Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Feb 2001

Vol. 531 No. 4

Order of Business.

The Order of Business today shall be as follows: No. 19, Motion re Referral to Select Committee of proposed approval of Agreement on Scientific and Technological Co-operation between the Government of the People's Republic of China and the Government of Ireland; No. 20, Motion re International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation, 1990 (returned from Committee); No. 21, Motion re Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 (returned from Committee); No. 22, Motion re Irish Takeover Panel Act, 1997 (Relevant Company) Regulations, 2001 (returned from Committee); and No. 6, Finance Bill, 2001 – Second Stage (resumed).

It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that: (1) the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30p.m. tonight and Business shall be interrupted not later than 10 p.m.; (2) Nos. 19, 20, 21 and 22 shall be decided without debate; and (3) the proceedings on the resumed Second Stage of No. 6 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 10 p.m. tonight. Private Members' Business shall be No. 111 – Motion re Health Services (resumed) – to conclude at 8.30p.m.

There are three proposals to put to the House. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed?

No, Sir. On a number of occasions I have raised a matter on the Order of Business at this juncture. I have repeatedly asked the Taoiseach when he will explain to the House why a former Minister of State was bullied by an unelected person into resignation, why this Minister's version of events is at odds with his and why the Minister in question had responsibility for an area which is of crisis proportions. The Taoiseach has a responsibility to address the House, to be accountable to it and to explain why these events took place and his role in them. I will continue to ask the Taoiseach to be accountable to the House.

There will be three votes today and many votes tomorrow. We could be here for a long time until such time as the Taoiseach faces up to his responsibilities and tells the House and the nation why Deputy O'Keeffe was sacked or forced to resign.

I oppose the Order of Business on similar but more extended grounds. First, there is Deputy O'Keeffe's unexplained resignation/sacking and the part played by some shadowy advisers in that affair. Second, as a result of Deputy O'Keeffe's resignation the Minister of State, Deputy Ó Cúiv, was given new responsibilities and he has said that he has neither a budget nor a function in his new role. He seems to have no interest in the post he has been given. Third, the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, made a statement in the House yesterday. He had been grossly misled by CIÉ and was turned into a fig ure of fun which would have matched the heyday of "Scrap Saturday".

(Interruptions.)

I am not casting aspersions on the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, but he was so grossly misled that only the Taoiseach can explain how a Minister of State could, in effect, have been set up by people in CIÉ when such a serious matter as a rail accident was involved.

The Taoiseach needs to take all these issues together in the House. A third Minister of State is in the firing line this morning. Rather than letting it go on from day to day and having us call votes on the Order of Business every morning, the Taoiseach should come out of his bunker and deal with the issues in the manner in which his predecessor dealt with them.

I am putting the question.

(Interruptions.)

What about the Taoiseach?

Question put: "That the proposal for a late sitting be agreed to".

Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, David.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Coughlan, Mary.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Gildea, Thomas.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.

Jacob, Joe.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael P.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McGuinness, John J.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Malley, Desmond.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis J.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas P.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, Richard.Burke, Liam.Burke, Ulick.Clune, Deirdre.Connaughton, Paul.Cosgrave, Michael.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.Deenihan, Jimmy.Dukes, Alan.Finucane, Michael.

Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Hayes, Brian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael.Hogan, Philip.Howlin, Brendan.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGahon, Brendan.McGinley, Dinny.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Jim. Mitchell, Olivia.

Níl–continued

Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.

Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Sargent, Trevor.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Bradford and Stagg.
Question declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with items Nos. 19, 20, 21 and 22 agreed?

Item No. 19, a motion regarding referral of an agreement on scientific and technological co-operation between this country and the People's Republic of China requires debate because the practice is growing in this Government to do sweetheart deals with technological interests, including MediaLab. The normal tendering process does not seem to be adhered to. In relation to this arrangement with the People's Republic of China, it should be clearly stated that tendering is part and parcel of technological investment in this country. I am not sure what the Chinese Government does but I have a feeling it is not as democratic as we would wish.

No. 19 proposes that the matter be referred to a select committee so that a debate can take place. The matter is not being pushed through.

It will not involve the Taoiseach, which should be the case.

Prior to the vote, I asked the Taoiseach when would he announce if he would make time available for himself to explain to the House the events surrounding the enforced resignation of the Minister of State, Deputy O'Keeffe. Before we proceed with this matter, will he give an indication whether he will be accountable to this House and have the courage to stand up and explain why, as Taoiseach, he did certain things? That is the Taoiseach's job. He may not like it but he is accountable to this House. It is the job of the Opposition to make the Taoiseach of the day accountable. It will be his job when in Opposition following the next election to do the same.

(Interruptions.)

Order, please.

I am asking the Taoiseach when will he have the courage and responsibility to come to this House and inform us what happened?

The Chair is somewhat concerned about the continual repetition of certain matters. The Deputy has been advised to proceed by way of substantive motion. Perhaps he will take that into consideration.

I have no quarrel with you, a Cheann Comhairle. However, I wish to put on the record that I have attempted to raise the matter under Standing Order 31 and it was disallowed. I have attempted to raise the matter by way of Special Notice Question and it was not allowed.

That is not a substantive motion.

I have tabled a regular question—

(Interruptions.)

I have used every legitimate means to raise this issue.

There is the option of a substantive motion.

I have used three specific measures.

Look who is talking, the Minister for expenditure and elections.

The Deputy is a good one to talk of expenditure and elections.

The joint treasurer of Fianna Fáil has found his voice.

What about the Woodchester four?

Look at Inspector Clouseau.

Deputy Quinn should resume his seat. I must put the question.

Question put: "That Nos. 19 to 22, inclusive, be taken without debate."

Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, David.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Gildea, Thomas.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.

Jacob, Joe.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael P.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McGuinness, John J.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Hanlon, Rory.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Malley, Desmond.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis J.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas P.Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Bruton, Richard.Burke, Liam.Burke, Ulick.Clune, Deirdre.Connaughton, Paul.Cosgrave, Michael.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.Deenihan, Jimmy.Dukes, Alan.Durkan, Bernard.Enright, Thomas.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Gregory, Tony.Hayes, Brian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael.

Hogan, Philip.Howlin, Brendan.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGahon, Brendan.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Jim.Mitchell, Olivia.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Sargent, Trevor.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies Bradford and Stagg.
Question declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 6 agreed to?

For one reason or another, the debating time allocated to the Finance Bill, 2001, is being truncated. I would like the Taoiseach to agree to a meeting of the Whips with a view to rescheduling the Finance Bill again for tomorrow. Many of my party want to contribute and time is very limited for such important legislation.

The Deputy's side has taken up all the time.

(Interruptions.)

The Taoiseach will deal with this. It is a reasonable request. Could the Whips meet to see if we can have this debate again tomorrow? It will not upset the schedule and we will cooperate at Committee.

I asked the Taoiseach twice this morning if he intends to make time available to explain to this House why former Minister of State, Deputy Ned O'Keeffe, the Minister responsible for food—

(Interruptions.)

Repetition is not in order.

Persistent democratic opposition to a Taoiseach who is a coward and who will not come into this House—

The Deputy should withdraw that remark.

(Interruptions.)

If the Deputy is making allegations, he should make them by way of substantive motion. That has been pointed out to the Deputy many times.

The Deputy should withdraw that remark.

My party is being asked to agree to the Order of Business. At the height of a BSE and foot and mouth disease crisis, I can think of nothing more important than why a Minister of State with responsibility for food quality was bullied—

The Deputy has made a personal remark. Such personal remarks should be withdrawn.

(Interruptions.)

A Cheann Comhairle, I believe—

The Deputy should withdrawn the word "coward". It is a personal remark and should be withdrawn.

A Deputy

Be a man and withdraw the remark.

The Deputy should withdraw the remark.

I believe that a Taoiseach who refuses to—

It is a personal remark and it should be withdrawn. Personal remarks of that kind about any Member should not be made in the House.

I believe that a Taoiseach who refuses consistently to answer questions in this House is acting in a cowardly way—

(Interruptions.)

The Taoiseach is refusing to—

I have made a ruling on it, Deputy Quinn.

Sir, I will naturally respect your ruling and will withdraw the word "coward" but I will not allow Fianna Fáil backbenchers to bully me into silence. Deputy Ned O'Keeffe was bullied into resigning. The Taoiseach misled the Dáil and has consistently refused to explain what happened. We have asked and will continue to ask when Government time will be made available to provide such an explanation. It is extraordinary that everybody in the Fianna Fáil Party, with the exception of the Taoiseach, can speak.

He has given up speaking for Lent.

Perhaps the Ceann Comhairle will allow the Taoiseach to indicate now whether he intends to make a statement.

If the Taoiseach offers – The Deputy should resume his seat. I call Deputy Noonan.

The Taoiseach and everybody else in the House is aware that the issues of food safety and animal health are paramount in this country at present yet we have witnessed the unexplained resignation of the Minister of State who was responsible for food safety. Several precedents exist for Taoisigh and Cabinet Ministers to come into the House to make statements and answer questions from the Opposition. Why is the Taoiseach so afraid to follow precedent in this regard? Has he something to hide? Is he prepared to be forthright and arrange to come into the House next week to deal with this matter?

For the Deputy's information, the Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children, Deputy Moffatt, is in charge of food safety and there is no dispute about him. I do not wish to see the Opposition continuing to cause disorder about these issues. I outlined the factual position to the House last week. Nobody was bullied. It is the Taoiseach's job to hire and fire. Deputy O'Keeffe resigned as a Minister of State and I appointed somebody in his place. End of story.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 6 agreed to? Agreed. We now proceed to brief and topical questions from the Leaders of the Fine Gael and Labour Parties.

When did the Taoiseach last hold a detailed discussion with the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development or the Minister of State, Deputy Davern, in regard to the outbreak of foot and mouth disease in the UK? It appears to me we have evidence that the assurances provided by both Ministers to this House have not been upheld. For example, two young women returning to Ireland from a UK agricultural college which was closed due to the outbreak, travelled by bus through Dún Laoghaire port. The bus tyres were disinfected and one of the young women, who comes from County Limerick, approached the person in charge and sought advice on the regulations with which she should comply. Details of her name and address were taken but nothing else happened. The woman was allowed to return to the family farm in Limerick. This incident, which happened only yesterday, totally contravenes the assurances provided in this House by the Minister and Minister of State. It appears that practice is not keeping pace with theory and that the Government is making an appalling mess of this potential catastrophe.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

It does not give either Deputy Noonan or me any great pleasure to have to draw the Taoiseach's attention to deficiencies in regard to a matter which concerns everybody. Irrespective of what the Taoiseach feels is his duty, we would be failing in ours if we did not highlight incidents such as the one to which Deputy Noonan referred and another which occurred last night in Dublin Port where people travelling to this country from Liverpool were not disinfected at all. Will the Taoiseach put in place help lines, hot lines and other forms of assistance to allow people to be informed about this issue? This is not an issue on which the House is divided but it is an issue which will destroy the country if the Government does not get its act together.

The effort to keep foot and mouth disease out of this country is a national issue of paramount importance. For it to be otherwise would be hugely detrimental to all sec tors of the economy and would cause enduring widescale damage to the agri-food sector in particular, probably for years to come. The effort to keep foot and mouth out of Ireland requires the ongoing commitment of the entire population here. There have been a number of incidents which give rise to concern, one of which was highlighted on the "Marian Finucane Show" this morning and relayed by Deputy Noonan in the House.

I attended the first meeting of the task force this morning. The task force comprises Ministers, members of the gardaí and the Army, customs officers, representatives of the Department of Public Enterprise, Aer Rianta and others. We decided the other day that all ports and airports would be vigilantly manned. Deputy Dukes stated that this issue should be in people's faces and I agree with him. I have asked the airports and ports to display clear signs which people will see immediately on disembarking. It should be made clear that disinfectant bays are available. If possible, I have asked the port and airport authorities to ensure all passengers go through the disinfectant bays. That would be the best way to proceed although I am not certain it is entirely feasible. I am aware that people would not necessarily be wearing the same clothing they wore on farms or other land. Dublin, Waterford, Cork, Farranfore, Shannon, Galway, Knock, Sligo and Donegal airports and Dún Laoghaire, Dublin and Rosslare ports will all display "in your face" signs warning people about the disease and indicating the existence of disinfectant bays. There is also a mobile presence in Ringaskiddy in Cork and in Kinsale and Crosshaven marinas.

A number of other measures were discussed and agreed this morning following yesterday's debate in the House. The wording of front page newspaper advertising will be strengthened and tightened and local radio, local newspapers and any other available media will be used to provide information. Where people must go abroad, they can at least ensure they do their utmost to prevent the spread of the disease. It is our duty to ensure facilities are provided to facilitate this. Whatever resources – financial, manpower or otherwise – are required to do this job properly will be provided. Several hundred people are being employed to deal with this issue.

It was stated yesterday that the disease only affects cloven hoofed animals, of which there are a number on Fota Island and in Dublin Zoo, although we tend to think only of cattle, pigs, goats, sheep etc. The Government this morning requested the Office of Public Works to close Fota Wildlife Park and Dublin Zoo. The Office of Public Works is also suspending all arterial work.

The question of the movement of cattle was also raised. I am advised that while the movement of cattle to final destination points such as factories is acceptable, farm to farm movement is a serious issue.

(Dublin West): What about horses?

A meeting is currently ongoing on this matter and we will announce its outcome as soon as possible. In reply to Deputy Noonan, what happened yesterday is not acceptable, but I accept it at face value. Other incidents have been reported to my office this morning. Over the weekend and again today more formally I instructed that whatever is necessary must be done. The Garda, and the Army have secured the 30 official Border crossings but today we must ensure that all other crossings are secured. It is not practical to stop everyone coming into the country but everyone should cross the disinfected mats. Supplies of disinfectant, which are produced in Wexford, are adequate. They ran out in Britain and we do not want that happening here. I will not be here tomorrow morning but we have already put in place arrangements for the Garda, the army, inspectors, veterinary officers and others to seal off particular areas if even a scare occurs. I thank the Deputy for raising the issue and repeat on behalf of all the Members that this is a national effort to avoid a crisis. The leaders of agriculture stated that one case of foot and mouth disease would ruin a £5 billion industry for a considerable period. Every effort must be applied, no matter how extreme it appears.

This is simply not good enough. There is now a yawning credibility gap between what Ministers announce, what is supposed to be the regulatory regime and what is happening in practice. In the case of this young woman, it was not lack of advertising that was the problem. She studies at an English agricultural college which was closed down. She knew the issues involved and approached the person in charge at the port of Dún Laoghaire and all they did was take her name and address.

What instruction has the Taoiseach given to the staff at places like Dún Laoghaire when persons like this young woman approach them and ask for their advice? What is the point in announcing in planes that one must visit the agriculture official at Dublin Airport if, when one does, nothing happens? This woman knew the issues and was very conscious of them because her college had been closed down because of them. Yet, when she went to whoever is responsible at Dún Laoghaire they only took her name and address. What is the Taoiseach's understanding of what should have happened at the port of Dún Laoghaire, yesterday?

(Interruptions.)

These are Leaders' Questions to the Taoiseach. Deputy Higgins, please resume your seat. Deputy Higgins is out of order.

(Interruptions.)

Detailed instructions were issued to all staff last week. My understanding—

What are the instructions? What are the details?

If the Deputy will wait, I will tell him.

The Taoiseach does not usually tell me. What should have happened?

Detailed instructions were issued. My understanding of what should have happened is that as soon as those people declared themselves, they should have gone over the mat or into the spray forthwith. That did not happen and that is not acceptable.

Last night the Minister for Finance did a spectacular U-turn, even for him, when he abandoned the measures of the third Bacon report in respect of the provisions for first time house buyers. Was the Taoiseach aware of this? The set of measures which were abandoned last night were designed to protect first time buyers. Does this mean that the Government believes it has solved the problem for first time house buyers? Can he explain why it capitulated to the moneyed interests which, no doubt, brought pressure to bear in relation to this matter? In the light of this dramatic policy change, what new measures, if any, will be introduced for first time buyers? Can we link this decision to capitulate to the money men, to Fianna Fáil's insistence on protecting the ongoing existence of corporate donations?

I support the thrust of Deputy Quinn's question and ask the Taoiseach to throw light on the other decision made, which is also contrary to the Bacon report. The capital gains tax on land was reduced to 20% so that land would come readily to the market. A condition of the 20% was that if it had not come to market within three years a rate of 60% would apply. It was a normal enough stick and carrot approach. The Minister in the Finance Bill is abolishing the 60% rate. Regardless of whether land comes to market it will be charged at 20%. If he is abandoning the capital gains imposition and the stamp duty regime, what is now the Government's policy in respect of first time buyers?

Last night, the Minister for Finance announced a number of measures which were previously cleared by the Government, so everyone was aware of them. The various aspects will be discussed during the course of the Finance Bill, including the revision of the stamp duty regime for investors and the decision not to proceed with the anti-speculative tax which was due to come into effect in April next. In the light of developments in the housing market since the summer—

What developments?

(Interruptions.)

—the Minister does not consider it necessary to go ahead with them.

(Interruptions.)

Order, please.

This would have attracted more investors into the market and in any event it had already been made clear right down the Western seaboard that this measure discouraged developments. That point has been made by Members from all sides of the House.

We told the Taoiseach that last year.

Order, please.

The point was made last year but—

The Government is making up policy as it goes along.

The issue was to try to take the heat out of the market and increase supply.

That is what happened.

There are now almost 50,000 houses compared to 36,000 or 37,000 houses. The measures last year removed the investors from the market. It took the heat out but also the supply. The Government has to manage this in such a way as to maintain the supply side and keep the first time buyers market buoyant.

(Interruptions.)

The Deputies are out of order.

As Deputy Dempsey stated—

(Interruptions.)

Order, please.

—the share of first time buyers in the under £150,000 market has increased from 38% to 44% in the second half of last year. We must balance the issues of keeping the supply up making sure that the first time buyer, our first priority, gets the best possible share of the market. We have increased it substantially. At the same time, we ought not to affect parts of the country like the 20% speculative tax would have done. On the capital gains tax issue, the Minister is endeavouring to ensure that land comes on to the market.

(Interruptions.)

This is Leaders' Questions. It is totally disorderly for any Deputy to intervene.

Under the new restrictive Standing Order, of all the people now in this Chamber, I have just one question to put to the Taoiseach. Does his reply indicate that the Government got it spectacularly wrong over the last year, but in fairness, he has the courage to correct the mistake? If that is the case, why was this not done for social welfare recipients last year? The Government also got that spectacularly wrong? If that is the case, the same should have been done for social welfare recipients last year when inflation doubled. The Government got it spectacularly wrong.

The Deputy's party granted an increase of £1.80 when in government.

The Minister is of the view that the second red hat is going to north Tipperary.

(Interruptions.)

Order, please. Deputy Quinn should be allowed to finish.

The Taoiseach responded to pressure from moneyed interests in less than 12 months with a ham-fisted measure which did not work. He was informed in advance that it would not achieve what it had set out to achieve and is spectacularly unable to respond to the pleas of thousands of social welfare recipients whose increase was wiped out by previous measures.

The Deputy should ask questions, not make statements.

Why the alacrity of response to one section of the community? Why has there been no response to another?

When the Minister introduced proposals in recent years, he said that they would be kept under review. There is no doubt that we have taken heat out of the market. We have improved the lot of first-time buyers who have moved from 38% to 44% of the market. Other measures, such as the 2% anti-speculative tax, have had an effect along the western seaboard which was not unforeseen. If it were to continue until April, development would be stopped to an enormous extent. This does not make sense.

It is already doing so.

There has been an enormous increase in the amount of land coming on the market. We want this to continue because it has been predicted that over 50,000 new houses per year will be needed.

Builders have stopped building houses.

There has been a huge increase in the number of planning permissions. Issues relating to section 5 have been dealt with. More land is being zoned. There has been an increase in the number of new starts.

Mr. Hayes

The number is down this year.

The Government has frightened them out of the market.

It would be unfair of Deputy Quinn not to acknowledge the enormous increases granted in other areas. Old age pensioners will now receive up to £106 per week, an increase of £10.

It is down compared to inflation.

Child benefit has increased enormously over a three year period.

Deputy Quinn's party was too stingy when in government.

Those over the age of 70 years have received excellent increases in tax allowances.

This is propaganda.

The lot of social welfare recipients has been improved substantially.

Is the Taoiseach aware that St. Ita's Hospital, Portrane has been without electricity since yesterday morning despite the Trojan work of ESB workers?

That is not in order.

Patients are suffering. When will the health and social care professionals registristration Bill be introduced? Professional staff in St. Ita's Hospital cannot provide a service because of a lack of resources from the Minister for Health and Children.

The Deputy is being disorderly.

Despite the work of the ESB, psychiatric and mentally ill patients have been left without electricity.

Deputies should concentrate on legislation.

The answer to the Deputy's question is 2001.

How stands the Local Government Bill? Is it to be proceeded with, as published, or withdrawn? Are the four Independent Members who have sustained the Government to be faced down on the issue of the dual mandate?

Only points relevant to the Bill should be raised.

The Bill will be introduced in the Dáil in the next few weeks.

(Mayo): There was a tragic rail accident in Britain this morning with considerable loss of life and many injuries. Looking at our rail safety track record, it is only a matter of time before there is a major tragedy here. The purpose of the rail safety Bill is to enhance and extend the powers of the rail inspectorate. Yet, it has been relegated to the C list. I ask that it be frontloaded given that the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, acknowledged that he had been grossly misled in relation to the rail traffic accident in Kiltoom, County Roscommon.

I also ask the Taoiseach to ensure the legislation in question is expedited given that many lives are at stake. There have been incidents at other level crossings and there will be a major tragedy if action is not taken immediately.

We extend our sympathy to the families of those who died in the United Kingdom this morning. I understand the latest figure is 15. The heads of the Bill are being expedited. We hope they will be completed within the next few months.

That is not good enough.

I will ask for them to be expedited.

The Interpretation Bill, 2000, on the G list, is due to be taken shortly. Since it was published, the Law Reform Commission has published a report on the matter. Is it intended to proceed with the Bill, as published, or to amend it substantially following the Law Reform Commission's report? Several months have passed since Committee Stage of the Sex Offenders Bill, 2000. It was introduced, withdrawn, reintroduced, but not reached. There is no register of sex offenders for which we have been waiting a long time.

Despite having all the money in the world.

When is it proposed to deal with Bill on Report Stage?

My notes indicate that we are ready to proceed. I am not sure we have not done so. I will check the matter for the Deputy.

What about the Interpretation Bill?

I was referring to the Interpretation Bill.

What about the Sex Offenders Bill? When will it be dealt with on Report Stage?

It was published on 12 January. Report Stage will soon be ordered in the House.

It has been a long process.

It is a matter for the Whips. There is no problem with the Bill.

The Government should be capable of dealing with it.

Last October, the Government decided to establish a compensation body to pay compensation to those who, as children, were abused in institutions in which they were resident and for which the State had regulatory or supervisory responsibility. The necessary legislation has not been produced. I declare an interest as my firm acts for some of the victims involved, many of whom are in advanced years. Does the Taoiseach realise the importance attached to establishing this body quickly? Compensation for the dreadful trauma suffered by them as children should be paid before the people concerned pass away? What is the up-to-date position? Will the Taoiseach give a guarantee that the legislation will be introduced and enacted this session?

I remind the Deputy that the people concerned were ignored and neglected until the Government took the initiative.

The Government has talked about it, but done nothing.

The Bill which will provide for compensation for persons abused in residential institutions is being drafted. The details of the scheme have been communicated by the Minister for Education and Science, Deputy Woods, to those involved. There has been ongoing consultation and deliberations. It is hoped to have the Bill introduced and enacted before the summer, if possible.

In the light of the seriousness of the matter raised earlier, does the Taoiseach still intend to travel to Wales tomorrow? It would set a very bad example.

I am due to visit No. 10 Downing Street tonight and address the General Assembly of Wales tomorrow, St. David's Day, as part of an arrangement agreed a long time ago and into which the Welsh have put much effort. I am reluctant to pull out given the great difficulties it would cause for them. I will attend a formal session of the parliament. A European investment conference, to which people will travel from Europe and elsewhere, will also take place, which I also agreed to address. It would be misunderstood, if I did not attend those.

The Taoiseach will be disinfected.

I assure the House I will not go near any farm land and I will go through whatever regulatory disinfectant system is required.

Can we get the Taoiseach to run that?

Can the Labour Leader recommend a suitable detergent?

If he wore the suit he wore in Rome, he would be disinfected.

In light of the exhortations to everyone else concerning this matter and notwithstanding that these events are important, the Welsh Assembly is not likely to be moved and will continue to be in place, therefore, the Taoiseach could visit it on another occasion. I ask him to reconsider his decision. I am sure the Welsh people would understand if he did that, as to do otherwise does not show good example.

(Carlow-Kilkenny): With regard to the legislation promised by the Minister for Health and Children last night on tackling smoking, does the Taoiseach regard the installation of air extractors in public houses where people assemble as an important measure?

When the Bill comes before the House that matter can be raised.

(Carlow-Kilkenny): The installation of air extractors can remove a great deal of the smoke passive smokers must endure in such places.

It is a matter relevant to the content of the Bill.

(Carlow-Kilkenny): Could it be included in it?

The housing private rented sector Bill, listed for publication, arises from the Report of the Commission on the Private Rented Sector. Why will the measures of that report that benefit landlords through tax allowances, landowners through reduced capital gains tax and property investors through reduced stamp duty be dealt with in the Finance Bill today, while the country's 150,000 tenants must wait two years before the Government publishes legislation to give them some protection or rights?

The housing private rented sector Bill is complex—

So is stamp duty and capital gains tax.

—and a detailed report and account of it was given by the Minister, Deputy Dempsey, last week. The heads of the Bill are expected to be ready later this year, although the Bill is not due to be introduced until next year.

The Taoiseach is too busy buying the elections.

Has the Deputy got a reply to the letter?

(Dublin West): Tens of thousands of people around the country will attempt to stop smoking nicotine today. I am sure everybody here would agree they should be given every support in view of the appalling human cost, economic cost and drain on our health services caused by nicotine addiction. In view of the fact that the big cigarette companies have made enough of a financial killing by killing people with their poisonous products, through its glamourisation, will the Taoiseach indicate if the public health and tobacco Bill will be expedited and brought quickly before the Dáil to give every support to those who want to quit cigarette smoking and nicotine addiction and to help prevent others taking up that habit?

The heads of that Bill have been completed and the Bill is due to be introduced in the summer.

The Taoiseach will remember that this time last year the Government voted down the Labour Party Bill on joyriding and refused to implement any programme of action to address that plague during the past 12 months. He will be aware that since Christmas this problem has re-emerged in my constituency, neighbouring ones, and probably in the Taoiseach's. The Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, seemed to say a few weeks ago he was having second thoughts about introducing legislation on this area. Does the Taoiseach intend to amend 1994 traffic Act, introduce new legislation or a programme of action in this regard, as this is a very serious matter?

A road traffic Bill is due to be introduced this session. I am aware the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, has been examining this matter. I had correspondence with him on it. I am aware it is an ongoing problem and I will raise it with the Minister.

Where stand the Government's legislative proposals to increase rates of motor taxation?

A financial resolution on this matter is due to come before the House next week.

Top
Share