It is proposed to take Nos. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) Nos. 3 and 4 shall be decided without debate; (2) the proceedings on the Report and Final Stages of No. 5, 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 or accepted by the Minister for the Marine; and (3) Private Members' Business shall be No. 14 and the proceedings thereon shall be brought to a conclusion at 8.30 p.m. tonight.
Order of Business.
Is the proposal that Nos. 3 and 4 be decided without debate satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 5 satisfactory and agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal that Private Members' Business shall conclude this evening at 8.30 p.m. satisfactory and agreed?
I want to ask the Taoiseach one question on legislation. Over the past number of weeks the Taoiseach has assured this side of the House in regard to numerous Bills. We have now received the Committee of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Bill and the Dumping at Sea Bill for which we are grateful. As the Taoiseach knows, the Order of Business this week deals mainly with reports which really should be dealt with in Committee. We agreed to that on the basis that there was not any other legislation. Will the Taoiseach tell the House now or give a notification later today of the legislation we can expect for the remainder of this session?
The Government has published five Bills in the past two weeks. That speaks for itself. If the Opposition has agreed with the Government not to take them straight away, that is fair enough from the Opposition's point of view, but the Government cannot be criticised for the delay. However, I would make the point — and this is relevant to the tendency to raise this matter on the Order of Business because it is the only matter the Opposition is allowed to raise — that legislation is not an end in itself. Legislation should only be introduced where it is necessary to regulate the activities of citizens and it should only be introduced when it has been properly and carefully drafted. Any legislation involves some form of infraction on civil liberties. We should not regard the production of legislation as if it was some sort of industrial product.
Adjourn the House.
Legislation should only be introduced as and when necessary.
When the Taoiseach gets his act together he should come back to us.
I would remind the Taoiseach that we raise questions on legislation he and his colleagues announce. We do not make up the names of certain items of legislation. The Taoiseach's job is to tell me when legislation will be published.
That is what I do in this House in a more informative way than any of my predecessors have done in so far as I can usually give precise answers to specific questions on legislation.
The Order Paper speaks for itself.
I would remind the House that I regard it as of greater importance than meeting time limits to ensure that legislation, before being introduced, has been properly considered and drafted in the most effective way possible——
And agreed by the three parties.
It is a democracy.
——because we owe it to the citizens to ensure that legislation is properly drafted before it is passed.
This matter should not give rise to a debate.
I do not want a debate, I want an answer to the question I asked. Will the Taoiseach tell me now or later the legislation we can expect this session? It is a simply question.
We are having much repetition.
I have answered questions in regard to items of legislation and I will continue to do so.
The Taoiseach must accept that the House is not working well at present. Debates on reports on the floor of the House are not appropriate. Legislation should be debated here and reports sent to committees. We have the daft situation where tomorrow we will discuss the de Buitléir report, which has been ignored by the Government, in order to fill in time. The way the House is operating at present is not acceptable and it is particularly difficult for smaller parties to be represented on the 22 committees and to also be present in the House to discuss ridiculous issues such as reports on conferences which took place in the distant past and on which we can have no influence.
Does the Deputy want to put the report on women's health into a committee?
It should be debated in committee.
The conference is long over; that is not what we need for women here——
(Interruptions.)
Let us hear Deputy Harney without interruption.
We should have an appropriate debate and not a daft debate on a conference which is long over and to which the Government made a very poor contribution.
The Deputy should address the Chair.
The Deputy's last comment is not true.
It is true. The Minister for Education experienced problems with the food in Beijing and she may not have been at the conference. The Government's contribution was appalling.
I experienced no problems and I will present a report to the House.
(Interruptions.)
I want to dissuade Members from interrupting, especially from sitting positions. If Deputies wish to interrupt they should at least seek the approval of the Chair.
On the announcement made last night by the Minister for Justice in regard to the representative body for the Garda Síochána, will the Taoiseach say if legislation is promised, when we will see it or if it is being drafted? Has the Government agreed in principle to bring forward legislation to change the constitution of the Garda representative body?
Legislation will be introduced in this area and it is now being promised by me in the House.
A Deputy
When will it be introduced?
When it is ready. Deputy Harney, and other Opposition Deputies, seem to have forgotten that we have an extremely effective committee system.
It is not effective.
The committees have no business.
The Committee Stages of a large number of Bills are being dealt with in committee. Previously such debates took place in the House. As a result there is, naturally, less business dealt with in the House because more business is being transacted elsewhere.
There is no business.
We could clog up the House with legislation if we wanted to and if we insisted on taking the Committee Stage of every Bill here. If that is what the Opposition wants we can make the necessary arrangements. However, it will mean that the committee system, a good innovation introduced by a previous Government with the support of the then Opposition, will fall into disuse. It is better to put up with these very superficial criticisms from Deputies Ahern and Harney than to depart from a very good system of dealing with the bulk of legislation in committee. If this means that the legislation is occasionally passed through this House so fast that Deputies can ask the sort of questions that were asked today so be it; I am happy to come in and give the same answer day after day.
I am taking my cue from the Taoiseach that legislation should only be introduced when necessary. Given that it is necessary and will have to be passed in 1995, when can we expect to see the legislation on the security of the local loans fund?
Tomorrow.
When will it be taken?
When will we see the new courts and court officers Bill or must every conceivable judicial vacancy be first filled by the Government?
It will be introduced early next month.
What about the second part of my question?
I am concerned that the universities Bill is being formulated outside the House in consultation with the heads of universities, the media etc. When will that legislation be brought before the House? Will the Taoiseach give an undertaking to Opposition spokespersons on Education that the position papers on the legislation——
There may be no elaboration now.
——will at least be given to them? It is a disgrace——
Please, Deputy Martin.
It is wrong to come into the House and say that the committees are effective when legislation is being formulated outside the committees and the House.
Deputy Martin may not ignore the Chair in this fashion.
It is very difficult to put up with the nonsense we have had from the Taoiseach this morning.
Deputy Martin has given us a good insight into Fianna Fáil's new attitude to social partnership. Obviously, Fianna Fáil believes it is wrong for the Minister to consult the relevant interests before introducing legislation.
The point I am making is that we are the last people to see it.
Unlike Fianna Fáil, I believe it is correct for the Minister to do as she is doing and to consult with the relevant interests in the university sector before introducing the legislation in the House.
Is it correct that we should be the last people to see it?
Deputy Martin will have to restrain himself.
I am happy to be able to tell the Deputy that the legislation will be introduced next April.
I am a legislator and I have been elected by the people to legislate.
The Deputy should have the manners not to interrupt me.
The legislation should first be——
I must ask Deputy Martin to restrain himself or else leave the House. I call Deputy Dermot Ahern.
On the question of Dáil reform, two weeks ago we changed the repeat rule in regard to questions. During the debate on the motion Deputies on this side of the House made some pertinent points and described the change as minimalist. I have a long list of the unanticipated difficulties the change in the repeat rule has given rise to for Opposition Deputies and the staff of the House. I ask the Taoiseach to urgently bring forward an amended motion on this topic.
I understand the queries to which the Deputy referred are the subject of careful consideration. If amendments are required to deal with any anomalies which are identified during the examination these will be made.
I call Deputy Ned O'Keeffe.
May I——
Order, the matter to which the Deputy referred is primarily one for the Whips, the Committee on Procedure and Privileges and, ultimately, this House.
I accept that but this is the only opportunity I have to put questions to the Taoiseach. It is not correct to leave all such matters to the Whips as we receive no word on certain issues. Given that it takes six months to one year to change our Standing Orders, will the Taoiseach undertake to introduce an amended motion as expeditiously as possible to deal with any anomalies identified during the examination?
I said that I will.
Given the failure of the file-carrying Cabinet Minister in Europe to negotiate a deal for Irish Steel, will the Taoiseach make a statement on the future of the company?
I ruled on that matter earlier.
There is panic in Cork this morning——
The Deputy is contributing to it.
I call Deputy O'Dea.
On the Taoiseach's remarks about promised legislation and his replies to questions on specific legislation, I wish to point out to him that on 30 May last he promised me that the courts and court officers Bill would be introduced before the summer recess, last month he promised me it would be introduced during that month, this month he promised me it would be introduced during this month and this morning he said it would be introduced next month? How can we take what he says seriously?
Nobody will take the Deputy seriously.
I give the House the best estimate as to the date for the introduction of items of legislation.
I can give the Taoiseach several other examples.
I do not draft the legislation and all I can do is give the best estimate as to the date for its introduction. If Deputies would prefer me to revert to the practice of my predecessor and give the answer "as soon as possible" to all questions I will do so.
It would be more honest.
My answers are given in good faith and are based on the best available information at the time.
The Taoiseach is being misled by his Ministers.
When is it proposed to introduce the trade marks Bill? It is now two years since it was promised by the relevant Minister. I understand it has long since been drafted and approved.
It is my best information that that legislation will be introduced early in December.
I have tried to use the procedures of this House correctly. In reply to a matter raised by me on the Adjournment the Minister concerned informed me that he was not responsible. I then tabled a question to the Taoiseach in an attempt to find out who the responsible Minister was, but his office transferred the question to the Minister who had previously stated that he had no responsibility in the matter. Will the Taoiseach——
The Deputy will have to raise that matter at another time. I am proceeding to the business of the House proper.