It is proposed to take No. 11, motion re referral to select committee of proposed approval by Dáil Éireann of the report by the Minister for Defence pursuant to section 4 of the Defence (Amendment) Act, 1993; No. 26, Private Security Services Bill, 2001 – Second Stage (resumed); and No. 3, Licensing of Indoor Events Bill, 2001 – Order for Second stage and Second Stage. It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that No. 11 shall be decided without debate. Private Members' Business shall be No. 36, motion re confidence in the Minister for Finance.
Order of Business.
There is one question to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 11, without debate, agreed to?
It is not agreed to. This is as important a matter as can come before any Parliament. In particular, given our Constitution, we should debate and vote on the expectations of a war, involving this country through the use of Shannon Airport for US military personnel and equipment. I ask you, a Cheann Comhairle, in upholding not just the rights of this House but the Constitution, that you ensure this matter does not go without debate and get hived off to another theatre of debate which is not the central Parliament. I ask you to uphold the seriousness of this issue and the Constitution. The effects of a war not just on humanity but on the price of energy, Co2 emissions, the radioactive burden from weaponry that may be used and the knock-on effects, and the likelihood of terrorist attacks anywhere else in the world, including our country, make this a matter of the utmost gravity.
As the Deputy is well aware, it is not a matter for the Chair to decide, it is a matter for the House to decide on this issue.
The issue that has been raised is of concern to the entire Chamber. There has been an enormous amount of confusion as to, for example, commitments which have been made. Have they been made by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the Taoiseach in relation to the context of Resolution 1368? Is Resolution 1368 being used or abused to justify preparation for a pre-emptive strike for military purposes? On all of these matters all Members will have received representations from different constituents. If it is referred to the committee, it may get deferred and not receive the full extended debate it needs. The issue should be discussed as a matter of urgency. Any use being made of facilities in Ireland at present is improper and does not have a mandate from this House. Such commitments as the Taoiseach may have made in a conversation, on foot of Resolution 1368, have no connection whatsoever to what is taking place at present.
I support the demand for time for a debate in the House. If the Taoiseach holds a very different view to the rest of us on this matter at least we are entitled to hear it. It is here we should discuss it. If he is suggesting a change in the Defence Acts so as to facilitate the kind of activity that is taking place, let us hear that too. What is happening at best is a fairly deceitful construction. Even if the terms of Resolution 1368 allowed it, which I believe they do not, it is a totally improper and unsustainable extension of that resolution to argue that it justifies what is going on at present. This is a matter of such urgency that I do not think it can wait for two weeks. Perhaps the best way to do that would be to have a discussion now in the House on the appropriate interpretation of such a resolution as has been passed by the Security Council, including this dimension of it.
I wish to also support the objection as articulated by Deputies Sargent and Higgins. In light of Ireland's voting position at the Security Council meeting at the end of last week there is a bounden duty on Government to facilitate the address of the proposition on the Order of Business in this Chamber rather than hiving it off to a committee of the House. It is an imperative and I urge the Taoiseach to confirm the request of the Members.
I raised this matter last week. In the event that the Iraqi Government has turned down the UN recommendation in respect of weapons inspectors going in and in the event that the United States, together with other countries of like minded mentality, decide to take action by force in Iraq, will the Taoiseach see to it that this House discusses the implications of that either as an emergency or in the course of a full debate? That is what is being requested by Deputy Higgins and others. The matter was raised last week but was not responded to clearly. War in the Constitution is a matter for the entire House. This could have the most catastrophic, social, personal and economic consequences not only for the countries of the Far East and Middle East but for countries of central and western Europe also. I seek clarification that the entire House will have the opportunity to discuss it if this unfortunate and potentially catastrophic event takes place.
In reply to Deputy Higgins and Deputy Kenny, in particular, I welcome the fact that the adoption of the Security Council Resolution 1441 was unanimous and that the Security Council has been able to express in a unified and rare fashion its concerns and intentions regarding Iraq. The Minister for Foreign Affairs will be answering questions on this issue tomorrow and no doubt there will be a debate in the House but it demonstrates the Security Council's determination to ensure that Iraq, on this occasion, will meet its obligations. We believe that Resolution 1441 offers the most likely means of achieving those three goals – obtaining Iraq's voluntary compliance with its disarmament obligations, avoiding a military conflict and preserving the primacy and importance of the Security Council. Deputy Kenny asked in the event that does not happen if there will be a debate here. We can certainly have that. We have had a few debates on this issue previously. I have no difficulty in ensuring another debate on it.
And a vote.
If the Deputy wants to oppose the view of the entire Security Council of the world that is—
We have not been given a chance to voice an opinion.
I hope the Deputy would not want to even if he got the chance. No. 11 is a 2001 report in regard to the service by the Defence Forces in the United Nations.
The report is being referred to a committee. It in no way affects what we are talking about. Clearly the Deputy is using it as a device to raise the issue and he has succeeded in doing that.
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with Item No. 11 be agreed to".
Tá
|
Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Breen, James.Brennan, Seamus.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Collins, Michael.Coughlan, Mary.Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Curran, John.Davern, Noel.de Valera, Síle. Dempsey, Tony. |
Tá–continued
|
Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Fahey, Frank.Fleming, Seán.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Hoctor, Máire.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Seamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McDaid, James.McDowell, Michael.McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.McHugh, Paddy. |
Martin, Micheál.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M. J.Ó Cuív, Éamon.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Donovan, Denis.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Peter.Roche, Dick.Ryan, Eoin.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Woods, Michael.Wright, G. V. |
Níl
|
Allen, Bernard.Boyle, Dan.Broughan, Thomas P.Bruton, Richard.Burton, Joan.Connaughton, Paul.Connolly, Paudge.Crawford, Seymour.Cuffe, Ciarán.Durkan, Bernard J.English, Damien.Enright, Olwyn.Ferris, Martin.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Harkin, Marian.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.Kehoe, Paul.Kenny, Enda.Lowry, Michael.Lynch, Kathleen.McCormack, Padraic.McGrath, Finian.McGrath, Paul.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay. |
Morgan, Arthur.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda.Murphy, Gerard.Naughten, Denis.Neville, Dan.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.O'Dowd, Fergus.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Seamus.Penrose, Willie.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairi.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Twomey, Liam.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Durkan and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
On the Order of Business, I call Deputy Timmins.
The Taoiseach will know that Commissioner Fischler was here yesterday and reiterated his commitment to proceed with his reforms. Is the Government still opposed to those reforms? On promised legislation, when is the land Bill due before the House?
The Taoiseach, on the land Bill.
And on the Fischler reforms.
That question is out of order. The Taoiseach may answer on the land Bill.
The land Bill is due before the House in 2003.
With regard to the Transport (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill, the Taoiseach will know that, last Thursday, the Minister for Transport went behind the closed doors of the IBEC-ICTU partnership transport forum to launch his part-privatisation of public transport—
The Deputy should ask a question appropriate to the Order of Business.
Given that the legislation was apparently discussed with IBEC and ICTU before it was discussed in the House, when will the Minister come to the House with legislation on the privatisation he proposes?
It is not necessary to make a statement
Is IBEC the right body to decide this or should the Dáil decide how legislation is progressed?
The Transport (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill proposes to increase the borrowing limits for CIE and other matters. It requires the prior notification and approval of the EU Commission and should be ready next year.
It is recognised that financial management in the Department of Health and Children is a shambles. Will the Taoiseach ensure, when the State and the public pay for patient care, they are assured the patients are still alive?
That does not arise. The Deputy should submit a parliamentary question on that matter. I call Deputy Deasy.
Will he amend the registration of deaths legislation to ensure doctors are not overpaid for patients who are no longer alive?
There is no proposed legislation on that matter.
Will the Taoiseach ensure there is a change in the legislation?
If it is necessary. Is the Deputy referring to the civil registration Bill?
No. The current legislation needs to be amended.
There is no promise on that issue.
The Deputy should submit a parliamentary question.
I have a list of 150 Bills with me. Members were elected on May 17 and since then we have passed three pieces of legislation. We have passed three Bills in six months. Is the Taoiseach happy that the work rate in the House is good enough? Why did it take six months to set up the committees of the Houses?
I am glad to answer those questions. This House sits longer hours than previously. I sit longer hours—
The Taoiseach does not.
Deputy Gormley is being disorderly.
He is on a one and a half day week.
Allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption.
(Interruptions.)
I spend more time in parliament than any other Prime Minister, and particularly Prime Ministers in parliaments where there are Green Party members in Cabinet.
(Interruptions.)
Is the Taoiseach talking about China?
The Taoiseach spends more time opening pubs than in parliament.
I am trying to answer a serious question. With the time spent on special debates, Question Time and on other issues, the time for legislation in the House is increasingly limited. That is a problem and we must decide whether legislation is to be dealt with by committees. Every year since I entered the House, the number of hours of the available parliamentary week spent on important business other than legislation has increased while the time available for legislation has decreased. All of my Government colleagues are howling at the Chief Whip for time for legislation but they cannot get it. It is a real problem.
The House should sit on a Friday and the Government should abolish the dual mandate.
With the recent revelations that the consumer price index has increased again and is now double the European norm, has the Taoiseach—
Has the Deputy a question appropriate to legislation?
Yes. Will legislation be introduced to control prices before we become known as "Rip-off Ireland"? Will the Taoiseach instruct the relevant Minister to introduce legislation in that regard?
Is there legislation promised?
No.
Will the Taoiseach instruct the relevant Minister to introduce such legislation?
If I allowed that question, every Deputy would invite the Taoiseach to encourage his Ministers to introduce legislation.
That would not be a bad thing.
The Deputy should submit a parliamentary question on the matter.
Is legislation now necessary to ensure the continuation of the all-Ireland implementation bodies in the wake of the British Government's suspension of the Assembly, the all-Ireland ministerial council and the Executive and, if so, when can we expect such legislation before the House?
On the second matter, we all agree that even if only a fraction of the accusations about Garda corruption at the Morris tribunal are true, this is a huge scandal by any standards. Will the Taoiseach bring forward, in the first instance, a motion to extend the terms of reference of the tribunal—
Deputy, that does not arise on the Order of Business.
—including the accountability of Garda management and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform.
The Taoiseach can only answer the first question which is in order.
Will he bring forward a Garda—
The Deputy is out of order.
This is about an item of legislation. I wish to know if the Taoiseach will bring forward such legislation.
Is such legislation promised?
Is such legislation promised? Will the Taoiseach—
I ask the Deputy to resume his seat. The Taoiseach will answer the question that was in order.
The Garda Síochána (inspection and complaints) Bill will be ready by the middle of next year. The answer to the Deputy's question on the matter of the implementation bodies and the ministerial council of the Good Friday Agreement is that it does require legislation. We cleared the initial draft at the Cabinet table today and hope to have it fully drafted by 20 November and before the House the week commencing 25 November. We hope, with the assistance of the Whips and the House, to get it passed by 1 December as it is urgent that this is done.
Legislation will be necessary if Aer Lingus is to be privatised and I would like an assurance from the Taoiseach that a White Paper will be produced on that important change in public policy before any decisions are made so that this House can have a proper role in debating it. As in the case of privatisation—
Is this question appropriate to the Order of Business? I suggest that the Deputy submit the question.
I am asking a question—
The Deputy is asking the type of question that I ruled out of order for Deputy Lynch.
It is in keeping with tradition that questions relating to promised White Papers or legislation—
Is legislation promised on this matter?
Legislation is promised by Deputy Brennan, the relevant Minister, and I seek an assurance that the House will be treated with respect and that we will have a White Paper on this issue before irrevocable decisions are taken.
We can only have questions on promised legislation.
No legislation is proposed at this stage because the Minister is currently assessing the options. If there is a change of policy to allow private sector investment in the State company, then there will have to be legislation. If a question were to be put to the Minister, he would answer it and explain the situation.
Which rights-based legislation can we look forward to in this session, either arising from the incomplete agenda of the Good Friday Agreement, on disability, or a decision to implement sections of the European Convention on Human Rights?
I have just outlined the legislation on the implementation bodies under the Good Friday Agreement. The Bill on disabilities is expected in this session, as I have pointed out many times before.
The Taoiseach did not address my specific question about rights-based legislation. Is the Bill on disability being redrafted on a rights basis, and will there be legislation on the outstanding sections on rights in the Good Friday Agreement, which would create two different regimes in the two different parts of the island? I also asked if the outstanding items in the European convention, from which Ireland derogated, will be coming before us by way of legislation.
The European convention is not scheduled before Christmas.
I know that Commissioner Fischler, after our discussion yesterday, would wish me to ask this question on promised legislation regarding the fishery harbours centres as it is clear that rules are not being enforced on redundant trawlers that are dumped dangerously in harbours, such as my own in Balbriggan and also in Skerries.
That is not an appropriate question. The Deputy cannot make statements.
Will the Taoiseach bring forward this Bill at the earliest opportunity?
The heads of the Bill on fishery harbours centres, which will establish the new management structures for these centres, are being prepared and it is hoped that legislation will be ready next year.
There is no secondary legislation, under section 21 of the Transport Act, 1958, before the House for the closure of a permanent way, which is required as Irish Rail is about to perform an illegal act—
The Deputy must ask a question.
I have a question. Irish Rail is about to perform an illegal act under section 21 of the Transport Act, 1950.
The Deputy must ask a question.
I am seeking to explain to the Taoiseach the legislation—
The Taoiseach does not need an explanation.
Under that Act, Irish Rail is committing an offence in closing the Athenry to Claremorris line.
Does the Deputy have a question on secondary legislation?
When will secondary legislation be brought before the House as this action is illegal until it is.
There is no legislation amending this Act.
I ask the Taoiseach about the Bill, under the North-South institutions, to implement the recommendations of the child protection joint working group. It is important regarding a register of persons who are considered unsafe to work with children. Does the Taoiseach have a specific timeframe for introducing this next year, and will he also consider a register of Ministers deemed to be unsafe to work with public finance?
The Minister intends to bring proposals to Government by the end of the year to establish a cross-departmental working group to finalise proposals for legislation, which we expect to be in the House in 2003.
Is it necessary to introduce legislation to provide banking services in post offices? I also call on the Taoiseach and Deputy Dermot Ahern, the Minister responsible, to intervene in the postal dispute which is causing great hardship for rural Ireland.
The question is inappropriate.
This is an important issue.
I suggest the Deputy finds another way to raise it.
If one puts down a question, one gets no answer, which is why I am trying to raise it now.
I am sorry but the issue does not arise on the Order of Business.
The Taoiseach wants to answer.
The Taoiseach is not allowed to be out of order anymore than any other Deputy.
The Taoiseach indicated that he wished to answer.
The Deputy must submit a parliamentary question.
Can the Taoiseach tell me when the national spatial strategy will be published?
The strategy will be published soon. It is still before a Cabinet committee.
In view of a recent study by Trinity College, which produced disturbing results about the health risk of living close to landfills, has the Government plans to introduce more stringent legislation in this area or, if not, will it consider introducing it?
I ruled Deputy Lynch out of order on a similar question. The Order of Business affords the opportunity to ask about promised legislation. I suggest the Deputy submits a parliamentary question.
I am asking the question to find out if the Government plans to introduce legislation.
The reason that the Deputy's question is not allowed is that Deputies would then ask questions about all the legislation they wish to see introduced.
This is a serious health matter.
I accept that and there are ways of raising it, such as on the Adjournment or through parliamentary questions.
I have done that but have not got a satisfactory reply.
I am sorry Deputy but it is not appropriate on the Order of Business.
Will the budget be poverty proofed?
That is not an appropriate question. We must move on.