Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 18 Nov 2004

Vol. 592 No. 5

Order of Business.

It is proposed to take No. 14a, motion regarding membership of committees; No. 14b, Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Bill 2004 — instruction to committee; No. 25, Road Traffic Bill 2004 — Second Stage (resumed); No. 26, Disability Bill 2004 — Second Stage (resumed); and No. 27, Water Services Bill 2003 [Seanad] — Second Stage (resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that Nos. 14a and 14b shall be decided without debate.

There is one proposal to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with Nos. 14a and 14b without debate agreed to? Agreed.

There are two ways to kill a reform agenda. One is not to act on it and the other is to delay it through endless discussions and consultation. Consultation cannot be a substitute for decision. Those were the words used by the Tánaiste last March.

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

Yes. In view of the Government's failure to make any decision and the subsequent debacle concerning Aer Lingus——

Does the Deputy have a question on legislation?

The manner in which the Deputy is approaching it is not appropriate. There were questions on this issue during Leaders' Questions twice this week. The Deputy must ask a question on legislation.

The Ceann Comhairle is not allowing me to ask a question. When will the findings of the Goldman Sachs report on Aer Lingus be discussed in the House? When will the air navigation and transport Bill dealing with the financing of aircraft be introduced to the House, particularly in view of the fact that Aer Lingus has turned the corner but is now in a precarious position? It needs €1 billion in investment. What will the Government do about this? Instead——

On the legislation, Tánaiste.

——of having personalised attacks made by the Taoiseach on management figures of Aer Lingus——

It was disgraceful conduct.

Deputy Kenny is out of order. This matter has been discussed twice this week on Leaders' Questions. It is not appropriate on the Order of Business.

It is appropriate.

The legislation will be introduced early next year. The Minister for Transport intends to publish the Goldman Sachs report.

After the Government has considered it.

When will that be?

We will let the Deputy know when.

The Tánaiste said consultation cannot be a substitute for decision.

I still agree with what I said.

I have called Deputy Rabbitte.

On 29 March, the Tánaiste said the Progressive Democrats would walk out of Government if transport reforms did not go ahead——

That does not arise on the Order of Business. Has the Deputy a question appropriate to the Order of Business?

It does.

Will the Ceann Comhairle allow the Deputy to complete his sentence?

The Chair is being very sharp.

The Ceann Comhairle cannot anticipate what a Deputy is about to ask. We are sick of this racket.

Do not be so rude.

I suggest Deputy Penrose reads Standing Orders.

I know as much about Standing Orders as the Ceann Comhairle. It is my business to know and interpret them.

When will the transport reforms Bill be brought forward? Does the Tánaiste agree that the senior management in Aer Lingus was seeking to——

The second question has already been debated on Leaders' Questions twice this week.

The Chair is interrupting again.

Does she think the members of senior management at Aer Lingus were seeking——

Tánaiste, on the legislation.

——to enrich themselves on the back of a State company?

The Ceann Comhairle is the chief heckler for the Government.

I ask Deputy Stagg to withdraw that remark.

A Cheann Comhairle, I find you constantly——

Deputy Stagg, withdraw the remark. The Deputy knows the Standing Orders. Leaders' Questions is available for the leaders of the parties.

——interrupting Members in mid-sentence.

I ask the Deputy to withdraw the remark.

Of course, I withdraw the remark only because you will make me leave the House. However, it stands nonetheless.

Then resume your seat. Tánaiste, on the legislation.

The transport reform Bill will be introduced next year to provide for the liberalisation of transport services.

Does she still agree with her remarks on 29 March?

She will be eating her own words.

Fianna Fáil is closing the Progressive Democrats down.

A Cheann Comhairle, no Member has spoken this morning except yourself. The Tánaiste wanted to reply to the question. I asked her if it is the intention——

The Tánaiste cannot be out of order anymore than the Deputy. If the Deputy is not happy with Standing Orders, I suggest the House should change them and the Chair will implement them.

Is it still the intention of the Progressive Democrats to walk out of Government if they do not get their way on transport reforms?

That does not arise on the Order of Business. There is no provision for Leaders' Questions on a Thursday.

Because the Taoiseach is away having acting lessons this morning.

A grand man for treading the boards.

Given the urgency of the position facing Aer Lingus, some of the legislation dealing with international financing for aircraft should be brought forward urgently to give us the opportunity——

Does the Deputy have a question in mind?

——to hear the Government's clear view, if there is such a thing.

Does the Deputy have a question on legislation?

He is heckling again.

I am asking about promised legislation as straightforwardly as I can without interruption. The air navigation and transport Bill——

It has already been dealt with.

My other question on promised legislation, which hopefully can be answered after the question on Aer Lingus which is urgent, concerns the medical practitioners Bill. Following a meeting with Patient Focus, the need for a redress board and the number of files that have gone missing, perhaps burned, this legislation should be given urgent priority for publication.

The House passed a Bill on Aer Lingus in April 2004 which provides the Government with the mechanisms it may need regarding the future of Aer Lingus.

So it could sell it off.

The medical practitioners Bill is priority legislation that is being worked on by my officials and it will be published next year.

Will the Ceann Comhairle bear with me while I ask this question?

So long as it is in order.

When is it proposed to change Standing Orders? It is very frustrating for ordinary quiet backbenchers with issues to raise to be ruled out of order every day. The Tánaiste is a very reasonable person. Will she move to help us because it is most frustrating? I spent two or three years in the Seanad where one can raise issues and get genuine answers across the floor from the Government parties. That is lacking in this House and it is totally unfair.

The Deputy has no intention of going back there.

The GovernmentChief Whip is very anxious to have discussions with his colleagues over the next few weeks to discuss Dáil reform, including Standing Orders.

That anxiety has been there for a long time.

There is a suggestion that the national monuments legislation, which we await, is to consolidate six national monuments Acts. The late date suggested in the Government's programme will cause great conflict. I was responsible for one of those Acts which is being seriously misinterpreted by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government and his predecessor in regard to the protection of national monuments, particularly in the Tara area.

As the Deputy knows, we enacted one Bill in this area earlier this year. The other Bill, which has, 86 heads is being revised and will be published in the second half of next year.

That means we will solve the issues in court rather than through legislation.

As usual.

Is there a specific date for publication of the Dormant Financial Assets Bill, which seeks to extend the dormant accounts treatment of assets other than life assurance and bank accounts? Is there a specific date for its publication, which is promised in the coming year? Will the heads of the Bill be circulated in advance?

I have no precise date for that but it will be next year.

What is the reason for the delay in the Railway Safety Bill? It is 16 months since Committee Stage was completed. When can we expect to have Report Stage here?

It has been derailed.

I do not know. The Minister may come forward with amendments. I will speak to him — he has just left the House. It is ordered for Report Stage. I do not know why there is a delay.

It does not take a year.

I will speak to the Minister about that. I presume it is awaiting amendment.

The Minister needs talking to all right.

The Tánaiste promised a debate on the Goldman Sachs report on Aer Lingus. In view of the importance of this issue will the Tánaiste be more precise and give us a timescale for that debate?

Will the Tánaiste share with us this morning whether she feels her political marriage of convenience is in some difficulty——

The Deputy's first question on the debates in the House is appropriate. He will have to find another way to put the second question.

It is the seven year itch.

The Goldman Sachs report will be published. As for my political philosophy I am a socially concerned liberal.

(Interruptions).

We have seen a lot of sea changes in this House in the past week.

They are all coming out.

It is catching.

Perhaps Deputy Joe Higgins will give the Tánaiste a test in the same way as he gave the Taoiseach one yesterday. When will the legislation on entitlements to health services be published?

Much detail will be discussed on entitlements to health services this afternoon, which the Deputy will welcome because he is a very fair-minded person. To which Bill is the Deputy referring?

The 2001 health strategy promised that a Bill on entitlement to health services would be published in 2002.

We have heard many promises in the past seven years but little has changed.

On 26 October the Taoiseach — I do not know whether he was acting or practising his acting lessons — told me that legislation was being worked upon with particular relevance to the persons aged 70 years and over who were granted medical cards and from whom payments have been extracted since. The Taoiseach promised that legislation is being drafted. It does not appear on the C list where 66 other Bills are mentioned.

Tomorrow the legislation to establish the Health Service Executive will be published. I will bring forward amending legislation for the people aged over 70 years either before Christmas or shortly thereafter.

The whistleblowers protection Bill has been hanging around for a very long time. It has passed Second Stage. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment has indicated that now the Government is minded to adopt a sectoral approach to this issue. Does the Government intend to withdraw this Bill or to proceed to Committee Stage and amend it?

No decision has been made to withdraw the Bill. The Deputy needs to speak to the Minister for Enterprise Trade and Employment. A view was taken in the Department that it would be better to do this sectorally

That means it is gone.

It was done already under the Competition Acts and is being done under other legislation too.

Why did the Tánaiste not do it?

There are serious legal implications in doing it.

We have been waiting for seven years.

The Tánaiste caved in on it.

There are serious legal implications.

Will the Tánaiste send me a briefing note on it?

Will the Government be willing to allow a debate on the issue of major road programmes in the greater Dublin area given the concerns——

The Deputy must refer to promised legislation.

I wish to make a brief point of order. I am unable to ask questions of the Minister on roads issues because any time I do the Chair rules them out as being outside the remit. In those circumstances and given the public controversy around such programmes as the Tara road and the efficacy of the M50——

The Deputy should ask a question on legislation. This is not appropriate to the Order of Business.

In regard to the Order of Business and promised debate, does the Tánaiste agree that since Deputies are unable to raise questions with the Minister on the issue, we should have a debate——

The Deputy should allow the Tánaiste to speak.

The Road Traffic Bill 2004 is being discussed today. It may be appropriate for the Minister to go to a committee of the House to discuss the specific road issues.

Has the Cabinet sub-committee set a date to discuss the Goldman Sachs report? That committee has not met.

It will meet next week.

I understand that the Ceann Comhairle must ensure that we behave in an orderly fashion but the method and order in which he called Members to ask questions this morning is eccentric and discriminatory.

I do not mind the Deputy feeling that my method is eccentric, that is her thought on the matter——

I think it is eccentric.

——but it is not discriminatory. The Deputy must withdraw that.

I would be happy to say it is eccentric——

Is the Deputy withdrawing it?

——and I withdraw my other comment. It is unfortunate that it is so eccentric but I understand that the Ceann Comhairle must ensure that we carry out our business in an orderly fashion. Do the Ceann Comhairle and the Tánaiste consider it orderly that a major health Bill as yet unpublished will be debated on Wednesday, guillotined and rushed through the Dáil before Christmas, unnecessarily, without important amendments being published? When will the amendments to the Health Bill be published? We need to see these amendments. Would the Tánaiste not consider it more appropriate, given that there is no chief executive officer for the Health Service Executive, to delay the establishment of the executive for approximately six months so that we can have a proper debate about important health issues and the future of the health service in a way that respects our democratic responsibilities?

Deputies

Hear, hear.

I accept it is not desirable that legislation is not published well in advance of a debate in this House. That is a priority not just for the Government but for the country and for the 120,000 people who work in the health services. They are working full-time or part-time to deliver health services. To be helpful and to give the Opposition spokespersons an opportunity to have the Bill in advance of the debate, I gave each party a copy of the Bill on Tuesday. The amendments are technical amendments resulting from the Government decision to make the chief executive officer of the Health Service Executive the accounting officer. There will be no substantial Government amendments to the Bill. It will be published later this evening or tomorrow. There are no surprises in it, with the possible exception of the accounting officer issue, as it has been well documented in all the reports published to date and in all the speeches and briefings given by my predecessor. It is not desirable to delay it. The momentum on reform has to be maintained and the uncertainty surrounding issues for staff cannot be allowed to proceed until the middle of next year.

When will we get the amendments?

Sometime in the next ten days, but they are merely technical amendments to facilitate the fact that the CEO of the HSE will be the accounting officer, as opposed to the Secretary General of the Department of Health and Children.

That is a big issue.

Yes, it is a big issue.

Given the increasing evidence of Internet and mobile phone abuse in areas such as child pornography and on-line gambling and the potential this has to damage society, will the Tánaiste indicate when the Electronic Communications (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill will come into the House? Can that Bill be expanded to cater for the types of issues I have just raised?

The heads of the Bill are expected shortly and it will not be published until next year. I am not in a position to say whether those matters mentioned by the Deputy can be incorporated. He should discuss it with the line Minister.

Will a Supplementary Estimate have to be introduced to the House for the Department of Foreign Affairs, given that the Government has now purloined €1 million from the budget of Development Co-operation Ireland? This has given the impression that it is giving extra money for development aid, when it in fact it is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

I am not aware that a Supplementary Estimate is necessary. If it were, it would obviously be introduced.

Top
Share