It is proposed to take Nos. 4 and 5. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that (1) the proceedings on the Report and Remaining Stages of No. 4, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 6.45 p.m. by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall in relation to amendments include only those set down by, or accepted by, the Minister for Finance; and (2) Private Members' Business shall be No. 10 and the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal for dealing with No. 4 satisfactory? Agreed. Is the proposal that Private Members' Business shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. agreed? Agreed.
Will the Taoiseach ensure that the Government will pause and reflect before taking precipitate action on the educational grants issue, particularly third level grants, which goes against the combined weight of all the expert opinion in this area? It would be helpful if the Taoiseach indicated to the House his views or the early decisions he intends to take on this matter.
As the House is aware, there is a number of commitments in the Programme for Government in regard to third level education, support for students at third level. assistance of various kinds for their families, the provision of additional places, etc. All these matters are being examined in the light of available resources.
There is a motion on this issue before the House but will the Taoiseach be more forthcoming? Will decisions be made at an early date or will there be a major debate on the de-Buitléir report by the committee and in the House before any decisions are made?
The previous Government was in possession of the de Buitléir report for many months but failed to publish it, for some reason. This Government has published the report——
It was forced to publish it.
We are allowing a debate to take place, a debate which for some reason I do not understand the Deputy's party did not want to take place. I am glad this debate is now taking place.
The Government was forced to publish the report.
Bite your tongue, Mary.
(Interruptions.)
Deputy Harney is offering.
Will the Taoiseach confirm that the Garda were aware for some weeks that a crime of the magnitude of the one committed last night was about to happen, that they had alerted certain vulnerable people? If that is the case, does the Government plan to improve the existing criminal justice provisions to ensure that they are adequate to deal with racketeering of this kind?
The matter raised by the Deputy is not strictly relevant now but she has adverted to legislation——
I am referring to the Programme for Government and the Government's legislative plans.
In that regard, the Taoiseach, if he wishes, may comment.
At this stage I can do no more than say that an armed robbery took place at 6.30 p.m. yesterday at the Brinks-Allied premises at Clonshaugh and that a substantial sum of money was taken. It will not be possible to say how much money was taken until the sums involved are verified with the various institutions which had consigned cash to the premises at Clonshaugh. A full Garda investigation got underway within minutes of the robbery taking place. The Minister for Justice has been in direct contact with the Garda Commissioner and has reported twice to me on the progress being made in the investigations. I appeal to anyone who may have information which would be helpful to the Garda Síochána in identifying the perpetrators of this crime and recovering the money to assist the Garda Síochána in every way possible. It is through united community action that we will be able to get information which not only will deal with the perpetrators of this crime but will deter further attempts of this serious nature.
On that matter——
Sorry, Deputy, that may not give rise to debate.
On the Order of Business——
Yes.
——will the Taoiseach provide Government time today for statements on this extremely serious matter? It appears from all the reports that this robbery took place within minutes, was meticulously planned and there was——
This matter can be raised in many other ways, it is not in order now.
With all due respect, a Cheann Comhairle, I have asked the Taoiseach to provide time to discuss this very serious matter. This is a matter of grave public concern——
If we can find time for a debate on this matter Deputies will be facilitated.
I note the Taoiseach did not deny what I said, that the Garda were aware that a crime of this kind was planned for some weeks. When will the Government be bringing forward proposals to establish the fraud agency mentioned in the Programme for Government?
The Deputy should not be so quick to draw inferences of an alarmist character from comments I have made here. The position is that the Garda, of course, have information on an ongoing basis about threats of crime in general but it would be quite wrong to say or to infer that the Garda had any specific information in respect of this particular crime. I did not say that and I do not think anyone would realistically expect that they did because if they had, it would not have occurred. It is common knowledge that the Garda have general information all the time about threats from particular groups of criminals. I can say that they had indications in general but no indications in particular about this crime.
In regard to the second part of the Deputy's question, work is proceeding on the fraud legislation. It will be ready later this year. If the Deputy will bear with me while I find the relevant text.
It is hard to find it when you did not write it.
(Interruptions.)
I am glad to see so many Deputies opposite are awake.
Legislation drawing on the report of the Law Reform Commission to update the law in regard to fraud is being drafted. Work on the preparation of a general scheme of a Bill is at an advanced stage but, as the House will be aware, the general scheme of a Bill is an early stage in the process. The next stage is the drafting of wording for specific sections and that has not yet commenced.
Given the Taoiseach's stated commitment to making this House more relevant to the people outside it and to involving Deputies in the formulation of legislation, would he be agreeable to allowing time for a debate in this House on the implications of the de Buitléir report for so many sectors in our society and in relation to the third level grants structure? Surely that is a reasonable request. I have been inundated with requests from Members on my side of the House who want a debate on the implications of this report and permission for it should be forthcoming from the Government side.
The matter raised by Deputy Martin is more appropriate to Question Time.
Arising out of the Taoiseach's last response on fraud legislation, is the Government adequately equipped with parliamentary draftsmen? Is there a chief parliamentary draftsman at present and is the Government in a position to guarantee the House that there are adequate resources for the drafting of legislation?
Again, this is matter that should be raised in another way.
If the Deputy wishes to table a question about that important matter he will be given a very full answer.
Will the Taoiseach allow time for a debate?
I congratulate the energetic Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht for taking action in relation to the Lusitania by signing the Underwater Heritage Order. Arising from that, will the Taoiseach confirm that he has requested Minister Higgins to visit the site?
(Interruptions.)
A Deputy
With or without oxygen.
You cannot get your way overground so you might as well try underground.
I cannot think of any member of the Government who would be more suited to such an adventurous exploit.
On a more serious note, given the fact that a women's group is being threatened with eviction in this State because it is providing information in relation to the termination of pregnancies in England, will the Taoiseach confirm to the House that this long promised legislation to allow Irish women travel to England, fully counselled, with full information and, hopefully, with their medical records, will be introduced in this session? The legislation which was almost ready before the fall of the last Government should not be put on the long finger.
The Government and the Minister for Health are reviewing the legislation at present. It is a matter that has to be dealt with.
Given the serious concern being expressed here and indeed in many other countries with regard to the common fisheries policy, does the Government propose to follow through on a commitment of the previous Minister for the Marine, Deputy Andrews, and publish a White Paper on this topic? Will the Taoiseach agree that such a White Paper is urgently required?
Again, that is not strictly relevant to the business. before us.
There was a commitment from the previous Minister to publish a White Paper and it is a matter of some urgency and deep concern to the Irish fisheries organisations.
The Deputy would be well advised to table a parliamentary question to the new Minister for the Marine on that topic when he will get a full answer.
The Taoiseach informed the House that no decision was taken yesterday on changes to the legislation brought into force before Christmas. A spokesperson said last night that the Government was considering the graduation of penalties. Did the Government discuss this matter yesterday and if so, what did it decide? Has the Minister been given carte blanche to change the law or will it be brought back to Cabinet again?
This matter should be raised in a more appropriate manner. It is not relevant now and the Deputy knows that quite well.
It is an amendment to legislation promised by the Government.
Promised by one of their spokesmen.
A Deputy
A named anonymous source.
I hesitate to rule against the Deputy but he has introduced quite a lot of extraneous matter.
The Minister for Arts, Culture and the Gaeltacht indicated his intention to make an Underwater Heritage Order in respect of the Lusitania but is the Taoiseach satisfied that there is sufficient surveillance of that wreck at present to protect it from plunder?
I cannot permit the session being transformed into a mini Question Time.
I am not satisfied to a sufficient degree——
Deputy Quill knows how to proceed and my office will assist her in the matter. I now call Deputy Harney.
I am certain the Taoiseach would like to answer this question.
Deputy Quill's question is more admissible than some of those that have been admitted this morning.
Thank you very much.
It is quite clear that any surveillance must have a statutory base and the Minister is dealing with the matter in the proper sequence in that he is taking powers to make an order which will give a statutory base for such surveillance and protection, but without the steps that the Minister first intends to take in regard to making a protection order under the legislation. There would be no legal basis for any surveillance.
We are serving notice on the plunders, are we?
Yes.
On equality legislation, what is its standing now? As the Taoiseach will know, there is grave concern among many women's organisations since the full gender equality section was dropped from the Programme for Government. That section was a copy of what was in the Programme for Competitiveness and Work. Has the Government dropped the section completely, are there other proposals for it or is it still interested in the issue?
The general scheme of that legislation is with the parliamentary draftsman. It is a fairly advanced stage.
On a point of order, will the Taoiseach refer to the parliamentary draftsperson if he is talking about gender legislation?
He is referred to as the "PD".