It is proposed to take item No. 17, Financial Motions by the Minister for Finance, 1997, (resumed); item No. 2, the Fisheries (Commissions) Bill, 1997, Order for Second Stage and Second and Remaining Stages shall be taken at 8.30 p.m. tonight and the order shall not resume thereafter. It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. and business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m.; and that the Second and Remaining Stages of No. 2 shall be taken today and the proceedings thereon, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 10 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. Private Members' Business shall be No. 44, Motion No. 16, concerning hepatitis C.
Order of Business.
There are two matters to be put to the House. Are the proposals for the late sitting agreed? Agreed. Are the proposals to deal with No. 2 agreed? Agreed.
Is it the Taoiseach's intention to call on the British Government to investigate recent allegations arising from the Widgery tribunal? Will he use his contacts with No. 10 Downing Street to reopen inquiries into this matter which occurred in 1972?
That matter would be more appropriately raised in the form of a parliamentary question.
With respect, I believe the Taoiseach might respond to my query because this is a very important matter.
The answer to the Deputy's question is "yes". That matter is engaging the attention of the Tánaiste. We understand the strong feelings of the families concerned and their belief that the reputations of their loved ones have not been vindicated in the appropriate way. The Government is anxious to pursue the matter through all normal diplomatic channels and I will take a personal interest in it.
When is it intended to publish legislation to provide for the establishment of the courts service?
It is intended to publish it later in the year.
When is it intended to sign the commencement order for the Control of Horses Bill which was passed before Christmas? There is an urgent need for the legislation, which has been placed to one side, to deal with a serious problem.
Does that come under the category of promised legislation?
That is a commencement order and does not come under the category. It is delegated legislation. I will ask the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Forestry to communicate with the Deputy.
Does the Taoiseach plan to visit Cork city in the near future, given that the upgrading of Waterford regional technical college was decreed by him in advance of his visit to that city last week?
I do not make decrees of that kind. Decisions in respect of third level institutions are made on objective grounds, not on any others.
Is the Taoiseach trying to downgrade Cork?
The concerns and views of the relevant institutions will be taken into account by the Minister for Education in a proper manner. However, I do have plans to visit Cork in the near future.
I congratulate the Taoiseach for speaking with his tongue in his cheek.
The Dunnes Stores/Lowry Oireachtas committee meets today for the first time to elect a chairman and deal with legal matters.
It is the second time the committee has met.
Deputy Byrne and other representatives of the Government side did not attend.
The committee meets today to discuss its business. Will the Taoiseach inform the House, from the information available, when former Judge Buchanan will send his report to the committee so that it can engage in real work? Last December I supported moves to make progress and the Tánaiste has helped matters progress. I did so on the basis that it would be a speedy process and Judge Buchanan's findings would be despatched to the committee to facilitate action. It seems that requisite progress is not being made.
No thanks to Fianna Fáil and its allies in the Progressive Democrats.
The Deputy should remain silent. Will the Taoiseach clarify the position?
I have dealt with similar questions from the Deputy and others on previous occasions. Judge Buchanan is independent in his functions and has been given a task to perform. I have no doubt he will perform it as quickly as possible. I do not expect that the committee will have a lengthy wait for the first report. However, I stress that this is a matter for Judge Buchanan and it is not for me to set a deadline or make suggestions on his behalf as to when he will complete the first or subsequent instalments of his work.
Does the Taoiseach agree that, when we engaged in this process in December, there was an understanding that we were seeking a speedy way to deal with the matter? It seems reasonable that, without undue interference, the Taoiseach could ask Judge Buchanan when the committee might be in a position to carry out some useful work.
I would answer "yes" to the first part of the Deputy's question and give a qualified "yes" to the second part. I can convey a general concern that the matter should be brought to a rapid conclusion. However, I do not wish to interfere, or to be construed as interfering, in any way with the inquiries Judge Buchanan wishes to undertake, over whatever length of time he deems necessary, to fulfil his mandate. It is important he should be given latitude to do the job as he sees fit.
I wish to seek the assistance of the Leas-Cheann Comhairle regarding a specific matter. Before Christmas, I asked the Taoiseach if his attention had been drawn to public disquiet regarding the nature of charges being brought by the Director of Public Prosecutions arising from serious driving incidents and he referred the matter to the Minister for Justice. Today I received a letter from the Ceann Comhairle's office to state that the Minister has no responsibility to the Dáil in respect of this matter, which is proper to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The Deputy should know that by now.
If invisibility is the best form of transparency, we appear to have reached the point where evasion means avoidance. Who is answerable to the House for the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions?
I am amazed at Deputy O'Donoghue. Is he not aware that there is an independent prosecution service in this State and that there is no political answerability for individual prosecutorial decisions made by the DPP? If there were, there would be a politicisation of the judicial and prosecutorial service which would be entirely inappropriate. Therefore, I am surprised the Deputy posed the question. I discern, from the way he raised his eyebrows, that he is not entirely sincere in his pursuit of this matter.
When in Opposition, Deputy Bruton was first to remind the then Taoiseach and others that they were politically responsible for the offices of the Attorney General and the Director of Public Prosecutions. Will he provide some level of transparency and begin answering questions?
I refer the Deputy to the legislation establishing the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. I believe it would repay study on his part.
When is it intended to introduce legislation to establish Teastas, the new national certifying authority? Does the Taoiseach agree with the Minister for Social Welfare, Deputy De Rossa, and the Ministers of State at the Department of Finance and Education, Deputies Coveney and Allen, that Cork regional technical college should be upgraded?
I believe the Deputy's contribution contains a question regarding promised legislation.
Legislation concerning Teastas is in preparation. The body itself has been established.
Is there a proposed timeframe regarding the introduction of the legislation?
It is expected to publish it in the latter part of the year.
With regard to the Dunnes Stores issue and the Compellability of Witnesses Bill, does the Taoiseach agree that a nasty cloud will hang over the House until the matter is brought to a conclusion? Will he agree to put a specific timeframe on this process to bring it to a conclusion?
We should not debate that matter now. It has been referred to already and the Taoiseach has responded.
Does the Taoiseach propose to answer Deputy Kitt's question? What is the present status of the Equal Status Bill? Has it been shelved or shafted? Has the Government resolved its differences on the Employment Equality Bill and when may we proceed with it?
I am sorry yet again to disappoint the Deputy but there are no differences on that matter. The Bill will be ready very soon and I look forward to the Deputy's contribution on it, which I have no doubt will be a model of precision.
May I have an answer to my question on the Equal Status Bill?
I have given the answer.
The Taoiseach did not answer my question on the Equal Status Bill. When will that Bill be before the House?
That is the question the Deputy asked and that is what I answered.
When will we see the Employment Equality Bill?
That Bill is before the House.
As chairman of the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs, will the Taoiseach agree he should intervene to resolve the administrative wrangling on this matter, as referred to by a Minister yesterday? It would be unfortunate if the task force report could not be dealt with. This is a matter that greatly affects many communities throughout the country and it is regrettable if officials are delaying progress on it. It needs to be pushed forward quickly.
The operational committee established by the Government, which has functioned since well before Christmas, brings together all the agencies delivering services relating to drugs. In the event of difficulties arising there is now a structure for resolving them. A group of senior officials deals with policy questions. In terms of political direction in the committee which I chair, any difficulties of an interagency character which may exist will be resolved swiftly within the structures established for that purpose.
We have received notice that the Minister of State at the Department of the Marine intends to bring in regulations to implement the findings of the task force which examined the management of wild salmon stocks off the coast. We were informed some months ago that the report would be debated in the House before the regulations were introduced. Is it intended that there will be a debate on the report?
I will investigate the possibility of having a discussion on the report to see if it can be fitted into the timetable in an appropriate way.
Will the Taoiseach say when Report Stage of the Employment Equality Bill will be taken? It is in a state of suspended animation and we are waiting to see if there is agreement in Government on Report Stage. The Minister said he had to withdraw the Bill to bring it to the attention of the Attorney General and the Government and would come back in due course with Report Stage. When is that likely to be?
Reasonably soon.
On Deputy Deasy's comment about the salmon task force report, as he rightly pointed out we received notification that the Minister intends to implement sections of it. The report is before the Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy but no date has been fixed for debate. Perhaps the Taoiseach will instruct the Minister to withhold implementation of the report until we have had an opportunity to debate it.
The Select Committee on Enterprise and Economic Strategy will discuss that matter tomorrow and will set a time for a fuller debate on it.