Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 24 Jan 1995

Vol. 447 No. 11

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take Nos. 1, 9, 8, 10, Nos. 10a and 10b on a Supplementary Order Paper, and No. 3. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 1, 9, 8, 10a and 10b shall be decided without debate. Private Members' Business shall be No. 28.

Is the proposal that, notwithstanding anything contained in Standing Orders, Nos. 1, 9, 8, 10, 10a and 10b shall be decided without debate agreed?

I agree, Sir, but I wish to make a brief point on No. 8, the motion discharging Members from committees and appointing new Members to committees. Naturally the House has to agree quickly to set up new committees, we are anxious to facilitate the Government in doing that and we agree to the standing down of committees. This morning I received a document on Dáil reform, of which I had no notice. Will the Taoiseach give a commitment that that document which has fundamental changes, some with which I agree but others with which I totally disagree, will be referred to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges so that we can discuss it fully, otherwise things will be very difficult? There are four committees I have never heard of, and I do not know what they will do; neither do I know whether their four chairpersons will be paid——

You can be sure they will.

——nor their terms of reference. I would be concerned also that the chairpersons of other committees will be dumped. I would like to have these matters discussed, there are also time changes, the length of the sitting day and the number of days we are sitting. Will the Taoiseach give an assurance that these matters will be referred to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges where they will be debated and we will not be found wanting in trying to find a resolution to the problems?

Those proposals are for discussions between the Whips and are put forward in that context. I think we should allow that discussion to take place before going any further. The Government is anxious to proceed with proposals along these lines as soon as possible and will be engaging in intensive discussions with the Opposition Whips at an early date on those proposals.

I ask that the proposals be discussed at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and not by the Whips.

It is open to the Deputy to suggest to his Whip that he raise that possibility with the Chief Whip, Deputy Barrett, when the discussions take place.

I have already done that.

There is an opportunity for that to be further discussed. If the Party Whips are discussing a matter I do not think we should attempt to do their job for them.

I agree to the disbandment of all the present committees and the standing down of the chairpersons on the basis of an understanding with the Government. The issue of time changes and new committees are far broader than a matter just for the Whips, they are fundamental to the order of the House and how we do our business. Most of the Fianna Fáil proposals are contained in the Programme for a Partnership Government and the programme A Government of Renewal but the document presented today is different: committees never mentioned in any report or document are proposed. I would like to have these matters discussed by the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and the Taoiseach should give that commitment.

It would be more reasonable if we were to allow the Whips to discuss this matter for the next few days and we will then see if taking it to the Committee on Procedure and Privileges is the best course of action. For my part I would be a bit worried that things could get bogged down at the Committee on Procedure and Privileges. Perhaps we can proceed through discussion between the Whips to see how we get on——

What is wrong with the Committee on Procedure and Privileges?

I would not be adverse to any arrangements that command the widest possible support in this House. The Leader of the Opposition has acknowledged that he received these proposals only yesterday.

And he is raising them immediately after having received them. We are suggesting that they should be discussed between the Whips and if the Deputies have problems with any of the proposals it may well be that those problems can be dealt with by the Whips.

I am delighted with the Taoiseach's assurance that these proposals will not proceed unless there is agreement and that they are merely for discussion because I understood the Government announced they were establishing these committees, regardless of agreement, and I think that would be a mistake. Will the Taoiseach give an assurance that there will be full discussion and agreement before he proceeds to establish these additional committees?

The Deputy should not try to misstate what I said, I said we were willing to discuss these proposals between the Whips and to take on board constructive suggestions from the Opposition. However, we have not afforded a veto to any party on these proposals. These are the Government's proposals and the Government wishes to proceed with them but before we do we want to take into consideration the views of all parties——

Discuss them and then ram them through.

——in a constructive and open way and the way we propose to do that is by means of the traditional method, namely discussion between the Whips.

At this time, as the House well knows, I hear the views of certain Members in Opposition, I will be glad to hear them but I want to dissuade Members from any tendency to debate.

I understand there will be 17 committees in all. How many of them will have paid chairmen?

Are they all promised?

Will they all be Ministers of State?

All the information the parties opposite would like to obtain in regard to these proposals will be provided in the forum I suggested, namely through the Whips, which is the traditional forum for communication regarding proposals of this kind. I suggest that any questions the Opposition may have should be given to Deputy Dermot Ahern who can raise them at the Whips' meeting. That is a constructive way of doing it rather than attempting to do it in the House in an ad hoc way.

The Taoiseach said this was Government policy but the Programme for Government — the programme for reality as the Minister for Education called it yesterday — published on 15 December referred to only one of these committees. Seemingly, the other three emerged over the last few weeks. It seems ironic that when the Office for Environmental Protection was abolished——

It has not been abolished.

Yes, it has.

It was agreed at Cabinet——

I know all about it. The Taoiseach promised "simple Government". Those were his words on 15 December. I ask him for an assurance that, at a minimum, in advance of reasonable consultation with Opposition parties, their leaders or Whips — I am talking about a week or two weeks — the Government will not proceed to push these committees through the House this week or early next week.

I can give the Deputy such an assurance. There will be reasonable time for consultation.

I take it that items Nos. 1, 9, 8, 10, 10a and 10b are to be decided without debate? Agreed.

Top
Share