Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 20 Oct 1993

Vol. 434 No. 9

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 6. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that statements shall be taken at 12.40 p.m. on the National Development Plan which shall not exceed 50 minutes and that the following provisions shall apply in relation to the statements: (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 ten minutes in each case and (ii) the Tánaiste shall be called on to reply not less than ten minutes before the debate is due to conclude.

He should be called on to resign.

Coming from the Deputy, that is a strange statement. Private Members' Business shall be No. 9 and the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m.

He made a mess of it. The Taoiseach sent him out to take a dive on his behalf because he knew he could not do it himself.

Deputy Dukes must restrain himself and may not ignore the Chair. I take it that the Taoiseach has concluded his statement.

It was the biggest set up in the history of Irish politics.

Bertie was too smart.

(Interruptions.)

It is proposed to take No. 6.

(Interruptions.)

Order, please. I presume Members wish to hear the Order of Business. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything contained in Standing Orders, that statements shall be taken at 12.40 p.m. on the National Development Plan which shall not exceed 50 minutes and the following provisions shall apply in relation to the statements: (i) the opening statement of the Taoiseach and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party, the Progressive Democrat Party and the Technical Group shall not exceed ten minutes in each case and (ii) the Tánaiste shall be called on to reply not less than ten minutes before the debate is due to conclude. Private Members' Business shall be No. 9 and the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. May I now ask if the proposals for dealing with the statements are satisfactory and agreed?

No, Sir. The problem is that we have been relying on statements by the Government and alleged statements to the Government by President Delors. Statements are not good enough. We want a clear motion from the Government where the Government affirms and the Dáil underwrites the Government's understanding of the situation. A series of bland statements will bring us no further. It has been the reliance on apparently empty and incredible statements that has got the Government into the trouble it is now in. This is the biggest difficulty it has confronted.

We must not tend to debate the matter now. Deputies should make brief speeches on the Order of Business.

(Interruptions.)

This is a democracy.

The disturbance is on the Deputy's backbenches.

It is perfectly understandable, in view of the fact that it did not have the courage to table a motion on the National Development Plan this week, that the Government wants to avoid a debate on a motion today when the plan is unravelling. It is essential that the Government table a motion where it nails its colours to the mast properly and does not attempt to get away from this issue by making provision for a series of bland statements.

Let us not anticipate the main debate now.

There are not many smiles on the other side of the House this morning.

I certainly do not wish to anticipate today's debate. However, the main debate will take place outside this House. This is a serious matter and statements are not adequate. That format gives us no opportunity to put forward a resolution. The Government has been suffering from a political delusion about this plan since last December. The plan should be withdrawn. Not only every Cabinet Minister but every senior official here has been working under a false premise for the past number of months and it has made us the laughing stock of Europe. It is not good enough that this Dáil cannot debate this issue.

It is a matter on the Order of Business that we are discussing.

A number of points need to be made on this proposal to provide for statements. First, there were two requests here this morning that the House be adjourned to enable us debate this matter. What the Government has done is to divert that debate to which we would have been entitled and which would clearly have been in order. Unfortunately you, a Cheann Comhairle have decided to allow the Government to divert that debate by providing for ten minute statements. I find that unacceptable and I intend to seek a meeting with you to discuss the way in which you are conducting the business of this House on serious matters relating to the national economy.

Is that a reflection on the Chair?

I am saying that I will be seeking a meeting with you to discuss the matter. The second point I wish to make, a Cheann Comhairle, is that President Jacques Delors indicated on radio this morning that the amount of money in question was not £7.8 billion even last July but £7.3 billion. It seems we are to get £800 million less than the £7.3 billion.

The Deputy is anticipating the main debate.

It is time this House was allowed to debate this matter and we should be enabled to do so today.

I wish to point out that there was a motion before the House, from Deputies Bruton and De Rossa, requesting leave to adjourn the House under Standing Order 30. Clearly the Progressive Democrats did not consider it important enough to table such a motion.

We sought a debate last week.

The reason we are having statements later this morning is because the Government will be in a better position to inform the House of the position.

(Interruptions.)

Could we have some order? We had an example this morning of Deputy De Rossa misinterpreting and stating totally incorrectly——

It was the Taoiseach who misinterpreted——

We will send the Deputy a transcript of the interview and he will see it is not as Deputy De Rossa said.

Where is the bag with the £8 billion in it?

The cat is out of the bag now.

This disturbance is uncalled for. At this stage I will hear only the spokespersons for the parties.

A Cheann Comhairle, I have not finished. If you could get silence——

You are.

(Interruptions.)

It was the late night session that got to some people. They could not tell a three from an eight.

(Interruptions.)

No matter how strongly one feels about positions, in this House it is usual that the Taoiseach is heard without interruption. The Taoiseach must be heard without interruption.

(Interruptions.)

Will the House please come to order?

Thank you, a Cheann Comhairle. I repeat that we have had an example this morning of Deputy De Rossa not listening properly to what President Jacques Delors said. I want to put on the record that Ireland has an agreement with the President of the European Commission——

Is it in writing?

——and witnessed by the Secretary of my Department, the Ambassador to the EC and senior officials of all sides——

It is not in writing.

——and we expect that agreement to be honoured. It would be a very serious development for the Commission if such an agreement were to be set aside. Nobody yet knows what the true position is.

(Interruptions.)

How much is the Taoiseach claiming?

The Taoiseach has not concluded.

I would expect, when everybody knows the true position, that if there is any question of reneging on a deal freely entered into this House would unite in a national effort to tell the Commission that it is totally and absolutely unacceptable.

That is very feeble.

(Interruptions.)

What is the Taoiseach saying is the figure?

Deputy Bruton rose.

(Interruptions.)

Let us hear Deputy Bruton without interruption.

The Taoiseach said that he has an agreement and that Standing Order 30 provides for a motion. Given that the Taoiseach says he has an agreement, would he agree that the only way the House can actually unite as he wishes is if the Government tables a motion which states in words that we can read what the Government has actually agreed with President Delors? I would urge the Taoiseach to put the agreement he has in the form of a motion, in accordance with Standing Order 30, which we can agree with in this House as a united body. It is not in the Taoiseach's interest, or in the national interest, that he should proceed with mere statements which do not formalise anything.

I thought the Deputy was raising a point of order. I should remind Members, as I have done before, that the only motion before the House under Standing Order 30 is that the House do adjourn to allow a discussion on a particular matter. Statements under Standing Order 40 treat the matter in a similar manner.

(Interruptions.)

Order. I will not be intimidated by any Member. In effect, under both procedures the matter is discussed and there is no substantive motion before the House.

On a point of order, may I seek your guidance?

I thought the Deputy raised a point of order earlier and it was rather long.

I am grateful to you for your ruling. I am looking for clarification of it. Would the Chair agree that if a motion for adjournment is placed before the House, as it should be, it would then be open to the Government to table an amendment to that motion which would state in writing what is actually agreed. Any motion can be amended, and a motion to adjourn can be amended. It is important that at this stage we do not proceed any longer with statements or nods and winks but that we have a formal assertion in the form of a motion of what the Government has agreed. Otherwise the Government does not have credibility internationally.

These are not points of order. I have allowed the Leaders of the Opposition parties to put their points of view on the issue before the House on the Order of Business.

On a point of order——

On a point of order——

I hope these points of order are points of order.

When you state that you will not be intimidated, is that a reflection on a Member of the House?

The Deputy can draw his own conclusions. I will hear a brief point of order from Deputy De Rossa.

I want to propose an amendment to the proposals before us. That is a reasonable point which even you could not refuse. I propose that the Order of Business be amended to read that there shall be a debate on a motion from the Government today with regard to the National Development Plan and the proposal that the EC allocation to Ireland be reduced and that this debate take place until 7 p.m.

I support that proposal from Deputy De Rossa.

It is the prerogative of the Taoiseach to order the business of this House. The Deputy may seek to amend it——

That is what he is doing.

——but he may not seek to substitute something else for what the Taoiseach has laid down.

I am seeking to amend it. That is a fair point to make. I have, within the rules of this House, sought to amend what is proposed by the Government. It has put down its proposal and I am seeking to amend it. I think it is a fair and acceptable amendment.

The Taoiseach's proposal is for statements.

In line with the helpful approach adopted by you, Sir, and Deputy De Rossa, I wish to seek agreement to add a paragraph to the statement. The first paragraph refers to opening statements and the second refers to the Tánaiste being called upon to reply. May we add a third paragraph to the effect that at the conclusion of these statements the Government shall table a motion stating its understanding in regard to this matter and that the motion shall at that stage be voted upon by the House? Will the Taoiseach agree to such an amendment to the order in accordance with the suggestions made by you and Deputy De Rossa?

The Taoiseach has indicated the intention to have statements today and the only amendment that can be made is in respect of the time factor involved.

I am proposing an amendment.

Deputy Bruton's problem is that he wants to hear clearly and unequivocally from the Government what the substance of the agreement is. I assure him that that information will be given to the House during the statements.

We want to know if the Taoiseach is going to deliver.

Let us hear the Taoiseach.

We will set down that information unequivocally during the statements to the House. If I interpret Deputy Bruton correctly, he clearly indicated at the start, although he seems to be moving away from it, that if the Opposition knew the details of the figures reached and what was agreed upon, it would take a different position. It would then have an opportunity of stating its full support in the national battle against the Commission, if that is what the Commission is going to do — we should remember that nobody knows as yet what it is going to do.

(Interruptions.)

The trouble is the Opposition is reading too many newspapers at the moment. Everybody should bear in mind——

That is like the battle of the Boyne, changing kings, as Sarsfield said about the Battle of the Boyne.

Irrespective of feelings, Members of this House should have the courtesy of being heard. This is a democratic assembly. Let us hear the Taoiseach.

If the Opposition believed the matter was so important it should have put down a motion on it. We are debating this matter against the background of a movement by the larger states in Europe to take away much of the influence of smaller states. If this battle is not taken on immediately it can have very serious consequences down the line for other small states.

That is another day's work.

I would ask this House to bear that in mind.

(Interruptions.)

If I am not going to get attention I would ask you, a Cheann Comhairle, to try to control the House.

We should try to find agreement on the Order of Business.

Deputy Bruton, I am on my feet. I have striven earnestly to maintain order this morning and if disorder persists I will forthwith adjourn the proceedings.

Deputies

So be it.

I will adjourn the proceedings if I am not obeyed.

It will make no difference if we are simply to have statements.

I am seeking to find a basis on which the House can agree its business this morning. I propose that there be an amendment to the Order of Business which would require the Government to table a motion. If the power of this House and indeed of smaller countries and parliaments in Europe is not to be diminished, this House should be allowed to make a decision on this matter and it can only do so by way of a motion. That is why I want the Government to table a motion rather than have statements.

The proposal by the Taoiseach for statements this day is very limited.

On a point of order——

Order. Deputy De Rossa may not shout down the Chair.

I am entitled to be heard on this matter.

The Deputy should resume his seat.

The Taoiseach appealed for the Opposition parties to support him.

I am asking the Deputy to resume his seat.

I am seeking to make a contribution to the discussion.

If the Deputy does not resume his seat forthwith I will order him to leave the House.

You have never threatened to put any other party leader out of the House.

The Deputy is showing disdain, disregard and insult to the Chair.

A Cheann Comhairle, I intend to protest at the way in which——

The Deputy should resume his seat.

——you are running the business of the House on this important matter.

Deputy De Rossa may not reflect upon the Chair.

(Interruptions.)

The only amendments I can take on the proposal for statements are in respect of timing. I am putting the question now.

Deputies

No.

How can you possibly proceed in this manner? The Taoiseach has asked for the support of the Opposition parties and we are trying to offer support. His negotiators conducted themselves as if they were at the puck fair of Killorglin.

Deputy Rabbitte should desist.

The Taoiseach expects us to bail out the Government and you will not allow a real amendment to be put. If you want to adjourn the House you should seek to do so, but we are not going to agree to more mock statements that are not worth the paper they are written on.

Let us hear the Taoiseach.

We had all these statements only last week.

In view of the developments that may take place in Europe, do I interpret the mood of the Opposition correctly when I say it wants to show to Brussels a motion of solidarity of this House?

(Interruptions.)

When I get attention I will be able to say what I have to say.

The Government is spending millions of pounds that it has not got.

If disorder continues I shall have no option but to adjourn the House. The Taoiseach, without interruption.

If that is the mood I detect in the House, and I think it is, I suggest that the Whips get together and put an agreed motion to the House, or certainly discuss a motion that may be put to the House.

What we are looking for on this side of the House — I speak for the Fine Gael Party — is a Government motion whereby the Government puts its name to what it says it agreed. We want the Government to put its name on the line on this matter rather than getting us involved in an indirect way in taking responsibility for its mistakes.

(Interruptions.)

We want the Government to put its name to a motion which states unequivocally what was agreed. This is a Government responsibility and the Government should have the courage to take its responsibilities.

The Taoiseach wants to have his cake and eat it. He wants national Government when he is in trouble and he wants partnership when he can proceed on his own. What is the Taoiseach afraid of? The Government has a 35 seat majority. It should put down a motion telling us what was agreed. The Taoiseach told us the agreement was "in the bag" in Edinburgh. He should now let us see what was in the bag.

The Taoiseach should open the bag.

I appeal to the Opposition not to act like school children.

School children would not mistake a three for an eight.

Deputy Rabbitte, questions are being put to the Taoiseach and we should have the courtesy to allow him to reply.

I hope that the House takes this matter as a very serious one, not alone for this country but for the future of the Community. I have just been passed a note, which is unconfirmed, that the Commission is not discussing this matter today but may discuss it tomorrow. In the light of that information perhaps everybody would reconsider their position.

Deputies

No.

If that is the position we will set out in our statement exactly what the Government agreement is with Brussels and we hope for support from the other side in relation to that agreement.

I am putting the question now.

Sorry, Sir, is the Government refusing to table a motion on this matter?

Is the European Commission ordering business here?

I am putting the question: "That the proposals for dealing with the National Development Plan be agreed".

This is completely unacceptable.

I think the motion is carried.

Deputies

No.

(Interruptions.)

If you want to adjourn the House you should proceed to do so. This is completely unacceptable.

I have put the question. Is the question agreed?

Deputies

No.

Question put.
The Dáil divided: Tá, 82; Níl, 50.

  • Ahern, Bertie.
  • Ahern, Dermot.
  • Ahern, Michael.
  • Ahern, Noel.
  • Aylward, Liam.
  • Bhamjee, Moosajee.
  • Bhreathnach, Niamh.
  • Bree, Declan.
  • Brennan, Matt.
  • Brennan, Séamus.
  • Briscoe, Ben.
  • Broughan, Tommy.
  • Browne, John (Wexford).
  • Bruton, Joan.
  • Byrne, Hugh.
  • Callely, Ivor.
  • Collins, Gerard.
  • Connolly, Ger.
  • Costello, Joe.
  • Coughlan, Mary.
  • Davern, Noel.
  • Dempsey, Noel.
  • Doherty, Seán.
  • Ellis, John.
  • Ferris, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Brian.
  • Fitzgerald, Eithne.
  • Fitzgerald, Liam.
  • Flood, Chris.
  • Gallagher, Pat the Cope.
  • Gallagher, Pat.
  • Geoghegan-Quinn, Máire.
  • Haughey, Seán.
  • Higgins, Michael D.
  • Hilliard, Colm M.
  • Howlin, Brendan.
  • Hughes, Séamus.
  • Hyland, Liam.
  • Jacob, Joe.
  • Kavanagh, Liam.
  • Kemmy, Jim.
  • Kenneally, Brendan.
  • Kenny, Seán.
  • Killeen, Tony.
  • Kirk, Séamus.
  • Kitt, Michael P.
  • Lawlor, Liam.
  • Leonard, Jimmy.
  • Martin, Micheál.
  • McDaid, James.
  • McDowell, Derek.
  • Moffatt, Tom.
  • Morley, P.J.
  • Moynihan, Donal.
  • Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.
  • Mulvihill, John.
  • Nolan, M.J.
  • Ó Cuív, Éamon.
  • O'Dea, Willie.
  • O'Hanlon, Rory.
  • O'Keeffe, Ned.
  • O'Leary, John.
  • O'Rourke, Mary.
  • O'Sullivan, Gerry.
  • O'Sullivan, Toddy.
  • Penrose, William.
  • Power, Seán.
  • Quinn, Ruairí.
  • Reynolds, Albert.
  • Ryan, Eoin.
  • Ryan, Seán.
  • Shortall, Róisín.
  • Smith, Brendan.
  • Smith, Michael.
  • Spring, Dick.
  • Taylor, Mervyn.
  • Treacy, Noel.
  • Upton, Pat.
  • Wallace, Dan.
  • Walsh, Eamon.
  • Walsh, Joe.
  • Woods, Michael.

Níl

  • Allen, Bernard.
  • Barrett, Seán.
  • Boylan, Andrew.
  • Bradford, Paul.
  • Connor, John.
  • Cox, Pat.
  • Crawford, Seymour.
  • Cullen, Martin.
  • Currie, Austin.
  • Deasy, Austin.
  • Deenihan, Jimmy.
  • De Rossa, Proinsias.
  • Doyle, Avril.
  • Dukes, Alan M.
  • Finucane, Michael.
  • Fitzgerald, Frances.
  • Flaherty, Mary.
  • Flanagan, Charles.
  • Gilmore, Eamon.
  • Gregory, Tony.
  • Harney, Mary.
  • Harte, Paddy.
  • Higgins, Jim.
  • Hogan, Philip.
  • Kenny, Enda.
  • Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).
  • Bruton, John.
  • Carey, Donal.
  • Clohessy, Peadar.
  • Connaughton, Paul.
  • Keogh, Helen.
  • Lowry, Michael.
  • McCormack, Pádraic.
  • McDowell, Michael.
  • McGahon, Brendan.
  • McGinley, Dinny.
  • McGrath, Paul.
  • McManus, Liz.
  • Mitchell, Gay.
  • Mitchell, Jim.
  • Molloy, Robert.
  • 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 Boylan.
Question declared carried.

Is the proposal that the proceedings on No 9, Private Members' Business, shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. Agreed? Agreed.

When will the Government table a motion indicating what was agreed in regard to the National Development Plan? Does the Government intend to allow the House to debate a motion on the national plan?

We must have questions on matters relevant to the Order of Business.

Sir, it is essential——

I will not have a rehash of our earlier proceedings.

No business is possible unless we know whether the Government can be trusted in a matter of this nature.

The House decided this matter today.

We will hear statements, the same unreliable statements which apparently the Government made in the past.

Deputy Bruton, I will go on to the Order of Business proper if this persists.

Has the Government so little confidence in its alleged agreement that it will not even table a motion on it?

On the Order of Business, on a number of occasions I raised the matter of the possibility of the Government providing for a debate on Northern Ireland in this House. Will the Taoiseach, in view of the revelations in The Irish Times today with regard to the Hume-Adams agreement——

The Deputy is surely aware that there are questions on the subject of Northern Ireland, the Hume-Adams talks, etc., on the Order Paper for today. I will not allow the Deputy to refer further to it. It would make nonsense of the questions tabled by the various Deputies and the Deputy knows that.

You asked me a question, a Cheann Comhairle, and I am attempting to answer it.

The Deputy may not refer to the matter any further.

You asked me whether I was aware that there were questions on today's Order Paper.

Yes, and the Deputy is aware of them.

Deputy De Rossa is asking a procedural question.

I am about to tell you whether I am aware of them.

If the Deputy is not aware I will refer to them. The Deputy may not refer any further to the subject matter.

A Cheann Comhairle, I do not know whether you are in order in trying to put a gag on me in this House. Will the Taoiseach provide for a debate in this House given the revelations on the Hume-Adams talks?

Deputy De Rossa, I repeat again, you must now please desist. Resume your seat.

The only people denied a debate on this matter are democratically elected Members of this House.

There is a number of questions on Northern Ireland on today's Order Paper and the Deputy is acting most unfairly in respect of the other Deputies who tabled questions.

Parliamentary Questions, a Cheann Comhairle, are not a debate as you frequently point out to Members when they ask supplementaries. Deputy De Rossa asked when we will debate the Hume-Adams talks and he is entitled to the courtesy of a simple reply from the Taoiseach or the Tánaiste.

Unusual allies.

These are matters for answer this day.

They are not.

On a procedural matter, will the Taoiseach simply reply to the question as to whether he will provide time in the House for a debate on Northern Ireland?

The problem that may not speak its name.

The questions are on the Order Paper for today, Deputy.

I am aware of that, Sir, but the questions are quite different. They are in regard to the substance of the Hume-Adams talks and so on. I am asking for a debate.

I am sure the Deputy will find some way of asking that question.

It is most unfair to try to usurp the role of Deputies who tabled relevant questions on the subject. I will hear no more about it.

We would be better off having Niall Stokes as Taoiseach.

Top
Share