Michael Noonan
Question:3 Mr. Noonan asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the progress of the Cabinet sub-committees which he chairs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [20939/01]
Ceisteanna–Questions. - Cabinet Sub-Committees.
Joe Higgins
Question:4 Mr. Higgins (Dublin West) asked the Taoiseach if he will make a statement on the work of any Cabinet sub-committees he chairs since the resumption of Dáil Éireann after the summer recess. [25083/01]
Pat Rabbitte
Question:5 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Taoiseach if the Cabinet sub-committee on drugs and social inclusion has met since the 2001 summer recess; if so, the number of occasions it has met; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26105/01]
Trevor Sargent
Question:6 Mr. Sargent asked the Taoiseach if he will report on the progress of the newly founded Cabinet sub-committee, of which he is a member, in its consideration of possible future legal challenges against the Sellafield nuclear complex. [26250/01]
Ruairí Quinn
Question:7 Mr. Quinn asked the Taoiseach the Cabinet sub-committees chaired by his Department; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26411/01]
I propose to take Questions Nos. 3 to 7, inclusive, together.
I chair Cabinet sub-committees on asylum seekers, children, European affairs, housing, infrastructure and public private partnerships, social inclusion and the information society. The Government has also established a sub-committee to oversee the management of the legal action concerning the Sellafield MOX plant.
As I have outlined to the House on a number of occasions, most recently on 15 May, Cabinet sub-committees are an integral part of the Cabinet process. Questions as to the business conducted at Cabinet or Cabinet sub-committee meetings have never been allowed in the House on the grounds that they are internal to Government. The reasons for this approach are founded on sound policy principles and the need to avoid infringing the constitutional protection of Cabinet confidentiality. As always, questions on particular policy issues should be put down to relevant Ministers.
The Taoiseach chairs the Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure and public private partnerships. Last Sunday the Minister for Finance announced that there would be cutbacks in the national development plan. Has the sub-committee discussed these cutbacks? Which projects will be discontinued?
Supplementary questions about what the sub-committee discussed are not in order.
Last Sunday the Minister for Finance indicated that the national development plan will not go ahead as planned. Did he discuss that with the Taoiseach before he made the announcement? Is the Taoiseach aware of which projects the Minister thinks will not go ahead in accordance with the plan?
Questions Nos. 3 to 7, inclusive, do not relate to the national development plan.
The Taoiseach, speaking at the Institute of Engineers, gave solemn guarantees that the national infrastructural plan would be implemented in full but this view was countermanded by the Minister for Finance last Sunday on national radio. Will the Taoiseach clarify the working agenda of the cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure and public private partnerships? Which of the two views is holding sway?
Questions about the national development plan are separate. It is not in order to ask questions on what is discussed at Cabinet sub-committees because of Cabinet confidentiality.
My question is not about what is discussed—
Then it is not relevant.
I refer to the terms of the reference of the sub-committee. Are the terms of reference those which were outlined at the Institute of Engineers by the Taoiseach, whereby the institute would be the group to steer implementation of the national development plan in the time frame outlined, or have the terms of reference been amended to accommodate the views expressed by the Minister for Finance last Sunday when he stated the NDP will not be implemented in the time frame that was envisaged?
There has been no amendment to the terms of reference. I cannot answer questions regarding the work of the sub-committees. I can outline how often they meet and the dates on which they meet. The other questions relate to budgetary matters and there is no difference of opinion.
With regard to my question, how many times has the sub-committee on social inclusion met this session? Does the Taoiseach acknowledge that in terms of social exclusion the gap between the haves and the rest in these areas has widened? Does he agree that, notwithstanding the good work that has been done on the drugs issues, it is still regrettable that many young people in need of treatment cannot get a place on a programme? Do the terms of reference of the sub-committee take into account the policing of the areas worst affected by social exclusion? There is not adequate policing in many of these areas, crime is going unreported and undetected and this is having a serious injurious effect on the quality of life of many of our citizens living in these areas.
The content of what is discussed at these meetings is not subject to question. The Taoiseach may answer the question regarding the number of times the sub-committee has met.
The committee meets monthly other than in August. All issues such as NAPS, social housing, literacy, local development are part of the remit of those meetings.
I am very disappointed Ceann Comhairle, that your rulings on supplementary questions today are far more restrictive than when similar questions were asked previously; and that your rulings today reflect absolutely the position taken by the Taoiseach in his answer.
Rulings are my own rulings as chairman of this body. It is quite obvious that the sub-committees are part of the Cabinet and as such there is Cabinet confidentiality as to the content of what is discussed at these meetings and there cannot be questions. The Taoiseach is not answerable to the House for matters discussed at the sub-committee meetings.
Your ruling today is your own ruling and the reason for your ruling is an echo of the Taoiseach's reply. It is different from the latitude you allowed on previous occasions when these questions were asked.
Arising from the question in my name, Question No. 3, I asked the Taoiseach to report on the progress of the Cabinet committees he chairs. Will the Taoiseach report specifically on the progress of the Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure which he chairs?
I answered the substance of this question. The Cabinet committee meets monthly. All the main issues of a national infrastructural nature are part of the agenda. The implementation of the national development plan, issues concerning transport, housing and infrastructure are all put to the relevant Ministers.
When the question is related to good news the Taoiseach is very expansive in the information he gives about Cabinet sub-committees. Now when the economy has turned and there are cutbacks in the national development plan, we are being closing down in the matter of information. I do not wish to be disorderly so I will change the subject. There is a huge difference in attitude from the Taoiseach today and he is simply stalling; he is not giving the information.
Last week we spent 45 minutes in the House talking about the Cabinet committee on infrastructure.
Before the Minister for Finance torpedoed it.
Both the Minister for Finance and I have made several statements about these issues. The position has not changed and I have said this many times. All the questions and issues that arise are questions that can be asked in any form to any of the relevant Ministers. The position as outlined by the Ceann Comhairle and as outlined by me on many occasions in this House has not changed.
I should point out that questions can be put down and are in order on Cabinet decisions.
The Taoiseach has confirmed that there is now a Cabinet sub-committee to oversee the Government's legal action in respect of Sellafield and in particular the issues arising from the proposed MOX plant at Sellafield. Can I take it the Taoiseach chairs this sub-committee even though he did not confirm that he does? Is this Cabinet sub-committee designed to replace Minister of State, Deputy Joe Jacob? Will the Taoiseach say what are the terms of reference of this committee; the composition of the committee; and the number of times which it has met since it was put in place?
I will assume Deputy Sargent's supplementary question is on the same lines.
You assume correctly, Ceann Comhairle. My Question No. 6 asks for a report on progress of the newly formed Cabinet sub-committee on Sellafield, or, as the Taoiseach says, on the MOX plant. I know the Taoiseach is interested in this. I could hear him shouting from Citywest from as far away as Balbriggan. The question is whether he is heard across the Irish Sea. Is the committee dealing in totality with the issues to do with Sellafield? The STAD case being taken by Dundalk residents will be an important precedent for any future legal action. This case has not been well-supported from their point of view and the Taoiseach may have been made aware of this by his colleague, Deputy Dermot Ahern. Is the committee looking at the EURATOM treaty, the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the Law of the Sea and OSPAR as a basis on which to take legal action?
The question is too detailed.
It was in order when I put down the question.
I am merely warning the Deputy not to go into too much detail. The details are a matter for the relevant Minister.
Too much detail is a problem for the Taoiseach.
I will endeavour to stay within the parameters of the Chair's ruling. How many meetings of the new Cabinet committee have taken place? How many meetings were chaired by the Taoiseach? Was the Government or the committee represented by a member of the committee at the hearings in London of the legal action taken by Greenpeace/Friends of the Earth? Who was there to ensure that the concerns of the Irish Government were clearly understood by the court? With reference to the envisaged meetings and work plan of the committee – I am trying to stay within the Ceann Comhairle's ruling – what further initiatives are expected before the end of the year?
Members of the committee include the Minister of State, Deputy Jacob, the Attorney General, the Departments of the Environment and Local Government, Social, Community and Family Affairs, the Marine and Natural Resources and the Tánaiste. I chair it. A number of officials attend when required.
What about the Departments of Health and Children and Environment and Local Government?
The Department of the Environment and Local Government, yes.
Is that the whole Department or the Minister at the meetings?
The Minister. The officials attend when necessary. They are covering all the issues raised, the legal issues, STAD, OSPAR, EURATOM, UNCLAS. At last week's meeting there was a watching brief on behalf of the Attorney General which was reported to the committees.
How many meetings did the Taoiseach chair?
A number of these committees have been full Cabinet committees. I have had a number of meetings at the committee meetings with the Attorney General about the legal process. The most recent meeting was today. We have had a number of sessions in different forms on the legal brief.
Are they meetings of the actual committee?
Most of the briefs on this in recent years have been full Cabinet meetings. We have had a number of meetings with the Attorney General, Deputy Jacob and others.
Since the Sellafield committee was established?
The Sellafield committee has been operating since the MOX committee. There have been two meetings since the MOX committee.
In relation to the chairing of the Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure and notwithstanding what you said earlier, Ceann Comhairle, regarding a difficulty on the part of the Taoiseach to deal with matters that are under discussion or have been discussed, may I ask in relation to decisions made, does the Taoiseach accept that the current log jam and bottleneck in our economy as far as infrastructural deficit is concerned, is giving rise to difficulties on the part of industry in ensuring that we maintain competitiveness? Last Sunday his Minister for Finance stated that certain aspects of the national development plan will not now proceed. Will the Taoiseach agree that this has given rise to even greater uncertainty in business and enterprise? There is now a feeling that there will be a certain amount of reneging on fundamental aspects of the national development plan. Is the Taoiseach in a position to clarify matters for the benefit of the House this afternoon? This is the first opportunity we have had since the Minister's statement and having regard to the rules of the House. If parliament is not allowed to ask questions of a fundamental nature, when will the Taoiseach as head of Government and as chairman of the Cabinet sub-committee on infrastructure make a statement clarifying what is proceeding under the national development plan as far as infrastructure is concerned and what aspects of the plan have been scrapped?
I repeat that Cabinet decisions are always open to question but decisions of the sub-committees, which may not end up as Cabinet decisions, are not open to questions in the House.
Does that mean that decisions the Government is making through the sub-committee system, for example, on Sellafield, are secret?
No. Once they are Cabinet decisions, they are open to scrutiny and questions.
Discussion.
If they are sub-committee decisions, does it mean—
They are sub-committees of the Cabinet. They do not become decisions until the Cabinet approves them.
It would be absolutely ridiculous if the Government had to keep decisions of the sub-committees secret. It is an extraordinary ruling.
I have pointed out the position as clearly as I can. Decisions of sub-committees are not relevant. The only matters of concern to this House are Cabinet decisions. I call the Taoiseach.
May I pursue this matter further because it is causing real difficulty in the House? It would be extraordinary if we could not now ask the Taoiseach about a whole range of areas that are the subject of ongoing decisions at Cabinet sub-committee level.
As I pointed out on a number of occasions, there is Cabinet confidentiality.
On discussions, but surely not on decisions.
Decisions.
The position regarding committees is the same as for the agendas of Cabinet meetings in that Members cannot ask what will be discussed. Members could never seek that information. However, it is different when a Member asks about the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness, as Deputy Noonan did last week. It is the form in which the issue is raised. One could never ask a Taoiseach about what took place at a Cabinet meeting because of the confidentiality rules.
One can raise it in another form, for example, if the matter is kicked to another Minister.
Such questions are framed in a different form. For example, Members can raise matters through NESC. I answer questions each week about NESF and NESC. It is the form in which the questions are put. The Ceann Comhairle has not made a new ruling. It has been the position for the past 25 years at least.
They are obviously at one on the issue.
We are at one on the national development plan. It will be implemented.
Standing Orders and the Constitution govern the situation.
I recognise the Chair's ruling that only decisions can be discussed. Has a decision been taken to pursue a case under the EURATOM Treaty in relation to Sellafield or does it only relate to cases under the OSPAR Convention and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea? Has a decision been made with regard to the non-proliferation treaty?
The Deputy is asking about a Cabinet decision.
On the basis of the Chair's ruling, I understand it is possible to discuss a decision.
Only if it is a Cabinet decision.
I am asking if there has been a decision.
It must be a Cabinet decision.
The position is that the case will start next Monday and Tuesday in Hamburg.
The United Nations?
Yes.
Yes. The Attorney General will represent the committee and outline the case.
No decision has been taken in relation to the EURATOM Treaty?
No. We are taking the first one first and I hope we will be successful.