Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 16 Apr 2003

Vol. 565 No. 4

Order of Business.

The Order of Business today shall be as follows: No. 13a, motion re ministerial rota for parliamentary questions; No. 18, Local Government Bill 2003 [Seanad] – Second Stage (resumed); No. 19, Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill 2002 – Order for Report, Report and Final Stages; and No. 19a, statements on the humanitarian situation in Iraq.

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 on the conclusion of No. 19a; No. 13a shall be decided without debate; the proceedings on the resumed Second Stage of No. 18 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 5.30 p.m.; the Report and Final Stages of No. 19 shall be taken today and the proceedings thereon shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 7 p.m. by one question which shall be put from the Chair and which shall, in relation to amendments, include only those set down or accepted by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform; the proceedings on No. 19a, shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion after 65 minutes and the following arrangements shall apply: the statements of the Minister of State and of the main spokespersons for the Fine Gael Party, the Labour Party and the Technical Group, who shall be called upon in that order, shall not exceed 15 minutes in each case; Members may share time; the Minister of State shall be called upon to make a statement in reply which shall not exceed five minutes; and the Dáil on its rising today shall adjourn until 2.30 p.m. on Wednesday, 7 May 2003. Private Members' Business shall be No. 32, motion re cancer support services (resumed) – to conclude at 8.30 p.m..

Is the proposal for the late sitting agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 13a without debate agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 18 agreed?

I propose that the guillotine imposed on this be removed. A significant number of speakers on this side of the House wish to contribute to the Bill. It is supposed to go to committee tomorrow but Report Stage cannot be taken until May so there is no reason for the rush.

I agree with Deputy Kenny.

There does not seem to be any reason the House could not sit tomorrow to debate this Bill as the proposed recess to 7 May is sufficient and will not eat into people's time. In view of this, I ask the Government to reconsider its decision that the Dáil should rise today.

I object to the proposal to impose a guillotine on the Second Stage of this important legislation, which not only addresses the issue of the dual mandate but proposes to abolish the provision allowing for the direct election of mayors and cathaoirligh of local authorities. The Bill is inadequate and requires significant amendment. The proposal to rush through Second Stage today and proceed to Committee Stage tomorrow will truncate debate.

The House needs more time to consider the detail of the major reform of local government that is not being addressed by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government in the Bill. It is unnecessary to rush to Committee Stage tomorrow and I join with other Members in objecting to the proposal to guillotine the Second Stage today. I therefore cannot support the proposed Order of Business.

The Bill deals specifically with the dual mandate.

It also deals with other matters.

The dual mandate is the main issue addressed in the Bill. The reform of local government will be the subject of other legislation sponsored by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government. The Government is anxious to take Committee Stage during the Easter break to enable Report and Final Stages to be taken when the House resumes on 7 May, with a view to its implementation during May.

Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with No. 18 be agreed to."

Andrews, Barry.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Cassidy, Donie.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.

Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Curran, John.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fleming, Seán.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim. Tá–continued

Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Seamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McEllistrim, Thomas.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.

Nolan, M.J.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donoghue, John.O'Donovan, Denis.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Seán.Ryan, Eoin.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Treacy, Noel.Walsh, Joe.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G.V.

Níl

Allen, Bernard.Boyle, Dan.Breen, James.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas P.Bruton, Richard.Burton, Joan.Connolly, Paudge.Crawford, Seymour.Crowe, Seán.Durkan, Bernard J.Enright, Olwyn.Ferris, Martin.Fox, Mildred.Gilmore, Eamon.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Gregory, Tony.Harkin, Marian.Hayes, Tom.Healy, Seamus.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.Hogan, Phil.Howlin, Brendan.Kehoe, Paul.Kenny, Enda.Lynch, Kathleen.McCormack, Padraic.

McGinley, Dinny.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.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Seán.Sargent, Trevor.Sherlock, Joe.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Twomey, Liam.Wall, Jack.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and Moloney; Níl, Deputies Durkan and Stagg.
Question declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 19, Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill 2002, Report and Final Stages, agreed?

It is not agreed. I do not object to Ministers having drivers, but since security has been reviewed for former Taoisigh, is it time to review it for judges, Ministers and gardaí travelling to social functions? If we need more gardaí for criminal justice provision, perhaps we should review the use of Garda drivers.

This might be more appropriate to the debate on the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill.

The job could probably be done by civilian drivers.

We cannot have a debate on the matter now. The proposal we are discussing is a time motion.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform opened the question himself. Maybe we could have civilians to drive Ministers.

The Deputy has made his point which it would be more appropriate to raise during the general debate on the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill.

The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform claimed this morning that the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill was obstructed by filibuster in the House. The Bill was introduced on 3 April, just prior to the general election. After the election, it was restored to the Order Paper and Second Stage debate took place on 19 and 20 June and 11 December. The Bill was referred to Select Committee on 11 December and Committee Stage was finalised in a single day on 11 February. The reason it has not proceeded to Report Stage is that ministerial amendments were not ready on time. It is now to proceed on 16 April.

The Minister should apologise.

It is important that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform comes into the House to make clear that he was using a public forum to mislead the people that the Opposition had obstructed this minimalist measure—

Deputies

Hear, hear.

It is not his first time.

—when in fact, the Opposition wanted to see this Bill enacted quickly. The Minister criticised the time we spent on the Bill on Second Stage when several Members from all sides—

We are discussing a time motion.

It is important.

—wanted to contribute on Second Stage because the issue of public order breakdown is extremely serious. There was no filibuster on the Bill, which was not detained by the Opposition. It was untrue and unfair of the Minister to use the forum he had this morning to give that impression.

Deputies

Hear, hear.

The Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill is one which the Minister has acknowledged is not the most controversial of Bills. Of the 37 Bills he has promised, one has been enacted and the passage of this latest Bill demonstrates that the Minister is long on public relations exercises and very short on delivery. We should get on with business and enact quickly the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill. The other Bills should be brought forward and we should see action rather than PR from the Minister.

Sinn Féin will support the Bill and we see no reason it should not be moved forward. The Minister's remarks on the radio this morning were a slight on the Opposition's role in engaging in the areas of amendment. As Deputy Rabbitte has noted, the Mini ster misled the public and he has a responsibility to come to the House to put the record straight and to apologise to Members for what he has said.

The Tánaiste could apologise for him.

I am delighted by the support from all parties opposite. We should proceed to enact this Bill today as intended. I appreciate the support.

That keeps Deputy McDowell in his place.

Question, "That the proposal for dealing with No. 19 be agreed to", put and declared carried.

Is the proposal for dealing with No. 19a, statements on the humanitarian situation in Iraq, agreed?

No, we have already had a debate on the humanitarian crisis in Iraq and we do not need another. What we need is a debate on the Government's position on how Iraq should be governed. Does the Government support the United States administration or would it prefer a United Nations administration? Does the Government, for example, support the introduction of weapons inspectors because this, after all, was supposed to be a war about weapons of mass destruction, but we still have not discovered them? We know now that this was a war about regime change.

Unlike Deputy Rabbitte, I listened to the Tánaiste's speech at the weekend when she spoke about neutrality. It is all very well talking about neutrality outside the House but we need a debate in the Chamber on neutrality. The Government is shirking its responsibilities. We need a real debate in the House now about the crisis in Iraq. The Government is hiding behind this proposal.

I am delighted to see that Deputy Gormley is coming around to my way of thinking that we should at last debate neutrality in the House.

I have always said it.

We have had a debate on humanitarian aid and I welcome the debate this evening. I presume the Chair will, as part of that debate, allow Members raise their concerns about the future governance of Iraq because that has relevance to the question of delivery of humanitarian aid. On that basis we will not oppose the proposal. Instead, we support it and welcome the opportunity.

It would be entirely unrealistic to debate humanitarian aid without debating the structures, for example, whether the United Nations will be the lead agency to enable non-governmental organisations and United Nations agencies to work in Iraq.

I have considerable sympathy for and support what Deputy Gormley said. This is probably not the opportunity for it although we must seek a debate. The Government has consistently refused a substantial debate on Iraq in the House, especially on the issues of legitimacy, the concept of pre-emption and regime change. While people at their conferences can "guff" on about one principle or another, the principle of illegality was never allowed to be discussed in the House. I support what Deputy Gormley said because the Government's concession of a debate on humanitarian issues was used as a cover for those who did not want to come to a position on the fundamental issues of whether what took place was legal. That is a fact.

Obviously we will not now have a debate on the fundamentals. I assure you, a Cheann Comhairle, that we will continue to raise this issue because issues of foreign policy should be discussed in the Chamber. People say they are in favour of discussing neutrality or whatever. The Government should discuss that in the House with other aspects of its foreign policy and should not ask us to respond to its bland statements after views have been exchanged at one Council meeting or another.

The House recently unanimously supported a motion on humanitarian aid to Iraq presented in Private Members' Business and endorsed by the Government. Is it not the case that we should now address the worrying statements issued by President Bush, Mr. Rumsfeld and others, not only on the situation in Iraq and the militarily imposed regime that is proposed for it, but also regarding Syria and the United States' real intent at this time in the region? The House needs to address that and the Government needs to outline its position in response to those statements. That should be the focus. Undoubtedly that is where the people's concerns lie.

Deputies opposite sought a debate last week on the Iraqi situation and because the Minister for Foreign Affairs is with the Taoiseach in Athens, it is being taken by the Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs, Deputy Kitt. Certainly there will be no difficulty with Members putting their views on record on the governance and reconstruction of Iraq or other issues in that regard.

There is no time to do it.

Members will certainly be free to do that.

Is the proposal for deal ing with 19a, statements on the humanitarian situation in Iraq, agreed? Agreed.

I will not call a vote.

Is the proposal for dealing with the adjournment of the Dáil today agreed?

No, it is not agreed. I can see no reasonable explanation for the House not meeting again until three weeks from today. There is no reason it cannot reconvene on 29 April. We have managed to sit for 32 days since the beginning of the year and for 16 of those, the Taoiseach chose not to honour us with his presence. He has managed to be present for half the sitting days – 16 – and during that time the guillotine was used on 31 items of business. That is unprecedented at this stage of the lifetime of a Dáil. I know the Taoiseach wants to stay out of the House as frequently as possible and whenever he can.

That is unfair.

There is no justification for a three week adjournment of the House when a Minister went on radio this morning and accused the Opposition of filibustering and said he did not have enough time to introduce all the legislation he promised. There are many days when the House could be in session and when the Minister, Deputy McDowell, could put through legislation to deal with public order and crime.

There are several other examples. It did not take the Government long to put through the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill to disembowel the original Act when it wanted to, but it cannot put through legislation to protect the safety of citizens when it is needed. There is no need for this three week adjournment of the Dáil and I propose to the Tánaiste an amendment to the effect that the House will reconvene on 29 April.

My party objects to the length of time the Government will suspend the Dáil. There is no doubt that the Government is most comfortable when the House is not sitting, but that is no excuse to have such an extended vacation when so many reports as well as Bills are due to be issued in the interim. The funding of third level education report, for example, is due to be issued when the Dáil is not sitting. It is important that the issue is addressed and that the Government clarifies its position. Many families are concerned that the Government is bringing back third level fees by stealth.

For the Dáil not to sit gives more credence to the belief that the Government is acting not behind a pane of glass but a brick wall, that it is bringing forward measures the Dáil cannot debate, and that is the reason it is suspending the Dáil for this time. We support Deputy Rabbitte's call that the Dáil be recalled before the date the Tánaiste announced and that we have a properly accountable Dáil without the long vacations of which people are rightly suspicious and contemptuous.

I call Deputy Kenny.

On a point of order—

We will hear Deputy Kenny first and then I will hear Deputy Breen's point of order.

I support the proposal put forward by Deputy Rabbitte for the early reconvening of the Dáil. In the event of the situation in respect of Northern Ireland being clarified, it may be necessary to recall the Dáil for whatever reason. Will the Tánaiste assure me that if a recall is warranted, depending on the outcome of the closing stages of these negotiations, the Dáil will be recalled?

It is ludicrous to hear Deputy Rabbitte criticising the Taoiseach when he colluded with him to put the Technical Group at the end of the line.

That is not a point of order, Deputy.

He colluded with the Taoiseach—

That is not a point of order.

—to allow the Taoiseach stay out of the House on Thursdays.

I call Deputy Ó Caoláin.

Then he criticises the Taoiseach for not being present.

Deputy Breen should resume his seat.

It is typical of Deputy Rabbitte to criticise the Taoiseach—

That is not a point of order. I call Deputy Ó Caoláin.

—when he colluded with him to allow the Taoiseach stay out of the House—

The Deputy should resume his seat.

—and put the Technical Group back to the end.

Deputy Breen should resume his seat. I call Deputy Ó Caoláin.

That is what Deputy Rabbitte did. It is hypocrisy.

Saddam Hussein—

A Deputy

He can rejoin Fianna Fáil any time he wants. Will Fianna Fáil take him back?

He is looking to get back in.

Deputy Ó Caoláin without interruption.

(Interruptions).

Allow Deputy Ó Caoláin to speak.

Deputy Breen has never spoken truer words. He may be out of order but he is accurate in what he has said. I support the proposal that the House should not adjourn for the period specified. There are so many reasons we could argue for an earlier resumption of business following the Easter recess, not least of all because of the raft of legislation the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has to present to both Houses and the important rights-based legislation for people with disabilities.

The Dáil will be in recess for two Dáil weeks plus tomorrow. I do not believe that is excessive. During those weeks—

This is not Leaders' Questions.

Standing Order 26 allows one Member from each party to make a brief contribution.

On a point of order—

This has already been done by the Opposition parties and I now call on the Tánaiste to make her contribution.

My point of order is that I got lectured by the Government for the past two weeks on the dual mandate. Now we are taking another three weeks off—

That is not a point of order.

It is the only way to make my point. One could join—

I ask the Deputy to resume his seat.

—and have another day to do both.

I have called on the Tánaiste.

(Interruptions).

As I said, the Dáil will adjourn for two weeks plus tomorrow. During that period, at least four Bills will be discussed in committee, including the dual mandate Bill in which Deputy Ring has a particular interest. I have no doubt he will participate. During this session we have passed 15 Bills—

The Deputy promised another 15.

—and I do not believe the break that is being proposed is excessive. If events in Northern Ireland, legislation or whatever warrant the recall of the Dáil, I have no doubt that a recall will be forthcoming. It is the Taoiseach's intention to stay in touch with the Opposition parties during the break if matters evolve in Northern Ireland.

Deputy Rabbitte has tabled an amendment to the Order of Business to delete "7 May" and substitute "28 April". Is the Deputy pressing the amendment?

Yes. Deputy Breen can abstain.

Question put: "That the words proposed to be deleted stand."

Andrews, Barry.Aylward, Liam.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Breen, James.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Carty, John.Cassidy, Donie.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cregan, John.Cullen, Martin.Curran, John.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Fahey, Frank.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fox, Mildred.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Harney, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.

Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Brian.Lenihan, Conor.McCreevy, Charlie.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Michael.Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M.J.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donoghue, John.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Seán.Ryan, Eoin.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Mary.Walsh, Joe.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael.Wright, G.V.

Níl

Boyle, Dan.Breen, Pat.Broughan, Thomas.Bruton, Richard.Burton, Joan.Connolly, Paudge.Coveney, Simon.Crawford, Seymour.Crowe, Seán.Deasy, John.Durkan, Bernard.Enright, Olwyn.Ferris, Martin.Gilmore, Eamon.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Harkin, Marian.Hayes, Tom.Healy, Seamus.Higgins, Joe.

Higgins, Michael.Hogan, Phil.Howlin, Brendan.Kehoe, Paul.Kenny, Enda.Lynch, Kathleen.McGinley, Dinny.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'Shea, Brian.

Níl–continued

O'Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Seamus.Penrose, Willie.Quinn, Ruairí.Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.

Sherlock, Joe.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Stanton, David.Timmins, Billy.Twomey, Liam.Wall, Jack.

Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Stagg and Durkan.
Question declared carried.
Amendment declared lost.

I was asking earlier about the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill 2002. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform is taking gardaí away from former Taoisigh and is reviewing this whole matter and putting more gardaí on the beat. I do not have any objection to Ministers having drivers, but if the Minister is looking at this issue, maybe it is time to civilianise that whole process and put more gardaí on the beat—

Does the Deputy have a question on legislation appropriate to the Order of Business?

The Criminal Justice (Public Order) Bill 2002 before the House is an attempt to curb the terrible crimes that are taking place, particularly among young males on the streets of Dublin. Will the Tánaiste use the opportunity of this Bill to maximise the number of gardaí available by not just reviewing Garda drivers and Garda security for former Taoisigh but also for Ministers and other office holders?

The Deputy is out of order.

Driving judges to courts and so on could be done by civilians—

I ask Deputy Mitchell to resume his seat. He is out of order and he knows it.

When will the Campus Stadium Ireland Bill be introduced in the House?

That Bill has not gone to the Government yet so I am not in a position to give the Deputy a precise time.

The Tánaiste will be aware that one of the primary demands of people with disabilities is rights-based legislation. Can the Tánaiste assure people with disabilities, and this House, that the Government will introduce rights-based legislation that will address the needs of people with disabilities both nationally and internationally? When will such legislation be brought forward?

The two Bills in this area will be published in the next session.

In light of the virtual collapse of the penalty points system and the decision of the Garda not to enforce it, I wish to ask the Tánaiste about two pieces of promised legislation. Is she aware that 16 local authorities have a computerised system in place but that when it was put forward for tender, they were told that their proposal was far too comprehensive to be dealt with?

Does the Deputy have a question on legislation?

When will we see the road traffic Bill and the fines Bill, which could at least articulate these concerns?

The penalty points system has not collapsed. Some 14,000 people have received penalty points already.

How many penalty points have actually been—

We cannot discuss the number of penalty points on the Order of Business.

I do not know how many points have been issued but 14,000 people have received them.

It has taken three months—

If the Deputy interrupts the Tánaiste she cannot answer his questions.

I asked about promised legislation.

The fines Bill will be published later this year. There are a number of Bills planned in the whole area of road traffic. Some of them will be published next year and I think there may be one later this year as well.

Does the Tánaiste share my concern that eight gardaí are working full time in the fines office, together with about another 50 gardaí—

The Deputy is out of order. Does she have a question appropriate to legislation?

I am asking about the development of the agency to collect fines which has been promised by this Government for about six years. There are 50 gardaí working in Dublin collecting fines at a time when a local newsletter in my constituency and the Tánaiste's is warning about—

The Deputy is out of order.

—the availability of crack cocaine. Some 50 gardaí are collecting fines—

I ask the Deputy to resume her seat.

The war in Iraq claimed many lives, including that of an Irish man. I ask the Tánaiste if she would consider it appropriate for the House to express our sympathy to the family of Lance Corporal Ian Malone, who was killed in that war.

It is not appropriate to raise the matter at this time.

I think it is appropriate that we should express our condolences and our sympathy with the family of the late lance corporal. That has been done privately by a number of people in this House and it is a good thing that we do it here this morning. We have reached a level of maturity in this State where we can acknowledge that Irish people do fight under different flags and are no less Irish for that. I agree with the sentiments expressed by Deputy Power.

Can we include all of the people who died in this awful war?

I ask the Tánaiste, on behalf of the Taoiseach and the Government, to correct a serious error the Taoiseach made yesterday in speaking about the Moneypoint power station. He said it would be converted to gas but we have received confirmation that we are correct in saying that it is not being converted.

The Deputy should find another way of raising the matter.

It is important, on the Order of Business, that the Government clarify its position. I have tabled an adjournment debate matter because it is very important.

I suggest that the Deputy submit a question to the Taoiseach on the matter.

In light of the extremely serious situation regarding the dispute in agriculture, will the Tánaiste provide time in this House today to discuss the likely problems that will occur—

I call Deputy O'Sullivan.

The matter is extremely serious—

I call Deputy Jan O'Sullivan. The Deputy knows there are other ways of raising that matter. There is the Adjournment and parliamentary questions.

It is vital for this major industry—

Deputy Crawford is out of order.

Will the Government, as promised, make an announcement one way or the other with regard to third level fees before Easter? It was promised in the

House—

I call Deputy Joe Higgins.

I am asking about promised legislation.

No legislation is promised. I call Deputy Joe Higgins.

On 10 April, the Minister for Education and Science promised it—

The Deputy very ably raised that question himself this morning and it was dealt with. We cannot have repetition in the House.

On a point of order, legislation was promised in this area in the House. Therefore, a Deputy is entitled to ask about it.

No legislation was promised.

At the weekend, the Tánaiste railed against greed, profiteering, the rip-off culture and the general sinfulness of our society. I thought she had contracted the acute syndrome from which only the Taoiseach used to suffer—

Does the Deputy have a question appropriate to the Order of Business?

I refer to the sudden loss of memory of the Tánaiste that she has been in Government for the past six years. I have gone diligently through the legislative programme this morning. Which Bills will the Tánaiste bring for ward to right the profiteering and rip-offs that she condemned in Galway?

Is legislation promised, Tánaiste?

I was talking about competition which is not something on which Deputy Higgins is too keen.

Given the proliferation of legislative proposals from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform currently mooted, thought about or talked about, could the Tánaiste give the House some indication as to how it is proposed to bring that legislation forward as quickly as possible, particularly in view of the current pressing circumstances? Some 37 Bills have been proposed, thought about or talked about. It is a question now of either talking the talk or walking the walk, or is it a question again of the Progressive Democrats punching above their weight?

There is a long list here and perhaps I will circulate the timescale to the Deputy, but a number of Bills will be published in this area after Easter.

In view of the breakdown in the negotiations between the IFA and the tourism interests on access to upland areas around the country, which will now be prevented and will have a negative effect on our tourism industry, is any legislation envisaged or promised to deal with this matter which has now reached crisis proportions?

I do not believe it is a matter for legislation and I do not think any legislation has been promised in this area.

Has the Government made a decision on the break up of Dúchas? If it made that decision yesterday at Cabinet, will it be introduced by way of regulation or legislation? When can we expect to see the regulation or the legislation?

That question was dealt with yesterday, Deputy.

I know but no answer was given yesterday. That is why I am asking the question again today because I am no wiser.

The Minister for the Environment and Local Government will make an announcement on that matter in the next 24 hours.

When the Houses are not sitting.

Will the Tánaiste let us know the whereabouts of the Ombudsman (Defence Forces) Bill 2002? Will she comment on the serious breach of security at Gormanstown army camp where a pipe bomb was found 40 meters inside the perimeter and whether it is being investigated?

The Deputy will have to find another way to raise the second question. The first question is in order.

The Ombudsman legislation was published more than a year ago.

Where is it now?

Search and rescue.

Will the private rented sector Bill definitely be published during the recess? Will it be introduced in this House and when will Second Stage be taken?

The answer to the first two questions is "yes" and it will be introduced as quickly as possible.

In view of the seriousness of the dispute in the Department of Agriculture and Food and the huge hardship—

A question appropriate to legislation.

This is very appropriate because the Dáil will not sit for three weeks. This dispute will escalate and will cause huge—

I have already ruled your colleague, Deputy Crawford, out of order. We must have fair play in the House. I call Deputy Lynch.

(Interruptions).

I want to ask—

Deputy, I ask you to resume your seat. I have already ruled Deputy Crawford out of order and you cannot have preferential treatment.

The seriousness of the situation is not understood by the Government. I ask the Tánaiste to ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food to intervene.

Deputy, I ask you to resume your seat. I call Deputy Lynch.

On 5 March in Ringaskiddy in Cork more than 100 workers were locked out of their place of employment. A ruling yesterday by the Department of Social and Family Affairs states that under legislation, these people will not be paid despite the fact they are available for work. Will the Tánaiste intervene—

Deputy, that does not arise on the Order of Business. Do you have a question on legislation?

I refer to the social welfare (consolidation) legislation. There are families in Cork who face difficulties—

The content of the legislation is more appropriate to Second Stage.

—having had no money for the past seven weeks. Will the Tánaiste go home to a comfortable house and possibly a foreign holiday and the Minister for Social and Family—

I call the Tánaiste on the social welfare (consolidation) legislation. Is legislation promised?

No legislation has been promised.

(Interruptions).

Deputy Lynch, you are out of order and I ask you to resume your seat.

Will the Tánaiste sleep tonight knowing that 109 families have had no money for the past seven weeks?

Deputy Lynch, I ask you to resume your seat.

A Cheann Comhairle, I am very sorry but I simply cannot allow this matter to lie.

Deputy Lynch, resume your seat.

We need an answer—

Deputy Lynch, do you wish to leave the House?

It is collusion between the Government and the company.

Deputy Lynch, resume your seat or leave the House.

I will leave the House because I could not sit with people who do not care about these people.

Deputy Lynch withdrew from the Chamber.

In regard to No. 14 on yesterday's Order Paper and the Tánaiste's own Vote, will she bring this Vote forward urgently for debate because I am sure it has not escaped her notice that food prices in the shops have risen dramatically in the past 12 months while food prices at the factory gate have fallen sharply? There is a major rip-off going on and the Tánaiste is responsible—

We cannot discuss the content of the Estimate. There will be an opportunity to debate it when it comes before the House.

I want to underline the importance of the Tánaiste making—

The Tánaiste on when the Estimate will come before the House.

There is a large-scale rip-off going on.

Sorry, Deputy, we cannot discuss the Estimate or we would be here all day without doing any other business. Tánaiste, when will the Estimate come before the House?

I do not know if Deputy Richard Bruton is calling for price control legislation. If he is, it is a reversal of his previously held policy.

I am calling on the Tánaiste, as the responsible Minister, to deal with rip-offs and explain—

Sorry, Deputy.

She is taking no action.

Is Deputy Richard Bruton advocating changes in legislation?

I am advocating proper enforcement of the competition law to ensure people do not profiteer at the expense of consumers.

The strongest possible competition law has been in force since last year, as the Deputy well knows.

Both Deputy Richard Bruton and the Tánaiste were out of order.

We are heading into a long weekend at a time when there are problems with infectious diseases in Ireland and abroad and we have no—

Do you have a question on legislation?

I do. We have no proper public health cover.

Sorry, Deputy McManus, that issue was already raised during Leaders' Questions by Deputy Ó Caoláin.

It is in relation to legislation. The Tánaiste in answering Deputy Ó Caoláin stated that this was an issue of pay.

Sorry, Deputy, about what legislation are you speaking?

Is the Tánaiste not aware that there are other issues—

Sorry, Deputy, you cannot ask the Tánaiste about matters other than legislation on the Order of Business.

—that may well require legislative change and that the Medical Practitioners Bill—

Sorry, Deputy, you are out of order.

—may well be—

You are out of order. I ask you to resume your seat. I call Deputy Michael D. Higgins.

I have asked a question on legislation.

Sorry, you are not entitled to ask a question at this stage. There are other ways in which the matter may be raised. It was dealt with during Question Time yesterday and during Leaders' Questions this morning.

I am asking a question about legislation.

On what legislation?

This is the problem, a Cheann Comhairle, if you do not listen to what we are saying—

Sorry, the Chair will give the Deputy absolute fair play in this matter but the Deputy must ask a question on legislation.

A Deputy

She did.

On what legislation?

I do not understand why you are saying I did not do that.

You did not do that. You re-opened the debate which has already taken place this morning on the dispute with the medical officers.

She asked about the Medical Practitioners Bill.

On the Medical Practitioners Bill, Tánaiste.

It will be brought forward next year, 2004.

I asked previously about the prison service Bill. The reply I got was that it was not possible to indicate a date for publication. In view of the concern expressed by international rights bodies and by a number of those dealing with prisoners' rights and with an interest in the administration of the prison service, is the Tánaiste in a position to indicate when this listed legislation to provide a statutory basis for an independent prison service will be published?

I understand the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform was to communicate directly with the Deputy. If that has not happened, I will speak to him.

I can assure the Tánaiste that has not happened.

Will the Tánaiste indicate when further legislation on local government reform which she promised this morning will be published? At what stage is it? Will there be a number of Bills or other measures?

The Minister for the Environment and Local Government has informed me that there will be other measures. I do not know if we have a specific time frame for those measures but that matter is being pursued by the Minister. I think we are talking about next year.

Last evening I raised the matter of ADM on the Adjournment. I thought the Tánaiste or the Minister of State would have been here but neither turned up.

That does not arise on the Order of Business.

It is in relation to Vote 40 on social welfare. I raised this matter last night on the Adjournment but the Tánaiste failed to turn up.

When will Vote 40 on social welfare come before the House, Tánaiste?

I want to know why the Departments are colluding to lock up workers and to deny them social welfare payments.

The Tánaiste has a responsibility to answer me.

Sorry, Deputy.

She did not turn up last night, nor did the Ministers of State—

You will have to find another way of raising this matter.

I had the opportunity last night, but she did not turn up.

We are moving on to No. 13a.

There is no other way to raise it, a Cheann Comhairle.

There is no other way.

Is No. 13a agreed?

On a point of order, a Cheann Comhairle—

We have to take the motion re ministerial rota for parliamentary questions.

On a point of order—

I call the Minister of State at the Department of the Taoiseach, Deputy Hanafin, to move the motion.

On a point of order, 200 workers will be—

Sorry, Deputy, that is not a point of order.

—locked out over the Easter period.

Is No. 13a agreed?

The Tánaiste has washed her hands of this matter.

My colleague wanted to raise a point.

He had a chance to raise the point

I want an answer.

I raised this matter last night.

Sorry, Deputy, you are out of order.

I was given the opportunity.

You are out of order. You will have to find another way of raising it.

In what way may I raise it?

You may raise it in many ways.

I raised it on the Adjournment last night.

You can put down a question.

Nobody from the Department turned up for it.

As you say, you raised it last night and had an opportunity to discuss it—

I did not receive answers.

—on the Adjournment.

There is no other way of raising it.

Is No. 13a agreed?

On a point of order—

I will allow the point of order.

On that issue and similar issues, it has become obvious over some considerable time that Adjournment debates do not elicit answers and do not draw replies from the responsible Ministers.

Deputy, that is not a point of order.

It is a point of order.

It is a matter for the Dáil reform committee to examine the Adjournment.

It is not, a Cheann Comhairle, it is a matter for the Government, the Tánaiste and the Taoiseach.

It is a matter for the Dáil reform committee.

If you let me finish, a Cheann Comhairle, it is high time that the responsible Ministers came into the House to answer the questions raised regarding their Departments.

This cynical system whereby—

You have made your point, Deputy

—somebody else is delegated—

It is not in order.

—rather than a Minister being present is—

We have to move on to No. 13a.

—sheer cynicism.

It is collective responsibility.

On a point of order—

It is a rejection of the democratic principles on which this House is based.

I will allow the point of order.

You said, a Cheann Comhairle, that there are other ways for me to raise this matter.

There are no such ways.

Yes, Deputy, and if you call to the Office of the Ceann Comhairle—

I had the opportunity to raise the matter last night—

—we will tell you the various ways you can raise it.

—but the Tánaiste and the Ministers of State failed to turn up.

We are moving on to No. 13a.

I want the Ceann Comhairle to tell me how I can raise it.

People cannot wait until—

Put him out of his misery.

On a point of order, a Cheann Comhairle, the ADM workers cannot wait until—

Sorry, Deputy, that is not a point of order.

—it reopens on 7 May.

The Deputy knows that is not a point of order.

They are being starved into submission.

If the Deputy continues to be disorderly, the Chair will have to deal with him.

I am not going to leave.

Why does the Deputy not leave like Deputy Lynch did?

I will sit down.

Is No. 13a agreed?

I do not wish to listen to the Minister, Deputy O'Donoghue, who is a smart alec.

Is No. 13a agreed?

The Deputy's colleague, Deputy Lynch, is way ahead of the Deputy.

When the Minister had an opportunity to introduce zero tolerance, he did nothing.

It is not my fault that the Deputy woke up too late.

He sat on his hands.

It is his own fault that he woke up too late.

The Minister woke up too late to deal with the points system.

Top
Share