The Order of Business today shall be as follows: No. 23 – motion re: Standing Order 35 (private notice questions); No.24 – motion re: Membership of Committee; and No. 5 – Twenty-fourth Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 2001 – Order for Second Stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 23 and 24, shall be decided without debate. Private Members' business shall be No. 115 – motion re: Economic Effects of Foot and Mouth Disease.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 23 and 24 agreed?
Sir, the Government still has the opportunity to withdraw its appeal to the Supreme Court in the Sinnott case. There are two motions on the Order Paper which the Labour and Fine Gael parties have attempted to get on the Order of Business without success. In view of the refusal of the Government to even debate this issue here properly we oppose the Order of Business.
I draw the attention of the House to the fact that No. 23 deals with a change of time for the taking of private notice questions on Tuesdays and No. 24 deals with the change in Fine Gael membership of the Committee of Public Accounts.
Question put, "That the proposal for dealing with items 23 and 24 be agreed to".
Tá
|
Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, David.Ardagh, Seán.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Matt.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Daly, Brendan.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Gildea, Thomas.Hanafin, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe. |
Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael P.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGennis, Marian.McGuinness, John J.Martin, Micheál.Moffatt, Thomas.Molloy, Robert.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Ó Cuív, Éamon.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donoghue, John.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Kennedy, Michael.O'Rourke, Mary.Power, Seán.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe. |
Níl
|
Bell, Michael.Broughan, Thomas P.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Higgins, Michael.Howlin, Brendan.McDowell, Derek.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda. |
O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Sargent, Trevor.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies S. Brennan and Power; Níl, Deputies McDowell and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
Does the Taoiseach recall that almost four years ago the main plank of his election campaign was a proposed regime of zero tolerance inspired by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform? Is he aware of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General published last week which states that half of all fineable motoring offences, including those liable for on-the-spot fines and others such as drink driving and dangerous driving, went unpunished either by fines or other penalties? In view of the carnage on our roads, how does this record of the Government square with the policy of zero tolerance?
In sharing Deputy Noonan's concern, will the Taoiseach request the Committee of Public Accounts to look at the issue to determine how effective the Garda has been in carrying out its duties?
I am aware of the report published last week which I am sure will be examined to ascertain if it is the case that so many on-the-spot fines are not being collected. I have no difficulty with a committee of the House looking into the matter.
Regarding crime generally, we said four years ago that we would cut the crime figures. We have done so. The last figures were 21% down. The provisional figure this year is 26% down. We said that we would increase prison capacity which is up 50%. We also said that we would increase Garda numbers. The force now stands at 11,600. The traffic management strategy launched in 1998 by the Minister of State at the Department of the Environment and Local Government, Deputy Molloy, has progressed also. Last week we debated a Bill introducing a points system and other related matters. So far we have done an excellent job in relation to crime and still have 15 months in which to do more.
The House is aware, even if the Taoiseach is not, that nobody believes the crime statistics any more. Approximately two thirds of crimes committed are no longer reported because people see it as futile to report many crimes, including those involving violence on the streets.
A question, please.
Since the Comptroller and Auditor General bases his assessment on information supplied by Departments and others, in this case the Garda and the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, why has the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform not done something about the matter when, clearly, he was aware of the situation for over 12 months?
I have no doubt that the administration and collection of fines is a matter of concern to the Minister, the Garda and the others concerned and that they will work on the report.
They cannot all be in the bus lane.
I congratulate the Garda on its intelligence work in recent days on two very serious matters, in particular the largest heroin find in the history of the State in my constituency.
The third largest.
Where are we in relation to reform of the legislation governing the conduct of elections, including their funding? On 2 June last the Taoiseach wrote to me advising that it was his intention to have legislation enacted by the end of 2000. On 4 December 2000 he published an article in The Irish Times setting out six areas in which he intended to introduce legislation, some of which had passed Second Stage in this House, including the whistleblower's Bill. On 14 December 2000 the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, perhaps the weakest link in the Administration, published proposals to increase election expenditure by 50%. Since January the Taoiseach has been blocking attempts, both outside and inside the House, through the Select Committee on the Environment and Local Government, to discuss Committee Stage of the Labour Party's Bill on political donations. As recently as 21 March that committee, on the instructions of Fianna Fáil, voted against discussing this issue.
A question for the Taoiseach.
Will the Taoiseach indicate when this farce is going to end? When will he introduce proposals or is it his intention to have nothing in place before the next general election?
As the leader of the only party in the House which no longer accepts corporate donations, will the Taoiseach indicate his intention to regulate the law in this area? He has made a number of ambiguous statements in the House. Will he clarify the position?
The Electoral Bill is before the House. Amendments on the level of funding and other issues will shortly be introduced by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government. The standards in public office Bill is also before the House. Amendments to the anti-corruption Bill are almost finalised. We have accepted Deputy Rabbitte's whistleblowers Bill and will amend it on Committee Stage. I hope most of these Bills will be enacted in the course of the year.
Acceptance by Deputy Quinn of my outstanding invitation would enable him to influence the Electoral Bill. If he wishes, I would be glad to meet him before the amendments are finalised. If not, we will introduce them.
I also appreciate the correspondence from Deputy Noonan. I wish to enact an Electoral Bill that will stand the test of time and will withstand legal challenge. I do not want to introduce a Bill that becomes a joke as it tries to make definitions that will not work. I also want to introduce spending limits. To impose limits that are too high would be wrong. I have a difficulty with the argument over the distinction between corporate and personal donations. What one may interpret as a corporate donation, another may interpret as a personal donation. There is no need for me to recite the difficulties involved.
Some argue that constitutional arguments do not arise here. That is not the case.
Will the Taoiseach publish the constitutional advice he has received?
If the Deputy wishes to meet me I am prepared to share the information at my disposal. We do not need to have a row about this. I presume we want to improve matters. There are many other issues to argue over. I am willing to discuss with members of the Opposition ways and means of getting things right in this area. However, if they do not wish to meet I have an obligation to proceed, and I will do so.
Does the Taoiseach accept the long established precedent that Private Members' legislation accepted at Second Stage is amended on Committee Stage? He referred to Deputy Rabbitte's Bill in that regard. A Bill dealing with the funding of political parties and elections has passed Second Stage and is ready for Committee Stage where the Government should introduce its amendments. I fail to understand why the Government members of the Select Committee on the Environment and Local Government have refused to discuss this matter when the Opposition parties are willing to do so.
If the Taoiseach has written advice to the effect that corporate donations are unconstitutional he should let us see it. We do not believe they are. I have outlined the litany of promises from the Taoiseach going back to 2 June 2000. One can only conclude that he is committed to the maintenance of corporate donations, that he is in a minority in the House on holding such views and that he is deliberately dragging his heels on the issue to get Fianna Fáil to the far side of the next general election date without reform.
The Electoral Bill is before the Seanad. The Government had not finalised its whistleblowers Bill so we were prepared to accept the Labour Party Bill. The anti-corruption Bill has also been finalised. Apart from the aspects on which we would differ, the Electoral Bill is excellent legislation. We wish to discuss it further.
From my correspondence with him I am aware Deputy Quinn contends I do not wish to take any further action in this area. I do not wish to argue with him but I assure him he is incorrect. I want to proceed but I do not want to engage in spurious arguments about what is meant by corporate donations.
Deputy Quinn believes I am delaying on this because I and my party have been collecting enormous amounts of money. If anybody wishes to ascertain what we have collected I am prepared to make the information available to prove that is not the case.
Will the Taoiseach be seeking £120,000 from Mr. Ray Burke?
Deputy Dukes was in Ben Dunne's house.
Perhaps the Taoiseach will be up every tree looking for money.
There were golden apples in Ray Burke's tree.
Allow the Taoiseach to conclude.
My concern is to implement a system that will work. There are a number of important issues for the future of politics. It should be relatively easy to obtain all party agreement on a number of areas. From my conversations with Members on all sides of the House, it is evident that people want new rules, regulations and definitions. They also want to ensure that smaller sums of money are involved. However, they do not want a situation to arise where it becomes practically impossible to administer politics. I am not only referring to the next five or ten years but the long-term future. All Members, especially the younger ones, have an interest in this. We should try to proceed together. For the umpteenth time, I am offering to proceed on that basis so we can conclude these matters.
Will the Taoiseach indicate if it is true, as it has been represented to me today, that the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development intends, either today or in the near future, to make an order continuing the ban on artificial insemination services until 19 April? If that is the case will the Minister stay his hand on this and bring the orders before the House? These are passive orders, of the kind I have discussed with him previously. Could he introduce proposed orders to the Houses to give us the opportunity to debate them?
I understand the Minister is meeting those concerned on Thursday.
The Taoiseach has indicated that the Government has reduced crime levels since taking office. Many parts of towns and cities are no go areas because of street violence.
Do you have a question relevant to the Order of Business?
This is especially relevant at closing time and in the vicinity of take-away outlets. When will we see legislation introduced and the enforcement of the legislation already in place to address the problem? When will we see the Criminal Justice Bill?
The heads of the Criminal Jus tice (Garda Powers) Bill were approved by Cabinet last month and the Bill will be published later this year.
It is almost a month since Second Stage of the Local Government Bill began in the House. When will the debate be resumed?
As soon as possible. The Minister is anxious to get ahead with it as soon as possible.
Does that mean as soon as the Taoiseach is allowed?
When he has consulted with Deputy Healy-Rae.
The Twenty-Second Amendment of the Constitution Bill, to deal with judicial impeachment, was published last week. Does the Government intend to publish in draft form the other Bill concerning the establishment of a judicial body which that Bill envisages before we take Second Stage of the Bill in this House and well in advance of a referendum?
Would the Taoiseach now accept that the level of street violence is escalating yet again?
The first question is in order.
Will he indicate what has happened to Operation Oíche and why are young people dying on our streets?
The first matter raised by the Deputy is being looked at. No decision has been made on that. The other Bill is before the House.
From 2 May next the Bons Secour Hospital in Cork will be unique in that the VHI will not cover its patients.
That does not arise on the Order of Business. Do you have a question appropriate to the Order of Business?
I would not rise to speak if I did not. I want to ask about the Health Insurance (Amendment) Bill, 2000, which is currently before the House. Given what is happening in Cork from 2 May, we should have that Report Stage taken as soon as possible. I would ask the Taoiseach to confirm that it will be before the House soon before the crisis reaches the Bons Secour Hospital in Cork.
I think a date has been scheduled for Report Stage.
When is it?
Shortly.
About two weeks.
What is the exact time frame for the Pensions Bill? Will it include anything on public sector pensions parity, on which the Taoiseach made a promise during the general election campaign four years ago and on which he has not delivered?
On disturbing reports about conflicts of interest among local government officials, I wonder if it is time for the Taoiseach to ask the Comptroller and Auditor General to investigate that area—
The second part of the Deputy's question is out of order.
I hope the Bill will be published before Easter.
It is more than three weeks since the Taoiseach came to the rescue of rock fans throughout the country by holding out the prospect of a second U2 concert. Have the barriers now been lifted and will this concert take place?
Is there legislation promised?
Yes.
It is not a Bill.
Is the Deputy an old swinger?
The Taoiseach was embraced by Bono on his reciprocation. I think we are entitled to know what is happening.
(Interruptions.)
I call Deputy Belton. I hope Deputy Belton has a question appropriate to the Order of Business.
Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle. I hope you do not expect any edge on this.
I thought the Taoiseach would be in Miami for the concert.
Allow Deputy Belton to speak without interruption.
Has the Minister for Agriculture, Food and Rural Development plans to introduce legislation to deal with the meat plants?
That does not arise on the Order of Business. I call Deputy Coveney.
It is a very serious matter. The whole agriculture sector has been put under threat by produce purported to be from Ireland which is not Irish produce.
The Deputy must find another way of raising it. I have called Deputy Coveney.
That is the core problem. This is the second occasion the Taoiseach has failed to answer this question because he has no answer for it.
Deputy Belton, allow Deputy Coveney.
He has no answer to it.
I am not allowed.
Mr. Coveney:
In the light of a 13 year old child presenting himself for methadone treatment in inner city Dublin in recent days, the youngest heroin addict ever to seek help, could the Taoiseach explain the delay in publishing a national drug strategy review, which is the responsibility of his Department?
That does not arise on the Order of Business. I suggest that the Deputy submit a Question.