Ruairí Quinn
Question:1 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the plans, if any, for amendments to the Constitution he intends to bring forward within the lifetime of this Dáil; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [19835/00]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - Constitutional Amendments.
Trevor Sargent
Question:2 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach the referenda or preferenda, if any, planned for the current Dáil session. [20335/00]
John Bruton
Question:3 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach the plans he has for amendments to the Constitution or for referenda to be brought forward during the current Dáil session; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [21075/00]
Joe Higgins
Question:4 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach the plans he has to bring forward amendments to the Constitution within the lifetime of this Dáil. [21139/0]
John Bruton
Question:5 Mr. J. Bruton asked the Taoiseach if he has satisfied himself with the work of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [22940/00]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:6 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the progress to date of the work of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution; if he has received an interim report from the committee; and when a final report will be published. [24061/00]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 1 to 6, inclusive, together.
There are no plans to hold any referenda or preferenda in relation to constitutional amendments during the current Dáil session.
During the lifetime of this Dáil, it is hoped to hold a referendum in relation to the International Criminal Court. I understand that preparations are currently taking place in the Department of Foreign Affairs in relation to the ratification by Ireland of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. It is also hoped to hold a referendum in relation to other matters. However, it is not possible at this stage to give any further details.
I have not received an interim report on the progress to date of the work of the All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution, nor do I expect to receive one. As Deputies will be aware, the all-party committee is looking at and will report on various issues such as Parliament, the conduct of referenda, gender proofing, etc., and will report on each issue in due course.
Has the Taoiseach or anyone acting on his behalf informed or assured Independent Deputies that a referendum will definitely be held on the issue of abortion in spring next year?
This issue was last discussed prior to the summer recess when I met all the Independent Deputies. The Deputies specified their views on this matter and all of them indicated their hope to see a referendum being held during the life of this Dáil. I stated recently, as I did to the Independent Deputies when I met them prior to the summer, that the Government's position is that when the all-party committee reports on this matter, it will then be referred to the Cabinet subcommittee, which will make a decision. Until that happens, neither I, nor anyone acting on my behalf, can make a decision on this matter.
Can I take it that any Independent Deputy who has stated privately or in conversation that he or she has been assured by the Taoiseach or people acting authoritatively on his behalf that a referendum will be held on this issue in spring 2001 is not telling the truth? Is that a correct understanding of the Taoiseach's response?
I outlined my views to the Independent Deputies some months ago and I do not believe they have spoken to anyone else about this matter. They indicated their preference to me very strongly when I spoke to them and, in return, I outlined the Government position to them following the publication of the Green Paper. I presume they will raise this issue again when the Cabinet sub-committee has considered the report of the all-party committee. No decisions can be made until that report is presented to the House and considered by the Cabinet sub-committee so nobody could have made any promises one way or another.
Has the idea of holding a preferendum been considered as it would be less divisive although the issue itself will prove very divisive? Will the Taoiseach inform the House whether the Treaty of Nice will be subject to a referendum and whether the pledging of in excess of 800 troops to a 60,000 strong rapid reaction force will be the subject of even an advisory referendum? Is there a constitutional requirement for such a referendum in view of the fact that the Irish people did not explicitly sanction such an important and major departure from traditional foreign policy?
In reply to the Deputy's first question, we must await the outcome of discussions on this matter and must not pre-empt that. The all-party committee has worked very hard on the production of this report and I thank all its members and those who worked on the Green Paper for their efforts. I hope that we can avoid turning this into a divisive issue.
I stated recently that until we see what is concluded at Nice, I will not be in a position to say whether a referendum will be required. When matters are concluded, I will ask the Attorney General for his advice. Some people believe that a referendum is not necessary while others believe it may be. We will act on the advice we receive from the Attorney General.
Will the Taoiseach indicate whether any work has been done by the Attorney General or others on the possible wording or wordings of a constitutional amendment on the question of abortion?
No.
Will the Taoiseach assure the House that, in the event of the Government deciding on a wording and in the event of such wording receiving sufficient report in these Houses to be put before the people, this issue would be put to the people on its own and would not be grouped with other issues in view of its complexity?
That question is outside the scope of the questions on the Order Paper.
It is not because the questions refer to the lifetime of this Dáil. The Government may decide, for whatever reason, that at the end of the lifetime of this Dáil, two issues will be put to the people namely, the election of a new Dáil and a constitutional amendment on abortion. I urge the Taoiseach not to pursue such a course of action because the two issues—
We cannot go into detail on what issues may be put to the people by referendum.
I am not going into detail. Will the Taoiseach assure the House that any issue of this nature will be put to the people on its own?
I have not given any thought to whether the abortion issue would be put to the people on its own or with another matter but I will take on board the Deputy's comments.
The abortion issue is of such complexity that it should be dealt with on its own, not grouped with other questions as happened in 1992.
The All-Party Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution has completed its work and the report will be published next Wednesday.
The Taoiseach is aware of my interest, as a result of our international obligations, in transposing the International Criminal Court into law. A referendum is required on this issue about which the Taoiseach has communicated with me. Is it intended to produce the legislation directly or will the issue be referred to the all-party committee? I am not asking that the matter would be referred, nor am I seeking its referral as a delaying tactic but I am concerned that a referendum be held and legislation enacted as soon as possible.
Is the Taoiseach aware that the all-party committee has already produced four reports although the focus is on the upcoming fifth report? The committee has produced a series of recommendations for constitutional reform which date back over three and a half years. Does the Taoiseach agree that constitutional reform in the lifetime of this Government has proceeded at a snail's pace? Apart from that on local government reform nothing much has happened in relation to the recommendations. Where does the Taoiseach now stand in relation to the work of the committee and the recommendations?
While the first matter is one for the Minister for Foreign Affairs, I understand his intention is to try to get the legislation currently being drafted through the House early in the new year and then to go straight to a referendum. I do not think there would be an objection if the committee wanted to discuss this.
I thank the vice-chairman of the all-party committee for his work on the reports, including the fifth report. We have had four constitutional referendums in the life of the Government and I do not accept there has not been much work in this context. However, I accept that the second, third and fourth reports, which were published in 1997, 1998 and 1999, have made many recommendations. As I promised, I referred all those to the relevant Departments which have examined the merits of the individual recommendations. Some of the recommendations are technical and others are practical. The issue is whether they can be put together in a single referendum, which is unlikely given the number of issues involved. Some of the matters are straightforward and reasonably simple, some concern gender proofing and others are correctional in nature.
In most cases I have received reports back from the Departments. The Cabinet secretariat has been looking at how a number of these could be taken together. The Deputy is very familiar with these issues and I think he accepts that there would be great difficulty in trying to take them all together as there would be a very long list. The secretariat has been examining the possibility of multiple referendums which will give effect to as many recommendations as possible. I hope this is possible as many of the things put forward are very practical, but I have to await advice.
I know the Deputy is very keen on raising the judicial aspect and we are very anxious to deal with this. It is probable that this will have to be dealt with separately. The Chair is also very anxious to see the reform and updating of the judicial aspect. The Chair has written to me on the matter with detailed views on the impeachment process and how it can be updated. If we could finalise the two reports, namely that of the committee of which the Deputy is a member and the soon to be completed report of the committee on judicial ethics chaired by Mrs. Justice Susan Denham, then perhaps a referendum could be held, and we are considering this course of action.
I want to concentrate on abortion. Contrary to the extensive media reports, is the Taoiseach now saying that neither he nor the Government has any position on holding a referendum?
This is a matter for the Minister for Health and Children. I have already answered the question to the extent to which I am responsible.
I find the answer quite staggering. Yesterday I asked the Minister for Health and Children if—
Has the Deputy a relevant question?
The Taoiseach has just said something which I did not hear.
The question the Deputy has asked me was tabled by Deputy Quinn and has been referred to the Minister for Health and Children.
I raised this by way of question to the Minister for Health and Children and he did not give me any idea that he was responsible.
Has the Deputy an appropriate question for the Taoiseach?
In terms of the Taoiseach making any future decision, quite apart from the report of the all-party committee, is he aware there is a serious danger that any change to the Constitution will bring us into conflict with our international obligations? This issue was raised by the UN committee with the Attorney General.
I suggest the Deputy tables a separate question on the matter. I call Deputy John Bruton.
This is a very important question.
I have no doubt that everybody who submits a question considers it very important, but it is not appropriate to the questions on the Order Paper.
The Taoiseach referred to the all-party committee, and rightly so. However, there is another aspect to the issue which is equally important—
But we are not going into detail on any specific item which might come before the people by way of referendum.
It is not specific at all. I am referring to general international obligations. Is the Taoiseach aware of the difficulty in this regard?
It does not arise under these six questions. I ask the Deputy to table a separate question.
Therefore the Taoiseach will not answer that either.
I call Deputy John Bruton.
What is the likely timeframe for the consideration by the Cabinet subcommittee of the forthcoming report of the Committee on the Constitution on abortion?
I will be in a better position to make a judgment on that as soon as we see the final report. At this stage we have only heard about and seen drafts of the report. Only members of the committee have seen the final report. I assure the Deputy there will be no delay and that the intention of the Cabinet committee will be to examine the report as soon as possible.
If, as the Taoiseach said, no work has been done by the Government on the possible wording of legislation or a constitutional amendment, and if, as seems likely, no such wording will be produced by the committee, what resources are available to start from scratch on drafting a word, and are the resources sufficient?
The problem I have with these questions is that there would not be much point in having an All-Party Committee on the Constitution if the Government or the Cabinet committee was to prejudge its work. Even though under the terms of reference of the committee I would have been entitled to get draft reports and be updated in this regard, my view is that the committee was entitled to complete its work. As soon as the committee has completed its work we will deal with these issues. It would have been wrong to pre-empt the work of the all-party committee by drafting words and suggesting what might or might not have been in the report. We did not do so, but I assure Deputy Bruton that as soon as the report of the all-party committee is formally given to me I will ensure the Cabinet committee resumes its work. That committee includes the Attorney General who offers advice.
Has the Taoiseach been kept briefed in accordance with subparagraph—
I have been briefed in terms of the early version of the report, but I have not used what was a preliminary report to draft a wording – to do so would have been entirely improper.
I ask the Taoiseach to clarify the answer I was given to the last question I raised on whether he regards it as constitutional or whether there is a mandate for pledging 800 troops to join a 60,000 strong EU rapid reaction force.
Secondly, as a people used to proportional representation, does he accept that the holding of a "preferendum" should be relatively straightforward and could help us arrive at a greater consensus on the issues at stake, rather than an approach based on the winner takes all, divisive referendum process? Does he accept that constitutional change is only one reason for having a referendum or a "preferendum" and that the option of an advisory referendum or "preferendum" exists and has not yet been exercised? Would the Taoiseach consider an advisory referendum or "preferendum" at a future date?
The Deputy has put forward a point of view and has asked me to give consideration to it. Other countries use that mechanism frequently and I accept we have not used that system here.
The other matter raised by the Deputy concerned the detail and substance of the conference on the capabilities, capacity and participation in a rapid reaction force. As long as it is under the Petersberg Tasks and on a humanitarian basis on the grounds that are already ratified under the Amsterdam agreement, that is in order and does not require a subsequent change. That matter has already been dealt with.
I thank the Taoiseach for his reply and for clarifying the matter. To be sure I understand the nature of his reply, can I take it that any Deputy who says to commentators or others inside this House or outside that they have received an assurance from people purporting to speak on behalf of the—
That question has already been answered.
No. I just want to get it clarified, as it was not fully answered, that that authoritative assertion that there would be a referendum on the issue of abortion by spring of next year was not given with the Taoiseach's assent? Is that correct?
I have already answered that question.
So it is not clear.
I have already answered it.
Since the Taoiseach is a Taoiseach of a Coalition Government has he consulted the Tánaiste and the Progressive Democrats in relation to any future referendum on abortion and is he satisfied that there is consensus within the Government?
That question has already been answered.
No, it has not.
It is a question of—
I am sorry, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, this question had not been asked.
The Cabinet sub-committee is made up of both parties which represent the Government. The Deputy has the advantage over me in that she is a member of the committee and knows what is in the report. I do not have that information.
The Taoiseach has a fair idea.
No answer yet.
The Taoiseach knows nothing, he hears nothing.
Is it not the case that the Taoiseach's party representative, Deputy Brian Lenihan, is keeping him, as party leader of Fianna Fáil, fully informed of the wordings of the report, as he should be? I have seen the relevant passages as Leader of the Fine Gael Party and I find it very hard to believe the Taoiseach has not been briefed fully on what is contained in the report to be published.
I have already said that but what I have not tried to do, because it is not in the terms of reference that the Taoiseach or a party leader should try to unduly influence the members on that committee—
Unduly.
Unduly influence – which I have not done.
The Taoiseach promised the Independents.
I did not. I do not know if Deputy Bruton has been actively engaged in trying to influence the report and given wordings but I have not.
Question No. 7, please.
On a point of order. I am concerned now that there are implications in which the Taoiseach has said in relation to my question. I just want to make it clear and again state what I asked—
It is not appropriate. The Deputy will have to find another way of making it clear. At Question Time it is not appropriate and out of order.
The Taoiseach made an accusation.
It is a fact that the Deputy is a member of the committee and has all the information. Facts are not accusations.
The Taoiseach has not given straight answers.
I ask the Deputy to resume her seat.
Has the Taoiseach consulted the Tánaiste?
I have already answered.
The Taoiseach has not.
I said both parties in the Government are represented on the committee.
That is not the answer.
The Deputy is being disorderly.
It is not the answer the Deputy wants. I decide on my answer, the Deputy can decide hers.
What is the Taoiseach running from?
Nothing at all.
Do not be worried about us.
(Interruptions.)