Order of Business.

It is proposed to take Nos. 13, 14, 15 and 3.

It is also proposed notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders that; 1. The proceedings on the Committee Stage of No. 13 if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 1.15 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 Enterprise and Employment; 2. The proceedings on the Report and Final Stages of No. 14 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 Enterprise and Employment; 3. The proceedings on the Committee and Remaining Stages of No. 15 if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 5.45 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 Justice; 4. Statements shall be made at 6.00 p.m. on the EC summit in Copenhagen and the meeting between the Taoiseach and the British Prime Minister, and the following arrangements shall apply: (i) the opening Statement of the Taoiseach and of the main spokesperson for the Fine Gael Party, the Progressive Democrat Party and the Technical Group shall not exceed 20 minutes in each case; and (ii) The Minister for Enterprise and Employment shall be called upon to make a statement in reply not exceeding ten minutes; 5. Business shall be interrupted at 7.30 p.m.

Are the proposals for dealing with No. 13 satisfactory and agreed?

I object. I want to say something about the way the Government programme managers are mismanaging the business of this House. Two or three weeks ago we had no business and the House had to break up prematurely. Now a Government who want to make it a crime under the Social Charter for people to work 48 hours a week wants the staff of this House to come in here at 9 a.m. and not leave until 2 a.m. the following morning because it cannot manage its own business properly——

I must dissuade the Deputy from making a speech. I will hear a brief point in respect of the matter I put to the House.

In regard to this issue of putting through legislation so that Deputies cannot table amendments properly because there is not sufficient time, is it the case that the Government intend not just to do this with this Bill but with legislation to give a tax write-off for tax cheats, to commit Irish troops to almost certain death in Somalia——

Deputy Bruton, this is quite out of order.

——and to change the ownership of the family home? All of this is to be put through.

If the Deputy wants to challenge the motion I put to the House he is quite entitled to do so, but he cannot embark on a general speech.

I wish to explain the reasons for my opposition. The reasons are that this is part of a pattern of a Government which is willing to spend £20 million on running this House but is preventing the House from doing its business properly because it cannot manage its business.

I take it that there is objection——

It is a question of mismanagement on the part of this Government; they are unable to manage their business properly.

I will now put the question. Are the proposals for dealing with item No. 13 satisfactory?

I am entitled to explain why we oppose——

No, Deputy, you are not. You are not entitled to make a speech at this time. I am putting the question.

(Interruptions.)

Please, Sir, I really feel you should allow me to make my case.

Deputy Bruton, please. You are completely out of order and you know it. You may not make a comprehensive statement at this time.

Sir, the way the Government is running the business of this House is completely out of order. They are mismanaging the business of this House, spending thousands of pounds on programme managers and yet cannot manage their own business.

Deputy Bruton must desist. I will hear Deputy O'Malley.

They are mismanaging the business of this House, forcing the staff to work inhuman hours, yet they go home themselves early because they have such a huge majority. There are no Government Deputies around the House at midnight; the Opposition and staff are here but they have all gone home.

(Interruptions.)

There is now a list of Government Deputies who are allowed to go home at 6 p.m. each evening while the remainder of us have to stay on and do the work. We are not putting up with this.

(Interruptions.)

Deputy Bruton, you will now resume your seat.

I want to give you notice that we are not prepared to put up with this mismanagement of the Government's business.

You will now resume your seat, Deputy Bruton. Deputy Bruton, please resume your seat.

I believe you should allow me to make my statement without interruption.

No, Deputy, you have said enough to prove conclusively that you are completely out of order.

This is gross mismanagement——

Deputy Bruton, I will not call on you again to resume your seat.

(Interruptions.)

This is uncalled for.

In deference to you and no one else, I will resume my seat but I believe this is an appalling Government.

Deputy O'Malley is offering.

A Cheann Comhairle, there are 38 amendments tabled to this Bill.

Sir, you are denying free speech in this House.

Deputy Flanagan, you made a remark against the Chair in respect of a matter which is completely out of order.

You are denying free speech in this House, Sir.

Deputy Flanagan, you will withdraw those remarks or leave the House.

You shout down the Leader of the Opposition each day; you do not shout down the Taoiseach.

You will not allow the Leader of the Opposition to make a valid point.

Deputy Flanagan——

This is a Parliamentary Assembly. We are all elected by the people, not only was this Government elected but so were the Members of the Opposition.

Deputy Flanagan, you will withdraw your remarks against the Chair or leave the House.

If the Chair will allow free speech I will withdraw my remarks.

The Chair is the upholder of free speech in this House.

The Chair is not.

I would ask you not to allow yourself to be duped by this Government.

This is disgraceful conduct.

You are not being fair to yourself by allowing yourself be put in this false position.

The Deputy is completely out of order and his party knows it.

(Interruptions.)

On the Industrial Development Bill, 1993, Committee Stage, there are 38 amendments, many of them tabled by the Minister. There is no possible way in which 38 amendments on a Bill of this importance could be discussed within three hours. It is entirely wrong that this Bill should be guillotined in this way. In addition, I might say in regard to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill 1993, the Minister for Justice, when replying last evening on Second Stage——

We are now dealing with item No. 13.

——gave an indication that she was prepared to consider favourably some suggestions made to her, in particular, I think, some of the suggestions made by Deputy Harney.

Deputy, we are now dealing with item No. 13. We shall be coming to item No. 15 later.

There is no opportunity for the Minister or anyone else to put down amendments——

I have the list of amendments and there are none on the part of the Minister.

I am now putting the question in regard to item No. 13. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 13 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with item No. 14 agreed?

In relation to the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill, 1993, may I point out that there are 18 amendments tabled to this Bill, many of a substantial nature, yet only three-quarters of an hour is being provided to deal with them. The attempt to deal with the Report and Final Stages of this Bill within such a short period of time is simply not good enough. In relation to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993, we have gained an extra——

Deputy, we will deal with the items seriatrim. I am now on item No. 14.

I am not asking you, Sir, to deal with item No. 15. I simply want to complete my point in that an extra hour is being allowed for item No. 15, but it still affords us only one hour and 50 minutes. I am proposing, in relation to item No. 14, that the matter relating to statements on the EC Summit held in Copenhagen be deferred until tomorrow, that the resultant extra time gained be shared between the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill, 1993, and the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993 — an extra half hour at least to be devoted to the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill, 1993, and an extra hour to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993. That would be a fair way to deal with them. Statements on the recent EC Summit could be taken tomorrow morning without any great difficulty in that no vote is required on statements. Therefore, the Government backbenchers would not be required to attend.

I think the Deputy has made his point.

This House agreed to set up committees to take the Committee Stage of Bills without time pressure so that we, who are expensively paid by the taxpayer, can do our job properly. This Government which has so mismanaged business is now attempting to deny Members the opportunity to do their work. I object to the taking of this Bill in this fashion.

Is the Taoiseach willing to consider my proposal in relation to the reallocation of time?

First of all, in relation to the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill, 1993, may I point out that we are taking the Report and Final Stages of that Bill and I believe the time allocated is adequate.

(Interruptions.)

If Members do not want me to comment, that is fine, I will sit down and will not comment. I might remind the House that the Government put in 15 speakers on Second Stage of this Bill to only three from the Opposition. If that is any indication of the seriousness with which they approach the debate on the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill, 1993, I suggest adequate time is being allocated today to finish that Bill.

In relation to the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993, I was asked yesterday to consider allowing more time for that debate. We have done so and have doubled the time for Committee Stage. I think it is most unlikely we would reach agreement for tomorrow; I predict the same arguments would be advanced tomorrow. However, if all parties want us to consider the possibility of allowing one and a half hours in the morning for statements on the EC Summit, I am prepared to let the Whips talk about it, but I do not think it is likely to find agreement among the parties.

May I ask the Taoiseach to explain why there is this fuss about rushing the Committee Stages of these Bills through the House? Why are these Committee Stages not being dealt with by the Select Committees set up under the reform procedures? In relation to the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill, 1993, I recall a reply given by the Taoiseach to Deputy Flaherty a week ago to the effect that the Committee Stage of this Bill would be dealt with by the Select Committee on Social Affairs. Why is it being jackbooted through the Dáil within this short period of time? Will the Taoiseach say, in relation to those three Bills, why they are not being referred to Select Committees?

The Deputy has made his point.

This matter, as Deputy O'Keeffe obviously is unaware, was gone into in detail earlier in the week. Therefore, I must ask where was he when this debate was taking place?

We are in here more often than the Taoiseach is.

I asked the Taoiseach a question; I should like a reply.

(Interruptions.)

It is polyfilla legislation; nobody at all to speak on it.

A Cheann Comhairle, arising from the Taoiseach's comment about the Whips discussing the matter of allocating time to statements on the recent EC Summit tomorrow morning, may I say that it was made perfectly clear to us, at the Whips' meeting yesterday, that that could not happen because of engagements that you yourself, Sir, and the Tánaiste have? We can understand and appreciate that. But I have to say it was made perfectly clear to the Government that the business for today is but a forerunner of the method of proceeding for the next two weeks. We consider this to be a gross abuse of the guillotine facility that operates in the House — to put through more detailed and heavy legislation within the next two weeks than has gone through this House within the past four months.

A Cheann Comhairle, I am not too clear about precisely what the Taoiseach is offering in relation to my suggestion that statements on the recent EC Summit be deferred and that the additional time be shared between the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill, 1993, and the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993. Is he saying that, if agreement can be found on deferring those statements, that time will be shared between those two Bills? If that is the case, it does not have to be tomorrow morning; it could be Tuesday evening or Wednesday morning. The statements on the Summit will not lead to the conclusions of the Summit being changed.

Let us bring this matter to finality.

This is a repetition of what happens here every year.

It is not.

Pressure has been building up——

(Interruptions.)

Especially when the Taoiseach has promised reform.

It is a manifestation of open government.

If Deputies opposite do not want to listen we will proceed with the business of the House.

Answer some questions.

We have been put under pressure by the opposite side of the House to bring forward and complete Bills before the summer recess but even when we do this there is an outcry. This happens every year and it is nothing new.

Free speech.

The Taoiseach does not believe in it his own party.

Would the Deputies show some respect for the House? I know that some of the Deputies opposite have no respect for the Chair.

(Interruptions.)

We have doubled the time to be made available for the Committee Stage of this Bill. There is a problem about taking the statements tomorrow because, as the Whip has made clear, I have certain engagements. As Members are not anxious to meet for one and a half hours tomorrow to take them we have extended the sitting this evening. I also have a problem about taking them tonight but I have tried to facilitate Deputies in the best way I can.

Question put: "That the proposals for dealing with No. 14 be agreed to".
The Dáil divided: Tá, 64; Níl, 47.

  • Ahern, Bertie.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Bell, Michael.
  • Bree, Declan.
  • Brennan, Matt.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Broughan, Tommy.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Burton, Joan.
  • Byrne, Hugh.
  • Callely, Ivor.
  • Collins, Gerard.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Coughlan, Mary.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • de Valera, Síle.
  • Doherty, Seán.
  • Ferris, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Brian.
  • Fitzgerald, Eithne.
  • Fitzgerald, Liam.
  • Flood, Chris.
  • Foley, Denis.
  • Gallagher, Pat.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Hyland, Liam.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kavanagh, Liam.
  • Kemmy, Jim.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Kenny, Seán.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • McDaid, James.
  • McDowell, Derek.
  • Moffatt, Tom.
  • 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.
  • Penrose, William.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Reynolds, Albert.
  • Ryan, Eoin.
  • Ryan, John.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Taylor, Mervyn.
  • Treacy, Noel.
  • Upton, Pat.
  • Wallace, Dan.
  • Wallace, Mary.
  • Woods, Michael.

Níl

  • Ahearn, Theresa.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Barry, Peter.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
  • Bruton, John.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Connor, John.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Creed, Michael.
  • Cullen, Martin.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • De Rossa, Proinsias.
  • Doyle, Avril.
  • Dukes, Alan M.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Frances.
  • Flaherty, Mary.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Foxe, Tom.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Harney, Mary.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Keogh, Helen.
  • Lowry, Michael.
  • McDowell, Michael.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • McManus, Liz.
  • Mitchell, Jim.
  • Molloy, Robert.
  • Nealon, Ted.
  • Noonan, Michael (Limerick East).
  • O'Donnell, Liz.
  • O'Keeffe, Jim.
  • O'Malley, Desmond J.
  • Owen, Nora.
  • Quill, Máirín.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Timmins, Godfrey.
  • Yates, Ivan.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Dempsey and Ferris; Níl, Deputies E. Kenny and Browne(Carlow-Kilkenny).
Question declared carried.

A Cheann Comhairle——

Allow me to deal with the Order of Business first. I will call the Deputy later. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 15 satisfactory?

This Bill proposes to change major aspects of our criminal law. The whole purpose of Committee Stage is to allow detailed amendments to be put forward by all sides of the House and for the Minister to listen to what the Opposition and his or her backbenchers have to say and, if necessary, make changes. This process is destroyed if there is a time limit. In matters of this importance I appeal to the Government not to have any time limit on Committee Stages and if there is a problem to refer the Committee Stages to a special committee of the House.

Let us hear the Taoiseach's views on what Deputy Bruton has said.

It is on the same point.

On the Order of Business yesterday I was asked to consider giving more time for the Committee Stage of this Bill, which I have done. There is now a request that the Committee Stage should be allowed to go on indefinitely, a request with which the Government could clearly not agree.

The Taoiseach is attempting yet again to mislead this House. Yesterday we were offered 50 minutes, less than an hour, to deal with the Committee Stage of one of the most important pieces of social legislation the Dáil has ever had to deal with. The Taoiseach has doubled the time available for this debate. It is derisory to talk about dealing with the Committee and Remaining Stages of this Bill in approximately one hour and fifty minutes. We offered the Taoiseach a way out on this matter but he refused to accept it. In agreeing this proposal — it is clear that the Taoiseach will not agree to any reasoning by Members on this side of the House — the scheduling of the amendments should at the very least permit a debate on the sections dealing with homosexuality and prostitution. At the very least we should have the opportunity to deal with those two items.

The Deputy's point is adequate.

Before the last Vote I indicated that I was again prepared to reconsider the situation tomorrow in an effort to reach agreement. There was no acceptance of my suggestion and the proposals for dealing with No. 14 were put to a vote. That is the position.

The Taoiseach said he would not be available tomorrow.

I said I was available for a period tomorrow, not for the whole day.

No, the Taoiseach said he was not available tomorrow.

I said I would have a problem being here at a certain time tomorrow but I would be available for a short period. However, this was not accepted. We have now wasted 35 minutes.

We are not wasting time.

This is democracy.

(Interruptions.)

A Deputy

We are entitled to make a point.

Thirty five minutes of Dáil time have been wasted——

(Interruptions.)

I am being shouted down again.

This is not a petfood factory where one wants to get units of output. This is a legislative assembly where we are entitled to make our point and be heard.

In my long experience in this House I have seldom seen such gross disorder.

In my long experience in this House——

Nothing has been done to advance the dignity of the House by the procedures I have witnessed this morning.

You should be protecting the Opposition as well as the Government.

May I——

A brief relevant question, Deputy. I am putting the question on No. 15 shortly.

I wish to make an observation on the proposals for dealing with No. 15. In my long experience in this House, which I think is about the same as the Ceann Comhairle's experience, I have never seen a set of guillotine motions like this with a warning that we will get the exact same next week, including guillotines on Bills which have not even yet been published, which we have not seen and which are enormously important.

Let us deal with No. 15.

If the sensitive and difficult matters contained in No. 15 — to which apparently further amendments will be put down by the Minister for Justice in addition to the 15 amendments already put down, and which we have not seen — are dealt with in two hours it will be an absolute waste of time.

The Deputy has made his point adequately.

The best point I could make is that if we are going to have only a two hour session where nothing is discussed properly we might as well not be here at all.

I am putting the question on No. 15.

I want to raise a question.

If all legislation is going to be trundled through——

Speech making at this time is not in order. The Deputy has made his point quite substantially.

Speech making and debate in this House do not seem to be in order. This is not good enough. What is the point of this House?

The Deputy cannot blame the Chair for the procedures of the House.

I wish to ask one question on item No. 15, the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993. Will the Taoiseach give me a clear answer as to why this Bill is not referred to one of the Dáil select committees? In response to an earlier question I raised the Taoiseach said that the Unfair Dismissals (Amendment) Bill had been dealt with in the House but I have been told that of the 21 amendments only five were disposed of. Why is the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993 not being referred to the Select Committee on Legislation and Security for full examination? Has the absence in America of Deputy Davern a bearing on the Taoiseach's wish to have it dealt with before he returns? Why can we not have an adequate debate on this Bill on committee?

It is time to put on record that this Government is less than six months in office and we have done more to reform this House in that time——

(Interruptions.)

For about ten years we have been talking about doing our business in a business like fashion and that is what we are doing.

That is what we are waiting for.

If all the Deputies opposite want to do is make their own point and shout down everybody else, and if that is the type of democracy that they want to inflict upon this House, I am glad the Chair is here. We do not subscribe to that. We will continue to reform this House. We are bringing forward Bills to ensure that the committee system which has been talked about for the past ten years operates effectively during the months of July and September——

Why not make them work in June as well as July?

Will Deputy Owen please refrain from interrupting and let me make my point?

Why is this Bill not being dealt with by the Select Committee on Legislation and Security?

It appears the Deputies are not interested in Dáil reform.

The Taoiseach clearly told the House before the vote that he will not be available tomorrow and therefore the Summit statements could not be taken tomorrow. That is what I heard him say. If he is now telling the House he is available there is no reason that we cannot extend the debate on the Committee Stage of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill except spite.

That is an ignorant remark.

There is no reason that we cannot extend the debate beyond 7.30 p.m. and take the statements tomorrow.

Will Deputy De Rossa please resume his seat? I now call Deputy Flanagan.

(Interruptions.)

If this continues and the Chair is ignored further, I will adjourn the House for a considerable time.

I understand that we have scheduled less than one hour this afternoon to debate the Committee Stage of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offenes) Bill, 1993. Out of respect for the views of the elected Members of this House, and in the context of open government, does the Taoiseach consider it adequate that an hour is being made available for the 165 elected Members to debate the Committee Stage of this Bill?

This is another instance of wasted time. We have stated that two hours and not one hour will be allowed for this debate.

A Deputy

Big deal.

Will the Taoiseach answer this question, why is this Bill not going before the Select Committee on Legislation and Security?

The Taoiseach cannot answer that question.

The Taoiseach said he wanted the committees to work during July. The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill, 1993, is an ideal Bill to give to the committees rather than ramming it through in two hours. Why will he not do that? Is the Taoiseach afraid of something?

This cannot go on interminably.

Let us give credit where credit is due. The Taoiseach is correct in saying they brought in more substantial reform than any Government and I think it is the first time that throughout the term we have managed to do our business with 120 Deputies. That is the major reform that has been introduced.

Does the Taoiseach consider it in order for us to give the go-ahead when seven of the ten Bills that we will consider between now and the end of the session have not yet been published? I do not think that is understood by the public. Seven of the ten Bills have not yet been published and the Taoiseach told us at Question Time seven weeks ago that he was absolutely satisfied with the ability of the parliamentary draftsman's office to furnish this House with legislation. We have been reduced to scouring around and poaching legislation from another House and now we are anxious to secure a Bill we have not even read.

The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill is very important social legislation and a number of very important issues will arise from the debate this afternoon, but I do not want to trespass on them now. Even at this late stage will the Taoiseach consider sending the Committee Stage of this Bill to the Select Committee on Legislation and Security? The reason I ask is that I am unaware of any other business for that committee to conduct in the near future. This select committee has not processed the Committee Stage of any Bill yet, the purpose for which it was set up. In effect, we are trampling on democrary if we do not use the procedures we have.

May I remind Deputy McDowell that the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill will be the subject of very detailed discussion by the select committee he mentioned. That is the Government's intention in relation to it.

It has not been published.

Why is the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Bill not being sent to this select committee?

The question is: "That the proposals for dealing with item No. 15 be agreed to."

Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 61; Níl, 45.

  • Ahern, Bertie.
  • Ahern, Michael.
  • Ahern, Noel.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Bell, Michael.
  • Brennan, Matt.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Broughan, Tommy.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Burke, Raphael P.
  • Burton, Joan.
  • Byrne, Hugh.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Coughlan, Mary.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • de Valera, Síle.
  • Doherty, Seán.
  • Ferris, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Brian.
  • Fitzgerald, Eithne.
  • Flood, Chris.
  • Foley, Denis.
  • Gallagher, Pat.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Hyland, Liam.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kavanagh, Liam.
  • Kemmy, Jim.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Kenny, Seán.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Kitt, Tom.
  • McDaid, James.
  • McDowell, Derek.
  • Moffatt, Tom.
  • 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.
  • Penrose, William.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Reynolds, Albert.
  • Ryan, John.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Stagg, Emmet.
  • Taylor, Mervyn.
  • Treacy, Noel.
  • Upton, Pat.
  • Wallace, Dan.
  • Wallace, Mary.

Níl

  • Ahearn, Theresa.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Barry, Peter.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
  • Bruton, John.
  • Bruton, Richard.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Connor, John.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Cullen, Martin.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • De Rossa, Proinsias.
  • Doyle, Avril.
  • Molloy, Robert.
  • Nealon, Ted.
  • Noonan, Michael (Limerick East).
  • O'Donnell, Liz.
  • O'Keeffe, Jim.
  • Dukes, Alan M.
  • Durkan, Bernard J.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Frances.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Foxe, Tom.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Harney, Mary.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Keogh, Helen.
  • Lowry, Michael.
  • McDowell, Michael.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • McManus, Liz.
  • Mitchell, Jim.
  • Owen, Nora.
  • Quill, Máirín.
  • Rabbitte, Pat.
  • Shatter, Alan.
  • Timmins, Godfrey.
  • Yates, Ivan.
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Dempsey and Ferris; Níl, Deputies E. Kenny and Browne(Carlow-Kilkenny).
Question declared carried.

Are the proposals for dealing with Statements agreed?

I am sure Members of the Government parties would like to hear the Taoiseach speak on this subject. Why are so many Government Deputies absent this morning?

That matter is irrelevant now. Are the proposals for dealing with Statements agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal that business shall be interrupted at 7.30 p.m. agreed? Agreed. I understand Deputy Gilmore wishes to move a Private Members' Bill.