It is proposed to take No. 17a, motion regarding membership of committee; No. 5, Social Welfare and Pensions Bill 2005 — Second Stage (resumed); and No. 4, Criminal Justice Bill 2004 — Second Stage (resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that (1) No. 17a. shall be decided without debate; and (2) the proceedings on the resumed Second Stage of No. 5 shall, if not previously concluded, be brought to a conclusion at 1.30 p.m.
Order of Business.
There are two proposals to be put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 17a. motion re membership of committee, without debate, agreed? Agreed. Is the proposal for dealing with No. 5, conclusion of Second Stage of the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill 2005, agreed?
It is not agreed. The imposition of the guillotine on the social welfare Bill proposed for 1.30 p.m. today is another example of the curtailment of real and full debate which the Government has employed on a raft of legislation. Yesterday we saw the example of rushed legislation and the unaccommodating approach of Government to full participation by all Members. In the debate being allowed for, only two of my colleagues will have the opportunity to participate. If that is a pro rata indication of the number of speakers allowed across the floor of the House, the significant majority of Members of this House will not have a chance to participate on Second Stage of the social welfare Bill.
This is a major matter and this proposal should not be accepted. The social welfare Bill is an important Bill and I suggest that the Tánaiste lift the guillotine and allow full participation for all Members who wish to offer. I know there are other Deputies who would like to participate but who cannot do so on the basis of this guillotine proposal. I strongly oppose it.
The Green Party also opposes the guillotining of the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill 2005 for the reasons mentioned by Deputy Ó Caoláin in that a number of my party members will not have an opportunity to speak on it. More importantly perhaps from a national point of view, the decision by Government to invest pension funds increasingly in the oil industry begs questions as to what the Government sees as being the future of all our pensions.
Likewise, the social welfare Bill is important when one considers the EU Commission report stating that Irish women are more at risk of poverty than women of any other member state. This shows the need for full reform. I have spoken briefly to the Minister about this matter but the whole prospect of a guaranteed basic income, or reversing the growing gap between rich and poor, needs to be part of the debate. That debate will be curtailed if the Government has its way.
I must put the question.
Question, "That the proposal for dealing with No. 5, conclusion of Second Stage of the Social Welfare and Pensions Bill 2005 be agreed", put and declared carried.
I wish to raise three matters on the Order of Business. No. 50 deals with the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty Bill and Ireland's obligations thereunder. Further to the matter that Deputy O'Dowd raised, without being in any way hysterical, have the British Government and authorities been contacted about a report that 30 kg of plutonium has been deemed missing in the internal audit of the British Ministry of Defence and UK Atomic Energy Authority? That matter should be clarified forthwith in view of the legitimate concerns of a great many people and the global climate in which we live.
Deputy, that is not in order.
Second, regarding yesterday's Supreme Court judgment, perhaps I might ask the Tánaiste if she now accepts collective responsibility for the part of the judgment stating that, as was accepted by the Attorney General from the date on which that section came into effect on 1 July 2001, there was no possible room for doubt, as health boards were not entitled——
Deputy, that matter was discussed in the House for two hours yesterday.
Yes, I know that, but was it discussed that the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform was then the Attorney General who would have advised that Government? The former Minister for Health and Children, Deputy Martin, was deemed to have left a meeting when the matter was discussed.
The Deputy will have to find another way of raising that matter, which is not appropriate to the Order of Business this morning.
His two Ministers of State were present, and it seems that the former Minister for Health and Children was in full possession of that information——
The Deputy has made his point. It does not arise on the Order of Business.
——and sought not to act on it.
I call the Tánaiste on the nuclear test ban issue.
Third, arising from the moving of the writs and their acceptance regarding Meath and north Kildare, if we are to be faced with three and a half weeks of promises made by Ministers, we should inject an element of common sense into what is to happen. The Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, who is not here this morning, announced that he was closing in on a rail deal for Meath——
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
——when, as the former Minister, Deputy Brennan, will know, two years ago——
The Deputy will have to find another way of raising that. There is a number of ways in which that can be done within Standing Orders.
I will finish in ten seconds. Two years ago the Government produced a comprehensive rail package for the country, and County Meath was not mentioned.
I call the Tánaiste on the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty.
That proposal is being put forward by Meath County Council.
I suggest that the Deputy submit a question to the relevant Minister.
If we are to have such announcements from Ministers, let them be based on fact rather than fantasy.
That does not arise on the Order of Business. There is a number of opportunities available to the Deputy to raise that matter. I call the Tánaiste.
Perhaps the Minister for Transport, Deputy Cullen, is having some of the rub-off that his Minister for State, Deputy Callely, had the other day when he announced it.
Regarding the legislation the Deputy raised, the draft heads of the Bill are currently being prepared by the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche. I do not know if he has been in touch with colleagues, but I will raise the matter with him.
You are very lucky. I bet you do not regret it now. You are better off with us.
I call Deputy Rabbitte, without interruption.
Regarding the same Supreme Court judgment, perhaps the Tánaiste will assure the House that there will be no cutbacks in the current level of service. I have a letter with me this morning from one typical small service provider pointing out the financial implications of the decision and advising clients that, inevitably, this will have an effect on the level of service. Will the Tánaiste clarify to the House that——
That is not appropriate to the Order of Business. As I pointed out to Deputy Kenny, the matter was discussed for two hours yesterday in the House, and the Deputy will have to find another way of raising it.
People who have their relatives and loved ones in such homes require reassurance, and all I ask is that——
Yes.
The correct way to seek reassurance in this House is to submit the question in the appropriate way to the responsible Minister rather than on the Order of Business, which deals exclusively with legislation.
I was about to sit down. I was happy that I had asked the question and that the Tánaiste could give the assurance that I sought equally speedily.
I ask the Deputy not to pursue the matter in this way. The Deputy has any number of opportunities. He has Leaders' Questions two days a week and debates on the Adjournment. There are other ways in which the matter can be raised. I ask the Deputy not to pursue it in a way that is totally out of order. I call Deputy Sargent.
Perhaps I might ask the Tánaiste if she considers that it will be necessary to bring a Supplementary Estimate before the House to assure people in care in such circumstances that there will be no reduction in the current level of service.
Is a Supplementary Estimate necessary?
Yes, I believe that it will be necessary to bring a Supplementary Estimate before the House. The health Vote for 2005 could not sustain the repayment of moneys in excess of €500 million. That would be grossly unfair on services. As the Deputy has acknowledged, it would involve a serious cutback in existing services if we took it from the current Vote. I anticipate that the Government will bring forward a Supplementary Estimate later this year.
Can I take it that the purpose of the Supplementary Estimate will be to ensure that there will be no diminution in the level of care for people in such circumstances?
We cannot discuss the content of the Supplementary Estimate.
I understand that the Tánaiste has——
The question is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
I respect the Ceann Comhairle's decision in not allowing me to seek the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order 31, but perhaps the Tánaiste will say whether the Government had information about that missing separated plutonium.
Regarding promised legislation, will the Dublin metro Bill now be changed to the Meath metro Bill in view of the Minister for Transport's state of flux regarding where it will be located and whether it will be decided before 11 March? That is what people will be interested to know. On foot of the Law Reform Commission publishing two reports highlighting the need for regulation of charities, will the Tánaiste accept a bet that there will be no legislation regulating charities as long as there is a Fianna Fáil Government?
The Deputy raised the charities Bill on Tuesday and his question was answered.
Since 1990 and the Costello reforms, Fianna Fáil has not introduced a charities regulation since it would affect their fundraising too much.
On the metro Bill, I call the Tánaiste.
I ask the Tánaiste whether she will accept that wager.
I do not envisage a Dublin metro Bill or a Meath metro Bill in the foreseeable future. For the charities Bill, 2005 is the expected date.
When will the family law Bill come before the House?
That Bill will be published this year.
When will the employment permits Bill be brought before the House? There is a major strike in Mullingar, and I am dealing with a non-national currently residing in this country who is very vulnerable, so much so that when he tried to stand up for his rights, he was sacked on the spot and told to leave his accommodation.
I am sorry, Deputy, but it does not arise on the Order of Business.
This type of thing happened to our people in past decades. Are we to stand by and allow non-residents and some of our own——
Deputy Penrose.
It is an absolute scandal of exploitation. That is what is going on in the construction industry. The Tánaiste was the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Why did she bring that——
The Deputy is out of order.
To prevent what happened to our people back in the——
I ask Deputy Penrose to resume his seat and allow the Tánaiste to answer his legitimate question.
I will not stand for the exploitation of any worker who is paid one third of a wage. I remember being in England when some of those who exploited me on building sites were Irish.
The Deputy is aware of the Standing Orders of this House. He is totally out of order.
Now they are doing it again.
If the Deputy wishes to raise the matter, there are other ways of doing so that are in order.
We have been waiting three years. Must we allow people to be treated in this abysmal fashion?
The Chair asks Deputy Penrose whether he wishes to leave the House.
I have no wish to leave the House.
The Deputy will have to do so if he does not resume his seat. Please resume your seat.
No, I——
For the last time, will the Deputy resume his seat?
Will it be on the floor of the House?
Deputy Penrose, for the last time I ask you to resume your seat.
With due respect——
It is obvious to the Chair the Deputy wishes to leave the House. I now ask him to leave the House.
Why should I leave the House? That is nonsense.
Because you are out of order. You disobeyed the Chair.
Because the Deputy was told to leave.
It was sent on 11 February to the Minister's Department.
It was not.
I move: "That Deputy Penrose be suspended from the service of the Dáil." Is the motion opposed?
Yes, of course.
Under Standing Order 61, any division is postponed to take place immediately before the Order of Business on the next sitting day. Deputy Penrose must now leave the House.
It is a farce coming in here.
The Minister should be suspended.
On a point of order——
Deputy, I cannot hear a point of order. We are dealing with disorder at the moment and as soon as we have concluded it, I will hear your point of order. Deputy Penrose to leave the House.
Deputy Penrose withdrew from the Chamber.
Enjoy the canvassing, Willie.
If that is the Minister's attitude to workers' rights, it speaks volumes.
A Cheann Comhairle, Deputy Penrose was engaged in a consultation with the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment across the floor of the House. I do not understand why you have resorted to——
That is a point of view, Deputy, not a point of order. I call Deputy O'Dowd.
In view of the fact the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, has refused to make a decision on the future of the archaeological site on the M3 motorway in Tara, will the Tánaiste indicate if he will have to wait until the National Monuments Bill is passed before he can come to a conclusion on the matter? Also, when will the Bill come before the House?
The National Monuments Bill will be introduced this year. The labour laws apply equally to citizens, whether they are nationals or non-nationals.
They are not being enforced.
The work permits legislation will be brought forward this session.
As the Government clearly intended by its proposed timing of the legislation on the GP only medical cards to dovetail with its idea of when the by-elections would take place, and now that the date has been brought forward and the Government has been wrong-footed somewhat, will the legislation to introduce the GP only medical cards be brought forward to give an opportunity of presenting some good news to more of the electorate in advance of 11 March?
The legislation has nothing to do with by-elections. As I said a number of weeks ago in the House, it will be brought to Government next week.
In view of the concern of the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform about the appalling conditions in Mountjoy Prison and the lack of in-cell sanitation, and his willingness to purchase a greenfield site in north County Dublin for a new prison at ten times the market value, will the Tánaiste give us some idea when the prisons Bill allowing for the closure of Mountjoy Prison is likely to come before the House?
The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform hopes to bring that Bill forward in the middle of this year. The heads of the Bill were approved by the Government at the start of last year.
The Tánaiste will be aware that Ireland has been fortunate in getting the contract for providing the registry of aircraft, which was envisaged under the Capetown Convention. It would be very embarrassing for us if that convention were to take effect without Ireland transposing the legislation into Irish law. When is it envisaged that legislation will be brought forward to allow the registry be set up?
If it is the Capetown Convention Bill——
That is right.
——it will be this session.
Will the Tánaiste indicate, in respect of the Supreme Court decision and the requirement to bring legislation before the House to enable charges be levied on elderly and incapacitated people and so on, when such legislation might be published?
Before Christmas I was accused of rushing things——
I am not asking the Tánaiste to rush anything.
——so the Deputy will appreciate that a day after the decision I am not in a position to indicate when the legislation will be published. I would like to do it soon, however, because we are losing €2.5 million a week in the health service for as long as appropriate legislation is not in place. Obviously, I will have to consult with the Attorney General and with my officials to determine how quickly we can draft the legislation.
It was very quick the last time. It will be 12 March, after the by-election.
No. We intend to do it. There is no secret about that.
Since the Tánaiste is taking the Order of Business, and to have clarity regarding an answer she gave me on the Order of Business previously when she held the Enterprise, Trade and Employment portfolio, will the work permits Bill transfer the work permit to the individual applicant rather than the company, as was promised by the Tánaiste in the House?
We will have to wait and see what happens but the intention was that while the company may apply for a permit, it would thereafter belong to the employee. Most of our employment needs will be met from inside the enlarged European Union and the Minister is considering a green card approach in regard to other skills, but we will have to wait and see. The legislation has not come to the Government yet.
Will it be published this session? Have the heads of the Bill been passed?
The heads of the Bill have been passed.
I am not sure if the Tánaiste is aware that many families throughout the country are still awaiting the processing of third level grant applications and cannot afford to keep their children in third level education without the grant. When will the legislation to provide for a third level student support grant be published, which will centralise applications regarding third level grants?
The Minister for Education and Science is examining that matter but it is not possible to indicate the timescale at the moment.
On the compensation scheme to pay back the elderly who are owed money from the State, will the Tánaiste confirm that there will not be any need for legislation? In any scheme——
Deputy, that question has already been asked by your colleague and leader, Deputy Rabbitte.
No. The compensation scheme is a separate issue. This is a pay-back of money due to these people. We understand the Tánaiste has to take some time to devise this scheme but when it is devised can she assure Members that there will be an opportunity to debate it in the House?
That does not arise, Deputy. You will have to submit a question to the appropriate Minister.
I think the Tánaiste is quite happy to answer. In fact, she has answered.