Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 27 May 2003

Vol. 567 No. 5

Order of Business (Resumed).

I call Deputy Lynch.

On a point of order—

I have called Deputy Lynch. Deputy Durkan, we cannot have a point of order on the issue on which the Chair has already ruled.

It is not on that issue I wish to speak; I merely want to finish making the point of order I was making.

The Deputy is out of order.

The Chair should listen to him.

That is not a point of order.

I am not out of order.

A point of order deals with procedure. The Chair ruled on Deputy Timmins because he disobeyed the Chair, not because of the substance of the question he was asking.

Is the Chair ruling that if a Member asks the Taoiseach whether Government time can be given to discuss an issue that requires immediate action, he or she will be thrown out of the House?

The Chair has ruled.

That is not the way this Parliament should be run and the Chair knows that.

I ask the Deputy to resume his seat.

This is an absolute disgrace.

The Chair has already ruled that Deputy Timmins was asked to leave the House because he continually disobeyed the Chair, not because of the content of his question or anything else. If Deputy Durkan has a problem with that, he can come to the Office of the Ceann Comhairle and we will deal with it.

I have asked a question. Will the Chair allow me to pursue the content of my question?

No, I will not allow the Deputy to put such a question.

The Chair will not allow me to pursue the content of my question.

I have called Deputy Lynch. Deputy Durkan's name is on the list to be called to ask a question on the Order of Business and I will allow for that.

If this is the way the Chair wishes to deal with this issue, so be it.

I call Deputy Lynch.

I wish to ask the Taoiseach about a promise that was given by Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy O'Dea, in respect of a firm commitment that the disability Bill would be published this session, although that now seems highly unlikely. Will the Taoiseach let us know exactly when it will be published—

A question on promised legislation, Taoiseach.

—given that thousands of people are awaiting its publication and a firm commitment in respect of that was given by the Minister of State?

The Deputy should allow the Taoiseach to answer her question.

I was asked about this issue on the first day of this session and I stated that it was the Government's intention to bring forward and complete the education for persons with disabilities Bill and try to get that published this session, and then to bring forward the disability Bill. The latter Bill will not be published this session. As soon as we get the other Bill passed, we will bring forward the disability Bill.

Can the Taoiseach indicate when the disability Bill will come before the House?

That question has been answered.

People are awaiting its introduction.

The disability Bill is not ready. The education for persons with disabilities Bill is almost ready. We hope to introduce that Bill and I hope that by the autumn, we will be able to move to introduce the disability Bill.

It will be ready for the next session.

Yes, it will not be ready during this session. An enormous range of work and complications are involved in the disability Bill, as there was in the case of the education for persons with disabilities Bill. Let us get one Bill done and then move on to the next one.

Why has committee time not been provided for Bills that are still on the Order Paper, several of which were published and had passed Second Stage prior to the election of the Dáil, such as the Whistleblowers Protection Bill 1999, the Proceeds of Crime (Amendment) Bill 1999, the Patents (Amendment) Bill 1999, the Containment of Nuclear Weapons Bill 2000, the Sea Pollution (Hazardous and Noxious Substances) (Civil Liability and Compensation) Bill 2000 and the Private Security Services Bill 2001? Is it the Government's intention to provide committee time or will these Bills remain in some type of legislative black hole?

That is a matter for committees.

I am asking whether these Bills are due to come back before the House. They are on the Order Paper.

It is a matter for the committees how they deal with their business.

It is not. That is not true.

It is a legitimate question.

To be helpful, I will ask the Chief Whip to talk to the committees. The Government would prefer that Bills are dealt with quickly by committees unless there is some reason they are not. Most of the time there is no reason they are not dealt with other than finding time to do so. There is an odd Bill that encounters legal difficulty but there is no reason the vast majority of Bills should not be dealt with by the committees.

On the Whistleblowers Protection Bill 1999, the Government indicated it was willing to accept what was a Labour Party Bill. Is it still intended that the Bill would be processed through a committee, which can only happen with the goodwill of the Government?

The issue was to try to make the Bill workable and the relevant Minister was involved in trying to do that. It still is the intention.

I am not sure I should raise this under Vote 24, Charitable Donations and Bequests.

That matter has already been raised.

I know that. I notice that Deputy Ned O'Keeffe has been appointed chairman of a committee that has not yet been formed. Will the Taoiseach inform us when Deputy O'Keeffe will take—

I call Deputy Sherlock. The matter is not appropriate to the Order of Business.

(Interruptions).

Allow Deputy Sherlock to contribute, without interruption.

When will the Bill to provide for the appointment and functions of the ombudsman for the Defence Forces which involves an amendment of the Defence Acts be brought before the Dáil?

My latest information is that the Bill to provide for the Defence Forces ombudsman has been published and was ordered for Second Stage some time ago. I am not sure why it has not been taken.

When is it likely to be taken?

I will ask for it to be taken. It was ordered for Second Stage last year. I do not know why it has not been taken.

I asked last Tuesday if the progress of the Greater Dublin Land Use and Transport Authority Bill would be brought in ahead of the Critical Infrastructure Bill. On Wednesday I was in the position to ask the Minister for Transport about his views on the Bill. He said he did not believe in the agency proposed in the Bill and did not think it would proceed. How is a Bill which the Minister does not support removed from the legislative process? Given that the Minister for Transport and the Minister for the Environment and Local Government, who is present, evidently do not believe in planning, how will we address the sprawl occurring in Dublin, the free-for-all zoning that will benefit developers rather than the people—

The Deputy should confine himself to the legislation.

I am. This is crucial legislation in which the Minister for Transport said last week he did not believe, even though it is on the legislative programme.

We must not discuss the content of legislation.

What are we going to do to set a strategic vision to stop the sprawl of Dublin—

The content of the Bill does not arise at this stage. I call the Taoiseach.

What alternative legislation will there be given that the Minister does not believe in planning?

I stated last week on the Greater Dublin Land Use and Transport Authority Bill that the policy in that legislation is under review because, under the national spatial strategy, the regional authorities have taken on the functions of the agency. That is why it is under review.

I call Deputy Connaughton.

The Taoiseach said last week that local authorities would be the appropriate bodies to deal with planning and transport.

I have called Deputy Connaughton.

May I finish the point? The Taoiseach is now saying that regional authorities are the appropriate bodies to review planning and transport. Does the Taoiseach seriously believe that the existing regional authorities are suitable and appropriate bodies to conduct the necessary review?

The Deputy should table a question on the matter. I call Deputy Connaughton.

It is empowerment at regional level for local government.

The Minister should allow Deputy Connaughton to put his question without interruption.

The Opposition parties want it and do not want it. They should make up their minds.

Allow Deputy Connaughton to contribute without interruption or we will move on to the next item.

I have two matters I wish to raise. If the meeting tomorrow between the CPSU and the Department of Agriculture and Food fails – I presume the Taoiseach knows it has been scheduled—

Has the Deputy a question appropriate to legislation?

Very much so. Do we take it that the Taoiseach will allow for a debate in the House on the effects this dispute is having?

That question is out of order. What is the Deputy's second question?

Can I have an answer to the one I have just asked?

No, it is out of order.

That is fair enough. Let the farmers of Ireland know that—

It is a matter for the Whips to decide on that. The Chair has ruled on the issue. The Deputy has a second matter.

I have. Before the Taoiseach went hurling at Pearse Stadium in Galway last Sunday, he made an announcement about affordable housing. He said he had good news for County Galway. What he failed to tell the people of the county was that the subsidy for affordable housing is being withdrawn by the Minister for the Environment and Local Government. Perhaps the Taoiseach would like to clarify what is going on.

I call Deputy Gilmore.

The Deputy is taking it out of context as usual.

What I have said is correct. It is a case of more broken promises.

Deputy Connaughton should submit a question to the appropriate Minister.

The Local Government Bill was passed by the House a few weeks ago. Has it been signed into law? If not, has the Taoiseach any indication that he may shortly be requested to attend a meeting of the Council of State?

The Bill must go back to the Seanad for a technical amendment which was made this week. I understand the Bill will be signed then.

Deputy Ring has to have a look at it as well.

On a weekly basis the Minister for Transport puffs up his chest and, like a latter day Napoleon Bonaparte, declares he is taking on another group of semi-State workers or privatising semi-State companies.

That does not arise on the Order of Business.

It does. The Minister for Transport promised that he would bring to Cabinet in April two proposals that need legislation, one providing for a private terminal at Dublin Airport and the other for the break-up of Aer Rianta into three sections. I want the Taoiseach to be very specific in replying to the following question. Is it the Government's intention in this session to table amendments to the Air Navigation and Transport (Amendment) Act 1998 and the Aviation Regulation Act 2001 pursuant to what the Minister for Transport wants to achieve and to allow for his desire to facilitate the Progressive Democrats and other interests?

Is legislation promised?

The heads of the Air Navigation and Transport (Montreal Convention 1999) Bill, which is to enable Ireland to ratify the Montreal Convention of 1999 which was signed by Ireland in 2000 and which deals with air carriers' liability in the event of death, injury or delay of passengers or the loss or delay of baggage, are expected in the middle of this year and the legislation will be brought forward in the autumn.

I call Deputy Hogan.

The Ceann Comhairle would have to admit that my question was in order. The Taoiseach gave me an answer that did not relate to the question I asked about legislation. The Taoiseach was being disorderly. I asked him specifically about matters that a Minister promised and that require legislation and whether legislation or legislative provisions would be brought forward before the end of this Dáil session.

I was trying to be helpful to the Deputy. There are three air navigation Bills to be taken between now and the end of this session. I gave the Deputy the title of one and there is none other than these three. The second one is the Air Navigation and Transport (Capetown Convention) Bill. The other one is the air navigation eurocontrol Bill. These are the only three Bills listed.

They do not encompass the changes envisaged by the Minister for Transport.

The Deputy cannot discuss the contents of what might be in the Bill.

We are supposed to be able to get accurate information on impending legislation that has been promised.

While the Deputy is correct, he cannot discuss the content of what might be in a Bill on the Order of Business. I suggest that he submit a question to the Minister.

I appreciate that. Will the Taoiseach therefore say that this promised legislation by the Minister for Transport will not come this session?

The Taoiseach has answered the question on the three Bills.

These are the only three Bills. If the Deputy wants to pursue any other proposal he should table a parliamentary question. That is what parliamentary questions are for.

Oh, I see.

The Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment made promises before Easter, after it and a few weeks ago that the heads of the Bill to establish the personal injuries assessment board would be sent out for consultation. We have not yet seen the heads of the Bill. Is there a problem or what is the delay? When will we see this Bill?

The Bill dealing with this was cleared by Cabinet today.

I understood that the Local Government Bill had passed both Houses of the Oireachtas. I am a little puzzled as I have never before come across a case of a Bill that, having passed both Houses, was then referred back to one of the Houses on a technical or any other basis. What procedure is the Local Government Bill under? Perhaps the Taoiseach could enlighten the House as to what the technicality is. We had a long debate on the Bill and it would help if the House was enlightened about the new information we have received today.

The issue is not too technical. There was some confusion about whether it should be called the local government (No. 1) Bill or the local government (No. 2) Bill.

Someone cannot count.

Someone in the system has made a decision on what its name will be. We will change it and all will be well when that big change is made.

The Taoiseach is a great man for numbers.

Given that the Government in its previous incarnation made a mistake when it passed the Universities Act in that where there are allegations against universities such as Dublin City University—

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

Yes, I am giving a preamble that explains my question. Given that there are allegations of bribery and mismanagement at DCU—

What legislation is the Deputy talking about?

I am talking about the Higher Education Authority (amendment) Bill. DCU is effectively policing itself and this needs to be addressed. When will the Bill come before the House? I hope it will come before the House soon.

The Deputy should allow the Taoiseach to answer his question.

Discussions are ongoing between the Department and the Higher Education Authority so I do not have a date at this stage.

My question has been asked twice. I thought I was invisible. I put my hand up earlier and people were allowed to ask questions on two occasions and you still ignored me, a Cheann Comhairle. I wonder if I am still doing penance for my behaviour two weeks ago.

I would prefer if the Deputy did not pursue that line with the Chair. There are ten members of the Deputy's party, slightly more from the Labour Party and the Technical Group and the Chair cannot call them all at the same time.

We are still a substantial party in this House.

If the Deputy arranges with his party to have Members called in alphabetical order he would be called first.

I was going to ask a question on the current status of the Local Government Bill and whether it has gone to the President. Deputy Gilmore was informed there was a legal cock-up by the Department. I find it incredible that a Bill that went through the Seanad—

The Deputy knows he is out of order.

I am not out of order. How can a flawed Bill pass undetected through all Stages in the Seanad and Dáil?

That does not arise at this stage. The question has already been answered in response to Deputy Gilmore. I now call Deputy Wall.

The Deputy facilitated it himself.

We did not facilitate it. We opposed it on all Stages.

Deputy Wall has been called and I ask the Minister to allow him to speak.

I hope the Ceann Comhairle's proposal is not accepted as I would be last alphabetically. I have raised the driver testing agency Bill with the Taoiseach a number of times. We have been told it will be published in 2004. Every Member of the House is receiving representations from drivers, especially young drivers, trying to obtain insurance. Is it possible to bring this Bill forward to facilitate the number of people that are seeking driving tests, etc.? This might go some way towards alleviating the problems many people have, especially regarding employment, as many people are being deprived of employment by not having a full licence.

The Deputy should allow the Taoiseach to answer his question.

The Bill has 40 sections and is being drafted. While it is expected in the autumn, it could be next year before the Bill is enacted.

I thought I was even worse off than Deputy Allen. As you are aware, a Cheann Comhairle, many farmers in our constituency of Cavan-Monaghan are not being paid REPS grants—

Does the Deputy have a question on legislation?

I asked the Taoiseach a number of weeks ago if he would allow for a debate on agriculture in this House. Can he at least introduce the land Bill as a matter of urgency so that agriculture can be debated in this House, whether that would be of any benefit or not, and that the farmers might be paid?

The land Bill will be introduced next year.

Is the Taoiseach concerned at the number of poor people spending time in jail because of the non-payment of fines? There is nothing like a jail record to make an individual permanently disadvantaged.

To what legislation is the Deputy referring?

The Taoiseach has promised to introduce the fines Bill. At what stage is this Bill?

This Bill will provide for the updating and indexation of fines and related matters. The heads of the Bill are expected this summer and hopefully it will be passed in the autumn.

I gather it is in order to raise secondary legislation.

I wish to raise the proposed fisheries harbour centre order. I understand this involves new and increased port charges for fishermen that, in some cases, will run to an increase of 600%. Surely this cannot be true. While the Taoiseach may not be aware of this, he should make himself aware of it. The Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources is doing enough damage in the way he is handling the issue of the Irish Box, besides imposing increases of this order on fishermen.

The Deputy has made his point.

Will the Taoiseach give me a reply on this? If he does not have the details, perhaps he could come back to me on it. If he has any concern for fishermen, this type of approach is not the way to deal with the problems of the industry.

This order is to establish new management structures for the five fishery harbours. I understand that the heads of the Bill are expected in September. Is the Deputy asking about secondary legislation other than this?

Secondary legislation can be deferred until another day in accordance with Standing Orders.

I can pass this question to the Minister for his views. While there is a Bill due, I do not think it relates to this.

It will wipe out the fishermen.

The Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Bill was on the order clár for last Friday. Given that it dates from 2000, when, if ever, will that Bill be resubmitted? It seems to have been bypassed.

The Taoiseach will be aware that the Northside Partnership, one of our main development bodies, has had its income slashed by 30% or €400,000. Under Vote 42, is it possible for the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs to find the extra €400,000, as Deputy Harney has done?

The first question is in order; I ask the Deputy to allow the Taoiseach to answer.

They are both in order.

The Dumping at Sea (Amendment) Bill has been published. I will check with the Department to find out why it is not proceeding with the Bill.

The Taoiseach will be aware that the finance available to local authorities for the essential repairs grant and the disabled person's grant has run out in many cases and waiting lists are growing. In response to a parliamentary question, the Minister for the Environment and Local Government—

To what legislation is the Deputy referring?

I am coming to it.

We need to know what legislation is being referred to.

The Minister has assured—

It is not appropriate to have a preamble to a question on legislation.

If the Ceann Comhairle would let me finish—

Sorry, Deputy, the question must relate to legislation.

The Minister has assured a Deputy on this side of the House that he intends to introduce a new scheme to replace the existing schemes. Is legislation required for this and, if so, when will we see it?

Has legislation been promised?

No. There is to be a review of the existing schemes.

I have asked before about the prisons Bill and have received different answers. The Taoiseach will recall that nearly a year ago it was in draft form. At what stage is the Bill now and when will it come before the House?

Work is in progress on the heads of the Bill, although I do not have a date for it. The Bill will provide a statutory basis for an independent prison service and related matters.

What is the difficulty?

I will ask again for a date.

The Taoiseach might regard this matter as parochial. At the weekend the Minister for Transport indicated that he proposed to privatise the Dublin Port tunnel, which would involve charging motorists in Dublin and those using the port €100 million per year for the benefit of using this public infrastructure. What legislation, either primary or secondary, will be introduced in the House to bring about this change? A very different proposal was put to the people at the time detailed public inquiries were held into the operation and building of the tunnel. If the Government is proposing to change the ground rules, we need to see proper secondary legislation and a debate on the subject.

I suggest that the Deputy put down a question, because any discussions on this are very tentative and at an early stage.

I am entitled to ask about secondary legislation.

The Deputy is entitled to ask about promised legislation.

This is promised legislation. The Minister outlined this proposal at the weekend and we are entitled to know whether secondary legislation is involved.

Is legislation promised?

There is no legislation.

There is no legislation promised.

I asked about secondary legislation.

Unless secondary legislation is promised, questions in that regard are not in order here.

There is no legislation.

It was promised; it was manifestly promised in public newspapers. The Ceann Comhairle is bringing this House into disrepute—

The Deputy's question is not in order in the House. Please allow Deputy Durkan to speak.

On a point of order, surely I am entitled to know whether a proposal by the Minister, which he has mentioned in the public media, involves legislative change. We are entitled to know that.

The Deputy is entitled to inquire about promised legislation and secondary legislation only. That goes back to the foundation of the State.

Yes, secondary legislation.

It must be promised.

There is secondary legislation involved and we are entitled to know whether we are to have a debate in the House. The Taoiseach should show that courtesy to the House. This is a democratic House.

The Deputy should show courtesy to the House and accept this ruling, which is in accordance with the precedent of all my predecessors.

The Opposition in this House is beginning to feel exasperated at the difficulty of getting through even legitimate questions.

We have spent one hour on the Order of Business, which is without precedent.

The Minister promised the legislation.

The Minister promised that legislation outside the House. He made a statement to the effect that the legislation was imminent. It is a valid question, a Cheann Comhairle, and I ask that you allow the Taoiseach to answer it.

A suggestion was put. We should stop some of this nonsense. The Minister said he was having tentative discussions about what might turn out to be a proposal and now people are saying this is promised legislation.

It is just a try-out.

The Minister was only flying a kite.

No, it was a tentative question. To turn it into promised legislation is nonsense.

It is just an old kite.

It is like good and bad third level fees – it is all tentative.

The Taoiseach's Ministers have so many kites flying that we will need a regulator for them.

Allow Deputy Durkan to proceed without interruption. Deputy Joe Higgins has already asked a question.

The subject matter of Vote 31 on today's Order Paper was raised some time ago. Will the Taoiseach allow Government time to discuss its contents?

Where is this on the Order Paper?

Vote 31, page 556.

The Human Reproduction Bill 2003?

No. I know the Ceann Comhairle is interested in the medical area, but this does not relate to that. I refer to Vote 31 for the Department of Agriculture and Food.

All the Estimates will be dealt with through the committee system.

So there will be no Government time set aside to discuss this. I also have another question, which relates to legislation promised outside the House. The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform promised to deal with the question of gardaí returning to work which will require legislation. He indicated that gardaí who have retired would volunteer for the Garda reserve force. This, I am reliably informed, requires legislation. I am asking the Taoiseach to indicate when that legislation will come before the House.

No such legislation is promised at this stage.

It was tentative.

The Minister was only thinking aloud.

Top
Share