The Order of Business shall be as follows: No. 14, motion re Apprenticeship Levy Act, 1994, (Suspension of Levy), Regulations, 2000 – Draft; No. 15, motion re Merchant Shipping (Investigation of Marine Casualties) Bill, 1999, and No. 37, National Minimum Wage Bill, 2000 – Order for Report and Report and Final Stages. It is 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 10.30 p.m.; Nos. 14 and 15 shall be decided without debate; and Report and Final Stages of No. 37 shall be taken today and the proceedings thereon, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 10.30 p.m. tonight by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down and accepted by the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Private Members' Business shall be No. 90 – motion re Broadcasting.
Order of Business.
There are three proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed to? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 14 and 15 agreed to?
No. Would the Taoiseach agree that we should have a short discussion on the fact that many people are unable to complete their apprenticeships because phases four and six of their apprenticeships, which must be completed in institutes of technology, are not being completed because the institutes have no places for apprentices? This is a crisis and we should debate it here in the House.
If the Opposition wants a debate about this, perhaps we can have one some time in the future but we have ordered other business for today. As I understand it, the matter raised by Deputy Bruton is being looked at and other arrangements are being put in place.
They are not. This problem is getting worse. The Taoiseach should give the House an undertaking that the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment will make a statement on this matter in lieu of a debate on this subject. Will she agree to make a statement on this problem concerning the institute of technology places for apprentices within the next week?
The Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, tells me that there are an extra 1,800 places available but if there is a reason for a debate on this some time in the future, I do not have a problem with that.
I can assure the Taoiseach that FÁS is very concerned about this matter and its representatives have said so to me within the past two weeks. I would ask that the Government would make arrangement for a discussion on this subject shortly.
There is one other question to put to the House, the proposal for dealing with No. 37. Is that agreed?
May I ask about No. 15?
We have dealt with that but I will hear your question.
I also want to ask the Taoiseach a question about No. 15. I have no problem with the Bill being deferred from tomorrow for the reasons given by the Minister's office, but will the Taoiseach indicate when the Merchant Shipping (Investigation of Marine Casualties) Bill, 1999, will be taken in Committee, having been postponed from tomorrow?
We will take that question on the Order of Business after we deal with the third proposal.
My question was along those lines.
We will take those two questions then. Deputy Bruton on No. 37.
I cannot agree to the Order of Business unless we get an assurance that there will be a debate on the Lisbon Summit. Those who watch television will have seen the British Prime Minister accounting to his Parliament and being closely questioned on the outcome of the summit as far as it affects Britain. This sovereign Parliament should debate the outcome of the summit just as promptly as the one across the water. I understand the Government has refused to have a debate on the Lisbon Summit any time this week and that is not acceptable. I want an assurance from the Taoiseach that we will have that debate either today or tomorrow. Otherwise I cannot agree to the Order of Business.
I am wondering what is the Taoiseach's attitude to this matter. Would he regard, as I do, that statements on summits are less than satisfactory and that, while he should report back to this House, it might be more effective if he was to go to the Committee on European Affairs to give a detailed response on the outcome of the summit with questions and answers?
I would agree with Deputy Bruton. It is unacceptable that there is no report from this summit bearing in mind the matters which were discussed. Will the Taoiseach indicate when it is intended to report to this House, either to a plenary session or to a relevant committee of the House?
As I understand it, it was suggested that we would take statements on the Lisbon and Cairo Summits together. If the Opposition wants them taken separately, I have no difficulty with taking them separately in the usual format.
It was suggested by the Government that the two would be taken next week. The Opposition wants the Lisbon Summit dealt with this week. Could we have an assurance that it will be dealt with today or tomorrow?
The Taoiseach referred to the usual format. Will he accept what I have said already, that the usual format is highly unsatisfactory, that it could be much more efficiently transposed by simply faxing each other the relevant statements which we read in this House, that there is no question and answer dialogue and that it is a pointless exercise in its present form and is far from being productive?
A give way mechanism can be used.
Deputy Quinn without interruption.
Does the Taoiseach consider, in the context of the report on the summits, that there should be a mechanism for a question and answer session?
What happens is what has always happened in terms of summits and I have no proposals to change this. Questions are tabled in relation to summits – about 20 questions have been tabled already on the summit. We have a debate and then questions, as happens all the time, and I have no reason to change that format.
Deputy Bruton, we cannot have a debate on the issue.
I appreciate that the Taoiseach has responded to our request for a debate this week, to be held today or tomorrow, and I thank him for that. Could the problem regarding questions be more readily resolved if Ministers were willing to adhere to requests from other Members to give way to allow questions be put to them?
That does not arise at this stage. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 37 agreed? Agreed.
I informed Deputies Finucane and Bell that I would hear them on legislation.
I have no problem with Committee Stage of the Bill being deferred on the basis of advice from the Minister's office which in turn sought advice from the Office of the Attorney General. However, the Bill has already been deferred a number of times and I ask the Taoiseach to indicate when Committee Stage will be taken. Will we be consulted about the advice from the Office of the Attorney General before it is taken?
That is not a matter appropriate to the Order of Business.
The Bill was published in December and I understand it will now go to the select committee. I think there is a requirement for discussion between the Department and the committee, but I understand they will shortly be ready to take it. There is some reason for raising questions on the matter. The reason for the discussion concerns allowing the amendment to be taken on Committee Stage.
Can I clarify whether the delay is due to the fact that it is trying to give scope to the Department of the Marine and Natural Resources to—
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
Outside the House the Government has promised to introduce legislation to provide for a reception and integration agency to deal with asylum seekers and has also decided to provide 1,000 places in what will be known as flotels. Will we have a debate shortly on this legislation? In particular, will the idea of flotels be debated in the House and approved by it before being put into effect? Will the view of the House be taken on this issue?
I understand that in the past hour the Tánaiste gave a press conference saying she will issue 28,500 visas per year to bring people to the country and that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform issued a press statement announcing he has already signed 300 deportations orders. When will we have a statement of complementary Government policy? In replies I have received in the House over the past three weeks I was informed that the immigration legislation and the work permits legislation would be introduced at the end of the year. Is there any change in that timeframe or are the promises of the Tánaiste to be implemented in advance of the passing of such legislation? Will there be a debate on immigration before the specific measures outlined in the statement of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform are implemented?
I call the Taoiseach on promised legislation. However, I remind the House that Question No. 35 on today's Order Paper will probably be taken tomorrow. Therefore, we cannot have a debate on the issue, but we can hear from the Taoiseach on promised legislation.
It is a pity the Government does not respect the fact that questions have been tabled before issuing statements outside the House.
Amending work permit legislation will be brought forward, but the announce ment by the Tánaiste does not require it. What was announced by the Tánaiste will and can happen straight away. The reception and integration measures will require legislation. Of course, we already have the amendments in the 1996 immigration legislation.
When will the reception and integration legislation be introduced?
As soon as possible. The Departments of Foreign Affairs and Justice, Equality and Law Reform are working on it.
Is it still envisaged that it will be the end of the year before the work permits legislation and the immigration legislation are introduced?
It will be later in the year.
It is not clear from the Taoiseach's reply whether the announcement which the Tánaiste is reported to have made by way of a press briefing earlier this afternoon, indicating that work permits to provide for the immigration of 28,500 workers in special skills categories, will require new legislation for its implementation. If specific legislation is to be implemented, when will it be published? If legislation is not required, as the Taoiseach seemed to indicate, when will the details of what the Tánaiste proposed be available?
(Mayo): I ask the Taoiseach for an assurance that the legislation he is talking about in the context of the announcement by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will be a new Bill, that we are not talking about amending existing legislation as happened with the Immigration Bill or the Illegal Immigrants (Trafficking) Bill, the entire thrust of which was changed on Committee Stage, with due process being severely undermined.
Will the Taoiseach clarify whether he has sought the advice of the Attorney General on the constitutionality of confining asylum seekers to flotels?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
In the context of proposed legislation—
The content of proposed legislation is not a matter for the Order of Business.
In the context of proposed legislation—
He wants internment camps.
Will the Taoiseach clarify whether the legislation envisages flotels as accommodation or as a form of internment?
Will there be a naming ceremony?
The work permits system currently in existence is not on a statutory basis. The Tánaiste announced previously that the system will be put on a statutory basis and the provisions in the announcement today can operate immediately pending this.
Will we see the mechanism—
We cannot have a debate on the matter. The issue will be raised at Taoiseach's Question Time tomorrow.
The reception and integration system will form separate legislation and will not be introduced by way of amendment.
Regarding the issue raised by Deputy Shatter, I think it will be seen that this is part of an enormous and comprehensive range of issues which have been dealt with. Flotels form about one-thirteenth of the measures. I do not know where the Deputy got the notion that people would be corralled or interned.
The Minister of State, Deputy O'Donnell, made reference to it last week.
We are providing accommodation and it is obvious that the Deputy's knowledge is entirely limited.
Where will the flotels be located?
It is part of an large range of comprehensive measures.
The regime governing work permits is not currently on a statutory basis. That regime as it operates currently requires an employer to make an application for a work permit on behalf of somebody outside the State. Will the Taoiseach clarify whether the 28,500 immigrant workers will have to be identified in advance by employers?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
No, but I am trying to clarify the response.
I appreciate that, Deputy, but it is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
These matters are announced outside the House.
The Taoiseach referred to legislation.
This has been debated for long enough.
We are not trying to debate the issue.
As I pointed out there are questions on the Order Paper and there will be an opportunity for Members to pursue the matter.
I am trying to clarify whether legislation to put the scheme relating to work permits on a statutory basis will give effect to the existing scheme or whether it will be totally reformed.
The content of legislation is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
The scheme will be reformed.
When will Members be provided with details?
(Dublin West): When will there be a debate on Eircom's announcement that it is to shed 3,500 jobs only months after privatisation? Does the Taoiseach think that is a disgrace? Will he comment on this?
That is not appropriate to the Order of Business and the Deputy must find another way to raise the issue.