It is proposed to take No. 48, Twenty-second Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 2001( Judicial Conduct) – Second Stage (resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the Dáil shall sit later than 8.30 p.m. tonight, and business shall be interrupted not later than 10.00 p.m. In relation to No. 48, the proceedings on the Second Stage (resumed), if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 10.00 p.m. tonight. Proceedings on Committee and Remaining Stages, if not previously concluded, shall be brought to a conclusion at 1.30 p.m. tomorrow, 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 Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform. Private Members' business shall be No. 122, motion re Stadium Ireland.
Order of Business.
There are two proposals to be put to the House. Is the late sitting agreed to?
(Mayo): We do not agree to the arrangements because we feel the late sitting and the guillotine which is being applied in relation to Second Stage is not acceptable. This Judicial Conduct Bill is of tremendous importance. We recall that some time ago, it led to a major judicial controversy which shook the State to its very foundations in terms of the impeachment or threatened impeachment of two judges, a Supreme Court judge and a High Court judge. We have been promised that there would be an adequate debate in relation to dealing with—
That comes under the next proposal which I will put to the House.
(Mayo): I am just signalling that the arrangement is not acceptable.
Deputy Higgins opposes the first proposal. Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 48 agreed to?
No, I propose the following amendment:
To delete paragraph (ii) of the arrangements proposed for taking No. 48, and substitute the following: The Bill shall thereupon be referred to the Select Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights, pursuant to Standing Order 112 (1) of the Standing Orders relative to public business, paragraph 1(a) (i) of that Committee's Orders of Reference; that it be an instruction to the select committee that it should not proceed to consider the Bill until the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights have (a) considered submissions in writing and (b) met in public to hear oral evidence on the Bill and report it thereon.
We regard this as a very important matter. We believe the issues of last year arising from the Sheedy and O'Flaherty affair are not being dealt with in this Bill in a manner which allows allegations of misconduct against judges to be pursued satisfactorily. This Bill is being guillotined and rushed through the House without due debate. The recommendation of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution that a 90-day period should be allowed for consideration of constitutional amendments is being transgressed.
The amendment proposes that rather than completing this by 1.30 p.m. tomorrow on Committee Stage in plenary session it should be teased out by the appropriate Select Committee of the House and that Select Committee should consider submissions in writing and should hear oral evidence. Issues as important as the procedures which should be invoked by this House against judges should not be galloped through the House as if they were matters of insignificance.
The Labour Party has fundamental difficulties not only with the proposed legislation but with the manner in which it is being handled by the Government. We have no difficulty in supporting the amendment tabled to the Order of Business by the Fine Gael Party. I hope it will be amplified to include consideration by the justice committee of the promised legislation to bring into effect the judicial conduct council that is to be established under the proposed constitutional amendment. It is an established fact that where there is legislation to establish any body subsequent to a constitutional amendment, for example, in relation to the divorce referendum and the bail referendum, that legislation would be published in advance of the completion of the Bill to take the constitutional amendment in this House so that people know exactly the terms under which the constitutional amendment will be implemented. In this case, a judicial council is to be established, which, under the terms of the referendum would have very limited functions, that is, to make recommendations and findings. Contrary to the repeated statements of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, it would not be able to take actions or to discipline anybody. We need to see the legislative measures that will govern the operation of the judicial council. This is a fundamental matter of constitutional importance. It should not be guillotined and rushed through this House. If it is persisted with, we will rue the day when at some date in the future we will have to deal with another matter of judicial accountability.
I ask you, Sir, to assist us in another matter. I understand two proposals are being taken together under No. 2, that is (i) and (ii). I ask you, Sir, to rule in relation to (ii) on whether it is acceptable to set tomorrow's business on the assumption that a vote to be taken at 10 p.m. tonight will be passed? How can we make arrangements for the Committee Stage of a Bill before the conclusion of Second Stage and the views of the House are determined? I ask you, Sir, to answer that question. I appeal to the Taoiseach to give the space and the time for a proper ventilation of this most serious matter – the judicial accountability procedure to be put in place and enshrined in the Constitution.
There is a long-standing precedent for this procedure in ordering the business.
It pre-empts the views of the House.
We will be happy to accept the Fine Gael amendment. However, it exposes the folly of holding four referenda simultaneously. I ask the Government Chief Whip to reconsider his approach because tomorrow we have only one hour for Committee and Report Stages of the Bill to deal with the Nice Treaty, which is an important treaty. He is exposing himself to ridicule. The people will consider that this is being rushed through, that he does not want debate on these issues and that is why these referenda are being held simultaneously. I urge the Government Chief Whip to reconsider his approach.
I have listened to what Deputies have to say here and also outside the House. The Twenty--second Amendment of the Constitution Bill will be given a good deal of time, almost as much time as the debate on Nice.
If one compares it with the time given to some previous Bills one will see the comparisons.
This is—
Please, Deputy Gormley, allow the Taoiseach without interruption.
This is very important.
I would remind the House of the daily pressure here in trying to deal with a number of constitutional issues from the report of the All-Party Committee on the Constitution and all the requests for multiple referendums and for a number of issues to be taken together to not let the agenda clog up. That happens day in day out here.
That is all—
When we put a few issues together people change their minds.
The approach is the exact opposite.
Please, Deputy Shatter.
I have listened carefully to what people have said and I want to reply briefly. The All-Party Committee on the Constitution also had much to say about judicial conduct and what should happen in that regard. There was a lengthy debate on this matter followed by a lengthy report—
The Taoiseach ignored its findings.
—which was also taken into account. We also had Ms Justice Susan Denham's complex report into which an enormous amount of work was put. I was pressed here for weeks on end as to when I would have that report and if we would take action. I was asked if we were delaying, if we were procrastinating and when we would act? As soon as the Government—
Where is the Bill?
Please, Deputy Howlin. You were given the opportunity to make your contribution without interruption. I ask that the Taoiseach be afforded the same opportunity.
I will be brief. There was great pressure on us to deal with this issue. People thought that for some reason we would not deal with the issue. Now I am of the view, I regret to say, that it seems people are upset because we dealt with the issue.
Where is the Bill?
Will the Deputy please wait? The Deputy should not get excited, it is bad for him.
This is ridiculous.
If the Deputy wants to asks questions he must listen to my reply, otherwise there is no point in my replying.
Will the Taoiseach answer the questions he was asked?
Deputy Howlin, allow the Taoiseach.
I will. This is not Question Time. That was earlier and it is finished. There is the Twenty-second Amendment of the Constitution Bill which is already before the House. I presume that is one of the Bills about which the Deputy asked. For the information of the House, in his closing speech the Minister will indicate the amendments which will be moved on Committee Stage tomorrow. He will also give an outline of the legislation he is preparing to set up the body provided for in the proposed constitutional amendment. The Minister has listened, as has the Government, to proposals put forward by Members who took part in the debate. I have read the full text of what Members have said and we have tried to take those views into account. This outline will include a proposed composition of the body, its functions and its relationship with other elements of the court structure. I ask the parties in Opposition to wait and listen to what the Minister has to say tonight which is his and the Government's considered response to the points made here prior to Easter on this matter.
I am replying to the amendment I have moved. Does the Taoiseach realise that the Twenty-second Amendment of the Constitution Bill has had in whipping terms only one round of speakers, one slot for each party? On an issue which concerns a change in the Constitution, to say that we have sufficient debating time when there has only been one speaking slot per party is a travesty of language. There are fundamental differences in principle with our approach and with the approach proposed by the Government in this Bill and we have not sufficient time to tease those out. We want that time on Committee Stage. If any measure less than impeachment were to be taken against the judge the procedure invoked in the Bill to do that needs to be underpinned by legislation. The legislation has not yet been produced.
We are being asked to sign a blank cheque today on Second Stage and on Committee Stage. We should proceed in an orderly fashion in accordance with precedent in this House over several years, that legislation on Committee Stage would be referred to the appropriate committee so that the expertise of this House could scrutinise the Twenty-second Amendment of the Constitution Bill and so that the Government would be given time, while evidence is being taken in Committee, to produce the Bill which is actually the substantive proposal which would underpin the bulk of allegations of misbehaviour against judges where sanctions would fall far short of impeachment. That is the problem. I ask the Taoiseach to reconsider my amendment and, in the interests of the success of the forthcoming referenda, to take my views on board.
I welcome the indication from the Government that it will table amendments to its published proposals. Will the Taoiseach pay the Opposition the courtesy of circulating those amendments before the House embarks on the balance of the Second Stage debate, if it is intended to change the substance of the proposals on Committee Stage tomorrow? If the Government proceeds with the proposals as they currently stand, the Labour Party will trenchantly oppose a referendum to have them enshrined in the Constitution.
The Minister will outline them tonight before the debate. A total of eight hours will have been allowed for this and, as I said previously, it was already comprehensively dealt with in the other issues. I ask the Opposition to wait and hear what the Minister says. Over the Easter period he considered in detail what has been said during debates in the House.
Is the amendment being pressed?
On a point of order, perhaps the Taoiseach will clarify a matter arising—
That is not a point of order. Is the amendment being pressed?
If the Chair would let me raise the point of order, he could then rule whether it is in order. The point of order I wish to raise relates to what the Taoiseach said about the business of this House tomorrow, as it is now proposed. I assume the Taoiseach is informing the House that at about 9.45 p.m. tonight, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will unveil a new version of the proposed constitutional amendment. Based on the orders now being put to the House, Committee Stage will be taken first thing tomorrow morning. Is the Taoiseach suggesting that at about 9.45 p.m. tonight the House will be given a new version of the proposed article, that it is reasonable that at approximately 10.45 a.m. tomorrow the House should conduct Committee Stage and that Opposition Members must determine at some time between 10 p.m. and midnight tonight what amendments should be tabled to the amendments not as yet tabled by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform?
It is unreasonable.
This is a most serious issue. We are changing a provision—
The Deputy is outside the rules of debate.
—which has been in the Constitution since 1937. It is a grossly irresponsible way to deal with this most important issue.
I must put the question.
It would be better to have consensus than conflict on this matter. Can the amendments be circulated before the Minister speaks tonight?
|
Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ahern, Noel.Andrews, David.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Harry.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Séamus.Briscoe, Ben.Browne, John (Wexford).Byrne, Hugh.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Collins, Michael.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cullen, Martin.Daly, Brendan.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Doherty, Seán.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Flood, Chris.Foley, Denis.Fox, Mildred.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe. |
Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kenneally, Brendan.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Séamus.Kitt, Michael P.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McGuinness, John J.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.Power, Seán.Ryan, Eoin.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wade, Eddie.Wallace, Dan.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V. |
|
Barrett, Seán.Bell, Michael.Belton, Louis J.Boylan, Andrew.Bradford, Paul.Broughan, Thomas P. |
Browne, John (Carlow-Kilkenny).Burke, Liam.Burke, Ulick.Carey, Donal.Clune, Deirdre. Coveney, Simon. |
|
Creed, Michael.Currie, Austin.D'Arcy, Michael.Deenihan, Jimmy.Durkan, Bernard.Enright, Thomas.Farrelly, John.Finucane, Michael.Fitzgerald, Frances.Flanagan, Charles.Gilmore, Éamon.Gormley, John.Hayes, Brian.Higgins, Jim.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael.Hogan, Philip.Howlin, Brendan.McCormack, Pádraic.McDowell, Derek.McGinley, Dinny.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay. |
Mitchell, Jim.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.Owen, Nora.Penrose, William.Perry, John.Rabbitte, Pat.Reynolds, Gerard.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Shatter, Alan.Sheehan, Patrick.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack. |
We will now take leaders' questions.
The Taoiseach is aware of the widespread concern about the high incidence of various forms of cancer. The incidence is higher than the European average. Most forms of cancer are capable of being treated and cured if treatment starts in time. The Taoiseach is also aware that some cancers are terminal, particularly if treatment is interrupted or unavailable. Does he agree that it is an absolute disgrace that life-saving cancer treatment has had to be discontinued for the first time in the history of the health services? Such services have been discontinued for a number of patients in the Mater Hospital and other hospitals.
The consultant oncological posts that were announced by the Minister for Health and Children have not been sanctioned by the Department of Finance and have not been agreed by the Government. The Minister engages in public relations under the guise of improving the health service. When will the Taoiseach do something about the crisis in our hospitals? People who have been told by their consultants that they will die if they do not receive on-going chemotherapy have been refused this necessary treatment.
I add my voice to support the importance and urgency of ensuring there is a comprehensive oncology service. Will the Taoiseach indicate when a nation wide mammography service will be put in place? It has been proven that breast cancer can be detected and cured with proper screening. Does the new health plan provide for similar screening for testicular cancer, which kills more men than any other cancer?
Since the launch of the national cancer initiative about five years ago, £60 million has been spent on cancer treatment services. The money has been allocated to health agencies to enable the commencement of care treatment of cancer, in line with the national strategy which has been followed diligently. Allocated funding has resulted in oncology, haematology and histopathology appointments in hospitals, and has been used for palliative care. Areas for further development have been identified by regional directors, who have made changes in the strategy for providing cancer services through health agencies. Advances have been made in the provision of radiotherapy, dedicated and specialist cancer nurses, specialist surgery, palliative care services and cancer drug units.
In reply to Deputy Howlin's question, the Minister, along with the health boards and regional health authorities, has extended the programme on a nation wide basis as far as possible. Although there have been difficulties in certain areas, the Minister for Health and Children has tried to make the programme a success. Deputy Noonan referred to services provided by the Eastern Regional Health Authority, which is the statutory responsible body. I have been informed by the Department of Health and Children that a small number of patients' chemotherapy treatment was cancelled recently due to the extreme pressure on beds. The authority made arrangements for these patients to have their treatment in the Mater private hospital. The situation is being continually monitored to ensure that appropriate arrangements are put in place to provide rapid access to chemotherapy services for those that need them. The Government will continue to increase enormously funding to the health service.
Waiting lists are getting longer.
They are not. We have averaged 17.5%—
What about all the trolleys?
The Deputy will be interested to know that while the increases—
I have seen them in the Mater and Beaumont hospitals. There are 30 to 35 people on trolleys every night.
The Deputy must allow the Taoiseach to speak.
People have to lie on trolleys for up to three nights.
The increase of 17.5% in public expenditure is about ten points higher than it was when Deputy Owen's party was in Government.
That is no justification.
The most obvious fact is the waiting lists.
It is time the Taoiseach talked about people instead of money.
Deputy Shatter should realise that these are leaders' questions.
The national waiting list, at 27,000, is well below 30,000—
There are people waiting for cancer treatment because of the inadequacies of the services.
—for the first time ever.
That is not true.
It is true.
It is not the first time ever.
The official figures—
The figure was 28,000 when we were in power.
The Government has allocated—
I ask Deputy Howlin not to speak and the Taoiseach to answer through the Chair so we can avoid interruptions.
I am sorry.
The list has been filleted.
Tell that to cancer patients.
The problem, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, is that I am the only Deputy to keep to that rule so there is not much point in my continuing to keep to it, but I will do my best. The Government has allocated £34 million to its waiting list initiative as against the £8 million that was previously given. We have doubled expenditure in this area overall.
That is no consolation to those without hospital beds.
Whenever there is a bad case the Government deals with it.
That is not dealing with the question.
In response to Deputy Noonan's point about particular patients, I assure him that they are now getting treatment in the Mater private hospital. The authority has given an undertaking to monitor cases to ensure appropriate arrangements are in place.
How long was their treatment delayed?
Arrangements will be made so that cases similar to those to which Deputy Shatter refers will not continue to arise.
The system is in chaos.
The Taoiseach is covering up this matter.
Deputy Shatter should note that only party leaders are entitled to ask a question.
All Deputies are aware of waiting lists in hospitals, which I am not pursuing as they apply to elective surgery. Even in the worst days of the health services, such as when the Leas-Ceann Comhairle was Minister for Health—
Those were the worst days.
—emergency services and life-saving services were always available. For the first time, patients have been denied life-saving chemotherapy treatment in the Mater Hospital during the past three weeks. If an enormous furore had not been created in the media, the patients would not have been given services in the Mater private hospital, three weeks late. I put it to the Taoiseach that he cannot plead ignorance in this case as the Mater Hospital is in his constituency. He was once employed there and is fully familiar with the situation. Is he not ashamed of himself? This Government has money coming out of its ears for its pet projects but it cannot make the necessary management arrangements so that those dying of cancer get the services necessary to save their lives. It is an absolute disgrace.
In these times of plentiful resources, when problems arise I am glad the facilities of the local private hospital were made available to patients so they could continue with their treatment.
Only after they had telephoned many radio and television stations.
It was embarrassing for the Government.
It must be noted that extra resources have been allocated to this important area, for example the spending of £44 million or the establishment of 28 new consultant posts. Additional facilities and people have been provided in the areas of medical oncology, haematology, histopathology, palliative care and surgery. Of course it is regrettable that there is ever a problem, but the fact of the matter is the authority has given an undertaking that it will watch these figures.
That is from the codology department.
It is not a matter of money or resources. The staff and the resources and the teams are available.
Nothing the Government does works. He can not do it.
Hopefully that will continue to improve matters.
I call Deputy Howlin on the second Leaders' question.
I want to ask the Taoiseach about the Local Government Bill, 2000. The Minister for the Environment and Local Government has been briefing councillors through their representatives, the General Council of County Councillors, to the effect that "the Bill has been discussed on a weekly basis with the relevant Independent Members", but he admitted that he was trying to find a compromise between two very opposite conflicts.
In response to a direct question, he also told councillors that there was no hope of the Bill being enacted before the summer recess. The reason he gave for that was this very opposite conflict with Members supporting the Government—
No, that is not true.
—and that there was a list as long as one's arm of Members who wanted to speak on this Bill. The Labour Party has indicated that we will support—
A question please.
I am coming to the question.
This is not Question Time.
There is a latitude of preamble given in leaders' questions. We have indicated that we will support this Bill on Second Stage. We will have amendments to table on Committee Stage but we will support it at committee. Who is in charge of this Government? Is it the Taoiseach or is it Deputy Healy-Rae? Where is this Bill, when will it be put to this House and what is the timeframe for its enactment?
Is the Taoiseach aware that the Fine Gael Party is prepared to take the Bill at any time, on any day and give free passage to those provisions of the Bill which councillors are demanding? Can he name anything on which his Minister for the Environment and Local Government has delivered following a PR announcement in this the fourth year of office of the Government?
I will send the Deputy a long list.
He has not done anything. Has he achieved anything?
I have done a great deal more than the Deputy since he shafted my constituency colleague.
A great deal of talk. Has he done anything but make announcements on housing, incinerators, litter, refuse and planning?
I have done more than the Deputy since he shafted my constituency colleague.
Minister, allow Deputy Noonan to put a brief question.
A Deputy
The Minister did much more than the Deputy since he got rid of Deputy John Bruton.
The Deputy should not get nasty.
I thank the Opposition for its helpful support on this matter, which no doubt will be useful. It would be nice if I could get the same assistance on the constitutional referendum which came from another all-party committee, where they all agreed until we progressed it.
It took 90 days to organise an amendment.
There are 246 sections in this Bill. It took nearly a year and a quarter to get through the Planning and Development Bill, which was of a similar size. It is the Government's intention to get this Bill passed before the summer, if possible; if not, in the autumn. The Bill will be enacted this year at the latest.
On the question of latitude raised by Deputy Howlin, the Standing Order is very specific in that a brief question from the leaders of the two main parties is permitted. There is no question of latitude.
It is silent on latitude.
I would instance only custom and practice. If one examines the record of all leaders' interventions since the Standing Order was amended, I think it would sustain my argument. Let me put a brief final question to the Taoiseach. When will this Bill be replaced for debate in order that Second Stage may be completed in this House?
As I understand it, it will be taken again in a few weeks' time.
We will now move on to items on the Order of Business.
On proposed legislation, on the list the Taoiseach published yesterday, the ombudsman for children is listed under proposed legislation. On the same day, a 15 year old boy was held in Donnybrook Garda station for two days. He had previously been held in Irishtown Garda station.
That does not arise on the Order of Business. It is the subject of an Adjournment Debate later this evening.
Can the Taoiseach give us an assurance about secure accommodation for young people and will this Bill be published?
That will be dealt with on the Adjournment this evening.
On a point of order, the question is in order.
The question on the Bill is in order.
The legislation to provide for the establishment will be before the House this session.
In the published list of legislation, the Bill to provide some measure of protection for tenants in the private rented sector is listed to be published around June 2002 which, irrespective of when the Taoiseach calls an election, means the Bill will not be enacted in the lifetime of this Government. Given that many tenants are facing eviction and the high rents and appalling conditions in the private rented sector, is it acceptable to the Taoiseach and his Government—
Deputy, do you have a question appropriate to the Order of Business?
Yes. It is a question appropriate to the Order of Business.
Have you a question on legislation?
I am asking the Taoiseach if he is proud of the fact that this Government will not introduce legislation to protect tenants in the private rented sector?
Deputy, that does not arise on the Order of Business.
The housing (private rented sector) Bill will give effect to the report of the Commission on the Private Rented Sector. I already have undertaken that this will move as quickly as possible. There are all kinds of constitutional and legal issues involved, but work is being done in the Department and the heads of the Bill are expected later this year.
When will it be published?
We must get the heads first.
It will not be published before the Taoiseach leaves office.
Is the Taoiseach aware that hauliers intend to block the N5 over the June bank holiday weekend due to its atrocious condition?
That is not a question for the Order of Business.
On promised legislation, when will the State authorities (public private partnership) Bill be published? Will the Taoiseach ensure that funding is drawn down for the N5, which is in an atrocious condition?
What is the position on the Bill?
It will be published this session.
What is the current standing of the Bill dealing with Aer Lingus? It has gone through the Seanad but are we to take it that the sale of Aer Lingus has now gone off the agenda?
While I have the floor, in case you do not come back to me, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I also want to ask about the Solicitors (Amendment) Bill, 1998, which is languishing on Committee Stage. That Bill, which would introduce some control regarding the atrocious advertisements by a very small number of solicitors inciting people to make claims, is in the doldrums in committee and we would like to know where it is.
The Solicitors (Amendment) Bill, 1998, is in committee. The Aer Lingus Bill was published last summer and is awaiting Second Stage in the House.
When will it be taken?
I do not have a date for it.
I have a question on legislation. I wonder if the Taoiseach could explain what the Government has against people who suffer from mental illness because there is such a delay—
Please ask a question.
The Mental Health Bill was published in 1999 and we are still waiting for it to become an Act. Surely the Taoiseach is aware that the basic rights which the mentally ill are being denied is an issue of concern.
It is on Report Stage.
I call Deputy Gay Mitchell.
A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, I think I am entitled to an answer.
You are entitled to an answer on promised legislation.
It is not acceptable to me, as a public representative, that the Taoiseach should mutter an answer from the corner of his mouth while seated to a serious question I have raised about people's rights.
The Deputy should read the Order Paper.
No. I am sorry, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, we are waiting for Report Stage
The Bill is before the House. The Deputy must find another way of raising it.
As each week goes by, it is not listed.
I called the Taoiseach to answer the Deputy's question on prom ised legislation. The Bill is already before the House. It does not really arise on the Order of Business.
Just to make the point, the Deputy should know that, according to Standing Orders, when the Bill is before the House she is not entitled to get an answer from the Taoiseach but I was trying to be helpful to her, even though she is in breach of Standing Orders. The answer to her question is that the Bill has completed Committee Stage and is awaiting a date for Report Stage. That is a matter for the Whips to agree.
Some weeks ago I tabled a question to the Minister of Health and Children asking the number of steering groups, reviews, committees and such bodies he had set up and the reply I got was that the information was being compiled.
Is this matter appropriate to the Order of Business?
Yes. The reply was that the information was being compiled and would be forwarded to me. There must be so many reviews, steering groups and other such bodies—
If the Deputy does not have a question appropriate to the Order of Business, I will call Deputy Joe Higgins.
A steering group will have to be set up to obtain that information.
The Committee on Procedure and Privileges should meet each month. I have a complaint before the Committee on Procedure and Privileges about the contempt with which the Minister for Health and Children treated this House.
That matter is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
I have two questions. Why has the Committee on Procedure and Privileges not met yet and why have I received no communication on this matter. I wrote to the Ceann Comhairle about the matter. Will the Taoiseach take the motion in my name requiring the Committee on Procedure and Privileges to meet every month? It is unacceptable that the Minister for Health and Children should treat the House with such contempt.
The Deputy's second question relates to a Private Members' motion. It is up to the Deputy's party to move it in Private Members' time.
(Dublin West): The view of the majority of the people in this State is that obstructionist tactics should not be allowed to wreck the Abbeylara inquiry into the tragic death of John Carthy.
Has the Deputy a question appropriate to the Order of Business?
(Dublin West): I do. Given that the truth of what went wrong at Abbeylara must be brought into the open and lessons must be learned—
The Deputy is out of order.
(Dublin West): I sat here for nearly an hour and listened to everyone else; all I want to say is a few words and then ask a question on legislation.
The Deputy is out of order.
(Dublin West): I am not, as I want to ask about No. 54 on the legislative programme. Given that a high profile senior counsel who earns several thousand pounds a day disputes the right of elected Members to hold the gardaí accountable, will the Taoiseach bring forward—
The Deputy may not preface a question on the Order of Business with a Second Stage-type speech.
(Dublin West): If the Committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas (Compellability, Privileges and Immunities of Witnesses) Act, 1997, is not sufficient to have a thorough inquiry, will the Taoiseach bring forward the Oireachtas Bill, No. 54, which would enable inspectors to be appointed from time to time to ascertain facts relevant to an inquiry? Will the Taoiseach give his full backing to the inquiry?
On a related question—
Is the Deputy's question related to what Deputy Higgins raised?
Yes.
I will hear Deputy Belton on a matter appropriate to the Order of Business.
My question is not related to one raised by Deputy Higgins.
If it is not related, I will take it separately.
It is related to the tragedy in Abbeylara.
The Deputy may ask a question appropriate to the Order of Busi ness, otherwise he will have to find another way of raising it.
I will let the Chair decide whether it appropriate when he hears it. Can I at least continue?
Thank you. Due to the fact that the Government representative, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, raised concerns with the committee—
That matter does not arise on the Order of Business.
At least let me finish the sentence. Does the Government intend to introduce legislation that will address those concerns of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform?
Both Deputies asked question on the legislation to enable inspectors to be appointed from time to time to ascertain facts relevant to an inquiry by Oireachtas committees and provide them with the necessary powers to compel the giving of such information. Work on the Bill is in progress. The heads of the Bill are expected to be ready this summer. The legislation is due before the House later this year.
I call Deputy Sean Ryan.
(Dublin West): Is the Government backing the inquiry?
I am backing the legislation.
(Dublin West): Is the Government backing the inquiry that is under way?
Allow Deputy Sean Ryan to contribute without interruption?
When is it proposed to amend section 27(1)(d) of the Credit Union Act to facilitate credit unions to operate the special savings account scheme? This was promised by the Minister for Finance. The credit unions cannot operate this scheme and have a level playing pitch until that section of the Act is amended. I ask the Taoiseach to take this on board and give that commitment.
I am not aware of the Minister's statement, although I have seen advertisements in various credit unions advertising the scheme. I will ask the Minister for Finance about it.
The credit unions cannot operate the scheme until that section of the Act is amended.
The Deputy's question has been answered. If the Deputy does not resume his seat, we will have to move on with the business proper. I call Deputy Coveney.
I did not hear the Taoiseach's reply.
He said he was not aware of the Minister's statement.
I said I was not aware the legislation required amendment, as the credit unions have been advertising schemes under the saving schemes for several weeks. I will ask the Minister for Finance if he made that statement.
Mr. Coveney
Will the Taoiseach confirm that the relevant Bill will be introduced before the summer recess to ensure activity and adventure centres across the country are regulated? The relevant Bill, the adventure activity standards authority Bill, was promised more than two years ago on foot of a Fine Gael Private Members' motion. Will the Taoiseach give us an update on the Bill and assure the House it will be in place before the summer recess?
I am not sure why there is a delay in its introduction. It was published prior to Christmas and is awaiting order for Second Stage. I will ask the Minister about it. I accept it was agreed.
I wish to raise the Stadium Ireland Bill, as I calculate, on the basis of the money paid by Mr. Dennis Tito to the Russians, the Taoiseach could send his entire Cabinet into space and it would still cost less than the Bertie bowl. I am concerned that the Taoiseach might consider that good value for money.
And for mankind.
I cannot think of anything nicer for him to do.
The Bill will hopefully be completed as soon as possible. The Leader of the greens, Joscha Fischer, put the Deputy into space yesterday.
In relation to the Waste Management (Amendment) Bill, the Taoiseach will be aware of the decision in the High Court yesterday in a case brought by my colleague, councillor Arthur Morgan of Louth and a ruling that struck down the decision of Louth County Council, which rescinded its previous decision, to reject plans for a waste incinerator. In light of the judge's ruling that the council did not have the required two-thirds majority and the affirmation of the High Court yesterday, will the Taoiseach press ahead with what is clearly an exposed, undemocratic and dictatorial Bill, which is designed to take away those powers?
I call Deputy Michael Higgins.
Will the Taoiseach clarify—
I call Deputy Michael Higgins to ask a question appropriate to the Order of Business?
My question is appropriate. The prospect of legislation that allows incinerators to be foisted on communities is an appropriate matter for the Order of Business.
If the Deputy does not conclude, we will have to move on to the business proper.
I wish to ask about two Bills, No. 17, the work permit Bill, which is appropriate to raise on May Day. In so far as the heads of this Bill have been agreed, which would put work permits on an comprehensive statutory footing, what is the delay in publishing the text of the legislation?
With regard to the second Bill, which has turned into a farce, the Committee on Heritage and the Irish Language listened this afternoon to a man make a submission—
Is the Deputy's question on promised legislation?
Yes, it is on No. 34, which in the English version of the official language is the Equality Bill, Bille na Gaeilge. This afternoon at that committee meeting—
It is not appropriate for the Deputy to make a statement, even on this matter.
An individual waited three months for a single sheet of paper from the millennium committee about the millennium forests.
It must have got burned among the candles.
I understand the Taoiseach told the House that the heads of that legislation had been agreed.
I ask the Deputy to give way to the Taoiseach on the two Bills.
What is the current position?
On the work permits Bill, that Bill is due to be ready later this year.
I know that. What is the difficulty about producing the text of it?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
I do not think there is a difficulty, it is just a matter of the time slot for it. With regard to the Bille na Gaeilge, the heads of it are expected to be ready very shortly.
Expected?
Yes. They are not completed yet.