It is proposed to take No. 9, motion re referral to joint committee of proposed approval by the Dáil of the draft risk equalisation scheme, 2003; No. 10, motion re referral to joint committee of proposed approval by the Dáil of the National Council for Special Education (Establishment) Order, 2003; No. 11, motion re ministerial rota for parliamentary questions; No. 20, European Convention on Human Rights Bill 2001, Report and Final Stages (Resumed). It is also proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 9, 10 and 11 shall be decided without debate. Private Members' business shall be No. 36 – motion re Mental Health.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 9, 10 and 11 without debate agreed to?
With regard to No. 11, I wish to put down a marker that there be full clarification with the spokespersons with regard to the rota for parliamentary questions. I do not object to the proposal, but there appears to be some confusion about the matter.
My party is opposed to the Order of Business unless the Taoiseach can give an undertaking in respect of the Criminal Justice (Temporary Release of Prisoners) Bill. On Second Stage, the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform described it as a minor housekeeping Bill. He quoted Winston Churchill and Clement Attlee and no doubt he saw himself in the Winston Churchill role. The Minister stated: "This is a measure that has been lying around for some time and is one of the less headline grabbing minor housekeeping exercise with which the House must deal." The purpose of the Bill is to put the temporary release of prisoners on a statutory basis.
We are discussing the proposal regarding Nos. 9, 10, and 11, which does not cover the matter referred to by the Deputy.
I wish to explain why I am opposing the Order of Business.
We can only deal with the proposal before us. The Order of Business cannot be opposed on any other basis.
I will oppose the Order of Business later.
On a point of order, in proposing the Order of Business, the Government has short-circuited the normal procedure by combining three proposals in a composite proposal. What would happen if the House was in favour of two but against one of the proposals? It is not in order for the Government to proceed on this basis.
I ask the Deputy to make his point of order.
I am seeking your protection on this matter, Sir. It is not in order for the Government to present three proposals under a composite proposal.
The proposal is to take the three of them without debate.
The House may wish to debate the second of the three proposals but not the other two.
The proposal to deal with these items together makes it difficult to select one from the other and in view of this I wonder if, for some reason, the Government is seeking to bounce the Opposition into calling a vote. Nos. 9 and 10 deal with diverse issues. The increasing number of those who are members of the VHI and BUPA because they cannot depend on public health would wish to see No. 9 debated more fully, rather than being referred to a joint committee. Likewise, in view of the year of the disabled, No. 10 should also be debated more fully. While I have no objection to the proposal regarding No. 11, we must object to the Government combining these items in a composite proposal.
With regard to the proposal to refer to a joint committee the proposed approval by the Dáil of the National Council for Special Education (Establishment) Order, 2003, it will be recalled that this proposal was an important element in the Education for Persons with Disabilities Bill 2002, which was flawed legislation and was subsequently withdrawn following objections by those involved in the various disability campaigning groups. While the Taoiseach indicated to the House during Leaders' Questions that the education for persons with disabilities Bill is expected to come before the House within the coming week – I ask him to clarify that – the proposal regarding No. 10 is to be adopted without debate, despite the fact that the subject matter is outside the impending legislation. It should be included in the legislation because otherwise, the National Council for Special Education will be established with all of the flaws intact and without the context of the impending legislation.
I ask the Deputy to make his point.
I am in the process of making it clear that we should not allow this proposal to proceed without the education for people with disabilities Bill being first published. It should be before the House and should include the proposed council. In view of this, I object to the proposal on the Order of Business, especially the proposal to proceed without debate, which is a slight on the sector of people with disabilities, which the proposed council is intended ostensibly to address.
The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has circulated a raft of amendments to what is effectively a new criminal justice (temporary release of prisoners) Bill. There was no advance notice of this and there will be no Second Stage debate because Second Stage has concluded on the Criminal Justice (Temporary Release of Prisoners) Bill, the purpose of which was to put on statutory basis the temporary release of prisoners. The amendments proposed by the Minister will extend it to provide a statutory basis for committing people to prison. The House is entitled to adequately scrutinise what is tantamount to a new Bill. In view of this I ask the Taoiseach to proceed with the original Bill, or, if these amendments are to be tabled, that appropriate time be provided for a Second Stage debate on what will effectively be a new Bill.
That matter does not arise under the proposal to deal with Nos. 9, 10 and 11.
The Minister for Education and Science wishes to establish the National Council for Special Education under section 54 of the Education Act to enable the council to begin employing people so that it will be an integral part of the education for persons with disabilities Bill when it is passed by the Oireachtas. It will be debated in committee. The intention is to seek to gain time and move ahead in this area.
It should not take months to fully debate the proposal.
The legislation must be passed by the House. The Bill will be before the Cabinet next week. Unfortunately, the legislative process in this House does not move quickly.
That is because the House does not sit.
We have 36 Bills before the House. We are sitting on Friday, if we can get Members to attend.
The Taoiseach will not be present in the House on Thursdays or Fridays.
Allow the Taoiseach to continue.
This is an integral part of the Bill and the Taoiseach has indicated that it is—
Deputy Ó Caoláin, please.
Why can we not debate it now and save time?
Deputy Ó Caoláin, the Taoiseach is on his feet. The Taoiseach is entitled to respond without interruption.
I was only asking a simple question.
Does the Deputy want us to delay it? Does he want the special education legislation delayed?
Deputy Dempsey I ask you to allow the Taoiseach to speak without interruption, please.
I will try to be helpful for the sake of order. Deputy Rabbitte raised the question and I can deal with this issue rather than there being a difficulty. With regard to the amendments to the Criminal Justice (Temporary Release of Prisoners) Bill, it was announced last November on Second Stage that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform was considering bringing forward amendments on Committee Stage and to give effect to the transfer of sentence provisions under the Schengen Convention, and the additional protocol for the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons. The amendments were published a few weeks ago.
This is not just about the convention.
Allow the Taoiseach to speak, please.
I am just trying to answer the question. I do not want to have a debate about it. If the Opposition's view is that the Second Stage debate is required the Minister informs me that he has no difficulty bringing forward a separate Bill. He was endeavouring to move it on rather than bringing in the separate Bill which will be back again in the autumn. He would have preferred to bring it on in this Bill but if there is an objection to that he will keep those amendments for an entirely separate Bill.
I would like to support Deputy Rabbitte in that objection.
It is a matter for the party spokespersons to check but we have no difficulty with it. If it can be done we would prefer to do it, if not, then we cannot do it.
Justice is always done.
I call Deputy Durkan on a point of order.
I have a point of order by way of clarification on the Order of Business. Nos. 9 and 10 on today's Order Paper are items to which I referred at the whips' meeting almost two weeks ago where it was indicated that perhaps there might be an occasion for a debate in the House, apart from the referral to committee.
That is not a point of order. The leader of the Deputy's party already made comments on it.
The position was left open at that time and I am entitled to the clarification at this stage because it may well happen that by forgoing it now we may not have another opportunity. I would like clarification.
Question put: "That the proposal for dealing with Nos. 9, 10 and 11 be agreed to."
Tá
|
Ahern, Bertie.Ahern, Dermot.Ahern, Michael.Ardagh, Seán.Aylward, Liam.Blaney, Niall.Brady, Johnny.Brady, Martin.Brennan, Seamus.Browne, John.Callanan, Joe.Callely, Ivor.Carey, Pat.Carty, John.Collins, Michael.Cooper-Flynn, Beverley.Coughlan, Mary.Cowen, Brian.Cregan, John.Curran, John.de Valera, Síle.Dempsey, Noel.Dempsey, Tony.Dennehy, John.Devins, Jimmy.Ellis, John.Finneran, Michael.Fitzpatrick, Dermot.Fleming, Seán.Fox, Mildred.Gallagher, Pat The Cope.Glennon, Jim.Grealish, Noel.Hanafin, Mary.Haughey, Seán.Healy-Rae, Jackie.Hoctor, Máire. |
Jacob, Joe.Keaveney, Cecilia.Kelleher, Billy.Kelly, Peter.Killeen, Tony.Kirk, Seamus.Kitt, Tom.Lenihan, Conor.McDaid, James.McDowell, Michael.McGuinness, John.Martin, Micheál.Moloney, John.Moynihan, Donal.Mulcahy, Michael.Nolan, M. J.Ó Cuív, Éamon.Ó Fearghaíl, Seán.O'Connor, Charlie.O'Dea, Willie.O'Donnell, Liz.O'Flynn, Noel.O'Keeffe, Batt.O'Keeffe, Ned.O'Malley, Fiona.O'Malley, Tim.Parlon, Tom.Power, Peter.Power, Seán.Sexton, Mae.Smith, Brendan.Smith, Michael.Treacy, Noel.Wallace, Dan.Wilkinson, Ollie.Woods, Michael. |
Níl
|
Allen, Bernard.Boyle, Dan.Breen, James.Broughan, Thomas P.Bruton, Richard.Burton, Joan.Connaughton, Paul.Connolly, Paudge.Costello, Joe.Coveney, Simon.Cowley, Jerry.Crawford, Seymour.Crowe, Seán.Cuffe, Ciarán.Deasy, John.Deenihan, Jimmy.Durkan, Bernard J. |
English, Damien.Gilmore, Eamon.Gogarty, Paul.Gormley, John.Harkin, Marian.Higgins, Joe.Higgins, Michael D.Hogan, Phil.Howlin, Brendan.Kehoe, Paul.Kenny, Enda.McGrath, Finian.McManus, Liz.Mitchell, Gay.Mitchell, Olivia.Moynihan-Cronin, Breeda. Naughten, Denis. |
Níl–continued
|
Neville, Dan.Noonan, Michael.Ó Caoláin, Caoimhghín.Ó Snodaigh, Aengus.O'Dowd, Fergus.O'Keeffe, Jim.O'Shea, Brian.O'Sullivan, Jan.Pattison, Seamus.Perry, John.Quinn, Ruairi. |
Rabbitte, Pat.Ring, Michael.Ryan, Eamon.Ryan, Seán.Sherlock, Joe.Shortall, Róisín.Stagg, Emmet.Twomey, Liam.Upton, Mary.Wall, Jack. |
Tellers: Tá, Deputies Hanafin and Kelleher; Níl, Deputies Durkan and Stagg.
Question declared carried.
I have given the Taoiseach a rough time today. Perhaps I might remind him that on this day 25 years ago, he and I togged out against the British House of Commons in Islington.
That does not arise on the Order of Business today.
It does.
Has the Deputy a question appropriate to the Order of Business?
In the context of the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement, as the leader of a Nationalist party, and in view of the fact that Sinn Féin has attacked Deputy Jimmy Deenihan for taking part in a football match against the PSNI, perhaps the Taoiseach might have ten minutes to spare with me next Tuesday to demonstrate that we are serious about spreading sport across our island and about the full implementation of the Agreement in all its forms and facets. I know that the Taoiseach could not play today because of a bad back, but he might have ten minutes to spare next week.
I remember well this day 25 years ago. It was not our best match, but we had a good summer that year, and some of our friends and players at that time are departed. I am a great believer, as most in this House will know, that we should keep politics and sport separate, and there is no harm in the idea of a match next week.
I was still at secondary school 25 years ago.
Can the Deputy relate that to the Order of Business?
I will do whatever is required.
I am sorry that I must introduce a corrosive note into this love-in between the main party leaders. There was a serious chemical spill involving nitric acid this morning in Mulhuddart which put the local community at grave risk – the second in two weeks. Will the Taoiseach introduce legislation to ensure proper restraints on trucks going through residential areas with dangerous chemicals so that they do not pose such a risk?
If I recall correctly from my days as Minister for Labour, there is already legislation covering that.
Given the appalling state of our health service and the fact that almost every week there is another story of cutbacks affecting—
Has the Deputy a question on legislation?
It is about promised legislation. Those cutbacks affect the poor and those with a disability.
I am calling Deputy Ó Caoláin.
I am asking about the health complaints Bill, which we need at this stage because there are so many complaints about our health service.
The heads of the Bill are expected during the summer. The legislation will then be drafted.
The Taoiseach made a comment about keeping politics and sport separate. The proposal under discussion was a case of involving politics and sport, which is very unfortunate.
Regarding the Taoiseach's responses to Deputy Rabbitte on the Criminal Justice (Temporary Release of Prisoners) Bill, will he confirm to the House that the 13 pages of amendments tabled by the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform will now be presented as a new Bill and be part of a Second Stage debate?
That question has already been dealt with.
No, the answer was not clear. Will the Taoiseach clarify the situation?
That question was asked by Deputy Rabbitte and answered by the Taoiseach.
There remains an uncertainty, and I ask for the clarity—
We cannot go back over the same legislation twice.
I seek clarification from the Taoiseach. Will he confirm it is the Minister's intention to take the 13 pages of amendments as a new Bill at some future point?
The Taoiseach has indicated his good intentions on this matter and he intends that the legislation will be taken separately, with which I agree.
That is the position.
Regarding No. 28, the Taoiseach will be aware that the mortgage institutions have passed on the reduction in interest rates but lenders to business or to personal lenders have not. Will the Taoiseach bring forward for early debate No. 28 which deals with a financial services ombudsman and a consumer representative panel so we can have a greater voice for consumers regarding financial regulation?
Regarding No. 28, the content of what might be debated is not appropriate.
When is it coming in? The Taoiseach wants to answer.
This is the Central Bank and Financial Services Authority of Ireland (No. 2) Bill which is scheduled for mid to late 2003.
The taxi regulator Bill does not appear on the pink list. This morning the Minister for Transport said that not only would the Bill be published but that he expected it to pass all Stages—
The taxi regulator Bill—
May I finish the sentence, please? He said that not only would the Bill be published but that he expected it to pass all Stages—
Does the Deputy have a question related to the Bill?
Yes, please listen. He said he expected it to pass all Stages before the summer recess. Have the heads of that Bill been agreed? When does the Taoiseach expect publication? Does he concur with the timescale outlined by the Minister for Transport?
We want clarification regarding the same legislation. It is not safe to travel in a taxi in Dublin and the response from the Government so far—
On the legislation itself.
—is just not acceptable. When will we see the legislation and when will it be published?
When will the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform compensate them?
As the Minister indicated this morning, the scheme of the Bill has already been approved by Government and it has gone for priority drafting. Hopefully we will have the Bill soon as we already have it on a non-statutory basis. It is just a matter of putting this on a statutory basis and it should be a Bill that the House can pass quickly.
People throughout the country are following the example of the Government and not paying attention to the law as it stands. I refer to the forthcoming enforcement of fines Bill. When will that come before the House? We need serious enforcement as people are ignoring fines and no leadership is being shown in the House.
I do not have a date for this. Work on this Bill is at a preliminary stage of examination so I presume it will take some time.
The risk equalisation scheme is on the Order Paper. It was delayed pending a decision from the EU but apparently a judgment has now been made by the EU. The judgment has not been published and is not available to any of us. Will the Taoiseach publish that judgment before this matter is dealt with by an Oireachtas committee and regulations made?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
It arises on the Order Paper for today. Will the Taoiseach agree to have this published? Otherwise we will not agree to the scheme.
It is on the Order Paper as it is to be referred to committee, is that not correct?
Even if the education for persons with disabilities Bill is published in the next week, it is unlikely to go beyond Second Stage in one House of the Oireachtas before the summer. The Taoiseach appears to be indicating that we are going to go through that Bill before starting the disabilities Bill. I know the leaders raised this issue but it is still not clear.
We have to move on.
I want to know the timescale for the education for persons with disabilities Bill.
It was raised by two leaders today and we cannot debate the same issues.
Can the Taoiseach clarify whether we need to finish one before we start the other?
I have answered this several times and Deputies keep referring to it. It is intended to finish the education for persons with disabilities Bill, which will be in the House this session, though it may not be finished during the session. When that is completed we will then bring forward the disabilities Bill.
When is it proposed to implement a vaccine compensation Bill, as requested by the vaccine campaign group?
Is legislation promised?
It was promised to the campaign group.
There is no legislation.
When will the Bill to provide for the statutory regulation of health and social care professionals to ensure a quality service for the public be introduced? This Bill was expected before the summer. Will it be introduced before then?
It is hoped to publish the Bill during this session.
We have been promised a debate on the three major reports on health care reform. When does the Government intend to have this debate?
We will have to finalise that with the Whips but it will be in the next few weeks.
There are two items on the legislative programme without indicated dates and both are the responsibility of the Department of Health and Children. Both deal with the important area of adoption law, which has not been updated for many years. I would be grateful if the Taoiseach would indicate the priority given to the adoption information, post adoption contact and associated issues Bill and the Hague Convention on the Protection of Children and International Co-operation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption Bill.
The Minister of State, Deputy Brian Lenihan, is undertaking a detailed examination of this general area with a number of interest groups. Both Bills and other matters are being considered and we will not proceed until that consultation process is over. He may then bring in an omnibus Bill to deal with all these issues together.
Is there any timeframe?
The consultation process is ongoing. He hopes to finish that by the summer and then get on with the Bill. However, a number of issues, particularly regarding foreign adoptions, have come up.
When will the industrial relations (amendment) Bill be published or introduced?
The heads of the Bill have been passed by the Government very recently and the Bill has gone for drafting. I understand the drafting period involved will not be long. It is urgent.
When does the Government intend to bring forward the promised legislation to regulate domestic charities in this jurisdiction?
The heads are expected early next year. The change in target date, which was 2005, is a result of the proposed streamlining of the public consultation process into a single, tighter timeframe. It is hoped the heads will be cleared this summer and the Bill will be presented next year.
When can we expect to see the land Bill? I wish the Minister for Agriculture and Food well in his negotiations tomorrow. Does the Taoiseach agree the Minister should come to the House next week and inform us as to how those negotiations went?
The land Bill is for next year.
We know the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform has contempt for a rights-based society but will the Government defy his right-wing agenda and his rush towards right-wing legislation? Will he introduce legislation to give positive effect to the EU directive on racism—
To what promised legislation is the Deputy referring?
The EU directive on racism. It is legislation because we are due to give effect to that directive by July 2003.
Is there legislation promised on that?
That is a month away and there is still no sign of any legislation to give effect to the directive.
That is secondary legislation.
I will have to check that and get back to the Deputy.
The Deputy can submit a parliamentary question on that matter.
In light of the ongoing dispute at DVO offices and the total failure of the Minister for Agriculture and Food to settle that dispute, when will the animal disease Bill come to the House? Enormous damage is being done—
There is no need to discuss the content of what might be in the Bill.
The animal health Bill will be introduced early next year.
Since the pharmacy sector has now been deregulated, when will the pharmacy Bill come before the House?
Drafting is under way and the heads of the Bill are expected this year. The Bill shall be introduced in the Dáil next year.