It is proposed to take No. 18, Garda Síochána Bill 2004 [Seanad] — Second Stage (resumed); and No. 17, Land Bill 2004 [Seanad] — Second Stage (resumed). It is proposed, notwithstanding anything in Standing Orders, that the taking of any divisions demanded on Nos. 18 and 17 shall be postponed until immediately after the Order of Business on Tuesday, 19 April.
Order of Business.
There is one proposal to put to the House. Is the proposal for dealing with the postponement of any divisions demanded on Nos. 18 and 17 agreed to? Agreed.
I wish to raise three issues with the Tánaiste. No legislation regarding the nursing home charges is contained on the A list of legislation. When does the Tánaiste expect to be able to introduce such legislation? Will that legislation deal with the problem of lump sum payments which might result in pensioners having their pensions reduced? Will it also address the matter of the private nursing homes and the Statute of Limitations?
I raise this matter in a non-political fashion as I know the Tánaiste has an interest in it. Last night we debated cancer screening programmes, in particular BreastCheck. The radio advertisement for BreastCheck certainly does not do justice to women who live in the west and south and should be revisited. It is offensive to women who live in parts of the country where the programme does not apply.
That matter is not appropriate to the Order of Business.
I suggest that we have a debate next week on the report the Government will have received from the Dublin Airport Authority in respect of the issues of security at Dublin Airport. I understand that from 6.30 a.m. to 9 a.m., some 44 flights were delayed. There are reports of security staff entering planes before crews and pilots.
We cannot go into detail on the matter.
We should have a full discussion about the matter next week.
Legislation will be needed to deal with some elements of the nursing home charges issue. It is intended to have that legislation passed by the Houses of the Oireachtas by the end of this session. The legislation, if required, will deal with the issue of ensuring that the moneys to be paid back will not be used to prevent people getting social welfare entitlements. In other words, it will not be used for the purposes of means testing people, which would be very unreasonable. This may be done through the proposed legislation or there may be another mechanism for doing so. The issue of private nursing homes is separate. The proposed Bill will provide for the repayment of those in public institutions. Litigation is pending regarding the private nursing home issue, which will be vigorously defended by the State. I believe everybody would accept we could not possibly pay for everybody in a private nursing home.
Last night I said the Government was committed to ensuring BreastCheck was rolled out in Cork and Galway and in place by 2007. One would wish that population screening programmes could be carried out for the whole country at once. Unfortunately that is not possible. In every other country we reviewed this has been done on a phased roll-out basis, which is happening in this case. The commitment is to have it in place by 2007.
The Minister for Transport advises me that he is not certain when he will have the Dublin Airport Authority's report. Clearly any discussion that might take place in the House should be discussed by the Whips.
Will the Tánaiste clarify her answer about the long-stay nursing home charges? We now receive queries from people wishing to know when they are likely to receive some refund under whatever redress scheme the Tánaiste might announce. I have come across some cases of people in extremis who are desperately in need of some alleviation.
In her speech at her party conference, the Tánaiste promised further involvement by the private sector in the health service. Did she mean Mr. Ben Dunne and other benefactors through the "Liveline" programme?
The matter does not arise on the Order of Business.
I wonder if the health service, like Mr. Charles Haughey, will end up dependent on Ben Dunne.
We cannot have a debate. The Deputy has other opportunities to raise the issue if he so wishes.
With regard to the letter concerning Gama Construction written by the Tánaiste to the then Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, and published today, I wrote to the Tánaiste at that time about the same employer——
The matter does not arise on the Order of Business. We cannot have an omnibus question time on the Order of Business.
——complaining about a company being undercut.
I ask the Deputy to obey the Chair.
May I ask about No. 6 on the legislative programme? I would have finished by now if the Ceann Comhairle had permitted me.
The Chair cannot allow an omnibus question time on the Order of Business or make a special rule for a Deputy.
The Ceann Comhairle is right. When will the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Bill come before the House? Is it not extraordinary that during the Tánaiste's period in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment her officials and inspectors carried out an investigation when complaints made to me, the then Minister for Transport, Deputy Brennan, and others concerning that employer were communicated to her Department directly, yet she gave a clean bill of health to Gama practices?
We cannot have a debate.
On long-stay charges the intention is to have the legislation passed before the summer recess. As this will obviously be a mammoth logistical task, we are going to tender to get assistance because the last time the health service was in a position in which repayments had to be made, it took a considerable length of time — I believe it was up to three years — to reimburse a relatively small number of people in comparison to the number involved in the current case. I hope we will start to make repayments towards the end of the year, beginning in autumn, but it will not be before the summer.
On the issue surrounding work permit legislation, the Bill in question will be before the House during this session. Complaints were also made to me at my constituency clinic and investigated on my behalf on at least two occasions when I was Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment. I have asked my press officer today to publish the outcome of those investigations as presented to me by officials on that occasion. It is not correct to state nothing was done as the complaints were investigated.
I did not say nothing was done but asked how the Department ended up giving Gama a clean bill of health.
If one appoints experts to do these things and they carry out inquiries or an audit is carried out on behalf of the company——
The Department did not have many experts at its disposal.
Let us be reasonable.
Is the Tánaiste blaming officials again?
No, I am simply stating it is not the case that the matter was not investigated.
I ask Members to confine their questions to matters relevant to the Order of Business.
While we have some private sector investment in the health services, we need more capital investment in the service. We welcome Irish or other money if it becomes available to provide services. Generous as €30,000 is, one can imagine how much it would do in the context of €12 billion.
Private sector investment costs the health service more than public sector investment.
The Tánaiste is responsible for underspending the Department's capital allocation by 13%. She is so incompetent she cannot spend her own money.
Allow the Tánaiste to speak without interruption. She was asked a question regarding No. 6 on the legislative programme.
As I stated, the Bill will be taken this session.
On No. 35, the charities regulation Bill which currently comes under the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs, will the Department of Health and Children have a role in this legislation given that it deals with regulating charities? Will the Bill formalise the role of private benefactors?
We cannot discuss the contents of the Bill.
On the promised legislation, about which I must ask a question since the Ceann Comhairle ruled my request under Standing Order 31 out of order, given that the Sea Fisheries Bill is a subject of discussion in the Labour Party in Britain——
The Deputy may not make a speech.
Although the Bill is due to be taken in this session, will it be given priority because of drift netting of salmon around our coast?
The Sea Fisheries Bill will be taken this session. It would be normal for all Departments affected to be consulted on the charities regulation Bill.
Last January the Minister for Agriculture and Food stated in the House that the Tánaiste and Minister for Health and Children would introduce legislation which the Minister for Agriculture and Food could amend to facilitate revised food labelling. To what legislation was she referring and when will it come before the House? When will the House take Second Stage of the Parental Leave (Amendment) Bill and Report Stage of the Adoptive Leave Bill?
I am not in a position to indicate when the House will take Second Stage and Report Stage of the two Bills but I will make inquiries and have somebody communicate with the Deputy. On the labelling of food, the Minister for Agriculture and Food is anxious that the source of beef be displayed. The matter is being examined because we may need to go beyond this.
No legislation is pending.
Legislation will be required.
What assurances can the Tánaiste give women in County Kerry following a report that the Health Service Executive proposes to close the maternity department of Tralee General Hospital?
The matter does not arise on the Order of Business.
It arises under the nurses and midwives amendment Bill. Is the Government about to do another U-turn on the Great Southern Hotel Group and is it proposed to introduce legislation to facilitate that?
Questions must be confined to promised legislation.
As the Deputy is aware, many members of the Government are very supportive of the Great Southern Hotels when they spend their holidays in the Deputy's constituency.
Will they carry through their support and ensure the group is not privatised?
Allow the Tánaiste to continue, please.
We will have to ensure the hotels start to make some money. The nurses and midwives Bill will be taken next year.
Since the Tánaiste carries a major personal responsibility for the Gama exploitation scandal——
Does the Deputy have a question appropriate to the Order of Business?
Yes. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Martin, indicated last night that he wants the labour inspectorate report on Gama published as soon as possible, laid before the Oireachtas and debated in the House. As soon as the High Court gag is lifted, will the Tánaiste provide for a major debate on the implications of the labour inspectors' report? In regard to legislation, will the Tánaiste promise that any legislative changes pointed to by the report in light of the experience of the Gama scandal will be immediately fast-tracked in the House?
Officials on behalf of the Government made presentations overseas encouraging companies to tender for work here to complete the national development plan. At the time they were made everybody was told they would be subject to European tender procedures, labour laws would have to be honoured and there could be no discrimination. No doubt was left about this in the official presentations made by officials in a number of cities overseas to encourage companies to enter the Irish market. The Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment will publish the labour inspectors' report if and when he can. He has given a commitment that a debate will be held in the House. Clearly, if there is any legislative gap on this matter, it will be rectified.
Would the Tánaiste like to apologise for her role in the matter?
I had no act, hand or part in bringing the company in question to Ireland. What I did, as Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, was encourage investment in this country anywhere I went. I also encouraged employees to come here and would still do so. I regret very much the circumstances which are emerging regarding this case. It is a disgrace and I would not stand over it.
How could the company get away with it for five years?
I call Deputy Stanton.
I have been trying to get a response to a question for some time.
There are other cases about which we are not aware.
What else does the Deputy know about?
The point is whether the Minister investigated them.
He applied for——
I ask Deputy Joe Higgins to show the same courtesy to Deputy Stanton as was afforded to him.
I have tried to get some information about the fact that the Commission to Inquire Into Child Abuse Act 2000 (Additional Functions Order 2001) was struck down by the courts. I was given to understand that the Child Abuse Amendment Bill 2005 would deal with this but I am now told that it will not. What is the Government's response? Legislation has been promised. When will it be seen and what is the Government going to do about it? This affects many people with babies who——
We cannot have a debate on the issue.
That legislation was published on 24 March and is ordered for Second Stage.
It will not deal with the issue.
The Deputy will have to discuss the matter with the Whips. I cannot deal with it here.
It will not deal with the fact that this order was struck down. I have raised this on a number of occasions and have been informed of it this week by way of a reply to a parliamentary question which indicated that it is not envisaged that the child abuse amendment Bill will address the issue of the vaccine trials. I want to know when the Tánaiste will bring forward an amendment or primary legislation to deal with it, as promised.
The reason it cannot is because the Supreme Court has said that the witnesses, by virtue of age and other factors, cannot give evidence. There is no point in having an inquiry if the key witnesses are not in a position to participate. This is a fact and I think the group understands this. I have spoken to some members of that group. We must be realistic and we cannot have an inquiry just for the sake it, if we cannot get the facts.
The lawyers would like that.
On the vaccine trials, the Supreme Court said one cannot call these witnesses by virtue of their age.
The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform makes a joke out of everything.
The Deputy cannot have a debate on the issue.
I ask the Tánaiste to explain why the long-promised building control Bill has been delayed for so long. It is wonderful to behold that the country is experiencing an unprecedented level of activity in the construction industry. However, it is without the safeguards and consumer protection associated with this Bill. Can one assume that it is due to the influence of the Galway Races hospitality tent and the builders there that have prevented this?
We cannot have a debate on this issue.
Why then is it taking so long? Can it be contracted out to some other parliamentary draftsman with nothing to do? More than three years have passed.
I cannot explain why it has taken so long. I am told it will be published later this year.
This is the standard reply which unfortunately the Tánaiste must give because it is the information she has been given. However, it will be the same next year. I invite the Tánaiste to consult with the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, Deputy Roche, to consider whether the Bill can be contracted out to be drafted.
The Deputy has made his point.
It is a serious problem.
The Tánaiste is probably aware of the bed crisis in Wexford General Hospital over the past number of years. Are any Bills being brought forward that will improve the position in Wexford General Hospital because——
On promised legislation only. I call Deputy Seán Ryan,
I have gone through the legislative programme and I cannot find anything——
I call Deputy Seán Ryan. The Chair suggests to the Deputy that he submits a question to the Minister for Health and Children.
I will not sit down until I get an answer because the crisis in Wexford General Hospital has gone out of control.
Deputy Kehoe can only ask a question on promised legislation. I call Deputy Seán Ryan.
There were 35 people on trolleys last week.
Deputy Kehoe is being disorderly. The Deputy can bring the matter to the attention of the Minister for Health and Children during Question Time.
I was elected to represent the people of Wexford here.
The Deputy is not entitled to raise the matter on the Order of Business.
This has gone on for too long. I am not sitting down until I get an answer.
Deputy Kehoe is being disorderly and I ask him to resume his seat.
I am not sitting down until I get an answer.
The Chair will be obliged to deal with the Deputy. This sort of behaviour cannot be allowed on the Order of Business.
I am not sitting down until I get an answer.
It appears to the Chair that the Deputy wishes to leave the House. Does the Deputy wish to leave the House?
The Deputy has no further commitments until next Tuesday.
It is absolutely scandalous. It is not just happening in Wexford but throughout the country.
Bye-bye.
I am going to ask the Deputy to leave the House unless he resumes his seat immediately.
It is an absolute disgrace. If the Ceann Comhairle could see what is happening——
Deputy Kehoe, you are to leave the House. It is obvious to the Chair that Deputy Kehoe wishes to leave the House.
It is an absolute scandal in Wexford General Hospital.
A Deputy
The waiting lists are someone else's problem.
This cannot continue. We had 35 people on trolleys last week and they have run out of beds. They have to use trolleys. There is no money for them.
The Deputy is out of order.
I move: "That Deputy Kehoe be suspended from the service of the Dáil".
Question put.
A Deputy
Vótáil.
Under Standing Order 61, any division is postponed to take place immediately before the Order of Business on the next sitting day. The Deputy must now leave the House.
I am not leaving the House until I get an answer.
Get a trolley. Wheel him out.
In view of the Deputy's refusal to leave the House, the sitting is suspended for five minutes.
Sitting suspended at 10.55 a.m. and resumed at 11 a.m.
Could the Tánaiste explain why there appears to be a lack of commitment on the Government's part towards the Pharmacy Bill?
I call on the Tánaiste.
I wish to finish my question.
We cannot have a debate on this issue. I am moving on to the next item.
There is an inconsistency on this issue.
I am pressing on with the next item as it is after 11 a.m.
We were told in the spring that the Pharmacy Bill would be introduced in 2005. However, the Minister says she does not know when the Bill will be introduced.
The next item is No. 18, the Garda Síochána Bill. The Deputy will be called first on Tuesday.
I have raised a question. I am raising a point of order.
(Interruptions).
Deputy Seán Ryan is being totally disorderly.
It is a legitimate question.
When the Tánaiste was called to answer, Deputy Seán Ryan refused to resume his seat.
There are issues relating——
Under what authority is the Ceann Comhairle making these decisions to cut off speakers?
My predecessors have made the same decisions.
I am entitled to ask this question.
If Deputy McManus reads Standing Order 26, she will see the Chair is correct.
I am entitled to ask this question. The Ceann Comhairle has denied me the right to ask it.
I have not denied the Deputy any rights.
What is happening here is wrong. I indicated to the Ceann Comhairle at the beginning of the Order of Business that I wished to ask a question.
Deputy McManus's name is not even on the list.
That is because you deliberately ignored me.
The Deputy will withdraw that remark.
The Ceann Comhairle nodded at me.
I did not deliberately ignore Deputy McManus. The Chair does not deliberately ignore anyone. Deputy McManus must withdraw the remark.
I withdraw the remark but I find it impossible to believe that we are now being denied our rights to ask legitimate questions.
Deputies are not being denied their rights.
Deputy Seán Ryan was denied the right to ask his question properly.
He was not denied the right to ask his question.
Deputy Crawford is being denied his right to ask questions and I was denied my right to ask questions.
I ask the Deputy to resume her seat.
We are not being treated fairly in this House.
I call on Deputy McManus to resume her seat.
We are not given the right to ask legitimate questions of this Government.
Deputy McManus should allow the Chair to deal with the query.
It is the job of the Ceann Comhairle to ensure that the right questions are asked.
I call on Deputy McManus to resume her seat. If she continues to rise while the Chair is speaking, she will be asked to leave.
(Interruptions).
The Deputy knows that Members of this House leave it because they wish to do so. They leave the Chair with no option but to ask them to leave.
(Interruptions).
Regarding the point of order raised by Deputy McManus, Deputy Seán Ryan asked a question on the Pharmacy Bill, the Tánaiste was called upon to answer that question and when she was called to speak, Deputy Seán Ryan proceeded to make a statement about the Bill, which was out of order. I call on the Tánaiste to reply to Deputy Ryan's question on the Pharmacy Bill.
I do not know who mentioned the spring session as the Bill is a mammoth piece of legislation and it certainly will not be published this year. However, I am examining bringing forward issues surrounding fitness to practice in a smaller Bill that can be completed more quickly.
I call Deputy Crawford.
The Ceann Comhairle said that Members leave the House because they want to. That has an implication for my constituency colleague, Deputy Kehoe, which is unfortunate and I do not think it was intended by the Chair as it would imply Deputy Kehoe's motivation was less than the real motivation which was to underline a constituency point. I ask the Ceann Comhairle, on reflection, to withdraw the remark.
Deputies know what is permitted and what is not permitted on the Order of Business. If Deputies persist in breaking the rules on the Order of Business in the manner in which they were broken this morning, the Chair has no choice but to ask them to leave the House.
I genuinely believe that implication was present in the Ceann Comhairle's remark. I call on the Ceann Comhairle to withdraw the remark.
There was no implication whatsoever in my remark.
Deputy Kehoe was merely seeking to highlight the bed crisis in Wexford General Hospital.
Deputy Kehoe knew the consequences of persisting with his behaviour.
In eight days decisions will be made regarding the Nitrates Directive. I ask the Tánaiste to organise a full debate on the directive in this House in the coming week.
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
A debate on agriculture is necessary. Poultry, pig and other farmers will be put out of business.
Deputy Crawford should be orderly.
My conduct is orderly.
Deputy Crawford's conduct is not orderly.
Does the Tánaiste intend to ensure implementation of the promise made by Deputy Brennan under the Air Navigation Indemnity Bill that all airports would be left debt-free on the breakup of Aer Rianta?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
Earlier, the Tánaiste asserted that what was emerging about the treatment of the workers in Gama Construction was disgraceful and I agree with her. Does she also agree that the treatment of the unsecured creditors of IFI who are owed €26 million by this Government, which is a major shareholder, is also disgraceful?
That does not arise on the Order of Business.
What plans does the Tánaiste have to facilitate payment to those creditors who have recently been told after two years that they will only receive €74,000?
Deputy Timmins must conclude.
I would like to ask the Tánaiste when we can expect to see the introduction of the Company Law Consolidation and Reform Bill?
Deputy Timmins should allow the Tánaiste to answer his question.
The Bill does not deal with the issue of liquidation but it will be introduced in 2006.
(Interruptions).
I ask Deputy Timmins to resume his seat and show some respect for the House.
My question concerns three pieces of marine legislation. Regarding what happened this morning to Deputy Kehoe, we discussed——
This does not arise under marine legislation.
He did not say it.
I have not said anything. We discussed the issue on the Adjournment. I was nearly thrown out yesterday. Deputy Kehoe was thrown out today. We do not usually have a senior Minister here to discuss such issues and we cannot raise them elsewhere. That is the difficulty.
Deputy Broughan is aware that he can raise this elsewhere.
One cannot. It is impossible.
There are other ways to raise this issue.
Can I ask——
If the Deputy is not happy with Standing Order 26 I suggest he ask for it to be amended. The Chair will be delighted to implement it.
I am trying to be helpful by explaining the reasons, which the Chair knows. On the matter of the harbours Bill, does the Tánaiste intend to have a fisheries harbours Bill as well? What has happened to the foreshore Bill?
The harbours Bill is intended for 2006 but I do not know if it deals with the second issue the Deputy raised. I understand that the foreshore Bill is being reviewed.
It is being eroded.
It is being reviewed.
When the Tánaiste became the Minister for Health and Children, she gave a commitment to resolve the accident and emergency crisis and that there would be significant improvement by March 2005.
That is right.
There has been no improvement. The problems have been getting worse. Nurses are going out today to——
Has the Deputy a question that is appropriate to the Order of Business?
Yes. It is now clear the money the Tánaiste has allocated to her initiatives——
We cannot have a speech at this time.
I am only getting started. Does the Tánaiste intend to bring in a Supplementary Estimate to ensure that there will be sufficient funds for dealing with the accident and emergency crisis which she has so far failed to do?
With regard to the legislative programme, the Tánaiste has indicated there will be a new Bill concerning nursing home charges that will come into effect shortly. As it does not seem to appear, where is this in the legislative programme?
Why is there such a major drift in the legislation for which she is responsible? In September 2004, the alcohol products (control of advertising, sponsorship and marketing practices/sales promotions) Bill was promised for early 2005 but was changed to late 2005 in the most recent legislative programme. The medical practitioners Bill was promised for early 2005 but, according to the recent programme, has been moved to early 2006. The adoption — Hague Convention, adoption authority and miscellaneous provisions Bill — was promised for 2006 but is now scheduled for mid-2006. Despite what the Tánaiste claims, it is not possible to tell from this programme when the nurses (amendment) Bill will be ready. The same applies to the pharmacy Bill, which was promised for 2005. Neither is it possible to determine when the Voluntary Health Insurance board (corporate status) Bill, to which the Tánaiste referred when discussing the case of Vivas Health on 13 April, will be ready, even though it was promised for 2005.
Is the Tánaiste sorry she moved?
The Bill providing for the health information quality authority was promised by the Tánaiste for shortly after the Health Bill but there is no indication of when that will now occur. Mr. Kevin Kelly, the executive chairman of the Health Service Executive, stated this morning there will be further legislation on accountability and that he had held discussions with the Tánaiste on this issue. However, there is no indication of such legislation either.
We have a legislative programme and we ask questions in the House but every time we do there is a different answer.
The Deputy has made her point. Allow the Tánaiste to answer.
It is important to have clarity on this issue. The extent of the drift in terms of legislation under the tenure of this Minister for Health and Children——
Allow the Tánaiste to answer the question.
——--is quite disturbing.
The Deputy may laugh but there is no drift.
That is absolutely wrong.
I am making substantial changes to the heads of the medical practitioners Bill as we must ensure we get this right. It is better to do so and have the Bill next year than to have it as it is this year. I have given a commitment to the House that I will publish the heads of many of the Bills Deputy McManus mentioned, as it would be helpful from the point of view of public debate.
No legislation has been promised on accountability. Perhaps Mr. Kelly was speaking about regulations that can be made under the Act we passed before Christmas 2004. The issue of charges has consumed many of my Department's resources over the past three months in terms of finances and manpower owing to the issue's implications. It is a current priority as we must make repayments to honour the Supreme Court decision on the one hand and seek to protect taxpayers' money as best we can to invest what resources are available in health care on the other.
There will be a Supplementary Estimate for this year but not to get additional moneys for the areas Deputy McManus mentioned. People must learn to live within their budgets. We are spending a considerable amount of time on this. Budgets for hospitals have doubled in recent years. However, a Supplementary Estimate will be needed because we were unable to charge for the first three months of 2005 since December 2004, for example, which brings a shortfall of almost €40 million to the health service. We must deal with this and other issues concerning the change of accountability from the Department to the HSE.
I will be brief. In light of the devastating criticism of St. Patrick's Institution by the inspector of prisons, as published in today's newspapers, when will the prison service Bill be introduced to remove responsibility for running prisons from the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform and enable them to be run properly?
It is not possible to say at this stage.
The Tánaiste indicated the legislation intended for before this summer will only deal with public beds and publicly contracted beds. How does she intend to deal with this matter? Will it be by way of legislation? There is an issue of people in private nursing homes who are entitled to public beds or who may be in acute hospitals and occupying beds because they cannot afford long-term care despite their entitlement to it. Will this be dealt with by way of legislation?
Is legislation promised?
The issue of the charges will concern public beds. The pending litigation with regard to private nursing homes and the State's liability for their costs will be vigorously defended by the State. This country cannot afford to pay for all the private nursing home costs.
What about the rights of people to these beds?
We cannot have a debate on this.
On a point of order, why were only two Members of the Technical Group asked to contribute to the Order of Business as opposed to half a dozen from the other two Opposition groups?
The Chair apologises. Deputy Boyle will be the first Member called next Tuesday.
I am asking for a ruling on this matter.
There will be no ruling.
There is usually a degree of proportionality in the Order of Business. I indicated——
The Chair was unaware that the Deputy was offering.
——a number of times.
As the Deputy can appreciate, there was much to sort through this morning.
I indicated at precisely the same time as Deputy Crawford and the Chair could not miss either of us given where we are sitting.
I refute the implication that the Chair is refusing to write names. At the same time the Chair writes names, the Chair is listening to the questions being asked to ensure they are on the Order of Business. The Chair apologises to any Deputies who raised their hands but did not have their names noted. A number of Deputies raised their hands three or four times to ensure the Chair did not miss them. I suggest this course of action to Deputy Boyle.
Perhaps Members must engage in histrionics to get attention in the House.