?
Ask Deputy Yates.
Is legislation promised in this area?
Yes, it will be published very shortly and we expect to complete it before the summer recess.
Which end is up today, Ruairí — the smarmer or the waffler? You change your suit every day.
Will the Taoiseach confirm that Ross Perot made an offer to buy out the Government?
I am sorry, but since there is no strict regard for the Order of Business I am proceeding to item No. 4, the Industrial Development Bill, 1993.
It is considering it.
It is a garage sale.
Its credit rating is not good enough.
The Cabinet is meeting to decide.