Before coming to the Order of Business I propose to deal with a number of related notices under Standing Order 30 from Deputies John Bruton and Pat Rabbitte. I propose to call on the Deputies in the order in which they submitted their notices to my office. I call first Deputy John Bruton to state the matter of which he has given notice to me.
Request to Move Adjournment of Dáil Under Standing Order 30.
I wish to seek, under Standing Order 30, a debate on the changes that will now have to made to the Government's medium term plans as approved by the Dáil last year for taxation and for spending on non-EU aided services to make up the £1 billion shortfall in EU funding under the Community Support Framework, in light of the Government's stated intention of continuing with all projects regardless of the £1 billion EU funding shortfall. The Government has been persistently economic and tardy with the truth in this matter and it is time we had the full truth.
The Deputy may only convey to the House the message he conveyed to me. He has slightly elaborated thereon. I now call on Deputy Rabbitte to state the matter of which he has given notice to me.
In accordance with Standing Order 30 I wish to advise you that at the commencement of public business today I intend to request leave to move the adjournment of the Dáil to discuss the following specific and important matter of public interest, namely: the confirmation that the European Union funding for the National Development Plan will be £1 billion less than promised by the Government and that there will be substantial cutbacks in projects listed in the plan and the consequences for economic and social development in the country especially in regard to unemployment.
Having considered the matters fully I do not consider them to be contemplated by Standing Order 30 and, therefore, I cannot grant leave to move the motions. These issues are unlikely to develop significantly before the Dáil will, in practice, have an opportunity of discussing them.
On that point, Sir, have you received information which the rest of the House has not as to the actual date of publication of this document formally and its debate here and also as to the date of the adjournment of the Dáil? Without that information it is impossible to come to that conclusion.
The Chair takes the view that there are ample ways and means open to Deputies to raise these matters.
You have made a different point. You said that the House will, in the normal way, come to debate this matter before it develops further. What is the basis for that assumption?
It is a matter for the Whips to consider in the first instance.
I am sorry, Sir, this is not a matter for the Whips. You have made the statement that the House will come to debate this matter. You made that decision independently of any discussion.
I have no knowledge as to when this House will adjourn.
On that basis how have you come to the conclusion that this matter is not in order?
The Deputy should not continue that argument.
I would like to continue the argument with you in another forum because I feel that your judgment may be less than fully founded in this case.
The Chair has merely indicated to the House, as he has so often done before, that in matters of this kind there are ample ways and means under the procedures of this House to deal with such matters. That is my assumption.
Presumption might be a better term.
On the same point, if it is the case that this document is available to journalists surely it is absurd that it is not available to Members of this House. The Minister of State at the Department of Finance told the House two weeks ago that the 8.5 per cent pro rata cut had been accepted by the European Commission——
You cannot debate the matter now, Deputy Rabbitte.
——and now it turns out to be the exact opposite.
I am calling now for the Order of Business proper.
If this is not a sufficiently urgent matter contemplated by this Standing Order, what conceivably could ever be discussed under this Standing Order?
I have advised Deputies how to proceed.