It is proposed to take Nos. 7, 3 and 4. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) business shall be interrupted not later than 4.45 p.m. today; (2) No. 7 shall be decided without debate and if a division is demanded thereon it shall be taken forthwith; (3) the Second Stage of No. 3 shall be taken today and the following arrangements shall apply in relation the debate: (i) the proceedings thereon if not previously concluded shall be brought to a conclusion at 4.45 p.m. today; (ii) the speech of each Member called on shall not exceed 20 minutes; and (iii) the Minister for Justice shall be called upon not later than 4.30 p.m. to make a speech in reply; and (4) the Dáil shall sit tomorrow at 10.30 a.m. and shall adjourn not later than 4.00 p.m.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal that No. 1, business shall be interrupted not later than 4.45 p.m. today, satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 7 satisfactory and agreed?
Is there a mistake in the Estimates circulated for consideration which will be dealt with next week? Perhaps the Minister will make an announcement in this regard this morning. There is an additional Supplementary Estimate of £18,000 for the Office of the Minister for Justice and £377,000 for the Garda Síochána, neither of which represent salaries. An article in the Irish Independent today stated that an additional £40 million will be spent on a crime package. Perhaps the Minister will tell us whether these Estimates are accurate or whether there is some sort of disinformation campaign.
The Deputy is making a speech.
Are these Estimates accurate? Where is this £40 million? It is like all the other announcements made outside the House.
Announcements should not be made outside the House; they should be made in the House.
Spending is out of control.
On No. 7, is there not something incongruous in taking a vote today on an Estimate that has yet to be discussed in special committee, the day after the announcement by the OECD that we have the largest class sizes in Europe? Surely it is putting the cart before the horse to decide the Estimate and to debate it next week in committee? It is obvious there is a major crisis in relation to the numbers in classrooms.
I advise the Deputy and the House that these Estimates are merely being introduced.
Will we have an opportunity of opposing the Estimates in the special committee?
Of course.
Is it the case that we will simply consider the Estimates in committee and, having accepted them today, they cannot be voted on in special committee?
The Deputy should be well aware that he can vote on the Estimates next week.
I will be doing so.
The order of today needs to be amended to allow for that.
I was merely going to say that we were given permission only to introduce the Estimates; there was no question of voting on them, as was clarified.
Will the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry make a statement to the House on progress — or lack of it — in the GATT negotiations?
That is not relevant to the Order of Business.
It is very relevant.
It is relevant to thousands of farmers around the country.
There are procedures to which we should conform. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 7 agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals for dealing with No. 3 agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with tomorrow's sitting agreed? Agreed.
I do not wish to be disorderly in questioning your ruling, a Cheann Comhairle, but I am very disappointed you did not see fit to accept Deputy Avril Doyle's motion under Standing Order 30, in view of the dire consequences of the non-acceptance of the national plan.
I indicated to the Deputy how to proceed to deal with the matter. There are many ways open to the Deputy——
There is no truth in this rumour from Brussels.
The Minister should ask the Department of the Environment officials who are dealing with the plan whether that is so. The Minister was told on 14 October that this would happen, and it has happened.
Rubbish.
The Minister should ask the officials——
Perhaps Deputy Doyle would allow Deputy Owen to speak.
That is the first cock-up.
Let the Minister give an explanation on this matter.
What else can we expect?
The Members behind the deputy leader of the party should allow her to speak without interruption.
I do not mind these interruptions. I am very glad the Deputies in Fine Gael are more concerned than those on the Government benches about the fact that the national plan has not been accepted in Europe.
I have ruled out that matter——
I realise that.
——and I cannot allow my ruling to be challenged. I have advised Deputy Doyle and I advise, you, Deputy, how to proceed to deal with the matter. There are many ways open to you to do so.
Will the Taoiseach make time available in the House, now that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry is here, to discuss Ireland's position with regard to GATT? Now that the Minister has returned, one assumes he concluded negotiations. I would like to know the Government's position on this matter.
The Deputy may raise that matter another way.
On the Order of Business I am allowed to ask for time from the Government to debate this matter.
Only matters appertaining to proposed legislation may be referred to.
I do not know what the Government thinks it can do. One minute it says that everything we read in the papers is not true but when it suits, it makes announcements through the papers. We do not know how the Government is running the country.
It is only fair to say that matters appertaining to GATT have been the subject matter of many questions on the Order Paper in this House for the past number of days.
They have not been dealt with since the sell-out. The Minister wishes to apologise to the House.
He came back with an empty brief case.
Surely there are enough cowboys on the Government benches to look after the farmers?
On proposed legislation, may I ask the Taoiseach if a Bill dealing with the registration of Members' interests will be introduced as opposed to an Ethics in Government Bill, and if so, when?
The Minister, Deputy Eithne Fitzgerald, has been overruled again.
I do not hear very many voices over there now.
Come back, Ned, all is forgiven.
I am sure the Deputy is aware that a voluntary scheme is being considered by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. We would all be delighted if the Deputy followed my good example and declared her interests.
Nonsense.
The Ethics in Government Bill is with the draftspeople and will be published as soon as it is ready.
It is being negotiated in public.
That is not so.
Will the Taoiseach indicate if, having abandoned the guts of the Ethics in Government Bill, they have also abandoned the principle of holding by-elections, given that there has been a vacancy in Mayo West for almost a year and in Dublin South Central for almost a year and two months?
The Deputy has many other ways of raising this matter.
It is reasonable to ask when the Government proposes to move writs for the by-elections.
I understand there is a motion on the Order Paper in connection with that matter.
May I ask the Taoiseach when it is proposed to move the writs?
Not in 1993.
May I ask the Taoiseach whether marketing is the responsibility of the Minister for Tourism and Trade, given that yesterday at Question Time that Minister was unable to answer questions on the subject.
I thought the Deputy wished to raise a relevant matter.
It is relevant. It is unacceptable that the Minister was unable to answer questions on the Order Paper and said that the civil servants had not given him the information sought.
It is not in order now to proceed along those lines.
It is highly unusual.
I wish to raise two questions. In view of the fact that in the business ordered for next week there is no reference to a debate on the renewal of section 31 of the Broadcasting Act and having regard to the undertaking given to the House by the Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht in this regard, I presume the Taoiseach can assure the House it is not proposed to renew section 31.
Is legislation promised in this area?
That will be done in the same manner as it is done every year.
Is the Taoiseach anticipating a decision?
The second question I wish to raise relates to a statement made this time last year by the Minister for £7.2 billion, Deputy Eithne Fitzgerald, when she said, and I quote——
Deputy Rabbitte, please——
That is a gross figure.
——the Ethics in Government Bill is "the price of Government".
This Bill is being prepared and we cannot debate it prematurely.
Now that Deputy Ned O'Keeffe and his comrades have torpedoed it, can we expect a rush to the country by the Government? Surely the Labour Party——
Deputy Kenny, on a matter relevant to the Order of Business.
The real objections are coming from over there.
Would the Taoiseach be prepared to consider Supplementary Estimates in respect of damage caused to many parts of the western region as a result of last night's storm?
That matter is not relevant to the Order of Business.
At the start of this parliamentary session the Government published more than 30 Bills which it hoped to introduce during the session. At this stage 18 Bills have yet to be published. Can I take it that the Bills about to emerge will be published before the Christmas recess so that committees and Opposition Deputies will have an opportunity to study them before the Dáil resumes in January?
They will be delivered by Santa Claus.
One of them is the refugee Bill, the Taoiseach's Bill which was referred to yesterday.
On that point, it was stated yesterday on the Order of Business, incorrectly as usual, that this commitment was given last Tuesday in the House by the Minister for Justice——
I said it was given——
The Minister for Justice was ill last Tuesday and was not in the House. No such——
On a point of order——
Excuse me. No such commitment was given——
On a point of order——
Excuse me——
I am calling a point of Order——
——when I am speaking, please—
I beg your pardon——
The Deputies opposite do not like to hear the truth——
——the Ceann Comhairle is in charge.
This is women now, you cannot even give way to someone who wants to give you information.
A Deputy
Bring back John Bruton.
The Taoiseach would not say that to Deputy John Bruton.
The Taoiseach should withdraw that outrageous sexist remark.
Please, Deputies, there is no need for this.
On a point of order——
The Taoiseach should apologise.
Come on, tell us all about it.
If the Taoiseach asks a member of his staff to get out the unrevised copy of yesterday's debate he will see that I said the Minister of State — I even gave his name, Deputy Tom Kitt — the day before during the debate on the Diplomatic and Consular Officers (Provision of Services) Bill gave the commitment he had received from the Minister for Justice. Therefore, the Taoiseach did not get it right——
He got it wrong again.
Let us resolve that matter in another way——
I did not say the Bill——
I am trying to reply to the Fine Gael Whip, but the Fine Gael Party is not interested in letting me reply to him.
The Taoiseach should get his facts rights.
I want to say——
On a point of order——
I am on my feet, Deputy.
On a point of order——
I will hear no more spurious points of order. I am concerned that matters have become very untidy at this stage.
I am attempting to reply——
If we do not come back to order I will proceed to the business as ordered.
The Taoiseach is on his feet.
I stood up——
The Labour Party has been stood up.
——to respond to the Fine Gael Whip who asked a question which was in order, and I hope I will be given the opportunity to answer it.
On a point of order——
Please, Deputy, listen to the Taoiseach's reply.
I would agree——
On a point of order——
Please, Deputy Harte.
On a point of order, the Taoiseach made an offensive remark about women.
On a point of order.
Please desist, Deputy.
On a point of order, the Taoiseach has made an offensive remark about women and he should be asked to withdraw it.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
It was outrageous.
What is your point of order, Deputy Harte?
The Taoiseach would never have made a comment like that about a man.
He would never say that to Deputy De Rossa or Deputy Bruton.
I never——
I am in order, according to the Chair, in responding to the Fine Gael Whip. I made no remark about Deputy Harney or Deputy——
You made a remark about women——
A Deputy
The Taoiseach made a despicable remark about them.
I made a remark about Deputy Owen not allowing me the opportunity to answer the Fine Gael Whip.
The Taoiseach should withdraw his remark.
The Taoiseach should not dig the hole any deeper.
The real Taoiseach has emerged.
Let us please get away from this subject. I call Deputy Harte for his point of order.
You, a Cheann Comhairle, asked a Deputy on the Opposition benches to resume her seat because you were on your feet. Does this ruling not apply also to the Taoiseach?
It does, and to the Deputy also.
Why, a Cheann Comhairle, did you not ask the Taoiseach to resume his seat?
I am seeking to restore order, Deputy.
With respect, a Cheann Comhairle, you did not ask the Taoiseach to resume his seat.
Thank you very much, Deputy.
I have to answer Deputy Kenny's question about legislation which was in order but which I could not answer because Deputy Owen kept interrupting me.
The Taoiseach was giving wrong information; he was accusing me of lying.
I will answer the question now. It is the objective of the Government during the recess to publish those Bills which have not yet been published before the Christmas recess.
For the sake of the dignity of this House, and the women of Ireland who are represented here by all of us, may I ask the Taoiseach to withdraw the disparaging remark he made about women to Deputy Owen.
Deputies
Hear, hear.
I object strenuously to any misinterpretations of what I said. I said Deputy Owen jumped to her feet and was not allowing me to answer a legitimate question from Deputy Kenny.
The Taoiseach should stop digging the hole any deeper.
Deputies can try to twist what I said all they like but that is the reality, and that is what the record will show.
We are not deaf or stupid. The Taoiseach should withdraw that remark which he made in the heat of the moment.
I wonder what the Taoiseach's daughters would have to say about that kind of disparaging remark.
The Taoiseach should withdraw that disparaging remark.
I am proceeding now to the business as ordered. I call the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach to make an announcement.